This has to be one of the most thought provoking pieces I’ve recently read. It is written by a Jewish Rabbi from Teaneck, N.J. It is far and away the most succinct and thoughtful explanation of how our nation is changing . The article appeared in The Israel National News, and is directed to Jewish readership. 70% of American Jews vote as Democrats.(So what were those Jews thinking 2012?)
The Rabbi has some interesting comments in that regard. Rabbi Steven Pruzansky is the spiritual leader of Congregation Bnai Yeshurun in Teaneck, New Jersey.
“The most charitable way of explaining the election results of 2012 is that Americans voted for the status quo – for the incumbent President and for a divided Congress. They must enjoy gridlock, partisanship, incompetence, economic stagnation and avoidance of responsibility. And fewer people voted.
But as we awake from the nightmare, it is important to eschew the facile explanations for the Romney defeat that will prevail among the chattering classes. Romney did not lose because of the effects of Hurricane Sandy that devastated this area, nor did he lose because he ran a poor campaign, nor did he lose because the Republicans could have chosen better candidates, nor did he lose because Obama benefited from a slight uptick in the economy due to the business cycle.
Romney lost because he didn’t get enough votes to win.
That might seem obvious, but not for the obvious reasons. Romney lost because the conservative virtues – the traditional American virtues – of liberty, hard work, free enterprise, private initiative and aspirations to moral greatness – no longer inspire or animate a majority of the electorate.
The simplest reason why Romney lost was because it is impossible to compete against free stuff.
Every businessman knows this; that is why the “loss leader” or the giveaway is such a powerful marketing tool. Obama’s America is one in which free stuff is given away: the adults among the 47,000,000 on food stamps clearly recognized for whom they should vote, and so they did, by the tens of millions; those who – courtesy of Obama – receive two full years of unemployment benefits (which, of course, both disincentives’ looking for work and also motivates people to work off the books while collecting their windfall) surely know for whom to vote. The lure of free stuff is irresistible.
The defining moment of the whole campaign was the revelation of the secretly-recorded video in which Romney acknowledged the difficulty of winning an election in which “47% of the people” start off against him because they pay no taxes and just receive money – “free stuff” – from the government.
Almost half of the population has no skin in the game – they don’t care about high taxes, promoting business, or creating jobs, nor do they care that the money for their free stuff is being borrowed from their children and from the Chinese. They just want the free stuff that comes their way at someone else’s expense. In the end, that 47% leaves very little margin for error for any Republican, and does not bode well for the future.
It is impossible to imagine a conservative candidate winning against such overwhelming odds. People do vote their pocketbooks. In essence, the people vote for a Congress who will not raise their taxes, and for a President who will give them free stuff, never mind who has to pay for it.
That engenders the second reason why Romney lost: the inescapable conclusion that the electorate is ignorant and uninformed. Indeed, it does not pay to be an informed voter, because most other voters – the clear majority – are unintelligent and easily swayed by emotion and raw populism. That is the indelicate way of saying that too many people vote with their hearts and not their heads. That is why Obama did not have to produce a second term agenda, or even defend his first-term record. He needed only to portray Mitt Romney as a rapacious capitalist who throws elderly women over a cliff, when he is not just snatching away their cancer medication, while starving the poor and cutting taxes for the rich.
During his 1956 presidential campaign, a woman called out to Adlai Stevenson:
“Senator, you have the vote of every thinking person!” Stevenson called back:
“That’s not enough, madam, we need a majority!” Truer words were never spoken.
Obama could get away with saying that “Romney wants the rich to play by a different set of rules” – without ever defining what those different rules were; with saying that the “rich should pay their fair share” – without ever defining what a “fair share” is; with saying that Romney wants the poor, elderly and sick to “fend for themselves” – without even acknowledging that all these government programs are going bankrupt, their current insolvency only papered over by deficit spending.
Similarly, Obama (or his surrogates) could hint to blacks that a Romney victory would lead them back into chains and proclaim to women that their abortions and birth control would be taken away. He could appeal to Hispanics that Romney would have them all arrested and shipped to Mexico and unabashedly state that he will not enforce the current immigration laws. He could espouse the furtherance of the incestuous relationship between governments and unions – in which politicians ply the unions with public money, in exchange for which the unions provide the politicians with votes, in exchange for which the politicians provide more money and the unions provide more votes, etc., even though the money is gone.
Obama also knows that the electorate has changed – that whites will soon be a minority in America (they’re already a minority in California) and that the new immigrants to the US are primarily from the Third World and do not share the traditional American values that attracted immigrants in the 19th and 20th centuries. It is a different world, and a different America. Obama is part of that different America, knows it, and knows how to tap into it. That is why he won.
Obama also proved again that negative advertising works, invective sells, and harsh personal attacks succeed. That Romney never engaged in such diatribes points to his essential goodness as a person; his “negative ads” were simple facts, never personal abuse – facts about high unemployment, lower take-home pay, a loss of American power and prestige abroad, a lack of leadership, etc. As a politician, though, Romney failed because he did not embrace the devil’s bargain of making unsustainable promises.
It turned out that it was not possible for Romney and Ryan – people of substance, depth and ideas – to compete with the shallow populism and platitudes of their opponents. Obama mastered the politics of envy – of class warfare – never reaching out to Americans as such but to individual groups, and cobbling together a winning majority from these minority groups. If an Obama could not be defeated – with his record and his vision of America, in which free stuff seduces voters – it is hard to envision any change in the future.
The road to Hillary Clinton in 2016 and to a European-socialist economy – those very economies that are collapsing today in Europe – is paved.
For Jews, mostly assimilated anyway and staunch Democrats, the results demonstrate again that liberalism is their Torah. Almost 70% voted for a president widely perceived by Israelis and most committed Jews as hostile to Israel. They voted to secure Obama’s future at America’s expense and at Israel’s expense – in effect, preferring Obama to Netanyahu by a wide margin.
A dangerous time is ahead. Under present circumstances, it is inconceivable that the US will take any aggressive action against Iran and will more likely thwart any Israeli initiative. The US will preach the importance of negotiations up until the production of the first Iranian nuclear weapon – and then state that the world must learn to live with this new reality.
But this election should be a wake-up call to Jews. There is no permanent Empire, nor is there an enduring haven for Jews anywhere in the exile. The American empire began to decline in 2007, and the deterioration has been exacerbated in the last five years. This election only hastens that decline. Society is permeated with sloth, greed, envy and materialistic excess. It has lost its moorings and its moral foundations. The takers outnumber the givers, and that will only increase in years to come.
The “Occupy” riots across this country in the last two years were mere dress rehearsals for what lies ahead – years of unrest sparked by the increasing discontent of the unsuccessful who want to seize the fruits and the bounty of the successful, and do not appreciate the slow pace of redistribution.
