Exposing Obama on voting for infanticide: one of my favorite topics of conversation. That being the case, I couldn't possibly let this story go.
From National Review:
Obama’s Infanticide Votes
Newt wasn’t 100 percent right — but he was about 95 percent right.
By Patrick Brennan
"In last Wednesday’s debate, when the Republican candidates were asked about their positions on birth control, Newt Gingrich parried with one of his usual tactics, a fusillade against the mainstream media. He told CNN’s John King, 'You did not once in the 2008 campaign, not once did anybody in the elite media ask why Barack Obama voted in favor of legalizing infanticide. If we’re going to have a debate about who is the extremist on these issues, it is President Obama, who, as a state senator, voted to protect doctors who killed babies who survived the abortion.'
Two points of Gingrich’s barrage warrant assessment. First, did Barack Obama, as a state senator, vote 'in favor of legalizing infanticide,' by voting 'to protect doctors who killed babies who survived the abortion'? And second, has no one in the elite media ever discussed his record on the issue? Yes; and no, but essentially yes.
Gingrich’s assertion rests on then–State Senator Obama’s opposition, in 2001, 2002, and 2003, to successive versions of the Born Alive Infants Protection Act, an Illinois bill that was meant to provide protection for babies born alive after attempted abortions. The bill gave them protection as legal persons and required physicians to provide them with care, rather than allowing doctors to deal with them as they would, literally, with medical waste. In 2008, Obama’s campaign repeatedly claimed that he opposed the bill because it was unnecessary, since Illinois law already provided protection for infants born alive. However, as Ramesh Ponnuru pointed out on NRO at the time, this extended only to babies whom physicians deemed to have 'sustainable survivability.' Thus infants who were not expected to survive could be killed or left unattended to die. Obama, Ponnuru wrote, 'did not want the gap filled.' (The National Right to Life Committee has a report on Obama, Illinois’s legal loophole, and its horrific consequences here.)
Obama maintained at the time, with support from Planned Parenthood of Illinois, that the bill wasn’t really about protecting infants’ lives or mitigating their suffering, but was in fact a backdoor attempt to restrict abortion. The argument (which is constitutionally dubious, anyway) goes that, by providing legal protection and 'recognition as a human person' for a pre-viable infant, the law could be used to threaten Roe v. Wade. Thus, in his 2004 Senate campaign, and then during the course of the 2008 campaign, Obama claimed that he would have supported a law like the 2002 federal born-alive statute, which stated explicitly that it could not be used to dispute the legal status of fetuses prior to their birth.
In committee in 2003, however, Obama voted against a version of the Illinois bill that contained the same protection included in the federal bill (which passed 98–0 in the U.S. Senate). Thus, Obama’s tenuous constitutional argument doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.
One other excuse for Obama’s opposition to the Illinois bill has been proffered: that the final version of the bill was coupled with another piece of legislation that imposed criminal or civil consequences for doctors who did not properly treat infants who were covered by the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. Obama and others deemed this second bill unacceptable. However, this doesn’t begin to defend Obama’s vote on the first bill.
As Ponnuru pointed out back in 2008, FactCheck.org and PolitiFact admitted the above facts as such, but have disputed whether they constitute 'legalizing infanticide'; FactCheck argued that that question remains a value judgment. Since the Illinois bill would have provided legal protection for born-alive infants who had not been protected before, by opposing it, Obama voted to continue to make it legal to kill them. Thus, the only question remaining in order to determine whether it was 'infanticide' is: Were the subjects of the bill fetuses or were they infants? In order for them not to be considered infants, one would have to contend that an unviable prematurely born baby is not an infant — a claim few would be willing to make. And yet, Obama’s votes, three times over the course of three years, indicate that he believes that fetuses who have been born alive, but have not yet reached the age of viability, are not human persons worthy of protection by our laws. Such a position on abortion is, to say the least, extreme, and deserves attention.
Which leads to the second question Gingrich raised: Have the media questioned Obama’s position on the Illinois infanticide bill? Washington Post blogger Erik Wemple has turned up a few media references to President Obama’s extreme abortion stances from the 2008 campaign: two CNN segments discussing his record, including the Illinois legislation specifically; one instance in a debate, where John McCain raised the question of Obama’s record, and he defended his position on the Illinois bill; and one interview with Chris Wallace of Fox News, in which Obama was queried on partial-birth abortion, though not the Illinois legislation specifically.
The attention was most intense in August of 2008, after the NRLC managed to generate national debate about Obama’s position on the Illinois bill. Obama was asked about it during an interview with the Christian Broadcasting Network, where he offered a thoroughly deceptive response to the question, saying, 'Here’s a situation where folks are lying' about his position. However, Obama was the one lying: He told the interviewer, David Brody, that he opposed the bill because of its threat to Roe v. Wade, and that existing Illinois law already protected infants who were born alive. As we have seen, the first assertion is implausible; the second is just plain false.
This seems to be the one instance in which a journalist asked candidate Obama directly about his support for the bill, and he was unfortunately let off, even by a conservative reporter, with his mendacious explanation.
Both the Washington Post and the New York Times reported on the controversy, noting the points the NRLC had raised about Obama’s inconsistent and extreme positions. The Times, citing sources on both sides, explored Obama’s claim that he opposed the final Illinois bill because of its unacceptable companion bill. However, Obama’s claim has no solid legal basis: Two different bills are two different bills.
Thus, while one cannot say, as Gingrich did, that the media have literally never questioned Obama’s extreme record on abortion, we can certainly say that there has not been a sufficiently revealing discussion of his views. An honest appraisal would depict him as having voted repeatedly to protect a form of infanticide. Instead, the media have willingly accepted explanations that don’t stand up to scrutiny.
And they deserve scrutiny, for two reasons. First, as explained above, Obama has offered deceptive explanations of his own pro-abortion legislative work, while simultaneously accusing his pro-life opponents of being dishonest. More important, Obama’s record as a state senator was not merely pro-choice, but radically pro-abortion. His voting record indicates that he does not believe infants deserve protection even once they have emerged from the womb if they are deemed to be below the age of viability, and he did in fact, three times, vote to keep a form of infanticide legal."
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
Get Out of the Way, Mr. President!
It may be gas prices that save us from another four years of Barry. If that's the case, I'll take a deep breath and take my medicine. Anything to get rid of Obama.
Read from Dick Morris:
Gas Prices To Cost Obama
"I hate to quote the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, but the chickens have come home to roost for President Obama as higher oil and gasoline prices swamp his reelection bid.
Count the chickens:
*Obama refused, until two months ago, to impose tough sanctions on Iran, increasing the likelihood of an Israeli attack. Already, speculation that such a strike might be in the offing is driving up oil prices.
*His anti-Israeli policies have diminished that nation’s confidence that it can rely on the United States to handle Iranian nuclear ambitions.
*The president’s veto of the Keystone pipeline and his refusal to drill in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge makes it crystal-clear to voters that there will be no relief coming from the north.
*His stubborn refusal to issue deep-water drilling permits despite having officially lifted the moratorium he imposed after the BP spill is costing us hundreds of thousands of daily barrels in domestic production.
*His relentless crusade against oil company tax privileges undermines our ability to explore, drill and produce oil.
As gas prices rise, President Obama owns them. His public stands against oil drilling are coming back to haunt him. After his approval ratings peaked at 50 percent, Rasmussen and Gallup both have him back in the mid-40s.
Obama proudly points to the fact that we are producing more oil domestically than we have for some years. True. But that’s because Bush issued permits for a massive expansion in offshore drilling and exploration on federal lands. And it’s because private and state land is being used for horizontal drilling and fracking despite the increasing objections of Obama’s EPA.
Obama says that more domestic drilling is not the answer. But it is. Even with his stubborn refusal to issue deep-water drilling permits, American oil production is slated to rise by 2 million barrels of oil per day — an increase of about 25 percent — over the next two years. Canadian production will rise by 1 million barrels, assuming we can get it to the United States over Obama’s objections.
Globally, a 3 million-barrel increase in oil production would be huge — about a 4 percent increase in global supply. Those 3 million new North American barrels will make it possible for the United States to cut off all imports from the nations that hate us: Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Ecuador, Russia, Algeria.
By 2020, we can be the new Saudi Arabia — providing the world’s oil needs — if only Obama would get out of the way.
Peter Morici, professor at the Smith School of Business, University of Maryland School, and former chief economist at the U.S. International Trade Commission, points out that domestic oil production lowers prices in the United States. He points out, for example, that Texas oil is selling for $17 less than oil from the North Sea off the United Kingdom. He says 'this indicates the U.S. market is becoming somewhat separate and less wholly determined by global conditions; hence, more domestic production and increased access to Canadian oil would lower U.S. oil and prices — more drilling in the Gulf and elsewhere in North America, and the Keystone pipeline, would significantly affect gas prices and employment.'
Nor has Obama hidden his opposition to oil production under a bushel. He has been front and center in calling for movement away from fossil fuels and has made clear that he is more worried about climate change than keeping prices down. Now Americans see that his policies are backfiring and it is costing them at the pump.
For Obama, the risks are even greater. The surge in oil prices that will follow speculation about an Israeli attack on Iran — and the huge increase that will take place if there is an actual attack — will derail his so-called recovery. And everyone will know where to place the blame."
Read from Dick Morris:
Gas Prices To Cost Obama
"I hate to quote the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, but the chickens have come home to roost for President Obama as higher oil and gasoline prices swamp his reelection bid.
Count the chickens:
*Obama refused, until two months ago, to impose tough sanctions on Iran, increasing the likelihood of an Israeli attack. Already, speculation that such a strike might be in the offing is driving up oil prices.
*His anti-Israeli policies have diminished that nation’s confidence that it can rely on the United States to handle Iranian nuclear ambitions.
*The president’s veto of the Keystone pipeline and his refusal to drill in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge makes it crystal-clear to voters that there will be no relief coming from the north.
*His stubborn refusal to issue deep-water drilling permits despite having officially lifted the moratorium he imposed after the BP spill is costing us hundreds of thousands of daily barrels in domestic production.
*His relentless crusade against oil company tax privileges undermines our ability to explore, drill and produce oil.
As gas prices rise, President Obama owns them. His public stands against oil drilling are coming back to haunt him. After his approval ratings peaked at 50 percent, Rasmussen and Gallup both have him back in the mid-40s.
Obama proudly points to the fact that we are producing more oil domestically than we have for some years. True. But that’s because Bush issued permits for a massive expansion in offshore drilling and exploration on federal lands. And it’s because private and state land is being used for horizontal drilling and fracking despite the increasing objections of Obama’s EPA.
Obama says that more domestic drilling is not the answer. But it is. Even with his stubborn refusal to issue deep-water drilling permits, American oil production is slated to rise by 2 million barrels of oil per day — an increase of about 25 percent — over the next two years. Canadian production will rise by 1 million barrels, assuming we can get it to the United States over Obama’s objections.
Globally, a 3 million-barrel increase in oil production would be huge — about a 4 percent increase in global supply. Those 3 million new North American barrels will make it possible for the United States to cut off all imports from the nations that hate us: Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Ecuador, Russia, Algeria.
By 2020, we can be the new Saudi Arabia — providing the world’s oil needs — if only Obama would get out of the way.
Peter Morici, professor at the Smith School of Business, University of Maryland School, and former chief economist at the U.S. International Trade Commission, points out that domestic oil production lowers prices in the United States. He points out, for example, that Texas oil is selling for $17 less than oil from the North Sea off the United Kingdom. He says 'this indicates the U.S. market is becoming somewhat separate and less wholly determined by global conditions; hence, more domestic production and increased access to Canadian oil would lower U.S. oil and prices — more drilling in the Gulf and elsewhere in North America, and the Keystone pipeline, would significantly affect gas prices and employment.'
Nor has Obama hidden his opposition to oil production under a bushel. He has been front and center in calling for movement away from fossil fuels and has made clear that he is more worried about climate change than keeping prices down. Now Americans see that his policies are backfiring and it is costing them at the pump.
For Obama, the risks are even greater. The surge in oil prices that will follow speculation about an Israeli attack on Iran — and the huge increase that will take place if there is an actual attack — will derail his so-called recovery. And everyone will know where to place the blame."
The Tremendous Growth of Mosques in America
The Muslim invasion of America is underway.
Read from Weasel Zippers:
Number of U.S. Mosques Explodes By 74% In Post-9/11 Decade…
"And yet CAIR runs around screaming about rampant 'Islamophobia' and how Muslims are severely repressed in this country.
(Mercury News) — 'The number of American mosques grew by 74 percent in the past decade and are increasingly found in the suburbs, according to a national survey by a coalition of Muslim groups.
The 2011 U.S. Mosque Survey counted 2,106 mosques in the United States, 246 in California and 62 in the Bay Area.
“This building boom is indicative of the growing financial resources of the Muslim community as many Muslims have lived in the U.S. for many decades now and their financial resources have improved,” wrote study author Ihsan Bagby, an associate professor of Islamic studies at the University of Kentucky.
The poll is the first of its kind since similar surveys by the same group of researchers in 2001 and 2000. The new survey shows some perspectives have changed.
Only about 25 percent of mosque leaders believe American society is hostile to Islam, compared to 56 percent who thought so in 2000.'
Keep reading…"
Read from Weasel Zippers:
Number of U.S. Mosques Explodes By 74% In Post-9/11 Decade…
"And yet CAIR runs around screaming about rampant 'Islamophobia' and how Muslims are severely repressed in this country.
(Mercury News) — 'The number of American mosques grew by 74 percent in the past decade and are increasingly found in the suburbs, according to a national survey by a coalition of Muslim groups.
The 2011 U.S. Mosque Survey counted 2,106 mosques in the United States, 246 in California and 62 in the Bay Area.
“This building boom is indicative of the growing financial resources of the Muslim community as many Muslims have lived in the U.S. for many decades now and their financial resources have improved,” wrote study author Ihsan Bagby, an associate professor of Islamic studies at the University of Kentucky.
The poll is the first of its kind since similar surveys by the same group of researchers in 2001 and 2000. The new survey shows some perspectives have changed.
Only about 25 percent of mosque leaders believe American society is hostile to Islam, compared to 56 percent who thought so in 2000.'
Keep reading…"
Obama Negotiates with Egypt
Be outraged! Be very outraged! January 20, 2013, cannot come soon enough, and that is if Americans come to their senses and throw Barack Obama out of the White House on Election Day. And that is a big if.
Obama continues to violate the oath he took to protect our nation. In a sane world, this man would be arrested for treason.
Read about his latest act of betrayal, via Atlas Shrugs:
BOMBSHELL: US in talks to swap jihad terror Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman & 49 others for 19 Americans held in Egypt
"Shocking. This would be the nadir of Obama's craven foreign policy of surrender, releasing the mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing that killed six people and injured more than a thousand. Treason.
Al-Arabiya: US in talks to swap jihad terror Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman & 49 others for 19 Americans held in Egypt thanks to Robert Spencer
'Al-Arabiya is reporting, in Arabic only so far, that the U.S. is talking with the Egyptian government to free the blind Sheikh and 49 other Egyptians currently imprisoned in the U.S. in exchange for the freedom of the 19 Americans the Egyptians are holding.
The blind Sheikh, Omar Abdel Rahman, is in prison for his role in masterminding the 1993 World Trade Center jihad terror bombing. If he is freed, it will be the apotheosis of Obama's policy of appeasement toward the Islamic world.
