Sep 202010
 

A reporter who helped write the first and positive New York Times story on the Ground Zero Mosque was trained by the group run by mosque leader Feisal Abdul Rauf, according to that group’s website.

Rauf’s organization, the American Society for Muslim Advancement (ASMA), touted the journalist’s participation in a training program by ASMA’s “Muslim Leaders of Tomorrow” (MLT).

“Media trainings showed immediate results,” ASMA’s 2009 year-end report said.

Rauf’s group then cited Sharaf Mowjood, “a journalism student at Columbia University and trained at the MLT [Muslim Leaders of Tomorrow] conference, wrote a compelling story about the Muslim community’s plan to establish a center near Ground Zero. The story was published on the front page of the New York Times with Sharaf as co-author.” The article appeared in the Dec. 9, 2009, edition of the New York Times.

Mowjood could not be reached for comment. In an email, Times Metro Editor Joe Sexton, disputed ASMA’s representation about the program Mowjood attended.

“He participated in no training sessions sponsored by ASMA or the Cordoba Initiative,” Sexton wrote. He attended a lecture sponsored by ASMA in 2008. He was not a presenter or participant. He signed the sign-in sheet.”

Sexton added that “The experienced reporters here who have worked with him have had no questions about his professionalism.”

A picture from the MLT conference indicates the session was more than a lecture. Mowjood is seen seated at a conference table as another person speaks.

The media training was conducted April 25 and 26, 2009, according to an email update sent by the program in May 2009. “The conference focused specifically on the media,” according to the ASMA email. “It offered participants a diverse range of intensive media trainings, imparting the MLTs in attendance with concrete tools to become effective media spokespeople.”

The Dec. 9, 2009, Times story about the Ground Zero Mosque was written with veteran reporter Ralph Blumenthal. It featured few dissenting voices about the wisdom of building the project near the scene of the attacks. Instead, it characterizes Rauf as “Imam Feisal,” who “follows a path of Islam focused more on spiritual wisdom than on strict ritual, and as a bridge builder, he is sometimes focused more on cultivating relations with those outside his faith than within it.”

Mowjood previously worked as a government relations manager for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). The FBI cut off communications with CAIR in 2008, citing evidence in the Hamas-support prosecution of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF). Exhibits admitted into evidence in that case place CAIR as an arm of a Hamas support network in America. Prosecutors say that CAIR was “a participant in an ongoing and ultimately unlawful conspiracy to support a designated terrorist organization, a conspiracy from which CAIR never withdrew.”

And an FBI official wrote that the cut off would last “until we can resolve whether there continues to be a connection between CAIR or its executives and Hamas.”

In April 2010, Mowjood co-authored a story published on ABC News’ website on the October 2009 FBI shooting of a Detroit imam as agents moved in to arrest him.” CAIR has waged a campaign to cast the shooting as excessive and unjust, and to minimize Imam Luqman Abdullah’s history of preaching violent jihad, including instructions not to surrender peacefully to police.

The ABC story was based on CAIR’s release of autopsy photographs. It quoted CAIR-Michigan executive director Dawud Walid rebutting FBI claims that Abdullah was dangerous. FBI officials say Abdullah fired first, killing a police dog, as agents ordered him to surrender. Four others with Abdullah followed those instructions and were arrested without injury.

Rauf, the force behind the mosque near the site of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, started ASMA in 1997 as an organization to promote Muslim values. As the Investigative Project on Terrorism reported earlier this month, ASMA’s application for tax-exempt, church status from the Internal Revenue Service included a number of questionable assertions. Among them, the group – originally called the American Sufi Muslim Association – promised to build a “permanent large scale prayer center in New York City,” and claimed to be operating as a prayer center for between 450 and 500 daily worshipers.


The promised building never materialized. The address given for the existing prayer services turned out to be an Upper West Side apartment building with no space large enough to hold such daily crowds.

Last week, the IPT reported that an ASMA founder, Faiz Khan, formed an interfaith “9/11 truth” organization that claims the 2001 attacks against America were “an inside job.”

In addition to the questions raised about Rauf and his organizations, he and his partner in the mosque project have had their business integrity challenged. In addition to the questions raised about Rauf and his organizations, he and his partner in the mosque project have had their business integrity challenged. The New York Daily News reported Wednesday that developer Sharif El-Gamal was evicted from his New York offices for failing to pay $39,000 in back rent. His company also owes the city more than $270,000 in back taxes, which he started paying last week. The New York Daily News reported Wednesday that developer Sharif El-Gamal was evicted from his New York offices for failing to pay $39,000 in back rent. His company also owes the city more than $270,000 in back taxes, which he started paying last week.

And Union City, N.J., Mayor Brian Stack called Rauf “among the worst landlords” in his city after years of fire and health code violations in two apartment buildings Rauf owns.