If this election proves one thing, it is that the Old America is gone. And, sad for the world, it is not coming back.”
The problems we face today are there because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.
(Washington, D.C., April 26, 2013) — Tzachi Hanegbi, a close, trusted, long-time personal friend and confidante of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, made remarks on Tuesday at a security conference in Tel Aviv that did not make news in the U.S. But they should have.
Hanegbi explained that the time for sanctions, diplomacy and covert options to neutralize the Iranian threat is over, and the time for Israel to use its military option has come.
“It’s now or never,” said Hanegbi, “and the option of never does not exist.”
Hanegbi formerly served as the Minister of Intelligence and as Justice Minister in previous governments. He is currently a Member of Knesset (Likud).
“Israel has to act according to its own imperatives,” he said.
Given how close Hanegbi and Netanyahu are — and given how sensitive the current moment is — it is difficult to believe Hanegbi spoke without knowing the Prime Minister’s mind, and without having his blessing to make such ominous remarks.
I, for one, am praying for peace. I don’t want to see another war in the Middle East. I’m asking the Lord to bring down the regime in Tehran, and sabotage their nuclear weapons projects, and keep Tehran from going to far. But even as I pray for peace, I know Israel is preparing for war.
Consider other indicators that an Israeli first strike may be increasingly close at hand….
[To read the full article, please go to the blog.]
ALSO ON THE BLOG:
U.S. says Syria used chemical weapons: Countdown to military action against Damascus?
Israel shoots down drone from Lebanon
U.S.-Israel sign new arms deal, but Obama team refuses to sell bunker buster bombs. What message does that send to Iran?
Canada arrests two in al-Qaeda terror plot connected to Iran
Israeli intel: Damascus used chemical weapons against rebels
How it went down: The most interesting coverage of the hunt for the Boston terror bombers
Is war with Iran unavoidable? Video of my Fox News interview on what lessons Israeli leaders are drawing from North Korean nuclear crisis.
“Damascus Countdown” spends 5 weeks on NYT bestseller list.
[To read these articles — and/or learn more about DAMASCUS COUNTDOWN; or to find links to the latest news and analysis of events and trends in the U.S., Israel, North Africa, Russia, and the Middle East — please go to:http://flashtrafficblog.wordpress.com/.]
Leonard Magruder – Founder/President Former professor of psychology – Suffolk College, N.Y., Director of Counseling and Research – Univ. of N.D.(ret.)
“Everyone knows they are trying to kill us but its like we can’t say that.” witness to judge, Murfreesboro
THE ANSWER TO BOSTON’S “WHY” – SHOW THIS FILM by Leonard Magruder
Our new mission began shortly after 9/11, with the desire to understand what was behind terrorism. What became increasingly apparent as the reading and research went along, over a period now of nine years and over a hundred books, is that it is Vietnam all over again. Media and academia robbing the American people of the ability to make critical judgements about their most vital security interests in a time of war. Media and academia, and now even the Obama administration, will not mention, are keeping from the American people, what is the central theme throughout my library on Islam – throughout all the literature – the violence that has been a central part of Islam throughout its history- Jihad.
By the time we posted our first article on wmdterror.com on July 31, 2003, four things were clear from our research:
1) The root cause of terrorism is to be found in the teachings of Islam, the religion, not in poverty or American foreign policy.
2) Academia and the media, brainwashed by multiculturalism and political correctness, were hiding the fact from the American people.
3) Misguided as to the root cause, the government had no policy to meet the threat of continuing terrorism.
4) The only solution is the president publicly naming Islam the enemy and warning of catastrophic retaliation on Islam and its symbols, such as Mecca, to any attack on the U.S..
The fact is, no honest scholar could possibly come up with any other conclusions. As you see here, William Bennett, professor of philosophy and former Sec.of Education, only seven months after 9/11, had already arrived at basically these same conclusions in the first book anywhere on the issue, “Why We Fight: Moral Clarity and the War on Terrorism”. Bennett was the first to name correctly both the external enemy, and the internal enemy:
“Among the many vanguard institutions of this ideological movement – from Osama bin Laden’s worldwide al-Qaeda to Hamas and Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad in the Middle East and North Africa., to the Islamist insurgencies in Indonesia and the Philippines, to their brethren in Central Asia and Pakistan, to the regimes holding actual power in Iran, and the Sudan – there is no question that Islam is at war with the West and specifically with America.”
As to why America was having trouble facing this fact, and this is the background to the widespread denial of the violent nature of Islam, he wrote:
“For forty years, leading educators and intellectuals have been saying and writing and teaching that the United States was no better and might be even worse than its enemies; that Western “civilization” was a mask under which one perfidy after another had been visited upon the poorer nations of the world; that good and evil themselves were matters of perspective; if not of mere opinion. Some of the noblest ideas ever framed in the mind of man, including democracy, patriotism, honor and freedom, had been systematically drained of meaning; to some younger Americans they were now without content altogether. There has been a great forgetting, and the result has been a kind of unilateral disarmament. That way lies a generation prepared only for accommodation, appeasement, and surrender. ”
In studying Islam you learn to be alert to two groups in particular, Western scholars who want to present Islam in the most inoffensive terms possible, and Muslim apologists, who argue Islam is “peaceful”- in defiance of all religious and historical evidence to the contrary. The books written by Muslim converts, or present or former FBI or CIA analysts, or counter-terrorism experts are the ones you learn to rely on to be objective. Here are some of the authors whose names appear repeatedly on the rosters of symposiums and conferences on terrorism, although these events are almost always boycotted by media and academia. And rarely are any invited to speak on campus.When Brigette Gabriel spoke recently at the University of Memphis it took ten policemen to save her from an assault by members of the Muslim Student Association. Some authors have to remain in hiding because of death threats, as does Geert Wilder of the Netherlands for producing “Fitna”, which documents in film the clear connection between terrorism and the Koran.
Walid Phares Andrew McCarthy Kenneth Timmerman Robert Spencer Whalid Shoebat Steve Emerson Dr. Andrew Bostom Bat Ye’or Abdullah Al-Araby Brigette Gabriel Paul Williams Nonie Darwish Ayann Hirsi Ali David Horowitz Michael Evans Mark Gabriel SergeTrikovic
Here is what happens when a university does allow one of these boycotted experts on Islam, like Steve Emerson or Robert Spencer, in this case Ayaan Hirsi Ali, to be heard. Prior to a debate, “Religion of Peace ? ” the audience of 800 at New York University was polled as to what they thought about the issue, and results showed 41 percent were for ‘peaceful’, 25 percent were for ‘violent’ 34 percent were ‘undecided’. After the debate, poll results revealed a dramatic change from the results at the beginning of the night — 36 percent were now for ‘peaceful’, 55 percent were for ‘violent’ and 9 percent were undecided.
