Islam Is Eroding Society In the U.S. And The West. Do You Care?

Does this stealth attack on Judeo-Christian morality bother you in the least? Were you aware of the extent of the imposition of Sharia in the US?

Western Govts Welcome Harems

by Daniel Pipes
Jerusalem Post
November 26, 2008
Westerns Welcome Harems

A Scottish judge recently bent the law to benefit a polygamous household. The case involved a Muslim male who drove 64 miles per hour in a 30 mph zone – usually grounds for an automatic loss of one’s driving license. The defendant’s lawyer explained his client’s need to speed: “He has one wife in Motherwell and another in Glasgow and sleeps with one one night and stays with the other the next on an alternate basis. Without his driving licence he would be unable to do this on a regular basis.” Sympathetic to the polygamist’s plight, the judge permitted him to retain his license.

Monogamy, this ruling suggests, long a foundation of Western civilization, is silently eroding under the challenge of Islamic law. Should current trends continue, polygamy could soon be commonplace.

Since the 1950s, Muslim populations have grown in Western Europe and North America via immigration and conversion; with their presence has grown the Islamic form of polygyny (one man married to more than one woman). Estimates find 2,000 or more British polygamous men, 15,000-20,000  harems in Italy, 30,000 harems in France, and 50,000-100,000 polygamists in the United States.

Some imams openly acknowledge conducting polygamous marriage ceremonies: Khalil Chami reports that he is asked almost weekly to conduct such ceremonies in Sydney. Aly Hindy reports having “blessed” more than 30 such nuptials in Toronto.

Social acceptance is also growing. Academics justify it, while politicians blithely meet with polygamists or that Westerners should “find a way to live with it” and journalists describe polygamy with empathy, sympathy, and compassion. Islamists argue polygamy’s virtues and call for its official recognition.
Polygamy has made key legal advances in 2008. (For fuller details, see my blog, “Harems Accepted in the West.”) At least six Western jurisdictions now permit harems on the condition that these were contracted in jurisdictions where polygamy is legal, including India and Muslim-majority countries from Indonesia to Saudi Arabia to Morocco.

  • United Kingdom: Bigamy is punishable by up to seven years in jail  but the law recognizes harems already formed in polygamy-tolerant countries.  The Department  of Work and Pensions pays couples up to £92.80 (US$140) a week in social  benefits, and each multiculturally-named “additional spouse” receives £33.65.  The Treasury states thatWhere a man and a woman are married under a  law which permits polygamy, and either of them has an additional spouse, the  Tax  Credits (Polygamous Marriages) Regulations 2003 allow them to claim tax  credits as a polygamous unit.” Additionally, harems may be eligible for  additional housing benefits to reflect their need for larger properties.
  • The Netherlands: The Dutch justice minister, Ernst  Hirsch Ballin, has announced that polygamous Muslim marriages should  not be dealt with through the legal system but via dialogue.
  • Italy: A court  in Bologna allowed a Muslim male immigrant to bring the mothers of his two  children into the country on the grounds that the polygamous marriages had  been legally contracted.
  • Australia: The Australian newspaper reports “it is illegal to  enter into a polygamous marriage. But the federal  government, like Britain, recognises relationships that have been legally  recognised overseas, including polygamous marriages. This allows second wives  and children to claim welfare and benefits.”
  • Ontario, Canada: Canadian law calls for polygamy to be punished by a  prison term but the Ontario  Family Law Act accepts “a marriage that is actually or potentially  polygamous, if it was celebrated in a jurisdiction whose system of law  recognizes it as valid.”

Thus, for the cost of two airplane tickets, Muslims potentially can evade Western laws. (One wonders when Mormons will also wake to this gambit.) Rare countries (such as Ireland) still reject harems; generally, as David Rusin of Islamist Watch notes, “governments tend to look the other way as the conjugal mores of seventh-century Arabia … take root in our backyards.”

At a time when Western marriage norms are already under challenge, Muslims are testing legal loopholes and even seeking taxpayer support for multiple brides. This development has vast significance: just as the concept of one man, one woman marriage has shaped the West’s economic, cultural, and political development, the advance of Islamic law (Shari’a) will profoundly change life as we know it.

White Guilt Is Dead

Philadelphia Inquirer
11/10/08 Tom Adkins

WHITE GUILT IS DEAD Free at Last, free at last!

Look at my fellow conservatives! There they go, glumly shuffling along, depressed by the election aftermath. Not me. I’m virtually euphoric.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not thrilled with America’s flirtation with neo-socialism. But there’s a massive silver lining in those magical clouds that lofted Barack Obama to the Presidency. For today, without a shred of intellectually legitimate opposition, I can loudly proclaim to America: The Era of White Guilt is over.

This seemingly impossible event occurred because the vast majority of white Americans didn’t give a fluff about skin color, and enthusiastically pulled the voting lever for a black man. Not just any black man. A very liberal black man who spent his early career race-hustling banks, praying in a racist church for 20 years, and actively worked with America-hating domestic terrorists. Wow! Some resume! Yet they made Barack Obama their leader. Therefore, as of November 4th, 2008, white guilt is dead.

For over a century, the millstone of white guilt hung around our necks, retribution for slave-owning predecessors. In the 60s, American liberals began yanking that millstone while sticking a fork in the eye of black Americans, exacerbating the racial divide to extort a socialist solution. But if a black man can become President, exactly what significant barrier is left? The election of Barack Obama absolutely destroys the entire validation of liberal white guilt. The dragon is hereby slain.

So today, I’m feeling a little “uppity,” if you will. From this day forward, my tolerance level for having my skin color hustled is now exactly ZERO. And it’s time to clean house. No more Reverend Wright’s “God Damn America,” Al Sharpton’s Church of Perpetual Victimization, or Jesse Jackson’s rainbow racism. Cornell West? You’re a fraud. Go home. All those “black studies” programs that taught kids to hate whitey? You must now thank Whitey. And I want that on the final.

