Whenever Any Form of Government Becomes Destructive To These Ends,
It Is The Right of the People to Alter Or To Abolish It,
And To Institute New Government
Saturday, November 01, 2008
THIS IS OUR WAR TOO
This election is TIGHTENING, no matter how hard the mainstream media attempts to deny it.
According to a Zogby poll, and via Drudge:
ZOGBY SATURDAY: Republican John McCain has pulled back within the margin of error... The three-day average holds steady, but McCain outpolled Obama 48% to 47% in Friday, one day, polling. He is beginning to cut into Obama's lead among independents, is now leading among blue collar voters, has strengthened his lead among investors and among men, and is walloping Obama among NASCAR voters. Joe the Plumber may get his license after all...
So here is the deal. This race is VERY close, and getting CLOSER. How important is it that Obama not ascend to the presidency? Here's something we can all agree on whether US Citizens or International bloggers:
Who understands that we are in a long-term war of ideas against RADICAL ISLAM, ISLAMO-FACISM, etc?
Who would actually tell us this is the case, and not fear using those terms?
Who on the other hand would hide that, deny it, and said they would stand with the muslims?
Who continues to have no platform whatsoever regarding Radical Islam? Whose only claim to fame is that he will pull us out of Iraq and finish the job in Afghan? This doesn't even account for the root of the problem.
Who has stated he will meet unconditionally with States that harbor and support terrorist organizations?
Who has supported Israel?
Who understands what WAR really is? What WAR means?
Who would attempt to spread and indoctrinate the youth further into the philosophy of cultural relativism and multiculturalism - the bitter pill that is destroying European culture?
Who who who?
Everyone has a part to play in this, American or not, because we understand this existential threat, while others accept their suicide.
What can we do? Simple:
The Republican Party is known for it's last 72 hr get out the vote program, this is what propelled Bush to the Presidency in both 2000 and 2004. So let's help support it by donating WHATEVER we have at:
Unhelpful, unwanted, stupid and venal, and most of all counterproductive...CJ ..over the edge
I support Andrew Bostom and Robert Spencer Bostom supports Diana West Diana West supports VB
Does that mean I support ethnic nationalism?
Anyone care to take that one up?
Anyone who has seen my posts and comments knows just how strongly I feel.
Charles Johnson has managed to parlay a righteous dislike for 'white europe' into some logical off the cliff pathway to considering Robert Spencer as supporting some of the unarguably racist commenters at GoV.
I don't know about the rest of you, but enough is enough.
If someone like the eminently sensible, and quite fair Spencer can be smeared in this way, it's time to look critically at the source.
Paint it anyway you want to. Another 'Who is John Galt' moment. The essential truth is that you want to take someone else's money not for more research on Parkinson's, or discovering how and why cells commit suicide, or for way to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities wit no collateral damage, but to give that money to someone else.
We all know what that is.
Obama's New Attack on Those Who Don't Want Higher Taxes: 'Selfishness'
October 31, 2008 10:58 AM
On the stump this week, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., has pushed back against Sen. John McCain's description of his tax policies.
"The reason that we want to do this, change our tax code, is not because I have anything against the rich," Obama said in Sarasota, Fla., yesterday. "I love rich people! I want all of you to be rich. Go for it. That's the American dream, that's the American way, that's terrific.
"The point is, though, that -- and it's not just charity, it's not just that I want to help the middle class and working people who are trying to get in the middle class -- it's that when we actually make sure that everybody's got a shot - when young people can all go to college, when everybody's got decent health care, when everybody's got a little more money at the end of the month - then guess what? Everybody starts spending that money, they decide maybe I can afford a new car, maybe I can afford a computer for my child. They can buy the products and services that businesses are selling and everybody is better off.
The best way to help people into the middle class and above is to identify those who will work for it, those who have the need for and want more education, AND THEIR CHILDREN, and then to give them the path to achieve that end.
Giving people a check does NOT make poor people middle class.
Giving them a way to go from technician to MSEE WILL ABSOLUTELY.
With every word, with every further justification and explanation, Sen Obama is explaining very accurately who he is and what he believes.
He doesn't want to take our dreams in order to protect the nation from enemies foreign and domestic, he wants to take our dreams for ourselves and our children in order to DIMINISH them for a check to others ...who will never achieve theirs that way.
He really believes that to hold to the American dream for yourself and your children, IS SELFISHNESS.
I AM SELFISH Oh and by the way....
John McCain spent more time as a POW than Barack Obama has as a Senator
Walid Phares Weighs In: A Little Something You Can Use In Your Final Courageous Effort To Change Someone's Vote to McCain
The link below goes to a 12-page PDF document by Walid Phares that analyzes the two presidential candidates on how effective they would be in combating the progressive Islamization of America.
As you can probably guess, McCain wins hands down. He understands much better than Obama what the enemy is, and how it can best be defeated.
I'm sure if you've been reading the IBA for longer than ten minutes, you know McCain is the one to vote for, at least if you're interested in the survival of the U.S. and the free world. But I'm posting it here to help you make a last-minute appeal to those who haven't decided. On the basis of pure survival against a real and growing threat, Phares makes some excellent arguments in favor of McCain, and Phares is a legitimate expert. Here's the PDF article:
A Snapshot Of The Kind Of Harrassment Robert Spencer Has To Go Through To Tell The Truth About Islam
I'm going to post the entire article, because I think we should all be aware of what Spencer has to go through. In fact, we should express our gratitude to him. Maybe you can all go over and give him some props in his comment section.
East Tennessee State University: The death of reasoned discourse
Over the last year, during three different Islamo-Fascism Awareness Weeks, I've spoken at seventeen university campuses all across the country. I've never been shouted off the stage, as have some other speakers. I have, however, been threatened, heckled, protested, and made the subject of libelous hate-sheets passed out to people attending my talks, but I have never encountered a bolder or more brazen display of Islamic supremacist denial, obfuscation, lies, slander, intimidation, apologetics for mass murder and open hostility to reasoned discourse than I did Wednesday night at East Tennessee State University in Johnson City, Tennessee.
East Tennessee State, of course, is that bastion of free inquiry and open debate that denied funding for my address for fear that my speaking there would make Muslim students feel "ostracized." Through a donation from the Middle East Forum, supplementing the David Horowitz Freedom Center's covering of the costs of travel, lodging and a bodyguard (all of which should have been paid for by the University, whose students evidently can't be expected to behave civilly), I was able to go anyway, and university officials need not have worried: Muslim students had no reason to go away feeling ostracized. Indeed, they were anything but ostracized: along with some Muslim leaders from the area, they were responsible for an evening strongly reminiscent of the denunciation sessions once held in the Soviet Union and Communist China for those who deviated from the ideological line of those who held power. The same furious hatred, the same frenzied personal attacks, the same emotionalism and defiance of reason and fact -- it was all on display in spades, and it was all directed at me.
