Monday, July 25, 2011

Freedom's Last Stand

WHEN THE United States is in a tough fight, Tennessee always comes through. When the War of 1812 broke out between the United States and Britain, 2,000 Tennesseans volunteered to fight under General Andrew Jackson. The Tennesseans made up the main part of Jackson's army that defeated the British at the Battle of New Orleans on January 8, 1815.

In the Mexican war, Tennessee was asked to call up 2,800 men. But 30,000 volunteered. Tennessee is known as the "volunteer state" for good reason. And they're still earning that moniker today. All over the world, people are yielding to Islam's relentless encroachment. But Tennesseans aren't having it. This may be freedom's last stand, where the tide is turned.

Orthodox Muslims have come to Tennessee to push their agenda, but they've clearly come to the wrong place.

Leading the fight is the
Tennessee Freedom Coalition (TFC), a non-partisan grassroots movement led by executive director Lou Ann Zelenik and chairman Andy Miller.

Among TFC's goals is to "educate citizens on the realities of Sharia and stop the growth of radical Islam." They create events that inform people with educational forums and expert speakers, and by conducting political workshops.

They've only been in existence for a few months, and already TFC has accomplished two remarkable things: They partnered with Americans for Peace and Tolerance to make a professional documentary that exposed radical Islamist preachers in Nashville — preachers who had been accepted by the city leadership and the media as "moderates," but who were indoctrinating students at both Vanderbilt and Tennessee State University (as well as their mosque members in Nashville) with extremist, anti-American views.

You can see their first-rate 16-minute video on YouTube here:
Losing Our Community. This video had a significant part to play in alerting legislators to what needed to be done, and they recently voted overwhelmingly to approve an anti-terrorism bill in a 26-3 landslide in Tennessee's Senate. The vote passed in the House a few days earlier, 76-16. The bill allows Tennessee to prosecute anyone who provides material support for terrorism of any kind.

The other important thing TFC has accomplished is the inaugural Signature Series event on May 12, 2011. The main speakers were
Geert Wilders, Sam Solomon, and Bill Warner. This event also had a major educational influence on Tennessee politicians and helped the anti-terrorism bill pass. Many state legislators had a chance to meet with and listen to Geert Wilders at this event, and the very next day, the bill had 14 new co-sponsors!

You can read an excellent first-hand account of the event by Baron Bodissey here:
Tennessee the Model. But I'd like to quote Bodissey briefly here, just to give you an idea of what kind of event it was:

Last week’s events in Nashville can provide inspiration for the rest of the United States, Canada, Europe, Australia, and anywhere else in world where grassroots groups are resisting Islamization. Tennessee can also serve as a model for future actions all across the American heartland.

This was the largest and most effective event of its type that I have ever attended, and one of the main reasons for its success was the mega-church environment. I realize that this doesn’t sit well with some of our atheist or secular readers, but it’s hard to argue with effectiveness.

The plans to bring in Mr. Wilders gained TFC some media attention a day or two ahead of the event, but most of the advance publicity was by word-of-mouth through churches, civic organizations, and the local Republican party. The venue was ideal for a large crowd, since it could seat as many people as a convention hall, and had enough parking to accommodate all their vehicles. The church already had the expertise and personnel to direct traffic, deal with crowd control, and provide security. With the local police cooperating, the setup was orderly and secure.

There was no entry fee.

The audience response to the speeches was uniformly positive and enthusiastic — Geert Wilders was interrupted by applause over and over again. One could tell that people had been desperate to hear these things actually spoken out loud. These were opinions which they had thought were forbidden, but which they now understood to be held in common with thousands of other Tennesseans. Mr. Wilders reminded them of their rights under the First Amendment — as he said, “here I can say what I want to say without having to fear that I will be dragged to court upon leaving this church.”

Thousands of people who had never heard of Geert Wilders have now listened to him and understood his message.

TFC has a DVD of the inaugural Signature Series event, which you can purchase here:
Geert Wilders' Warning to America. The Nashville event was Wilders' only United States appearance during his last visit. You can see Bill Warner's speech, which is included on the DVD, here.