Congressional Black Caucus? Irrelevant. Maxine Waters? Shut up. ACORN? Outlawed. Black Panthers? Go home and pet your kitty. Black separatists? Find another nation that offers better dreams. Go ahead. I’m waiting.

Gangsta rappers? Start praising America. Begin with the Pledge of Allegiance. And please, no more ebonics. Speak English, and who knows where you might end up? Oh, yeah, pull up your pants. Your underwear is showing. You look stupid.

Black Fraternities? Seek diversity. Race Card? It’s now the joker. Miss Black America? Get in line with all the other lovely ladies. Reparations? Paid.

To those Eurosnots who forged entire careers hating America? I’m still waiting for the first black French President.

And let me offer an equal opportunity whupping. I’ve always despised lazy white people. Now, I can talk smack about lazy black people. You’re poor because you quit school, did drugs, had three kids with three different fathers, and refuse to work. So when you plop your Colt 45-swilling, Oprah watchin’ butt on the couch and complain “Da Man is keepin’ me down!!!” allow me to inform you: Da Man is now black. You have no excuses.

No more quotas. No more handouts. No more stealing my money because someone’s great-great-great-great grandparents suffered actual pain and misery at the hands of people I have no relation to, and personally revile.

It’s time to toss that massive, obsolete race-hustle machine upon the heap of the other stupid 60s ideas. Drag it over there, by wife swapping, next to dope-smoking. Plenty of room right between free love and cop-killing. Careful, don’t trip on streaking. There ya go, don’t be gentle. Just dump it. Wash your hands. It’s filthy.

In fact, Obama’s ascension created a gargantuan irony. How can you sell class envy and American unfairness when you and your black wife went to Ivy League schools, got high-paying jobs, became millionaires, bought a mansion, and got elected President? How unfair is that??? Now, Like a delicious O’Henry tale, Obama’s spread-the-wealth campaign rendered itself moot by it’s own victory! America is officially a meritocracy. Obama’s election has validated American conservatism!

So, listen carefully … “Wham!!!”

That’s the sound of my foot kicking the door shut on the era of white guilt. The rites have been muttered, the carcass lowered, dirt shoveled, and tombstone erected. White guilt is dead and buried.

However, despite my glee, there’s apparently one small, rabid bastion of American racism remaining. Black Americans voted 96% for Barack Obama. Hmmm. In a color-blind world, shouldn’t that be 50-50? Tonight, every black person should ask forgiveness for their apparent racism and prejudice towards white people. Maybe it’s time to start spreading that guilt around.

Tom Adkins is the founder of CommonConservative.com

Russian Analyst Predicts Decline and Breakup of USA

Tue Nov 25 2008 09:04:22 ET

A leading Russian political analyst has said the economic turmoil in the United States has confirmed his long-held view that the country is heading for collapse, and will divide into separate parts. 

Professor Igor Panarin said in an interview with the respected daily IZVESTIA published on Monday: “The dollar is not secured by anything. The country’s foreign debt has grown like an avalanche, even though in the early 1980s there was no debt. By 1998, when I first made my prediction, it had exceeded $2 trillion. Now it is more than 11 trillion. This is a pyramid that can only collapse.” 

The paper said Panarin’s dire predictions for the U.S. economy, initially made at an international conference in Australia 10 years ago at a time when the economy appeared strong, have been given more credence by this year’s events. 

When asked when the U.S. economy would collapse, Panarin said: “It is already collapsing. Due to the financial crisis, three of the largest and oldest five banks on Wall Street have already ceased to exist, and two are barely surviving. Their losses are the biggest in history. Now what we will see is a change in the regulatory system on a global financial scale: America will no longer be the world’s financial regulator.” 

When asked who would replace the U.S. in regulating world markets, he said: “Two countries could assume this role: China, with its vast reserves, and Russia, which could play the role of a regulator in Eurasia.” 

Asked why he expected the U.S. to break up into separate parts, he said: “A whole range of reasons. Firstly, the financial problems in the U.S. will get worse. Millions of citizens there have lost their savings. Prices and unemployment are on the rise. General Motors and Ford are on the verge of collapse, and this means that whole cities will be left without work. Governors are already insistently demanding money from the federal center. Dissatisfaction is growing, and at the moment it is only being held back by the elections and the hope that Obama can work miracles. But by spring, it will be clear that there are no miracles.” 

He also cited the “vulnerable political setup”, “lack of unified national laws”, and “divisions among the elite, which have become clear in these crisis conditions.” 

He predicted that the U.S. will break up into six parts – the Pacific coast, with its growing Chinese population; the South, with its Hispanics; Texas, where independence movements are on the rise; the Atlantic coast, with its distinct and separate mentality; five of the poorer central states with their large Native American populations; and the northern states, where the influence from Canada is strong. 

He even suggested that “we could claim Alaska – it was only granted on lease, after all.” Panarin, 60, is a professor at the Diplomatic Academy of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and has authored several books on information warfare. 

Developing…from the Drudge Report 

What Every Child Should Know About Thanksgiving

Newt Gingrich   Thanks to H.T. of NY-Metro ACT!

Second only to Independence Day, Thanksgiving is a uniquely American holiday. And as an American holiday, it is rooted deeply – like our nation – in faith in God.

The earliest Thanksgivings were celebrated by Americans who were keenly aware that their blessings — like their rights – came from god. In times of hardship unimaginable to us today, they took time to give thanks to their Creator.

Throughout early American history, when they suffered from drought famine or war, Americans paused, not to seek vengeance or to question their faith, but to give thanks (Celebrating Thanksgiving In America) to God for the blessings they still had. At a time when the economic news seems to get worse every day, it’s important to remember the humble faith of these early Americans. They didn’t just give thanks when times were good, they gave thanks when times were bad – especially when times were bad. 

Radical Secularists Deny the Central Role of Religion in American History

Today is a decidedly different time in America.

Not only have many American forgotten or never learned the historic origins of our thanksgiving – to pause and give thanks to God for our abundance – but radical secularists are intent on removing God and faith from our national life altogether (America Rediscovering God DVD).