Let’s look at this reversal carefully:
Before the debate: 25% violent, 34 % undecided After the debate: 55% violent, 9% percent undecided.
The scriptures of the Koran call for violence until Islam dominates the world. That task will be unending. Therefore, logically, there is only one solution to the problem – the total eradication of Islam. Orherwise we are just sitting here while Boston type events occur again and again, until the final nuclear attack when America is brought to its knees. We begin, then, with all the governments of the free world denouncing Islam as a false religion, and the Koran as the root cause of terrorism. At the same time threats of retaliation are put in place. The next step could be deportation, all Muslims back to their original lands.The situation becomes clearer if we understand what goes on in Mecca these days. An article on this on the Internet not long ago begins, “This week in Mecca we can watch on Memri video at the height of the Muslim spiritual Hajj, the holiest time and holiest site of all Islam, Muslims screaming for the death and mutilation of all infidels, but specifically Americans and Jews. They cry to their god for our hands to be chopped off and to be murdered, while thanking Allah for his greatness.” A very crucial point – These are not “radical” Muslims. They are ordinary Muslims from all over the world, drunk with hatred inspired by the Koran.
The problem is that all this puts the Islamic world at total odds with the rest of the world. Obama does not want you reading anything about that. Nor does the Muslim world. At an April 2005 meeting of the UN Human Rights Commission, its 51 Islamic members, the Organization of Islamic Conference, (OIC) refused to condemn those who kill in the name of religion, and in fact said that criticism of Muslim terrorists amounted to “defamation of religion.” There it is, for the whole world to see. The right to murder in the name of God.
Two items that demonstrate the suppression of the truth about Islam:
Diana West, one of the most perceptive analysts we have on the subject of Islam in her book, “The Death of the Grown-Up”, writes of the cover-up:
“Both the the topic of Islam.and the topic of Islamization – are verboten. Islam as a whole, as a historical continuum, as the theology of what we know as terrorism, as a rationale for dhimmi repression (Islamic slavery), is off the charts; out of bounds, really, and way beyond acceptable discourse. The issues central to Islam’s incompatibility with modernity are ignored according to an unspoken consensus, and thus, never appear on the public agenda. What is left is a black hole. But – there does exist a formidable body of contemporary scholarship that bravely explicates the history of jihad and its modern- day applications. But such scholarship has been largely relegated to the sidelines, scholarship all but ignored by elites for purposes of public discussion and debate. Ex-Muslim intellectuals such as Ibn Warraq, Ali Sina, Wafa Sultan, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and Brigette Gabriel, are held at arm’s length…out in the cold, their copious knowledge of the dire perils of jihad unheeded, unexplored, undebated. This has helped enforce a terrible silence on the urgent questions of our times”
To show how the Obama administration suppresses the truth about Islam, in our recent article, “FBI and the Koran ,” posted on wmdterror.com on Oct 27, 2011, we summed up that growing issue as follows
“What has happened is that the FBI, seeking to put together a comprehensive library of books on Islam managed to include a significant number of those authors who document the Median or violent verses of the Koran as the true root cause of terrorism.(Many from the above list) Deputy U.S. Attorney General James Cole confirmed on Wednesday that the Obama administration had removed all these authors from the FBI library in Quantico. Dwight C. Holton, the U.S. Attorney in Oregon said he had spoken with Holder directly about the issue of the terror training materials:
“I want to be perfectly clear about this: training materials that portray Islam as a religion of violence or with a tendency towards violence are wrong, they are offensive, and they are contrary to everything that this president, this attorney general and Department of Justice stands for.”
As to how “homegrown radicals” come about, people convert to Islam. The violence is in the religion. This recent study throws light on that:
Shari’a and Violence in American Mosques by Mordechai Kedar and David Yerushalmi Middle East Quarterly – Summer 2011
“The authors of this article undertook a survey specifically designed to determine empirically whether a correlation exists between observable measures of religious devotion linked to Shari’a adherence in American mosques and the presence of violence-positive materials at those mosques.The mosques surveyed contained a variety of texts, ranging from contemporary printed pamphlets and handouts to classic texts of the Islamic canon. From the perspective of promoting violent jihad, the literature types were ranked in the survey from severe to moderate to nonexistent. Works by several respected jurists and scholars from the four major Sunni schools of jurisprudence, dating from the eighth to fourteenth centuries, are all in agreement that violent jihad against non-Muslims is a religious obligation. Such behavior is normative.. The survey’s findings were that 51 percent of mosques had texts that either advocated the use of violence in the pursuit of a Shari’a-based political order or advocated violent jihad as a duty that should be of paramount importance to a Muslim; 30 percent had only texts that were moderately supportive of violence, 19 percent had no violent texts at all. By promotion of jihad, the study included literature encouraging worshipers to engage in terrorist activity, to provide financial support to jihadists, and to promote the establishment of a caliphate in the United States. These materials also explicitly praised acts of terror against the West; praised symbols or role models of violent jihad; promoted the use of force, terror, war, and violence to implement the Shari’a; emphasized the inferiority of non-Muslim life; promoted hatred and intolerance toward non-Muslims ; and endorsed inflammatory materials with anti-U.S. views. Of the 51 mosques that contained severe materials, 100 percent were led by imams who recommended that worshipers study texts that promote violence.”
(Steve Emerson, one of the boycotted authors, was the first American journalist to document in chilling video, one year before 9/11, what goes on in many mosques across America. See “The Terrorists Among Us: Jihad in America.” At their events and in this film, recruiters state their murderous intentions in their own words. “Blood must flow, there must be widows, there must be orphans, hands and limbs must be cut and blood spread everywhere in order that Allah’s religion stand on its own feet.”)
The way the media, and the university, keep the truth hidden about Islam is to talk about “radical” Islam, as opposed, they would have you believe, to a “vast majority” of Muslims that are not radical. Here are three items that show that the distinction is false.
Osama bin laden and his theorist al Zawahiri in particular have provided us with numerous texts outlining the Islamic foundations of their war against the West. A few of these pronouncements and manifestations have been long been available, but now thanks to Raymond Ibrahim’s “The Al Qaeda Reader” writings previously unavailable in English can be studied and analyzed. Such study provides powerful evidence that contrary to the deceptions of apologists and the naive delusions of some Westerners, the bases of the jihadists’ actions lied squarely within Islamic tradition, not in alleged Western crimes against Islam. The documents in the first section make a sustained, coherent argument for offensive jihad based on the Koran.