"Omar Abdel Rahman at the head of Egyptian-American swap deal," from al-Arabiya (Arabic), February 28 (thanks to Emad). This is my translation from the Arabic:
The Egyptian government has started real action to respond to a U.S. offer offering to release 50 Egyptians in American prisons, including Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, in return for the release of 19 Americans accused of foreign funding of nongovernmental organizations, as confirmed by Major General Mohamed Hani Zaher, an expert on military research and the fight against international terrorism.
Zaher told the newspaper that the Egyptians need to exploit the weak U.S. position, especially after the conviction of their nationals on charges affecting Egypt's sovereignty over its territory, and not to allow this deal to take place without the agreement of the U.S. administration to release more than 500 Egyptian prisoners in U.S. custody; the Egyptian Foreign Ministry does not know anything about them.
He added that the Egyptian Foreign Ministry asked the Egyptian Embassy in Washington for a list of Egyptian prisoners in the United States of America, and the Egyptian consulate there had already started procedures to account for the number of Egyptian prisoners and detainees in custody on a number of charges in the United States, he said, adding that among the prisoners in the Consulate files was Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, the Mufti of Al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya (the Islamic Group) and currently imprisoned in America....'"
This is outrageous!! First of all, if Obama weren't such a weak president, the Egyptians would never have dared to arrest these 19 Americans. We are reliving the Jimmy Carter years and the Iran hostage situation. The main difference between these two cases is the fact that the American Pravda is currently mum concerning the Americans who are currently being held in Egypt, so as to protect Obama from the public outcry that would be evident if Americans had a clue what was taking place.
And to even consider swapping the likes of the blind Sheikh, Omar Abdel Rahman, is so over the top that's it's almost unbelievable, even for Obama.
Obama continues to violate the oath he took to protect our nation. In a sane world, this man would be arrested for treason.
Read about his latest act of betrayal, via Atlas Shrugs:
BOMBSHELL: US in talks to swap jihad terror Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman & 49 others for 19 Americans held in Egypt
"Shocking. This would be the nadir of Obama's craven foreign policy of surrender, releasing the mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing that killed six people and injured more than a thousand. Treason.
Al-Arabiya: US in talks to swap jihad terror Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman & 49 others for 19 Americans held in Egypt thanks to Robert Spencer
'Al-Arabiya is reporting, in Arabic only so far, that the U.S. is talking with the Egyptian government to free the blind Sheikh and 49 other Egyptians currently imprisoned in the U.S. in exchange for the freedom of the 19 Americans the Egyptians are holding.
The blind Sheikh, Omar Abdel Rahman, is in prison for his role in masterminding the 1993 World Trade Center jihad terror bombing. If he is freed, it will be the apotheosis of Obama's policy of appeasement toward the Islamic world.
"Omar Abdel Rahman at the head of Egyptian-American swap deal," from al-Arabiya (Arabic), February 28 (thanks to Emad). This is my translation from the Arabic:
The Egyptian government has started real action to respond to a U.S. offer offering to release 50 Egyptians in American prisons, including Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, in return for the release of 19 Americans accused of foreign funding of nongovernmental organizations, as confirmed by Major General Mohamed Hani Zaher, an expert on military research and the fight against international terrorism.
Zaher told the newspaper that the Egyptians need to exploit the weak U.S. position, especially after the conviction of their nationals on charges affecting Egypt's sovereignty over its territory, and not to allow this deal to take place without the agreement of the U.S. administration to release more than 500 Egyptian prisoners in U.S. custody; the Egyptian Foreign Ministry does not know anything about them.
He added that the Egyptian Foreign Ministry asked the Egyptian Embassy in Washington for a list of Egyptian prisoners in the United States of America, and the Egyptian consulate there had already started procedures to account for the number of Egyptian prisoners and detainees in custody on a number of charges in the United States, he said, adding that among the prisoners in the Consulate files was Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, the Mufti of Al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya (the Islamic Group) and currently imprisoned in America....'"
This is outrageous!! First of all, if Obama weren't such a weak president, the Egyptians would never have dared to arrest these 19 Americans. We are reliving the Jimmy Carter years and the Iran hostage situation. The main difference between these two cases is the fact that the American Pravda is currently mum concerning the Americans who are currently being held in Egypt, so as to protect Obama from the public outcry that would be evident if Americans had a clue what was taking place.
And to even consider swapping the likes of the blind Sheikh, Omar Abdel Rahman, is so over the top that's it's almost unbelievable, even for Obama.
Gitmo Detainees Receiving a New Soccer Field on Your Dollar
The Left has been howling for years about the rough treatment of terrorists at Gitmo. It has been a load of crap from day one, and it continues to be the case. These savages do not deserve kind treatment from us; if given the chance, they would slit an American throat in a heartbeat.
America is flat broke. Why on earth are we spending even a dime to improve the lives of terrorists?
Read from the American Thinker:
New $750 grand soccer field for Gitmo terrorists
Rick Moran
"They're cutting military pensions and health benefits but the Pentagon found $750,000 for a new soccer field at Guantanamo for the terrorist detainees.
Fox News:
'At a time of record deficits, a new soccer field for detainees at Camp 6 in Guantanamo Bay is just getting the finishing touches -- at a cost of $750,000 to taxpayers.
The project was the highlight of a tour Tuesday of the detention camp for reporters at the facility covering the arraignment in a military court of Majid Khan, a former Baltimore resident and the the only legal U.S. resident on trial at Guantanamo.
The project began in April 2011 and is due to finish this spring. The detainees will now have three recreation facilities at Camp 6, which is home to "highly compliant" detainees who live in a communal setting.
In addition to an indoor recreation field and the existing outdoor recreation field, the new soccer field -- selected because it is such a popular sport with detainees -- is half the size of an American football field.
The new field has been specially constructed so that the detainees "have maximum access" -- about 20 hours a day. Special passageways allow the detainees to pass into the new recreation yard without being escorted by the military.
On the tour, a military police representative who asked not to be identified by name said allowing high levels of activity outdoors helped reduce behavioral problems at the camps, and it also limited the amount of interaction between detainees and the guards.'
I am very happy for the terrorists. Have their ever been prisoners treated in such a grand manner? These guys were living in hovels and mud huts before their capture. Now they've got 3 squares and a bed, a soccer field, a big library -- stuff they never dreamed of possessing back home. Not to mention a government lawyer provided free of charge.
Something is wrong with this picture."
America is flat broke. Why on earth are we spending even a dime to improve the lives of terrorists?
Read from the American Thinker:
New $750 grand soccer field for Gitmo terrorists
Rick Moran
"They're cutting military pensions and health benefits but the Pentagon found $750,000 for a new soccer field at Guantanamo for the terrorist detainees.
Fox News:
'At a time of record deficits, a new soccer field for detainees at Camp 6 in Guantanamo Bay is just getting the finishing touches -- at a cost of $750,000 to taxpayers.
The project was the highlight of a tour Tuesday of the detention camp for reporters at the facility covering the arraignment in a military court of Majid Khan, a former Baltimore resident and the the only legal U.S. resident on trial at Guantanamo.
The project began in April 2011 and is due to finish this spring. The detainees will now have three recreation facilities at Camp 6, which is home to "highly compliant" detainees who live in a communal setting.
In addition to an indoor recreation field and the existing outdoor recreation field, the new soccer field -- selected because it is such a popular sport with detainees -- is half the size of an American football field.
The new field has been specially constructed so that the detainees "have maximum access" -- about 20 hours a day. Special passageways allow the detainees to pass into the new recreation yard without being escorted by the military.
On the tour, a military police representative who asked not to be identified by name said allowing high levels of activity outdoors helped reduce behavioral problems at the camps, and it also limited the amount of interaction between detainees and the guards.'
I am very happy for the terrorists. Have their ever been prisoners treated in such a grand manner? These guys were living in hovels and mud huts before their capture. Now they've got 3 squares and a bed, a soccer field, a big library -- stuff they never dreamed of possessing back home. Not to mention a government lawyer provided free of charge.
Something is wrong with this picture."
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Bring Our Troops Home
I was a huge supporter of both the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan at their inception, but I have had a complete change of heart regarding both war efforts. Unlike the Left which believes that we should run from any military conflict, I would not go that far by any stretch of the imagination. I am all for taking it to the enemy. It's the nation building nonsense that I oppose. All the American dollars, all the military training, and the building of schools, hospitals, etc. is being done in vain.
Iraq and Afghanistan are both Islamic nations, and no matter what we do, we are seen as the infidel. Islam always comes first to these people, and the Koran teaches them to hate the infidel. How can we overcome such an obstacle?
I say we bring our brave men and women home and resort to bombing missions when these nations get out of control, which is obviously very likely to be the case. The lives of our military personnel are just too precious to risk for such a hopeless venture. Besides that, we're flat broke.
Read from One News Now:
When will America wise up?
Dr. Michael Youssef
"When will America realize that the infidel by any name is still an infidel?
We have poured trillions of dollars into Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Egypt, to say nothing of what is more precious than money -- the blood of the brave men and women of the United States military. And for what?
To watch Iran's influence permeate Iraq? To see the butcher of Teheran hold and raise hands with the propped-up presidents of Afghanistan and Pakistan? If there is a picture worth a billion words, that is it. That picture of Islamic unity is like using American sacrifice and tax dollars to jab a finger in America's eye.
Some misguided policymakers in Washington, DC, actually think we can do good in Syria by supporting the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda types against Bashar al-Assad, the Shiite dictator and ally of Shiite Iran. Those policymakers will say we need to abide by our humanitarian principles and support the revolutionaries, regardless of their Islamic stripes.
However, helping one Islamic militant faction against another is a huge mistake. They know how to use America to serve their long-term purposes, and the ultimate outcome will backfire against us just like it did in Egypt and Libya.
Although history repeatedly shows how our good intentions in the Middle East go awry, we are apparently so desperate for our enemies' approval that we will abandon knowledge altogether.
What happened to wisdom? What happened to statesmen who take into account historic and sectarian divisions? What happened to judicious diplomacy? Jesus speaks of being wise as serpents and gentle as doves, yet when I look at our foreign policymakers, I see very little serpent-like sagaciousness.
There is a saying in the Arab/Muslim world that truly reflects how various Islamic factions view one another: 'My brother and I against my cousin, but my cousin and I against the stranger.'
Shiites and Sunnis in Iraq and Pakistan may bomb each other, but we will always be the stranger, the infidel. The holding and raising of those three leaders' hands is like a middle-finger salute to America and the West. They proclaim that 'my cousin and I are against you.'
No matter how many trillions of dollars we pour into those countries, they will always hate the infidels. If the riots and the killing of two American soldiers in Afghanistan last week do not convince our policymakers of the desperate need for wisdom, then even the threat of our demise may not do it.
Our citizens and leaders who truly understand that region must not surrender to the abandonment of wisdom. We must change our approach and return to judicious diplomacy. The protection of our tax dollars, the lives of our soldiers, and ultimately, our very survival depends on it.
Knowing that part of the world as I do, and having confidence in the principled core of some American leaders, I will keep on pleading for real change as long as I live."
Iraq and Afghanistan are both Islamic nations, and no matter what we do, we are seen as the infidel. Islam always comes first to these people, and the Koran teaches them to hate the infidel. How can we overcome such an obstacle?
I say we bring our brave men and women home and resort to bombing missions when these nations get out of control, which is obviously very likely to be the case. The lives of our military personnel are just too precious to risk for such a hopeless venture. Besides that, we're flat broke.
Read from One News Now:
When will America wise up?
Dr. Michael Youssef
"When will America realize that the infidel by any name is still an infidel?
We have poured trillions of dollars into Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Egypt, to say nothing of what is more precious than money -- the blood of the brave men and women of the United States military. And for what?
To watch Iran's influence permeate Iraq? To see the butcher of Teheran hold and raise hands with the propped-up presidents of Afghanistan and Pakistan? If there is a picture worth a billion words, that is it. That picture of Islamic unity is like using American sacrifice and tax dollars to jab a finger in America's eye.
Some misguided policymakers in Washington, DC, actually think we can do good in Syria by supporting the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda types against Bashar al-Assad, the Shiite dictator and ally of Shiite Iran. Those policymakers will say we need to abide by our humanitarian principles and support the revolutionaries, regardless of their Islamic stripes.
However, helping one Islamic militant faction against another is a huge mistake. They know how to use America to serve their long-term purposes, and the ultimate outcome will backfire against us just like it did in Egypt and Libya.
Although history repeatedly shows how our good intentions in the Middle East go awry, we are apparently so desperate for our enemies' approval that we will abandon knowledge altogether.
What happened to wisdom? What happened to statesmen who take into account historic and sectarian divisions? What happened to judicious diplomacy? Jesus speaks of being wise as serpents and gentle as doves, yet when I look at our foreign policymakers, I see very little serpent-like sagaciousness.
There is a saying in the Arab/Muslim world that truly reflects how various Islamic factions view one another: 'My brother and I against my cousin, but my cousin and I against the stranger.'
Shiites and Sunnis in Iraq and Pakistan may bomb each other, but we will always be the stranger, the infidel. The holding and raising of those three leaders' hands is like a middle-finger salute to America and the West. They proclaim that 'my cousin and I are against you.'
No matter how many trillions of dollars we pour into those countries, they will always hate the infidels. If the riots and the killing of two American soldiers in Afghanistan last week do not convince our policymakers of the desperate need for wisdom, then even the threat of our demise may not do it.
Our citizens and leaders who truly understand that region must not surrender to the abandonment of wisdom. We must change our approach and return to judicious diplomacy. The protection of our tax dollars, the lives of our soldiers, and ultimately, our very survival depends on it.
Knowing that part of the world as I do, and having confidence in the principled core of some American leaders, I will keep on pleading for real change as long as I live."
No Warning for Obama
I love this. Israel has informed the United States that there will be no warning given before the Jewish nation strikes the Iranian nuclear facilities. The reason given is to protect America from bearing any blame for not stopping Israel.
Good for Bibi Netanyahua, though I don't buy that excuse for a moment. I wouldn't trust the anti-Semitic Obama with such a news bulletin either. He would more than likely inform Iran before Israel could make its strike.
I'll bet Obama is hopping mad.
Read from Israel Matzav:
Israel tells Obama 'no warnings'
"A US intelligence official has told the Associated Press that Israeli officials have told the Obama administration that Israel will not give any advance warning to the United States in the event that Israel decides to attack Iran.
'Israeli officials said that if they eventually decide a strike is necessary, they would keep the Americans in the dark to decrease the likelihood that the US would be held responsible for failing to stop Israel's potential attack. The US has been working with the Israelis for months to persuade them that an attack would be only a temporary setback to Iran's nuclear program.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak delivered the message to a series of top-level US visitors to the country, including the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the White House national security adviser and the director of national intelligence, and top US lawmakers, all trying to close the trust gap between Israel and the US over how to deal with Iran's nuclear ambitions.
Netanyahu delivered the same message to all the Americans who have traveled to Israel for talks, the US official said.
The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive strategic negotiations.
The White House did not respond to requests for comment, and the Pentagon and Office of Director of National Intelligence declined to comment, as did the Israeli Embassy.'
The bottom line is that Israel no longer trusts the United States, and will not trust the United States so long as Obama is in power. And with good reason.
What could go wrong?"
Good for Bibi Netanyahua, though I don't buy that excuse for a moment. I wouldn't trust the anti-Semitic Obama with such a news bulletin either. He would more than likely inform Iran before Israel could make its strike.
I'll bet Obama is hopping mad.
