The man behind the underwear bomber and the Fort Hood murderer is gone!

From The Australian:

RADICAL US-born cleric Anwar al-Awlaki has been killed with several other suspected al-Qa’ida operatives, the Yemeni defence ministry said tonight.

The ministry did not elaborate on the circumstances of Awlaki’s death in a statement released to the media.

A senior US official confirmed Awlaki’s death.

“I can confirm… he’s dead,” the senior administration official said, without providing further details.

But tribal sources said Awlaki, who was on a US wanted list, was killed in an air strike which hit two vehicles in Marib province, an al-Qa’ida stronghold in eastern Yemen, early today.

One tribal source said the plane that carried out the strike was likely to be American, adding that US aircraft had been patrolling the skies over Marib for the past several days.

The Yemeni defence ministry had previously announced Awlaki’s death late last year.

On December 24, the Yemeni government said he had been killed in an air strike only to admit later that he was still alive.

In February, the director of the US National Counterterrorism Centre, Michael Leiter, told US members of congress that Awlaki probably posed “the most significant risk” to the United States.

Awlaki, a US-Yemeni citizen who had eluded capture for years, was believed to be a key leader of al-Qa’ida in the Arabian Peninsula.

In April last year, a US official said President Barack Obama’s administration had authorised the targeted killing of Awlaki, after American intelligence agencies concluded the cleric was directly involved in anti-US plots.

US intelligence officials believe Awlaki was linked to a US army major who allegedly shot dead 13 people in Fort Hood, Texas, and to a Nigerian student accused of trying to blow up a US airliner on December 25, 2009.

And disloyalty to every other non-Muslim country.

Abdo’s Loyalty to Muslims Always Meant Disloyalty to Americans

By Raymond Ibrahim

To anyone familiar with Muslim doctrine, Pfc. Naser Jason Abdo’s actions — from refusing to deploy to Afghanistan lest he kill fellow Muslims to plotting a terror attack to kill fellow Americans — make perfect sense and accord well with Islam’s dichotomous doctrine of wala wa bara, often translated as “loyalty and enmity.”

Built atop numerous Koran verses and backed by Sharia, wala requires Muslims to be loyal to fellow Muslims, and explains why Abdo refused to deploy to Muslim nations.

While loyalty may appear admirable, it has a flipside, bara, which requires Muslims to disassociate themselves from non-Muslims — to be disloyal to them (see al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri’s 60 page treatise titled “Loyalty and Enmity” in The Al Qaeda Reader for details).

For example, Koran 5:51 literally warns Muslims against “taking the Jews and Christians as friends and allies … whoever among you takes them for friends and allies, he is surely one of them,” i.e., he becomes an infidel; 58:22 states that true Muslims do not befriend non-Muslims — “even if they be their fathers, sons, brothers, or kin.”

Now consider the progress of Abdo and how his actions reveal great doctrinal consistency:

First, he objected to participating in any war in any Muslim country, claiming “conscientious objector” status:

I don’t believe I can involve myself in an army that wages war against Muslims. I don’t believe I could sleep at night if I take part, in any way, in the killing of a Muslim. … I can’t deploy with my unit to Afghanistan and participate in the war — I can’t both deploy and be a Muslim.

He would not be the first to object to combating fellow Muslims: Major Nidal Hasan, who went on a shooting spree in Fort Hood in 2009, killing thirteen —and who Abdo heroizes — considered himself to be “a Muslim first and an American second”; the idea of deploying to a Muslim nation, his “worst nightmare,” threw him “over the edge.” Then there was Sergeant Hasan Akbar, who killed two American soldiers and wounded fourteen in Kuwait “because he was concerned U.S. troops would kill fellow Muslims in Iraq.”

Next, though Abdo had no problem openly evincing loyalty to Muslims, trusting that tolerant or sentimental Americans would indulge him, he hid his enmity and disloyalty for those same Americans, in accordance to taqiyya — a doctrine that permits Muslims to deceive infidels. In fact, the Koran’s primary justification for deception is in the context of “loyalty and enmity”:

Let believers not take for friends and allies infidels [non-Muslims] instead of believers. Whoever does this shall have no relationship left with Allah — unless you but guard yourselves against them, taking precautions (3:28).

Mainstream Muslim reference Tabari interprets this verse thusly:

Only when you are in their [non-Muslims’] power, fearing for yourselves, are you to demonstrate friendship for them with your tongues, while harboring hostility toward them. But do not join them in the particulars of their infidelities, and do not aid them through any action against a Muslim.

[…]
More here.

The ONLY answer is mass deportation of Muslims – as politically incorrect as that may seem.

Any American-born individual who embraces Islam should be considered a stateless person and a subversive.

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?

Just askin’.

Obama, Netanyahu Meet Amid Discord Over 1967 Borders

(h/t: huckfunn)

President Obama welcomed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to the White House Friday, one day after the president’s policy speech on the Arab world and Israeli-Palestinian relations called for a return to pre-1967 borders, a state Mr. Netanyahu called “indefensible.” After a closed door meeting, Netanyahu reiterated that “Israel has certain security requirements.”

If you can decipher the polite diplomatic terminology, Bibi told Ubama, in no uncertain terms, that he will not compromise Israel’s security by capitulating to any of BO’s demands, and that’s that.

Good for Bibi. Unlike BO, he loves his own country and he understands what his duties are.

Caroline Glick: Obama’s Abandonment of America

(h/t: Speranza)

I was out sick yesterday so I was unable to write today’s column for the Jerusalem Post. I did manage to watch President Obama’s speech on the Middle East yesterday evening. And I didn’t want to wait until next week to discuss it. After all, who knows what he’ll do by Tuesday?

Before we get into what the speech means for Israel, it is important to consider what it means for America.

Quite simply, Obama’s speech represents the effective renunciation of the US’s right to have and to pursue national interests. Consequently, his speech imperils the real interests that the US has in the region – first and foremost, the US’s interest in securing its national security.

Obama’s renunciation of the US national interests unfolded as follows:

First, Obama mentioned a number of core US interests in the region. In his view these are: “Countering terrorism and stopping the spread of nuclear weapons; securing the free flow of commerce, and safe-guarding the security of the region; standing up for Israel’s security and pursuing Arab-Israeli peace.”

Then he said, “Yet we must acknowledge that a strategy based solely upon the narrow pursuit of these interests will not fill an empty stomach or allow someone to speak their mind.”