Inside the folder that Muslim students were handing out at the door was a paper entitled "WHO IS THE REAL ROBERT SPENCER?" This contained the usual libels, more expensively printed than usual. A few choice morsels:
He is politically aligned with the extreme Right-wing and receives patronage from Neo-Conservative foundations and organizations. This sentence is designed to frighten away the ignorant and easily intimidated by invoking scare words -- "Right-wing," "Neo-Conservative" -- that ultimately have no substance beyond "opposed to Islamic supremacism." But as empty as it is, this charge was a favorite of the Muslim propagandists at the event. Two separate questioners asked me just who was paying me, asking me to identify the "right wing extremists" that were supposedly bankrolling my attempt to "defame Islam."
I refused to play along with this, saying both times that I was supported by patriotic Americans who were interested in defending the U.S. Constitution, the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience, and the equality of rights before the law, and I would not stand by silently while these good people were slandered. For this one of the slanderers said he hoped that the audience noted how "defensive" I got at his question. But he did not dispute my characterization of my benefactors -- no doubt for the questioners who tried this ad hominem tack, to defend the Constitution is precisely to be a "right wing extremist."
The flier goes on to claim that I have "no formal academic training in Islamic studies," which is false. I don't have a degree in it, but I certainly have formal academic training in it. I took courses on Islam, and first read the Qur'an, while working toward my Master's degree in Religious Studies -- not, as the flier claims, in "the field of early Christianity." The University of North Carolina doesn't offer a Master's degree in "early Christianity." Of course, the point is that I have learned most of what I know about Islam through personal study -- something I've never made a secret of. The assumption of the flier is that this means that what I say is inaccurate. Its compilers, however, did not and could not buttress that assumption with any actual evidence that I've said anything false about Islam.
The flier invokes such impartial, disinterested authorities as Carl Ernst, Robert Crane, FAIR, Dinesh D'Souza, and Stephen Suleyman Schwartz to establish my wicked "Islamophobia," although none of them either, of course, offers even one specific example of any false or inaccurate claim that I make about Islam. (How proud Dinesh D'Souza must be to find himself used as a tool by Islamic supremacist smearmongers and thugs!)
Then followed a few supposedly damaging quotes from me, such as my saying that Islam is the only major religion that mandates violence against unbelievers -- in other words, statements that are absolutely true, but may appear troublesome to the ignorant. Anyway, the main impact of this flier and the folder it came in was that it showed signs of considerable expense and careful preparation: the Islamic community of East Tennessee worked long and hard to prepare for my appearance at ETSU, and this showed also during the question period.
Many of the questions were clearly scripted. One girl apparently got mixed up about which question she had been assigned to ask, and asked the same question that had been asked by a young man before her. When I asked her why she was asking the same question that the previous questioner had just asked me, she insisted it was a different question, so I went ahead and answered it again.
My talk was not disrupted, but the question period immediately heated up, with the first questioner engaging in the ad hominem "Who is paying you" attack. Subsequent questions were uniformly hostile, with many "questioners" engaging in self-righteous and beside-the-point counter lectures. I tried to stop them from doing this whenever I could, as this was something both the moderator and I had asked the audience not to do -- a request the Muslims in the audience utterly ignored.
Many also called me a liar. Yet only one questioner even tried to back up the accusations of lying with even one specific example. He claimed that I had misquoted the Qur'an, because I had said that Qur'an 4:89 said "Slay them wherever you find them." He asked me to read the passage -- I had a Qur'an with me, so I read it, including the section that says, "Slay them wherever you find them." Evidently his point was that I had misrepresented the passage because I didn't mention that it goes on to say that Muslims shouldn't fight those with whom they have peace treaties. I pointed out that I had discussed the institution of dhimmitude at some length, in which non-Muslims agree to what is essentially a peace treaty with the Muslims, accepting a second-class status and institutionalized discrimination, and so I had not misrepresented the passage, and had not misquoted it, since it does indeed contain the words "Slay them wherever you find them."
It wasn't until I was back at the hotel that I remembered that I had only quoted 4:89 out of the Islamic legal manual 'Umdat al-Salik, which quotes "Slay them wherever you find them" -- and only that part of the verse -- from 4:89 in the context of its teaching about jihad warfare. So if I was misquoting the Qur'an, it was actually this Islamic legal manual certified by Al-Azhar, in Cairo, the foremost authority in Sunni Islam, as a reliable guide to Sunni orthodoxy, that was misquoting the Qur'an. Not that it would have made any difference with the thuggish crowd at ETSU.
Besides that one failed attempt, no one even tried to demonstrate that anything I had said (and established from the Qur'an, Sunnah, and fiqh) about the Islamic doctrinal imperative to make war against and subjugate unbelievers was false. One charged that the translations of the Qur'an and 'Umdat al-Salik that I was using (I had both with me) were inaccurate, but was unable to sustain his claim after I pointed out that both were made by Muslims -- and that Al-Azhar even certified the accuracy of the translation of 'Umdat al-Salik.
Several "questioners" spoke of how painful it was to have to sit and listen while I defamed Islam. I responded to one that if reading from their authoritative texts and recognized authorities constituted defaming Islam, maybe he ought to take a second look at those authorities.
The questioners, all of whom were Muslim, issued two separate invitations to the audience to attend one of Yusuf Estes' talks, at which, they said, they would hear the truth about Islam. Capping off a lovely evening was the last questioner, who had no question at all, but accused me of shouting down questioners (perhaps in reference to cutting off their windy, pseudo-pious counter-lectures), not answering questions (in reality I answered every substantive point that anyone made), and calling me a liar. One of his slightly smoother coreligionists than ran to the mike to assure me that he thought of me as a brother, albeit a misguided one, and...to invite everyone to come see Yusuf Estes.
The Orwellian Hate-Rally atmosphere reached its crowning point just before I left the hall (between police officers and security guards, of course). A middle-aged Tennessee matron approached me; she had been sitting next to her husband, who was clearly a Muslim, during the entire evening, and had not asked a question. She said: "I forgive you for hating Muslims so much, and I hope that God will forgive you too." I told her that I didn't hate Muslims, and that she should be ashamed of saying so -- but she was busy making a quick getaway.
There was an unpleasant, mob atmosphere, marked by the refusal of any of my accusers to deal with the actual arguments that I had made. Perhaps they hoped to rattle me, but the more that they resort to these gutter tactics, the more determined I am to resist them.
It is worth noting that in the news as this event took place was the beheading of a convert from Islam to Christianity for apostasy, the stoning to death of a woman for the crime of adultery, and a suicide car bombing in Somalia. And that's just a small bit of this week's jihad news. The people in the mob at ETSU are among those who are responsible for these things. They could be speaking out against them, but they didn't say a thing about them Wednesday night at ETSU, and almost certainly will not.