“Zawahiri’s writings especially are grounded in Islam’s roots of jurisprudence, in fact of the many thousands of words translated here from his three treatises, more than half are direct quotations from the Koran, the Sunna and the consensus and conclusions of the Ulema .This extensive grounding weakens the “hijacking ” charge apologists use to explain Islam jihad. On the contrary, al Qaeda’s arguments are unexceptionally traditional – which is , or course , why millions of Muslims accept them. In these writings addressed to fellow Muslims, bin Laden and Zawahiri argue against the notion of “moderate;” Islam, the compatibility of Sharia law with democracy, the idea of accommodation with the enemy, and the prohibition against killing women and children. In other words, they meticulously attack as distortions of Islam all the popular assertions about Islam’s nature promulgated by apologists and Westernized Muslims. Even the idea of “co-existence” is a Western idea contrary to Islam. wrote bin Laden, “As if one of the foundations of our religion is how to coexist with infidels ! Quite the contrary: the traditions and foundations of Islam urge believers to “wage war against the infidels and the hypocrites , and be ruthless against them.” (Koran 66:9) Allah commands the waging of Jihad against the infidel by use of sword, sermons, and the summons to Allah. ” For that part of the Muslim world, which is rapidly expanding, that wishes to destroy the West, the “root cause;” is absolutely the Koran. The roots of terrorism, in al-Qaeda, and in all other terrorist enclaves found in practically all Muslim nations, is to be found strictly in the Koran. We are absolutely at war with Islam.
Andrew C. McCarthy of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, who prosecuted the mastermind of the first Towers attack, explains how jihad radiates throughout the Muslim world.
“The principal challenge of al-Qaeda is that it spearheads the spread of a strong, though noxious, ideology. The group does not purport to give directions only to its own members, it presumes to be guiding all Muslims toward that which Islam compels. This is abundantly clear from bin Laden’s infamous 1998 fatwa. “The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies – civilian and military – is an individual’s duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it. This is in accordance with the words of Almighty God.” The direction is to everyone. In bin Laden’s mind he is merely the medium, the direction comes from Allah. He cites verses from the Koran to show Muslims that it is the ideology itself which announces these commands, compelling every Muslim, not just al-Qaeda operatives, to perform. But the ideology indisputably springs from Islam.”
Analysts David R. Frum and Richard Perle write about the issue the issue in their book, “An End to Evil:”
“The terrorists kill and will accept death for a cause with which no accommodation is possible. That cause is militant Islam. Moreover, these beliefs are not really confined to a radical fringe, but infect even ordinary Muslims. Even though it is comforting to deny it, all the available evidence indicates that militant Islam commands wide support , and even wider sympathy, among Muslims worldwide, including Muslim minorities in the West. The roots of Muslim rage are to be found in Islam itself. While there are multiple terrorist groups, the common element of Islam makes the threat monolithic. The ideology that justifies the terrible crimes of Hamas and Hezbollah is the same ideology that justifies the crimes of al-Qaeda. The result is the unlimited threat to dominate the world through Jihad.The aim is to overthrow our civilization and remake the nations of the world into Islamic societies , imposing on the whole world its religion and law.The result is an unlimited threat to dominate the world through Jihad.”
Note on the meaning of the term “jihad.” From “Understanding Jihad”, by David Cook.”Warfare with spiritual significance, is the primary and root meaning of the term as it has been defined by classical Muslim jurists and legal scholars and as it was practiced by Muslims during the premodern period. This meaning is sustained in the standard definition given in the “Encyclopedia of Islam,” “In law, according to general doctrine and in historical tradition, the jihad consists of military action with the object of the expansion of Islam.” This terse summary of Muslim law and history is the standard, scholarly one. ” The idea that jihad means spiritual exertion has never been the primary meaning. That is Muslim propaganda.
Watch this video in which Bill Maher debates Keith Ellison, the one Muslim in Congress, on the nature of Islam. At one point Maher quotes author Sam Harris as charging Islam with being violent. Elliot vigorously denies this. Here is what Harris wrote in his book “End of Faith:”
“There is no question that, at this point in history, Islam represents a unique danger to all of us. Many Muslims are basically rational and tolerant of others. But as we will see, these virtues are not likely to be products of their faith. Insofar as a person is observant of the doctrines of Islam, that is, insofar as he really believes it, he will pose a problem for us. Most people in position of leadership in this country will say there is no direct link between the Muslim faith and terrorism. It is clear, however, that Muslims hate the West because of their faith and that the Koran mandates such hatred. It is widely claimed by ‘moderates’ that Islam is a ‘religion of peace.’ You need only to read the Koran to see that this is untrue. The basic thrust of Islam is undeniable: convert, subjugate, or kill unbelievers; kill apostates, and conquer the world. There is no substitute for confronting the Koran itself. On almost every page, the Koran instructs Muslims to despise non-believers. We are at war with Islam. It may not serve our immediate foreign policy objectives for our political leaders to openly acknowledge this fact, but it is unambiguously the truth. It is not true that we are at war with an otherwise “peaceful religion” that has been “hijacked” by extremists. We are at war with precisely the vision of life that is prescribed to all Muslims in the Koran.”
And the world’s dream of an effective “moderate” counter-movement is a fantasy. For the simple reason that the Islam of “jihad” can always trump moderates with quotes direct from the Koran. Contextual reinterpretation is not acceptable to the vast majority of Islamic scholars, who also hold to the principle of “abrogation,” the rule that says the more violent verses of the later Koran of the bloody Medina period nullify the more peaceful verses of the earlier Meccan period.
In his book Harris quotes over 300 of the hateful verses or “suras” in the Koran. Here are a few. How can anyone miss the violence at the heart of Islam ?
9. 5 Slay the idolaters wherever you find them…lie in ambush everywhere for them.
22. 9 Garments of fire have been prepared for the unbelievers. Scalding water shall be poured upon their heads, melting their skins and that which is in their bellies. They shall be lashed with rods of iron.
47. 4 When you meet the unbelievers in battle strike off their heads.
98. 6 The unbelievers among the People of the Book, Christian and Jews, and the pagans shall burn forever in the fire of Hell. They are the vilest of creatures.
5. 60 God has cursed the Jews, transforming them into apes and pigs and those who serve the devil.
5. 33 Those who make war against Allah and his Apostle shall be put to death or have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides.
2. 216 Fighting is obligatory for you, much as you may dislike it.
8. 12 I will instill terror into the hearts of the Infidels, strike off the heads then, and strike off from them every fingertip.