~ IPT News

Share
Sep 202010
 

“Names to describe her abound. Republicans, conservatives and independents have expressed their dislike and frustration, calling her ‘Queen’ or ‘Czar.’ Even members of her own party in the Senate who have been burned by her imperiousness have their choice titles: ‘She who would be queen,’ ‘House mother,’ ‘madam,’ ‘mother superior’ and ‘mother bear with her cubs.’”

“Despite the maternal monikers, there is more than a little Machiavelli in Pelosi. Her typical modus operandi suggests she would rather be feared than loved. To be sure.”

With these words, author Rochelle Schweizer opens her book on America’s first woman speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi.

Schweizer continues the profile.

“Pelosi’s influence on Washington is unmistakable. Those who work with her say she is ‘strategic, shrewd, tenacious, and driven.’ She is also ruthless,” Schweizer wrote.

“As Politico quoted a Democratic insider, Pelosi ‘will put a bullet in the head of anyone she needs to. … She’ll do anything it takes to keep her majority, anything.’

“While Republicans may have true philosophical disputes with the speaker, many have a grudging respect for her tenacity, knowing few can fight as she can,” Schweizer continued.

In her new book, “She’s the Boss: The Disturbing Truth of Nancy Pelosi,” Schweizer, a veteran political biographer, describes Pelosi’s rise to power.

Pelosi paved her way to the speaker’s chair by first winning the post of House Minority Whip in 2001, only weeks after 9/11.

The Oct. 10, 2001, edition of the San Francisco Chronicle reported, “Ninety years to the day after California women won the right to vote, San Francisco Rep. Nancy Pelosi made history by winning election to the Democrats’ No. 2 position in the House. Pelosi won the job of Democratic whip by a 118-95 vote this morning over Maryland Rep. Steny Hoyer.”

Responding to the election results, the Chronicle reported Pelosi saying, “We made history, now we need to make progress. This is difficult turf to win on for anyone. But for a woman breaking ground here, it was a tough battle.”

At the same press conference, the newly minted minority whip also was asked if her election sends a signal that the House Democratic Caucus was too liberal. Pelosi responded by challenging the basis for the question.

“I don’t know why you would say that,” she responded. The Chronicle article and Schweizer reported that Pelosi claimed the liberal-conservative divide was, “an old formula that overlooked the Bay Area’s entrepreneurial spirit.”

As part of her effort to win the speaker’s post, Schweizer says that Minority Whip Pelosi used the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina to exploit the Bush White House’s weakness and win a Democratic majority in the U. S. House.

“On August 29, 2005, Hurricane Katrina, the most expensive and third-most-intense storm ever to the hit the U. S. mainland, ravaged the Gulf Coast. Pelosi now had her tragedy to exploit,” wrote Schweizer.

Five years after that disaster, and as a continuing reference to Pelosi’s attacks on the Bush White House, Pelosi’s website still featured a page devoted to Katrina-related, Gulf Coast economic recovery programs.


According to Schweizer, one of most recent examples of Pelosi’s contempt for the system is how she pushed President Obama’s health-care bill through Congress.

The author adds that Pelosi had her sights on only two major issues when she rose to the speaker’s platform: health care reform and energy.

“The former is literally a matter of life and death. Moreover meddling with heath care – unlike, say, the tax code or even the environment – presents immediate and life-altering medical choices that can have dire consequences. Despite the moral heft of such an issue, unforgivably, Pelosi found a way to drown health-care ‘reform’ in a sea of government exploitation and incompetence.


“For leftists like Pelosi and Obama, health care represents the Holy Grail, a massive slice of the federal fiscal pie, totaling one sixth of the U. S. economy. Better still, as the Boss and Obama fully understand, once health-care authority has been centralized and the left’s utopian vision of ‘redistributive justice,’ has been realized, citizens are unlikely to unwind such massive entitlements,” Schweizer described.

“Just before passage of the ‘historic’ health-care measure, the speaker claimed, ‘Our economy needs something new, a jolt. And I believe that this legislation will unleash tremendous entrepreneurial power into our economy,’” Pelosi is quoted as saying.

“The best action we can do to create jobs and strengthen our economic security is to pass health care reform,” Schweizer quoted Pelosi as saying.

The speaker got her wish and the health-care package passed in March. However, Pelosi started out as speaker by “attempting to reward her loyalists and marginalizing her rivals.”

“This reality became clear when Pelosi tried to catapult her long-time ally John Murtha to the Democratic Majority Leader’s post ‘over her arch-rival, Representative Steny Hoyer.’”

The maneuver failed, but it showed Pelosi’s operating philosophy: Reward loyal friends and punish dissenters.

Schweizer points out that Pelosi doesn’t tolerate dissent, which is why most House Democrats have voted as a single block since 2007.

