This comment by CzechRebel deserves to stand on its own:

I can remember Ron Paul’s stance against the Kosovo War very well. He seemed like the only voice of reason in the Congress at the time. However, do we see Ron Paul reaching out to the Serbian community today? During the debates or media interviews, does he ever bring up the fact that we were on the wrong side of the Kosovo War?

Perhaps future historians will look back at the United States and wonder what happened to a group of peoples, united under one government, who were the first to put a man on the moon, and wonder: How did such a great empire fall?

Perhaps some future historian will look back at the spring of 1999 and declare it to be the time when America lost its soul. Yes, lost its soul so much so, that even the one voice of reason during the Kosovo War refused some thirteen years later to acknowledge that it was not that the war was so wrong, but that we had actually fought on the wrong side.

Challenge to Ron Paul: Support the Serbs again and renounce radical Islam.

That is the whole point: we fought on the wrong side in the Balkans. Until we acknowledge the situation and make our best effort to undo the damage we did, the US and Europe will continue to suffer “blowback” from this tragic political and moral error.

We on 1389 Blog staunchly support both the Serbian people and Israel. Ron Paul and his supporters, in true doctrinaire fashion, blame our current global predicament not on our worldwide appeasement of our Muslim enemies, but on our alliance with Israel and on the supposed manipulation of the “Jewish lobby” in the US. They insist that all we have to do is to throw Israel and the Jews under the bus, and the rest of the world will leave us in peace.

While we ourselves are not Randians (indeed, blog admins 1389 and CzechRebel are both Orthodox Christians), we find it ironic that Ron Paul named his son Rand after Ayn Rand.

Ayn Rand on libertarianism and Israel:

Ayn Rand, who unintentionally provided the impetus for the movement, disdained libertarians, calling them “right-wing hippies.’ She was unequivocal in her support for Israel, which she explained this way in a 1974 appearance: “When you have civilized men fighting savages, you support the civilized men, no matter who they are.”

We do agree with Ron Paul on one issue: the Senate must explicitly declare war before the US engages in military action. Nothing justifies our current “War Powers Act”; nothing in the US Constitution empowers the Senate to delegate its authority to declare war. Even when Congress is not in session, present-day communications and transportation are so rapid that it would take little time to gather a quorum in the Senate to declare war, even in an emergency situation.

It is not the job of the President or of the State Department to decide when we go to war. It is the duty of the Senate to meet and declare war, without waiting for the President, whenever a foreign enemy declares war on us (via a fatwa or other proclamation) or perpetrates an act of war on us. Then it becomes the President’s duty, as Commander in Chief, to wage war in accordance with the Senate’s declaration. Ever since the Iranian hostage crisis, our Senate has allowed foreign Muslim enemies to walk all over us. That is a disgraceful abdication of responsibility.

Also see:

• Trevor Loudon: Blinded by the Left: How Marxists Wrote Ron Paul’s Defense Cuts Plan
• Don Feder: To Get Ron Paul’s Insanity, You Have To Understand Libertarianism
• Lemuel Calhoon: Ron Paul is an @$& Clown

Stop the Islamization of America: Maryland Public Pools Enforce Sharia-Muslim Swim, Segregated Swimming

(h/t: J.C.)
Ever wondered what a “burqini” looks like? Now you know. The article at the above link tells how shari’a and gender apartheid are coming to a sports facility near you.

Perfect: Florida Occupier Busted for Stealing Furniture He Used in Camp

Photo of the perp (but not the furniture) at the above link. No information about whether the victim still wants his furniture back after it’s been collecting mildew and vermin at Occupy Pensacola.

Obama Administration Training Egyptian Islamists for Elections

I keep mentioning that Washington DC is swarming with Muslim Brotherhood moles. Now they’re coordinating the Obama Administration response to the so-called “Arab Spring” so as to cement the ascendancy of the Muslim Brotherhood in the affected countries.

If you want proof that U.S. policy towards the Arab Spring is fatally flawed, look no further than William Taylor, the State Department’s Special Coordinator for Middle East Transitions and long associate of Muslim Brotherhood apologists. Taylor officially took charge on September 16 and oversees U.S. aid to countries affected by the Arab Spring, specifically Egypt, Tunisia and Libya.

Taylor’s office has been giving Egyptian Islamists training to prepare for the election contests that begin on November 28. He justified it by saying that the assistance is open to all parties and the U.S. wouldn’t pick sides. “Sometimes, Islamist parties show up, sometimes they don’t,” he said nonchalantly.

When asked how the U.S. would feel if the Muslim Brotherhood won Egypt’s elections, he said, “I think we will be satisfied, if it is a free and fair election. What we need to do is judge people and parties and movements on what they do, not what they’re called.” The answer seemed to infer that critics of the Brotherhood are needlessly alarmed by the name of the group.

It gets worse. Taylor compared the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood to Tunisia’s Ennahda Party, as if that is a positive example to follow. “As long as parties, entities do not espouse or conduct violence, we’ll work with them.” He said there is undue fear of the Islamists. “This is something that we are used to, and should not be afraid of. We should deal with them.”

It is hard to imagine a statement more frightening and naïve coming from a senior official…

Much more here.

The Muslim Brotherhood, like other organizations that support the Islamic agenda, does, in fact, espouse and conduct violence. Muslim doctrine requires violence; that’s what it’s all about.

Hege Storhaug: Very Little to Debate at ‘Human Rights in Islam’ Discussion

It’s an oxymoron.

It is impossible for me to provide a complete account of the debate on “Human Rights in Islam: Just or Unjust?” that was held under the auspices of IslamNet, Norway’s largest Islamic organization, on November 7, 2011. The “ideas” that were presented were utterly lacking in logic or intelligence, and the whole thing raced by very fast. It was almost impossible to keep up with it all: claims were made at a tempo out of another world, and were absolutely without substance. It was far more a revival meeting than a debate.

They delightedly applauded the chopping off of hands and feet. And they didn’t raise an eyebrow when executions committed by family agreement were defended as a reasonable ”human right in Islam.”

You would be forgiven for thinking that we were in deepest Saudi Arabia, or in a long-ago century. Far from it. We were in an auditorium at Oslo University College, where our future was being hatched onstage. The place was packed, and the great majority of the young students were wearing clothes that identifed themselves as followers of the Prophet.

The website Fritanke.no reported prior to the “debate” that the participants were sharia expert Fadel Soliman, Lars Gule, and myself, and that Gule would withdraw from the event if IslamNet separated the audience members by sex. But they did. The young women used one entrance to the auditorium, the young men another. The auditorium consisted of four sitting areas. The areas in the back were entirely separated by sex, while one of the areas in the middle contained members of both sexes — though not in the same rows. The sexual separation “just happened — entirely naturally.”…

More here.

THE USUAL SUSPECTS

Comment by Jim Campbell:

Another Obama illegal war?

Question: Has the United States ever sent in Special Forces as advisers when it wasn’t a prelim for war?  I didn’t think so. Congress must get off it’s collective ass and regain control of their positions of authority, honor their oath to protect and defend the Constitution from two foreign enemies or step aside.

That’s my story and I’m sticking to it, I’m J.C and I approve this message.

Obama’s billionaire friend has interests in African country’s oil.

Personification of EVIL!

After President Barack Obama announced earlier this week that he would be sending American troops into Uganda, WND uncovered billionaire activist George Soros’ ties both to the political pressure behind the decision and to the African nation’s fledgling oil industry.

Soros sits on the executive board of an influential “crisis management organization” that recently recommended the U.S. deploy a special advisory military team to Uganda to help with operations and run an intelligence platform, a recommendation Obama’s action seems to fulfill.

The president emeritus of that organization, the International Crisis Group, is also the principal author of “Responsibility to Protect,” the military doctrine used by Obama to justify the U.S.-led NATO campaign in Libya.

Soros’ own Open Society Institute is one of only three nongovernmental funders of the Global Centre for Responsibility to Protect, a doctrine that has been cited many times by activists urging intervention in Uganda.

Authors and advisers of the Responsibility to Protect doctrine, including a center founded and led by Samantha Power, the National Security Council special adviser to Obama on human rights, also helped to found the International Criminal Court.

Several of the doctrine’s main founders also sit on boards with Soros, who is a major proponent of the doctrine.

Soros also maintains close ties to oil interests in Uganda. His organizations have been leading efforts purportedly to facilitate more transparency in Uganda’s oil industry, which is being tightly controlled by the country’s leadership.

Soros’ hand in Ugandan oil industry

Oil exploration began in Uganda’s northwestern Lake Albert basin nearly a decade ago, with initial strikes being made in 2006.

Uganda’s Energy Ministry estimates the country has over 2 billion barrels of oil, with some estimates going as high as 6 billion barrels. Production is set to begin in 2015, delayed from 2013 in part because the country has not put in place a regulatory framework for the oil industry.

A 2008 national oil and gas policy, proposed with aid from a Soros-funded group, was supposed to be a general road map for the handling and use of the oil. However, the policy’s recommendations have been largely ignored, with critics accusing Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni of corruption and of tightening his grip on the African country’s emerging oil sector.

Soros himself has been closely tied to oil and other interests in Uganda.

In 2008, the Soros-funded Revenue Watch Institute brought together stakeholders from Uganda and other East African countries to discuss critical governance issues, including the formation of what became Uganda’s national oil and gas policy.

Also in 2008, the Africa Institute for Energy Governance, a grantee of the Soros-funded Revenue Watch, helped established the Publish What You Pay Coalition of Uganda, or PWYP, which was purportedly launched to coordinate and streamline the efforts of the government in promoting transparency and accountability in the oil sector.

Also, a steering committee was formed for PWYP Uganda to develop an agenda for implementing the oil advocacy initiatives and a constitution to guide PWYP’s oil work.

PWYP has since 2006 hosted a number of training workshops in Uganda purportedly to promote contract transparency in Uganda’s oil sector.

PWYP is directly funded by Soros’ Open Society as well as the the Soros-funded Revenue Watch Institute. PWYP international is actually hosted by the Open Society Foundation in London.

The billionaire’s Open Society Institute, meanwhile, runs numerous offices in Uganda. It maintains a country manager in Uganda, as well as the Open Society Initiative for East Africa, which supports work in Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda.

The Open Society Institute runs a Ugandan Youth Action Fund, which states its mission is to “identify, inspire, and support small groups of dedicated young people who can mobilize and influence large numbers of their peers to promote open society ideals.”

U.S. troops to Uganda

Obama yesterday notified House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, that he plans to send about 100 military personnel, mostly Special Operations Forces, to central Africa. The first troops reportedly arrived in Uganda on Wednesday.

The U.S. mission will be to advise forces seeking to kill or capture Joseph Kony, the leader of the rebel Lord’s Resistance Army, or LRA. Kony is accused of major human rights atrocities. He is on the U.S. terrorist list and is wanted by the International Criminal Court.

In a letter on Friday, Obama announced the initial team of U.S. military personnel “with appropriate combat equipment” deployed to Uganda on Wednesday. Other forces deploying include “a second combat-equipped team and associated headquarters, communications and logistics personnel.”

“Our forces will provide information, advice and assistance to select partner nation forces,” he said.

Both conservatives and liberals have raised questions about whether military involvement in Uganda advances U.S. interests.

Writing in The Atlantic yesterday, Max Fisher noted the Obama administration last year approved special forces bases and operations across the Middle East, the Horn of Africa and Central Asia.

“But those operations, large and small, target terrorist groups and rogue states that threaten the U.S. – something the Lord’s Resistance Army could not possibly do,” he wrote.

“It’s difficult to find a U.S. interest at stake in the Lord’s Resistance Army’s campaign of violence,” continued Fisher. “It’s possible that there’s some immediate U.S. interest at stake we can’t obviously see.”

Bill Roggio, the managing editor of The Long War Journal, referred to the Obama administration’s stated rationale for sending troops “puzzling,” claiming the LRA does not present a national security threat to the U.S. – “despite what President Obama said.”

Tea-party-backed presidential candidate Michele Bachmann also questioned the wisdom of Obama’s move to send U.S. troops to Uganda.

“When it comes to sending our brave men and women into foreign nations, we have to first demonstrate a vital American national interest before we send our troops in,” she said at a campaign stop yesterday in Iowa.

Soros group: Send military advisors to Uganda

In April 2010 Soros’ International Crisis Group, or ICG, released a report sent to the White House and key lawmakers advising the U.S. military run special operations in Uganda to seek Kony’s capture.

The report states, “To the U.S. government: Deploy a team to the theatre of operations to run an intelligence platform that centralizes all operational information from the Ugandan and other armies, as well as the U.N. and civilian networks, and provides analysis to the Ugandans to better target military operations.”

Since 2008 the U.S. has been providing financial aid in the form of military equipment to Uganda and the other regional countries to fight Kony’s LRA, but Obama’s new deployment escalates the direct U.S. involvement.

Soros sits in the ICG’s executive board along with Samuel Berger, Bill Clinton’s former national security advisor; George J. Mitchell, former U.S. Senate Majority Leader who served as a Mideast envoy to both Obama and President Bush; and Javier Solana, a socialist activist who is NATO’s former secretary-general as well as the former foreign affairs minister of Spain.

Jimmy Carter’s national security advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski, is the ICG’s senior advisor.

The ICG’s president emeritus is Gareth Evans, who, together with activist Ramesh Thakur, is the original founder of the Responsibility to Protect doctrine, with the duo even coining the term “responsibility to protect.”