Instead, they direct all their energies toward discrediting one who is speaking out against these things. Their motives are clear. The blood is on their hands.
Make no mistake: had a Muslim speaker been treated this way, the university would be opening up a commission of inquiry about "Islamophobia" on campus. As it is, university administrators will take little notice of what happened on their campus Wednesday night. But to the lasting shame of East Tennessee State University, the record of what happened will stand as a challenge and rebuke to anyone who thinks that reasoned dissent and free academic inquiry are still even possible at ETSU, or at many other American universities today.
"The record shows that voting machines in America are rigged."
"My friends Ken Follett and Susan Cheever are extremely worried. Naomi Wolf calls me every day. Yesterday, Jane Fonda sent me an email to tell me that she cried all night and can't cure her ailing back for all the stress that has reduces her to a bundle of nerves."
"My back is also suffering from spasms, so much so that I had to see an acupuncturist and get prescriptions for Valium."
"After having stolen the last two elections, the Republican Mafia..."
"If Obama loses it will spark the second American Civil War. Blood will run in the streets, believe me. And it's not a coincidence that President Bush recalled soldiers from Iraq for Dick Cheney to lead against American citizens in the streets."
"Bush has transformed America into a police state, from torture to the imprisonment of reporters, to the Patriot Act."
She also laments that not all of America's men of letters share her devotion to Obama.
"Tom Wolfe and John Updike are men of the right and Philip Roth is at this point a hermit who leads a monastic life in Connecticut, far from everything and everybody."
Luckily, she said there is her and Michael Chabon, who, she says, have "taken the place of Susan Sontag and Norman Mailer respectively."
They have the same political sensibilities, she said, but a better "sense of humor."
The Constitution says we have a "right to bear arms." That means we have the right to carry them. If we can not carry them in a concealed manner, does that mean we ought to carry them right out in the open?
How do you think Obama would answer that question?
“Well I, I, I, I continue to, I continue to, uh, uh, support a ban on concealed carry laws.”
Obama flat says, with pausal prompts omitted, “I continue to support a ban on concealed carry laws.” As I mentioned, I didn’t know that until now. It turns out that it really isn’t much of a secret, (”I am consistently on record and will continue to be on record as opposing concealed carry”) but you wouldn’t know that from Obama’s campaign website, where you have to find his position on the 2nd Amendment under “additional issues — sportsmen” and not find anything about carry permits.
Martin Kramer notes that Barack Obama places suspicious emphasis on the influence of benign nobodies, while buttoning up about his many conversations with Rashid Khalidi:
For example, Obama, in an interview and in his spring AIPAC speech, recalled conversations with a Jewish-American camp counselor he encountered-when he was all of eleven years old. “During the course of this two-week camp he shared with me the idea of returning to a homeland and what that meant for people who had suffered from the Holocaust, and he talked about the idea of preserving a culture when a people had been uprooted with the view of eventually returning home. There was something so powerful and compelling for me, maybe because I was a kid who never entirely felt like he was rooted.” (In the same interview, Obama said Israel “speaks to my history of being uprooted, it speaks to the African-American story of exodus.”)
Of course, the story of someone like Khalidi could have just as readily spoken to Obama’s history of uprootedness, exodus, preserving a culture, and longing to return home. (So too would the story of the late Edward Said, who wasphotographed seated at a dinner with Obama in 1998, and who entitled his memoirOut of Place. Obama has never said anything about the impact, if any, of that conversation.) And indeed, it stretches credulity to believe that a two-week childhood encounter at a summer camp was more significant to Obama that his decade-long association, as a mature adult, with his senior university colleague, Khalidi.
It’s true. In Obama lore, camp counselors shape your politics, while terrorists are just guys in the neighborhood, and terrorist mouthpieces are babysitters. As Kramer points out, the Obamas’ babysitter said the following about the start of the Iraq War:
This war will be fought because these neoconservatives desire to make the Middle East safe not for democracy, but for Israeli hegemony. They are convinced that the Middle East is irremediably hostile to both the United States and Israel; and they firmly hold the racist view that Middle Easterners understand only force. For these American Likudniks and their Israeli counterparts, sad to say, the tragedy of September 11 was a godsend: It enabled them to draft the United States to help fight Israel’s enemies.
Which, Kramer notes, sounds a lot like Obama’s own October 2002 antiwar speech:
“What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other arm-chair, weekend warriors in this Administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.” No mention of Cheney or Rumsfeld-and no need to mention them, to a constituency that knew who was really behind the push for war, and why. (Later, the same argument would figure prominently in The Israel Lobby, co-authored by another Chicago professor, John Mearsheimer.)
Funny–none of the sage words of Obama’s camp counselor seemed to make it into that speech.
He mentions the richest Jew in Damascus, Mallim Yusef, who was a very important member of the Damascus branch of the Ottoman government, "directing all the financial operations" there.
Buckingham then describes a visit to the "kihyah bey," or local prime minister, temporarily taking the duties of the late Governor of Damascus after the latter's untimely death returning from the Haj in Mecca:
[We] found the venerable Turk seated in a small but richly furnished apartment, guarded and attended by at least fifty handsome officers, all armed with sabres and dirks, and all superbly dressed. We were desired to seat ourselves on the sofa beside these chiefs, before whom stood in groups an equal number of armed attendants, and were treated with great respect and attention.
The rich Jew, Mallim Yusef, who conducted us to the presence of the kihyah bey, seated himself with the greatest possible humility on the floor beneath us, at the feet of his superiors who occupied the sofa, first kneeling, and then sitting back while kneeling, on the heels and soles of his feet, with these and his hands completely covered, in an attitude and with an air of the most abject and unqualified humiliation.
Mr. Bankes was dressed as a Turkish effendi, or private and unmilitary person : I still continued to wear the less showy garments of the Christian merchant, with which I had replaced my Bedouin garb. The rich Jew was dressed in the most costly garments, including Cashmere shawls, Russian furs, Indian silks, and English broad-cloth : all, however, being of dark colours, since none but the orthodox Mohammedans are allowed to wear either green, red, yellow, azure, or white, in any of their garments, which are therefore, however costly in material, almost restricted to dark browns, blacks, and blues.
Among the party was also a Moslem dervish, with a patchwork and party-coloured bonnet of a sugar loaf shape, and his body scarcely half covered with rags and tattered garments ; his naked limbs obtruding themselves most offensively, and his general appearance being indecent and disgusting.