“Under Pelosi, according to the Congressional Quarterly’s 2005 study of the past 50 years of Democratic House voting trends, Democrats were more unified as a voting bloc than ever before, voting together an astonishing record 88 percent of the time.”

Schweizer also writes that Pelosi is hardly bi-partisan.

“For a person who espouses the importance of open-mindedness and of including a diverse chorus of opinions and perspectives, Pelosi seems curiously insistent on robotic groupthink,” Schweizer stated.

Schweizer points out that New York magazine reporter Vanessa Grigoriadis says, “Pelosi cares little about her public opinion ratings, or how her fierceness may offend people, so long as she does not portray frailty.”

Conservative political writer Thom Hunter says Pelosi is an ideologue.


“She’s disingenuous, dismissive and divisive. Other than that, she leaves me wondering which country she represents,” Hunter observed.

Neither Hoyer nor Pelosi responded to requests for comment.

By Michael Carl WND

Share
Sep 202010
 
Sharia_Hell

It is time for a “Team B” approach to Islamist ideology. The strategy has worked before, against a similarly determined threat to freedom. In 1976, George H.W. Bush, then director of central intelligence, invited a group of known skeptics about the strategy of detente to review the classified intelligence regarding Soviet intentions and capabilities. The point was to provide an informed second opinion on U.S. policy toward the Kremlin.

The conclusions of this experimental Team B study differed sharply from the government’s regnant theory. The skeptics found that, pursuant to its communist ideology, the Soviet Union was determined to secure the defeat of the United States and the West and to tyrannize the globe. Thus, not only was detente unlikely to succeed, but national-security policies undertaken in its pursuit exposed the nation to grave danger. The study was particularly persuasive to former California Gov. Ronald Reagan, who would use it not only to challenge the detentist policies of the Ford and Carter administrations but to build the strategy that ultimately brought down the “Evil Empire.”


Today, the United States faces a similarly insidious ideological threat: Shariah, the authoritarian doctrine that animates the Islamists and their jihadism. Translated as “the path,” Shariah is a comprehensive framework designed to govern all aspects of life. Though it certainly has spiritual elements, it would be a mistake to think of it as a “religious” code in the Western sense because it seeks to regulate all manner of behavior in the secular sphere – economic, social, military, legal and political. That regulation is oppressive, discriminatory, utterly inimical to our core constitutional liberties and destructive of equal protection under the law, especially for women.

We consequently have joined a group of security-policy practitioners and analysts in subjecting this ideology and its adherents to a new Team B study. Our assessment challenges bedrock assumptions of current American policy on combating (and minimizing) what the government calls “extremism” and on engaging (and appeasing) Shariah proponents who claim to reject terrorism. These proponents are described, wrongly, as “moderates” because they appear content to achieve their patently immoderate designs through political-influence operations, “lawfare” and subversion. Participants in the study constitute a rich reservoir of national security experience drawn from military, intelligence, homeland security, law enforcement and academic backgrounds.

Our study does not perfectly replicate the Team B work of a generation ago. We have not been encouraged by our government, which, under administrations of both parties, has been immovably content to wear its blinders. Nor have we been invited to review classified information. These, however, have hardly been insuperable obstacles. What Americans need to know is ready to hand in the public record. The problem isn’t access to information, it is coming to grips with what available information portends for our security.

Shariah is the crucial fault line of Islam’s internecine struggle. On one side of the divide are Muslim reformers and authentic moderates – figures like Abdurrahman Wahid, the late president of Indonesia and leader of the world’s largest liberal Muslim organization, Nahdlatul Ulama – who embrace the Enlightenment’s veneration of reason and, in particular, its separation of the spiritual and secular realms. On that side of the divide, Shariah is defined as but a reference point for a Muslim’s personal conduct, not a corpus to be imposed on the life of a pluralistic society.

The other side of the divide is dominated by “Islamists,” who are Muslim supremacists. Like erstwhile proponents of communism and Nazism, these supremacists – some terrorists, others employing stealthier means – seek to impose a global theocratic and authoritarian regime, called a caliphate. On this side of the divide, Shariah is a compulsory system that Muslims are obliged to wage jihad to install and to which the rest of the world is required to submit.


For these ideologues, Shariah is not a private matter. They see the West as an infidel enemy to be conquered, not a culture and civilization to be embraced or at least tolerated. It is impossible, they maintain, for alternative legal systems and forms of government like ours to coexist peacefully with the end-state they seek.

It is not the burden of our study to broker competing claims about which side of the Shariah divide represents the “true Islam.” There are approximately 1.4 billion Muslims in the world, and their understandings about their belief system, as well as their practices with respect to it, vary widely. There may not be a single “true Islam.” If there is one, we do not presume to pronounce what it holds.