While this is true enough, Obama went on to say that the Arabs have good reason to hate the US and that it is up to the US to put its national interests aside in the interest of making them like America. As he put it, “a failure to change our approach threatens a deepening spiral of division between the United States and Muslim communities.”

And you know what that means. If the US doesn’t end the “spiral of division,” (sounds sort of like “spiral of violence” doesn’t it?), then the Muslims will come after America. So the US better straighten up and fly right.

And how does it do that? Well, by courting the Muslim Brotherhood which spawned Al Qaeda, Hamas, Jamma Islamiya and a number of other terror groups and is allies with Hezbollah.
[...]
The fact is that if you don’t distinguish between your allies and your enemies then you betray your allies and side with your enemies. Bahrain and Yemen need US support to survive. Iran and Syria do not. So when he removes US support from the former, his action redounds to the direct benefit of the latter.

I hope the US Navy’s 5th Fleet has found alternate digs because Obama just opened the door for Iran to take over Bahrain. He also invited al Qaeda – which he falsely claimed is a spent force – to take over Yemen.

Beyond his abandonment of Bahrain and Yemen, in claiming that the US mustn’t distinguish between its allies and its foes, Obama made clear that he has renounced the US’s right to have and pursue national interests. If you can’t favor your allies against your enemies then you cannot defend your national interests. And if you cannot defend your national interests then you renounce your right to have them.
[...]
In short, every American who is concerned about the security of the United States should be livid. The US President just abandoned his responsibility to defend the country and its interests in the interest of coddling the US’s worst enemies.

AS FOR ISRAEL, in a way, Obama did Israel a favor by giving this speech. By abandoning even a semblance of friendliness, he has told us that we have nothing whatsoever to gain by trying to make him like us. Obama didn’t even say that he would oppose the Palestinians’ plan to get the UN Security Council to pass a resolution in support for Palestinian independence. All he said was that it is a dumb idea.

Obama sided with Hamas against Israel by acting as though its partnership with Fatah is just a little problem that has to be sorted out to reassure the paranoid Jews.
[...]
Then of course there are all the hostile, hateful details of his [Obama's] speech:

He said Israel has to concede its right to defensible borders as a precondition for negotiations;

He didn’t say he opposes the Palestinian demand for open immigration of millions of foreign Arabs into Israel;

He again ignored Bush’s 2004 letter to Sharon opposing a return to the 1949 armistice lines, supporting the large settlements, defensible borders and opposing mass Arab immigration into Israel;

He said he was leaving Jerusalem out but actually brought it in by calling for an Israeli retreat to the 1949 lines;

He called for Israel to be cut in two when he called for the Palestinians state to be contiguous;

He called for Israel to withdraw from the Jordan Valley – without which it is powerless against invasion – by saying that the Palestinian State will have an international border with Jordan.

Conceptually and substantively, Obama abandoned the US alliance with Israel. The rest of his words – security arrangements, demilitarized Palestinian state and the rest of it – were nothing more than filler to please empty-headed liberal Jews in America so they can feel comfortable signing checks for him again.

Read it all, including the comments!

• Is he or isn’t he? Only his imams know for sure…
• More evidence that Obama is Muslim
• Even more evidence that Obama is Muslim
• Don’t try to tell me Obama is not a Muslim!

WaPo: U.S. speeds up direct talks with Taliban

Just as we continue negotiating our surrender to shari’a at home through the rationalizations of not being “islamophobic”, we also continue negotiating our retreat from the Taliban abroad under the rationalizations that Islam is compatible with civilization, and that altruistic nation-building is the proper role of our military. Check out p10:

The Taliban, one U.S. official said, is “going to have to talk to both the Afghans and the Americans” if the process is to proceed to the point that it would significantly affect the level of violence and provide what the Taliban considers an acceptable share of political power in Afghanistan.

I guess that’s what we meant by “never forget”.

According to this story, some items from the cache of documents and files from the Osama bin Laden compound were shown to certain members of the US House and Senate. Those documents indicate that OBL instructed his followers in how to “sow political dissent in Washington and play political figures against one another.” I am certainly not surprised at this, in that the words and decisions of US politicians strongly suggest that al Qaeda leaders have been deceiving, manipulating, and corrupting them from the get-go.

Considering that politicians will do literally anything to protect themselves, I doubt that the US Senate and Congress will see fit to release any detailed evidence showing exactly what al Qaeda operatives were instructed to do, or what they actually did, to manipulate political outcomes in Washington DC.

I, for one, would like to see this evidence that would truly identify some of the traitors that we undoubtedly have in our midst.

Officials: Bin Laden eyed small cities as targets

By KIMBERLY DOZIER, AP Intelligence Writer

WASHINGTON – Though hunted and in hiding, Osama bin Laden remained the driving force behind every recent al-Qaida terror plot, U.S. officials say, citing his private journal and other documents recovered in last week’s raid.

Until Navy SEALs killed him a week ago, bin Laden dispensed chilling advice to the leaders of al-Qaida groups from Yemen to London: Hit Los Angeles, not just New York, he wrote. Target trains as well as planes. If possible, strike on significant dates, such as the Fourth of July and the upcoming 10th anniversary of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

Above all, he urged, kill more Americans in a single attack, to drive them from the Arab world.

Bin Laden’s written words show that counterterrorist officials worldwide underestimated how key he remained to running the organization, shattering the conventional thinking that he had been reduced through isolation to being an inspirational figurehead, U.S. officials said Wednesday.

His personal, handwritten journal and his massive collection of computer files show he helped plan every recent major al-Qaida threat the U.S. is aware of, including plots in Europe last year that had travelers and embassies on high alert, two officials said. So far, no new plots have been uncovered in bin Laden’s writings, but intelligence officials say it will take weeks, if not months, to go through them.

They described the intelligence to The Associated Press only on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk publicly about what was found in bin Laden’s hideout.

The records show bin Laden was communicating from his walled compound in Pakistan with al-Qaida’s offshoots, including the Yemen branch, which has emerged as the leading threat to the United States. U.S. officials have not shared any specific evidence yet that he was directly behind the attempted Christmas Day 2009 bombing of a Detroit-bound airliner or the nearly successful attack on cargo planes heading for Chicago and Philadelphia, but it’s now clear that they bear some of bin Laden’s hallmarks.

He was well aware of U.S. counterterrorist defenses and schooled his followers how to work around them, the messages to his followers show. Don’t limit attacks to New York City, he said in his writings. Consider other areas such as Los Angeles or smaller cities. Spread out the targets.