The DVD is perfect for sharing with people who have not yet fully "embraced the horror" (people who haven't yet accepted the idea that Islam is not a religion of peace). They will see and hear with their own eyes that there are a lot of people who appreciate this information. From the applause you can hear on the DVD, you can tell the audience is enormous. It isn't a few crackpot conspiracy theorists in a dingy basement. This is a mainstream, well-attended, openly-publicized event, and this lends a tremendous feeling of legitimacy to the whole affair that will have a positive influence on your skeptical friends and family.

A couple of days before the inaugural Signature Series event, TFC had a smaller event which included a barbecue and a lecture by Sam Solomon. Twenty-five legislators attended this event. When Solomon first stood up to speak, he wasn't getting much attention. Many people in the audience were texting or doing something with their phones. But as soon as Solomon began speaking, they could not look away.

Solomon speaks with authority. He is a not only a former Muslim, he is a former Middle Eastern Muslim scholar and professor of Sharia law who can still easily recite the Koran from memory. He speaks fluent Arabic. He's now a senior lecturer and research coordinator, a human rights activist and an advisor to British as well as European parliamentarians.

At the TFC barbecue event, Solomon took the room under his spell and many of the legislators afterwards remarked about how much Solomon's talk had advanced their understanding of the very real threat Sharia law poses to the West.

Beforehand the legislators were told they wouldn't have to endure more than 30 minutes of lecture time. But they asked so many questions, the session was stopped after an hour and 20 minutes. This doubtless had a strong influence on the anti-terrorism bill landslide I mentioned above.

This fall TFC is planning an event centering around "jihad hotels" and illegal immigration.

The Tennessee Freedom Coalition is a new and formidable force in the counterjihad movement. I encourage you to
sign up for the TFC email updates, to "like" TFC on Facebook, and to follow TFC on Twitter. You can contact them at tnfreedomcoalition@gmail.com.

24 comments:

Citizen Warrior said...

The TFC has no intention of remaining a local organization. They are working with a group of international counterjihadists and plan on taking their organization as far and wide as possible.

D Charles QC said...

The item and the intentions seem good, with the only mistake being that they invited Geert Wilders, Sam Solomon and Bill Warner. By doing so they have linked themselves to the tarnished fringe section of hate-society.

Wilders' hate is well known, his hypocrisy within The Netherlands is always borderline criminal as is his non-democratic club he calls a political party (existing only because of archaic political laws only existing there).

Solomon is worse, his background is irrelevent if he is a convert, that immediately puts him on an agenda. There are enough ex-Catholics that blast my faith and because they are ex-priests, scholars they "say with authority". They, like Solomon, are simply talking with their "ex" cap only...

I agree that the TFC needs to point out the radicalism and those that allow Sharia-creep, but do it with pride, not with another "wrong".

christian soldier said...

: - ) (-:
go Tennessee!!
Carol-CS

Citizen Warrior said...

Damien, I'm surprised at what you said about Wilders. I've never known Wilders to say something hateful but I've never known you to say something inaccurate.

Can you quote something Wilders said that you would consider hateful?

midnight rider said...

CW -- I don't know if you are aware of it but this is not the Damien that usually comments here. This is a new Damien. One we've been having one helluva discussion with these past 2 days. This one's a barrister or a lawyer or a prostitute or something. Oh, sorry, shouldn't insult prostitutes that way. . .

Rebellious Kafir said...

Well, its a good thing we Tennesseans didnt ask for your blessings on the guest list, then isn't it Damien?
You don't like who we invited, tough. There were plenty of other people who did. :)
This has been an ongoing struggle for several years now. For a long time anytime some of us local bloggers would post a blog to our newspapers, they would be taken down pdq.
Back in 2009, I posted this article http://rebelliouskafir.blogspot.com/2009/03/exclusive-are-somali-jihadists-in.html in my local paper's blogsite and it was taken down before the morning was over, along with a very stern phone call from the editor type person who told me I was not going to be allowed to "stir up trouble" lol
So, now its good that finally more people are finding the courage to speak up and stop worrying about offending everyone.
Bout damned time.

D Charles QC said...

Rebellious Kafir,

"So, now its good that finally more people are finding the courage to speak up and stop worrying about offending everyone.
Bout damned time."