What cannot be denied credibly, however, is that Shariah is firmly rooted in Islam’s doctrinal texts, and it is favored by influential Islamic commentators, institutions, traditions and academic centers. For more than a half-century, moreover, Shariah Islam has been financed lavishly and propagated by Islamic governmental entities (particularly Saudi Arabia, Iran and the Organization of the Islamic Conference) through the offices of disciplined international organizations, particularly the Muslim Brotherhood. We know from an internal 1991 memorandum authored by one of the Brotherhood’s U.S. leaders that its mission is a “grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house.”

Read the rest…By R. James Woolsey, Andrew C. McCarthy and Harry E. Soyster The Washington Times

R. James Woolsey was director of central intelligence under President Clinton. Andrew C. McCarthy was the assistant U.S. attorney who prosecuted the perpetrators of the first attack on the World Trade Center. Lt. Gen. Harry E. “Ed” Soyster was director of the Defense Intelligence Agency from 1988 to 1991.

Their full report online: Sharia: The Threat to America

This is the press conference for the release of the Center for Security Policy’s report, “Shariah, the Threat to America.” It was composed by Team B II, a group of intelligence and national security professionals, including former CIA head James Woolsey, author and former federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy, Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin, author Diana West, the Center’s Frank Gaffney, Lt. Gen. Ed Soyster, and many others. At the press conference at the US Capitol, the report was presented to Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ)– who read a statement on Team B II by Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN)– and Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-MI). This is a companion video for the Center for Security Policy’s report above

Share
Sep 202010
 

~thanks to The Founding Patriots

Companion Video from The Blaze:

Share
Sep 202010
 

Chicago Man Arrested in Attempted Bombing Plot

A 22-year-old Chicago man was arrested early Sunday morning, immediately after placing a backpack which he thought contained an explosive device into a curbside trash receptacle near a crowded North Side street corner, announced Robert D. Grant, Special Agent-in-Charge of the Chicago office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and Patrick J. Fitzgerald, U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois.

SAMI SAMIR HASSOUN, who lives in the 4700 block of North Kedzie in Chicago, was arrested just after midnight Saturday, without incident, on Seminary Avenue near the 3500 block of North Clark Street, by members of the Chicago FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF). The arrest followed an investigation that accelerated in June of this year. HASSOUN was charged in a criminal complaint filed today in U.S. District Court in Chicago with one count each of attempted use of a weapon of mass destruction and attempted use of an explosive device, both of which are felony offenses.

In announcing this arrest, Mr. Grant and Mr. Fitzgerald wish to emphasize that at no time was the public in danger during this investigation. The supposed explosive device was inert and provided to HASSOUN by an undercover agent. In addition, HASSOUN was under intermittent surveillance as the plot developed and the undercover agents were in regular contact with HASSOUN, monitoring his activities. There was no indication that any foreign or domestic terror groups were in any way connected to this plot or inspired HASSOUN.

According to the complaint, starting in June of this year, HASSOUN, who is a Lebanese citizen and permanent resident alien, began expressing to an associate the desire to commit acts of violence in the city for both monetary gain and to cause political transformation in Chicago. Unbeknownst to HASSOUN, his associate was secretly cooperating with the FBI and assisted with the investigation of these alleged threats.

Throughout the summer, HASSOUN allegedly discussed with this associate a number of possible targets and plots, including a biological attack on the city, poisoning Lake Michigan, attacking police officers, bombing the Sears (Willis) Tower, and assassinating the mayor. Eventually, HASSOUN is alleged to have selected the Wrigleyville area of Chicago as his target, utilizing an explosive device which he would detonate on a weekend night to inflict maximum damage.

Because of HASSOUN’s stated desire to carry out this attack, an undercover agent (UCA) was introduced to him in July by his associate. The UCA indicated that he was from California and that he had access to explosives and the expertise necessary to construct an explosive device which HASSOUN could use to carry out his plot. During this and subsequent meetings with the UCA, at which time a second UCA was also introduced, HASSOUN allegedly discussed several possible plots and scenarios in which he could dramatically impact the city and force the mayor to resign. HASSOUN eventually settled on a bombing outside a crowded Wrigleyville nightclub as the first step in his plan.

The complaint indicates that HASSOUN met with the UCA late on Saturday night, at which time he was provided a backpack which he thought contained a high powered explosive device. HASSOUN was shown the various components of the device and instructed on its operation. Although the explosive device was designed to look real, it in fact was constructed by the FBI of inert materials and was incapable of detonating.

HASSOUN and the UCA then left together in a rented vehicle, en route to the Wrigleyville area, where the bombing would take place. HASSOUN was under constant surveillance and agents watched as he placed the fake explosive device into a trash receptacle, after which he was arrested and the fake device recovered.

The complaint indicates that HASSOUN’s motivation for planning this attack was a combination of personal greed and political motivation.