In one particularly macabre bit of mathematics, bin Laden’s writings show him musing over just how many Americans he must kill to force the U.S. to withdraw from the Arab world. He concludes that the smaller, scattered attacks since the 9/11 attacks had not been enough. He tells his disciples that only a body count of thousands, something on the scale of 9/11, would shift U.S. policy.

He also schemed about ways to sow political dissent in Washington and play political figures against one another, officials said. [emphasis added]

The communications were in missives sent via plug-in computer storage devices called flash drives. The devices were ferried to bin Laden’s compound by couriers, a process that is slow but exceptionally difficult to track.

Intelligence officials have not identified any new planned targets or plots in their initial analysis of the 100 or so flash drives and five computers that Navy SEALs hauled away. Last week, the FBI and Homeland Security Department warned law enforcement officials nationwide to be on alert for possible attacks against trains, though officials said there was no specific plot.

Officials have not yet seen any indication that bin Laden had the ability to coordinate timing of attacks across the various al-Qaida affiliates in Pakistan, Yemen, Algeria, Iraq and Somalia. It is also unclear from bin Laden’s documents how much the affiliate groups followed his guidance. The Yemen group, for instance, has embraced the smaller-scale attacks that bin Laden’s writings indicate he regarded as unsuccessful. The Yemen branch had already surpassed his central operation as al-Qaida’s leading fundraising, propaganda and operational arm.

Al-Qaida has not named bin Laden’s successor, but all indications point to his No. 2, Ayman al-Zawahri. The question is whether al-Zawahri, or anyone, has the ability to keep so many disparate groups under the al-Qaida banner. The groups in Somalia and Algeria, for instance, have very different goals focused on local grievances. Without bin Laden to serve as their shepherd, it’s possible al-Qaida will further fragment.

Read the rest.

From 1389blog.com

Once again We The People are told not to burn our own copies of the Koran on our own property in our own homeland, because doing so will anger our enemy during this time of war against him, and an angry wartime enemy might endanger our troops.

In order to believe that ‘argument’, you must accept the following absurdities:

• Our enemy’s wish abroad is our command here at home.
• We mustn’t defy him, because defiance “inspires” him.
• We must obey him, because obedience is how to “fight” him.
• Our mission to preserve our freedom is threatened by our freedom.
• Thus, our government must defend our enemy against our freedom.
• Our opposition to terrorism is threatened by the risk of terrorism.
• Thus, our government must defend terrorists against opposition.
• Our “brave” military expects to protect our freedom while avoiding danger.
• Thus, we must exercise only those freedoms of which the enemy approves.
• So says the General who first made this ‘argument’, thereby demonstrating his superior understanding of what is necessary to defeat our terrorist enemy.
• All of this is the new and more advanced model of warfare.
• Its purpose is to preserve our freedom and our security.
• And it’s “working”.

Each and every one of those absurdities is packed into that one single brief ‘argument’, and each and every one of them is logically equivalent to an Orwellian mantra such as “ignorance is strength” or “freedom is slavery”.

And most people believe it.

Which is in full Orwellian character, since the gist of that ‘argument’ is that to preserve our freedom against Islamists, we must enslave ourselves to their restrictions. Freedom requires slavery.

But even in Orwell’s classic dystopian novel – where by complete coincidence the government was engaged in a murky foreign conflict whose victories, losses and goals kept being revised – even there, no position was expressed which contained so many contradictions at such high-compression density.

Congratulations, America. You have surpassed Orwell.

Now all that’s left is to enshrine that ‘argument’ and its long list of requisite absurdities into law, so that those of us who see through them will be forced to obey them nonetheless.

How very Orwell of you.

The wish is that our new legally-restricted behavior will please our barbaric foreign wartime enemy. His proxies – the Wish Fulfillment Fairies – are Senators Graham, Reid, Kerry, and all his other domestic operatives who wield government power. This of course includes General David Petraeus, who is tasked with leading the ‘fight’ against the barbaric wartime enemy he doesn’t want us to annoy.

The explicit goal of the Wish Fulfillment Faries is to comfort our wartime enemy against the discomfort caused by American citizens exercising our right of free expression on our own property in our own homeland. Yes, that is the stated goal. That is the selling point!

Is there anyone who doesn’t know that aiding and comforting the enemy during a time of war is the exact technical definition of treason? How about you? – do you know it?

Sure, we all know it. Then why are we letting some of our highest elected and appointed officials get away with openly promoting it?

Those officials – those Wish Fulfillment Fairies, the traitorous proxies of our wartime enemy – are sometimes called “Dhimmis” and “Quislings”, but that’s not accurate. Real Dhimmis are vastly outnumbered and outgunned by the Islamic tyranny they live amidst, and they nonetheless openly maintain their socially marginalized belief sets. Real Quislings are a big step down from that, but they at least have the pseudo-excuse of appeasing a stronger occupier in order to preserve their physical survival.

It’s probably obvious that I don’t know the right term for these traitorous proxies of our barbaric wartime enemy. Do you know the right term? I sure don’t.

I don’t think it even exists. But maybe in future history one of the Wish Fulfillment Faries’ names will become the term itself, as it did with Vidkun Quisling. He was Minister-President of Norway during the Nazi occupation, later tried and executed by Norwegian firing squad for high treason.

Vidkun Quisling was under occupation. Petraeus, Graham, Kerry and Reid are not.

Naming this new level of high treason after one of them may be the only option, since I don’t think all of world history even has a precedent for officials of the stronger, freer and non-occupied defender, openly promoting the exact and known definition of treason by attempting to pass laws explicitly designed to comfort their wartime enemy, who is the weaker, tyrannical and occupied aggressor.

That is what’s going on here, and right now the vast majority of people seem to be just fine with it, along with that long list of its requisite absurdities.

Congratulations again, America.

Maybe you try to believe in it because the absurdities are too big to be easily measured, they’re too blatant to be actually real, they’re stacked too deep to be dug up between your nightly Facebook posts, and they’re each and every one too horrible to be accepted when all you want is for everything to just be ok, you know?

So go ahead, accept it as blindly tonight as you did last night. Pretend that there are other more important issues in the news than our abject surrender to the savage enemy who committed that unprecedented atrocity 10 years ago, the atrocity we swore we would “never forget”.

And don’t listen to me. I’m probably just ‘hateful’ anyway, and I’m probably an ‘extremist’ and ‘an Islamophobic bigot’, and I no doubt ‘watch too much Fox News’.