Both Evans and Thakur serve as advisory board members of the Global Center for the Responsibility to Protect, the main group pushing the doctrine.

As WND first exposed, Soros is a primary funder and key proponent of the Global Centre for Responsibility to Protect.

Soros’ Open Society is one of only three nongovernmental funders of the Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect. Government sponsors include Australia, Belgium, Canada, the Netherlands, Norway, Rwanda and the U.K.

Samantha Power, Arafat deputy

Meanwhile, a closer look at the Soros-funded Global Center for the Responsibility to Protect is telling. Board members of the group include former U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, former Ireland President Mary Robinson and South African activist Desmond Tutu. Robinson and Tutu have recently made solidarity visits to the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip as members of a group called The Elders, which includes former President Jimmy Carter.

WND was also first to report the committee that devised the Responsibility to Protect doctrine included Arab League Secretary General Amre Moussa as well as Palestinian legislator Hanan Ashrawi, a staunch denier of the Holocaust who long served as the deputy of late Palestinian Liberation Organization leader Yasser Arafat.

Also, the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy has a seat on the advisory board of the 2001 commission that originally founded Responsibility to Protect. The commission is called the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty. It invented the term “responsibility to protect” while defining its guidelines.

The Carr Center is a research center concerned with human rights located at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University.

Samantha Power, the National Security Council special adviser to Obama on human rights, was Carr’s founding executive director and headed the institute at the time it advised in the founding of Responsibility to Protect.

With Power’s center on the advisory board, the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty first defined the Responsibility to Protect doctrine.

Power reportedly heavily influenced Obama in consultations leading to the decision to bomb Libya, widely regarded as test of Responsibility to Protect in action.

In his address to the nation in April explaining the NATO campaign in Libya, Obama cited the doctrine as the main justification for U.S. and international airstrikes against Libya.

Responsibility to Protect, or Responsibility to Act, as cited by Obama, is a set of principles, now backed by the United Nations, based on the idea that sovereignty is not a privilege, but a responsibility that can be revoked if a country is accused of “war crimes,” “genocide,” “crimes against humanity” or “ethnic cleansing.”

The term “war crimes” has at times been indiscriminately used by various United Nations-backed international bodies, including the International Criminal Court, or ICC, which applied it to Israeli anti-terror operations in the Gaza Strip. There has been fear the ICC could be used to prosecute U.S. troops who commit alleged “war crimes” overseas.

Soros: Right to ‘penetrate nation-states’…

MRC TV:

From Patriot’s Corner:

John Bolton RIPS the first muslim illegal alien potus over Christian Copts being murdered in Egypt.

Many more videos here.

I have already warned everyone who would listen that the real story behind Weinergate was not Anthony Weiner having tweeted photos of his private parts, but the role played by his wife, Huma Abedin. (See Weinergate: Sleeping with the Enemy.) It certainly appears that Huma is in a long-term lesbian relationship with Hillary Clinton, and possibly is in a relationship of another sort with Bill Clinton.

Be that as it may, the real problem is that Huma Abedin has been peddling the pro-Pakistani, pro-Saudi, and pro-Islamic agendas through Hillary Clinton, first during the Clinton Administration, and now through the State Department in the Obama Administration.

Now it turns out that Huma Abedin’s mother, Saleha Abedin, is associated with the Muslim Brotherhood. In addition, Huma’s brother, Hassan Abedin, has been working with Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal on the project of promoting the Muslim agenda in the West.

Obviously, the Clintons will never be willing to abandon their emotional and physical ties to the Muslim mole, Huma Abedin.

What we, as American citizens, must do is to demand that Hillary Clinton resign from her position as Secretary of State, and to ensure that neither Bill nor Hillary Clinton ever again play any role in public life.

BOMBSHELL: Weiner’s In-Laws and the Muslim Brotherhood

I teased this story a bit on my June 12th program. For those of you who listened, you know what this is about. For the rest, former PLO member and ex-Muslim Brotherhood activist Walid Shoebat has unearthed some shocking discoveries. Among them is that Anthony Weiner’s mother-in-law is a card-carrying member of the Muslim Brotherhood. What makes this a national security issue is the fact that Weiner’s wife is also Hillary Clinton’s closest adviser.

Weiner’s In-Laws and the Muslim Brotherhood Connected

Walid Shoebat and Ben Barrack

According to translated Arab sources, it has been learned that the mother of Huma Abedin – Huma is Anthony Weiner’s wife and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s Deputy Chief of Staff – is an official member of the Muslim Brotherhood; Saleha Abedin belongs to the women’s division known as the Muslim Sisterhood.

What has not been validated by western media – which has been confirmed by Arab sources – is that Huma has a brother named Hassan Abedin who is a fellow with the Oxford Centre For Islamic Studies (OCIS). This adds to strong evidence that an extremely reputable British institution has been infiltrated.

The OCIS consists of an increasing number of Muslim Brotherhood members who sit on the Board. OCIS has Al-Qaeda godfather, Omar Naseef as well as the notorious Muslim Brotherhood leader and suicide bombing supporter – Sheikh Youssef Qaradawi listed as OCIS Trustees. Naseef continues to serve as Board Chairman.

In 2009, Qaradawi’s role within Oxford and the Muslim Brotherhood was championed by the notorious Sheikh Rached Ghannouchi. OCIS has even presented an award for great scholarly achievement to Muslim Brotherhood member Shaykh Abd Al-Fattah Abu Gudda, who was an associate of Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna. Even the Sunday Times acknowledges that the cradle of Islamic Jihad – Al-Azhar University – actively attempts to establish links with OCIS.

These Arab sources have been researched and translated by former Muslim and ex-PLO member Walid Shoebat, who successfully translated and exposed the words of Ground Zero Mosque Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf in 2010; these discoveries helped to derail Rauf’s efforts to build the mosque. Shoebat also uncovered the Arabic statements of Mosab Hassan Yousef, the Son of Hamas author who allegedly converted to Christianity. Shoebat’s work revealed Mosab to have very unsavory and deceptive motives.

Now, back to the Abedins. As Hillary Clinton’s Deputy Chief of Staff, Huma accompanied the Secretary of State to the Dar El-Hekma women’s college in Saudi Arabia. Huma’s mother is the co-founder and a Vice Dean at the college.

The Shoebat Foundation has also translated Arab sources that identify Huma’s mother – Saleha Mahmoud Abdeen (aka Abedin) as a member of the woman’s arm of the Muslim Brotherhood. This information was obtained via Al-Liwa Al-Arabi, which released the entire list on the investigation done by Egyptian security, showing Saleha as a member. This arm is also known as the International Women’s Organization (IWO) or “Muslim Sisterhood.”

The ‘Dostor’ Egyptian newspaper confirms 63 International Missionaries from the Muslim Brotherhood’s “Sisterhood” branch that spans 16 different countries; it’s also confirmed by the Arab Centre for Studies, headed by researcher Abdul Rahim Ali.

This “Womens Division” of the Muslim Brotherhood can be found at the Muslim Brotherhood’s official website. Shoebat translates the relevant excerpt thusly:

“The Womens Organization’s goal in accordance with the Muslim Brotherhood rules, is to gain and acquire a unified global perception in every nation in the world regarding the position of women, and the necessity of advocacy work at all levels in accordance to the message of the Brotherhood as written in Women in Muslim Society, and the rearing of women throughout the different stages of life.”

True to this cause, another member of the Sisterhood – as confirmed by the list – is Suheir Qureshi. She spoke alongside Saleha Abedin as well as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who was brought in due to the connection to Saleha’s daughter. All three women spoke on issues of Women in Muslim Society. An Arabic news report of what happened during Hillary’s visit is translated by Shoebat. In that report “Suheir Qureshi spoke of how elated she was of Hillary’s historic visit.” Translating further, Shoebat reveals in English what was reported about the words of Huma’s mother as well as those of Hillary:

“Saleha Abedin spoke after Shuheir Qureshi and beamed in the presence of Secretary Clinton. Saleha’s speech preceded the former First Lady’s. Then Hillary stood. She donned a broad smile as she approached the podium… Clinton started with a strong word and she spent a long time complimenting Dr. Saleha Abedin regarding her daughter. Hillary explained that Huma holds an important and sensitive position in her office. She ended her speech by speaking of Saleha Abedin’s daughter (Huma), that a person must be happy if mentioned in a positive light but there is no happiness that equals the compliment given to children in front of a parent.”

Exposed to State secrets, Huma’s marriage to Weiner also gives her inside access to the inner workings of Congress. It is sacrilege in Islam for Huma’s mother to accept the reality that her daughter is married to a Jew, a marriage that is considered null and void by the highest authorities in Islam

Huma’s brother has been key in furthering the Islamic agenda in the west. He is seen meeting with Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal on an agenda of “spreading Islam to the west.” He is well linked to Omar Naseef, a notorious associate of Al-Qaeda. According to a very detailed report from 2007, Naseef was identified as the likely force behind the Abedin family’s departure from Kalamazoo, MI to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia circa 1977.

Whether coincidentally, ironically, or both the Muslim Sisterhood was established in 1977.

In still another significant translation by Shoebat, in 2008, Dr. Mumen Muhammad wrote about why Huma vowed to stay with Hillary even if the latter were to lose the presidential nomination to Obama:

“Abedin assures in press releases her continuance on the path with Hillary Clinton, even if Clinton failed as a candidate. The candidate’s aids and other influential figures in the Democratic Party assure that they do not disregard Abedin running for election or taking her position in the political arena by the help in successive political administrations with the aid of the Clinton family itself.”

Indeed, the “Clinton family” played a key role in promoting the extremely powerful Turkish Imam and notorious Islamist Fethullah Gülen. In 2008, the former president heaped praise on Gülen, giving him a clean slate at the Turkish Cultural Center Friendship Dinner.

Gülen fled Turkey for the United States in 1998 – during the Clinton administration – after attempting to overthrow Turkey’s secular government, a charge over which he was indicted in 2000; the Turkish Imam still lives in the U.S.

More than a little sympathetic to Muslim Brotherhood’s goals, Gülen explained in a sermon that aired on Turkish television how his followers could best seize power from the Turkish government:

“You must move in the arteries of the system without anyone noticing your existence until you reach all the power centers… until the conditions are ripe… Until that time, any step taken would be too early—like breaking an egg without waiting the full forty days for it to hatch. It would be like killing the chick inside.”

Gülen expressed this sentiment in another sermon as well:

The philosophy of our service is that we open a house somewhere and, with the patience of a spider, we lay our web to wait for people to get caught in the web; and we teach those who do.

Turkey’s president – Abdullah Gül – considers himself a follower of Fethullah Gülen (Gülenist) according to Wikileaks and also serves with Huma’s brother as an Oxford Centre Trustee.

It was also Hillary Clinton who signed a document less than one month prior to her trip to Saudi Arabia with Huma that lifted the ban on Tariq Ramadan, allowing him entry into the United States. Ramadan is the grandson of the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hasan al-Banna and has ties to Islamic terrorist groups.

Huma Abedin is a practicing Muslim and is still well-connected to her family. She also has access to highly sensitive State secrets – admitted by Hillary herself – as well as significant influence in the Obama administration.

To view the Sisterhood List and Defined Goals, click here.

Bill Clinton: Fethullah Gulen’s Contribution to the World, Turkish Cultural Center Friendship Dinner

Saleha Abedin, Huma Abedin’s mother:
Will Huma look like her in twenty years?

At first glance, Anthony Weiner’s use of the Internet as a vehicle for long-distance flashing might seem to be off-topic for a hard-news counterjihad blog. (No pun intended!) Other sources, such as Andrew Breitbart and Robert Stacy McCain, have already provided ample coverage, and yes, the jokes just keep on writing themselves.

But it turns out that there’s more to the story than that. Much more.

Politically incorrect comedienne Julia Gorin mines Weinergate for some new comedy gold:

Strauss-Kahn’s Weiner

June 08th 2011 10:41:56 PM – Posted by Julia Gorin

So it turns out that Anthony Weiner’s wife is a Muslim who works for Hillary Clinton. This explains a lot. He must have figured that if she likes Hillary so much, then — like Hillary — she wouldn’t mind if he showed his pee-pee to others.

Given that the man who married them was Bill Clinton, their fate was pretty much sealed right there.

(Ever notice how people will often marry people who look exactly like them?)

Now, I haven’t been following this story or the one about the other prominent Jew and his Muslim. That would be IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn and the devout West African Muslim hotel maid he allegedly tried to rape. First, I must explain that it wasn’t his Jewishness that made him force himself on the woman, but his Frenchness. Jews don’t tend to be rapists, just perverts.

Not that French tend to be “rapists” per se; it’s just a hazier term there since declining sex isn’t normal or common, and so “rape” as such isn’t common.

Regardless, the news of the Jew trying to rape a Muslim should at least satisfy this woman, who won an award from Hebrew University for arguing that IDF soldiers NOT raping Muslim women is a form of racism.

In other words, Strauss-Kahn may be a rapist, but at least he’s no racist!

My main objection to Anthony Weiner is not his having tweeted his genitalia; it’s his role as point man for policies that are profoundly destructive to the US. For that, the blame belongs to the ignoramuses in his district who elected him.

From the viewpoint of US national interests, the real EPIC FAIL here is all about Weiner’s wife, Huma Abedin, and her connection with the Clintons. It has been going on for a very long time, and it has largely escaped notice in the press.