HASSOUN is scheduled to appear today at 2:40 p.m. before Magistrate Judge Susan Cox in Chicago, at which time he will be formally charged. HASSOUN has been held at the Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC) in Chicago, since his arrest on Sunday. If convicted of the charges filed against him, HASSOUN faces a mandatory minimum sentence of five (5) years to a maximum of life in prison.

This case was investigated by the Chicago FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) which is comprised of FBI special agents, officers from the Chicago Police Department, and representatives from 20 federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies.

The public is reminded that a complaint is not evidence of guilt and that all defendants in a criminal case are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

FBI Chicago
Contact: Special Agent Ross Rice
(312) 829-1199
FBI Chicago
Contact: Special Agent Ross Rice
(312) 829-1199

~after Dave Matthews Concert

Chicago – 22-year-old Sami Samir Hassoun of Chicago was in federal court on Monday, charged with attempted use of a weapon of mass destruction for an attempted backpack bombing incident in Wrigleyville early Sunday morning.

Hassoun, who lives in the 4700 block of North Kedzie Avenue, (Near Lawrence) JUST look at the muslim conflagration (~This area is very close to where I’m from, the Jefferson Park area, NW side of the city) was arrested around 12:30 A.M. Sunday by members of the Chicago FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force. THIS will give you an idea about the area. I’ve written about it before & will put that piece up later, so look for it please.

He allegedly put the “bomb” in a trash container at Eddy and Clark. Businesses at or near that location include Sluggers World Class Sports, Improv Olympics, Salt and Pepper Diner, Goose Island Wrigleyville and Wild Hare.

The spot where Hassoun allegedly left the bomb is about a block from Wrigley. The Cubs were not at home on Saturday, but the neighborhood was filled with people who had just left a Dave Matthews Band concert.

According to Federal authorities, Hassoun never posed any actual threat because the pipe bomb was inoperable and had been provided to Hassoun by an undercover agent.

The FBI says Hassoun had discussed with an associate various plots for monetary gain or to cause political transformation in Chicago. Those alleged schemes included a biological attack on the city, poisoning Lake Michigan, attacking police officers, bombing the Willis Tower or assassinating Mayor Richard Daley.

Hassoun is being held without bond pending a detention hearing on Wednesday.

While the cooperating witness told Hassoun repeatedly, and the suspect at times agreed, not to kill anyone, he allegedly said he wanted to plan a “diversionary incident, followed by a more substantial strike that would likely result in casualties,” according to the complaint. Hassoun told the undercover agent he was not motivated by religious ideology, but did suggest in a meeting on June 14 that terrorists motivated by extremist views of Islam could be framed for his proposed actions, a press release from the FBI said.


When an undercover agent told Hassoun his motivation was to change the way the United States treated “our people back home,” Hassoun, according to the complaint, said, “Mine is a kind of a different concept than this.”

Hassoun “expressed his opinion that the mayor’s policies had weakened Chicago’s security apparatus and that he wanted to do something to show it,” the release said. When the source asked how he would carry out such an attack, Hassoun said, according to the complaint, “You park the car and let it ‘boom.’”

Sun-Times Media Wire contributed to this report.

~My FOX Chicago

Share
Sep 202010
 

Share
Sep 202010
 

~H/T Char

Share
Sep 202010
 

~H/T by Asst Natl Dir Mellie resistnet.com

Click on CC (lower right corner to the left of the YouTube icon, Fun to Karoake :)


Chorus
They promised bread and butter
They promised endless fun
Expand that social contract
Provide for every one

1.
Well, I like bread and butter
I like money spent
Protection not provision
From a government

Chorus
They promised guns and butter
They promised endless fun
Expand that social contract
Provide for every one

2.
They talk about provision
I’ll tell you how it comes
They’ll be gettin’ re-elected
We’ll be providin’ the funds

3.
Now, no more contempt from Congress
No more back room fun
Don’t show contempt for the people
They’re the sovereign one!

4.
No no no no more guns and butter
When it’s down to what gets spent
Protection not provision
From a government

No no no provision
Yeah yeah yeah protection

Share
Sep 202010
 

~H/T Blackie SM

Y’know, if I were a terrorist I think I’d hit America right now because I don’t think we’ve been this vulnerable since Clinton gutted our military, worked against our national security, and paved the way for 9/11.

For the record, I am not a terrorist, no matter what the mutant Janeane Garofalo says. How do I know I’m not a terrorist? Well, you pretty much have to be a Muslim or a progressive to be one, and I’m not Islamic but rather a Christian and a conservative.

For those unfamiliar with Christianity, one of the tenets of this faith disallows its followers to blow innocent people up while they’re working, riding a bus, flying home to see Granny for Christmas, or getting a slice of pepperoni at Famous Ray’s. The Koran, on the other hand is, how shall I say … more lenient … when it comes to such issues, and so are the likes of toads such as Bill Ayers. But I digress.