It was impossible not to be struck forcibly with the different modes of reception and treatment adopted towards us, more particularly as contrasted with our real and apparent conditions. The Jew, who was by far the wealthiest and the most powerful of all present, who lived in the most splendid house in Damascus, and fed from his table more than a hundred poor families every day, who literally managed the great machine of government, and had influence enough, both here and at Constantinople, to procure the removal of the present bey from his post if he desired it, was obliged to kneel in the presence of those who could not have carried on the affairs of government without his aid, while the dervish, contemptible alike for his ignorance and arrogant assumption of superiority, was admitted to the seat of honour, and, with ourselves, who were of a faith as far removed from their own as the Jew's, was served with coffee, sherbet, and perfumes, and treated by the attendants with all the marks of submission and respect.
Here we have the very definition of dhimmitude: a Jew could reach great political heights and wield enormous power in the Muslim world, yet must always act with deference and abject humiliation to even the lowest Muslim he meets. We see that in 1816 Damascus, Muslim servants were considered higher in the social milieu than the richest Jew in the city.
In Germany, when Hitler came to power, it was a time of terrible financial depression. Money was worth nothing. In Germany people lost homes and jobs, just like in the American Depression in the 1930s, which we have read about in Thoene's Shiloh books.
In those days, in my homeland, Adolph Hitler was elected to power by promising "Change." He blamed the "Zionists" around the world for all our problems. He told everyone it was greedy Zionist Bankers who had caused every problem we had. He promised when he was leader, the greedy Zionist bankers would be punished. The Zionists, he promised, would be wiped off the face of the earth. So Hitler was elected to power by only 1/3 the popular vote. A coalition of other political parties in parliament made him supreme leader.
Then, when he was leader, he disgraced and expelled everyone in parliament who did not go along with him. Yes. Change came to my homeland as the new leader promised it would. The teachers in German schools began to teach the children to sing songs in praise of Hitler. This was the beginning of the Hitler Youth movement.
It began with praise of the Fuhrer's programs on the lips of innocent children. Hymns in praise of Hitler and his programs were being sung in the schoolrooms and in the playyard. Little girls and boys joined hands and sang these songs as they walked home from school. My brother came home and told Papa what was happening at school. The political hymns of children proclaimed Change was coming to our homeland and the Fuhrer was a leader we could trust.
I will never forget my father's face. Grief and fear. He knew that the best propaganda of the Nazis was song on the lips of little children. That evening before he said grace at the dinner table, he placed his hands upon the heads of my brothers and me and prayed the Living Word upon us from Jeremiah 1:4-5.
'Now the Word of the Lord came to me, saying, "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to The nations."
Soon the children's songs praising the Fuhrer were heard everywhere on the streets and over the radio. "With our Fuhrer to lead us, we can do it! We can change the world!"
Soon after that Papa, a pastor, was turned away from visiting elderly parishioners in hospitals. The people he had come to bring comfort of God's Word, were "no longer there." Where had they vanished to while under nationalized health care? It became an open secret. The elderly and sick began to disappear from hospitals feet first as "mercy killing" became the policy. Children with disabilities and those who had Down syndrome were euthanized.
People whispered, "Maybe it is better for them now. Put them out of misery. They are no longer suffering.And, of course, their death is better for the treasury of our nation. Our taxes no longer must be spent to care for such a burden." And so murder was called mercy.
The government took over private business. Industry and health care were "nationalized." (NA-ZI means National Socialist Party) The businesses of all Jews were seized. (Perhaps you remember our story in Berlin on Kristalnacht in the book Munich Signature)
The world and God's word were turned upside down. Hitler promised the people economic Change? Not change. It was, rather, Lucifer's very ancient Delusion leading to Destruction. What began with the propaganda of children singing a catchy tune ended in the deaths of millions of children.
The reality of what came upon us is so horrible that you in this present generation cannot imagine it. Our suffering is too great to ever tell in a book or show in a black and white newsreel.
When I spoke to Bodie about some of these things, she wept and said she could not bear to write them. Perhaps one day she will, but I asked her, "who could bear to read our suffering?" Yet with my last breaths I warn every Christian and Jew now in the name of the Lord, Unless your course of the church in America is spiritually changed now, returning to the Lord, there are new horrors yet to come.
I trembled last night when I heard the voices of American children raised in song, praising the name of Obama, the charismatic fellow who claims he is the American Messiah. Yet I have heard what this man Obama says about abortion and the "mercy killing" of tiny babies who are not wanted.
There are so few of us left to warn you. I have heard that there are 69 million Catholics in America and 70 million Evangelical Christians. Where are your voices? Where is your outrage? Where is passion and your vote? Do you vote based on an abortionist's empty promises and economics? Or do you vote according to the Bible? Thus says the Lord about every living child still in the womb.
"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you."
I have experienced the signs of the politics of Death in my youth. I see them again now. Christians! Unless you stand up now, you will lose your freedom of religion. In America priests and preachers have already lost their freedom to speak openly from their pulpits of moral danger in political candidates. They cannot legally instruct you of which candidate holds fast to the precepts of scripture! American law forbids this freedom of speech to conservative pastors or they will lose their "tax exempt" status.
And yet I have heard the words of Obama's pastor Damning America! I have heard the words of Obama damning and mocking all of you in small towns because you "Cling to your religion." But I am a woman whose name is unknown. My life is recorded as a work of fiction. I have no fear of reprisal when I speak truth to you from the pages of a book.
I have no fear for myself, but for all of you and for your children, I tremble. I tremble at the hymns to a political leaders which your children will sing at school.. (Though even now a hymn or a prayer to God and our Lord Jesus is against the law in public school!)
Your vote must put a stop to what will come upon America if Barack Obama is elected. I pray you will personally heed this warning for the sake of your children and your grandchildren. Do not be deceived. The Lord in Jeremiah 1:7-8 commands every believer to speak up!
"Do not say, 'I am only a youth,' for to all whom I send you, you shall go, and whatever I command you, you shall speak. Do not be afraid of them for I am with you, declares the Lord!"
OBAMA to critical reporters- Your attitude has been noticed, now get out ...RAUS !
AMERICA WAKE THE EFF UP !
PURGE: SKEPTICAL REPORTERS TOSSED OFF OBAMA PLANE Fri Oct 31 2008 08:39:55 ET
The Obama campaign has decided to heave out three newspapers from its plane for the final days of its blitz across battleground states -- and all three endorsed Sen. John McCain for president!
The NY POST, WASHINGTON TIMES and DALLAS MORNING NEWS have all been told to move out by Sunday to make room for network bigwigs -- and possibly for the inclusion of reporters from two black magazines, ESSENCE and JET, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.
Despite pleas from top editors of the three newspapers that have covered the campaign for months at extraordinary cost, the Obama campaign says their reporters -- and possibly others -- will have to vacate their coveted seats so more power players can document the final days of Sen. Barack Obama's historic campaign to become the first black American president.
Some told the DRUDGE REPORT that the reporters are being ousted to bring on documentary film-makers to record the final days; others expect to see on board more sympathetic members of the media, including the NY TIMES' Maureen Dowd, who once complained that she was barred from McCain's Straight Talk Express airplane.