I find it problematic that both a prominent US Congressman and the current Secretary of State are, literally as well as figuratively, in bed with a Muslimah.

Talk about sleeping with the enemy!

If Hillary Clinton had a lesbian affair with Huma Abedin then everything in Weinergate fits

(h/t: Sparta)

By Kevin “Coach” Collins

People are motivated to follow their darker instincts by lust for money power or sex.

In mid 2007 rumors started to circulate about Huma Abedin a stunningly beautiful staffer working for Hillary Clinton. The wagging tongues of Washington asked logical questions about Huma. “If Hillary is bisexual (as had long been thought and occasionally uttered in public), what is the nature of her relationship with the dark eyed enchanting Abedin, a young lady from a strict Muslim family?”

“Is the fact that Huma was never seen twice in the same designer outfit and lived in a $649,000 condo explainable because she was trading sexual favors with Hillary for a fabulous lifestyle?” “If so what does that make Huma?”

“How did Huma, whose government salary was listed as $9,999, live as she did?”

“Is Hillary Clinton a lesbian?”

Is Huma Abedin her lesbian “kept woman?”

In 2007 Michael Musto a Village Voice columnist who writes about gay issues commented that Hillary might be “Gayle King-ing” Huma, that is getting her a higher profile in order to head off media scrutiny about her and why Clinton would be “hiding” Huma and the true nature of their relationship.

In her tell all book about her affair with Bill Clinton Gennifer Flowers wrote that when she asked Bill if Hillary is a lesbian he laughed and made reference to her being more experienced with women then he is.

The purpose of this essay is NOT to prove Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin are lesbians, but to raise the question: If they are daughters of Sapphos wouldn’t it have been a good deal for Anthony Weiner to become Huma’s beard or faux husband?

Killing any rumor of a lesbian relationship between Hillary and Huma would be very helpful to Hillary’s drive to be elected president, and a “President Hillary Clinton” would be enormously helpful to Weiner’s long held dream of being elected Mayor of New York City.

The coverage of Weinergate has nibbled around the edges. The reports have carefully avoided mentioning the scandal’s “third rail”: the relationship between Huma Abedin Congressman Anthony Weiner’s wife and her former boss Hillary Clinton. Nevertheless, if this is the root of the relationship between Huma and Weiner the whole ugly affair falls into place.

Bill Clinton understands all to well what it’s like to live with a women like Hillary. He knows what it can drive an ordinary man to do. Anthony Weiner’s tweets to a porn star may be motivated by more than mere curiosity.

The biggest motivators driving human behavior are money power and sex. This one has all three.

To contact your Congressional Representative use this link: http://www.contactingthecongress.org/

Much more here.

Zimbio: Hillary Clinton’s Lesbian lover Huma Abedin?

(h/t: Sparta)

The August issue of American Vogue featured an article on Huma Abedin, the traveling chief of staff for presidential hopeful, Hillary Clinton. As observed on Gawker http://gawker.com/news/huma-abedin/, the Vogue article is lengthy but lacks substance similar to the Observer piece in April. Huma is characterized in short as a control freak, beautiful and a force to be reckon with. Yet, there isn’t much evidence of her intellect and capabilities outside of showing composure in designer clothes and accessories and having a keen understanding of political dynamics in the Middle East having lived there until her teens and raised by parents who are professors and of Indian and Pakistani descent. She has worked for Clinton as an intern/aide since graduating from George Washington. I just don’t see how she can be sought out for her expertise in matters related to the Middle East when she hasn’t worked in an objective international capacity outside of being Clinton’s aide. If she has, the authors of the artices in Vogue and the Observer should have pointed that out rather than rely on just the opinions of others. How about demonstrating the woman’s true smart rather than focusing on how smart and polish she looks in an Yves Saint Laurent suit?

It is worrying too that high power people in Washington like Senator Clinton is heavily relying on the advice of people who haven’t had extensive professional experience in international politics. Even if she grew up in the Middle East, I think that things have changed drastically in the 12+ years she has been away in Washington at college and working for Clinton. Somehow I don’t think that growing up in Saudi Arabia was so bad.

I’m sure that Senator Clinton have some very smart people working for her which makes me surprise that they allow such articles to be printed. Not so much the fact that the articles has a lot of fluff painting Huma as a super-woman, a wonder-kid. By putting forth the image of Huma and Hillary has dynamic, stylish, professional women, they are widening the gap between Senator Clinton and middle America, a weakness of her campaign. I would hope that America is ready for a woman president. However, I’m not sure if America knows how to relate to a woman presidential candidate and the fact that she’s an accomplished lawyer/politician woman makes it even worse. There’s no need to paint a perfect picture of these women to give the average Joes and Janes out there more reason to stay clear of Hillary Clinton…

Much more here.

Also see:

• Hillary’s Lesbian Affair with Muslim Aide?
  (h/t: Sparta)
• The missing woman in Weinergate
  (h/t: Sparta)
• Like most Americans, Rep. Anthony Weiner can’t afford to quit the DC day job
  (h/t: Speranza)

But wait, there’s MORE:

Saleha Abedin, Huma Abedin’s mother:
Will Huma look like her in twenty years?

Anthony Weiner’s mother-in-law, Saleha Abedin, is connected with Muslim Brotherhood

Why are huge megamosque complexes invading the American South? Who is funding them? And why are they often being built next to churches?

Human Events: Southern-Fried Jihadists?

by Jason Mattera

05/05/2011

Homegrown Islamic terrorists are consciously moving to the South to take their Jihad to the heart of “infidel America,” says Erick Stackelbeck, investigative reporter and author of the new book, The Terrorist Next Door.

When we sat down, Stackelbeck argued that monster mosques are popping up everywhere below the Mason-Dixon Line because Jihadists want to “challenge American Christendom.” These multi-million dollar facilities, Stackelback suspects, are almost completely funded with Saudi Arabian and United Arab Emirates money. As you’ll see in our interview, Stackelback highlights a massive mosque in the Nashville area that had to get gobs of financial assistance for construction from elsewhere than the local Muslim community, as there are only 200 Muslim families in the area.

Oh, and these mosques are generally built near churches on purpose with the “minaret” towering over the “steeple,” and that’s not by accident. I’ll let Stackelbeck explain:

YouTube: Southern-Fried Jihadists?

View article and read comments here.

The federal government settles Somali Muslim “refugees” in small towns such as Shelbyville, Tennessee, where they not only disrupt and endanger the lives of law-abiding locals, but also form a permanent security risk to the US:

Atlas Shrugs: PBS in Tandem with the State Department Smears Shelbyville to Advance Al Hijra (Muslim Immigration)

For years I have been writing about the refugee resettlement program here: Refugee Resettlement: The quiet Jihad tsunami that is wreaking havoc on "gateway cities" like Lewiston, Maine; Shelbyville, Tennessee; St. Cloud, Minnesota; Clarkston, Georgia; and Jamestown, North Dakota. (here)

More deeply disturbing is the UN decides who gets refugee status. I have recounted the subsequent sometimes violent repercussions of these "religious" communities attempting to advance Islamic supremacism by targeting gays and hurling stones at them, trying to impose Muslim prayer on the public schools, imposing sharia law on these workplaces in America (go here and here and here and here and here and here)….

More on al hijra here.

Brian Mosely, staff writer for the Shelbyville Times Gazette, contacted me on the topic of Somali immigration in that small Tennessee community. He has written a number of articles over the past three years dealing with the strains and culture clashes that have occurred as a result of that.

In his email, Mosely describes the Islamic supremacist propaganda war being advanced by the notoriously left PBS (your taxpayer dollars at work) and the Arabist State department:

One of these stories took the national stage in 2008 when the Times-Gazette reported that a new union contract at the Shelbyville Tyson Foods facility replaced Labor Day as a paid holiday with the Muslim festival of Eid al-Fitr.

Following that, a documentary crew came here and shot  "Welcome to Shelbyville," which will air nationwide, May 24 on PBS..

The film received financing and support from progressive migration advocates, with the hand of George Soros thrown into the mix, and has also been sponsored by the state department as overseas propaganda. The "propaganda" label comes from no less an authority than the New York Times

I am in the film and after seeing it in October, found it a completely biased distortion of what has happened, one that depicts myself and Shelbyville as "unwelcoming." In short, they came to town with a prearranged agenda to link the community with the Jim Crow past and the KKK and then proceeded to stage events with the Soros supported Welcoming Tennessee activist group, but completely edited out important issues like the communality's reaction and resistance to the demands of the Muslims during the Eid al Fitr controversy. The event is not mentioned at all.

Writing about this topic has so far resulted in my appearance in this left wing movie, as well as a right-wing book. I learned last week that I am in Chapter 4 of Erick Stakelbeck's The Terrorist Next Door, which examines Somali immigration and is partly based on my work from 2007-2008. Erick came down an shot a segment for the 700 Club with me in 2009 about our situation.

It even got so nuts for this country-boy scribe in 2008 that no less an authority than Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy flew down here to meet with me personally in order to pick my brain about creeping Shariah.

This morning, our paper published an editorial calling into question the motives of the filmmakers, and my publisher has allowed me to take them to task for the way I am portrayed in my blog. I detail my experiences with the director, who was only focused on arriving a prearranged story, no matter what the facts were.

Times Gazette wrote of the film here.

There is quite a bit of money and media support for this effort by the filmmakers and the state department, but I feel that the other side of the story is not being told. I am just a small town journalist with only one voice, and now I learn that the state department is throwing their weight behind this slanted film:

Read it all.

In an effort to keep the voters from figuring out that accepting any Muslim refugees is a bad idea, liberal media operatives backed by George Soros produce a movie, shown on PBS, that smears the town as raaaaacist:

About “Welcome to Shelbyville”

(h/t: Atlas Shrugs)

By Brian Mosely

As many of our readers are aware, in late 2007, I wrote a five part series about the impact that the introduction of Somali refugees were having on Bedford County. The stories focused on how the refugees got here, their traditions and beliefs, and took an honest look at the many cultural clashes that were taking place between the locals and the newcomers.

The series provoked a huge controversy, along with much discussion and debate from members of our community.

Then, in August 2008, the Times-Gazette reported that a new union contract at the Shelbyville Tyson Foods facility replaced Labor Day as a paid holiday with the Muslim festival of Eid al-Fitr.

That story put Shelbyville on the national stage, with the topic touching off coverage from the national news media, as well as massive attention on the issue from talk radio hosts, websites and blogs, some of which continues to this very day.

The controversy the stories created led a documentary crew to Shelbyville in late 2008 to shoot “Welcome to Shelbyville,” which will air nationwide, May 24 on PBS at 9 p.m.. The film received financing from progressive migration advocates, and has been sponsored by the state department as overseas propaganda. The “propaganda” label comes from no less an authority than the New York Times.

I viewed the film twice in October of last year during its local premiere, and found the filmmaker’s depiction of myself and the stories published by the T-G to be a monstrous distortion, with an incredible series of blatant omissions and dishonest misrepresentations that was obviously designed only to advance the political agenda of the filmmakers and the progressive organizations that funded and supported its production.

While the filmmakers certainly have a right to express their views, in the process, I feel they have engaged in a completely unfair character assassination of both myself, the Times-Gazette, not to mention how the entire city of Shelbyville is depicted.

They have told their story. Now, I shall tell mine.

The first time I met the director of Welcome to Shelbyville, Kim Snyder, was on the public square in the fall of 2008 and it was obvious from the start that the filmmakers was planning on telling the story of our situation to promote their own agenda. She was with Catalina Nino, who did public relations for the Tennessee Immigrant and Refugee Rights Coalition (TIRRC) at the time, and another woman whose name escapes me, but who was heavily involved in the production of the film.

We spoke about the situation here regarding the Somalis and they asked if I would appear in the film. I knew I had no choice but to take part in this, otherwise, they would tell whatever story they pleased without my participation.

Apparently, they intended to do that whether I was in the movie or not.

Then the discussion turned to what I was doing at that time, which was covering the new prosecution of Edward McGee, who raped and murdered two little girls in 1966. I explained the sad case and why it was still a topic of conversation over 40 years afterwards.

But the director’s friend only had one question: “Was he black?”

She said this in such excited tones that I felt like I was disappointing her by informing them that everyone involved in the horrific murder case was white.

It was obvious to me, however, that the filmmakers already had a narrative in place for their project and appeared to be let down that there would be no “To Kill a Mockingbird” parallels to work with in Shelbyville.

But, despite my misgivings about their motives, I asked the editor at the time, John Philio, for permission to be interviewed for the film and it was granted.

So, one month later, I sat down with Snyder and her crew to tell the story of what had been going on in Shelbyville with the refugees and the series of stories we ran, and the impact. I went into extreme detail about the history of the Tyson indictment from 2001, and how the community felt about the issue of immigration, as well as going into great detail the more recent Labor Day/Eid al Fitr flap, which brought us national media attention and angered many in Shelbyville and across the country.

None of these important topics made it into the film. Not even a mention.

Instead, the filmmakers decided to use a clip of dialog in which I described some of the derogatory comments made by our readers on the T-G website that mentioned the alleged hygiene of the Somalis. I clearly stated that the T-G never published these stories and statements ourselves, and that they were made by our readers but for some reason, out of the three hours of footage they shot of me, this clip is featured at the start of the film and prominently on the Internet via YouTube.

Much more here.

Why are we harboring “refugees” who are known to be terrorists? Just askin’.

