Thursday, April 26, 2007
The Remarkable Joseph Lieberman
Earlier today Senator Joseph Lieberman -- who, it is worth recalling, was the Democratic Party's Vice Presidential nominee in 2000 --addressed the Iraq withdrawal provision in the supplemental appropriations bill on the floor of the U.S. Senate. Below is the full text of Senator Lieberman's speech (as prepared for delivery). It is a significant, compelling, and analytically strong rebuttal to the speech delivered by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid earlier this week. But see for yourself.
Mr. President, the supplemental appropriations bill we are debating today contains language that would have Congress take control of the direction of our military strategy in Iraq.
Earlier this week the Senate Majority Leader spoke at the Woodrow Wilson Center and laid out the case for why he believes we must do this—why the bill now before this chamber, in his view, offers a viable alternative strategy for Iraq.
I have great respect for my friend from Nevada. I believe he has offered this proposal in good faith, and therefore want to take it up in good faith, and examine its arguments and ideas carefully and in depth, for this is a very serious discussion for our country.
In his speech Monday, the Majority Leader described the several steps that this new strategy for Iraq would entail. Its first step, he said, is to "transition the U.S. mission away from policing a civil war—to training and equipping Iraqi security forces, protecting U.S. forces, and conducting targeted counter-terror operations."
I ask my colleagues to take a step back for a moment and consider this plan.
When we say that U.S. troops shouldn't be "policing a civil war," that their operations should be restricted to this narrow list of missions, what does this actually mean?
To begin with, it means that our troops will not be allowed to protect the Iraqi people from the insurgents and militias who are trying to terrorize and kill them. Instead of restoring basic security, which General Petraeus has argued should be the central focus of any counterinsurgency campaign, it means our soldiers would instead be ordered, by force of this proposed law, not to stop the sectarian violence happening all around them—no matter how vicious or horrific it becomes.
In short, it means telling our troops to deliberately and consciously turn their backs on ethnic cleansing, to turn their backs on the slaughter of innocent civilians—men, women, and children singled out and killed on the basis of their religion alone. It means turning our backs on the policies that led us to intervene in the civil war in Yugoslavia in the 1990s, the principles that today lead many of us to call for intervention in Darfur.
This makes no moral sense at all.
It also makes no strategic or military sense either.
Al Qaeda's own leaders have repeatedly said that one of the ways they intend to achieve victory in Iraq is to provoke civil war. They are trying to kill as many people as possible today, precisely in the hope of igniting sectarian violence, because they know that this is their best way to collapse Iraq's political center, overthrow Iraq's elected government, radicalize its population, and create a failed state in the heart of the Middle East that they can use as a base.
That is why Al Qaeda blew up the Golden Mosque in Samarra last year. And that is why we are seeing mass casualty suicide bombings by Al Qaeda in Baghdad now.
The sectarian violence that the Majority Leader says he wants to order American troops to stop policing, in other words, is the very same sectarian violence that Al Qaeda hopes to ride to victory. The suggestion that we can draw a bright legislative line between stopping terrorists in Iraq and stopping civil war in Iraq flies in the face of this reality.
I do not know how to say it more plainly: it is Al Qaeda that is trying to cause a full-fledged civil war in Iraq.
The Majority Leader said on Monday that he believes U.S. troops will still be able to conduct "targeted counter-terror operations" under his plan. Even if we stop trying to protect civilians in Iraq, in other words, we can still go after the bad guys.
But again, I ask my colleagues, how would this translate into military reality on the ground? How would we find these terrorists, who do not gather on conventional military bases or fight in conventional formations?
By definition, targeted counterterrorism requires our forces to know where, when, and against whom to strike—and that in turn requires accurate, actionable, real-time intelligence.
This is the kind of intelligence that can only come from ordinary Iraqis, the sea of people among whom the terrorists hide. And that, in turn, requires interacting with the Iraqi people on a close, personal, daily basis. It requires winning individual Iraqis to our side, gaining their trust, convincing them that they can count on us to keep them safe from the terrorists if they share valuable information about them. This is no great secret. This is at the heart of the new strategy that General Petraeus and his troops are carrying out.