After a week of quiet but desperate behind-the-scenes negotiations, the reporters of the three papers heard last night that they were definitely off for the final swing. They are already planning how to cover the final days by flying commercial or driving from event to event.
Two anti-tank missiles were fired at IDF soldiers near the Kissufim crossing, in the southern Gaza Strip, early Friday morning in the first incident of its kind since the cease-fire between Israel and Gaza factions took effect some five months ago, the army said.
No one was wounded in the attack.
The IDF reported that the troops were investigating suspicious movements along the Gaza fence when they came under fire.
There was no immediate claim of responsibility from any Palestinian terror group.
Following the missile fire, soldiers searched the scene out of concern that bombs were planted in the area.
Since the inception of the truce agreement in June, Palestinians have fired over 20 rockets and 20 mortars at western Negev communities, but until Friday, no anti-tank missiles had been fired.
On Thursday night, a Hamas policeman was killed and three others were wounded when a bomb exploded as they tried to safely detonated it in a Gaza City police station, the group said.
Hamas said its forces found the bomb, but would not say where, or why it was taken to the police station.
There is something wrong in this nation..Obama effigy hangers GO TO JAIL, Palin's have a barbecue
If you protest the One, in a manner they have judge to be distasteful you go directly to jail. If you protest Sarah Palin, your neighbors have a talk with you. America, WAKE UP
2 arrested for hanging Obama effigy on Ky. campus
By ROGER ALFORD - Associated Press Writer
LEXINGTON, Ky. -- A University of Kentucky student and another man were arrested Thursday, accused of hanging a life-sized likeness of Barack Obama from a tree on the campus.
The incident was one of several in recent weeks involving effigies of the presidential candidates or their running mates. No charges have been filed in four other cases that have made national headlines.
UK Interim Police Chief Joe Monroe said the men "expressed remorse for a stunt that had gotten out of hand."
WeHo Homeowners Pull Down Sarah Palin Effigy
WEST HOLLYWOOD, Calif. (CBS) ― An effigy of Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin has been taken down from a West Hollywood home, after the homeowner discussed the situation with the city's mayor.
The mannequin hanging by a noose was part of a larger Halloween display that included an effigy of John McCain coming out of the chimney surrounded by fake flames. The display has drawn national attention and a visit from the Secret Service, which decided there was no threat.
Earlier in the afternoon, neighbors covered up the Palin mannequin with sheets, in what was described as a friendly protest.
Last time I checked, mangling effigies WAS PROTECTED EFFING SPEECH I hope thse college kids find some hotshot who is going to take this disorderly conduct charge and ram it and a back breaking monetary problem to the Fayette County Kentucky administration.
A free speech college stunt, perpetrated about a well known public figure is now ANOTHER example of how the minions of the one have been inculcated to think. These morons don't know Obama, they are not trying to curry favor with Obama, they are looking at the behavior Obama has modeled, and are just following right along.
The polls still indicate a lead for Mr Obama.
His administration is not even and administration elect, and we have abuses.
The LA Times is holding a video that shows Barack Obama celebrating with a group of Palestinians who are openly hostile towards Israel. Barack Obama even gives a toast to a former PLO operative at this celebration. If the American public saw this radical side of Barack Obama it is unlikely he would ever be elected president. But, the media refuses to release this video.
Here's the LA Times' latest excuse... Charles Johnson posted the latest excuse by the LA Times for not releasing the Obama-Khalidi tape:
And yet another version of the excuse, also from Weitman (courtesy of LGF reader ‘jbolty’):
I completely agree about the role of the press being a watchdog on government abuse. The LA Times, as you know, brought this story to light in the first place and described what was going on on the tape. The reporter on the story has written extensively about Barack Obama’s relationship to the Khalidi family. The reporter agreed with his source not to release the tape in return for getting acess to it.
The Times has made it clear (last night online and in today’s newspaper) that it will honor that agreement. That is what you’d want, I would think: protection of a source in return for getting the underlying information. To break that agreement might put the source of the tape in jeopardy. Honoring the agreement allows the newspaper to continue to get information from other sources and assures those sources of information that they can come forward confidentially.
Unreal! Obama's party friends are so dangerous that revealing the source of the tape would put him at risk! You've got to be kidding!
The recent films 28 Days Later, its sequel 28 Weeks Later, the “Firefly” film Serenity and I Am Legend with Will Smith all involve humans converted into frenzied murderous demons due to a man-made virus - usually a virus created with noble intentions. In Weeks and Legend, the hero(s) must give their lives to protect a “special” individual whose blood may hold the key to humanity’s salvation; in Serenity the sacrifices are (less convincingly) necessary so that truth can out. In all cases not only are the demons trying to stop the heroes, but the heroes are up against the establishment as well. Similar setups can be found in many recent films, good and bad, from Children of Men to Ultraviolet.
Why does this theme of the demon virus and the special savior keep popping up, and what are all these movies really about?
Seems to me most of them are about the failure of ‘liberalism’ (in the American sense), i.e. the failure of social democracy - and also, more surprisingly, a longing for monarchy.
A certain stripe of horror/disaster/apocalyptic/exploitation film serves to play upon some widespread yet unstated fear, a fear that cannot or does not find its expression via “respectable” outlets. It’s not politically correct to make a straightforward movie about the threat of commies, but who will object if you make Invasion of the Body Snatchers? ’70s teen slasher films were about the dangers of casual sex and free love: teens have sex, then get killed. The subtext, which could not be stated in progressive company but could be woven into a cheesy movie, being that teens who have sex are sluts and deserve what they get.
What happens in a demon-virus movie? Who are the monsters? The monsters are other people. And not just some evil or colluding subset of other people, either: basically, it’s all other people (except the protagonists). The message is pretty clear: people are monsters and will come after you and claw at you and not stop until they are dead. But, how did those people - regular, faceless people - all get to be monsters? Usually it’s like this: the government is working on some project, something that they think will do a lot of good (say, cure cancer), and something goes horribly wrong.
The well-intentioned government program ends up going awry and turning people into monsters.
This sounds like every far-right caricature of their view of every liberal government project, does it not?
This is not to say that the people who write and make these films are actually far-righties who have such a view of liberal government programs. Probably, most of the people involved in making these films (as with all films) are well to the left of the political spectrum and probably would not even recognize this subtext of their films. (Some of them, e.g. Serenity director Joss Whedon, probably even think the critique they are levelling is pro-left and anti-right.) Nevertheless, these films appear designed to tap into that fear, the fear that liberal social projects will inevitably backfire and have disastrous unintended consequences.
I suspect there is a neo-Ludditism behind these films. I know many Liberals, whose very livelihoods are dependent upon technology, who are, nevertheless, frightened of the modern world.