Many of the entertainment and political elite seem to be threatened by religious faith. Bill Maher is among the latest who stands like a drunken mouse circling the wine keg waving his tiny fist in the face of God. Last sentence is editorial note. 

Others seem intent on denying or whitewashing the central role that religious faith has played in American history, such as the attempt to whitewash God out of the Capitol Visitor’s Center (view the video and petition my wife, Callista, and I have created to ask Congress to ensure the Capitol Visitor’s Center is historically accurate about America’s Godly heritage.)

These radical secularists seek to portray those who acknowledge this historical fact as theocrats intent on imposing their religion on others.

In fact, to acknowledge the centrality of God in American history is to acknowledgeAmerica’s great freedom of religion – the freedom to worship and the freedom not to worship. Many Americans have taken advantage of this freedom by drawing closer to their Creator. They understand, even if so many of our media and political elites don’t, that religious freedom is the cornerstone of all of our freedoms.

Voices From Thanksgivings Past

The centrality f God in Thanksgiving in America comes through in the words of some of our greatest national leaders:

Virginia Governor Thomas Jefferson, in 1779:

(1) appoint … a day of public Thanksgiving to Almighty God … to (ask) Him that He would  … pour out His Holy Spirit on all ministers of the Gospel; that He would … spread the light of Christian knowledge through the remotest corners of the earth … and that He would establish these United States upon the basis of religion and virtue.

President George Washington’s first Federal Thanksgiving proclamation in 1789:

Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor … Now, therefore, I do appoint Thursday, the 26th day of November 1789 … that we may all unite to render unto Hiim our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection.

President Abraham Lincoln, making Thanksgiving an annual national holiday in 1863, in the midst of the Civil War:

No human counsel hath devised nor hath any mortal hand worked out these great things. They are the gracious gifts of the Most High God, who, while dealing with us in anger for our sins, hath nevertheless remembered mercy. It has seemed to me fit and proper that they should be solemnly, reverently, and gratefully acknowledged, as with one heart and one voice, by the whole American people.

“Let Us Be Thankful For a Land That Will For Such Religion Stand.”

Our leaders have not been alone in celebrating God’s gifts at Thanksgiving, of course.

I conclude today with a poem by Lizelia Augusta Jenkins Moorer, an African-American poet writing at the turn of the 20th century. Her generous, hopeful view of Thanksgiving is made even more remarkable by the suffereing and discrimination she endured as an African-American in the late 19th and early 20th century.

Thanksgiving

Let us give thanks to God above,
Thanks for expressions of His love,
Seen in the book of nature, grand
Taught by His love on every hand.

Let us be thankful in our hearts,
Thankful for all the truth imparts,
For the religion of our Lord,
All that is taught us in His word.

Let us be thankful for a land,
That will for such religion stand;
One that protects it by the law,
One that before it stands in awe.

Thankful for all things let us be,
Though there be woes and misery;
Lessons they bring us for our good-
Later ’twill all be understood.

Thankful for peace o’er land and sea,
Thankful for signs of liberty,
Thankful for homes, for life and health,
Pleasure and plenty, fame and wealth.

Thankful for friends and loved ones, too,
Thankful for all things, good and true,
Thankful for harvest in the fall,
Thankful to Him who gave it all. 

May you and your family have a happy, healthy, and blessed Thanksgiving.

Your friend

From the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews Website

Did you know that Thanksgiving is really a Jewish holiday?

Although Thanksgiving is not on the Jewish calendar, historians believe that Sukkot may have inspired America’s favorite farewell to fall, often nicknamed “Turkey Day.”    

“The pilgrims based their customs on the Bible,” says Gloria Kaufer Greene, author of the “New Jewish Holiday Cookbook” (Times books, 1999). “They knew that Sukkot was an autumn harvest festival, and there is evidence that they fashioned the first Thanksgiving after the Jewish custom of celebrating the success of the year’s crops.”

Linda Burghardt, author of “Jewish Holiday Traditions” (Citadel Press, 2001), said, “Sukkot is considered a model for Thanksgiving. both holidays revolve around showing gratitude for a bountiful harvest.”

Today Thanksgiving is celebrated on the fourth Thursday of November, but President Franklin Roosevelt didn’t propose this timing until 1939.

It was Abraham Lincoln who made Thanksgiving a national holiday. Roosevelt actually changed Lincoln’s decree that Thanksgiving be observed on the last Thursday in November, which may fall on the fifth Thursday of the month. 

The pilgrims’ invited local Indians to the first Thanksgiving during the fall of 1621. This follows a biblical commandment, well known to the Pilgrims, to welcome the stranger to your meals. Historians speculate that this celebration occurred somewhere between September 21 and November 9, but most likely in early October, around the time of Sukkot.

“Originally, Sukkot entailed a pilgrimage to Jerusalem,” says Greene, who believes the two holidays share much in common.

The Puritan Christians who landed on American shores seeking religious freedom were called pilgrims, in deference to their journey from England. Their dream of finding a place where they’d be free to worship as they pleased in a recurrent theme in Jewish history.

After their pilgrimage to Jerusalem, the ancient Israelites lived for a week in temporary huts while giving thanks for a plentiful harvet. Likewise, during their first wintr in Massachusetts, the pilgrims dwelled in makeshift huts, wigwams that the Indians helped them build.

While Sukkot remains a seven-day observance, the first Thanksgiving celebration continued for three days, a time frame more similar to the Jewish harvest festival than today’s Thanksgiving dinner, which often begins in late afternoon and ends several hours later. 

The Real Objectives of Barack Obama

The following posts is not quick and easy reading, but it’s too serious not to circulate. Please read carefully and circulate to those who will consider and understand the implications of the situation!

Posted: November 25, 2008
By Hilmar von Campe  © 2008 

Editor’s note: Hilmar von Campe is author of the new book ”Defeating the Totalitarian Lie: A Former Hitler Youth Warns America,” which is available at WND’s online store.

Lust for power is in the heart of every human being – it is part of human nature. It is an issue for each one of us in our personal and professional life, and it is a political issue on the level of government. The question is how to deal with the lust for power and serve justice at the same time if you want a stable government.