True freedom of speech is important, and no the TFC needs not my blessings nor do I seek theirs or yours, as with all of this, in the end our opinions are our own.

D Charles
Gibraltar

D Charles QC said...

Citizen Warrior

Geert Wilder's entire Fitna is a quote on hate. Though I know you will say it is actually quotes of hate by Islam or Islamists, that will be wrong based on cut & paste and context. Anyone could find enough quotes and images and with a good editing process make the same. The end is that it represents nothing but Wilders' intentions and that is hate.

We can add his infamous excuse that is used by many now that "I am not against Muslims, only the Koran" - that of course is impossible, as without the Koran there are no Muslims - another example of pushing "hate".

The proof in the pudding - so to speak, is of course in the organsation and practices of Wilders in his own country. He exists because of old laws that have not been changed. His Freedom Party would not exist in any other country. It has only "one member", Mr Wilders, there is no party leadership voted by members who also have no say in policies an agenda. I find it absurd, if not hypocritical, that the far right of America who demand "democracy" as being so essential turns its' hypocritical back when dealing with an autocratical oligarch as Wilders.

Another example - he never debates but only makes a speech. Again, Dutch rules - he spends the minimum time on the floor in Parliament with the lowest attendance record in history. He makes his speech and leaves and thus never attends 'question time'. He "avoids" debate citing security yet Parliament and the power of video conferencing guarentees his security. Why is that? Because his arguments are shaky and he would be eaten by the first quality debator and facts pointing out that he pushes hate and an agenda funded by the Settler Movement, of which one third of his speeches are identical to.

D Charles
Gibraltar

Epaminondas said...

D CHarles .. that makes Wilders sound like the mirror image of Chucky Schumer, camera hound.

Unfortunately that is IRRELEVANT to the message.

Wilders is making a point the most powerful way he can, which means AIR TIME.

D Charles QC said...

Epa,

A certain Norwegian also made his point in the most "powerful way he can, which means AIR TIME" which of course is not a good thing, so is Wilders.

D Charles
Gibralter

D Charles QC said...

Citizen Warrior,

as I commented on another thread, I think the same response is due:

"Those that avoid the issues and would rather attempt to discredit the writer or the source is almost always a sign of admission to having no real point at all."

Do you have a point regarding what I said?

I answered a comment/question on Wilders and I expressed it. If you wish to argue a case in response to mine in regards to Wilders, the Dutch electoral system, his record low level of appearances in the Lower House of Parliament in that country or his never-ending excuses to avoid actual debate - go ahead.

To keep in topic, the TFC gets more negative than positive in associating with hate-for-profiteers like Wilders and evangelical haters like Solomon and it is a shame because their original cause was justified.

Citizen Warrior said...

Charles, you didn't answer the question. What is your purpose in reading the IBA? Why are you here?

D Charles QC said...

Sorry, I may have answered it on another thread or was side-tracked on this one by your imature name-calling.....

I was linked into this site via a discussion with Always On Watch that I do make comments on particular issues. It should be pointed out that I have no problems with AOW. We certainly do not agree on many points (but do on some), she engages in good discussion, debate and is civil and respectful and in return merits the same. Certainly there is no childish name-calling and avoiding debate or discussing the issues.

My interest in AOW's site and here is to learn what ticks in certain groups' minds on subjects that also interest me. I am anti-jihadist in my own fashion and I debate within the British Conservative Party circles of which I have been a proud and active member for over thirty years.

I hope that answers your question.

Pastorius said...

Damien says of Geert Wilders: he spends the minimum time on the floor in Parliament with the lowest attendance record in history


I respond: I would caution that, while this may be true, it is likely that the reason for this is the man lives under constant death threat, and actually sleeps in a different place every night, sometimes in prison cells, in order to avoid those who want to murder him.

If he were to show up at the Parliament building regularly, it would likely not only endanger him, but the other MP's as well.

Pastorius said...