President Obama must immediately announce to the world that there is something wrong, something sub-moral and a threat to humanity about Islam. That it poses a threat to the entire non-Muslim world, and therefore he is issuing a warning to the Muslim world that an attack on America will be met with catastrophic retaliation against Islam. This is the only possible response to a religion that say it intends to dominate the world, through violence, if necessary. Once that shield is put in place against the deadly irrationality at the heart of the Koran, the second phase must take place, the discrediting and even eliminating , of Islam. In the final analysis the only answer to Islam, because it contains a built-in and permanent thrust to dominate the world, through violence if necessary, is total eradication. The world can no longer live with a religion whose mission is to murder, or enslave, those who won’t convert to Islam, and now have access to the weapons of mass destruction that could make that possible.
OUR MESSAGE TO BOSTON
In our last article we urged people to get a copy of the documentary, “Islam:What the West Needs to Know,” and have it shown on Public Access TV, which is free, in their hometown. (The film is available at Amazon.com) This is the best film, fully documented with quotes from the Koran, that we have on the dangers of Islam. Here is a description:
“Virtually every major Western leader has over the past several years expressed the view that Islam is a peaceful religion and that those who commit violence in its name are fanatics who misinterpret its tenets. This claim, while widely circulated, rarely attracts serious public examination. Now the question is finally being asked, “Is Islam itself violent ? ” Through an examination of the Koran, other Islamic texts, and the example of the prophet Muhammad, this documentary establishes, through a sober and methodical presentation, that the violence against non-Muslims is and has always been an integral aspect of Islam. “Jihad”, translated as “struggle” as represented in the Koran and the life of Muhammad, means nothing less than organized warfare against unbelievers. Relying primarily on Islam’s own sources, this documentary demonstrates that Islam is a violent, expansionary ideology that seeks the destruction or subjugation of other faiths, cultures, and systems of government. The documentary consists of original interviews, citations from Islamic texts, computer animated maps, footage of Western leaders, and Islamic television broadcasts. It features interviews with noted experts on Islam including Robert Spencer, Serge Trikovic, Bat Ye’or, Abdullah Al-Araby, and former terrorist Walid Shoebat.”
This film contains the answer to Boston’s “Why”. We urge the people of Boston to get this film, get it to the Mayor, get it to the Governor, get it shown on Boston TV, in Congress, and by way of national media to the whole nation. I have one copy left which I will send overnight to anyone in Boston who can get this widely shown. Send address. You can show it legally at home to family and friends. But to show it publicly permssion to do so must first be obtained from the producers, but any TV station could probably do this. Also, the film is long , an hour and a half. But just the first thirty minutes covers many of the main points and an hour almost all of them. If you have any friends in Boston please forward this article to them.. We must educate America, deliver it from the myths of media and campus, or lose it.
As columnist Douglas Stone wrote recently:
“With a new era of WMD in the hands of fanatical mullahs or their terrorist allies, one thing is becoming increasingly clear in the War for the Free World: We can lose. And losing does not mean that our economy is set back be a few percentage points of growth or increased unemployment, or even suffers the death of a few thousand Americans as happened on September 11th. The United States could be devastated even more thoroughly than Germany or Japan in World War II. Our society as we know it can be destroyed, unambiguously, completely, irretrievably.”
How could that happen ? By a simultaneous nuclear attack on seven major American cities, a known goal of the terrorists, or a nuclear explosion over the Midwest, creating an electromagnetic pulse that would destroy everything electrical, leaving 90% of all Americans dead in a year.
V. V.A.R. honors all, past and present, who have served on our National Board of Advisors Mr. Richard Kitson – President, Vietnam Veterans of America – Suffolk Chapter (New York) Mr. Dennis Garbosky – founder, Vietnam War Historical Society (New York) Mr. Ray Gallagher – past Commander, American Legion – Toronto (Canada) Col. Stanley Horton – former Director, V.V.Leadership- Houston (Texas) Mr. John Lowe – Commander, Native American Veterans Association (Kansas) Lt. Col. Chuck Allen (ret.) – founder, “National Vietnam Veterans Review” (North Carolina) Mr. Stephen Markley – former Director, V.V.Leadership – Minnesota (Kansas) Dr. William Beausay – Academic Consultant – psychology (Ohio) Annette R. Hall -Co-author, “I Served” and Executive Producer of the documentry, “Silent Victory” (Washington). Mr. Steve Hawkins – President, Committee on the Crisis in Education (Kansas) Mr. Michael Capel – Editor, Campus Report, -AIA (Washington Mr. William Street – history – Vietnam War (Hawaii) Mr. Dan M. Steinruck – Virginia State Director for Point Man Ministries (Virginia) Dr. Richard G. Stevens – Professor of Political Science Emeritus -Institute of World Politics (Washington, D.C.) Mr. Bernie Russo – President, VVA Chapter #484, Editor, VVA Newspaper- Conn. Edition (Connecticut) Mr. Joseph P. Larson – Consultant – Computer Science (Kansas) Mr. Bill Laurie – Academic Consultant – History of Vietnam War (Arizona) Rev. Lloyd Snodgrass – Academic Consultant -Theology (Kansas) Mr. Roger Young – Co-Editor, “Northwest Veterans Newsletter”, and military consultant – (Washington) Beverly Haire – Consultant – POW/MIA issues (Florida) Mr. David Horowitz – President, Center for the Study of Popular Culture (California) Mr. Jack O’Brian – President, Vietnam Veterans of America – Long Island Chapter (New York)
“Your activities indeed, indeed, sound very worthwhile.” – Edwin Feulner – President – The Heritage Foundation “Very best wishes for success in your important work.” – Former President George Bush “I salute your aims… my best wishes in this.” – Charlton Heston – actor, producer “Very best wishes for your important work.” Christopher Demuth – President – American Enterprise Institute “Academic reform is necessary, and no one has more moral authority to demand that they clean up their act than those who have put their lives on the line for this country – Thomas Sowell – Hoover Institution “Your concerns regarding the academic climate on our nation’s college campuses will be provided to the Legion’s National Committee on Education.” – The American Legion “I support your efforts to awaken the West to the dangers presented by Islam..” – Peter Gadiel- President – 9/11 Families for a Secure America “I never miss an opportunity to thank Vietnam veterans for serving their country. …best wishes for great success.” – H. Norman Schwarzkopf – General, U.S.Army (ret.) “Thanks for all your efforts on behalf of Vietnam veterans.”- Micheal Clodfelter – Vietnam combat veteran and author of “Vietnam in Military Statistics : A Study of the Indochina Wars, 1772-1991.” “You have done an exhaustive bit of research and I congratulate you.” – General William C. Westmoreland “Its comforting to know that folks like you are in the trenches taking a stand in mainstream America. Keep up the good work.” – Karl Day – Editor – Washington Watch “…has greatest respect for veterans and takes this very seriously.”- Office of Kweisi Mfume -President – NAACP “Many of your aims have been the subject of articles in VFW Magazine. Good luck with your project.” – Richard Kolb – Editor-in-Chief – VFW Magazine “With the help of people like you we can achieve a real breakthrough in academic freedom.”- Reed Irvine – Chairman – Accuracy in Academia · “Best of luck with your enterprise” – William F. Buckley Jr.- National Review. “I share your objectives” – James Buchanan, Nobel Laureate – George Mason University “Some may think the article below is radical – I am not one of them. – we need to act now and let the enemy know what the stakes are.” Mr. Giles Crider -Chief of Staff -Center for Domestic Preparedness-Department of Homeland Security
This is amazing. There are two parts. Be sure to read the 2nd part (in RED). Thomas Jefferson was a very remarkable man who started learning very early in life and never stopped.