The handling of human nature in organizing power is different from country to country. Because our Founding Fathers understood human nature and the temptation of power, they created a Constitution that took both issues into account – a masterpiece of transferring Christian teachings into the political organization of American society. It is built on the respect for life and for the rights every person has been given by our Creator and not by any government. Its political foundation consists of the separation of power between the three branches of government and depends on truthful and responsible citizen who make it function. The armed forces have to defend life and freedom of all Americans to outside enemies. Additionally, there are the National Guards reporting to the governor of the respective state of the union and the militias. One reason for the creation of the militia was to enable the citizens to defend themselves against our own government if it should get oppressive. Therefore, to bear arms is our constitutional right, which cannot be taken away by any government.

Enemies of freedom do not like the idea of armed citizens and try all sorts of means to control or eliminate guns in private hands. Hitler described on April 11, 1942, in a dinner keynote address his thinking regarding the matter:

“The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. I would go so far as to say that supply of arms to the underdog is a sine qua non to overthrow of any sovereignty. So let’s not have any native militia or native police.” He was referring to occupied Soviet Union provinces whose people he called “races” but made clear that his principle is valid to wherever somebody wants to overthrow any sovereignty.

Hilmar von Campe’s riveting book, “Defeating the Totalitarian Lie: A Former Hitler Youth Warns America,” draws compelling parallels to today’s America

In our case, you just need to say “citizen” instead of “race” and you understand what that “somebody” means when he tells you his lies about why he wants to do it. It that simple!

The Nazis also controlled the media, which fed us with lies about what they were doing and why. The Democratic Party and Barack Obama would like to get a similar status of power as the Nazis had. The so-called Fairness Doctrine is a steppingstone in that direction. If you hear former NBC anchor Tom Brokaw say, “We have to have free speech in some kind of context,” then you know what he is up to.

By the time of his speech, Hitler had put himself into a comfortable position. He was commander in chief of the armed forces. In 1934, the armed storm troopers under the leadership of Ernst Roehm, a close friend of Hitler, had become a competitor of Hitler’s power. Hitler had him and 300 others killed in 1934, among them a great part of the storm troopers’ leadership. Thereafter, the troopers were without weight in the inside power struggle. Hitler had created the SS, including the Gestapo, the secret political police (Geheime Staatspolizei), the feared executioner of the Nazi system. The only dangerous enemies of the system remaining were inside the armed forces. He bribed some of the military leaders with ranches and had every officer and civil servant swear his oath of allegiance to him personally. The only ones who were legally forbidden to bear arms were the Jews. My father had a gun.

All of the above was meant to enable the government to put down any armed insurrection. Different from any “normal” dictatorship, a totalitarian system goes after the minds and hearts of the population with the purpose to make them do voluntarily what the government wants them to do. This is called mind control, which also is far advanced in the United States. The Nazis controlled 100 percent of the media and also an important part of education. In the schools, control was exercised through godless Nazi teachers where they had some and through Darwinism, which is also taught to American children. The minimum result they had with the Hitler Youth was that there was no other youth organization and that we young people didn’t question the legality of it. It belonged to the system into which we were born.

There was another Nazi organization that had the same task as all other institutions, namely to keep people under control and influence their thinking. It was the Service to Work(Arbeitsdienst). Young men had to serve half a year before entering into military service. It seems that Obama likes this Nazi feature because he has proposed, in addition to the idea of a civilian national security force, a plan to create a national community service program. Obama’s motives for this cannot be different from the Nazi motives – to bring as many youth as possible under their socialist umbrella and influence. Obama has 3.1 million e-mail addresses from young people who are waiting to do something.

President-elect Obama says that America is no more a Christian nation. He is not a Christian himself because you can’t be a Christian and promote the killing of unborn human beings, which he does. He also wants to neutralize our Constitution by adding class-warfare concepts. His plans point to where he wants to lead the American nation: onto the same road Germany took in 1933. Americans, do you want to go in that direction? It is still time to take the opposite direction – a nation under God.

Lewis Cass, governor of the Michigan Territory in 1848, secretary of state for President James Buchanan, senator and 1848 Democrat presidential candidate, stated the following: “Independent of its connection with human destiny hereafter, the fate of republican government is indissolubly bound up with the fate of the Christian religion, and a people who reject its holy faith will find themselves the slaves of their own evil passions and of arbitrary power. … God, in his providence, has given us a Book of His revealed will … to teach us what we ought to do here, and what we shall be hereafter.”

John Witherspoon, who lost two sons in the Revolution, was the only clergyman to sign the Declaration of Independence and served on 120 Congressional committees. He stated: “He is the best friend of American liberty, who is most … active in promoting true and undefiled religion … to bear down profanity and immorality of every kind. Whoever is an avowed enemy of God, I scruple not to call him an enemy of his country.”

Barack Hussein Obama would bring his immorality into the White House. He is an enemy of God. As everybody else, he can and must change morally to be in line with our Constitution and be able to represent and lead the American people.

Order von Campe’s new book, “Defeating the Totalitarian Lie: A Former Hitler Youth Warns America”

Hilmar von Campe is listed in the 1992 “International Who’s Who of Intellectuals” of the International Biographical Center in Cambridge, England. He is the author of “Defeating the Totalitarian Lie: A Former Hitler Youth Warns America.” Having grown up under the Nazis, he offers a unique perspective on the rise and fall of Nazi Germany. He warns that there are many similarities between the Nazi society and America of today.


Does Barack Obama Plan to Emasculate Israel’s Supposed Nuclear Deterrence?

by Emanuel A. Winston, Mid East analyst & commentator  Nov. 20, 2008

Ex-President Jimmy Carter was unable during his failed presidency to destroy “those Jews” but his gang is ready to try again under Abu*Hussein’s pro-Islam philosophy. Read and understand what’s really happening to Israel. Dan

President-elect Barack Obama plans to “get tough” on Israel’s alleged nuclear weapons. This is not new policy from the U.S. State Department.