Read from Israel Matzav:
Israel tells Obama 'no warnings'
"A US intelligence official has told the Associated Press that Israeli officials have told the Obama administration that Israel will not give any advance warning to the United States in the event that Israel decides to attack Iran.
'Israeli officials said that if they eventually decide a strike is necessary, they would keep the Americans in the dark to decrease the likelihood that the US would be held responsible for failing to stop Israel's potential attack. The US has been working with the Israelis for months to persuade them that an attack would be only a temporary setback to Iran's nuclear program.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak delivered the message to a series of top-level US visitors to the country, including the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the White House national security adviser and the director of national intelligence, and top US lawmakers, all trying to close the trust gap between Israel and the US over how to deal with Iran's nuclear ambitions.
Netanyahu delivered the same message to all the Americans who have traveled to Israel for talks, the US official said.
The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive strategic negotiations.
The White House did not respond to requests for comment, and the Pentagon and Office of Director of National Intelligence declined to comment, as did the Israeli Embassy.'
The bottom line is that Israel no longer trusts the United States, and will not trust the United States so long as Obama is in power. And with good reason.
What could go wrong?"
How Does a Movie About Mohammed Sound?
Actually, it would be fascinating if it were done with a truthful narrative. However, the outrage among Muslims would be terrific, so attending such a movie would be a dangerous venture.
Read all about it, via Atlas Shrugs:
"A Movie about Muhammad: An Idea whose Time Has Come"
Ali Sina, renowned ex-Muslim author, founder of FaithFreedom.org and SION Board member, has a brilliant idea, a plan, to educate and liberate those enslaved by the most radical and extreme ideology on the face of the earth, but he needs our help:
A Movie about Muhammad: An Idea whose Time Has Come.
'I started writing about Islam in 1998. When I read the Quran and the life of Muhammad it became clear to me that the world is in danger. Islam is a threat to mankind and this threat will not end until we all surrender to a global tyranny ruled under Sharia – the most draconian law since Hammurabi. Never underestimate the power of stupid people motivated zealotry.
When I started my campaign, the Internet was new and apart from AnsweringIslam.org, and Ibn Warraq’s few articles on ISIS, there were no other sources of truthful information about Islam online. There were also pundits like Dr. Daniel Pipes who wrote about “Islamism.” They conveyed the message that the problem is not Islam per se, but a tiny minority of radicalized extremists.
That sounded to me like shadow boxing. I grew up in the Muslim world and never had heard the word “Islamism,” unless in a pejorative way to discredit the zealots. I knew that categorizing Muslims between moderates and radicals is misleading. In the words of Erdogan, Turkey’s Prime Minister, “These descriptions are very ugly. They are offensive and an insult to our religion. There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam and that’s it.”
Radicalism is only pure Islam. Islamic terrorism is a symptom. The disease is Islam. My message was not politically correct. Although many people read my articles, I was dismissed by the mainstream media as one on the fringe.
However, truth is obstinate. That message spread and many ex-Muslims such as Wafa Sultan, Ayan Hirshi Ali, Nonie Darwish and others started echoing it. Today, there are thousands of blogs and sites on the Internet delivering that very politically incorrect message. I am elated to see so many non-Muslims have joined this crusade. My special thanks go to Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller for raising the awareness of millions of people, and of course to Geert Wilders for elevating the discussion about Islam to political sphere. I can’t hide my satisfaction of what has been achieved in such a short time. The trickle has turned into a torrent. It is now unstoppable.
But the mission is not accomplished. In the first year of this century, I predicted that Islam will be eradicated in our own lifetime. On the surface, it appears that it has become stronger. Secular despots in Islamic countries are being replaced by extremist Muslims. But don’t let appearances deceive you. This is a necessary step in the de-Islamization of the world. Muslims must first taste the bitterness of Islam before they spit it out for good. This process has already happened in Iran. If given freedom, Iran will be the only country today that will renounce Islam. In the land of Cyrus the Great, the illusion of Islam is all but waned. Other Islamic countries need to go through the same cleansing process. They are just three decades behind.
To get rid of Islam we need to reveal the truth about it. The Internet was godsend to critics of Islam. However, sites that are critical of Islam are blocked in Islamic countries and even if they were not, the great majority of Muslims don’t read. We need to get our message to the masses.
Masses watch movies. If a picture is worth a thousand words, what is the worth of a motion picture? We need to make a motion picture about Muhammad – a biopic that reveals the details of his life. The Devil is in the details.
The true story of Muhammad is untold. It is available in the books of Siras. But those are voluminous books. Combined, they are thousands of pages. I read them all and have condensed them in a script. This biopic starts with Muhammad’s childhood. Like all tyrants and psychopaths of history, he had a loveless childhood. This is crucial to understand his psychology and his ruthlessness in his later years.
The movie shows Muhammad’s raids, plunders, massacres, rapes, assassinations and other crimes. A small subtitle in the lower right corner of each scene will give reference to the source of the story. This movie is entirely factual. Wherever possible, I copied the Quran, the Sira and the Hadith verbatim. It is a riveting story. Truth about Muhammad is more shocking than fiction.
The world does not know Islam. What is known is a watered down and euphemized version of it that has no bases in reality. The truth is that Muhammad was a cult leader, much like Jim Jones, Shoko Asahara and Charles Manson. Unlike them he succeeded because there was no central power in the seventh century Arabia to stop him.
The other good news is that I have been promised a substantial angel financing. I have been daydreaming about this movie for ten years. It was this promise that prompted me into action. I put everything aside for five months, read everything I could about my protagonist, selected the most salient episodes and wrote the script.
The seed is now sown. Now it’s time to nurture it. What I need is an experienced executive producer, someone who shares my values, to make it happen with professionalism and missionary zeal.
I am not thinking of a high budget movie, but given the subject matter, it can become one of the most seen motion pictures ever. (Recall Danish cartoons?) There are hundreds of millions of people, all over the world who fear their freedom is under attack. They will be our primary viewers as well as promoters.
I don’t think this movie will require much investment on promotion. People in the movie industry know that nearly half of the budget of a film is spent on advertising and on marketing. We won’t need any of that. We have an army of millions strong who will promote this movie for free.
Just as the Internet allowed us to spread our message to millions of people, with this movie we can spread the same message to hundreds of millions. When the world discovers the truth about Muhammad, Islam’s days will be numbered. I have led thousands of Muslims out of Islam. I know truth sets people free.
New technology allows us to hide the identity of the actors. And we can distribute worldwide, even in Islamic countries. These would have been impossible a few years ago.
My interest in making this movie is not financial. I want truth be known. However, given the controversy and the buzz that such a movie will necessarily generate, and the fact that it is an untold and fascinating story about the most influential man in history, I can foresee a huge return on the investment. When I know about the budget and the legalities are in place, I will give a chance to those who might be interested to invest in this project. In you have questions you can email me to faithfreedom2@gmail.com. In the subject box write Movie Investment.
Although this biopic is about Muhammad, its focus is on his victims. I have given a face to his forgotten victims. I cried when reading their stories and I want the world to cry remembering them.
Truth will set mankind free. A movie is the fastest way to spread the truth.
Ali Sina'"
Read all about it, via Atlas Shrugs:
"A Movie about Muhammad: An Idea whose Time Has Come"
Ali Sina, renowned ex-Muslim author, founder of FaithFreedom.org and SION Board member, has a brilliant idea, a plan, to educate and liberate those enslaved by the most radical and extreme ideology on the face of the earth, but he needs our help:
A Movie about Muhammad: An Idea whose Time Has Come.
'I started writing about Islam in 1998. When I read the Quran and the life of Muhammad it became clear to me that the world is in danger. Islam is a threat to mankind and this threat will not end until we all surrender to a global tyranny ruled under Sharia – the most draconian law since Hammurabi. Never underestimate the power of stupid people motivated zealotry.
When I started my campaign, the Internet was new and apart from AnsweringIslam.org, and Ibn Warraq’s few articles on ISIS, there were no other sources of truthful information about Islam online. There were also pundits like Dr. Daniel Pipes who wrote about “Islamism.” They conveyed the message that the problem is not Islam per se, but a tiny minority of radicalized extremists.
That sounded to me like shadow boxing. I grew up in the Muslim world and never had heard the word “Islamism,” unless in a pejorative way to discredit the zealots. I knew that categorizing Muslims between moderates and radicals is misleading. In the words of Erdogan, Turkey’s Prime Minister, “These descriptions are very ugly. They are offensive and an insult to our religion. There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam and that’s it.”
Radicalism is only pure Islam. Islamic terrorism is a symptom. The disease is Islam. My message was not politically correct. Although many people read my articles, I was dismissed by the mainstream media as one on the fringe.
However, truth is obstinate. That message spread and many ex-Muslims such as Wafa Sultan, Ayan Hirshi Ali, Nonie Darwish and others started echoing it. Today, there are thousands of blogs and sites on the Internet delivering that very politically incorrect message. I am elated to see so many non-Muslims have joined this crusade. My special thanks go to Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller for raising the awareness of millions of people, and of course to Geert Wilders for elevating the discussion about Islam to political sphere. I can’t hide my satisfaction of what has been achieved in such a short time. The trickle has turned into a torrent. It is now unstoppable.
But the mission is not accomplished. In the first year of this century, I predicted that Islam will be eradicated in our own lifetime. On the surface, it appears that it has become stronger. Secular despots in Islamic countries are being replaced by extremist Muslims. But don’t let appearances deceive you. This is a necessary step in the de-Islamization of the world. Muslims must first taste the bitterness of Islam before they spit it out for good. This process has already happened in Iran. If given freedom, Iran will be the only country today that will renounce Islam. In the land of Cyrus the Great, the illusion of Islam is all but waned. Other Islamic countries need to go through the same cleansing process. They are just three decades behind.
To get rid of Islam we need to reveal the truth about it. The Internet was godsend to critics of Islam. However, sites that are critical of Islam are blocked in Islamic countries and even if they were not, the great majority of Muslims don’t read. We need to get our message to the masses.
Masses watch movies. If a picture is worth a thousand words, what is the worth of a motion picture? We need to make a motion picture about Muhammad – a biopic that reveals the details of his life. The Devil is in the details.
The true story of Muhammad is untold. It is available in the books of Siras. But those are voluminous books. Combined, they are thousands of pages. I read them all and have condensed them in a script. This biopic starts with Muhammad’s childhood. Like all tyrants and psychopaths of history, he had a loveless childhood. This is crucial to understand his psychology and his ruthlessness in his later years.
The movie shows Muhammad’s raids, plunders, massacres, rapes, assassinations and other crimes. A small subtitle in the lower right corner of each scene will give reference to the source of the story. This movie is entirely factual. Wherever possible, I copied the Quran, the Sira and the Hadith verbatim. It is a riveting story. Truth about Muhammad is more shocking than fiction.
The world does not know Islam. What is known is a watered down and euphemized version of it that has no bases in reality. The truth is that Muhammad was a cult leader, much like Jim Jones, Shoko Asahara and Charles Manson. Unlike them he succeeded because there was no central power in the seventh century Arabia to stop him.
The other good news is that I have been promised a substantial angel financing. I have been daydreaming about this movie for ten years. It was this promise that prompted me into action. I put everything aside for five months, read everything I could about my protagonist, selected the most salient episodes and wrote the script.
The seed is now sown. Now it’s time to nurture it. What I need is an experienced executive producer, someone who shares my values, to make it happen with professionalism and missionary zeal.
I am not thinking of a high budget movie, but given the subject matter, it can become one of the most seen motion pictures ever. (Recall Danish cartoons?) There are hundreds of millions of people, all over the world who fear their freedom is under attack. They will be our primary viewers as well as promoters.
I don’t think this movie will require much investment on promotion. People in the movie industry know that nearly half of the budget of a film is spent on advertising and on marketing. We won’t need any of that. We have an army of millions strong who will promote this movie for free.
Just as the Internet allowed us to spread our message to millions of people, with this movie we can spread the same message to hundreds of millions. When the world discovers the truth about Muhammad, Islam’s days will be numbered. I have led thousands of Muslims out of Islam. I know truth sets people free.
New technology allows us to hide the identity of the actors. And we can distribute worldwide, even in Islamic countries. These would have been impossible a few years ago.
My interest in making this movie is not financial. I want truth be known. However, given the controversy and the buzz that such a movie will necessarily generate, and the fact that it is an untold and fascinating story about the most influential man in history, I can foresee a huge return on the investment. When I know about the budget and the legalities are in place, I will give a chance to those who might be interested to invest in this project. In you have questions you can email me to faithfreedom2@gmail.com. In the subject box write Movie Investment.
Although this biopic is about Muhammad, its focus is on his victims. I have given a face to his forgotten victims. I cried when reading their stories and I want the world to cry remembering them.
Truth will set mankind free. A movie is the fastest way to spread the truth.
Ali Sina'"
Hand Writing Analysis of the President
Have you ever wondered what experts would say about our president in regard to what his handwriting tells us? Frankly, I never gave it a thought, but I find the results interesting, though not surprising in the least.
Check it out, via the American Thinker:
Barack Obama, in His Own Hand
By Marion DS Dreyfus
"Handwriting analysis may not be everyone's favorite analytical tool, but millennia of such exterior methods have yielded largely intriguing and historically valid conclusions or observations.
With reference to the 44th president: if you did not already know of his enormous arrogance and cocksureness, the president's signature would shake you into that realization.
His initial 'B' and 'O' are about six times the size of his following letters, a sign all by itself that his hubris is massive. But his signature also reveals an unusual feature not often seen in regular folk: he encapsulates the 'ba' in Obama inside the enormously inflated 'O' of his last name. Further, his idealism and egotism are announced by the elongated and extra-tall 'b' of Obama. This is a strong indication that he is above all self-protective and unlikely to admit wrongdoing or flaw. He is guarded on all sides by his self-love and imperviousness to exterior assault.
The straight up-and-down of his letters, absent any slant usual for most people, indicates his astringent and non-emotional aspects -- he does not come across as a warm human being, and he cannot be swayed by sentiment, as he has little on show or available.
The generous left-hand margin of space before his signature begins indicates his generosity -- to himself. His no-margin at the right-hand margin of the signature shows he is careful to a fault with giving to others. His strangely niggardly charitable contributions over the years we have been following them indicate that this aspect of his signature is accurate: his annual giving is paltry in contrast to the monies he has made over the past decade, during which time his book sales, senatorial salaries, and presidential perks have kicked in millions.
To the side of good is the clarity of his letters, which are so clear as to suggest printing, not cursive writing at all. This indicates that -- unlike many physicians' signatures, for instance -- he wishes to be understood above all.
The slight downward tilt of his name on a horizontal axis indicates a proclivity to moodiness and depression, but it is slight.
Interesting is the final 'k' in Barack, which is in proportion to the rest of his non-capital letters, approximately twice the height of the small letters 'arac.' However, this 'k' is at variance from the 'b' in 'Obama,' -- which 'b' is outlandishly extended to pierce the 'O' in 'Obama.' This second-banana 'b' is also some four times the height of surrounding letters, and five times the height of the 'k' in 'Barack.' The huge extension above the line is echoed, uncommonly, below the line. That is, this 'b' descends as if it were almost becoming a 'p' -- which trend does not happen often. Either it indicates excess energy or drive, or it shows a manifestation of hesitance. My first husband had that peculiarity of signature; he paused for a brief second every time he signed his name, darkening the ink on portions of his initial letters, and indicating some contest internally that had not been resolved. The president shows this unresolvedness in the up-and-down extension of that outsized 'b.' One can speculate about the etiology of that momentous pause, knowing Obama's background and vicissitudinous early life, but one cannot know precisely why it is the way it is.