Tell yourself whatever you have to. Just keep believing in that long list of absurdities, no matter what.

Just don’t get in between me and my copy of the Koran, because I will burn you right along with it, and good riddance to both of you.

And no, I don’t care if the Islamists murder people over it. “People” cannot be held hostage against my freedom. “People” had better learn that I do not negotiate with terrorists. “People” had better admit that the murders are committed by the Islamists, and not by Koran-burners. “People” had better stop lying to themselves about who the real enemy is. And “People” had better learn to defend themselves against him.

If you still believe in those absurdities, then you are obviously and blatantly incorrect, and you need to sit this one out and take no action on it until you have admitted that the facts simply are what they are, and you have therefore revised your beliefs accordingly.

If you take any action to limit or punish my burning of my own copy of the Koran on my own property in my own homeland, then you are pretending to have the ‘right’ to violate my rights as well as the Constitution, all so you can limit my freedom on behalf of my barbaric wartime enemy. If you operate against me and on his behalf, then you are a traitorous proxy, you are a Wish Fulfillment Fairy – YOU ARE AN ENEMY AGENT – and thus you may rightly be killed.

Freedom must prevail even if scores of its enemies and defenders have to die.

This is war, and we are not all on the same side. I damned well know which side I’m on: I’m on the side of unalienable individual rights and the US Constitution.

Any absurdity-believers who try to restrict either one is my enemy.

Period.

- Chuck

Member of the 1389 Blog team

Author of OPEN LETTER TO GEN. PETRAEUS

The team at 2.0: The Blogmocracy explains why:

Libyan War takes away incentive for Nations to remove WMDs

By Rodan

One of the disgusting acts of this illegal war in Libya is that the incentive for Rogue states to give up their WMDs are gone. In 2003 Col. Mumar Qaddafi in the aftermath of the initial invasion of Iraq gave up his WMDs. He decided that it was time for Libya to integrate into the Global economy and to stop being a pariah state. The Bush administration welcomed this move and used Libya as a role model for others.

Qaddafi also paid restitution to the families of the victims of Pan Am 103 and cooperated with US intelligence against AL-Qaeda. He had gone from Pariahs to harmless buffoon. He even declared himself King of Kings of Africa and was trying to be a stabilizing force.

Then because he had a falling out with France and due to the Muslim Brotherhood instigating in the Benghazi area, a rebelion broke out. All of a sudden, Qaddafi was once again an evil terrorist. The British and French connived the US into joining a war against him…

Read the rest.

By supporting these self-proclaimed and fraudulent “freedom fighters” in Libya, the Obama Administration is fighting on the side of al-Qaeda. The last I checked, this clearly meets the Constitutional definition of treason.

1,000 Jihadists with Libyan Rebels

By Rodan

With each passing day it has become apparent that the US and NATO are assisting Islamic Imperialists against Col. Mumar Qaddafi. Not only is Al-Qaeda present, but there are reports that Hizb’Allah has joined the fight as well. A Libyan ex member of Al-Qaeda admits that up to 1,000 Jihadists from these 2 organizations and others as well are among the ranks of this Libyan “Popular Uprising”…

Read the rest.

Footage of Purported Libyan People’s Mujahideen™ Proudly Displaying the Bodies Of Killed & Mutilated Pro-Gaddafi Soldiers

By Philip_Daniel

Click here for the graphic video footage of what appears to be Libyan People’s Mujahideen™ showing off a heap of bloody and, in some cases, mutilated loyalist soldier corpses…

Splendid chaps, aren’t they? Progressive freedom-fighters, the lot of them! No reversion to the barbarities of Tariq Ibn Ziyad, Yusuf Ibn Tashfin, or Muhammad Ibn Tumart, that’s for sure. Rasulullah, that most merciful of Allah’s Slaves, would be proud…

Read the rest.

The Libyan Freedom Fighters lie

By Rodan

Andrew McCarthy is one of the few prominent Conservative bloggers who has been telling the truth about Libya. He has been warning us about the Islamist nature of the the Libyan “Popular Uprising”. In his latest column he not only goes after the Obama regime for getting us involved in this mess, but also Fox News for not mentioning more about the Al-Qaeda connection to the Libyan rebels.[emphasis added]…

Read the rest.

Blogmocracy commenter doriangrey suggests what to do:

It is time to file Articles of Impeachment against President Obama

Posted by doriangrey1 on March 30, 2011

Every person who visits this blog needs to not only copy and e-mail this to their own congress person, and Speaker Bonehead, but also to make a post on their own blogs, calling on every person who visits their blog to do the same.

Congressman ——,

I say this with the greatest of regrets, but with his latest action in Libya, his failure to notify Congress as required by law, it is time, Sir, for you to demand that Impeachment proceeding begin against President Obama.

His act of war against the sovereign nation of Libya is nothing short of criminal, America has no vital national interest in mounting a regime change there and no justifiable excuse in attempting to interfere in Libyan national matters.

As a constitute of yours, I am demanding that articles of Impeachment be drawn up against the President of the United States of America and presented immediately to Congress.

And to Speaker of the House John Boehner,

Speaker John Boehner,

I say this with the greatest of regrets, but with his latest action in Libya, his failure to notify Congress as required by law, it is time, Sir, for you to demand that Impeachment proceeding begin against President Obama.

His act of war against the sovereign nation of Libya is nothing short of criminal, America has no vital national interest in mounting a regime change there and no justifiable excuse in attempting to interfere in Libyan national matters.

As an American tax paying citizen, I am demanding that articles of Impeachment be drawn up against the President of the United States of America and presented immediately to Congress.

See the Libya category on Blogmocracy for more.

First of all…

It is long past time for us to decide exactly what we are fighting for in Afghanistan. And when it comes to that, the infamous lefty rag, Rolling Stone, does all it can to add to the confusion.

Awhile back, Rolling Stone caused a major brouhaha by exposing the internal dissention between Gen. McChrystal and the Obama Administration regarding the war in Afghanistan. Though the problems were real, the intent of Rolling Stone was to undermine our military and thereby help our enemies.

To give the devil his due, the US was, and is, on a self-defeating path. I would be the first to admit that I am no fan of the way in which the war in Afghanistan is being fought. The difference is that Rolling Stone wants the US, and Judaeo-Christian civilization, to lose the war against the jihad, while I want us to win.