Regarding my assessment of our nation’s security (or lack thereof), I am not the only one out there with this opinion. Oh, no Spanky. There are more of us. Many more. As in many, many more.

Matter of fact, bestselling author and military analyst, Lt. Col. Robert “Buzz” Patterson, formerly Clinton’s senior military aide in charge of the “nuclear football” (which is not code for Monica’s plus-size lingerie bag), also thinks we’re incredibly susceptible to being attacked on a scale much larger that 9/11. He also believes … wait for it … that BHO is America’s biggest national security threat.

Who’s this “Buzz” guy, and why should we perk up and listen to what he says? Well, he’s not an obese commie who does shoddy documentary crap films, for one thing; nor is he a chunky, redheaded, unfunny, nerve-grating female comic who likes to spew her ill-informed views on HLN.

Nope, the good Colonel is a man who has honorably served our nation and was Billy’s top gun during the Clinton Administration. Patterson witnessed firsthand how William J. whittled away our military might, which Buzz meticulously documented in his New York Times bestselling book, Dereliction of Duty. Did you miss that one?

Patterson, however, in his latest tome, Conduct Unbecoming: How Obama is Destroying the Military and Endangering Our Security, says to the effect that Clinton looks like Genghis Khan on HGH compared to how Obama is dismantling the U.S. and thereby setting us up to be brutalized by those who detest the U.S. and that for which it stands.

Don’t believe me, MSNBC’er? Well check out these ditties I gleaned from Buzz’s most recent in regard to how Obama has gutted us from a security standpoint in just his first eighteen months (oh, how giddy Bin Laden must be seeing us morphing into a weak horse).


1. January – December 2009: The Administration refuses to detain the vast majority of illegal workers they find by drastically revising policy, such as halting workplace raids and stripping local law enforcement of the ability to pursue illegals. Also, terrorist detainees are ordered to be tried in civilian courts.

2. February 26, 2009: White House announces plans to slash defense budget, which undermines the U.S. military’s ability to meet its commitments.

3. March 13, 2009: No longer “enemy combatants,” terrorist supporters have new legal protections against being detained.

4. April 6, 2009: Obama gives speech in Turkey, apologizing for America, even as Turkey embraces Iran and Syria.

5. April 16, 2009: The Justice Department’s legal opinions on terrorist interrogations are disclosed and overruled by the Obama Administration.

6. May 21, 2009: President signs the US-UAE Civilian Nuclear Cooperation Agreement, which is intended to clear the way for the United Arab Emirates to gain access to sensitive U.S. nuclear technology.

7. May 2009: Obama Administration slashes missile defense funding and capabilities.

8. June 2009: CIA director Panetta kills program to explore options for assassination of Osama Bin Laden.

9. September 17, 2009: Obama Administration abandons Poland and Czech missile defense.

10. October 19, 2009: White House floats Iranian nuclear fuel swap offer, saying that it is willing to give Iran all of the enriched uranium they need to run Iran’s nuclear plant in Natanz.

11. December 2, 2009: Obama announces Afghanistan surge and prompt withdrawal of troops, with will expose U.S. troops to higher levels of risk.

12. December, 4, 2009: End of U.S . on-site inspection activities in Russia.

13. December 8, 2009: President sends U.S. Ambassador to North Korea for direct one-on-one negotiations.

14. December 29, 2009: National declassification order, which results in the release of over 400 million pages of Cold War-era records, exposing a wealth of secret data on U.S.-Soviet relations.

15. January 7, 2010: Obama blames “Christmas Day Bomber” on intelligence instead of fixing the problem.

16. January 20, 2010: China is no longer a Top Intelligence Priority.

17. March 25, 2010: U.S. backs away from tougher components of nuclear Iran sanctions proposal.

18. April 7, 2010: Terms “Islam,” “Jihad” banned from National Security Strategy.

19. April 8, 2010: New Gates-Obama plan announced to gut military.

20. April 17, 2010: Secretary of Defense Gates warns that U.S. has no long-range plan to deal with nuclear Iran.

21. April 27, 2010: Obama Administration refuses to release documents on the Fort Hood shooting to Senate Committee.

22. April 30, 2010: Department of Defense announces obesity as major security threat.

23. May 2, 2010: U.S. publicly reveals the size of nuclear arsenal, which until now has been a closely-guarded secret.

24. May 8, 2010: Secretary of Defense Gates calls for more sweeping cuts to the defense budget—around $10 billion for 2012.

25. May 24, 2010: Counter-terrorism Advisor Brennan praises foreign terrorist group Hezbollah.

26. May 27, 2010: Counter-terrorism Advisor Brennan says Jihadists are not America’s enemy.

27. May 27, 2010: Obama Administration’s new national security strategy is to focus on homegrown threats, says terror is not an enemy.