Quote from Jewish Tribune article:

For almost seven years, Wilders and his family have lived under constant, 24-hour guard. Their every move must be approved in advance; they sleep and live in safe houses such as army barracks and jail cells; all visitors must be pre-screened. There is no room for spontaneity and no possibility of quietly stopping in at a friend's house.

http://www.jewishtribune.ca/TribuneV2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4370&Itemid=53

Pastorius said...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A52502-2005Jan31?language=printer

THE HAGUE -- Sometimes the threats come by e-mail. Other times, warnings show up on Internet chat sites. Occasionally they are short video clips. The latest has a soundtrack of Arabic song and automatic-weapons fire, and a photograph of the intended target -- a Dutch lawmaker, Geert Wilders.

"He is an enemy of Islam and he should be beheaded," the narrator of one video clip posted on the Internet says in Arabic, against the crackle of gunfire. Behead him, "and you will earn a place in paradise."

Wilders, 41, grimaces as he plays the video for a reporter on his office computer. "I've been threatened many times," he says. "We've never experienced this before. It's something that nobody wants to live with."

Wilders is among the more provocative critics of radical Islam and immigrants in the Netherlands. He wants the preemptive arrest of suspected terrorists, whom he calls "Islamo-fascist thugs." And he wants immigrants expelled from the country for even minor infractions.

Since the execution-style killing last November of Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh in Amsterdam, and the discovery of an Islamic extremist cell in the Netherlands with a "death list" that included Wilders, police are taking seriously the threats against him and other people whose names have appeared on the list, often for far more moderate statements.

Wilders now travels everywhere with six bodyguards. He cannot sleep in his own home, but is moved around between various undisclosed safe houses. He sees his wife twice a week, at a safe house. Visitors to his parliament office must be cleared in advance and are thoroughly searched; even ballpoint pens are carefully examined.

Pastorius said...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A52502-2005Jan31?language=printer

Other Dutch politicians who are under similar protection include Job Cohen, the mayor of Amsterdam; Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a Somali-born member of parliament who is Muslim and collaborated with van Gogh on a controversial film about Islam's treatment of women; and Ahmed Aboutaleb, a Moroccan-born alderman in Amsterdam who has talked about tolerance and the need for Muslims to adapt to the Dutch way of life.

"We simply don't know if people are walking around targeting me or not," Aboutaleb said in an interview at Amsterdam's city hall. "I show up in meetings and give speeches -- unfortunately always surrounded by people armed to the teeth."

This kind of security is something entirely new for politicians in the Netherlands, where until recently even the prime minister had minimal protection compared to senior officials in the United States. The change illustrates how some European cities have become fronts in a war of ideas between extremist intolerance and freedom of expression.

Pastorius said...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A52502-2005Jan31?language=printer

Wilders's transgression, according to the extremists demanding his death, is his insulting of Muslims in the Netherlands, with frequent denunciations of Islam. "Islam and democracy are fully incompatible," he said in the interview. "They will never be compatible -- not today, and not in a million years."

Wilders has also called the concept of multiculturalism a failure in the Netherlands. He is advocating a complete five-year ban on immigration. He says Turkey does not belong in the European Union, which has agreed to open negotiations toward the country's membership.

Those positions were once politically taboo in the Netherlands. But that ended in 2002, when Pim Fortuyn, the flamboyant populist, entered the political scene and upended the Dutch tradition of consensus politics with an anti-immigrant stance summed up with his phrase "Holland is full."

Fortuyn was assassinated by an animal rights activist in May 2002 while campaigning in national elections, but his impact remains as more and more politicians angle for political mileage by directly confronting topics long considered unmentionable here.

Pastorius said...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pim_Fortuyn

Fortuyn was assassinated during the 2002 Dutch national election campaign [5][6][7] by Volkert van der Graaf. In court at his trial, van der Graaf said he murdered Fortuyn to stop him from exploiting Muslims as "scapegoats"

Pastorius said...

Pastorius says: It is very important to note that the media commonly says, Pim Fortuyn was murdered by an Animal Rights activist.

Sometimes the media says he was a militant vegetarian, or other such characterizations.

While Volkert van der Graaf may have been fairly characterized in such a way, the fact remains, he killed Pim Fortuyn because of Islam.

Pastorius said...

That does not mean Muslims asked him to kill Pim Fortuyn. To my knowledge, that is not true.