I am fundamentally opposed to the Wilsonian pipe-dream of “nation-building.” No country can bestow give liberty and a functioning civil society to anyone else; they have to be earned, and they can never be earned by a predominantly Muslim population. That is because Islam is not a religion in the sense that we understand it, but rather, it is an expansionist, enemy, totalitarian political philosophy that requires perpetual warfare against unbelievers, and that seeks to rid the world of everything but itself. Any people espousing Islam cannot govern themselves without bringing in a totalitarian system of shari’a law. They regard it as sinful to do otherwise. Enacting this as part of a new constitution simply sets it in stone. The new constitutions enacted under US hegemony in both Afghanistan and Iraq are specifically Islamic and implement shari’a law. Why did we send our troops to fight for this?

The purpose of warfare is to defeat enemies so that they cannot and will not do us any further harm. It will always be beyond our power as a nation to turn foreign evildoers into decent human beings.

The current US “rules of engagement” (ROE) are nothing short of suicidal. It makes no sense to run what amounts to a day care center for our enemies who are stuck in a mindset that reflects the worst that the seventh century has to offer. Our enemies (including those who are supposedly “civilian”) do not play by any rules whatsoever, while our side is hogtied by rules that make it impossible to retaliate effectively or even to protect our own troops from enemy attack.

Rolling Stone beclowns itself again

Rolling Stone has made one more attempt to undermine and smear the US military in Afghanistan. But it turns out that they believed an ex-officer who is, to put it bluntly, an openly adulterous, self-promoting, and disloyal ignoramus. So now Rolling Stone has egg on its face.

Big Peace: Psyops on Senators in Afghanistan? Not Hardly

Posted by Jim Hanson Feb 28th 2011 at 4:34 am

…Rolling Stone is out hunting for Generals again and they have found a willing dupe in LTC Michael Holmes. Although calling him a dupe is unfair, he is a willing participant in this grotesque farce. Let’s tee this up in case you missed it. He claims that while on the staff of LTG Caldwell in Afghanistan he was tasked with coming up with ways to influence the opinions of visiting Senators. Seriously, that’s it. The massive outcry from the media was over something that anyone with an above room temperature IQ, including the Senators, knew happens all the time. The problem is that Holmes’ IQ is well below room temperature.

Before we explore the sad little world of LTC Holmes let’s remember that Michael Hastings, the Rolling Stone Jackwagon, also wrote the hit piece that took down Stan McChrystal…

Back now to Holmes. He pitched this story to a newspaper or two, but couldn’t get them to bite. But he threw it at Rolling Stone and it stuck to their wall and obviously fit their agenda. Sadly keeping their rag afloat with tabloid level journalism is their only real option. So we have this spy movie sounding scenario where our Generals are plotting a la Dr. Strangelove and using psychological operations against visiting Senators. The reason they can conjure up this fiendish plot is because of a lack of understanding about Psy Ops, which is one part of Information Operations (IO) and the separate field of Public Affairs (PA). The simplest explanation is IO works to affect the enemy and the theater of operations and PA tells our stories to Americans and the press. Holmes was part of the IO staff and so normally he would have been working on information aimed at the enemy. But the mission he was part of on LTG Caldwell’s staff was to train the Afghan Army, so there was no need for IO operations. Consequently LTC Holmes was given a new assignment, part of which involved helping influence the opinions of visiting Senators.

…Holmes was sent home from Afghanistan in disgrace for multiple violations of orders and military law. Even worse, he was planning on cashing in on his experience with a civilian strategic communications company he had formed with a female officer who worked directly for him. That cunning plan crashed and burned when he and this officer, MAJ Laural Levine, made such a public nuisance of their “inappropriate relationship” that it became common knowledge among the staff. In addition to that, they were regularly heading off base in civilian clothes and were either weaponless, had surrendered them to the restaurants they frequented, or worse had carried them concealed. The first two are offenses against the General Orders for Afghanistan, the last is a violation of the Laws of Land Warfare. If they had been captured while carrying concealed out on the town, they would have been unlawful combatants.

Now how did we find these things out? Well in addition to being as discrete as Lady Gaga, Holmes is also an ultra maroon (yes I just quoted Bugs Bunny). He posted photos of he and his “far-too-intimate-female-associate” on Facebook. Then they go ahead and flirt like Junior High Schoolers in the comments while discussing photos that show them violating their orders. That’s right, a guy and gal who think they are smart enough to advise the government and corporations on strategic communications, busted themselves out on Facebook…

Read it all.

The bottom line? Never trust Rolling Stone or anything you read in it.

What has been missing from public discourse so far are constructive suggestions about how we should address the very real Islamic threat from a political and military perspective. Counterjihad blogger Sultan Knish offers some excellent ideas:

Canada Free Press: A Fourth Approach to the Muslim World

By Daniel Greenfield – Thursday, July 22, 2010

…The Fourth Way is Accountability and it is simple enough. Stop arguing over who will rule in which Muslim country. That is a decision that only the inhabitants of that country can make. And they won’t make it through elections, so much as through dealmaking among their oligarchy, tribal leaders and occasional outbursts of armed force. It would take a massive project of decades to have any hope of changing that. But we don’t need to. What we need to do is make very clear the consequences of attacking us to whoever is in charge.

Rather than trying to shape their behavior by shaping their political leadership, we can use a much more blunt instrument to unselectively shape all their leaders. A blunt instrument does not mean reconstruction. It doesn’t mean Marines ferrying electrical generators. It doesn’t mean nation building. It means that we will inflict massive devastation on any country that aids terrorists who attack us. If they insist on using medieval beliefs to murder us, we will bomb government buildings, roads, factories and power plants to reduce them back to a medieval state. We will not impose sanctions on them, we will simply take control of their natural resources and remove the native population from the area, as compensation for the expenses of the war.

Accountability means no more aid to tyrants or terrorists, and no grand democracy projects either. It means that we stop trying to pick a side, and just make it clear what happens when our side gets hurt. We gain energy independence and never look back. And when we’ve done that, the Muslim world will no longer be able to play America against Russia, against Asia and Europe. Instead it will suddenly find itself stuck with a predatory Russia looking for an energy monopoly, a booming China expanding into their part of the world, and no Pax Americana to protect them from either one.

America has provided the stability that kept many Muslim countries from imploding. It has protected others directly and indirectly from being conquered more times than anyone realizes. All the treachery and terrorism that has been carried out, has been done under an American umbrella. Now is the time to furl up the umbrella, and let the rain fall where it may.