The president himself might or might not be able to shed light on this, but likely not, since these stressors and strains are deeply buried and not accessible to easy disinterment.
The 'B' in Barack is measurably larger than the 'O' in 'Obama,' too, indicating his sense of ego and confidence in himself exceeds that which he has harbored as part of his once-upon-a-dead-father, the senior Mr. Obama from Kenya.
The initial 'B' in Barack is enormous, as we have stated. But it dispenses with the usual cursive cross-stroke and downstroke common in all teaching of handwriting. The president has instead begun to write his name with an extremely introverted upsweep that again indicates self-protectiveness, and is unusual in that it begins not at the top of a normal 'B,' but 'below the line,' and is a fluid sweep upward into a flourishing and powerful double-loop to form the body of the 'B.' He shows a healthy internal physiognomy in his flourishy signature. No evident health problems are indicated. Yet the initial 'O' in 'Obama' is not smooth, and more resembles a wobbly egg than a full-on open 'O'; he is showing a stronger predilection for himself over his family (name)."
Read it all.
Check it out, via the American Thinker:
Barack Obama, in His Own Hand
By Marion DS Dreyfus
"Handwriting analysis may not be everyone's favorite analytical tool, but millennia of such exterior methods have yielded largely intriguing and historically valid conclusions or observations.
With reference to the 44th president: if you did not already know of his enormous arrogance and cocksureness, the president's signature would shake you into that realization.
His initial 'B' and 'O' are about six times the size of his following letters, a sign all by itself that his hubris is massive. But his signature also reveals an unusual feature not often seen in regular folk: he encapsulates the 'ba' in Obama inside the enormously inflated 'O' of his last name. Further, his idealism and egotism are announced by the elongated and extra-tall 'b' of Obama. This is a strong indication that he is above all self-protective and unlikely to admit wrongdoing or flaw. He is guarded on all sides by his self-love and imperviousness to exterior assault.
The straight up-and-down of his letters, absent any slant usual for most people, indicates his astringent and non-emotional aspects -- he does not come across as a warm human being, and he cannot be swayed by sentiment, as he has little on show or available.
The generous left-hand margin of space before his signature begins indicates his generosity -- to himself. His no-margin at the right-hand margin of the signature shows he is careful to a fault with giving to others. His strangely niggardly charitable contributions over the years we have been following them indicate that this aspect of his signature is accurate: his annual giving is paltry in contrast to the monies he has made over the past decade, during which time his book sales, senatorial salaries, and presidential perks have kicked in millions.
To the side of good is the clarity of his letters, which are so clear as to suggest printing, not cursive writing at all. This indicates that -- unlike many physicians' signatures, for instance -- he wishes to be understood above all.
The slight downward tilt of his name on a horizontal axis indicates a proclivity to moodiness and depression, but it is slight.
Interesting is the final 'k' in Barack, which is in proportion to the rest of his non-capital letters, approximately twice the height of the small letters 'arac.' However, this 'k' is at variance from the 'b' in 'Obama,' -- which 'b' is outlandishly extended to pierce the 'O' in 'Obama.' This second-banana 'b' is also some four times the height of surrounding letters, and five times the height of the 'k' in 'Barack.' The huge extension above the line is echoed, uncommonly, below the line. That is, this 'b' descends as if it were almost becoming a 'p' -- which trend does not happen often. Either it indicates excess energy or drive, or it shows a manifestation of hesitance. My first husband had that peculiarity of signature; he paused for a brief second every time he signed his name, darkening the ink on portions of his initial letters, and indicating some contest internally that had not been resolved. The president shows this unresolvedness in the up-and-down extension of that outsized 'b.' One can speculate about the etiology of that momentous pause, knowing Obama's background and vicissitudinous early life, but one cannot know precisely why it is the way it is.
The president himself might or might not be able to shed light on this, but likely not, since these stressors and strains are deeply buried and not accessible to easy disinterment.
The 'B' in Barack is measurably larger than the 'O' in 'Obama,' too, indicating his sense of ego and confidence in himself exceeds that which he has harbored as part of his once-upon-a-dead-father, the senior Mr. Obama from Kenya.
The initial 'B' in Barack is enormous, as we have stated. But it dispenses with the usual cursive cross-stroke and downstroke common in all teaching of handwriting. The president has instead begun to write his name with an extremely introverted upsweep that again indicates self-protectiveness, and is unusual in that it begins not at the top of a normal 'B,' but 'below the line,' and is a fluid sweep upward into a flourishing and powerful double-loop to form the body of the 'B.' He shows a healthy internal physiognomy in his flourishy signature. No evident health problems are indicated. Yet the initial 'O' in 'Obama' is not smooth, and more resembles a wobbly egg than a full-on open 'O'; he is showing a stronger predilection for himself over his family (name)."
Read it all.
Mum Is the Word on Obama's Apology Letter
Ever since Barack Obama entered the White House, he has been apologizing for America. It's quite shameful, actually. America is the greatest force for good on this planet, yet to the Hard Left, for which Obama is a member, America is always cast in a bad light.
The latest incident of apology is in regards to the burning of Korans. Obama, and others like him, do not realize that when we kiss up to Islam and make apologies, it just encourages violence against the infidel because we are seen as weak.
Wouldn't it be interesting to read what exactly Obama said to Hamid Karzai in his most recent apology? I wonder how over-the-top it really was; I do know that it was three pages in length. Well, we will never find out because the letter is not considered "appropriate" to see. That leads me to believe that Obama must have been groveling at the feet of Karzai.
Read from Weasel Zippers:
Carney: Obama’s Apology Letter To Karzai Over Koran Burning “Not Appropriate” For Reporters To See…
"It’s obviously more pathetic than we imagined.
Via PJ Media:
'The White House press secretary told members of the press pool aboard Air Force One today that President Obama’s “sincere” apology to Afghan President Hamid Karzai for a Koran-burning incident “is not appropriate to show” to reporters.
Jay Carney spoke with reporters for about 20 minutes as the presidential entourage flew to Florida for a speech on energy at the University of Miami.
Obama’s letter to Karzai that included the apology was “a lengthy, three-page letter on a host of issues, several sentences of which relate to this matter,” according to the travel pool report.'
Keep reading…
HT: Fox Nation"
The latest incident of apology is in regards to the burning of Korans. Obama, and others like him, do not realize that when we kiss up to Islam and make apologies, it just encourages violence against the infidel because we are seen as weak.
Wouldn't it be interesting to read what exactly Obama said to Hamid Karzai in his most recent apology? I wonder how over-the-top it really was; I do know that it was three pages in length. Well, we will never find out because the letter is not considered "appropriate" to see. That leads me to believe that Obama must have been groveling at the feet of Karzai.
Read from Weasel Zippers:
Carney: Obama’s Apology Letter To Karzai Over Koran Burning “Not Appropriate” For Reporters To See…
"It’s obviously more pathetic than we imagined.
Via PJ Media:
'The White House press secretary told members of the press pool aboard Air Force One today that President Obama’s “sincere” apology to Afghan President Hamid Karzai for a Koran-burning incident “is not appropriate to show” to reporters.
Jay Carney spoke with reporters for about 20 minutes as the presidential entourage flew to Florida for a speech on energy at the University of Miami.
Obama’s letter to Karzai that included the apology was “a lengthy, three-page letter on a host of issues, several sentences of which relate to this matter,” according to the travel pool report.'
Keep reading…
HT: Fox Nation"
Obama Sticks It to the Military
The big spender, Barack Obama refuses to cut back on entitlements, but he has found one area for which he doesn't mind cutting expenses. It's the military, of course. The far left has a history of despising our brave men and women in uniform, and President Obama continues that trend.
Read from Joshua Pundit:
Obama Pushing To Cut Healthcare Benefits For Active And Retired Military
"In spite of the cute toys marketed in conjunction with President Obama's boasting about 'getting bin-Laden', it's been obvious for some time that this president and many others around him neither understand nor appreciate our military, except when it's useful politically.
You might remember the use of dead military bodies being flown as a political photo-op in defiance of Department of Defense regulations,(not to mention common decency) Senior Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett famously ordering a decorated military officer to bring her a fresh drink at a White House soiree and the ongoing efforts by Attorney General Eric Holder and the Obama Department of Justice to deliberately disenfranchise military votes during the 2010 midterms in a clear violation of the MOVE Act passed by Congress....and there are many more examples I could site.
The latest attack on our military by President Obama is an attempt to slash their health benefits.
The president tried this once before, in a scheme that would have seen wounded combat veterans cut off from VA benefits and being forced to take out their own private insurance to get treatment, but the outcry from groups like the Veterans of Foreign Wars and the American Legion and polling data that showed that Americans overwhelmingly disapproved made him back off.
Now, he's brought it back again in his new defense budget, which calls for slashing benefits from VA. specifically from a program many vets depend on called TriCare.
This is part of the massive cuts in defense the Obama Administration is demanding . Under the Obama plan, the main targets would be under-65 and Medicare-eligible military retirees through a tiered increase in annual Tricare premiums that will be based on yearly retirement pay:
'Significantly, the plan calls for increases between 30 percent to 78 percent in Tricare annual premiums for the first year. After that, the plan will impose five-year increases ranging from 94 percent to 345 percent—more than 3 times current levels.
According to congressional assessments, a retired Army colonel with a family currently paying $460 a year for health care will pay $2,048.
The new plan hits active duty personnel by increasing co-payments for pharmaceuticals and eliminating incentives for using generic drugs.
The changes are worrying some in the Pentagon who fear it will severely impact efforts to recruit and maintain a high-quality all-volunteer military force. Such benefits have been a key tool for recruiting qualified people and keeping them in uniform.
“Would you stay with a car insurance company that raised your premiums by 345 percent in five years? Probably not,” said the congressional aide. “Would anybody accept their taxes being raised 345 percent in five years? Probably not.”
A second congressional aide said the administration’s approach to the cuts shows a double standard that hurts the military.
“We all recognize that we are in a time of austerity,” this aide said. “But defense has made up to this point 50 percent of deficit reduction cuts that we agreed to, but is only 20 percent of the budget.”
The administration is asking troops to get by without the equipment and force levels needed for global missions. “And now they are going to them again and asking them to pay more for their health care when you’ve held the civilian workforce at DoD and across the federal government virtually harmless in all of these cuts. And it just doesn’t seem fair,” the second aide said.{...}
Additionally, the critics said leaving civilian workers’ benefits unchanged while hitting the military reflect the administration’s effort to court labor unions, as government unions are the only segment of organized labor that has increased in recent years.
As part of the increased healthcare costs, the Pentagon also will impose an annual fee for a program called Tricare for Life, a new program that all military retirees automatically must join at age 65. Currently, to enroll in Tricare for Life, retirees pay the equivalent of a monthly Medicare premium.
Under the proposed Pentagon plan, retirees will be hit with an additional annual enrollment fee on top of the monthly premium.'
Union votes that vote Democrat as opposed to military who predominantly vote Republican? When it comes to this president deciding whose benefits to slash, it's no contest.
It will be interesting to see how Congress deals with this."
Speaking of unions, Obama cuts military health care benefits, leaves unionized civilians untouched.
Read from Joshua Pundit:
Obama Pushing To Cut Healthcare Benefits For Active And Retired Military
"In spite of the cute toys marketed in conjunction with President Obama's boasting about 'getting bin-Laden', it's been obvious for some time that this president and many others around him neither understand nor appreciate our military, except when it's useful politically.
You might remember the use of dead military bodies being flown as a political photo-op in defiance of Department of Defense regulations,(not to mention common decency) Senior Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett famously ordering a decorated military officer to bring her a fresh drink at a White House soiree and the ongoing efforts by Attorney General Eric Holder and the Obama Department of Justice to deliberately disenfranchise military votes during the 2010 midterms in a clear violation of the MOVE Act passed by Congress....and there are many more examples I could site.
The latest attack on our military by President Obama is an attempt to slash their health benefits.
The president tried this once before, in a scheme that would have seen wounded combat veterans cut off from VA benefits and being forced to take out their own private insurance to get treatment, but the outcry from groups like the Veterans of Foreign Wars and the American Legion and polling data that showed that Americans overwhelmingly disapproved made him back off.
Now, he's brought it back again in his new defense budget, which calls for slashing benefits from VA. specifically from a program many vets depend on called TriCare.
This is part of the massive cuts in defense the Obama Administration is demanding . Under the Obama plan, the main targets would be under-65 and Medicare-eligible military retirees through a tiered increase in annual Tricare premiums that will be based on yearly retirement pay:
'Significantly, the plan calls for increases between 30 percent to 78 percent in Tricare annual premiums for the first year. After that, the plan will impose five-year increases ranging from 94 percent to 345 percent—more than 3 times current levels.
According to congressional assessments, a retired Army colonel with a family currently paying $460 a year for health care will pay $2,048.
The new plan hits active duty personnel by increasing co-payments for pharmaceuticals and eliminating incentives for using generic drugs.
The changes are worrying some in the Pentagon who fear it will severely impact efforts to recruit and maintain a high-quality all-volunteer military force. Such benefits have been a key tool for recruiting qualified people and keeping them in uniform.
“Would you stay with a car insurance company that raised your premiums by 345 percent in five years? Probably not,” said the congressional aide. “Would anybody accept their taxes being raised 345 percent in five years? Probably not.”
A second congressional aide said the administration’s approach to the cuts shows a double standard that hurts the military.
“We all recognize that we are in a time of austerity,” this aide said. “But defense has made up to this point 50 percent of deficit reduction cuts that we agreed to, but is only 20 percent of the budget.”
The administration is asking troops to get by without the equipment and force levels needed for global missions. “And now they are going to them again and asking them to pay more for their health care when you’ve held the civilian workforce at DoD and across the federal government virtually harmless in all of these cuts. And it just doesn’t seem fair,” the second aide said.{...}
Additionally, the critics said leaving civilian workers’ benefits unchanged while hitting the military reflect the administration’s effort to court labor unions, as government unions are the only segment of organized labor that has increased in recent years.
As part of the increased healthcare costs, the Pentagon also will impose an annual fee for a program called Tricare for Life, a new program that all military retirees automatically must join at age 65. Currently, to enroll in Tricare for Life, retirees pay the equivalent of a monthly Medicare premium.
Under the proposed Pentagon plan, retirees will be hit with an additional annual enrollment fee on top of the monthly premium.'
Union votes that vote Democrat as opposed to military who predominantly vote Republican? When it comes to this president deciding whose benefits to slash, it's no contest.
It will be interesting to see how Congress deals with this."
Speaking of unions, Obama cuts military health care benefits, leaves unionized civilians untouched.
No Free Speech in PA
Sharia law has come to Pennsylvania. No longer is free speech available to those who dare to insult the prophet Mohammed. Guess who made such a decision? A Muslim judge, that's who.
Insult Jesus? Nobody bats an eyelash because Christianity is not a violent religion. Just off the top of my head, I recall the Piss Christ painting, as well as the disgusting Virgin Mary in cow dung displayed at New York's Brooklyn Museum of Art, both of which were offensive to Christians.
Read about this disturbing happening, via the American Thinker:
Exclusive Interview: Infidel Victim of Pennsylvania Sharia Judge Reveals Inside Details of Case
"This is why anti-sharia legislation is so essential. What happened to equal protection under the law?