Kentucky: Federal indictment: Two Bowling Green residents involved in a conspiracy to provide support, weapons to al-Qaida in Iraq (ISI)

Pictured: Flag of the “Islamic State of Iraq” (aka al-Qaida in Iraq)

BGDailyNews[Emphasis mine..ed}

LOUISVILLE — Two Iraqi refugees living in Bowling Green were arraigned today on federal terrorism charges - including accusations of attempting to kill U.S. troops with explosive devices in Iraq.

Waad Ramadan Alwan, 30, and Mohanad Shareef Hammadi, 23, are charged in a 23-count indictment returned by a federal grand jury in Bowling Green on May 26. The men made their initial federal court appearance today in Louisville.

Alwan is accused of conspiring to kill U.S. nationals overseas, conspiring to use a weapon of mass destruction against U.S. nationals overseas, distributing information on how to manufacture and use improvised explosive devices, attempting to provide material support to terrorists and to al-Qaida in Iraq and conspiring to transfer, possess and export Stinger missiles.

Hammadi is charged with attempting to provide material support to terrorists and to al-Qaida in Iraq, as well as conspiracy to transfer, possess and export Stinger missiles.

The men were arrested Wednesday in Bowling Green. The FBI set up a mobile command center behind the Bowling Green Police Department headquarters last week, where FBI agents in camouflage, body armor and suits could be seen moving between the mobile command center and the BGPD.

In September 2009, the FBI began investigating Alwan, according to a news release from the Department of Justice. The FBI later began using a confidential source to meet with and record conversations with Alwan in August and with Hammadi in January. In meetings with the confidential source, Alwan allegedly discussed his previous activities as an insurgent in Iraq from 2003 until his capture by Iraqi authorities in May 2006 - including apparent use of IEDs and sniper rifles to target U.S. forces, according to the release. [More including links to PDF's related to case]

Hmmm, will they rat out others? May be a good idea to stock up on popcorn, this could get very interesting…

Read the rest.

Three videos presented by James George Jatras:

Muslim Extermination Of Kosovo Christians: Part 1 of 3

Muslim Extermination Of Kosovo Christians: Part 2 of 3

Muslim Extermination Of Kosovo Christians: Part 3 of 3

From the YouTube description:

The Taliban Yesterday, Kosovo Tomorrow!

The truth about Kosovo, Albanian jihad terrorism, organized crime (drugs, weapons, sex slaves including children, destruction of churches / monasteries and attacks on Christian Orthodox Serbs by Muslim Albanians is becoming impossible to ignore. Still, incredibly, elements of the international community including some sectors of the U.S. government and important voices in Congress have accepted the idea that the only “solution” for Kosovo is to detach it formally from democratic Serbia and create an independent Islamic state! This would mean the eradication of the remaining Christian Serb population from the historic cradle of their spiritual and national life. It would also mean officially handing power to the criminal and jihad terrorist leadership of the supposedly disbanded “Kosovo Liberation Army” (KLA), who would then become the “sovereign” government of a new state in Europe! These are the same men who already have made Kosovo a black hole of organized crime, and who have a demonstrated history of war crimes and links to al-Qaeda including to Osama bin Laden personally and to the government of Iran.

http://www.savekosovo.org/documents/GSCGKosovo.pdf

In 2001, the civilized world was outraged when the terrorist Taliban regime in Afghanistan demolished two gigantic statues of Buddha. But the post-1999 destruction and desecration of Christian churches and monasteries by mobs of Muslim Albanians in the Serbian province of Kosovo is barely noticed. The Taliban destruction of the Buddhas was an offense against the world’s cultural and spiritual values.

But the jihad violence in Kosovo is not directed against just artifacts but living people: to remove the remaining Christian Serb population from the historic cradle of their spiritual and national life. Criminal and jihad terrorist elements of the supposedly disbanded “Kosovo Liberation Army”(KLA) maintain a reign of terror over Kosovo’s still-dwindling Christian Serb population in what has become Europe’s black hole of organized crime activities — drugs (heroin derived from Afghan opium), sex slaves, weapons and the criminal gateway to the rest of the continent.

Major figures in the KLA leadership have documented links to al-Qaeda including to Osama bin Laden personally as well as to the government of Iran. Personnel,money, and explosives tied to terrorist actions in Europe (such as the London and Madrid bombings) have been traced back to Kosovo. The terrorist Taliban regime in Afghanistan is defunct, thanks to bold U.S. action.

But in Kosovo, incredibly, elements of the international community including some sectors of the U.S. government and important voices in Congress have accepted the idea that the only “solution” for the province is to detach it formally from Serbia and to make Kosovo an independent Islamic state! This would mean officially handing power to the criminal and jihad terrorist KLA leadership, who would then be empowered as a “sovereign”government.

http://www.savekosovo.org/documents/GSCGKosovo2.pdf

Say “NO” To Kosovo Independence!

James George Jatras, Director of the American Council for Kosovo http://www.savekosovo.org is a Principal in Squire Sanders Public Advocacy, LLC, in Washington, DC. He has traveled to Kosovo on several occasions and is thoroughly knowledgeable with the Islamic radical movement in Kosovo and the Balkan region. He is familiar with the link between the Islamic radical movement in Kosovo and the Albanian mafia’s activities throughout Europe as well as in the United States, notably the New York-New Jersey area.

Jatras has extensive experience at the senior staff level with the Republican Leadership in the U.S. Senate in a broad range of policy areas, including matters related to foreign policy, international security, human rights and religious freedom worldwide, public diplomacy, immigration, international trade and finance, and the global terror risk environment.. Prior to his Senate work, Mr. Jatras served as a Foreign Service Officer with the US Department of State, specializing in Soviet affairs and Eastern Europe. Mr. Jatras is a frequent speaker, panelist and seminar participant, and a frequent contributor to print and online publications.

Michael Savage: Kosovo’s Independence “Immoral”, Part 1 Of 2
Michael Savage: Kosovo’s Independence “Immoral”, Part 2 Of 2
Michael Savage: The Historical Truth About The Serbs/Kosovo

The Obama administration and the entire liberal establishment are actively supporting the Islamist takeover, not only of Egypt, but of all Muslim countries.

Caroline B. Glick: Clueless in Washington

(h/t: yenta-fada)

Does the US fail to understand what will happen to its strategic interests in the region if the Muslim Brotherhood is the power behind the throne of the next regime?

I would go much further than that. Genuine US strategic interests in the Middle East and everywhere else, including at home, would mean an all-out effort to roll back the worldwide jihad.

But the strategic interests of the US government at this point are exactly the opposite of the genuine stragetic interests of the American citizen, voter, and taxpayer. The Obama Administration and the US State Department are doing everything they can to promote the Islamic jihad.

…Certainly it is true that the regime is populated by old men. Mubarak is 82 years old. It is also true that his regime is corrupt and tyrannical. Since the Muslim Brotherhood spinoff Islamic Jihad terror group murdered Mubarak’s predecessor president Anwar Sadat in 1981, Egypt has been governed by emergency laws that ban democratic freedoms. Mubarak has consistently rejected US pressure to ease regime repression and enact liberal reforms in governance.

This reality has led many American commentators across the political spectrum to side enthusiastically with the rioters. A prestigious working group on Egypt formed in recent months by Middle East experts from Left and Right issued a statement over the weekend calling for the Obama administration to dump Mubarak and withdraw its support for the Egyptian regime. It recommended further that the administration force Mubarak to abdicate and his regime to fall by suspending all economic and military assistance to Egypt for the duration.
[...]
The problem with this recommendation is that it is based entirely on the nature of Mubarak’s regime. If the regime was the biggest problem, then certainly removing US support for it would make sense. However, the character of the protesters is not liberal.

Indeed, their character is a bigger problem than the character of the regime they seek to overthrow.

According to a Pew opinion survey of Egyptians from June 2010, 59 percent said they back Islamists. Only 27% said they back modernizers. Half of Egyptians support Hamas. Thirty percent support Hizbullah and 20% support al Qaida. Moreover, 95% of them would welcome Islamic influence over their politics. When this preference is translated into actual government policy, it is clear that the Islam they support is the al Qaida Salafist version.

Eighty two percent of Egyptians support executing adulterers by stoning, 77% support whipping and cutting the hands off thieves. 84% support executing any Muslim who changes his religion.

WHAT ALL of this makes clear is that if the regime falls, the successor regime will not be a liberal democracy. Mubarak’s military authoritarianism will be replaced by Islamic totalitarianism. The US’s greatest Arab ally will become its greatest enemy. Israel’s peace partner will again become its gravest foe.

Understanding this, Israeli officials and commentators have been nearly unanimous in their negative responses to what is happening in Egypt. The IDF, the national security council, all intelligence agencies and the government as well as the media have all agreed that Israel’s entire regional approach will have to change dramatically in the event that Egypt’s regime is overthrown.

None of the scenarios under discussion are positive.

What has most confounded Israeli officials and commentators alike has not been the strength of the anti-regime protests, but the American response to them. Outside the far Left, commentators from all major newspapers, radio and television stations have variously characterized the US response to events in Egypt as irrational, irresponsible, catastrophic, stupid, blind, treacherous, and terrifying.

They have pointed out that the Obama administration’s behavior — as well as that of many of its prominent conservative critics — is liable to have disastrous consequences for the US’s other authoritarian Arab allies, for Israel and for the US itself.

The question most Israelis are asking is why are the Americans behaving so destructively? Why are President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton charting a course that will necessarily lead to the transformation of Egypt into the first Salafist Islamic theocracy? And why are conservative commentators and Republican politicians urging them to be even more outspoken in their support for the rioters in the streets?

Does the US not understand what will happen in the region as a result of its actions? Does the US really fail to understand what will happen to its strategic interests in the Middle East if the Muslim Brotherhood either forms the next regime or is the power behind the throne of the next regime in Cairo?

Distressingly, the answer is that indeed, the US has no idea what it is doing. The reason the world’s only (quickly declining) superpower is riding blind is because its leaders are trapped between two irrational, narcissistic policy paradigms and they can’t see their way past them.

The first paradigm is former president George W. Bush’s democracy agenda and its concomitant support for open elections.

Bush supporters and former administration officials have spent the last month since the riots began in Tunisia crowing that events prove Bush’s push for democratization in the Arab world is the correct approach.

The problem is that while Bush’s diagnosis of the dangers of the democracy deficit in the Arab world was correct, his antidote for solving this problem was completely wrong.

Bush was right that tyranny breeds radicalism and instability and is therefore dangerous for the US.

But his belief that free elections would solve the problem of Arab radicalism and instability was completely wrong. At base, Bush’s belief was based on a narcissistic view of Western values as universal.

When, due to US pressure, the Palestinians were given the opportunity to vote in open and free elections in 2006, they voted for Hamas and its totalitarian agenda. When due to US pressure, the Egyptians were given limited freedom to choose their legislators in 2005, where they could they elected the totalitarian Muslim Brotherhood to lead them.

The failure of his elections policy convinced Bush to end his support for elections in his last two years in office.

Frustratingly, Bush’s push for elections was rarely criticized on its merits. Under the spell of the other policy paradigm captivating American foreign policy elites — anti-colonialism — Bush’s leftist opponents never argued that the problem with his policy is that it falsely assumes that Western values are universal values. Blinded by their anti-Western dogma, they claimed that his bid for freedom was nothing more than a modern-day version of Christian missionary imperialism.

It is this anti-colonialist paradigm, with its foundational assumption that that the US has no right to criticize non-Westerners that has informed the Obama administration’s foreign policy. It was the anti-colonialist paradigm that caused Obama not to support the pro-Western protesters seeking the overthrow of the Iranian regime in the wake of the stolen 2009 presidential elections.

As Obama put it at the time, “It’s not productive, given the history of US-Iranian relations, to be seen as meddling, the US president meddling in the Iranian elections.”

And it is this anti-colonialist paradigm that has guided Obama’s courtship of the Syrian, Turkish and Iranian regimes and his unwillingness to lift a hand to help the March 14 movement in Lebanon.

MOREOVER, SINCE the paradigm claims that the non-Western world’s grievances towards the West are legitimate, Obama’s Middle East policy is based on the view that the best way to impact the Arab world is by joining its campaign against Israel. This was the central theme of Obama’s speech before an audience dominated by Muslim Brotherhood members in Cairo in June 2009.

Like the pro-democracy paradigm, the anti-colonialist paradigm is narcissistic. Whereas Western democracy champions believe that all people are born with the same Western liberal democratic values, post-colonialists believe that non-Westerners are nothing more than victims of the West. They are not responsible for any of their own pathologies because they are not actors. Only Westerners (and Israelis) are actors. Non-Westerners are objects. And like all objects, they cannot be held responsible for anything they do because they are wholly controlled by forces beyond their control.

Anti-colonialists by definition must always support the most anti-Western forces as “authentic.” In light of Mubarak’s 30-year alliance with the US, it makes sense that Obama’s instincts would place the US president on the side of the protesters.

Read it all.

But why?

One reason is that, as waldensianspirit points out, “when ill winds blow no matter the source, Obama works for his faith”. And our Quisling president doesn’t have to come out of the closet officially as a Muslim to be promoting the interests of our Muslim enemies every chance he gets. (See Is he or isn’t he? Only his imams know for sure.)