October 30 to November 1, 1991 Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir attended the Madrid International “Peace” Conference. He was urged not to go but, he ignored the warnings. He assumed he could handle everything. As predicted, Israel was facing “Kangaroo Court”.

Shamir and the other Israelis present were thrust into an ambush arranged by then-Secretary of State James Baker III and Baker’s 3 infamous “Jew-boys” (as they came to be known): Dennis Ross, Aaron David Miller and Daniel Kurtzer. These 3 were selected by Baker because they were ambitious, Leftists and could be depended upon to take their marching orders from Baker and the ever-pro-Arab U.S. State Department.

These very same pro-Arab Leftists are now advising Obama on how best to deal with Israel, as they did before.

While they denied playing any significant role at the Madrid Conference, it was reported by those present that they bounced from room to room, pressuring, making recommendations and otherwise guiding the tenor of those meetings.

While Ross, Miller and Kurtzer were doing their lobbying, mostly biased toward the Muslim Arab countries’ positions, I had an uneasy thought. I sensed and wrote back then that I thought the Baker team would urge some Arab Muslim country’s representative to ask for a “Nuclear-Free Zone” in the Middle East. Sure enough, near the end of the Conference, like a well-oiled scheme, the Egyptian representative did ask for a “Nuclear-Free Zone,” in effect, to eliminate Israel’s deterrence to enemies who far out-number her.

Since it was well-known that Israel probably had a Nuclear Deterrence (and was the only country in the area to be so endowed) clearly, the objective of this proclamation was, as pre-planned, to eliminate Israel’s deterrent capability. If Israel obeyed those “diktats” that would translate into Israel having to face Muslim Arab aggression with conventional weapons only and limited man-power compared to the huge population of the surrounding Arab Muslim countries.

This was Baker’s and his team’s objective. Without a Nuclear Deterrence, Israel could be invaded with forces superior in numbers and arms. Without a Nuclear Deterrence, Israel could be driven, if not into extinction, certainly into submission and forced to accept any compromise or surrender on Muslim Arab terms. Remember: the very word “Islam” means “Submission.”

I would presume that you, the reader, knows what that could mean to the Jewish nation of Israel. Israel would be forced into a dangerous compromise of territory, being swamped by the return of descendants from the 450,000 Arabs who left in 1948 – now dubiously claimed to number 3 to 5 million; Israel would suffer the loss of precious ancestral sites like the Temple Mount and the Cave of the Machpelah (burial place of the Patriarchs and Matriarchs); Israel would become a parched desert with the loss of scarce fresh water resources under the Judean, Samarian mountains and the Golan Heights which Israel would be forced to surrender; Israel would lose the defensive positions on those mountains and Heights, plus homes, farms, factories, synagogues, schools – just as happened in Gaza.

Can’t they learn from that bitter experience? The Israeli government cannot afford to (or simply refuses to) re-settle the 10,000 Jewish men, women and children that her corrupt leadership “ethnically cleansed” from the 21 thriving communities in Gush Katif and the 4 towns in the Northern Samaria. How then could she possibly re-settle 400,000 more from their homes in Judea, Samaria, the Jordan Valley, the Golan Heights and those parts of Jerusalem that were occupied and desecrated by Jordan for 19 years from 1948 to 1967?

Regardless, this is the plan driven by the Bush family, by Condoleezza Rice, James Baker, and now threatened to be carried forward by Obama and his advisory team of Arabists. [And Hillary will gladly implement this plan, to honor the memory of the husband of her girl friend, Suha Arafat. -- Allan.]

It appears that Baker’s Leftist Jew boys, “Ross, Miller and Kurtzer” (who were later joined by Martin Indyk) now are all advising Barack Obama. They have re-sold their old kettle of dead fish (a “Nuclear Free Zone”) to the Obama advisory team.

Keep in mind that many on Obama’s advisory team are notorious Jew-Haters from years past. Zbigniew Brzezinski, Robert Malley, Gen. James Jones, Jimmy Carter and Robert Gates have all been deeply linked to James Baker’s philosophy for years. Remember James Baker famously said to President Richard Nixon: “F**k the Jews. They didn’t vote for us anyway.”

Condoleezza Rice is scurrying to insert her personal and State Department hostility into the Obama camp to insure continuity. Hillary Clinton requires more analysis given (Bill’s and her) relationship to Yassir (and Suha) Arafat and having been given honorary status at every Islamic Conference, to say nothing of millions of dollars in contributions and honoraria!

Israel has not spoken about her Nuclear Deterrence but, everyone assumes it exists in volume. Most of the Arab Muslim countries do not dare attack in complete confidence and assurance that they would survive an Israeli counterstrike. However, the only unknown is Iran which operates on several tracks. The worst of these is their joyous acceptance of being utterly destroyed by Israel in retaliation if Mahmoud Ahmadinejad ever hits Israel with even one nuclear bomb or a “dirty” radioactive bomb. Why? Because, every faithful Muslim believes that if he (or she) dies in battle against the “infidel” (non-Muslim), he will go to Allah’s heaven with all the benefits that he believes he will each receive for himself and his family, including 72 virgins, rivers of honey, precious stones, et al, as fed by the martyr-myth in the Islamic cult.

I am uncomfortable in relying on Intelligence estimates that conclude that Iran, through its own capabilities has processed enough Uranium to make one atom bomb. The IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) has been wrong so many times, especially under its current Director General, the Egyptian Muhammad Al-Baradei. However, in June 2008 he predicted that Iran’s 3,800 centrifuges would have processed enough enriched Uranium for an Atom bomb in six months to a year – and that Iran might have 6,000 centrifuges enriching Uranium by the end of this year. The latest IAEA report affirmed that these goals have been reached and that Iran said it intended to install another group of 3,000 centrifuges early next year. The amount of enriched Uranium Iran is said to have would be sufficient for a Nagasaki size atom bomb. (2)

However, the NYT story on this “grapefruit-sized” amount of enriched Uranium did NOT discuss the possibility that this amount of Uranium could be used to make one or more “dirty” radio-active bombs – which would be quite deadly if used against the small state of Israel – a checkerboard only 300 miles long and 50 miles wide.