At 5,began studying under his cousin’s tutor.
At 9, studied Latin, Greek, and French.
At 14, studied classical literature and additional languages.
At 16, entered the College of William and Mary.
At 19, studied Law for 5 years starting under George Wythe.
At 23, started his own law practice.
At 25, was elected to the Virginia House of Burgesses.
At 31, wrote the widely circulated “Summary View of the Rights of British America? And retired from his law practice.
At 32, was a Delegate to the Second Continental Congress.
At 33, wrote the Declaration of Independence.
At 33, took three years to revise Virginia’s legal code and wrote a Public Education bill and a statute for Religious Freedom.
At 36, was elected the second Governor of Virginia succeeding Patrick Henry.
At 40, served in Congress for two years.
At 41, was the American minister to France and negotiated commercial treaties with European nations along with Ben Franklin and John Adams.
At 46, served as the first Secretary of State under George Washington.
At 53, served as Vice President and was elected president of the American Philosophical Society.
At 55, drafted the Kentucky Resolutions and became the active head of Republican Party.
At 57, was elected the third president of the United States .
At 60, obtained the Louisiana Purchase doubling the nation’s size.
At 61, was elected to a second term as President.
At 65, retired to Monticello.
At 80, helped President Monroe shape the Monroe Doctrine.
At 81, almost single-handedly created the University of Virginia and served as its first president.
At 83, died on the 50th anniversary of the Signing of the Declaration of Independence along with John Adams.
Thomas Jefferson knew because he himself studied the previous failed attempts at government. He understood actual history, the nature of God, his laws and the nature of man. That happens to be way more than what most understand today. Jefferson really knew his stuff. A voice from the past to lead us in the future:
John F. Kennedy held a dinner in the white House for a group of the brightest minds in the nation at that time. He made this statement: “This is perhaps the assembly of the most intelligence ever to gather at one time in the White House with the exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone.”
“When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall become as corrupt as Europe.” — Thomas Jefferson
“The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.” — Thomas Jefferson
“It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the world.” — Thomas Jefferson
“I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.” — Thomas Jefferson
“My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.” — Thomas Jefferson
“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.” — Thomas Jefferson
“The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” — Thomas Jefferson
“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” — Thomas Jefferson
“To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.” — Thomas Jefferson
Thomas Jefferson said in 1802: “I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.
If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property – until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.”
If the above were shared and once again became a part of the educational process in our educational system, it would destroy the bureaucracy of Washington.
There are actually two messages here. The first is very interesting, but the second is absolutely astounding – and explains a lot. A recent “Investor’s Business Daily” article provided very interesting statistics from a survey by the United Nations International Health Organization.
Percentage of men and women who survived a cancer five years after diagnosis:
U. S. 65%
Percentage of patients diagnosed with diabetes who received treatment within six months:
U. S. 93%
Percentage of seniors needing hip replacement who receied it within six months:
Percentage referred to a medical specialist who see one within one month:
U. S. 77%
Number of MRI scanners (a prime diagnostic tool) per million people:
U. S. 71
Percentage of seniors (65+), with low income, who say they are in “excellent health”:
U. S. 12%
And now for the last statistic: National Health Insurance?
U. S. NO
Check this last set of statistics!!
The percentage of each past president’s cabinet who had worked in the private business sector prior to their appointment to the cabinet.
You know what the private business sector is. A real-life business, not a Government job. Here are the percentages.
This helps to explain the incompetence of this administration: only 8% of them have ever worked in private business!
That’s right! Only eight percent—the least, by far, of the last 19 presidents! And these people are trying to tell our big Corporations how to run their business?
How can the president of a major nation and society, the one with the most successful economic system in world history, stand and talk about business when he’s never worked for one? Or about jobs when he has never really had one? And when it’s the same for 92% of his senior staff and closest advisers? They’ve spent most of their time in academia, Government and/or non-profit jobs or as “community organizers.” They should have been in an employment line.
Share this! We we’ll NEVER see these facts in the main stream media.
“One of the penalties of not participating in the poliitical process is that you will be governed by your inferiors.” Plato
Before his article seen below, he said, “If you’re outraged the Tsarnaev brothers could repay the welcome America gave them as immigrants by unleashing a bomt-and-murder spree, yhour’e going to be REALLY outraged when you learn who picked up the tab for their living expenses while the terror plot was being planned. And when yuo find out why you’re not allowed to know the details of that funding … Look out!” His post below.
The mastermind behind the Boston bombing lived on taxpayer money, but the government won’t say how much welfare he received or for how long – because the state of Massachusetts is protecting the privacy of the man who collected public assistance while he plotted to kill Americans.
A picture is beginning to emerge of the taxpayer-funded assistance given to the two men accused of the Boston bombings, even as government agencies stonewall requests for information.
The Boston Herald reported Wednesday that dead terrorist suspect Tamerlan Tsarnaev, his wife and young daughter all collected welfare until 2012.
Tamerlan and his now-hospitalized brother, suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, also received benefits through their parents for an unknown period of time after they came to the U.S. about 10 years ago.
After those revelations, Massachusetts state agencies refused to provide any more information, citing the dead man’s right to privacy.
A Democratic congressman from Massachusetts chided the administration of Democratic Gov. Deval Patrick.
“It’s certainly relevant information that should be made public,” U.S. Rep. Stephen F. Lynch, D-Mass., told the Herald.
“There’s a national security interest, No. 1. Secondly, there’s also a public interest in finding out whether these individuals were able to exploit the system and get benefits they weren’t entitled to.”
The paper then made a number of inquiries and found:
Tamerlan Tsarnaev, his wife and 3-year-old daughter received EBT (food stamp) benefits that ended in 2012. State welfare spokesman Alec Loftus declined further comment.
Labor Department spokesman Kevin Franck refused to say whether Tamerlan Tsarnaev ever collected unemployment compensation. He said it was “confidential and not a matter of public record.”