It will be a cold day indeed, when Russia and China realize that they can do what they like in the Muslim world, without the US to stop them. And a colder day still, when European countries realize that there is nothing standing the way of deporting their insurgent Muslim populations, because the US will not lift a finger to protect them, as it did in Yugoslavia. That is accountability. And in both its active and passive forms it will exact a high price from the enemy, and none from us. To employ it, we must be prepared to use massive force casually without considering any collateral damage. We must achieve energy independence at any cost. And we must be prepared to realize that everything else we have tried has failed. Only by disengaging from the Muslim world, can we ever be free of it.

Daniel Greenfield is a New York City based writer and freelance commentator. “Daniel comments on political affairs with a special focus on the War on Terror and the rising threat to Western Civilization. He maintains a blog at Sultanknish.blogspot.com.

Daniel can be reached at: sultanknish@yahoo.com

Read it all.

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.

It is perhaps too soon to identify for certain exactly who or what is behind the January 2011 rioting in Egypt, but it is not too soon to begin asking questions. The rioting has been described as a populist revolt against the 30-year reign of Hosni Mubarak. Mainstream media news stories claim that the rioting was triggered by unemployment, poverty, and lack of economic opportunity in Egypt.

But considering the fact that the Muslim Brotherhood originated in Egypt, and that Hosni Mubarak has been standing in the way of the Muslim Brotherhood taking control of Egypt, it is time to take another look at what the Muslim Brotherhood is all about.

Hat tip to vagabond trader:

Indeed.

The Muslim Brotherhood “Project”

By: Patrick Poole
FrontPageMagazine.com | Thursday, May 11, 2006

One might be led to think that if international law enforcement authorities and Western intelligence agencies had discovered a twenty-year old document revealing a top-secret plan developed by the oldest Islamist organization with one of the most extensive terror networks in the world to launch a program of “cultural invasion” and eventual conquest of the West that virtually mirrors the tactics used by Islamists for more than two decades, that such news would scream from headlines published on the front pages and above the fold of the New York Times, Washington Post, London Times, Le Monde, Bild, and La Repubblica.

If that’s what you might think, you would be wrong.

In fact, such a document was recovered in a raid by Swiss authorities in November 2001, two months after the horror of 9/11. Since that time information about this document, known in counterterrorism circles as “The Project”, and discussion regarding its content has been limited to the top-secret world of Western intelligence communities…

Included in the documents seized during the raid of [Youssef] Nada’s Swiss villa was a 14-page plan written in Arabic and dated December 1, 1982, which outlines a 12-point strategy to “establish an Islamic government on earth” – identified as The Project. According to testimony given to Swiss authorities by Nada, the unsigned document was prepared by “Islamic researchers” associated with the Muslim Brotherhood.

What makes The Project so different from the standard “Death of America! Death to Israel!” and “Establish the global caliphate!” Islamist rhetoric is that it represents a flexible, multi-phased, long-term approach to the “cultural invasion” of the West. Calling for the utilization of various tactics, ranging from immigration, infiltration, surveillance, propaganda, protest, deception, political legitimacy and terrorism, The Project has served for more than two decades as the Muslim Brotherhood “master plan”. As can be seen in a number of examples throughout Europe – including the political recognition of parallel Islamist government organizations in Sweden, the recent “cartoon” jihad in Denmark, the Parisian car-burning intifada last November, and the 7/7 terrorist attacks in London – the plan outlined in The Project has been overwhelmingly successful.

Rather than focusing on terrorism as the sole method of group action, as is the case with Al-Qaeda, in perfect postmodern fashion the use of terror falls into a multiplicity of options available to progressively infiltrate, confront, and eventually establish Islamic domination over the West. The following tactics and techniques are among the many recommendations made in The Project:

•Networking and coordinating actions between likeminded Islamist organizations;
•Avoiding open alliances with known terrorist organizations and individuals to maintain the appearance of “moderation”;
•Infiltrating and taking over existing Muslim organizations to realign them towards the Muslim Brotherhood’s collective goals;
•Using deception to mask the intended goals of Islamist actions, as long as it doesn’t conflict with shari’a law;
•Avoiding social conflicts with Westerners locally, nationally or globally, that might damage the long-term ability to expand the Islamist powerbase in the West or provoke a lash back against Muslims;
•Establishing financial networks to fund the work of conversion of the West, including the support of full-time administrators and workers;
•Conducting surveillance, obtaining data, and establishing collection and data storage capabilities;
•Putting into place a watchdog system for monitoring Western media to warn Muslims of “international plots fomented against them”;
•Cultivating an Islamist intellectual community, including the establishment of think-tanks and advocacy groups, and publishing “academic” studies, to legitimize Islamist positions and to chronicle the history of Islamist movements;
•Developing a comprehensive 100-year plan to advance Islamist ideology throughout the world;
•Balancing international objectives with local flexibility;
•Building extensive social networks of schools, hospitals and charitable organizations dedicated to Islamist ideals so that contact with the movement for Muslims in the West is constant;
•Involving ideologically committed Muslims in democratically-elected institutions on all levels in the West, including government, NGOs, private organizations and labor unions;
•Instrumentally using existing Western institutions until they can be converted and put into service of Islam;
•Drafting Islamic constitutions, laws and policies for eventual implementation;
•Avoiding conflict within the Islamist movements on all levels, including the development of processes for conflict resolution;
•Instituting alliances with Western “progressive” organizations that share similar goals;
•Creating autonomous “security forces” to protect Muslims in the West;
•Inflaming violence and keeping Muslims living in the West “in a jihad frame of mind”;
•Supporting jihad movements across the Muslim world through preaching, propaganda, personnel, funding, and technical and operational support;
•Making the Palestinian cause a global wedge issue for Muslims;
•Adopting the total liberation of Palestine from Israel and the creation of an Islamic state as a keystone in the plan for global Islamic domination;
•Instigating a constant campaign to incite hatred by Muslims against Jews and rejecting any discussions of conciliation or coexistence with them;
•Actively creating jihad terror cells within Palestine;
•Linking the terrorist activities in Palestine with the global terror movement;
•Collecting sufficient funds to indefinitely perpetuate and support jihad around the world;

In reading The Project, it should be kept in mind that it was drafted in 1982 when current tensions and terrorist activities in the Middle East were still very nascent. In many respects, The Project is extremely prescient for outlining the bulk of Islamist action, whether by “moderate” Islamist organizations or outright terror groups, over the past two decades.

Read the rest.

Click HERE to read the full text of The Project.

Where does that leave us?