Back in October, I reported on Ernest Perce, a parade-goer wearing a 'Zombie Muhammad' costume while marching in a local Pennsylvania Halloween parade. He was viciously attacked and choked by Talaag Elbayomy, a Muslim (who was enforcing the sharia -- he assumed that it was illegal in this country to insult Muhammad). 'He grabbed me, choked me from the back, and spun me around to try to get my sign off that was wrapped around my neck,' reported Perce.
Last week, an American judge in Pennsylvania, Judge Mark Martin, ruled on the case and sided with the Muslim, and said that the victim would have been put to death in Muslim societies for his 'crime.'
Martin told Perce: 'Having had the benefit of having spent over two and a half years in predominantly Muslim countries I think I know a little bit about the faith of Islam. ... In many Arabic-speaking countries something like this is definitely against the law there. In their society in fact it can be punishable by death and it frequently is in their society.'
So what? This is America, where we don't have to obey the Islamic blasphemy laws -- at least not yet. But Martin went on to reveal why he was ruling against the victim: 'Then what you have done is you have completely trashed their essence, their being. They find it very very very offensive. I'm a Muslim, I find it offensive.' He now denies that he is a Muslim, but that's what he said.
Ultimately, it is irrelevant if the judge is or isn't a Muslim. What is germane is his sharia ruling, which is worse if he's not a Muslim. In Islam, sharia supersedes all man-made laws. It is the law of Allah, so one might understand (though not condone) a Muslim judge defaulting to sharia. But an American judge admonishing an infidel victim while holding up the Koran is shocking. You hear the Koran slam down in the audio of the court proceeding. Martin also told Perce: 'You're way outside your boundaries or First Amendment rights.'
Perce had video of the attack, but Judge Martin refused to allow the video into evidence. The judge refused even to look at the video, saying that he had heard enough and that there were two conflicting stories. In sharia, in any conflict between a Muslim and a non-Muslim, the Muslim is always right. Martin ruled for Elbayomy.
It gets worse. Since his ordeal began, the infidel victim, Ernest Perce, has received 471 verifiable threats. Perce never released any personal information on Judge Martin or Elbayomy, but they released his, and now he has gotten threats at his home. He may also soon be spending time in jail because he released audio of the court proceeding. Martin is threatening to hold Perce in contempt of court for releasing the audio, even though Perce says he was given permission to release it.
Perce released the video because he believes that he was treated unfairly -- that Martin showed Elbayomy preferential treatment. He wrote to Bonnie Snyder, administrative secretary of the Cumberland County District Court: 'I was in a recent proceeding and Judge Martin gave both parties the right/permission to record the proceeding on our cellular devices. I would like to know if it is allowed to put the recording online for listening purposes. If the answer is no, I'd like to know the case law which is being cited and the punishment for violating the case law.'
Snyder responded: 'Judge Martin only gave permission for the attorney or officer to record the proceedings. He did not give anyone else permission to record anything in the courtroom at the hearing held on December 6, 2011 at 2:45 pm.'
Perce then asked her: 'Are you instructing me via Judge Martin to destroy or delete and not use my audio recording?'
Answered Snyder: 'Yes, since you were not authorized to make any recordings.'
Are we living in a sharia state? Aren't court cases open to the public?
Recently I interviewed Ernest Perce and asked him why Judge Martin did not allow the video of the attack to be shown.
Perce: Judge would be offended! Yet they used comments made on the video at YouTube two months later to establish that I had a biased view toward Talaag Elbayomy. If the judge were honest, he would have said, 'Attorney, the video is not entered as evidence, and therefore I cannot use the comment from two months after the supposed attack.'
I called demanding to speak to the judge. He was always in a training session or in court. Finally, on February 16, I talked with the judge at 3:42PM, and he said, 'I will hold you in contempt of court under section 42 of the Judicial System" if I didn't take down the audio. He also threatened to hold me in violation of 112 of the Rules of Court Section D.
He also said that I would be held in contempt of court. He denies this now, but this is what he told me. He was furious.
PG: Why did you decide to dress as Zombie Muhammad for Halloween in the first place?
Perce: Mainly to stand for the freedom of speech, and to show my disdain for such a hateful religion and culture. I have always made fun of Muhammad.
PG: When did you start receiving threats?
Perce: I started receiving death threats immediately after putting the video online of the parade. People have said that they would kill me, rip my eyes out, run me over, shoot me and laugh at me, since I have blasphemed Muhammad. They say I will be found out and [hanged] in front of my family.
PG: Did you report these threats? If so, what response did you receive?
Perce: I have reported several of the threats.
PG: What is your reaction to the judge's telling you that what you did was offensive to Muslims?
Perce: When I first heard Attorney Thomas, the defendant's attorney, telling me to read the Koran and the judge stayed silent, I was stunned. Then when the judge said, 'I have a Koran; I challenge you to show me where it says Mohammed [rose] from the dead,' I was stunned. I remember thinking 'In America, what does it matter what interpretation a person has about a ruthless book?' I thought, 'I'm not going to challenge you to a debate, and who in the hell are you to require me to read a Koran?'
This is America! Freedom of speech is our birthright. This judge trampled on the Constitution. At that point I forgot I was recording. Do you think he thinks that being offended justifies harassment? There is no doubt that he believes that offensive speech warrants harassment.
PG: What do you think of Judge Martin's office denying that he is a Muslim?
Perce: Remember, a Muslim can lie to a nonbeliever, a kaffir. He spoke Arabic to the defendant and his friend. They answered back. If he claims he isn't a Muslim, then why does he have a Koran? Why did he challenge me to a debate on the interpretation of the Koran? Why get mad at me and insult me? Why then go on a six-minute rant against me? Why value Islam above Christianity? He said, 'They pray five times a day, towards Mecca. To be a good Muslim before you die, you have to make a pilgrimage to Mecca.' Christians pray all the time, Jews pray all the time, Buddhists follow the basics of karma. Humanists will do no harm to anyone.
There is so much wrong with his preference for Islam. I've never met a Christian who got offended at a person dressing as Muhammad or wanted to debate them, or who told another person, 'As-Salamu Alaykum.'
His staff can say what they want, but there are only three possibilities: he just got saved, or if he has nothing to hide, why threaten me with contempt and order me to destroy the audio? Or third, he's a Muslim who is backpedaling because he got offended and had a slip of anger, and he knew he couldn't physically attack me!
PG: What do you plan to do now?
Perce: I am going to organize a protest against Judge Martin. I'm going to buy a billboard featuring Martin's photo, saying, 'You're outside your bounds of the First Amendment! I'm Mark Martin, I am a Muslim and I'm offended.' Victims are not the antagonists. Women do not deserve to be raped because of how they dress. A woman who has been abused doesn't warrant further abuse. I'm angry that an official of a court would say this.
PG: Is there any possibility you could try to press any further criminal or civil charges against the attacker?
Perce: I am not able to file criminal charges against the attacker because of double jeopardy. I am considering a $50 civil suit or asking for a public apology. Martin's decision effectively says that Muslims do not have to learn to accept blasphemy against their religion without violence. Yet when you are a citizen of the USA, you accept our Constitution. Free speech is our foundation.
PG: What do you want people to know?
Perce: I will say to Muslims: 'I will not allow you put fear in my mind or [the minds] of those whom I know! I will not be silent. I am an American atheist, and I am not afraid to deal with you openly. While so many others draw Muhammad in private, I am Muhammad in open public!
PG: Are you worried about being attacked or getting death threats?
Perce: I'm more worried that if I stay silent, the energy and emotion within me will be worse to me than being attacked, or even death threats or death itself! So do your worst, and I will do mine! Only my worst is standing up against Islam!
PG: Has the media expressed interest in this story?
Perce: The media has expressed little or no interest. I hope they do, because this judge needs to be out of office.
This is why we must have anti-sharia legislation in America. Equal protection under the law. There is no equal protection or justice for non-Muslims under the sharia. Nor was there for Ernest Perce in Mark Martin's sharia court."
Insult Jesus? Nobody bats an eyelash because Christianity is not a violent religion. Just off the top of my head, I recall the Piss Christ painting, as well as the disgusting Virgin Mary in cow dung displayed at New York's Brooklyn Museum of Art, both of which were offensive to Christians.
Read about this disturbing happening, via the American Thinker:
Exclusive Interview: Infidel Victim of Pennsylvania Sharia Judge Reveals Inside Details of Case
"This is why anti-sharia legislation is so essential. What happened to equal protection under the law?
Back in October, I reported on Ernest Perce, a parade-goer wearing a 'Zombie Muhammad' costume while marching in a local Pennsylvania Halloween parade. He was viciously attacked and choked by Talaag Elbayomy, a Muslim (who was enforcing the sharia -- he assumed that it was illegal in this country to insult Muhammad). 'He grabbed me, choked me from the back, and spun me around to try to get my sign off that was wrapped around my neck,' reported Perce.
Last week, an American judge in Pennsylvania, Judge Mark Martin, ruled on the case and sided with the Muslim, and said that the victim would have been put to death in Muslim societies for his 'crime.'
Martin told Perce: 'Having had the benefit of having spent over two and a half years in predominantly Muslim countries I think I know a little bit about the faith of Islam. ... In many Arabic-speaking countries something like this is definitely against the law there. In their society in fact it can be punishable by death and it frequently is in their society.'
So what? This is America, where we don't have to obey the Islamic blasphemy laws -- at least not yet. But Martin went on to reveal why he was ruling against the victim: 'Then what you have done is you have completely trashed their essence, their being. They find it very very very offensive. I'm a Muslim, I find it offensive.' He now denies that he is a Muslim, but that's what he said.
Ultimately, it is irrelevant if the judge is or isn't a Muslim. What is germane is his sharia ruling, which is worse if he's not a Muslim. In Islam, sharia supersedes all man-made laws. It is the law of Allah, so one might understand (though not condone) a Muslim judge defaulting to sharia. But an American judge admonishing an infidel victim while holding up the Koran is shocking. You hear the Koran slam down in the audio of the court proceeding. Martin also told Perce: 'You're way outside your boundaries or First Amendment rights.'
Perce had video of the attack, but Judge Martin refused to allow the video into evidence. The judge refused even to look at the video, saying that he had heard enough and that there were two conflicting stories. In sharia, in any conflict between a Muslim and a non-Muslim, the Muslim is always right. Martin ruled for Elbayomy.
It gets worse. Since his ordeal began, the infidel victim, Ernest Perce, has received 471 verifiable threats. Perce never released any personal information on Judge Martin or Elbayomy, but they released his, and now he has gotten threats at his home. He may also soon be spending time in jail because he released audio of the court proceeding. Martin is threatening to hold Perce in contempt of court for releasing the audio, even though Perce says he was given permission to release it.
Perce released the video because he believes that he was treated unfairly -- that Martin showed Elbayomy preferential treatment. He wrote to Bonnie Snyder, administrative secretary of the Cumberland County District Court: 'I was in a recent proceeding and Judge Martin gave both parties the right/permission to record the proceeding on our cellular devices. I would like to know if it is allowed to put the recording online for listening purposes. If the answer is no, I'd like to know the case law which is being cited and the punishment for violating the case law.'
Snyder responded: 'Judge Martin only gave permission for the attorney or officer to record the proceedings. He did not give anyone else permission to record anything in the courtroom at the hearing held on December 6, 2011 at 2:45 pm.'
Perce then asked her: 'Are you instructing me via Judge Martin to destroy or delete and not use my audio recording?'
Answered Snyder: 'Yes, since you were not authorized to make any recordings.'
Are we living in a sharia state? Aren't court cases open to the public?
Recently I interviewed Ernest Perce and asked him why Judge Martin did not allow the video of the attack to be shown.
Perce: Judge would be offended! Yet they used comments made on the video at YouTube two months later to establish that I had a biased view toward Talaag Elbayomy. If the judge were honest, he would have said, 'Attorney, the video is not entered as evidence, and therefore I cannot use the comment from two months after the supposed attack.'
I called demanding to speak to the judge. He was always in a training session or in court. Finally, on February 16, I talked with the judge at 3:42PM, and he said, 'I will hold you in contempt of court under section 42 of the Judicial System" if I didn't take down the audio. He also threatened to hold me in violation of 112 of the Rules of Court Section D.
He also said that I would be held in contempt of court. He denies this now, but this is what he told me. He was furious.
PG: Why did you decide to dress as Zombie Muhammad for Halloween in the first place?
Perce: Mainly to stand for the freedom of speech, and to show my disdain for such a hateful religion and culture. I have always made fun of Muhammad.
PG: When did you start receiving threats?
Perce: I started receiving death threats immediately after putting the video online of the parade. People have said that they would kill me, rip my eyes out, run me over, shoot me and laugh at me, since I have blasphemed Muhammad. They say I will be found out and [hanged] in front of my family.
PG: Did you report these threats? If so, what response did you receive?
Perce: I have reported several of the threats.
PG: What is your reaction to the judge's telling you that what you did was offensive to Muslims?
Perce: When I first heard Attorney Thomas, the defendant's attorney, telling me to read the Koran and the judge stayed silent, I was stunned. Then when the judge said, 'I have a Koran; I challenge you to show me where it says Mohammed [rose] from the dead,' I was stunned. I remember thinking 'In America, what does it matter what interpretation a person has about a ruthless book?' I thought, 'I'm not going to challenge you to a debate, and who in the hell are you to require me to read a Koran?'
This is America! Freedom of speech is our birthright. This judge trampled on the Constitution. At that point I forgot I was recording. Do you think he thinks that being offended justifies harassment? There is no doubt that he believes that offensive speech warrants harassment.
PG: What do you think of Judge Martin's office denying that he is a Muslim?
Perce: Remember, a Muslim can lie to a nonbeliever, a kaffir. He spoke Arabic to the defendant and his friend. They answered back. If he claims he isn't a Muslim, then why does he have a Koran? Why did he challenge me to a debate on the interpretation of the Koran? Why get mad at me and insult me? Why then go on a six-minute rant against me? Why value Islam above Christianity? He said, 'They pray five times a day, towards Mecca. To be a good Muslim before you die, you have to make a pilgrimage to Mecca.' Christians pray all the time, Jews pray all the time, Buddhists follow the basics of karma. Humanists will do no harm to anyone.
There is so much wrong with his preference for Islam. I've never met a Christian who got offended at a person dressing as Muhammad or wanted to debate them, or who told another person, 'As-Salamu Alaykum.'
His staff can say what they want, but there are only three possibilities: he just got saved, or if he has nothing to hide, why threaten me with contempt and order me to destroy the audio? Or third, he's a Muslim who is backpedaling because he got offended and had a slip of anger, and he knew he couldn't physically attack me!
PG: What do you plan to do now?
Perce: I am going to organize a protest against Judge Martin. I'm going to buy a billboard featuring Martin's photo, saying, 'You're outside your bounds of the First Amendment! I'm Mark Martin, I am a Muslim and I'm offended.' Victims are not the antagonists. Women do not deserve to be raped because of how they dress. A woman who has been abused doesn't warrant further abuse. I'm angry that an official of a court would say this.
PG: Is there any possibility you could try to press any further criminal or civil charges against the attacker?
Perce: I am not able to file criminal charges against the attacker because of double jeopardy. I am considering a $50 civil suit or asking for a public apology. Martin's decision effectively says that Muslims do not have to learn to accept blasphemy against their religion without violence. Yet when you are a citizen of the USA, you accept our Constitution. Free speech is our foundation.
PG: What do you want people to know?
Perce: I will say to Muslims: 'I will not allow you put fear in my mind or [the minds] of those whom I know! I will not be silent. I am an American atheist, and I am not afraid to deal with you openly. While so many others draw Muhammad in private, I am Muhammad in open public!