Also ignored in this report is the available fissile material on the Russian black market through the mafia of Russian generals. You may recall that at the collapse of the Soviet Union, East Germans and Russians were selling tanks and other military equipment. Numerous nuclear tactical artillery shells went “missing,” though to have been bought by cash-rich Iranian shoppers.

General Alexander Lebed said on 60 Minutes TV, September 7, 1997, that approximately 100 suitcase sized ‘bombs’ (out of 250 that the Soviets had created) also went missing. Lebed presented to the U.S. Congress in 1997 that 132 K.G.B.-produced suitcase bombs could not be accounted for. (3)

Then there is North Korea, which has never been known to miss a chance to sell nuclear know-how and materials.

Pakistan’s nuclear scientist, Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan, called the father of the Islamic Atom Bomb, sent out his scientific and technical knowledge to many Islamic states.

Israel can deal with Terrorists provided, however, that American and European Arabists do not tie Israel’s defensive capability (as they have) behind their backs. In order to overthrow Israel, the main objective would be to force Israel into destroying her Nuclear Deterrence. Then the numerous Muslim Arab armies could attack and ignore their losses to Israel’s conventional arms, knowing that they have much greater depth in forces which would eventually wear down Israel’s conventional man-power and equipment.

Many forces are at work spreading the myth that, if the Palestinians were pacified with a State of their own, they would cease their terror attacks against Israel. Moreover, they would cancel their Quran-dictated Charter to eliminate the Jews and the Jewish State. The spurious myth continues that such nations as Syria and Iran would no longer use Terror globally.

Adding to that myth, then the Arab League would also cancel their Qur`an-based PLO Charter to eliminate the non-Muslim “infidel” State of Israel as Muhammad demanded. While the cessation of Global Terror is a matter of fiction, it serves oil-driven Arabists as an adequate excuse to disarm Israel, thus appeasing the Arabs.

[So long as the elimination of a "kafir" state within their claimed "dar al-islam" is an islamic imperative, the pundits at our State Dep't can no more expect islam to give up their quest than they can expect the Vatican to give up Easter. Disarming Israel will only permit the muslims to destroy that nation - and, just perhaps, that is the ultimate goal of Obama and his advisers as well. -- Allan]

1. “Pressuring Israel To Suspend Nuclear Activity Will Not ‘Build Confidence’” by Shmuel Rosner Jerusalem Post Nov. 19, 2008

2. “Iran Said To Have Enough Nuclear Fuel For One Weapon” by William J. Broad and David S. Sanger New York Times November 20, 2008

3. Dr. Irwin Redlener, associate dean, Professor of Clinical Public Health and Director of the National Center for Disaster Preparedness at Columbia’s Mailman School of Public Health

* The Arabs in the Middle East have named our soon-to-be president-elect “Abu Hussein,” because of his middle name.

Obama Administration May Be Open to Shariah Banking and Finance

Fox News Reports “Shariah-compliant banking, sometimes called Islamic banking, is growing in popularity in the Western and Islamic worlds. But critics say American interest in the system at a time of economic crisis is opening the door to increased Islamic influence in the American banking system. Worse yet, some fear the banks may be helping to finance international terrorism.

In Shariah-compliant banking, lenders may not charge interest and investors cannot make money from forbidden industries like gambling, alcohol, pork and pornography. Selling debt, devising derivatives and short selling are also prohibited, and investments must be closely tied to actual assets.In the U.S., the Dow Jones Islamic Index tracks Shariah-compliant companies and funds, and funds have sprung up like the Amana Mutual Funds Trust and the Azzad Asset Management.

American investment funds, like those offered by TD Ameritrade and Charles Schwab, can invest in Shariah-compliant companies, and those companies can offer investments in American companies. Top holdings in the Azzad Ethical Midcap Fund, for example, include Western Digital Corp., Southwest Electric Co. and Apple Computer, Inc.

But allowing Shariah-compliant finance in the U.S. is green-lighting a seditious system that supports jihad, said Frank Gaffney, founder and president of the Center for Security Policy in Washington, D.C.

“If you understand what Shariah is, you understand that it is a pretty awful system. Not something that you’d want insinuated in your society and becoming a major feature of your economic system,” Gaffney said.

“Shariah (Islamic law as dictated by the Koran) governs all aspects of life, from the personal practice of the faith to how you relate to your family to how you relate to your business partners, to your community …. all the way up to how the world is run, and it is all one seamless program. You can’t say ‘I’ll take the personal pietistic practice … and skip the beheading and the flogging and the stoning and the global theocracy,’” he said.”

I fully expect an Obama administration and a liberal Congress will be very receptive to sharia banking. Then it will be come very easy for terrorists to operate at will within our borders because they will have easy access to financing to do so. Given our free society, someone with $50,000 in cash can operate almost invisibly for quite a long time and cause untold damage.

Buckle up folks, it’s going to be a bumpy ride.

Personally, I set the over/under for the next terrorist attack on U.S. soil to happen within 6 months of Obama taking office. I then put it at one chance in three that Obama will do anything but apologize.

Muslims’ Letter of Gratitude to America Christians for their Liberation

Iraqi bishop receives letter: “There is no place for you infidel Christians among the Muslim believers in Iraq from now on. Otherwise, our swords will be legalized over your neck”

In accordance with Qur’an 47:4 <http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/047.qmt.html#047.004> , which directs jihadists to “smite at the necks” of unbelievers. “Letter From Iraqi Muslim Group Orders All Christians Out of the Country,” from the Assyrian International News Agency <http://www.aina.org/news/20081117193211.htm> , November 18:

(AINA) — A Christian bishop received a threatening letter written by Ansar al-Islam, a Kurdish Muslim group affiliated with al-Qaeda in Iraq. The letter ordered the Christians to leave Iraq en masse and stated it is sending a final warning to Christians in Baghdad and other Iraqi governorates to leave Iraq permanently.