For a class of people who purport to believe in a holistic approach to life, they seem to be able to conceive of the modern world only in fragments;
software = good
factories (who might happen to make comact discs) = bad
iPods = cool
people who leave a big carbon-footprint (like maybe, just maybe?, the rock stars who make the music which goes on the iPods) = way uncool
LONDON — An Iranian ship captured by Somali pirates carried sealed containers of a powdery substance believed to be nuclear or chemical weapons agents.
Western intelligence agencies have been monitoring the capture of the Iran Deyanat, seized by Somali pirates on Aug. 21. The cargo ship, owned and operated by the state-owned Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines, or IRISL, contains sealed cargo thought to be linked to the death of 16 pirates.
In September 2008, IRISL came under U.S. sanctions as a company that helps Iran's nuclear and other strategic programs, Middle East Newsline reported.
Industry sources said the ship's crew of 29, about half of them Iranians and reported to have left China on July 28, would neither disclose the exact contents of the cargo nor provide the code to open the sealed containers.
In the Somali port village of Eyl, pirates blasted open one of the seven cargo units, said to contain an unidentified powdery substance.
About 40 pirates, armed with rocket-propelled grenades and assault rifles, boarded the Iranian ship, owned by the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, in the Horn of Africa, about 130 kilometers southeast of Yemen. Iran Deyanat was registered to carry a sealed cargo of 42,500 tons minerals and industrial products to the Netherlands via Egypt's Suez Canal.
"That ship is unusual," Somali Regional Energy Minister Hassan Allore Osman, who has been investigating the Iranian ship, said. "It is not carrying a normal shipment."
"We cannot inspect the cargo yet," Osman said. "But we are sure that it is weapons."
"Our sources say it contains chemicals, dangerous chemicals," Andrew Mwangura, the director of the East African Seafarers' Assistance Programme, said.
Within days, the pirates sustained skin burns, lost hair and became critically ill. Soon after, at least 16 pirates died.
Asatru-believers wants to go to war in Afghanistan
Something is running deep in the veins of the Danes from their great ancestors and even a thousand years of Christianity haven't succeeded in suppressing their true values.
Outside Scandinavia most people do not know what Asatru is or their values so a quick explanation is needed to know what an Asatru believer is - He is one who believes in the old Norse deities as did the Vikings, Asatru is not a religion in the sense as we know it from monotheistic religions but a way of life and spirit and a set of values of some can be found in the Havamal. Here are some of the stanzas to get an idea of the Havamal wisdom:
14. Drunk I got, dead drunk, When Fjalar the wise was with me: Best is the banquet one looks back on after, And remembers all that happened.
15. Silence becomes the Son of a prince, To be silent but brave in battle: It befits a man to be merry and glad Until the day of his death.
16. The coward believes he will live forever If he holds back in the battle, But in old age he shall have no peace Though spears have spared his limbs.
Grolheim lays out a contemporary interpretation of the Asatru values which is a quick and interesting read for those interested - Here is the essence though:
It is better to die standing than to live on one's knees! Dignity was very important to our forefathers. It was better to die in battle than to become a thrall of somebody else.
Asatru has been growing in Denmark and I suppose in other Scandinavian countries too, in my personal opinion I think it is a result of this cultural war we are going through these days and people are sort of going back to their roots in search of a common identity and the Vikings as well as the Norse mythology still plays strongly on the Nordic psyche, it has always been something which fascinated kids as well as adults, there is nothing surprising in that Asatru believers are joining the army and it is delightful that they are growing in numbers, personally I have always been fascinated by the Norse mythology which of course is not unique being a Dane and I (being an atheits) surely would become an Asatru if ever I had to chose a 'religion' - That it stands for complete freedom of mind and soul as well as courage and honor makes it easy and after all without a doubt our culture and heritage is worth fighting for whoever we are and worthy to desire.
Then there is the desire to 'go get them' who burned our flags and embassies back in 2006, it was something which was beyond our imagination, the feeling I get is that the vast majority of ordinary people are proud of the army to some point, on top of that more than half the soldiers who have gone abroad are signing up for second duties and that is inspite of the Danes have got the highest casualty rates of all the coalition forces in Afghanistan. This clip from the TV2 News shows the fighting spirit of the Danes in the Helmand province where a journalist is with them on patrol and they get under attack in a fire fight with the Talibans, their happiness is difficult for them to contain, the whole clip is uplifting and makes you feel good - Their strategy is to kill as many Talibans as possible.
4 days ago the Danes provoked the Taliban to attack them after they had raided the Taliban head quarters in a village by raising the Danish flag in the captured head quarters and just waited - Between 30 to 50 Taliban was sent to their heaven as a result - The rules of engagement in ISAF is not to attack so they have to be inventive and illustrated what the commander said "Our goal is to cleanse the area from the Taliban, that is why we are provoking them so they stick out from the civilians"
Its a beautiful story and I am confident no harm was done to the flag.
Unfortunately Denmark is a small country but with a rare spirit these days and there is no way they are not going to fight all the way and die standing. Contrary to most other countries the Danes have not given one inch to any pressure and which is illustrated in the opening speech of parliament the Danish PM gave a few weeks ago - Denmark calls for fight for freedom - The Danes have been heading the other way, no dhimmitude to speak off apart from a frustrated left and their jihadist pets:
"Denmark is working for the EU to step up its fight for the right to basic freedoms, which are universal and inviolable," Rasmussen told the opening of the 2008-9 parliamentary session in Copenhagen.
Europe should stand together with "the other free democracies of the world in the global defence of these rights," he said, adding that "the freedom of expression is the most important of all freedoms. Freedom to speak, write and draw what one thinks is democracy's vital nerve."
That freedom is "under pressure. We saw that in the affair of the cartoons which still has serious repercussions," Rasmussen said.
The cartoons had been "exploited", he said, as a "grotesque reason to justify the bombing of the Danish embassy in (the Pakistani capital) Islamabad in June."
"We saw it last year when a series of Muslim countries had a resolution adopted at the United Nations seeking to restrain the freedom of expression in respect of religion," he said.
"It is an insult to human rights that the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) should be abused to put freedom of expression in chains."
The Durban II conference has been widely discussed in the medias and some have advocated proposing to make an alternative to the UN consisting of Democratic countries. But now back to the Asatru believers and this amusingly refreshing story about going to Valhalla. Don't mess with the Danes or you will one day meet your maker by the wrath of Thor's sons.
Asatru-believers wants to go to war in Afghanistan
"They want to be soldiers and some of them have got a romantic dream about dying in battle. Then you are assured to go to Valhalla" Says the asatru society Forn Sidr's secondary chairman about his young male co-believers who are deployed in the Danish Army.