28. June 11, 2010: Obama White House seeks to ease U.S. sanctions against Iran.

29. July 6, 2010: Obama Administration sues Arizona over immigration legislation.

Do you feel safer after reading that partial list, children? I know I don’t. If you want to be even more freaked out—as in freaked out to do something like vote BHO out and champion those who still dig America and think national security ought to be a major issue (duh)—you must log on to Amazon.com, find Buzz’s book, Conduct Unbecoming, and then click your mouse and melt your plastic and buy this razor-sharp, easy-to-read and comprehensive book on how Barack is setting us up to be crushed.

Townhall by Doug Giles. Doug Giles’ new book “If You’re Going Through Hell, Keep Going!” is now available. Ann Coulter says “Doug Giles is a substantive and funny tour de force for traditional values.” Doug’s talk show and video blog can be seen and heard at www.ClashRadio.com.

Share
Sep 202010
 
tear_upsidedown_flag


~ Friends , please read this entire post & act now?! Remember, if it does NOT pass the DHS, etc have said in those 3 exposed memos, they will finagle it somehow , which amounts to amnesty, have NO doubt! ~JP

SENATE SWITCHBOARD — 202-224-3121

AMNESTY COULD PASS SENATE TOMORROW (TUES)
– DON’T PUT OFF YOUR PHONE CALLS

The pro-amnesty forces have now paid to set up phone banks across the country where they are calling all the cell phone numbers they picked up at open-borders rallies the last two years and then patching them through to Senate offices. They also are holding rallies at the offices of swing-vote Senators. They have all the money in the world to gin up pressure to vote for the DREAM Act amnesty this week.

ACTION: Look at the phone list below.

Call the Senators from your state.

Then, look at Senators from small and medium-small states and consider making calls to them (especially if you have any connection to that state in any way, or live in the same region).

YOU HAVE SENATE LEADERS CONFUSED & WORRIED

Your phone calls and faxes all last week are making some difference.

I’m not sure I’ve ever seen Senate leadership so confused about its exact course just a day before voting starts.


Senate Majority Leader Reid (D-Nev.) continues today to tell Senate Minority Leader McConnell (R-Ky.) that he will bring the Defense Authorization bill to the floor at 2:15 p.m. Tuesday and that the bill will have the DREAM Act amnesty in it.

But the No. 2 Senate Democratic leader, Durbin (D-Ill.), is telling the public that the bill will NOT have the amnesty in it. Rather, he says, the amnesty will be brought up as an amendment later in the week.

The first vote at 2:15 p.m. est Tuesday will be a cloture vote requiring 60 YEAS to allow debate to even begin on the Defense bill.

Not knowing exactly what the form of the vote on DREAM will be, your best bet is just to keep calling Senators and saying that they must vote NO on anything that includes the DREAM amnesty.

TOP FENCE-SITTING PROSPECTS WHO NEED YOUR PHONE CALL BEFORE THEY WILL PLEDGE AMNESTY OPPOSITION

As far as we know, none of the following Senators has committed either to oppose or support the DREAM Act amnesty as part of the Defense authorization bill next week.

For a number of mixed reasons, we believe these Senators are the ones of the uncommitted who are most likely to listen to reasonable persuasion from constituents asking for a NO vote.

ACTION: Call the DC office of these Senators (the 202 number).

Calling the local offices (the number on the second line) will be most helpful, as well.

If you’ve never called a Senate office, it isn’t hard. Just state your name to the staffer and quickly say you are calling to ask the Senator to OPPOSE the DREAM Act amnesty. Then give one reason for your opposition, say thank you and good-bye.

DEMOCRATS WHO VOTED AGAINST AMNESTY IN 2007 BUT NOT YET RELIABLE THIS WEEK


Folks, if we don’t hold these 7 Democrats, we may be in big trouble. Capitol Hill news services are reporting today that they don’t find a single one of these who has yet committed to voting AGAINST the DREAM amnesty this week, even though they voted against it when NumbersUSA activists mobilized to kill it in autumn of 2007.

Not surprisingly, none of these 7 is up for re-election this year. So, you need to hit them forcefully enough to make them think you will remember when they DO come up for re-election in later years.

Some of these Senators are talking like there are significant changes in the bill that may allow them to vote for it this time. Talk about that when you call their offices. Tell them that this bill still:


* covers everybody up to age 35
* is wide open to fraud because people only have to CLAIM to meet criteria and the government has to PROVE that their claims are false
* is open to at least 2.1 million illegal aliens (even before fraud)
* allows illegal aliens to arrive as late as age 15 and claim that they don’t know the language or culture of their home country and, thus, should not be forced to go back home

These are top priorities:

Sen. Pryor of Arkansas 202-224-2353
501-324-6336

Sen. Landrieu of Louisiana 202-224-5824
225-389-0395

Sen. McCaskill of Missouri 202-224-6154
314-367-1364

Sen. Baucus of Montana 202-224-2651
406-657-6790

Sen. Tester of Montana 202-224-2644
406-449-5401

Sen. Conrad of North Dakota 202-224-2043
701-258-4648

Sen. Dorgan of North Dakota 202-224-2551
701-239-5389

DEMOCRATS ON THE FENCE WHO ARE GOOD PROSPECTS

Senators Stabenow and Ben Nelson voted for the amnesty in 2007. But we feel they could be persuaded to vote otherwise now that we are in a Jobs Depression.