The letter was published on Al-Ittihad’s website <http://www.alitthad.com/paper.php?name=News&file=article&sid=46250> , a daily newspaper that covers Iraqi politics.

Here is the translation of the letter:

The General Secretariat of the Adherent of Islam Brigade has decided to address the final warning to you and to all your adherents and flocks, the infidel Christian Crusaders, in Baghdad and the other governorates and order you to leave immediately, in masses and permanently from the Muslim countries (Iraq) and to join Pope Benedict the sixteenth and his followers who crossed over the greatest symbols of humanity and Islam.

There is no place for you infidel Christians among the Muslim believers in Iraq from now on. Otherwise, our swords will be legalized over your neck and the necks of you followers and flocks similar to what happened to the Christians living in Mosul.

God is our witness
He who warns is excused
The General Secretariat of the Adherents of Islam Brigade

Posted by Marisol at November 18, 2008 12:01 AM

“Jihad With Money,” Part 2

The previous post informed you of a new video on our website describing the emerging and serious threat of shariah-compliant financing, or “Jihad with money.” If you haven’t yet viewed it we encourage you to do so by logging on to www.actforamerica.org.

The commentary below, written by Melanie Phillips, gives us further insight into the chilling ramifications for countries that are buying into this “Jihad with money.” Ms. Phillips is well-respected for her research on issues like this and is the author of a book we highly recommend entitled Londonistan.

One sentence deserves particular attention. Ms. Phillips notes that “Sharia banking was devised by mid-20th century Islamist ideologues specifically to further their strategy for global Islamic rule by creating separate administrative systems.”


Beware this Saudi deal to help bail out Britain. It comes with a devastating IOU

Melanie Phillips UK Mail Online

Last updated at 11:55 PM on 09th November 2008 

With all eyes fixed upon the political excitements in the U.S, few have paid much attention to a trip made by the Prime Minister several thousand miles in the opposite direction.

A week ago Gordon Brown, accompanied by his new best friend the Business Secretary Lord Mandelson, went cap in hand to Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states to ask them to help bail out the stricken economies of the West by pumping billions into the International Monetary Fund.

It is more than a little strange that the British Prime Minister should have apparently taken it upon himself to speak on behalf of the IMF. But the real concern is that asking for help from Saudi Arabia is not like tapping your friendly neighbourhood bank manager for a bigger overdraft.

No, this loan comes with a devastating IOU — nothing less than a big slice of control over Britain and the West by a regime at the heart of the attempt to bring about the Islamisation of the free world.

Granted, this country is facing a truly grave financial crisis. But does this mean we should remortgage the future of the West to those whose most radical elements are actively engaged in seeing it destroyed?

Alarming
I have long been concerned by Britain’s failure to acknowledge the true nature of the threat from global Islamism. This latest move is yet more alarming evidence of that process.

Saudi Arabia is at the root of the Islamic onslaught against the West. It is Saudi’s Wahhabi form of Islam which, along with its Shi’ite counterpart in Iran, aims to restore the dominance of Islam in the world and destroy rule by ‘unbelievers’.

It is Saudi money which has fuelled the enormous spread of Wahhabi mosques, preachers and educational institutions in this country, delivering the message of holy war and radicalising countless thousands of British Muslims.

And it is this Saudi ideology which was the inspiration for Al Qaeda.

True, Al Qaeda turned upon Saudi itself on account of its ties with the U.S. As a result, Saudi regards Al Qaeda as its mortal enemy, and as such co-operates with Britain and the U.S in combating it.

But sometimes, to rephrase the old adage, our enemy’s enemy is not actually our friend, but our enemy as well.

Saudi Wahhabism seeks to conquer the West through a pincer movement comprising violence on the one hand and cultural infiltration and takeover on the other.

At the very least, Saudi Arabia speaks with the most lethal of forked tongues, and we should actively be seeking to diminish its influence over our affairs.

But instead our Prime Minister is effectively offering it yet more opportunity to control us.

Mr Brown claimed he did not want such investment to be used to gain political influence. But Lord Mandelson blurted out the truth when he acknowledged that the Saudis and other Gulf states would expect a bigger role in global institutions in return.

Takeover: The Islamic world has already bought Manchester City football club.
This should be enough to chill the British marrow. Islamic influence is already spreading in Britain and the West, way beyond Muslim communities themselves.

The Islamic world is buying a financial stake in increasing numbers of Western institutions. Among its latest acquisitions are Manchester City Football Club, which was sold to the ruling family of Abu Dhabi, and Barclays Bank, which has secured an almost £6 billion capital injection from Abu Dhabi and Qatar.

Extremist Islamist ideas are also being spread through Islamic study centres attached to our universities. According to Professor Anthony Glees, eight universities — including Oxford and Cambridge — have accepted more than £233.5 million from Saudi and Muslim sources since 1995, spreading radicalism and helping create within Britain two separate identities and sets of allegiance.

‘Bribery’
Shockingly, Saudi blackmail has also forced Britain to suspend its own rule of law by ditching the bribery investigation into the arms deal between Saudi Arabia and BAE systems, in response to an explicit threat made by the Saudi authorities that, if the case continued, ‘British lives on British streets’ would be at risk.

Those aren’t my words, they are from Britain’s former ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles.

Thus, the Islamists are already pulling British strings through the supremely manipulative combination of the threat of violence and the lure of unbridled wealth.

Apparently oblivious to all this, however, Mr Brown has pledged to make London the global centre of Islamic banking. Accordingly, Britain’s major banks are eagerly embracing sharia finance, on the basis that it is a source of vast wealth.

What they fail to realise is that sharia is also a project for Islamising society, and wherever it is embraced it will use its position to do precisely that. The assumption is that sharia banking — which has at its heart the prohibition of interest — accords with ancient Islamic religious principles. Not so.

Sharia banking was devised by mid-20th century Islamist ideologues specifically to further their strategy for global Islamic rule by creating separate administrative systems.

Muslims are required to donate a proportion of their income to charity, including the money that goes through the sharia banking system.