Western soldiers in muslim countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan are seen by many of the locals as modern day crusaders who wants to spread their infidelity to the whole world. Now it shows that the locals - Without the slightest exaggeration - can start making a new interpretation of the motives shared by a great deal of the soldiers from Denmark: They are Asatru believers and along the same lines of the muslim suicide bombers they believe that eternal honor in life after death awaits them if they fall in battle.
That Kristeligt Dagblad (The Christian Daily) reports after interviews with Army priests who have been with Danish soldiers in war and on international missions. And the tendency is acknowledged by the Asatru believers society Forn Sidr's secondary chairman Søren Fisker.
"They want to be soldiers and some maybe have got a romantic dream about dying in battle. Then you are assured to go to Valhalla. The Asatru-believe is right up the alley because it emphasizes on masculine values. You are persuaded to show courage and to protect the community, all are values which also belongs in being at war" he explains to Kristelight Dagblad.
According to Army priest Christian Madsen who have been on mission in Kosovo and Iraq the Asatru believers are so visible that the latest camp in Iraq, Camp Einherjer, was named after einherjerne, who in the Norse mythology were the Viking warriors who felt in battle with honor and found worthy to live in Valhalla.
Christian Madsen do not know how many Asatru believers there is in the army. But he underscores that they are very visible both in the military at home and on the international missions.
"There is a great deal of Asatru believing soldiers there have got a romantic dream of the community solidarity one experienced in the old North. The Norse mythology is heavily influenced by war and probably also one of the reasons they want to be soldiers. You notice them because they have got Thor's hammer as a necklace and tattoos of the Midgard serpent or other Viking tattoos on their arms" Says Christian Madsen to Kristeligt Dagblad.
After writing twice about the deliberate decision by the Barack Obama campaign to avoid validation checks on credit-card contributions, I’ve heard from a number of people in the credit-card industry on how this works. Two explanations in particular explain the depth of deliberation and deception involved in disregarding address and security-code verification. The first explains that Team Obama probably didn’t just opt out of using these verification processes, but more likely rewrote the code on their site to bypass them, emphases mine:
I have over 30 years of experience in investigating Credit Card Fraud and I can tell you, which you may or may not know, that the merchant acquirer that is conducting the collection of credit / debit card for the Obama campaign are responsible for the actions to be taken regarding the Address Verification System responses. The value of the AVS system is that the issuer of the card being used provides back to the merchant acquirer a response based upon the information provided during the authorization process. This response indicates to the merchant acquirer if the card information was validated as to ownership of the account. It is the merchant acquirer that determines what to do when the authorization response is received. In most cases the transaction that comes back with any negative meaning is denied. However, if the merchant acquirer has adjusted their system to accept any response as acceptable the transaction would be completed.
The value of the AVS system is to deny Card Not Present transactions (CNP) which are suspicious. This protects the merchant against charge backs for bad transactions. What is interesting to me is that the merchant acquirer has knowingly violated a basic CNP fraud prevention technique to accommodate a merchant (Obama Campaign). I think that both the Associations (VISA & MasterCard) would be highly interested in looking at the merchant acquirer that was processing these transactions. The value of ignoring the AVS responses is that multiple invalid transactions may be made without fear of being rejected by the authorization systems. This means that the real owner of the credit card account is willing to allow multiple transactions to be made on the account using different names and addresses that under normal conditions would be denied. The merchant acquirer has a complete listing of all transactions done and it would be very interesting to see how many transactions were conducted on the same account number using different names. I would think that this would be a Federal violation under the current campaign funding laws.
Another fraud-prevention veteran notes that Team Obama has at the least provided a testing ground for thieves looking to validate responses:
You may have mentioned this elsewhere, but disabling the security allows would be credit card thieves to “ping” numbers till they get a hit. The number of “pings” should have raised flags at Visa and MasterCard, don’t you think?
I wonder if they warned the Obama campaign, or worse, ignored it.
In other words, a crook could simply type in random numbers until he found one sequence that worked in some fashion. That could give a thief a starting point for committing credit-card fraud. If all they had to do was type nonsense values for names and addresses, such as Doodad Pro, they could quickly determine which numbers were valid — and they could probably program bots to do that kind of work.
Thanks to Team Obama, millions of people now have to wonder whether they’ve been victimized by credit thieves. Some of us wonder if the thieves aren’t really working at Team Obama in the first place.
Thanks to Joe the Plumber John McCain is now trusted by more Americans on the economy and taxes too- the number one issue in this year's election. Rasmussenreported:
After several weeks of John McCain’s campaign attacks on Barack Obama’s tax plan and idea of “spreading the wealth around”, the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds voters trust McCain more than Obama on taxes, 47% to 45%.
Two weeks ago, Obama had a one point-advantage on the issue of taxes and a month ago, he had a three-point edge. The last time McCain had the advantage on this issue was September 14, just before the collapse of Lehman Brothers started the meltdown on Wall Street (see trends).
Berg Filing Injunction to Stay Presidential Election
Philip J. Berg Will Be Arriving U.S. Supreme Court, Washington, DC at 3:15 p.m. today to file for an Injunction to Stay Presidential Election Pending Writ of Certiorari regarding Obama who is "NOT" qualified to be President of the United States
(Press Release - 10/30/08 - Contact information and pdf of press release at bottom)
(Lafayette Hill, Pennsylvania – 10/30/08) - Philip J. Berg, Esquire, the Attorney who filed suit against Barack H. Obama challenging Senator Obama’s lack of “qualifications” to serve as President of the United States, announced today that he will be at the United States Supreme Court today, October 30, 2008 to file:
1.Application to Justice Souter for an Immediate Injunction to Stay the Presidential Election of November 4, 2008; and 2.Writ of Certiorari. Berg stated, “I am hopeful that the U.S. Supreme Court will grant the Injunction pending a review of this case to avoid a Constitutional Crisis by insisting that Obama produce certified documentation that he is or is not a “natural born” citizen and if he cannot produce documentation that Obama be removed from the ballot for President.
Berg’s case, Berg vs. Obama was dismissed from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Docket # 08-cv-4083 for lack of standing. This is a question of who has standing to uphold our Constitution. If I don't have standing, if you don't have standing, if your neighbor doesn't have standing to question the eligibility of an individual to be President of the United States - the Commander-in-Chief, the most powerful person in the world - then who does?
What happened to ‘...Government of the people, by the people, for the people,...’ Abraham Lincoln in his Gettysburg Address 1863.
We must legally prevent Obama, the unqualified candidate, from taking the Office of the Presidency of the United States,” Berg said.
Our website obamacrimes.com now has 86.1 + million hits.
Berg again stressed his position regarding the urgency of this case as, “we” the people, are heading to a “Constitutional Crisis” if this case is not resolved forthwith.