PG: Are you worried about being attacked or getting death threats?
Perce: I'm more worried that if I stay silent, the energy and emotion within me will be worse to me than being attacked, or even death threats or death itself! So do your worst, and I will do mine! Only my worst is standing up against Islam!
PG: Has the media expressed interest in this story?
Perce: The media has expressed little or no interest. I hope they do, because this judge needs to be out of office.
This is why we must have anti-sharia legislation in America. Equal protection under the law. There is no equal protection or justice for non-Muslims under the sharia. Nor was there for Ernest Perce in Mark Martin's sharia court."
Monday, February 27, 2012
Drill, Baby, Drill
If it's OK for Saudi Arabia to drill for oil, why is it not acceptable for the United States of America? These libs running our country are a real danger to the future of our nation.
From Gateway Pundit:
Shameless… Dems Urge Saudi Arabia to Pump More Oil But Won’t Allow Production Here in US
"Despite record gas prices Democrats killed another Arctic drilling project this month. This came after Obama’s recent move to reject the Keystone pipeline project. US gas prices at the pump have doubled since Obama took office.
Gas Buddy
Now democrats want Saudi Arabia to drill more – not US companies.
These people are shameless…
Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) urged Saudi Arabia to pump more oil yesterday. This comes after his party has repeatedly stifled energy production here at home.
The Hill reported:
'Senate Republicans are bashing Sen. Charles Schumer’s (D-N.Y.) call for increased Saudi Arabian oil production to help ease prices, alleging it shows that Democrats are weak when it comes to boosting North American energy supplies and jobs.
Schumer on Sunday urged Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton to press Saudi officials to expand production, noting that the kingdom is producing well below its capacity of 12.5 million barrels per day.
Republicans are hopeful that the letter provides a political opening to undercut Democratic and White House energy policies.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R-Ky.) office on Monday circulated a press release headlined “Top Democrat Senator Demands Increased Energy Production, Jobs In Saudi Arabia Rather Than Increasing American Energy And American Jobs.”
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, also doesn’t want Schumer’s letter to go unnoticed.
“Rather than approve the Keystone pipeline, the Democrats’ energy plan now calls for the most powerful nation in the free world to politely ask other countries for more oil and cross our fingers,” he said in a statement.'"
From Gateway Pundit:
Shameless… Dems Urge Saudi Arabia to Pump More Oil But Won’t Allow Production Here in US
"Despite record gas prices Democrats killed another Arctic drilling project this month. This came after Obama’s recent move to reject the Keystone pipeline project. US gas prices at the pump have doubled since Obama took office.
Gas Buddy
Now democrats want Saudi Arabia to drill more – not US companies.
These people are shameless…
Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) urged Saudi Arabia to pump more oil yesterday. This comes after his party has repeatedly stifled energy production here at home.
The Hill reported:
'Senate Republicans are bashing Sen. Charles Schumer’s (D-N.Y.) call for increased Saudi Arabian oil production to help ease prices, alleging it shows that Democrats are weak when it comes to boosting North American energy supplies and jobs.
Schumer on Sunday urged Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton to press Saudi officials to expand production, noting that the kingdom is producing well below its capacity of 12.5 million barrels per day.
Republicans are hopeful that the letter provides a political opening to undercut Democratic and White House energy policies.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R-Ky.) office on Monday circulated a press release headlined “Top Democrat Senator Demands Increased Energy Production, Jobs In Saudi Arabia Rather Than Increasing American Energy And American Jobs.”
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, also doesn’t want Schumer’s letter to go unnoticed.
“Rather than approve the Keystone pipeline, the Democrats’ energy plan now calls for the most powerful nation in the free world to politely ask other countries for more oil and cross our fingers,” he said in a statement.'"
Obama on the Same Side As Terror Groups
That title may sound rather over-the-top. But, when Obama decided to side with the Syrian opposition groups, he made us allies with Muslim terror groups who also side with the opposition against Bashar Assad. If we are on the same side with the likes of al Qaeda, Hamas, and the Muslim Brotherhood, something is dreadfully wrong.
Read from Israel Matzav:
Surprise: The US is backing the Syrian opposition
"I had forgotten about this. One of the Wikileaks documents released last year showed that the US backing opposition groups in Syria. Who are the opposition groups in Syria? Let's just say that Al-Qaeda, Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood are all supporting the Syrian opposition.
Let's go to the videotape.
Why would the US be backing these groups? Well, Hamas and al-Qaeda are just the progeny of the Muslim Brotherhood and Walid Shoebat argues that the Brotherhood is where you need to look for the answer.
'For all intents and purposes, we identified Anthony Weiner’s wife and Hillary Clinton’s closest aid, Huma Abedin as a spy for the Muslim Brotherhood in June of 2011. Surely, she would have been jettisoned from the State Department after we proved that her mother is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood and that her familial ties to the group are so extensive that it would be a miracle if Abedin is NOT an Islamic enemy of the United States.
...
Again, it is worth noting that every policy of the Obama administration relative to the Middle East has been beneficial to the Muslim Brotherhood, a group to which Huma’s mother belongs. The photo of Huma informing Hillary of Gadhafi’s death was likely better news to Huma than it was to Hillary because it opened the gate for the Muslim Brotherhood in Libya. Remember, shortly after the fall of Gadhafi, the al-Qaeda (Muslim Brotherhood) flag was placed atop the Benghazi Courthouse.'
Have you noticed that every country that has fallen in the Arab spring has fallen to the Muslim Brotherhood? Coincidence? I think not."
Read from Israel Matzav:
Surprise: The US is backing the Syrian opposition
"I had forgotten about this. One of the Wikileaks documents released last year showed that the US backing opposition groups in Syria. Who are the opposition groups in Syria? Let's just say that Al-Qaeda, Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood are all supporting the Syrian opposition.
Let's go to the videotape.
Why would the US be backing these groups? Well, Hamas and al-Qaeda are just the progeny of the Muslim Brotherhood and Walid Shoebat argues that the Brotherhood is where you need to look for the answer.
'For all intents and purposes, we identified Anthony Weiner’s wife and Hillary Clinton’s closest aid, Huma Abedin as a spy for the Muslim Brotherhood in June of 2011. Surely, she would have been jettisoned from the State Department after we proved that her mother is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood and that her familial ties to the group are so extensive that it would be a miracle if Abedin is NOT an Islamic enemy of the United States.
...
Again, it is worth noting that every policy of the Obama administration relative to the Middle East has been beneficial to the Muslim Brotherhood, a group to which Huma’s mother belongs. The photo of Huma informing Hillary of Gadhafi’s death was likely better news to Huma than it was to Hillary because it opened the gate for the Muslim Brotherhood in Libya. Remember, shortly after the fall of Gadhafi, the al-Qaeda (Muslim Brotherhood) flag was placed atop the Benghazi Courthouse.'
Have you noticed that every country that has fallen in the Arab spring has fallen to the Muslim Brotherhood? Coincidence? I think not."
More Bad News
Just what Americans need -- higher water bills. We're getting killed with the increases in the price of gas, food, and electricity. Now, we can look forward to spikes in the cost of water. I'm glad that my water comes from a well.
Read from Washington Examiner:
More bad news: U.S. water bills to triple
"First high gas prices, now water. A shocking new report about the nation's crumbling drinking water system says that Americans should expect their bills to double or triple to cover repairs just to keep their faucets pouring. That means adding up to $900 a year more for water, nearly equal the amount of the newly extended payroll tax cut.
Fixing and expanding underground drinking water systems will cost over $1 trillion in the next 25 years and users will get socked with the bill, according to the American Water Works Association.
As with most infrastructure investments, spending heavily now means less costs down the road. But with little appetite in the country for even trickling taxes now, a delayed and more expensive fix is almost guaranteed. The association figures that spending to fix leaky water systems will double from roughly $13 billion a year today to $30 billion annually by 2040.
'Because pipe assets last a long time, water systems that were built in the later part of the 19th century and throughout much of the 20th century have, for the most part, never experienced the need for pipe replacement on a large scale,' said the report provided to Washington Secrets. 'The dawn of an era in which the assets will need to be replaced puts growing stress on communities that will continue to increase for decades to come.'
What kind of stress? Families can expect to pay at least $300-$550 more for water in taxes and fees just to keep their current systems operating. Add growth and improved systems, and that bill jumps to $900 for a family of three, said the report.
Currently, Americans pay about $400 a month in water taxes and fees."
Read from Washington Examiner:
More bad news: U.S. water bills to triple
"First high gas prices, now water. A shocking new report about the nation's crumbling drinking water system says that Americans should expect their bills to double or triple to cover repairs just to keep their faucets pouring. That means adding up to $900 a year more for water, nearly equal the amount of the newly extended payroll tax cut.
Fixing and expanding underground drinking water systems will cost over $1 trillion in the next 25 years and users will get socked with the bill, according to the American Water Works Association.
As with most infrastructure investments, spending heavily now means less costs down the road. But with little appetite in the country for even trickling taxes now, a delayed and more expensive fix is almost guaranteed. The association figures that spending to fix leaky water systems will double from roughly $13 billion a year today to $30 billion annually by 2040.
'Because pipe assets last a long time, water systems that were built in the later part of the 19th century and throughout much of the 20th century have, for the most part, never experienced the need for pipe replacement on a large scale,' said the report provided to Washington Secrets. 'The dawn of an era in which the assets will need to be replaced puts growing stress on communities that will continue to increase for decades to come.'
What kind of stress? Families can expect to pay at least $300-$550 more for water in taxes and fees just to keep their current systems operating. Add growth and improved systems, and that bill jumps to $900 for a family of three, said the report.
Currently, Americans pay about $400 a month in water taxes and fees."
"The Most Hyped-Up and Unqualified President in US History"
There are always consequences for our actions, and the s*** is about to hit the fan when it comes to Obama's foreign policy in the Middle East.
Read from the American Thinker:
Here Comes Obama's 3 AM Phone Call
By James Lewis
"In the next 60 days Obama's presidential career will finally meet that concrete wall of reality. He will either fail or survive. Trouble is, he might take many innocent people with him if he fails.
So far, the most hyped-up and unqualified president in US history has shown no capacity at all to act, in the face of a do-or-die challenge. This is the ultimate test of character, the one that John F. Kennedy met well enough in the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. This is the test that Jimmy Carter failed so miserably that Ronald Reagan beat him handily in the following election. This is the same test of reality that every single Democratic Administration has tried to avoid; it's the reason why Bill Clinton refused to do anything about Osama Bin Laden when he had four separate chances to take him out.
This time, abject apologies to ranting Pakistani mobs will not make a smidgen of difference. Even Axelrod's disinformation campaigns can't save Obama now, because that 3 am phone call is almost sure to come by April Fool's Day of 2012, when the real fool will stand revealed to the world.
On or about April 1 of 2012, that 3 AM phone call will reach the White House. We know what it will be -- which is itself a sign of stunning incompetence in this White House. None of this information should ever be public. Ever.
But this administration has chosen its Secretary of Defense to publicly leak the most closely guarded secret of Israel's back-against-the-wall defense against Iranian nuclear weapons.
Such public leaks amount to near treason in time of war. Imagine if someone leaked General Eisenhower's plans for the D-Day invasion in June of 1944. FDR would have fired them instantly, or if they were foreigners he would have felt justified to have them killed. Hundreds of thousands of American and Allied lives were at stake on D Day. In Israel today, hundreds of thousands of Jewish lives are at stake. Don't expect countries fighting for their national survival to act any differently.
The Israelis have now publicly retaliated against the Panetta leak. They have accused General Dempsey, our top general, of publicly taking the Iranian side in the confrontation. But General Dempsey is not the target. The General knows better. The real target is his boss in the White House.
This is the moment every sane person knew had to come, ever since Jimmy Carter and Zbigniew Brzezinski knowingly allowed the radical suicide regime of Ayatollah Khomeini to overthrow the modernizing Shah of Iran. That was the single most self-destructive decision by any American President in modern history.
Jimmy Carter empowered the first Islamic throwback regime since Kemal Ataturk modernized Turkey in the 1920s.
Since Khomeini, Islamic radicalization has only accelerated, culminating in the 9/11/01 attack on New York City. Obama's equally suicidal 'Arab Spring' has now brought the Muslim Brotherhood to power in Egypt, instead of our long-time ally Hosni Mubarak. Mubarak's predecessor Anwar Sadat was assassinated by the Muslim Brotherhood, and Obama knowingly chose to support Sadat's assassins.
So much for America's loyalty and word of honor.
Now Egypt is in economic and political despair, along with the other 'Arab Spring' countries. The Saudis are ordering their own nuclear weapons, because they cannot trust the United States to protect their vital interests any more.
Obama thrives on crisis and chaos. He is a gambler and a con artist who follows Napoleon's slogan of 'audacity, audacity, always audacity.' But Napoleon met his Moscow winter and his Waterloo. The only question is when Obama will crash into his own brick wall of reality.
April Fool's Day would be a very suitable target date for the coming Iranian nuclear crisis. The Administration has already started to undermine Israel's case for defending itself by claiming, dontchaknow, that the Iranians are not making nukes after all. They are just making highly enriched uranium, folks. Nothing to worry about. False alarms, all you fools! It's just that Zionist plot again.
Obama's string puppets at J Street and other Soros fronts are bound to start anti-Israel propaganda again, aided by the New York Times and its ilk. But the Iranians just said (again!) that they are bound and determined to 'wipe Israel off the map.'
It will make no difference. The Israelis are sensitive to hate propaganda by the international left, except when survival is at stake. Then they act to survive. That used to be US policy as well, until the fantasy-ridden Democrats took over the country. Today Obama is cutting our defense budget and reducing US nuclear weapons to the lowest level ever, even while nuclear proliferation breaks out all over the world. Good timing, BHO.
The conventional wisdom is that Israel must attack Iranian nuclear sites soon, because Ahmadinejad is moving his nuclear industry into deep mountain tunnels on an emergency basis. Once his nuke industry is deeply bunkered it is essentially invulnerable to conventional weapons. It is the point of no return.
The conventional wisdom also claims that Israel cannot maintain a long-term bombing campaign. Only the United States can do that. But the US is refusing to be the cop on the block, leaving the defense of the world's biggest oil supply to ... nobody. No one else has the power to do it. Which is why the Saudis are nuking up.
Israel will act as in defense of its right to live. The left will predictably turn reality upside-down, the way it always does. They keep their brains in the darkest place they can find. Nothing will change those facts.
The United States is the only nation with the power to knock down the Iranian threat with reasonable safety to itself and other countries. We have done it before. If Israel acts without our active help, the risks of great casualties on all sides will be much, much greater. In 1973 Golda Meir came close to using Israel's own nuclear arsenal when invading tank divisions from Egypt threatened to overrun Israel's cities. That decision was barely averted when Israeli tanks broke through the Egyptian lines.
Obama is by far the most mentally fixated president in the nuclear age. Nobody else has come even close to having his mental blinders, not even Jimmy Carter. Obama has little regard for human life, which is why he whipped up regional chaos in the 'Arab Spring,' by demanding the resignation of Egypt's Hosni Mubarak. Obama is happy to empower radical Islamist regimes, just like Jimmy Carter. With a solid phalanx of media liars, Obama has been able to evade responsibility for three years of solid misgovernment in foreign and domestic affairs.
But the coming crisis cannot be evaded. Obama and his propaganda media will spin and spin -- before, during, and after the coming crisis between Israel and Iran. Obama wanted above all to force Israel to retreat back to 1948 or face a nuclear Iran. It was a choice between slow genocide and fast genocide.