Yet in many instances, the clerics deciding where this ‘charity’ money should go are the spiritual godfathers of terror, such as Sheik Yusuf Qaradawi, who supports suicide bombing in Iraq and Israel, and Sheik Muhammed Taqi Usmani, who has admitted he ran a madrassa that supported the Taliban, yet who sits on the sharia supervisory board of the Dow Jones Islamic Index Fund.

It’s no surprise, then, that many charitable donations end up being channelled straight into terrorist organisations such as Hamas and Hezbollah.

But apart from being a global money-laundering exercise for terrorism, sharia banking is also a beachhead in the attempt by radical Islam to infiltrate British and Western society.

‘Seductive’

The key point is that sharia does not recognise the superior authority of the secular law of the land.

Sharia financial institutions may not be making this clear — they don’t want to frighten people away — but at some future time they may do so. This is how they will endeavour to spread sharia beyond their own territory.

There are already examples of sharia regulations over-riding commercial decisions. Citibank, for example, launched the Saudi American Bank (SAB) in Jeddah and Riyadh. In 1980, the Saudis abruptly seized the SAB, denied Citibank all future profits and ordered it to train Saudi staffers because the bank was judged insufficiently Muslim.

When trillions of pounds and dollars become locked into Islamic banking and Saudi and other Islamic institutions, who will be in a position to argue with the Islamists when they finally call in their IOUs?

But our politicians and financiers seem blind to this prospect — because they are mesmerised by the seductive prospect of so much wealth.

Moreover, the British establishment does not believe that what we are being subjected to is a religious war. That is why their response to the steady encroachment of Islamic radicalism in our society is so weak.

And that is why I fear the British Prime Minister is in danger of selling this country to those who are intent upon undermining our most treasured freedoms.

More than giving hostages to fortune, he is enabling fortune itself to hold Britain hostage.

“Jihad With Money,” Part 3

One of the features of Shariah-Compliant Finance is that financial institutions who participate in it may well be helping to finance terrorism through monies contributed to Islamic charities. As the article below reveals, some of these so-called “legitimate” charities have been funding and continue to fund terrorism.


Charities and
Terrorism

by Phil Leggiere
Thursday, 06 November 2008 

New paper examines how Al Qaeda uses moderate Muslims to ‘microfinance” terror.

Terrorist networks and organizations have many “underground” means of financing themselves, from drug smuggling to cybercrime. As challenging as these clandestine methods are to globally eradicate, an equally vexing problem is how to shut-off jihadist funding siphoned off from so-called “legitimate” charities.

Addressing that problem, according to Tolga Koker Department of Economics and Carlos Yordan Department of Political Science Drew University, means addressing the question of why tens of thousands of Muslims who are not terrorists and often opposed themselves to terrorism nonetheless support the work of charities that support jihadist operations. Their new paper, titled Microfinancing Terrorism: A Study in Al Qaeda Financing Strategy, published Tuesday by the Social Science Research Network, tries to do just that.

Although new banking and financial regulations may have made it difficult for terrorist groups to move funds around the world, the authors argue, these groups have be quite resourceful in finding ways to adapt to the new regulatory environment and to undermine it.

“For terrorist networks,” they write, “especially those informed by jihadist ideologies, one source of finance is Muslims’ religious donations to Islamic charities. Although Al Qaeda and its affiliates have employed other funding mechanisms, individual donations are a key source of financing because it is a steady flow of funds.

Charities, according to the report, have been a fundamental part of Al Qaeda’s financial Infrastructure, not only helping Al Qaeda raise funds, but allowing it to move funds across national boundaries and hide the transfers from financial regulators.

Though some charities, according to the authors knowingly and actively supported Al Qaeda’s efforts, “most were not aware that al Qaeda operatives working for these charities or that they were siphoning off thousands of dollars to fund terrorist activities and to build Al Qaeda’s global network, which supported jihadist struggles in Chechnya, the Balkans, Kashmir, Afghanistan, Central Asia, and Southeast Asia.”

“Given that Al Qaeda and other groups fund most of their activities through donations, collected by Islamic charities, why would Muslims provide funds to these organizations,” the authors ask.

The answer, the authors conclude, is that “social pressure forces moderate Muslims to publicly support the work of charities that may provide assistance to Al Qaeda or groups inspired by a jihadist worldview.”

As they explain it, an individual will comply with social pressures and donate funds to a charity that may supports jihadi causes if he perceives it as critical to his reputation and public recognition as a “practicing” Muslim. Given the primacy of charitable donations in the culture and status system of Muslim communities the need to maintain reputation in this sphere is a powerful force, one that Al Qaeda has been able to tap.

“Microfinancing jihadi charities has a snowballing effect,” they write. “A Muslim who previously refrained from donating to Islamic charities is likely to find himself in a position to provide some funds to religious organizations if he constantly observes his fellow acquaintances’ donations. As a bigger portion of Muslims are yielding to social pressures to contribute extra monies to jihadi charities, al Qaeda and other groups informed by jihadi goals will secure more funds to run their violent operations.”

The reputational model of charitable behavior, the authors believe, has strong implications for policy and counter-terror strategy.

“The model implies,” they say, “that identifying first and then publicly exposing such charities may help pious Muslims, especially those with high expressive drive to sincerely voice their concern among their communities. Encouraging individual donors with high threshold to voice their opinion against violence may create a snowballing effect deterring others from contributing to possible jihadi charities.”

“More importantly,” they conclude, “finding ways to decrease reputational benefits is crucial in curbing the financial resources flowing terrorist networks. However, this is not an easy task. It needs the involvement of secular charities to provide several basic services that were considerably diminished with the neo-liberal polices since the 1980s in Muslim countries and elsewhere. Strictly regulated foreign aid to secular charities may help in this regard.”

The ultimate goal of this campaign of cultural outreach will be “making contribution to jihadi charities unpopular, and hence, changing the direction of social pressure from donating monies to such charities to avoiding such organization will have a paramount effect in the fight against terrorism. This is a long-term goal which is not feasible in the very short run since it asks for major revisions in world politics of which the jihadi charities are by-products.”