Another reason is the tranzi-progressive/jihadi axis, which has infested not only the State Department, but many other areas of influence and power. I would go so far as to say that the US State Department has been a treasonous nest of Islamist moles for the past four administrations.

The American Left’s Role in Leading Mid-East Regime Change

(h/t: Bob in Breckinridge)

As the world watches Egypt crumble into chaos, with over 100 dead and 2000 injured, the Obama administration continues to be somewhat and rather curiously ambivalent. On the one hand, on Friday, Vice President Biden came to the defense of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, saying that he shouldn’t step aside. Yet, on the same day, the Telegraph (ala Wikileaks) reported that the U.S. had planned “regime change” for the “past three years” while both President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton demand that internet be restored to the Egyptian protesters. This morning, Secretary of State Clinton again clarified the United States’ official position, ”We do not want to send any message about backing forward or backing back.”

For all the lack of clarity on where the Obama administration stands, one thing is becoming more and more clear: Signs are beginning to point more toward the likelihood that President Obama’s State Department, unions, as well as Left-leaning media corporations are more directly involved in helping to ignite the Mid-East turmoil than they are publicly admitting.

If it is indeed the case that the Obama administration, with help by private-sector companies and the union movement has led an “internet revolution” in the middle east and toppled two governments within a month, the longer-term ramifications for U.S. relations with other allies such as Saudi Arabia and certain other Arab monarchies, could prove to have much more far-reaching consequences.

The Role of Unions in the Tunisian Revolution.

Last month, a riotous and deadly revolution began in the North African nation of Tunisia, which led to the ouster of long-time ruler President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali. According to a Huffington Post report:

After 23 years of iron-fisted rule, the president of Tunisia was driven from power Friday by violent protests over soaring unemployment and corruption. Virtually unprecedented in modern Arab history, the populist uprising sent an ominous message to authoritarian governments that dominate the region.
[snip]
U.S. President Barack Obama said he applauded the courage and dignity of protesting Tunisians, and urged all parties to keep calm and avoid violence.

Although there have been numerous articles regarding the role of unions in the Tunisian “revolution,” perhaps none have been so clear as this one in the Huffington Post:

Though the movement appears to be a mix of grassroots spontaneity and targeted direct actions, it has achieved political valence through the savvy of organized labor activists. In the days leading up to the uprising, unions were feeding the foment of the demonstrators by calling strikes nationwide, including an 8,000 strong lawyer strike that paralyzed the courts.

As Marwan Bishara, Al Jazeera’s senior political analyst commented:

Unlike the short-lived uprising in neighbouring Algeria or recent socio-economic protests in other Arab countries, the popular Tunisian uprising was immediately supported by all the opposition groups, from the Islamists to the Communists, as well as by the labour unions, which helped it spread to all major parts of the country, including the influential north.

While the General Tunisian Workers’ Union (UGTT) was initially involved in helping to set up a transitional government, its leadership has since pulled out due to a popular uprising from the rank-and-file workers. Nevertheless, the AFL-CIO announced on its blog that:

The global union movement is reaffirming its strong support for the General Tunisian Workers’ Union (UGTT) and the Tunisian people in their courageous struggle for equality, social justice, political freedom and democracy.
[snip]
In a statement, the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), which includes the AFL-CIO, said it welcomes the fall of the dictatorship in Tunisia and fully supports UGTT’s call for an end to corruption and nepotism and a genuine transition toward a true democracy.

Much more here.

In Barack Hussein Obama, we are truly dealing with a Vidkun Quisling writ large, playing his evil part on a worldwide stage:

U.S. open to a role for Islamists in new Egypt government

(h/t: Rodan)

Obama administration said for the first time that it supports a role for groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood, a banned Islamist organization, in a reformed Egyptian government.

The organization must reject violence and recognize democratic goals if the U.S. is to be comfortable with it taking part in the government, the White House said. But by even setting conditions for the involvement of such nonsecular groups, the administration took a surprise step in the midst of the crisis that has enveloped Egypt for the last week.

The statement was an acknowledgment that any popularly accepted new government will probably include groups that are not considered friendly to U.S. interests, and was a signal that the White House is prepared for that probability after 30 years of reliable relations with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.

More here.

Just sayin’

Although the US evidently no longer enforces its laws against treason, assisting an enemy of the US in front of witnesses all over the world does, indeed, fit the definition of treason in the US Constitution. Traitors who sell out to their country’s enemies are not looked upon kindly by history.

According to Wikipedia:

After the war he [Vidkun Quisling] was tried for high treason and executed by firing squad at Akershus Fortress. Today in Norway and other parts of the world, quisling is a synonym for traitor.

The Muslim Brotherhood is, indeed, an enemy, not only of the US, but also of all non-Muslims everywhere.

If you want to learn what the Muslim Brotherhood is all about, this post reveals their agenda: Egypt: Populist Revolt or Muslim Brotherhood?

If you oppose the Muslim Brotherhood, you will also want to boycott Campbell’s Soup.

A Mystery Is Solved

Back in 1999, I had no information about the organ trafficking. But I had heard that a considerable number of Serbs had gone missing during the Kosovo War and its aftermath. I contacted prominent and influential people both in the US and all over the world – politicians, media figures, other activists, various celebrities, even heads of state – demanding an investigation to uncover the whereabouts of the missing Serbs.

Even though some other activists helped by circulating my request, nobody replied. Absolutely nobody.

More recently, I was dismayed to learn that at least some of the Serbs who had gone missing at that time had been butchered and sold for their organs.

Now the reckoning begins.

…But Will It Matter?

Reprinted by request from American Council for Kosovo

By James George Jatras
Wednesday, 15 December 2010

One can’t help but wonder how many times we have to be hit over the head before it begins to sink in that America’s intervention in Kosovo was based on a pack of lies from the start. The ‘accepted’ narrative of Kosovo as the great success story parades under the headline: U.S. and NATO Allies Nobly Stepped in to Stop Genocide by Evil Serbs. The reality was U.S. Dragged NATO Allies Kicking and Screaming Into Support for Muslim Mafia Committing Genocide Against Christian Serbs.

Comes now the Council of Europe’s human rights investigator Dick Marty with damning accusations that Hashim Thaçi, a/k/a Gjarpër (Snake), currently masquerading as “prime minister” of the illegal separatist administration in Pristina, heads a “mafia-like” operation that included murdering captives, mainly Serbs, to sell their organs on the black market. Is even that ghoulish revelation enough to force a reconsideration of the preening self-justification of a humanitarian intervention most Americans have long since forgotten? We can hope. But did the plotted attack on Fort Dix changes any minds? No.

Now we have organ trafficking. Let’s remember the organ-trafficking story first broke over two years ago and seemed to be withering away in the face of brazen stonewalling by “authorities” in Pristina and Tirana (with full backing from Washington, of course.)

Release of Mr. Marty’s report, just as Thaçi is claiming victory in Kosovo’s recent elections, suggests that somebody in Europe wants to jump off this bandwagon to disaster. But for Americans, the question is: How horrible do the facts need to be before we start looking behind the curtain to see what our government is so desperate to conceal

In the unfortunate partisan myopia that plagues American politics, some of my fellow conservatives might be tempted to blame it on Bill Clinton and leave it at that. Of course, it was largely a “Clinton problem” back during the 1999 NATO war against Serbia. To their credit, most Congressional Republicans voted against the war, which our Razorback Rommel illegally launched even though the House of Representatives had voted down the authorization to use military force. But while Republicans mainly voted No, the neoconservative establishment was whipping up support for the Clinton White House. Unfortunately, with neocon domination of the George W. Bush administration’s foreign policy, and their desperation to win Islamic friends after 9/11, the Bush policy on Kosovo was even more Clinton than Clinton, leading to the decision to try to force the issue of Kosovo’s independence in violation of every principle of international law and national sovereignty.

So, what will Washington do now about “our” guy Thaçi? Do a Google Image search for his name with almost any top U.S. figure of either party you can think of and you’ll see him in a warm handshake, often a chummy embrace with a virtual Who’s Who of the American establishment: George W. Bush, Condi Rice, Bill Gates, Clinton (both of them), Joseph Biden, Madeleine Albright, Wesley Clark, etc. (See Snake and Friends at the end of this message.) One would like to think some one of these worthies would now have the decency to say (even if only in virtuous hypocrisy), “What, I didn’t know! I’d never have supported these guys if I had!” But the problem is, even aside from these organ-trafficking peccadilloes, the U.S. establishment did know – from Day One – that Thaçi and Co. (the “Kosovo Liberation Army,” KLA) were a bunch of thugs. So did the intelligence services of our allies. (And make no mistake – it’s not just Thaçi. If Thaçi needs to be dumped, we can guess that “Plan B” will be to install in his place another of his equally vicious KLA colleagues.) They – our government – knew the KLA were criminals running the drug, slave, and weapons rackets throughout Europe. They knew the KLA was supported by Osama bin Laden (with whom Thaçi met personally in Tirana in 1998 to plan the jihad in Kosovo, according to the former head of Albanian intelligence), the Iranians, the Saudis, the Turks, and other supporters of an Islamic re-re-conquest of the Balkans. And we supported them anyway, shredding every rule of law and decency in the process. Now what? In all probability, circle the wagons, hope it will blow over, and keep twisting arms around the world in support of the illegal separatist terrorist entity “KosovA”.

As for Serbia, if there were a respectable government in Belgrade, instead of a group of quislings, they wouldn’t be preparing to meet with representatives of Thaçi’s government in direct negotiations. Instead, conspiring with their U.S. and European supporters and collaborators in the Serbian Orthodox Church, Belgrade’s recent “contribution” to the Kosovo fiasco is their persecution of Vladika Artemije, Bishop of Ras and Prizren and Kosovo and Metohija, who over two years ago was calling for then-President Bush to refuse to meet with Thaçi and demanding an accounting for the organ-selling outrage!

Let us hope that Mr. Marty’s fine work doesn’t get thrown down the Memory Hole with any and all other facts inconvenient to Washington’s policy. But it’s not enough just to track down the individual perpetrators, or even to pack Thaçi off to jail (though both would be a good start). It’s time for the lies that have undergirded our entire Balkan policy to be exposed, for the United States to stop its obsessive support for Islamic jihad against the indigenous Christian population, and specifically to back off from our absurd and destructive global lobbying on behalf of the KLA regime.

Some might argue that “we’ve come too far” to reverse course now, that American commitment to “KosovA” is irreversible. But it s never too late to stop doing the wrong thing and start doing the right thing. If Mr. Marty s organ-trafficking revelations can be a catalyst for a truthful reassessment of American policy and of the events of recent years, the victims will not have died in vain.

Washington
December 15, 2010

Snake and Friends

Snake and Rice (with “president” Fatmir Sejdiu)

Snake and Biden

Snake and (now French foreign minister) Bernard Koushner, British General Michael Jackson, fellow KLA thug Agim Ceku, and American General Wesley Clark

Snake and Bush

Snake and Gates

Snake and Albright

Snake and H. Clinton

Snake and B. Clinton

More here:

• Kosovo PM Linked to Sale of Human Organs
• Kosovo physicians accused of illegal organs removal racket
• Kosovo Organ Harvesting: The Plot Thickens
• Serb prisoners ‘were stripped of their organs in Kosovo war’
• Serbs killed for organs in 99?
• Bernard Kouchner Involved In Albanian Organ Market
• International Coverup on Serbian-Organ Harvesting; ‘Pro-American’ Kosovo Prime Minister Thaçi Oversaw the Scheme
• Kosovo/Albania: Investigate Alleged KLA Crimes

From the 1389 Blog mailbox…

A Serbian correspondent has called my attention to this blog post at Julia Gorin’s Republican Riot:

Torture, Evidence-tampering, Beatings, Bribes, Blackmail and Bullying Continue at our International Kangaroo Court: Prosecutors have Witness Kidnapped, Falsely Imprisoned, and Family Detained and Threatened: All in a Day’s Work when a Serb is on Trial

Posted by Julia Gorin

If Americans had any interest in what the future of jurisprudence — and justice — looks like, they would tune in to the Hague’s International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, where Orwell’s world has been a reality for the past 17 years. The ICTY is the body that was set up to try cases whose supposed weightiness was compared to “Nuremberg II.” But so ignored by the public and media alike have the proceedings been, that no one even notices the perversion of jurisprudence and evisceration of justice that have been taking place there.

In a follow-up to the witness intimidation and other prosecutorial misconduct that the Hague itself has been compelled to investigate — that is, to give its best impression of investigating — we have a few updates, including a recent item from Andy Wilcoxson exposing perhaps one of the more blatant corruptions of the Hague.

Balkans: Prosecutors try to stop intimidation probe

The Hague, 21 Oct. (AKI) – The prosecutors of the United Nations war crimes tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) on Wednesday appealed a court decision to launch an investigation into claims that they pressured, intimidated and tried to bribe witnesses.

Several prosecution witnesses in the trial of Serbian nationalist leader Vojislav Seselj, accused of crimes against Muslims and Croats during the 1991-1995 war that followed the disintegration of the former Yugoslavia, told the court they were pressured, intimidated and even offered bribes.

The presiding judge in Seselj’s trial, Jean Claude Antonetti has ordered the tribunal Secretariat to name “amicus curiae”, whose identity will remain confidential, to investigate the claims.

In their appeal, the prosecutors said on Wednesday that the court paid unnecessary attention to “false and unbelievable accusations of people, many of who are closely connected to the political party of the indictee”.