But, he did what he did because he knew that Muslims were angry with Pim Fortuyn and wanted him dead.

Pastorius said...

Volkert van der Graaf (born July 9, 1969) is known for assassinating the Dutch politician Pim Fortuyn on 6 May 2002 during the political campaign. Van der Graaf was an animal rights and environmental activist, founder of a group that worked through litigation.[1][2] In court at his trial, van der Graaf said he murdered Fortuyn to stop him from exploiting Muslims as "scapegoats" and targeting "the weak members of society" in seeking political power.[3][4][5]

He was arrested shortly after shooting Fortuyn, who died immediately. In court Van der Graaf testified that he had become alarmed that Fortuyn was using Muslims and immigrants as scapegoats in a campaign to seek political power. He thought the politician endangered society with his controversial statements. Later Van der Graaf expressed doubt over his actions. His trial started on March 27, 2003. He was convicted on April 15, 2003 and sentenced to 18 years in prison. The trial generated large interest from the Dutch public, especially Fortuyn supporters.[1] Van der Graaf appealed for the reduction of the sentence to 16 years, but on July 18, 2003, the appeals court upheld the previous sentence.

During the trial, Van der Graaf described his reasons for killing Fortuyn. He had hoped that the leaders of other political parties would criticize Fortuyn, but that it never happened. Fortuyn had the talent to channel criticism so that it never touched him. Van der Graaf said he had spoken to no one about his plan. He finished his planning just the day before the murder. He was wrestling with regret for the killing, finding the killing of somebody morally reprehensible. On May 6 he had felt justified, wanting to fight the danger of what Fortuyn represented, not the man. He did not find it easy to talk about feelings. Asked about the danger of accidentally injuring somebody other than Fortuyn in the attack, he said that he had been confident that that wouldn't happen. The 3FM DJ Ruud de Wild said that he barely escaped with his life, as he received a bullet in the bag used for a shield.

To the argument that Fortuyn would have been chosen through democratic means, Van der Graaf said that that was also the case for Hitler. He compared the rise of Fortuyn to the rise of Nazism in the 1930s.[1] In his final argument, he said that he had acted from his conscience, but that did not justify murder. He said it was absolutely not normal to shoot somebody to death.

Van der Graaf said he murdered Fortuyn to defend Dutch Muslims from persecution. He wanted to stop Fortuyn from targeting "the weak parts of society to score points" and exploiting Muslims as "scapegoats" in an attempt to seek political power.[6][7][

Pastorius said...

Pastorius writes: Pim Fortuyn was murdered because people in the media, and various leftist political organizations, villainized him because of his political opinions.

Fortuyn believed Islam was a danger to society. And, exercizing his Freedom of Speech, he said so publicly.

Leftists believed this was an acceptable idea, not only to believe, but to express in public.

Hence, they villainized Fortuyn, until someone decided he was a Hitlerian figure who must be killed.

Are Leftists responsible for the murder of Pim Fortuyn?

Would Damien II be responsible, in part, for the murder of Geert Wilders, were he to be similarly assassinated?

Would Damien II, and people like him, have any culpability in assassinations of Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller, Epaminondas, Baron Bodissey, Pastorius, etc., if such murders were to happen in the future?

D Charles QC said...

"When one plays with fire then be prepared to be burnt." - 18th century Castillian saying.

I would take no responsibility at all becasue my condemnation of Wilders and Spencer - and most certainly Geller and the hypocrit Hirsi is just a drop in the bucket of many on a group that are playing with fire.

There is a huge difference to standing up for a cause but since we are talking about the Dutch, it was Erasmus Rotterdamus who said that "a cause only works when you can live with it", meaning that if it is based on bigotry, misinformation or personal benefit (Hirsi comes to mind here) then it is not really a cause and fails from the start.

The role of Wilders in the First House of the Dutch Parmiament is to be a sitting member and participate in discussion and debate. Whilst in Parliament he is as safe as he ever gets and his leaving has nothing to do with his daily shuffle but more of an excuse. He even gave up his seat on local council as the "workload" was too much - try and work that one around it... He actually hides in the parliamentary bar is not a secret.