Asked about college aid given to Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, University of Massachusetts Dartmouth spokesman Robert Connolly said, “It is our position — and I believe the accepted position in higher education — that student records including academic records and financial records (including financial aid) cannot under federal law be released without a student’s consent.”
The Federal Communications Commission would not say whether either brother had a government-funded cell phone, also citing privacy laws.
Cambridge officials and the family’s landlord wouldn’t say whether the brothers were ever on Section 8 housing assistance.
Nonetheless, taxpayers are now paying for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s court-appointed attorneys and his medical bills at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.
And the public paid for the attorney who successfully fought criminal charges in 2009 when Tamerlan Tsarnaev was suspected of battering a former girlfriend.
However, it remains unclear whether taxpayer money was used to finance the April 15 terrorist attack at the Boston Marathon that killed three people and injured 260.
It’s also unclear whether the brothers were part of larger group or jihadist network, and the government may be the one making that more difficult, too.
The biggest controversy in the investigation into the terror attack is the decision by the federal government to read Miranda rights to the surviving suspect, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, and choose to try him in criminal court rather than designate him an enemy combatant and put him on trial before a military tribunal.
WND reported Saturday that Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., John McCain, R-Ariz., and Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., had urged President Obama to hold the surviving brother as a potential enemy combatant, denying him a government-appointed attorney and other legal rights under the “Law of War” so investigators could learn about other possible attacks.
“The suspect, based upon his actions, clearly is a good candidate for enemy combatant status. We do not want this suspect to remain silent,” they agreed.
However, as WND reported two days later, the Justice Department announced Tsarnaev was arraigned in his hospital room on one count of using and conspiring to use a weapon of mass destruction resulting in death and one count of malicious destruction of property by means of an explosive device resulting in death.
As WND also reported, the timing was a bit odd, according to Andrew C. McCarthy, the lead U.S. prosecutor in the case against Omar Abdel Rahman and his collaborators in connection with the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center.
“It would have been good to keep him out of the criminal justice system for as long as they could have,” McCarthy told WND.
“There was no question he was going into the civilian criminal justice system. I would have held him out for as long as it took to get effective intelligence, an effective interrogation of him. I have no way of knowing what information they actually got from him. I wouldn’t have been in a rush to bring him into the system, but I don’t think there was any question that he was going to be in the system.”
McCarthy said it’s not actually clear whether Tsarnaev should have been quickly labeled as an enemy combatant, given the definition of that term dictated by Congress in the wake of 9/11.
He said he’s not concerned that reading Tsarnaev his Miranda rights would jeopardize a conviction, given the apparent mountain of evidence against him.
As for discovering whether the brothers were part of a network, McCarthy counseled patience even though others are convinced that radical elements in Chechnya are involved, and some insist the Saudi national questioned shortly after the bombing was highly involved.
“All pronouncements about who’s involved and who’s not involved that are made within days of the event have almost always been wrong. People who have been through this kind of a process before know that you have to roll up your sleeves and start doing real, comprehensive investigative work. Remember, we didn’t even know who these guys were. We didn’t know their names until Friday,” he said.
McCarthy also noted how the investigation really should have been much more extensive before the bombing. The FBI is coming under scrutiny following reports that Russia tipped off the U.S. about Tsarnaev. The bureau did investigate the elder brother but closed the case after finding nothing overly alarming. McCarthy said some changes definitely need to be made on that front.
“We really need a major rethinking of the FBI’s protocols that say we’re not going to take any notice of the straight-line nexus between Islamic supremacist ideology and terrorism committed by Muslims, which is a terrible mistake. They basically take the position that unless you’ve gone from radical ideology to radical activity, they don’t have any right to continue investigating you,” he said.
“You can’t wait until something happens to start investigating,” he concluded.
The entire storyline of the two men responsible for the horrible terrorist attack during the Boston Marathon has me completely stunned. These two radicals, picked a very public event and a location they knew would be filled with people, including children, and decided they wanted to kill Americans. Yet, in all the coverage, the phrase all media avoided like the plague, was the one that was the most obvious and readily known: they were Islamic extremists.
First here’s a little bit of history just to refresh the minds of the media and those others out there who think these very public acts of terror are somehow NOT motivated by a religion whose extremist wing is hell bent on destroying America:
18 April 1983 – The April 1983 U.S. Embassy bombing, Beirut, Lebanon by the Islamic Jihad Organization, 63 dead, 120 injured
26 February 1993 – World Trade Center bombing, in New York City. 6 killed.
7 August 1998 – United States embassy bombings in Tanzania and Kenya. 224 dead. 4000+ injured.
October 12, 2000 – USS Cole bombing at a Yemen port. 17 American sailors were killed, 39 injured.
11 September 2001 – 4 planes hijacked by 19 al-Qaeda hijackers: two planes crashed into World Trade Center and one into the The Pentagon. Nearly 3000 dead.
22 December 2001 – Richard Reid attempted shoe bombing on American Airlines Flight 63
11 September 2012 – On the anniversary of the 2001 September 11th attacks in the United States, Islamist militants killed 4 and wounded 7 in the Benghazi U.S. Consulate attack
Just take a look at the expanded list to see what’s been going on around the world over the past few decades.
And yet, when the reports started flowing in following the terrorist attack in Boston, it appeared the media all followed a two-step process.
Step 1 — Blame a far right, white, extremist man or Organization
Step 2 — Keep quiet about the real background of the bombers
Let’s look at Step 1. As I watched the initial coverage, I switched back and forth between Fox and CNN. At one point on CNN (and this was on the day of the bombing when the only thing that was going on was replaying the bombing videos over and over again), Wolf Blitzer was talking to a guest who brought up the idea that it could be a member of a white supremacist group. He brought this up simply because, “We’ve been hearing about that in the news a lot lately.”
As reported in Politic.com, MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell blamed the NRA for delays in the Boston Marathon investigation. MSNBC’s Chris Matthews immediately tried to link the bombing to a far right group.
I could go on and on, but let’s move to Step 2. NO ONE, not even Fox News, was reporting that these guys… these terrorist bombers… were Islamic extremists. Why? Is it politically incorrect to identify them for what they are?
It was quite amazing on Friday when GOPUSA ran it’s lead story with the headline: One Islamic Bomber Dead, One on the Run; Boston Suburbs Locked Down. It was amazing, because some people actually wrote in and complained that we used the word “Islamic.” Some accused us of spreading rumors. Others blamed us for “poor reporting.” And why? Simply because they hadn’t heard it anywhere else.
Here was my personal favorite by one reader: “Hey dumbass, he’s not islamic, but he was russian.”
There’s so much I could say about that one sentence. I guess this guy doesn’t know the difference between a religion and a nationality.