Barack Hussein Obama always sides with the Islamists. No surprise there. Unlike his historical predecessor, Vidkun Quisling, our current POTUS has been thoroughly proactive in helping the most dangerous totalitarian enemy of our time to launch its invasion.

As vagabond trader points out:

From this past August. Yup, bho is OK with the MB.

Coming August 31 [2010]: ‘Direct Access’ Stimulus Grants for the Muslim Brotherhood

Think of it as ACORN reborn, with a slice of Jihad on the side.

On August 31, this coming Tuesday, the Muslim Brotherhood-associated “Coordinating Council of Muslim Organizations” (CCMO) will bring 25-30 Muslim leaders of 20 national Muslim groups to attend a special workshop presented by the White House and U.S. Government agencies (Agriculture, Education, Homeland Security, Health and Human Services etc.) to provide the groups “funding, government assistance and resources.” The workshop will apparently provide special access for these Muslim Brotherhood organizations: the organizers pledge to provide “direct access” and “cut through red tape.” Government and Muslim groups will hold an Iftar dinner (breaking the fast of Ramadan) after the workshop.

The event was announced in an email newsletter sent August 27 by the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terrorism finance trial, long associated with the Muslim Brotherhood, the global Islamist network (great backgrounder here from Hudson Institute). Here are three key paragraphs from the email (the entire article on the August 31 event from the ISNA email is pasted below this post as reference):

This year, a phenomenal next step has been made where government iftars become coupled with workshops to provide resources and benefit the Muslim community. The US Department of Agriculture (DOA) and the Coordinating Council of Muslim Organizations (CCMO) have paired the first of such events, scheduled for August 31, 2010.

…Leaders from Muslim organizations around the nation, particularly social service organizations, are invited to a workshop with representatives from the DOA, Faith Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, Health and Human Services, the White House, Department of Education, the Department of Homeland Security, and more. Twenty five to thirty Muslim leaders representing 20 Muslim organizations are expected to attend the workshop.

According to a representative of CCMO, this workshop is designed to clarify how Muslim nonprofits, mosques, Islamic centers, and social service organizations can strengthen their communities through more direct access to opportunities provided to social service agencies at the Federal level. “It will hopefully help cut through some of the red tape and shine light on the many opportunities for funding, government assistance, and resources that we just don’t know about at the local level,” said Elsanousi.

The Problem: Your Money, redistributed to the Muslim Brotherhood

This workshop constitutes an abdication of their professional responsibility by all government participants – and a taxpayer-funded government stimulus program for the attending Muslim Brotherhood-associated groups. The Muslim Brotherhood, founded in 1928, is a global Islamist political movement dedicated to imposing Shariah law on all nations and institutions. Their credo is “Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Qur’an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.”

Why do we think some of these groups attending, possibly all, may be associated with the Muslim Brotherhood?

Because the sponsoring organization – the Coordinating Council of Muslim Organizations (CCMO), co-sponsoring with the Department of Agriculture – has a long history of associations with the Muslim Brotherhood. They also signed a 2009 American Muslim Task Force statement threatening to “suspend” relations with the FBI, because the FBI was investigating possible links to homegrown terrorism in mosques and other Muslim organizations.

Not so evident on the current website, of course. This happens all the time with groups associated with the Muslim Brotherhood – the current CCMO website has a LOT less information than the older ones preserved at archive.org (aka “The Wayback Machine”). Here are the previous websites for the CCMO from 2004-2008. The pre-whitewashed CCMO websites are highly revealing. They expose the degree to which this Administration intends to direct taxpayer money (and “reduced red tape”) to Muslim Brotherhood-associated organizations in the U.S.

Read the rest.

More coverage at Blazing Cat Fur.

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

Originally published on 2.0: The Blogmocracy

Obama Nuclear Agenda Faces Post-START Obstacles

Friday, June 25, 2010
By Tom Risen
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — Vocal objections from Republican lawmakers to the Obama administration’s nuclear-weapon policy moves to date could signal danger for the president’s future ambitions, experts said (see GSN, June 17).

In a highly touted April 2009 speech in Prague, President Barack Obama said his government would pursue a global nuclear disarmament strategy that included reducing the importance of nuclear weapons in U.S. national security, seeking U.S. ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, and establishment of a pact banning production of fissile material for weapons.

The Defense Department one year later issued its latest Nuclear Posture Review. The document reflected the president’s viewpoint — highlighting the administration’s disarmament aspirations but pledging that the United States would maintain a reliable deterrent as long as one was necessary. The document ruled out development of new nuclear weapons and restricted the circumstances in which the U.S. strategic arsenal would be used.

That same month, Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed the “New START” pact, which would obligate each nation to cut its deployed strategic nuclear forces to 1,550 warheads — down from a maximum of 2,200 ordered under a 2002 deal — and 700 delivery vehicles.

Both documents have faced opposition from GOP members on Capitol Hill.

“While the administration pursues deep cuts in our nuclear forces in the hopes that others will follow, Iran and North Korea’s nuclear programs continue unabated,” said Representative Michael Turner (R-Ohio), ranking member of the House Armed Services Strategic Forces Subcommittee.

Senate Armed Services Committee ranking member John McCain (R-Ariz.) and other conservatives have criticized provisions in the posture review, concerned they could limit the “spectrum of options” to maintain and use the nuclear deterrent.

The review pledged that Washington would not use its strategic arsenal against non-nuclear weapon states that have joined the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and meet their commitments under that regime. It also indicated that a nation would be likely to face a “devastating conventional military response” rather than a nuclear strike for using biological or chemical weapons against the United States or allied nations.

“One reason that we got rid of chemical and biological weapons is that we were told that we would always have the nuclear deterrent available,” McCain said with fellow Arizona Republican Senator Jon Kyl in an April 6 statement criticizing the Pentagon report. “The Obama administration must clarify that we will take no option off the table to deter attacks against the American people and our allies.”

Read the rest.

When a deterrent is no longer a deterrent

To put it mildly, I am no fan of John McCain. But on this occasion, with the utmost reluctance, even I must give the devil his due and admit that he is correct.

I am also no fan of disarmament, nuclear or otherwise. We don’t live on the Good Ship Lollipop and the sooner we stop pretending we do, the better.

The problem is that Obama is trying to take our nuclear and thermonuclear deterrents off the table. He didn’t bother to ask the rest of us what we thought of that, and I for one don’t like it one bit.