Seselj, the leader of the nationalist Serbian Radical Party (SRS), has been charged with crimes allegedly committed by paramilitaries recruited by SRS, but he himself never carried arms.

Seselj voluntarily surrendered to the tribunal in February 2003 and denied the charges. He claims he was tried for “verbal offence” because the prosecutors had no other arguments in the case.

The prosecutors asked the appeals panel to annul the decision to carry out an investigation, saying witnesses’ claims were “unbelievable and contradictory”.

So here’s just a sampling of the kinds of shenanigans the prosecutors would like dismissed — and no wonder. It of course applies to a different trial — the shocking experiences of a witness in the Karadzic case — and that’s what underscores just how pervasive the Hague’s crimes are:

Karadzic Trial Witness Alleges Extreme Prosecutorial Misconduct (Oct. 18)
Written by: Andy Wilcoxson
Hearing Date: June 30, 2010

On June 30th…the testimony of former Bosnian-Serb justice minister Momcilo Mandic began…Mandic began by telling the court that he would rather testify as a witness for the Chamber, than a witness for the Prosecution.

Mandic explained that the Prosecutor “threatened me, the associates of Mr. Tieger, they told me that if I didn’t come in to testify, I would be incarcerated.”

Mandic was also persecuted by the NATO puppet regime in Belgrade. He said, “In 2003 I was suspected of aiding and abetting and hiding Dr. Karadzic. I spent five months because of that in a solitary confinement cell in Belgrade, and none of my family members could visit me. And The Hague investigators came to see me. The Prosecutor’s investigator, that is, were allowed to come and see me.”

He said, “I was told that if I failed to co-operate and failed to tell them where Dr. Karadzic was, that I would be an accused before this Court and that I would be accused and found guilty by a Serbian Court.”

Mandic told the Tribunal that “My two sons were held in custody. And John Ruttel, one of the [OTP-Office of the Prosecutor] investigators, said to my son that he would be released if I were to come to Sarajevo.”

After the Serbian police released him, Mandic said, “I was kidnapped, as a citizen of Montenegro, and transferred in the space of two hours to a prison in Sarajevo, without any extradition proceedings or anything else. And in the prison there and in the Court of Bosnia-Herzegovina, in the evening hours I was taken out and was interrogated by the operatives and investigators of The Hague Tribunal, or, rather, the OTP. He said, “they asked me, once again, about Dr. Karadzic.”

Mandic said, “I wasn’t able to assist the OTP by telling them anything, because from 1996 I have had nothing to do with Dr. Karadzic. I wasn’t in contact with him at all. I tried to present my arguments and to explain this to them, but they just didn’t want to listen.”

He told the court that “The [Hague] investigators told me that I would be taken to court in Bosnia-Herzegovina and that the prosecutor of the BH Court would raise an indictment against me, and that I would be sentenced to a prison term of eight years. When I said that they had no grounds for filing a lawsuit against me, they said that they would find grounds and that that wasn’t important.”

Sure enough, Mandic told the Tribunal that “everything those operatives told me would happen did happen. I was prosecuted because of the commercial bank in Srpsko Sarajevo, which is owned by me, that I provided credits and loans to firms and companies which assisted Dr. Karadzic. And I was found guilty and given a prison term of eight years. I served five years.”

He was ultimately released from prison when Karadzic was captured and it was obvious that Mandic hadn’t been harboring him. Mandic said, “It was established that I was found guilty of a crime that didn’t exist and that it was all bureaucracy and false testimony on the part of false witnesses. And as an American citizen who had immunity, this person [who perjured herself with her testimony against Mandic] went to Dallas, Texas, and she even took some money from my bank. [The woman in question is named Toby Robinson, who in 2006 was appointed by the UN High Representative in Bosnia to liquidate Mandic’s bank. Interestingly, notes Wilcoxson, she got the job after her predecessor was beaten up and resigned.]

Much more here.

What’s to learn from this?

There’s a lesson a day here. I can’t even begin to scratch the surface. Just for starters:

Judicial corruption has been part of the human condition as long as we have had judges. That is why judges must always be accountable to the members of the public who may appear before them. When judges cannot be recalled from office by the citizenry, and when there is no practical way to remove judges who hold themselves above the law, or who prove to be incompetent, corrupt, cruel, or even insane, the situation quickly becomes intolerable. It is far worse when those judges are themselves tools of a corrupt governing body which serves at the behest of a foreign power. In this instance, the corrupt governing body is the Hague Tribunal, which is under US control. The Hague Tribunal was set up while Bill Clinton was president. But by now, the Obama Administration, with Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, has clearly lost the consent of the governed, and is, for the time being, accountable to no one.

While I have no sympathy for anyone involved in the Wikileaks debacle, including the New York Times, those leaks confirmed much that we already knew about the US government and its unwillingness to confront Islam. No, the Wikileaks documents released to the public do not go back far enough to reveal the evil that the Clinton Administration did to the Serbs. (Nor can we expect the same media organizations that had worked hand-in-glove with the Clinton Administration in smearing the Serbs so as to justify the war that the Clintons wanted, to release documents that would have exposed their own wrongdoing.) The Wikileaks documents do confirm that the government, and the news media, have been lying to us at every turn. They confirm that the US State Department is, at best, feckless and incompetent, as well as beholden to our Muslim adversaries. To put it bluntly, the US government threw the Serbs under the bus during the Clinton Administration to appease Muslim countries, and has kept them there ever since. We are now doing the very same thing to Israel, and it’s disgraceful.

If we, the American public, ever hope to win the war against Islamic aggression, we must stop persecuting the Christian Serbs on behalf of the jihadis in the Balkans. As long as we are fighting on both sides of the same war, we are going to lose that war. Yes, that means admitting we were wrong, with all that this implies. We must repent of our wrongdoing and stop being self-righteous. Will we try the Clintons and other politicians involved in this debacle for having participated in war crimes against the Serbs? What about the media shills who faked all sorts of flimsy evidence against the Serbs? What about George Soros, who bankrolled much of the effort? At the very least, can we expose their wrongdoing for all to see, to lessen the chance of it happening again anytime soon?

Originally posted at 2.0: The Blogmocracy

In ICJ Ruling: Blow to Serbia, Boon to Tadic, noted author and scholar Srdja Trifkovic explains that the current government in Serbia is, in effect, nothing but a puppet regime that is selling out the Serbian people, and Judaeo-Christian civilization in the Balkans, to jihadi forces in the Balkans.

The back story is that, ever since Reagan left office, the US, NATO, and the EU have worked to assist the jihadis to form a Muslim stronghold in the Balkans. Obviously, this is counter to the interests of the US and of the nations that form the EU. (See Bosnia and Kosovo export Muslim terrorism everywhere.) But our politicians and State Department bureaucrats do the bidding of Middle Eastern oil interests, George Soros, and other nefarious individuals and groups such as Muslim narcoterrorist drug gangs, who covertly bankroll prominent members of the elite in politics, academia, think tanks, the media, and other areas of influence.

As I have pointed out before, the UN is thoroughly corrupt. Just about all NGOs do the bidding of this transnational elite. That obviously includes supposedly “neutral” entities such as the ICJ. The bureaucrats who enjoy cushy jobs at NGOs know what side their bread is buttered on, and they also know what the consequences of defying their masters inevitably must be.

Because the current government in Belgrade is nothing but a powerless American puppet that does nothing to protect the interests of the Serbian people, it is no surprise that the Tadic government will use the decision of the ICJ as a way to try to sell the Serbian people on the idea that they had better give up Kosovo, and continue to throw the remaining Serbs stranded there, under the bus – or else.

As Dr. Trifkovic points out, the time frame is much longer than anybody in Washington or The Hague is capable of comprehending. Kosovo has been Serbian as long as the Serbs have existed, the truth will eventually come out, and God is not mocked.

ICJ Ruling: Blow to Serbia, Boon to Tadic
By Srdja Trifkovic
Thursday, July 22, 2010 – 13:20

Ever since the U.S. intervened in Serbia’s domestic politics two years ago and helped the current coalition take power in Belgrade, Boris Tadic and his cohorts have been looking for a way to capitulate on Kosovo while pretending not to. The formula was simple: place all diplomatic eggs in one basket – that of the International Court of Justice – and refrain from using any other political or economic (let alone military) tools at Serbia’s disposal. On July 22 the ICJ performed on cue, declaring that Kosovo’s UDI was not illegal.

It should be noted that the ICJ has only assessed Kosovo’s declaration of independence; it has not considered more widely Kosovo’s right to unilateral secession from Serbia. Furthermore, the ICJ has not assessed either the consequences of the adoption of the UDI, namely whether Kosovo is a state, or the legitimacy of its recognition by a number of countries. The ICJ decision was unsurprising in view of the self-defeating question which the UN General Assembly posed at Serbia’s request: “Is the unilateral declaration of independence by the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government of Kosovo in accordance with international law?” As a former British diplomat who knows the Balkans well has noted, international law takes no notice of declarations of independence, unilateral or otherwise; they are irrelevant:

[I]f the town council down the road here in the UK makes a solemn unilateral declaration of the town’s independence from the UK, the rest of us will make a wry smile and go back to blogging or working. The declaration is ‘in accordance’ with UK law – free speech and all that. [ ... ] If citizens of our town en masse support the declaration of independence, put up road-blocks, stop paying taxes to Westminster and proclaim Vladimir Putin their new king with his consent, things begin to get more interesting. Norms are being created and broken in all directions.

The ICJ has done more than its share of norm-creation. Its advisory opinion is deeply flawed and non-binding, but the government in Belgrade now has a perfect alibi for doing what it had intended to do all along.

Following the appointment of Vuk Jeremic as Serbia’s foreign minister in 2007, this outcome could be predicted with near-certainty. As President Boris Tadic’s chief foreign policy advisor, Jeremic came to Washington on 18 May 2005 to testify in Congress on why Kosovo should stay within Serbia. In his subsequent off-the-record conversations, however, he assured his hosts that the task was really to sugar-coat the bitter Kosovo pill that Serbia would have to swallow anyway.

Two years later another advisor to Tadic, Dr. Leon Kojen, resigned in a blaze of publicity after Austrian Chancellor Alfred Gusenbauer declared, on April 13, 2007, “We are working with Boris Tadic and his people to find a way to implement the essence of the Ahtisaari plan.” Tout Belgrade knew that “Tadic’s people” meant—Vuk Jeremic. Gusenbauer’s indiscretion amounted to the revelation that Serbia’s head of state and his closest advisor were engaged in secret negotiations aimed at facilitating the detachment of Kosovo from Serbia—which, of course, was “the essence of the Ahtisaari plan.” Jeremic’s quest for sugar-coating of the bitter pill was evidently in full swing even before he came to the helm of Serbia’s diplomacy.

In the intervening three years Tadic and Jeremic have continued to pursue a dual-track policy on Kosovo. The decisive fruit of that policy was their disastrous decision to accept the European Union’s Eulex Mission in Kosovo in December 2008. Acting under an entirely self-created mandate, the EU thus managed to insert its mission, based explicitly on the provisions of the Ahtissari Plan, into Kosovo with Belgrade’s agreement.

That was the moment of Belgrade’s true capitulation. Everything else — the ICJ ruling included — is just a choreographed farce…

The ICJ opinion crowns two decades of U.S. policy in the former Yugoslavia that has been mendacious and iniquitous in equal measure. By retroactively condoning the Albanian UDI, the Court has made a massive leap into the unknown. That leap is potentially on par with Austria’s July 1914 ultimatum to Serbia. The fruits will be equally bitter.

Aiding and abetting Muslim designs in the Balkans, in the hope that this will earn some credit for the United States in the Islamic world, has been a major motive of American policy in the region since at least 1992. It has never yielded any dividends, of course, but repeated failure only prompts the architects of the policy to redouble their efforts.

It is virtually certain that Washington will be equally supportive of an independent Sanjak that would connect Kosovo with Bosnia, or of any other putative Islamistan, from western Macedonia to southern Bulgaria (“Eastern Rumelia”) to the Caucasus. The late Tom Lantos must be smiling approvingly wherever he is now, having called, three years ago, on “Jihadists of all color and hue” to take note of “yet another example that the United States leads the way for the creation of a predominantly Muslim country in the very heart of Europe.”

In the region, the ICJ verdict will encourage two distinct but interconnected trends: greater-Albanian aspirations against Macedonia, Montenegro, Greece, and rump-Serbia (Preševo), and pan-Islamic agitation for the completion of the Green Corridor – an Islamic belt anchored in Asia Minor and extending north-westward across the Balkans into the heart of Central Europe.

Beyond the Balkans, it will breed instability in each and every potential or actual separatist hotspot, from Galilee to Kashmir, from the Caucasus to Sinkiang.

Kosovo is now an expensive albatross costing American and European taxpayers a few billion a year. It will continue developing, not as a functional economy but as a black hole of criminality and terrorism. The ever-rising and constantly unfulfilled expectations of its unemployable multitudes will eventually turn – Frankenstein’s monster-like – against the entity’s creator. There will be many Ft. Dixes to come, over there and here at home.

God acts in mysterious ways. Kosovo had remained Serbian during those five long centuries of Ottoman darkness, to be liberated in 1912. It is no less Serbian now, the ugly farce in Priština and at The Hague notwithstanding. It will be tangibly Serbian again when the current experiment in global hegemonism collapses, and when the very names of its potentates and servants – Boris Tadic and Vuk Jeremic included – are consigned to the Recycle Bin of history.