It looks like Netanyahu and Ehud Barak, the left and the right of Israel's parliament, called Obama's bluff. No American president has ever allowed an international crisis to come so close to the brink. Obama has now allowed the Middle East to deteriorate so far that he has lost control. He now owns whatever is going to happen. His fingerprints are all over it.
Around April 1, the biggest fool of the 21st century will stand revealed to the world.
After that, the American people will have to decide."
Read from the American Thinker:
Here Comes Obama's 3 AM Phone Call
By James Lewis
"In the next 60 days Obama's presidential career will finally meet that concrete wall of reality. He will either fail or survive. Trouble is, he might take many innocent people with him if he fails.
So far, the most hyped-up and unqualified president in US history has shown no capacity at all to act, in the face of a do-or-die challenge. This is the ultimate test of character, the one that John F. Kennedy met well enough in the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. This is the test that Jimmy Carter failed so miserably that Ronald Reagan beat him handily in the following election. This is the same test of reality that every single Democratic Administration has tried to avoid; it's the reason why Bill Clinton refused to do anything about Osama Bin Laden when he had four separate chances to take him out.
This time, abject apologies to ranting Pakistani mobs will not make a smidgen of difference. Even Axelrod's disinformation campaigns can't save Obama now, because that 3 am phone call is almost sure to come by April Fool's Day of 2012, when the real fool will stand revealed to the world.
On or about April 1 of 2012, that 3 AM phone call will reach the White House. We know what it will be -- which is itself a sign of stunning incompetence in this White House. None of this information should ever be public. Ever.
But this administration has chosen its Secretary of Defense to publicly leak the most closely guarded secret of Israel's back-against-the-wall defense against Iranian nuclear weapons.
Such public leaks amount to near treason in time of war. Imagine if someone leaked General Eisenhower's plans for the D-Day invasion in June of 1944. FDR would have fired them instantly, or if they were foreigners he would have felt justified to have them killed. Hundreds of thousands of American and Allied lives were at stake on D Day. In Israel today, hundreds of thousands of Jewish lives are at stake. Don't expect countries fighting for their national survival to act any differently.
The Israelis have now publicly retaliated against the Panetta leak. They have accused General Dempsey, our top general, of publicly taking the Iranian side in the confrontation. But General Dempsey is not the target. The General knows better. The real target is his boss in the White House.
This is the moment every sane person knew had to come, ever since Jimmy Carter and Zbigniew Brzezinski knowingly allowed the radical suicide regime of Ayatollah Khomeini to overthrow the modernizing Shah of Iran. That was the single most self-destructive decision by any American President in modern history.
Jimmy Carter empowered the first Islamic throwback regime since Kemal Ataturk modernized Turkey in the 1920s.
Since Khomeini, Islamic radicalization has only accelerated, culminating in the 9/11/01 attack on New York City. Obama's equally suicidal 'Arab Spring' has now brought the Muslim Brotherhood to power in Egypt, instead of our long-time ally Hosni Mubarak. Mubarak's predecessor Anwar Sadat was assassinated by the Muslim Brotherhood, and Obama knowingly chose to support Sadat's assassins.
So much for America's loyalty and word of honor.
Now Egypt is in economic and political despair, along with the other 'Arab Spring' countries. The Saudis are ordering their own nuclear weapons, because they cannot trust the United States to protect their vital interests any more.
Obama thrives on crisis and chaos. He is a gambler and a con artist who follows Napoleon's slogan of 'audacity, audacity, always audacity.' But Napoleon met his Moscow winter and his Waterloo. The only question is when Obama will crash into his own brick wall of reality.
April Fool's Day would be a very suitable target date for the coming Iranian nuclear crisis. The Administration has already started to undermine Israel's case for defending itself by claiming, dontchaknow, that the Iranians are not making nukes after all. They are just making highly enriched uranium, folks. Nothing to worry about. False alarms, all you fools! It's just that Zionist plot again.
Obama's string puppets at J Street and other Soros fronts are bound to start anti-Israel propaganda again, aided by the New York Times and its ilk. But the Iranians just said (again!) that they are bound and determined to 'wipe Israel off the map.'
It will make no difference. The Israelis are sensitive to hate propaganda by the international left, except when survival is at stake. Then they act to survive. That used to be US policy as well, until the fantasy-ridden Democrats took over the country. Today Obama is cutting our defense budget and reducing US nuclear weapons to the lowest level ever, even while nuclear proliferation breaks out all over the world. Good timing, BHO.
The conventional wisdom is that Israel must attack Iranian nuclear sites soon, because Ahmadinejad is moving his nuclear industry into deep mountain tunnels on an emergency basis. Once his nuke industry is deeply bunkered it is essentially invulnerable to conventional weapons. It is the point of no return.
The conventional wisdom also claims that Israel cannot maintain a long-term bombing campaign. Only the United States can do that. But the US is refusing to be the cop on the block, leaving the defense of the world's biggest oil supply to ... nobody. No one else has the power to do it. Which is why the Saudis are nuking up.
Israel will act as in defense of its right to live. The left will predictably turn reality upside-down, the way it always does. They keep their brains in the darkest place they can find. Nothing will change those facts.
The United States is the only nation with the power to knock down the Iranian threat with reasonable safety to itself and other countries. We have done it before. If Israel acts without our active help, the risks of great casualties on all sides will be much, much greater. In 1973 Golda Meir came close to using Israel's own nuclear arsenal when invading tank divisions from Egypt threatened to overrun Israel's cities. That decision was barely averted when Israeli tanks broke through the Egyptian lines.
Obama is by far the most mentally fixated president in the nuclear age. Nobody else has come even close to having his mental blinders, not even Jimmy Carter. Obama has little regard for human life, which is why he whipped up regional chaos in the 'Arab Spring,' by demanding the resignation of Egypt's Hosni Mubarak. Obama is happy to empower radical Islamist regimes, just like Jimmy Carter. With a solid phalanx of media liars, Obama has been able to evade responsibility for three years of solid misgovernment in foreign and domestic affairs.
But the coming crisis cannot be evaded. Obama and his propaganda media will spin and spin -- before, during, and after the coming crisis between Israel and Iran. Obama wanted above all to force Israel to retreat back to 1948 or face a nuclear Iran. It was a choice between slow genocide and fast genocide.
It looks like Netanyahu and Ehud Barak, the left and the right of Israel's parliament, called Obama's bluff. No American president has ever allowed an international crisis to come so close to the brink. Obama has now allowed the Middle East to deteriorate so far that he has lost control. He now owns whatever is going to happen. His fingerprints are all over it.
Around April 1, the biggest fool of the 21st century will stand revealed to the world.
After that, the American people will have to decide."
The Double Standard on the Destruction of Korans
When Americans are involved in the destruction of Korans, all hell breaks loose. What happens when Muslims destroy Korans?
Read from Atlas Shrugs:
Pakistan: Thousands of Qurans Dumped in Raw Sewage Canal
"In case you actually believed that all of this unholy slaughter was about some nonsensical manufactured 'religious indiscretion' and not about power, supremcacy and an excuse to kill infidel soldiers in the cause of Islam, get real:
Pakistan Korans: Thousands Dumped in Poop Sewer: Man Tries to Clean and Preserve February 26, 2012 By Maggie
'Koran’s used as toilet paper in Lahore, Pakistan? In the video, you will see some books are in tact, but many more, just pages and pages lying in the filth of a canal where sewage flows. A man drains the canal several times a year – been doing it for ten years. He rescues the pages and the books, and tries to clean them. He has begged his Government to use only paper that can be recycled, thinking they will be easier to clean! Apparently, Pakistan prints and supplies all the Korans in the country. His Government isn’t interested in recycling.
“What can I say? I say O Allah save this population from throwing Allah’s word into filth.”
Today our soldiers are dying in Afghanistan for disposing of Korans used among prisoners to pass messages. To date, four dead, murdered by Afghan security, whom we are training. Today, reports of another seven of our military injured in a grenade attack (according to Fox News this minute) - yet Muslims are using their own holy book for their own intimate convenience, maybe in silent protest for the darkness it has brought to their lives. Who knows? Moonbattery has another idea. Thanks to HalalPorkChop for the video.'"
Read from Atlas Shrugs:
Pakistan: Thousands of Qurans Dumped in Raw Sewage Canal
"In case you actually believed that all of this unholy slaughter was about some nonsensical manufactured 'religious indiscretion' and not about power, supremcacy and an excuse to kill infidel soldiers in the cause of Islam, get real:
Pakistan Korans: Thousands Dumped in Poop Sewer: Man Tries to Clean and Preserve February 26, 2012 By Maggie
'Koran’s used as toilet paper in Lahore, Pakistan? In the video, you will see some books are in tact, but many more, just pages and pages lying in the filth of a canal where sewage flows. A man drains the canal several times a year – been doing it for ten years. He rescues the pages and the books, and tries to clean them. He has begged his Government to use only paper that can be recycled, thinking they will be easier to clean! Apparently, Pakistan prints and supplies all the Korans in the country. His Government isn’t interested in recycling.
“What can I say? I say O Allah save this population from throwing Allah’s word into filth.”
Today our soldiers are dying in Afghanistan for disposing of Korans used among prisoners to pass messages. To date, four dead, murdered by Afghan security, whom we are training. Today, reports of another seven of our military injured in a grenade attack (according to Fox News this minute) - yet Muslims are using their own holy book for their own intimate convenience, maybe in silent protest for the darkness it has brought to their lives. Who knows? Moonbattery has another idea. Thanks to HalalPorkChop for the video.'"
The Horrors of Life in Gaza
From Israel Matzav:
Video: The hidden face of Gaza
"It's in French, but you'll all figure it out. The hidden face of Gaza.
Let's go to the videotape.
Looks like they're suffering terribly, doesn't it?"
Video: The hidden face of Gaza
"It's in French, but you'll all figure it out. The hidden face of Gaza.
Let's go to the videotape.
Looks like they're suffering terribly, doesn't it?"
Punishment from Daddy
More displays of love from an Islamist toward his westernized daughter, via Jihad Watch:
France: "Muslim fundamentalist" father pours gasoline on, tries to set fire to daughter who was "too emancipated"
"These things keep happening, but you're not supposed to notice that. 'Father tries to set 23-year-old daughter alight,' from The Local, February 27 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):
'A man was being held by police on Monday after allegedly trying to set fire to his grown-up daughter in central Paris.
Le Parisien newspaper reported that the man sprayed teargas in the young woman's face and then covered her in petrol on Saturday evening.
The father was apparently annoyed that the woman planned to go out with a group of friends that evening and considered her "too emancipated".
The newspaper quoted a source describing him as a "Muslim fundamentalist."
The 23-year-old daughter has a room in a building in the city's 11th arrondissement, close to the Place de la Bastille.
The 49-year-old man went there at around 11.30pm on Saturday evening and started arguing with her in the hall of the building.
He then attacked her with the teargas and poured petrol over her head and face, after which he pulled out a lighter, causing her to scream.
"She managed to grab the lighter from his hands while passers-by heard her screams," said a source close to the inquiry. "The man quickly made a run for it."
The woman told police her father had been harassing her for several weeks. "She explained he was unhappy that she had a Jewish boyfriend," said the source.
Police caught up with the man on Sunday and are questioning him in connection with attempted murder.
The newspaper reported that the man had only recently reconnected with his daughter, after abandoning her as a child.
He had recently taken her to his native country of Tunisia where he had tried to arrange a marriage for her.
She had resisted, while promising to behave in accordance with his wishes back in Paris.'"
France: "Muslim fundamentalist" father pours gasoline on, tries to set fire to daughter who was "too emancipated"
"These things keep happening, but you're not supposed to notice that. 'Father tries to set 23-year-old daughter alight,' from The Local, February 27 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):
'A man was being held by police on Monday after allegedly trying to set fire to his grown-up daughter in central Paris.
Le Parisien newspaper reported that the man sprayed teargas in the young woman's face and then covered her in petrol on Saturday evening.
The father was apparently annoyed that the woman planned to go out with a group of friends that evening and considered her "too emancipated".
The newspaper quoted a source describing him as a "Muslim fundamentalist."
The 23-year-old daughter has a room in a building in the city's 11th arrondissement, close to the Place de la Bastille.
The 49-year-old man went there at around 11.30pm on Saturday evening and started arguing with her in the hall of the building.
He then attacked her with the teargas and poured petrol over her head and face, after which he pulled out a lighter, causing her to scream.
"She managed to grab the lighter from his hands while passers-by heard her screams," said a source close to the inquiry. "The man quickly made a run for it."
The woman told police her father had been harassing her for several weeks. "She explained he was unhappy that she had a Jewish boyfriend," said the source.
Police caught up with the man on Sunday and are questioning him in connection with attempted murder.
The newspaper reported that the man had only recently reconnected with his daughter, after abandoning her as a child.
He had recently taken her to his native country of Tunisia where he had tried to arrange a marriage for her.
She had resisted, while promising to behave in accordance with his wishes back in Paris.'"
Obama's Real Religion
When Barack Obama was first running for president in 2008, I strongly suspected that he was a Muslim. As time went by, I changed my mind. Now, I think it's more likely that he is a Marxist, a Marxist soft on Islam, but a Marxist nonetheless.
I found this article to support my theory, via the American Thinker:
Son of Marx
By Jeffrey Folks
"Son of Islam? Let's get real.
Aside from his childhood attendance at a Muslim school in Indonesia, a school that was selected for him by his parents, Obama has never shown much interest in Islam. Nor, some would say, has he demonstrated a sincere interest in Christianity. Obama's attendance at Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago may have had more to do with political opportunism than religious devotion. In reality, there's little evidence that Obama as an adult has shown much interest in any religion.
So to call Obama a 'son of Islam' is true only in a particular sense. His paternal ancestors were members of the Muslim faith, and Obama is their descendant.
In truth, Obama is not really the son of any religion. His father was brought up as a Muslim but became an atheist. His mother was a self-proclaimed atheist who attended a leftist Unitarian Universalist church as a young woman. His maternal ancestors, Stanley and Madelyn Dunham, who were not practicing Christians, had multiple ties to the Communist Party USA. As a youth, Obama was also an atheist. His actions as a young man were not those prescribed in the Koran or any other religion. He was, by his own admission, a drug user, a womanizer, and an indifferent student. Had he been a devout Muslim, he would not have been any of these things.
Clearly, Obama is not the son of Islam, or of Christianity, but he is very much the son of Marx. When Rick Santorum referred to the president's radical environmentalism as a 'false theology,' he was perfectly correct. Obama's 'religion' is not Islam or Christianity, but the leftist ideology that Obama learned as a child. If anything, this radical ideology is the opposite of both Islam and Christianity since it would supplant individual conscience, and the conscience of the church, with centralized state control of all of life's functions. No devout Muslim or Christian wishes to inhabit a Marxist state that would run roughshod over the religious beliefs of the faithful. But this is very much Obama's goal.
Within the Marxist state that Obama envisages, all sectors of the economy -- all aspects of everyday life, in fact -- would fall under the control of a centralized bureaucracy. This destruction of liberty is already coming to pass with the implementation of ObamaCare. At the direction of a small panel of 'experts,' standardized protocols are being constructed that will constrain the health care choices for every American. When it comes time to decide upon end-of-life care, it will not be you, your doctor, and your family who make the decisions -- it will be a computer program implementing the cost-benefit analysis arrived at by a secretive panel appointed by the president.