No, we don’t have the Soviet Union threatening us any more. Our thermonuclear deterrent worked very well in holding the Soviet Union at bay, and we never had to use it. But now, instead of the totalitarian, expansionist Communist Bloc, we are faced with a different enemy, the equally totalitarian and even more expansionist threat of Islam. And yes, Islam is at war with everything that is not Islam, and its leaders have issued fatwas against us that comprise both an explicit declaration of war and a mobilization order for enemy forces.

By taking a hard line from the very beginning, we could have prevented the 9-11 attack. The nuclear deterrent is a vital part of any defensive strategy. Had we made it clear that we are likely to uncork some Oak Ridge vintage bottled sunshine on any country that harbors, aids and abets, or exports jihadis who attack the US, even if the culprit has been pretending to be our ally, nobody would have dared attack us. That’s why they call it a deterrent! If your enemies know you WILL use that weaponry if need be, and not necessarily as the very last resort, then it is exceedingly unlikely that you will ever NEED to use it.

On the other hand, if you assure your enemies that you won’t use that deterrent, no matter how much damage they do you by other means, then your deterrent is a deterrent no longer. Once you make that mistake, as Obama did, there will most assuredly come a time when you run out of other options.

Other than surrendering the US to expansionist Islam and creeping shari’a, of course.

But then, weakening the US to the point of surrender was probably the intention of Obama and his handlers all along.

How Bill Clinton forever discredited nuclear nonproliferation

Every country, friendly or otherwise, that watched the US bomb the Serbs in 1999 immediately figured out that such an onslaught will someday happen to them if they don’t have their own nuclear deterrent. Clinton let the genie out of the bottle over a decade ago, and there is no putting it back in.

As a result, nuclear nonproliferation agreements have become the equivalent of gun control writ large: these days, they protect only evildoers who ignore the constraints that others take pains to follow.

2.0: The Blogmocracy: Who Is George Schwartz?

By snork (reprinted with permission)

Ezra Levant has a blog post here, where he describes a man.

George Schwartz was born in Hungary in 1930 — not the luckiest time and place to be born a Jew.

George’s father Theodore tried to change the family’s fortunes by changing their name to something less Jewish-sounding. It didn’t help. And soon war came.

When the Nazis took total control of Hungary in 1944, the Holocaust followed. In two months, 440,000 Hungarian Jews were deported to death camps.

To survive, George, then a teenager, collaborated with the Nazis.

First he worked for the Judenrat. That was the Jewish council set up by the Nazis to do their dirty work for them. Instead of the Nazis rounding up Jews every day for the trains, they delegated that murderous task to Jews who were willing to do it to survive another day at the expense of their neighbours.

Theodore hatched a better plan for his son. He bribed a non-Jewish official at the agriculture ministry to let George live with him. George helped the official confiscate property from Jews.

By collaborating with the Nazis, George survived the Holocaust. He turned on other Jews to spare himself.

George Schwartz was a Kapo. A very evil man.

Steve Kroft of 60 Minutes asked him that. Was it difficult? “Not at all,” [George] answered.

“No feeling of guilt?” asked Kroft. “No,” said [George]. “There was no sense that I shouldn’t be there. If I wasn’t doing it, somebody else would be taking it away anyhow. Whether I was there or not. So I had no sense of guilt.”

A Nazi would steal the Jews’ property anyways. So why not him?

That moral hollowness has shaped [George's] life. He’s a rabid critic of capitalism, but in 1992 when he saw a chance, he speculated against the British pound, causing it to crash, devastating retirement savings for millions of Britons. [George] pocketed $1.1 billion for himself. If he didn’t do it, someone else would, right?

Pleased to meet you, hope you guessed my name.

George moved to London after the war and then to New York, where he became a stockbroker. He’s rich now. Forbes magazine says he’s the 35th richest man in the world. Maybe you’ve heard of him. He goes by the name his father invented: George Soros.

Yes, George “Soros” has no regrets about his Kapo years.

In 2002, Soros was convicted of insider trading in France, and fined millions of dollars. He admitted buying the shares, but denied it was a crime.

And that, ladies and gentlemen is the sure sign of a progressive. An amorality built around ego that excuses all acts that are unacceptable for others. That’s what allows an Al Gore to have jets and yachts and mansions, while preaching frugality to the masses. That’s what allows a Michelle Obama to call a country “downright mean” while raping that country’s taxpayers for extravagant vacations.

The hypocrisy of George isn’t that unusual or remarkable. When you can rationalize the small crimes how far is that from rationalizing sending fellow Jews to their deaths?

This is a man who boasted he offered to help his mother commit suicide. Apparently he didn’t see enough death in Hungary.

Soros is a sociopath. But he’s a sociopath with $14 billion, and he likes to spend it on politics.

Politics of the anti-American variety.

Now Soros has turned his attention to Canada.

One of his front groups, called Avaaz, is lobbying to stop Sun Media’s license for a TV news channel. Soros doesn’t know anything about Canada — Avaaz called the Sun newspapers the “Suncor newspapers” — but we’re his latest toy.

Avaaz is sending a petition to Canada’s TV regulator, the CRTC, claiming that thousands of Canadians want to censor the Sun and keep it off the air.

The petition is a fraud — it’s an Internet petition, and anyone can sign anyone else up without their permission. Fake names are permitted, and so are foreign citizens. And the whole campaign is run out of New York.

Do you think Soros should determine what you can watch on TV? Do you think that decision should be made in New York? Is our freedom of speech just another trinket for him to buy and sell?

Hasn’t Soros silenced enough voices in his life?

Fight back.

He has similar designs on the US. Shutting up dissent here will take a little longer, though.

I wish this man slow, painful death, and perpetual torment from his Holocaust victims.

It’s time for total war on George Soros

As I said on Blogmocracy:

I hereby declare total war on George Soros, on all his pomps, and on all his works.

Anybody care to join me?

You can participate by doing more research, submitting more threads, commenting, and re-tweeting. The more the merrier!

If you have your own blog, a Facebook page, an account on Twitter, StumbleUpon, or anything else, I would like to ask that you help publicize this effort by linking back to every anti-Soros thread on Blogmocracy.

If you haven’t visited 2.0: The Blogmocracy, please do so! Blogmocracy is a group blog. Commenters and guest bloggers are welcome. You’ll need to register to comment, but registration is open and takes little time and effort to do.

Healthy debate is encouraged. We don’t have thin skins, and you don’t have to walk on eggshells.

More about George Soros

• Ears to Hear: George Soros h/t: Rancher
• Glenn Beck: A War Report Discredited

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.