Here’s the same article in Serbian.

Be sure to visit The Lord Byron Foundation for Balkan Studies to read many other articles about the Balkans counterjihad and how US and EU foreign policy has consistently favored our jihadi enemies.

Blog author Sparta received the following email:

By Stephen Karganovic[1]

The aggressive Srebrenica lobby has been having some difficulties lately. It is not used to its demands being ignored or – worse yet – defied. But it seems that its increasingly obnoxious attempts to force-feed the world its version of events in Srebrenica in July of 1995 and to impose permanent global grief on people who had nothing to do with them are finally arousing some long overdue resistance.

A case in point to what absurd lengths the lobby is prepared to go were its infantile demands for the final World Cup soccer game in South Africa, scheduled for July 11, to be suspended to honor Srebrenica “genocide victims.” When that did not work, Bosnian Moslem lobbying groups signaled their readiness to settle for one minute of silence. But the World soccer association, FIFA, would not even have any of that, either. In a polite, but firm response, Srebrenica lobbyists were told that game will go on as scheduled, without the injection of any Balkan political overtones. Sarajevo was furious, but there was not much that it could do about it.

An equally unexpected and “disappointing” development was Canadian prime minister Stephen Harper’s refusal to endorse a Srebrenica resolution. Since his coalition has a majority in parliament, notwithstanding the impotent fulminations from Sarajevo and its local Canadian outfit, “Institute for Genocide Research,”[2] that effectively took the proposal off the table as far as parliament was concerned, at least for now. Again, the lobby was dealt a setback it is not used to and it does not quite know how to handle it.

The course of the Ganić extradition case in London may also cautiously be regarded as a sign of increasing ennui in the West with the Srebrenica lobby’s campaign to make everyone march to its tune. Serbia’s pro-Western client government did not really expect its pro forma Interpol arrest warrant for Ganić’s arrest to be honored anywhere and it was therefore caught by surprise when British authorities took Ganić into custody at Heathrow airport a few weeks ago. The amateurishly prepared evidence to back the extradition request, that was initially submitted by Belgrade, bore eloquent witness to that. Not that the charges were frivolous. Ejup Ganić, a member of Bosnia’s wartime Presidency, stands accused of organizing and ordering the lethal attack on a column of unarmed Yugoslav National Army soldiers who were evacuating their barracks in Sarajevo on May 3, 1992, after safe passage guarantees were solemnly given. Forty-two soldiers, mostly conscripts, were killed in murderous cross-fire and seventy were wounded. Two hundred and seven were taken prisoner and subsequently released, many after being subjected to humiliation and torture.

The fact that the British court is giving the matter lengthy and thorough review, notwithstanding Belgrade’s confused reaction, belies Sarajevo’s original expectations that the matter would be resolved quickly with Ganić’s complete vindication and triumphant return home. Regardless of the ultimate ruling in the case, the mere fact that Belgrade’s extradition request was not summarily discarded and that the Bosnian „statesman“ must undergo the lengthy rigours of a court procedure to sort out his responsibility for some rather grave offences, like General Pinochet before him, or any other similarly situated mortal, sends a clear signal that the free ride for the West’s favorite victims may be over.

This string of bitter reverses in the fields of sports, politics, and jurisprudence was ameliorated just in time by the long-expected ICTY judgment in the Popović et al. Case, made public on June 10. Not that there were any major surprises in the court’s findings: Serbian officers guilty, genocide, 7.000 to 8.000 victims, and all the rest. There is, however, one important novelty in the judgment. It is the shift from standard forensics[3] to the cutting edge technique of DNA analysis as the primary tool for dealing with the identification and quantification of exhumed human remains which constitute the corpus delicti of the Srebrenica case. In the Popović verdict, the chamber offers the following conclusions:

“Based on the evidence, the Trial Chamber has found that at least 5.336 identified individuals were killed in the executions following the fall of Srebrenica. However, noting that the evidence before it is not all encompassing, the Trial Chamber is satisfied that the number of identified individuals will rise. The Trial Chamber therefore considers that the number of individuals killed in the executions following the fall of Srebrenica could well be as high as 7.826.”[4]

The actual number of victims is a key aspect of the Srebrenica controversy and it goes also to the issue of genocide. It is manifestly incorrect to argue that provided the genocidal dolus specialis is demonstrated, even a handful of victims will do, so what is all the fuss about whether 8.000 or some other number were executed? In fact, it was precisely in the Krstić case that the chamber accepted the thesis that the “scale of killing,” i.e. numbers, was germane to genocidal intent.[5]

The real issue never was the courts’ attempts, provided they were in good faith, to determine the number of victims, but rather the methodologies they used in going about it. In both Krstić and Popović cases no attempt is made to disguise the fact that the “7.000 to 8.000” number of victims is sacrosanct and that evidence must be adjusted to fit that numerical target, rather than vice versa. It is thus that in Krstić the chamber claims, falsely as it turns out, that 2.208 Srebrenica bodies had been found at the time of judgment, and adds, quite absurdly, that in the opinion of unnamed experts 4.805 additional bodies supposedly relevant to the case lay in yet unexhumed mass graves. In relation to the critically important issue of numbers, it thus follows that the Krstić judgment was based not on a fact, but on a prognosis. Needless to say, ten years have passed since then but the predicted additional bodies have failed to materialise.

In testimony to the fact that nothing is new under the sun, or at least at ICTY, we now see the Popović chamber engaging in the same type of legal soothsaying in an attempt to gloss over the critical lack of executed bodies. The chamber notes that „the evidence before it is not all encompassing“ but since the magic figure of 8.000 must be reached by hook or by crook, it simply proclaims its conviction „that the number of individuals killed in the executions following the fall of Srebrenica could well be as high as 7.826.”

It would be useful to first review the grounds upon which that “conviction” is based and, indeed, the entire fabric of the chamber’s reasoning in this segment of its verdict before deciding whether to take its conclusions too seriously.

For starters, it would be a good idea to ask where the data on which the chamber’s conclusions are based comes from. The answer is in par. 638 et passim of the Popović judgment. The data come from the International Committee for Missing Persons [ICMP], an NGO based in Tuzla, Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina. ICMP’s website projects the image of a benign humanitarian organization whose mission is to apply science, in this case DNA, to identify dead victims of the Bosnian conflict and to provide solace and closure to suirviving relatives. All fine and good. But there may be more to ICMP than meets the eye.

ICMP’s independence is debatable. It was formed in 1996 at the G-7 Summit in Lyon, France, at the initiative of US President Bill Clinton. The list of its chairmen so far reads like a US establishment Who is who. Its first chairman was former secretary of state Cyrus Vance, 1996-1997, followed by Bob Dole, 1997-2001. ICMP’s current chairman, „philantropist“ James Kimsey, used to be the chairman of America Online.

But is that meticulously nurtured humanitarian profile realistic, or is it but another Srebrenica illusion? The probability of the latter option is enhanced when one considers that the chairman of ICMP is appointed by none other than the Secretary of State of the United States. As we learn from State Department press release of May 11, 2001:

„Secretary Powell has appointed Jim Kinsey as the new US chairperson of the International Committee for Missing Persons (ICMP), the leading organisation involved in the identification of remains of people killed in recernt conflicts in the Balkans. Mr. Kinsey isd the Founding CEO and Chauirman Emeritus of America Online Inc.“

Though ICMP’s public image projects the impression of a classical NGO with purely humanitarian objectives, based on the mechanism whereby its management is appointed at least a conflict of interest issue could be raised. Not only that, but while fullfilling its mission it would seem that ICMP is not accountable to any scientific or juridical body. In the opinion of US political analyst George Pumphrey:

„It is a wing of the US State Department and publishes a ’nímport quoi’ to serve the propaganda interests of its masters. Many of their reports are so ambuguously worded that even if someone would attempt to verify their announcements, it would be impossible, because one is not sure if they are speaking of whole corpses or of pieces of corpses.“

Lack of accountability and its corollary, unverifiability, are indeed the salient features of ICMP’s work. ICMP’s data have never been seen or tested by independent experts, even in court settings where they were officially presented in evidence, such as in the Popović case. That took place in closed session and under severely restrictive conditions which did not allow the defence either the time or the resources for a comprehensive expert review of ICMP’s results. But as we learn, if true, those results are in fact quite sensational: 6,481 Srebrenica victims currently identified, and enough evidence leading ICMP to support an estimate of altogether around 8,100 individuals missing from the fall of Srebrenica in July 1995.[6]

That is practically on the mark. In short, according to this, ICMP has cracked the Srebrenica case and put skeptics out of business.

If ICMP’s word is all that is required to show that, it may well be true. All requests for DNA profile matches and other pertinent data to be disclosed to be reviewed by independent experts are politely but firmly declined by ICMP. Its secretiveness is justified on the grounds that allowing public access to the data would be an insensitive act that would result in great indignity to the victims and compound the pain of the survivors. It claims that its hands in the matter are tied and that it can release the data only if the survivors would give their written permission. How likely is it in the Balkans that they ever would?

It seems that ICMP’s penchant for guarding the “privacy” of its data does go excessively far, even absurdly so. When Radovan Karadžić asked to be given access to their data for verification purposes, it came to light that in fact he was not precisely being discriminated against because the prosecution revealed that they, also, were denied proper access. Prosecutor Hildegard Uertz-Retzlaff made the astonishing statement that “ICMP did not share DNA data with us, either. So it is not correct that they gave it to us, but not to others.”[7]

Reliance on ICMP findings is, therefore, little better then faith-based jurisprudence.

But even if protestations of privacy on behalf of family members who donated blood samples are to be accepted at face value, now that the 5,336 identified victim figure has been enshrined in the official judgment, it would seem simple and convenient to allay doubts by publishing at least the first and last names of all the 5,336 individuals involved. The publication of such a list is indispensable to verify, first of all, if the persons in question ever existed: if they did, whether they are really dead: and if they are dead, whether their deaths had anything to do with the execution of war prisoners in Srebrenica in July of 1995.

That ought not to offend anyone’s sensibilities because thousands of names of alleged Srebrenica victims have already been carved onto a huge slab of stone at the Potočari Memorial Centre, to be seen by everyone. The publication of these names of victims supposedly identified by DNA would not only be quite sensational, it would also make further forms of verification possible. Unfortunately, no such list is appended to the judgment or seems to be forthcoming.

But the Chamber’s biggest problem in this regard is not its failure to name the identified individuals (identification, it should be recalled, means assigning a first and last name rather than a number to each individual.) Nor is it even its cavalier prediction, reminiscent of the failed forecast in the Krstić judgment, that “the number of individuals killed in the executions following the fall of Srebrenica could well be as high as 7.826. It is, rather, that the Chamber is apparently ignorant of how DNA works and of what it can and cannot do.

That ignorance is reflected in the Chamber’s mystifying finding that “at least 5,336 identified individuals were killed in the executions following the fall of Srebrenica”, which is a scientific impossibility. By matching samples taken from the deceased person to biological material donated by the potential blood relative, DNA procedure can establish, with various degrees of certainty, the deceased’s probable identity. But in terms that are relevant to criminal liability it can do nothing more than that. It cannot help determine the time and manner of death. The deceased whose first and last name might indeed be established as a result of a successful match, could have been killed in combat, in an accident, or could have died of natural causes, and it could have happened in Srebrenica or someplace else. The casual suggestion made by the Chamber, that the 5,336 identified individuals “were killed in the executions following the fall of Srebrenica” is scientifically unwarranted and, as any biology student could inform the Chamber, it is absurd on its face. No one can make such a determination based on DNA data without exposing themselves to enormous ridicule.

But this is exactly the determination which the Chamber was obliged to make, because without the time and manner of death claim to go with it, the pompously announced DNA identification evidence is quite useless for conviction purposes.

It may be argued that the Chamber acted most unwisely by embracing the DNA approach without at least consulting a biology student about its usefulness before doing so. Once this segment of the judgment is subjected to thorough critical analysis, ICTY will discover that it will get even less in terms of evidence that can withstand critical analysis than was the case with the apparently jettisoned standard forensic approach. The standard approach at least had yielded 947 potential execution victims (442 with blindfolds and ligatures, plus 505 with bullet injuries). The methodology shift to DNA is incapable of demonstrating a single culpable death in terms of legally relevant criteria. It seeks to impress with the aura of high tech, but like any bluff it can last only as long as it remains unchallenged or, in this case, unexamined.

“ICMP’s identification techniques directly undermine revisionist attempts to deny mass atrocities,” crowed ICMP’s Director-General, Kathryn Bomberger. “By providing irrefutable evidence on victims’ identities, the ICMP helps judicial institutions bring war crime perpetrators to justice, restores victims’ humanity and dignity and brings a sense of closure for their surviving family members. These family members have a right to information concerning the fate and whereabouts of their loved ones”.[8]

One can only feel sad for international justice as long as it is stuck with astute legal minds of the caliber of those who composed the laughable Popović judgment, and as long as in evidentiary matters they continue to be assisted by charlatans such as Kathryn Bomberger.

---

Footnotes:

[1] President of the Dutch NGO Srebrenica Historical Project.

[2] The autonomy of this institution on Canadian soil, not to mention its academic pretensions, may well be questioned. It turns out that the Canada-based Institute for the Research of Genocide was founded by an act of the Institute for the Research of Crimes Against Humanity and International Law at the University of Sarajevo as recently as August 2009 (http://www.instituteforgenocide.ca/about/).