Nothing this president has done would indicate any genuine interest in religion. His Feb. 2 'performance' at the National Prayer Breakfast is a case in point. His long-winded address was filled with hypocritical professions of faith, including the blatantly self-serving account of his pilgrimage to visit Rev. Billy Graham. It would seem that Obama does not know the meaning of the word 'travesty,' since his actions so often fall under that category. In this instance, his boastful account of his actions was a travesty of the humble and self-sacrificing faith that Rev. Graham embodied for well over half a century.
Obama's remarks at that same breakfast concerning what the Bible says about the rich were just as much of a charade. According to the president, Holy Scripture can be cited to support his own proposals to raise taxes on the rich. I do not recall any Bible verse that refers to a 30% levy on millionaires or a tax-rate surcharge on those earning more than $200,000 per year. The fact that the president would attempt to slip this message into the National Prayer Breakfast is, in and of itself, a strong indication of where his priorities lie. They do not lie with prayer itself, which has nothing to do with class envy (except, perhaps, the suppression of envy as the deadly sin that it is). Even in the midst of his National Prayer Breakfast address, the president could not resist advancing his class-warfare agenda.
Where this president has shown a great deal of interest is in wealth redistribution. Following the strictures of Marx, Obama constantly and reflexively frames his remarks in terms of class warfare. It seems that it is impossible for him to conceive of the American people in anything but antagonistic terms, with the rich pitted against the poor, whites against blacks, bankers against borrowers, producers against consumers, young against old, and women against men.
For each of these conflicts, or purported conflicts, Obama's 'solution' is wealth redistribution. Thus, he has ordered the entire federal bureaucracy to pursue those individuals and companies that have amassed wealth and to litigate, regulate, tax, and harass them until a 'fair' settlement has been reached. But after settlement (fair or otherwise) -- as that which will require U.S. banks to hand over as much as $40 billion to 'victimized' homeowners and other parties -- the intimidation will not end. It will be advanced further by the Justice Department with its activist pursuit of 'disparate impact' litigation and by state attorneys general on a host of other grounds. The strategy is to bleed American capitalism with a thousand cuts until government has in effect nationalized the private sector.
That goal -- the death of capitalism -- is Obama's guiding objective. The passion that he has brought to class warfare -- not just in the current re-election campaign, but throughout his presidency -- is clear evidence of where his heart lies. It does lies not with Islam or Christianity, but with Marx."
I found this article to support my theory, via the American Thinker:
Son of Marx
By Jeffrey Folks
"Son of Islam? Let's get real.
Aside from his childhood attendance at a Muslim school in Indonesia, a school that was selected for him by his parents, Obama has never shown much interest in Islam. Nor, some would say, has he demonstrated a sincere interest in Christianity. Obama's attendance at Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago may have had more to do with political opportunism than religious devotion. In reality, there's little evidence that Obama as an adult has shown much interest in any religion.
So to call Obama a 'son of Islam' is true only in a particular sense. His paternal ancestors were members of the Muslim faith, and Obama is their descendant.
In truth, Obama is not really the son of any religion. His father was brought up as a Muslim but became an atheist. His mother was a self-proclaimed atheist who attended a leftist Unitarian Universalist church as a young woman. His maternal ancestors, Stanley and Madelyn Dunham, who were not practicing Christians, had multiple ties to the Communist Party USA. As a youth, Obama was also an atheist. His actions as a young man were not those prescribed in the Koran or any other religion. He was, by his own admission, a drug user, a womanizer, and an indifferent student. Had he been a devout Muslim, he would not have been any of these things.
Clearly, Obama is not the son of Islam, or of Christianity, but he is very much the son of Marx. When Rick Santorum referred to the president's radical environmentalism as a 'false theology,' he was perfectly correct. Obama's 'religion' is not Islam or Christianity, but the leftist ideology that Obama learned as a child. If anything, this radical ideology is the opposite of both Islam and Christianity since it would supplant individual conscience, and the conscience of the church, with centralized state control of all of life's functions. No devout Muslim or Christian wishes to inhabit a Marxist state that would run roughshod over the religious beliefs of the faithful. But this is very much Obama's goal.
Within the Marxist state that Obama envisages, all sectors of the economy -- all aspects of everyday life, in fact -- would fall under the control of a centralized bureaucracy. This destruction of liberty is already coming to pass with the implementation of ObamaCare. At the direction of a small panel of 'experts,' standardized protocols are being constructed that will constrain the health care choices for every American. When it comes time to decide upon end-of-life care, it will not be you, your doctor, and your family who make the decisions -- it will be a computer program implementing the cost-benefit analysis arrived at by a secretive panel appointed by the president.
Nothing this president has done would indicate any genuine interest in religion. His Feb. 2 'performance' at the National Prayer Breakfast is a case in point. His long-winded address was filled with hypocritical professions of faith, including the blatantly self-serving account of his pilgrimage to visit Rev. Billy Graham. It would seem that Obama does not know the meaning of the word 'travesty,' since his actions so often fall under that category. In this instance, his boastful account of his actions was a travesty of the humble and self-sacrificing faith that Rev. Graham embodied for well over half a century.
Obama's remarks at that same breakfast concerning what the Bible says about the rich were just as much of a charade. According to the president, Holy Scripture can be cited to support his own proposals to raise taxes on the rich. I do not recall any Bible verse that refers to a 30% levy on millionaires or a tax-rate surcharge on those earning more than $200,000 per year. The fact that the president would attempt to slip this message into the National Prayer Breakfast is, in and of itself, a strong indication of where his priorities lie. They do not lie with prayer itself, which has nothing to do with class envy (except, perhaps, the suppression of envy as the deadly sin that it is). Even in the midst of his National Prayer Breakfast address, the president could not resist advancing his class-warfare agenda.
Where this president has shown a great deal of interest is in wealth redistribution. Following the strictures of Marx, Obama constantly and reflexively frames his remarks in terms of class warfare. It seems that it is impossible for him to conceive of the American people in anything but antagonistic terms, with the rich pitted against the poor, whites against blacks, bankers against borrowers, producers against consumers, young against old, and women against men.
For each of these conflicts, or purported conflicts, Obama's 'solution' is wealth redistribution. Thus, he has ordered the entire federal bureaucracy to pursue those individuals and companies that have amassed wealth and to litigate, regulate, tax, and harass them until a 'fair' settlement has been reached. But after settlement (fair or otherwise) -- as that which will require U.S. banks to hand over as much as $40 billion to 'victimized' homeowners and other parties -- the intimidation will not end. It will be advanced further by the Justice Department with its activist pursuit of 'disparate impact' litigation and by state attorneys general on a host of other grounds. The strategy is to bleed American capitalism with a thousand cuts until government has in effect nationalized the private sector.
That goal -- the death of capitalism -- is Obama's guiding objective. The passion that he has brought to class warfare -- not just in the current re-election campaign, but throughout his presidency -- is clear evidence of where his heart lies. It does lies not with Islam or Christianity, but with Marx."
Who Is the Most Christian President Ever?
Health officials are quick to inform us that laughter is good for our health. If that's the case, sit back and take a good dose of medicine because this article states the most absurd idea I've heard in a long time. President Obama is actually labeled as "the most explicitly Christian president in American history".
Excuse me, while I barf. Do people like this even take themselves seriously? And guess what? This comment came from a college professor. But, sadly, from one at a Christian college.
Read all about it from The Blaze: (I'm having trouble with this link continually getting stuck on my computer, so I can't go any further. You'll have to look it up yourself.)
Messiah College Professor: "Obama May Be the Most Explicitly Christian President in American History
Excuse me, while I barf. Do people like this even take themselves seriously? And guess what? This comment came from a college professor. But, sadly, from one at a Christian college.
Read all about it from The Blaze: (I'm having trouble with this link continually getting stuck on my computer, so I can't go any further. You'll have to look it up yourself.)
Messiah College Professor: "Obama May Be the Most Explicitly Christian President in American History
The Reality of Obama's Arab Spring
So much for the Obama-supported Egyptian Arab Spring. Moderates would take over after Hosni Mubarak stepped aside. Isn't that what the Obama regime tried to tell us?
Obama's disastrous foreign policy should be shouted from every roof top throughout America.
Read from Atlas Shrugs:
Jihadists take 80% of Egypt's upper parliament vote
"More of Obama's befouled foreign policy. How horrible is this? And you thought Mubarak was bad? He was golden.
Obama did this. Obama has been aiding and abetting the Muslim Brotherhood supremacists ever since he took office. This will not end well.
Islamists win 80% of Egypt's upper parliament vote
By OREN KESSLER 02/26/2012
'Islamist parties won more than 80 percent of seats in Egypt's upper house of parliament, the country's election board announced Sunday.
The Muslim Brotherhood's Freedom and Justice Party took 58 percent of the seats in contention, while the harder-line Salafist Al-Nour party came in second with a quarter of all seats. The nationalist Wafd party came in third with just 7 percent of the vote.
The upper house, or Shura Council, has no legislative powers and fulfills a largely ceremonial function. Two-thirds of its 270 are elected, and the rest filled by government appointment.
Voter turnout was low for the upper house, which will hold its first session Tuesday.
Islamists also dominated voting for the lower house of parliament, with the Brotherhood taking 38 percent and Al-Nour 27 percent.'"
Obama's disastrous foreign policy should be shouted from every roof top throughout America.
Read from Atlas Shrugs:
Jihadists take 80% of Egypt's upper parliament vote
"More of Obama's befouled foreign policy. How horrible is this? And you thought Mubarak was bad? He was golden.
Obama did this. Obama has been aiding and abetting the Muslim Brotherhood supremacists ever since he took office. This will not end well.
Islamists win 80% of Egypt's upper parliament vote
By OREN KESSLER 02/26/2012
'Islamist parties won more than 80 percent of seats in Egypt's upper house of parliament, the country's election board announced Sunday.
The Muslim Brotherhood's Freedom and Justice Party took 58 percent of the seats in contention, while the harder-line Salafist Al-Nour party came in second with a quarter of all seats. The nationalist Wafd party came in third with just 7 percent of the vote.
The upper house, or Shura Council, has no legislative powers and fulfills a largely ceremonial function. Two-thirds of its 270 are elected, and the rest filled by government appointment.
Voter turnout was low for the upper house, which will hold its first session Tuesday.
Islamists also dominated voting for the lower house of parliament, with the Brotherhood taking 38 percent and Al-Nour 27 percent.'"
Newt Reminds Us of Obama's Support for Infanticide
Personally, I find Newt Gingrich to be lacking in character because of his infidelities, but, oh, how I love it when he goes after President Obama. No one does it quite like Newt.
During last week's debate, Newt reminded every listener that our president was a supporter of infanticide. I didn't actually watch the debate, but I saw clips of it on Fox News the next morning. Oh, how I cheered to hear the truth exposed about Obama's radical record.
Read from Gateway Pundit:
Newt Nails Elite Media: Why Didn’t You Ask Obama About His Infanticide Support? (Video)
"Dan Riehl caught it. So did Dick Morris. So did the audience. CNN did its best last night to influence the GOP debate on Obama’s behalf.
The most obvious point of influence was CNN’s question on birth control.
'Which candidate believes in birth control and why?'
Newt Gingrich saw it coming and hit it out of the park – pointing to Barack Obama’s support of infanticide.
It’s funny, isn’t it, how Obama’s radical position on infanticide never came up in a debate? Weird."
During last week's debate, Newt reminded every listener that our president was a supporter of infanticide. I didn't actually watch the debate, but I saw clips of it on Fox News the next morning. Oh, how I cheered to hear the truth exposed about Obama's radical record.
Read from Gateway Pundit:
Newt Nails Elite Media: Why Didn’t You Ask Obama About His Infanticide Support? (Video)
"Dan Riehl caught it. So did Dick Morris. So did the audience. CNN did its best last night to influence the GOP debate on Obama’s behalf.
The most obvious point of influence was CNN’s question on birth control.
'Which candidate believes in birth control and why?'
Newt Gingrich saw it coming and hit it out of the park – pointing to Barack Obama’s support of infanticide.
It’s funny, isn’t it, how Obama’s radical position on infanticide never came up in a debate? Weird."
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
Update
I got a call 5:30 this morning telling me that the end was near for my mom. She died peacefully at around 7:45 am. Please pray for my family, especially my dad. He's helpless without her. Thankfully, she knew the Lord, so she is in a better place. Not sure when I will be posting again.
Monday, February 20, 2012
News Worth Reading
I am absolutely swamped with things to write about. I had a whole list of articles from which I wanted to post when my mother became seriously ill and have since found a few more. But, of course, they got tossed to the side. I have been at the hospital constantly for the last four days. My mom is actually doing better; she nearly died NUMEROUS times. Yet, God has spared her life. She is not out of the woods completely, but I'm believing for a full recovery and praising the Lord!!!
That being said, since I have so much to post, more that I can possibly do, as I'm behind with other responsiblities as well, I will just list the links for the articles in question, and you can go to the ones of interest. I will keep adding to the list as the day goes on. Happy reading!
Obama’s Deficit Spending Over Four Years: $5.17 Trillion, $70k Per Family, $17k Per Person…
Military Chaplains to be Charged with Sedition and Treason for Preaching Against Sin
Students Get Extra Credit Points For Putting Condom on Wooden Penis
Public School Student Quits Choir When Forced to Sing "There is no truth except Allah," "Allah is the only eternal and immortal"
Liberal Academia Instructing Teachers How To Demonize Israel In “Every Classroom”…
Where does the name 'Palestine' come from?
Obamacare, overregulation cited as reasons small businesses aren't hiring
It Begins… Obama Administration Arrests Praying Pastor and Priest Outside White House (Video)
Muslim Mom Honor Murders Her 16-Year-Old Daughter Over Gossip
Obama Disarms FBI Counter Terror Training Programs, Purges Truth about Jihad
Universities Team Up With Muslim Brotherhood
Planned Parenthood sells abortions to nine out of every 10 pregnant women who come to its clinics
Retired colonel on Islam - a must read
Obama's War on Religious Liberty
Obama gives precious energy resources away for nothing
Top 10 reasons to elect anybody but Obama
Does Israel Have to Defend the West?
That being said, since I have so much to post, more that I can possibly do, as I'm behind with other responsiblities as well, I will just list the links for the articles in question, and you can go to the ones of interest. I will keep adding to the list as the day goes on. Happy reading!
Obama’s Deficit Spending Over Four Years: $5.17 Trillion, $70k Per Family, $17k Per Person…
Military Chaplains to be Charged with Sedition and Treason for Preaching Against Sin
Students Get Extra Credit Points For Putting Condom on Wooden Penis
Public School Student Quits Choir When Forced to Sing "There is no truth except Allah," "Allah is the only eternal and immortal"
Liberal Academia Instructing Teachers How To Demonize Israel In “Every Classroom”…
Where does the name 'Palestine' come from?
Obamacare, overregulation cited as reasons small businesses aren't hiring
It Begins… Obama Administration Arrests Praying Pastor and Priest Outside White House (Video)
Muslim Mom Honor Murders Her 16-Year-Old Daughter Over Gossip
Obama Disarms FBI Counter Terror Training Programs, Purges Truth about Jihad
Universities Team Up With Muslim Brotherhood
Planned Parenthood sells abortions to nine out of every 10 pregnant women who come to its clinics
Retired colonel on Islam - a must read
Obama's War on Religious Liberty
Obama gives precious energy resources away for nothing
Top 10 reasons to elect anybody but Obama
Does Israel Have to Defend the West?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