And Sen. Hagan is a new Senator who has been indicating opposition to the amnesty but still doesn’t seem guaranteed.

Sen. Stabenow of Michigan 202-224-4822
313-961-4330

Sen. Nelson of Nebraska 202-224-6551
402-441-4600 or 402-391-3411

Sen. Hagan of North Carolina 202-224-6342
336-333-5311 or 919-856-4630

REPUBLICANS ON THE FENCE

Here are Republicans who still won’t promise to vote against a massive new illegal-alien amnesty.


Frankly, friends, we need not only to defeat this amnesty but to crush it in order to scare off Senate leaders from bringing this or another amnesty up for a vote during the lame duck session after the elections.

Most of these Republicans (not all) tend to put the desire of greedy businesses for cheap foreign labor over the needs of their unemployed constituents. They can use your educational assistance.

Sen. Murkowski of Alaska 202-224-6665
907-271-3735

Sen. LeMeiux of Florida 202-224-3041
904-398-8586

Sen. Lugar of Indiana 202-224-4814
317-226-5555

Sen. Brownback of Kansas 202-224-6521
785-233-2503

Sen. Collins of Maine 202-224-2523
207-945-0417

Sen. Snowe of Maine 202-224-5344
207-874-0883

Sen. Brown of Massachusetts 202-224-4543
617-565-3170

Sen. Gregg of New Hampshire 202-224-3324
603-225-7115

Sen. Voinovich of Ohio 202-224-3353
614-469-6697

Sen. Hutchison of Texas 202-224-5922
214-361-3500

DEMOCRATS WHO MAY BE SUSCEPTIBLE TO PRESSURE FROM THEIR CONSTITUENTS

These tend to lean in favor of foreign workers over unemployed Americans.

But they have NOT co-sponsored the DREAM Act amnesty even though Party Leaders have almost made support of this amnesty a litmus test for being a real Democrat. So, something is holding them back. Provide them some more reasons.

Sen. Begich of Alaska 202-224-3004
907-271-5915

Sen. Shaheen of New Hampshire 202-224-2841
603-647-7500

Sen. Tom Udall of New Mexico 202-224-6621
505-346-6791

Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio 202-224-2315
216-522-7272

Sen. Wyden of Oregon 202-224-5244
503-326-7525

Sen. Casey of Pennsylvania 202-224-6324
412-803-7370

Sen. Johnson of South Dakota 202-224-5842
605-332-8896

Sen. Warner of Virginia 202-224-2023
804-775-2314

Sen. Webb of Virginia 202-224-4024
703-573-7090

Sen. Goodwin of West Virginia 202-224-3954
304-342-5855

Sen. Rockefeller of West Virginia 202-224-6472
304-347-5372

SENATORS WHO ARE CO-SPONSORING THE ‘DREAM’ AMNESTY

Just because the following Senators are outspoken in their support for favoring illegal foreign workers over unemployed U.S. citizens and legal immigrants already here, they should not be allowed to feel that such a position is safe.

I know a lot of you want to shout in anger at Congress. Well, here’s your list.

You can reach these through the Switchboard at 202-224-3121

Give special attention to Boxer, Gillibrand, Lincoln and Mikulski, all of whom are running for re-election in November.

(AR) Lincoln
(CA) Boxer
(CA) Feinstein
(CO) Bennet (not Bennett of Utah)
(CO) Udall (not Udall of New Mexico)
(CT) Dodd
(CT) Lieberman
(DE) Carper
(DE) Kaufman
(FL) Nelson
(HI) Akaka
(HI) Inouye
(IL) Burris
(IL) Durbin
(IN) Bayh
(IN) Lugar
(IA) Harkin
(MD) Cardin
(MD) Mikulski
(MA) Kerry
(MI) Levin
(MN) Franken
(MN) Klobuchar
(NV) Reid
(NJ) Lautenberg
(NJ) Menendez
(NM) Bingaman
(NY) Gillibrand
(NY) Schumer
(OR) Merkley
(PA) Specter
(RI) Reed
(RI) Whitehouse
(VT) Leahy
(VT) Sanders
(WA) Cantwell
(WA) Murray
(WI) Feingold

THANKS FOR CALLING TODA Y!!!


WE CAN’T STOP CALLING . . . BECAUSE THE PRO-AMNESTY FORCES WON’T.

Share