[3] In the previous Srebrenica trials, Krstić and Blagojević asnd Jokić, the forensic evidence consisted of autopsy reports based on the examination of exhumed post-mortem remains. A critique of the Tribunal’s interpretation of that data was published by Dr. Ljubiša Simić, http://www.srebrenica-project.com/DOWNLOAD/post%20mortem/Forensic%20analysis%20of%20post-mortem%20reports.doc

[4] Prosecutor v. Popović et al., see par. 793, par. 837, and footnote 2862.

[5] Prosecutor v. Krstić, Appelate judgment, par. 35.

[6] http://www.instituteforgenocide.ca/6481-srebrenica-genocide-victims-identified-through-dna-science

[7] ICTY, Prosecutor v. Karadžić, Status conference, July 23, 2009, Transcript p. 364, lines 21-23.

[8] Radio Netherlands Worldwide, July 9, 2010: http://www.rnw.nl/english/bulletin/over-6400-dead-srebrenica-muslims-identified

OK, some of you still don’t get it! We had an Islamic attack on US military base, and the clueless US news media are treating it like an ordinary crime. The reports/commentators are trying to figure out why this Muslim soldier (who happens to wear a US Army uniform) on a suicide mission opened fire on American troops. It was a fairly obvious suicide mission. Just like the suicide bombers in the Middle East and the 911 attack, Muslims have infiltrated the US military and will be doing their best to give comfort and aid to radical Islam, which has declared war on these United States. (For those of you who speak, “Ya’ll,” I do mean all 50 of those States.)

The American media, once again, is proving that it is nothing more then the propaganda arm of the tyrannical dictatorship in Washington, D.C. True, you do get an election to choose the dictatorship’s figurehead for the next four years, and to pick the 535 power-mad flunkies who have let the real governance of the United States fall into the hands of thousands of unelected federal bureaucrats who are accountable to nobody.

Let’s examine the facts. Nidal Malik Hasan, the shooter, is a radical Muslim. He has been an outspoken supporter of radical Islamic causes. He has been in the US Army for a long period of time and knows the system well. He used that knowledge to kill a number of US troops and wound others. To wear a US uniform and support an enemy cause is a clear act of espionage. Of course, in the heavily controlled US press, no one would dare to point out this obvious fact.

Radical Islam is has been openly at war with the US since 1979, if not before. Yes, it has been thirty years since radical Muslims invaded US soil, namely the US Embassy in Iran, and took over 400 Americans hostage. President Jimmy Carter, one of the most clueless men ever to hold that office in US history, pussy-footed around, so that many of those Americans were not released until Ronald Reagan took office.

Reagan, with his hands firmly on the nuclear trigger, kept radical Islam at bay, but in radical Islamic circles, the hatred of America never ended. Reagan focused on “winning the Cold War.” He did so, but instead of using direct conflict, he pressured and cajoled the Soviets into slowly giving up Communism, thus freeing Eastern Europe from the clutches of left-wing tyranny. (On behalf of all non-Communist Slavic people, Mr. Reagan, please accept a “thank you” from this Czech-American.)

From then on, our position with radical Islam went downhill. The supposed “Third Reagan Term” was a dismal failure. Bush 41, sided with Islamic forces, and chose to help “break up the former Yugoslavia.” What that really meant was that after considerable Islamic violence, which he quietly but wholeheartedly supported, many Christians are now living under Islamic tyranny in the Balkans. Of course, the clueless American media, the abysmally corrupt US State Department, and many gullible Americans still believe that the Christian people of Serbian heritage did some horrible things to these “poor defenseless Muslims.” Nearly two decades of State Department and mainstream media efforts to dig up dirt against the Serbs have unearthed no credible evidence. On the contrary, there is overwhelming evidence that radical Islam and other outside influences not only set up this conflict in the Balkans, but also kept it going until they gained a jihadist stronghold in Europe. Thus, while the Roosevelt Administration helped liberate Europe from the Nazis, and the Reagan Administration helped liberate Eastern Europe from the Communists, the first Bush Administration helped the Muslim terrorists get a foothold in re-conquering the Balkans.

The Clinton Administration continued to coddle radical Islam, going so far as to use the US Air Force to aid and abet the radical Muslim terrorists in Bosnia, Albania and Kosovo. In addition, the Clinton Administration suckered and arm-twisted other nations to contribute their own air forces to aid in the terror-bombing of those who opposed the spread of radical Islam in the Balkans. While the controversy raged about the Clinton Administration’s eagerness to populate the US military with out-of-the-closet homosexuals, the public eye was distracted from the fact that radical Muslims were infiltrating the US armed forces. Of course, during the entire eight years of the Clinton Administration, reports of Islamic attacks on the US, and reports of attempted attacks, continued to trickle into the news.

It is likely that the most successful Islamic attack during the Clinton regime was the bombing of the Oklahoma Federal Building. On the day of the bombing, the US media at first focused the blame on Islamic terrorists. But then, the memo must have gone out to the closely government-controlled US media, so that the blame immediately shifted to US patriots who abide by the original intentions of the Framers of the United States Constitution and support their independent state militia. (No, the Framers were NOT referring to the state police or the National Guard.)

So, what was the payoff for twelve years of coddling radical Islam? What was the real legacy of both Bush 41 and Bill Clinton? The 911 attack, of course! By then, the Muslims had another oilman ally back in the White House, but jihadists have a habit of biting the hands that feed them. Bush 43, being both a former governor of the oil-rich state of Texas, and a close friend of the Saudi royal family and even of the bin Laden family, was not about to admit that we were at war with radical Islam. Instead, he declared war on “terrorism.” At the time, one commentator suggested that this would have been as silly as FDR asking Congress for a declaration of war against aircraft carriers on December 8, 1941. Terrorism is a weapon of war, not an enemy that one can declare war against. Radical Islam has declared war on the US several times during the last 30 years. A fatwa, after all, is an open declaration of war that is also an immediate and ongoing mobilization order. If the Muslim jihadists thought they could fight and win a conventional war against the US, they would do just that. Because they cannot, they use terrorism as their weapon instead.

The current Administration is an abomination. (Perhaps that should be spelled O-b-a-m-a-N-a-t-i-o-n.) A foreign-born immigrant from Africa serves as the United States President, illegally. He is allowed to hide behind his dark skin because all his critics are automatically accused of “racism.” So if you dare criticize his social agenda that is somewhere to the left of Karl Marx, or if you question his coddling of radical Islam, or even if you could not in good conscience vote for him because of his position on abortion, you run the risk of being labeled “racist.” (Note that the author of this article has been much harsher on Obama’s three white processors in this piece, but nevertheless, liberal propagandists with their “bigot” label will be complaining about this article).

Of course, all four of these administrations have used these Islamic attacks as just another pretext to restrict the freedoms of US citizens. Recently, I took my first airline flight since the 911 attack. The way I was treated was totally unbecoming a citizen of the US. Being disabled and unable to walk through metal detectors, I was made to balance precariously while being publicly patted down like a common criminal. The search was so invasive that the lady travelers in my party were aghast.

So, expect more Muslims in the US military to “go postal.” After all, this Nidal Malik Hasan is being passed off as a crazy man who lost control because he was being deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan. Expect the US media to continue to pass off these Islamic attacks on US soil as “random acts of violence.” Expect the US military forces to fight in Islamic countries, supporting one group of Muslims over another. Expect the US media and US government to continue side with Muslim terrorists in Eastern Europe, as they have in both Russia and the Balkans. And, of course, if you are a US citizen, expect to lose more of your rights and freedoms.

The US people should be demanding the following actions:

1. That the United State Congress declare war on radical Islam;
2. That a Constitutional Amendment be ratified declaring that Islam is not a religion, but an enemy ideology, and that it is not to enjoy the protection of the First Amendment or of any other law guaranteeing unabated religious freedom;
3. That no Muslim immigration into the US be allowed until the war against radical Islam has been won;
4. That all Muslims in the US military should be investigated intensively and be required to state publicly that their belief in Islam shall never be used to disobey any order or to commit any act against the US, and that they be required to renounce all individuals, by name, such as Osama bin Laden, who oppose the non-Islamic world and all organizations, such as al-Qaeda and Hamas, who support violence against non-Islamic countries (anyone refusing to do so is obviously a danger to the US military);
5. That dangerous radical Muslims be interned, similar to the detainment of radical Japanese nationals and Japanese-Americans who openly declared their loyalty to the Emperor of Japan over that of the US during World War II;
6. That the rights and freedoms of non-Muslim US citizens be restored;
7. That their respective States each declare its sovereignty; or declare independence from the US federal government.

Albert Einstein:

Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I’m not sure about the universe.

Kosovo Establishes Islamic Heroin Republic With EU & US Blessing

Caliphate News Networx & Al BeBeeCeera report LIVE:

Young ethnic Albanians (Muslims) celebrate Kosovo’s coming independence in Pristina yesterday. Check out the keffiyeh on the right.

Atlas Shrugs has more

Too Late: EURABIA is happening right now!

Thanx to the despicable Willie Cl*tman, who bombed the Christan Serbs in order to curry favor with Arab-Muhammedans, the Balkan-Mujaheddin will now move towards the final solution For now, we run these articles again:

• Kosovo: Islamic Heroin Republic With America’s Blessing?
• Kosovo Mon Amour: Willie Cl*tman’s Shameful Legacy
• Ethnic Cleansing Threat To Serbs in Kosovo

Bin Laden Mosque in Kosovo:

• Jihad against the Jews
• Wahabis: Replacing last of Kosovo deported Jews
• “Muslims are masters of the world, its leaders and teachers, even if the West rejects this.”
• Kosovo, Mon Amour P1

Why are the Serbs – whom apart from the Jews were the major victims of the Holocaust during World War 2 – being cast as the perpetrators of genocide while the real perpetrators of genocide – the Islamofascists loyal to Alija Izetbegovic – are being cast by the corporate media, the US, NATO and EU governments as “the victims”?

Why was Naser Oric – the Islamofascist commander of Srebrenica and perpetrator of a massive genocide against Serbian men, women and children in Srebrenica from 1992 to 1995 – given only a 2 year sentence for this monumental crime against humanity and allowed to walk free from NATO’s Scheveningen ICTY prison: the former Nazi SS dungeon for patriotic Dutch resistance fighters against the Germans during World War 2 in The Hague, Holland?

Israpundit has more.

History of Jihad against the Serbs, Croats, and Albanians
[1389 to 1920]

Update:
The “morally superior” Lizard King will never know where it’s at

Kosovo declares independence from Serbia.

Kosovo Serb Migration before Ottomans, 18th c.

Illustrated P.I.G.: ‘Can’t see blood’ on LGF

Lost in Lala-land:

Charles Johnson:

‘I’m not sure whose side to root for in the ethnic Albanian, Kosovo-Serbia morass—there are killers on all sides—and today’s news from Kosovo leaves me with mixed feelings: Kosovo declares independence from Serbia.’

May as well join the Koz Kidz, Charles, what’s the difference?

If the Lizard King doesn’t know which way to root that means the Lizard Army is rooted, no?

A Lizard comment:

‘They seem to be very pro-America.’

America enabled them. Just because they wave American flags means exactly nothing. Now just go there and wave some Muhammad cartoons, and watch them love you…

FoxNews Slide show

Another one:

‘Can’t be all that bad. Very few cultures that don’t have blood on their hands…. ‘

Right. that makes us all equal. Forrest Gump has spoken!

Killgore Trout, chief of the Lizard brain police, has the right spirit:

‘Can we start recommending deletion of comments denying Serbian war crimes?’

Here Charley, a link just for you:

Fleeing Serbs

Looting Muslim Female

Atlas Shrugs: Cl*tman bombed the wrong people

Bush is no better. But this was torture:

Dancing with terrorists. Not too bright…

Madeline Albright:
“It’s Wrong for US to use Terms Like Islamic Terrorists or Fundamentalists”….

(Thanx to Zip)

Sucking up to terrorists:

Photo above: Secretary Alb***h greets Hashim Thaci, UCK leader August 1999, after the war

Update (Dveri Srpske):
Serbs demonstrate in front of US Embassy in Belgrade yesterday

Julia Gorin:
Islamic Countries will be First to Recognize Independent Kosovo

Israel Matzav:
Why Israel’s supporters should care about Kosovo

Strong American support for the independence of Kosovo is detrimental to Israeli interests. The US position is based on the view that a solution to long-standing conflict can and should be imposed on the parties by outside powers. In addition, the new state’s creation seeks to award part of a nation’s territory to a violent ethno-religious minority; futilely hopes to curry favor with the Islamic world through appeasement; effectively gives a fresh impetus to the ongoing growth of Islamic influence in Europe; and denies the fact that the putative state’s leaders are tainted by terrorism, criminality, and well-documented links with global jihad. Most importantly, it betrays a cynically postmodern contempt for all claims based on the historical rights and spiritual significance of a land to a nation. (More…)

Bookmark Winds of Jihad.

Or subscribe to the Winds of Jihad feed.

More:

• Kosovo: The Bush Rush to an Islamic State in Europe
• United States and United Nations help steal Kosovo
• After the Holocaust, we Asked God: “How, Lord, oh HOW Could this have Happened? How could the World Let this Happen?
• Kosovo Gains Independence
• Pro-Albanian Blog: “Albania is Free!” (OOPS!)