For those inclined to see the workings of Divine Providence in human history, the special affinity of the American people for Israel provides a happy example. If Israel could have only one consistent ally in the world, it would surely have picked the world's (still) most powerful nation. Without the United States, Israel would be hard pressed to obtain the weapons needed to defend itself.
BELIEF IN AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM, its chosenness, has always played a major role in American civic religion. The two dominant conceptions of American foreign policy — isolationism and liberal internationalism — are both predicated upon an assumption of American moral superiority. Isolationists fear contamination from the "foreign entanglements," of which President George Washington warned of in his Farewell Address. Liberal internationalists seek to remake the world in America's image.
Senator Barack Obama represents a third foreign policy approach — what Harvard political scientist Samuel Huntington calls the "cosmopolitan." Far from taking American virtue as its starting point, the cosmopolitan seeks to remake America in Europe's image.
Thus Senator Obama presented himself to Europeans last summer as a citizen of the world, one of them. "Mr. Obama," in the words of Fouad Ajami, "proceeds from the notion of American guilt. We called up the furies ... ." He accepts the Western European critique of America's aggressiveness, and seeks to restore American "moral standing" in the eyes of the world.
He shares the Europeans contempt for the terminology of good and evil: "A lot of evil's been perpetuated based on the claim that we were fighting evil," he says. If his heart thrilled at the sight of Iraqis twice braving suicide bombers to go the polls, he kept it to himself. The war in Iraq, in his view, was nothing more than a "cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors ... to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the cost in lives lost and in hardships born."
And he expresses understanding of the grievances for the perpetrators of evil — Hamas, Hizbullah, even the perpetrators of 9/11, which he characteristically portrayed as part of "an underlying struggle between worlds of plenty and worlds of want" (despite the affluent backgrounds of the attackers). He voted against a Senate bill to designate the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization.
Senator Obama's most fervent support has come from the university campuses and cultural elites — where attitudes tend most to resemble those of Western Europeans and where scorn for those who "cling to guns or religion" runs rampant. The campuses also happen to be the redoubts of the greatest hostility to Israel.
AN AMERICA THAT MORE CLOSELY RESEMBLES Western Europe will not be good for Israel. Western Europeans consistently rate Israel the greatest threat to world peace. And they are remarkably cavalier about Israel's defense of its own existence. Recent memory does not include any Israeli response to attack that the Europeans did not deem disproportionate. The Western European countries have done little to prevent the United Nations from degenerating into an anti-Israel debating society, and a number have supported or abstained on U.N. Human Rights Council resolutions supportive of anti-Israel "resistance" — i.e., terrorism.
Many commonly-held attitudes predispose Europeans against Israel. Western Europe is far along a project of transferring political legitimacy from nation-states to supranational organizations, like the European Union, the United Nations and the International Criminal Court. Having achieved their nation-state rather late in the day, the Jews of Israel remain proud of it. To the Europeans, however, a non-Moslem state based on national/religious identity appears an atavism.
Western Europe's almost religious faith in international institutions of open membership, like the U.N., and a declining concern with national sovereignty threaten Israel. International criminal jurisdiction has already rendered Israeli military personnel wary of traveling abroad. Senator Obama frequently demonstrates a similar reverence for the U.N., and has a long list of international treaty obligations to which he is eager to submit the United States.
Europe has adopted a stance of appeasement towards both external threats and to Islamic minorities within. (Ironically, the United States, which offers no special dispensation to Moslems, has done a far better job of integrating Moslem immigrants than European countries.) Europeans' abhorrence of any resort to military action causes them to instinctively recoil from Israel, as the superior military power in the region.
Having moved beyond simplistic categories of good and evil, Europeans try to take, at best, an even-handed approach to any conflict, invariably warning, for instance, against a "cycle of violence" whenever Israel responds to attack. Obama's immediate call for "mutual restraint" after the Russian invasion of Georgia was a classic example of that tendency.
At worse, European sophistication favors whichever party can present itself as the aggrieved underdog, or serves to mask an ugly cynicism, as in the recent multi-billion deals signed by Austrian and Swiss energy companies with Iran.
To the extent that Senator Obama's likely election betokens a move towards a more European America, the special ties that have bound the people of America and Israel show signs of fraying.
And, what will come in the wake of a the end of this special relationship?
What the group who Sabeel's Naim Ateek calls a "liberation" movement has in mind:
Following are excerpts from an interview with Palestinian cleric Muhsen Abu 'Ita, which aired on Al-Aqsa TV on July 13, 2008
Muhsen Abu 'Ita: "Naturally, the Koran chapters conveyed to Muhammad in Mecca only rarely deal with the Jews - like in 'those who incur Allah's wrath,' which appears in the Al-Fatiha chapter.
"Hence, it is strange to find an entire chapter bearing the name of the Jews, or Bani Israil. It is even more peculiar that this chapter does not talk about the Jews of the Qaynuqa, Nazir, or Qurayza tribes.
"It talks about the Jews of our times, of this century, using the language of annihilation, the language of grave digging. Note that in this chapter, the Jews were sentenced to annihilation, before even a single Jew existed on the face of the earth. This Koranic chapter talked about the collapse of the so-called state of Israel, before this state was even established. From here stems the importance and oddity of this chapter...
"The blessing of Palestine is dependent upon the annihilation of the pit of global corruption in it. When the head of the serpent of corruption is cut off here in Palestine, and its octopus tentacles are severed throughout the world, the real blessing will come.
"The annihilation of the Jews here in Palestine is one of the most splendid blessings for Palestine. This will be followed by a greater blessing, Allah be praised, with the establishment of a Caliphate that will rule the land and will be pleasing to men and God."
All of us, every single man, woman, and child on the face of the Earth were born with the same unalienable rights; to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And, if the governments of the world can't get that through their thick skulls, then, regime change will be necessary.
The Untold Story of Muslim Opinions & Demographics
Infidel Babe Of The Week
Moran Atias - TYRANT
IBA Quote of the Week.
What Trump is proving is something Andrew Breitbart stumbled upon, but never really figured out how to exploit. The scolds on the Left are paper tigers. They rely on you turning your virtues into vices. Andrew used to respond to the Left's accusations with "So?" as in, "so what are you going to do about it?" The answer is and was nothing.
Trump is not responding as expected to the charge of the social justice warrior. Instead of cowering and apologizing, he is laughing and joking, often doubling down on his previous statements. What we're all seeing is the Left has no response for it, other than to keep chanting the same lines.
-- Quote from Anonymous commenter ...
"An Islamic regime must be serious in every field," explained Ayatollah Khomeini. "There are no jokes in Islam. There is no humour in Islam. There is no fun in Islam."
"I want to be very, very clear, however: I understand and agree with the analysis of the problem. There is an imminent threat. It manifested itself on 9/11. It's real and grave. It is as serious a threat as Stalinism and National Socialism were. Let's not pretend it isn't." ~~~~~Bono~~~~~