The fact is that even while most of the media were silent, the information was EASILY available. They guys were Islamic extremists. One posted a video with an “Extremist Religious Prophecy Associated with Al Qaeda” on YouTube.
All of this information was out there, and yet even conservative web sites avoided the obvious.
I guess the media was just too upset that it wasn’t a freaked-out white guy. Instead, it’s one more chilling example, just like we saw in Benghazi, of a strain of humanity that is clearly inhuman.
Note: This article was posted April 20, 2013 7:13 am
COPUSA Weekend Update By Bobby Eberle
Jeddah newspaper says first lady saw Alharbi in hospital
The following was posted by WND on Friday, April 19, 2003
A Saudi Arabian newspaper is reporting that United States First Lady Michelle Obama visited in the hospital Saudi citizen Abdul Rahman Ali Issa Al-Salimi Alharbi, the young man who had been labeled a “person of interest” in the Boston Marathon bombing.
The newspaper accompanied its report with an image of Obama, although the background was generic and it couldn’t be confirmed immediately that she was at the hospital where Alharbi was being treated at the time. He reportedly suffered injuries in the Boston bombing.
“Okaz, the same prominent Saudi newspaper that published photos of Abdul Rahman Ali Issa Al-Salimi Alharbi in the hospital after the Boston Marathon bombings, is now reporting that the Saudi national was also visited by the first lady of the United States, Michelle Obama, during his hospital stay,” Shoebat reported.
The newspaper is more than half a century old and publishes out of Jeddah in Saudi Arabia. It also publishes simultaneously in Riyadh.
One of the oldest newspapers in Saudi Arabia, it also is brave, taking on banned issues such as lesbianism in the repressive Islamic kingdom. Its circulation is estimated at about 150,000 and the online version was reported by Forbes Middle East two years ago to be one of the Top 10 online newspapers in the Middle East region.
It was CBS in Boston, and other outlets, that reported that President Obama and Michelle visited some of the victims of the marathon terrorism at hospitals in the Boston area yesterday.
It was reported the first lady went to Boston Children’s Hospital, as well as Brigham and Women’s Hospital, but the visits were off-limits to the media.
Reported Shoebat, “Now, contrarians … with concerns about this visit will likely say that the first lady was simply paying visits to all the victims in the hospital, of which Alharbi was one and had been cleared two days earlier.”
But he added, “In light of recent reports that Alharbi was scheduled for deportation on ‘national security grounds’, the first lady’s visit takes on much added significance if those reports are true. We already know that the Alharbi clan consists of multiple al-Qaida members. This would seem to bolster the claims of scheduled deportation, not claims to the contrary made by the likes of DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano, who actually never really answered the question; she just got rankled and blew it off.”
Wrote Shoebat, “With the track record of this administration relative to things like blaming a video for two weeks after the Benghazi attacks, it should have a higher standard to meet and its credibility should be questioned by the American people. If these reports about Alharbi’s scheduled deportation for such reasons are correct, a visit by the first lady of the United States would indeed be significant in its importance. It would also be a major national security blunder because of the message it would send.”
WND reported earlier when an expert on terrorism said Alharbi, the original “person of interest” in the Monday bombing, was going to be deported on national security groun
Alharbi is a foreign student, and had been living in Revere, Mass.
“I just learned from my own sources that he is now going to be deported on national security grounds next Tuesday, which is very unusual,” Steve Emerson of the Investigative Project on Terrorism told Sean Hannity of Fox News Wednesday night.
The Reuters news agency reported Barack Obama met with Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal on Wednesday, noting “the meeting was not on Obama’s public schedule.”
After that meeting was mentioned, Emerson told Hannity, “That’s very interesting because this is the way things are done with Saudi Arabia. You don’t arrest their citizens. You deport them, because they don’t want them to be embarrassed and that’s the way we appease them.”
Saudi national Abdul Rahman Ali Alharbi, the original “person of interest” questioned in the Boston Marathon bombings.
Meanwhile, Tuesday morning, a meeting Secretary of State John Kerry held with the Saudi foreign minister was abruptly closed to press coverage.
WND had reported Wednesday morning that the Saudi student Alharbi shares the same last name as a major Saudi clan that includes scores of al-Qaida operatives.
Some in the clan are senior al-Qaida members while others are reportedly being held by the U.S. in the Guantanamo Bay detention camp in Cuba.
A large group of federal and state law enforcement agents reportedly raided Alharbi’s apartment in Revere, Mass.
CNN reported the search took place by consent, according to a federal law-enforcement source, meaning no search warrant was needed
Then the Saudi embassy in Washington said Alharbi was no longer under detention and is not a suspect in the bomb blasts.
Saudi diplomat Azzam bin Abdel Karim reportedly visited Alharbi in the hospital.
Nail Al-Jubeir, a spokesman for the Saudi mission in Washington, stated that U.S. authorities told the embassy “no Saudi national was a suspect in the Boston Marathon attack and that the Saudi national in question was a witness, not a suspect.”
While it is not clear whether the Alharbi questioned as part of the marathon probe is a member of the well-known Saudi clan, his Facebook page, reviewed by WND, lists him as Facebook friends with at least seven other Alharbis, located in both Boston and in Saudi Arabia.
One of the Alharbis on his Facebook friends list, Ahmed Alharbi, is listed as a pharmacy technician at the Saudi Ministry of Health. Most others live in Riyadh.
The Alharbi clan has long been active in al-Qaida. Khaled bin Ouda bin Mohammed al-Harbi, for example, is a Saudi national who joined Osama bin Laden’s mujahadeen group in the 1980s. He reportedly became an al-Qaida member in the mid-1990s. He turned himself in to Saudi authorities in 2004 as part of an amnesty deal. Jeddah newspaper says first lady saw Alharbi in hospital
The list includes several members of the Alharbi clan:
Badr Saud Uwaid Al-Awufi Al-Harbi
Muhammad Atiq Uwaid Al-Awufi Al-Harbi
Khalid Salim Uwaid Al-Lahibi Al-Harbi
Raed Abdullah Salem Al-Thahiri Al-Harbi
Abdullah Abdul Rahman Muhammad Al-Harbi (leader)
Fayez Ghuneim Humeid Al-Hijri Al-Harbi
Shoebat also points out that several Alharbi clan members are being held by the U.S. government at Guantanamo Bay, including Salim Salman Awadallah Al-Saidi Al-Harbi, Majid Abdullah Hussein Al-Harbi, Muhammad Abdullah Saqr Al-Alawi Al-Harbi, Ghanem Abdul Rahman Ghanem Al-Harbi and Muhammad Atiq Uwaid Al-Awfi Al-Harbi.