And yet, if we pass this legislation, according to the Majority Leader, U.S. forces will no longer be permitted to patrol Iraq's neighborhoods or protect Iraqi civilians. They won't, in his words, be "interjecting themselves between warring factions" or "trying to sort friend from foe."
Therefore, I ask the supporters of this legislation: How, exactly, are U.S. forces to gather intelligence about where, when, and against whom to strike, after you have ordered them walled off from the Iraqi population? How, exactly, are U.S. forces to carry out targeted counter-terror operations, after you have ordered them cut off from the very source of intelligence that drives these operations?
This is precisely why the congressional micromanagement of life-and-death decisions about how, where, and when our troops can fight is such a bad idea, especially on a complex and changing battlefield.
In sum, you can't have it both ways. You can't withdraw combat troops from Iraq and still fight Al Qaeda there. If you believe there is no hope of winning in Iraq, or that the costs of victory there are not worth it, then you should be for complete withdrawal as soon as possible.
There is another irony here as well.
For most of the past four years, under Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, the United States did not try to establish basic security in Iraq. Rather than deploying enough troops necessary to protect the Iraqi people, the focus of our military has been on training and equipping Iraqi forces, protecting our own forces, and conducting targeted sweeps and raids—in other words, the very same missions proposed by the proponents of the legislation before us.
That strategy failed—and we know why it failed. It failed because we didn't have enough troops to ensure security, which in turn created an opening for Al Qaeda and its allies to exploit. They stepped into this security vacuum and, through horrific violence, created a climate of fear and insecurity in which political and economic progress became impossible.
For years, many members of Congress recognized this. We talked about this. We called for more troops, and a new strategy, and—for that matter—a new secretary of defense.
And yet, now, just as President Bush has come around—just as he has recognized the mistakes his administration has made, and the need to focus on basic security in Iraq, and to install a new secretary of defense and a new commander in Iraq—now his critics in Congress have changed their minds and decided that the old, failed strategy wasn't so bad after all.
What is going on here? What has changed so that the strategy that we criticized and rejected in 2006 suddenly makes sense in 2007?
The second element in the plan outlined by the Majority Leader on Monday is "the phased redeployment of our troops no later than October 1, 2007."
Let us be absolutely clear what this means. This legislation would impose a binding deadline for U.S. troops to begin retreating from Iraq. This withdrawal would happen regardless of conditions on the ground, regardless of the recommendations of General Petraeus, in short regardless of reality on October 1, 2007.
As far as I can tell, none of the supporters of withdrawal have attempted to explain why October 1 is the magic date—what strategic or military significance this holds. Why not September 1? Or January 1? This is a date as arbitrary as it is inflexible—a deadline for defeat.
How do proponents of this deadline defend it? On Monday, Senator Reid gave several reasons. First, he said, a date for withdrawal puts "pressure on the Iraqis to make the desperately needed political compromises."
But will it? According to the legislation now before us, the withdrawal will happen regardless of what the Iraqi government does.
How, then, if you are an Iraqi government official, does this give you any incentive to make the right choices?
On the contrary, there is compelling reason to think a legislatively directed withdrawal of American troops will have exactly the opposite effect than its Senate sponsors intend.
This, in fact, is exactly what the most recent National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq predicted. A withdrawal of U.S. troops in the months ahead, it said, would "almost certainly lead to a significant increase in the scale and scope of sectarian conflict, intensify Sunni resistance, and have adverse effects on national reconciliation."
Second, the Majority Leader said that withdrawing our troops, and again I quote, will "reduce the specter of the U.S. occupation which gives fuel to the insurgency."
My colleague from Nevada, in other words, is suggesting that the insurgency is being provoked by the very presence of American troops. By diminishing that presence, then, he believes the insurgency will diminish.
But I ask my colleagues—where is the evidence to support this theory? Since 2003, and before General Petraeus took command, U.S. forces were ordered on several occasions to pull back from Iraqi cities and regions, including Mosul and Fallujah and Tel'Afar and Baghdad. And what happened in these places? Did they stabilize when American troops left? Did the insurgency go away?
On the contrary—in each of these places where U.S. forces pulled back, Al Qaeda rushed in. Rather than becoming islands of peace, they became safe havens for terrorists, islands of fear and violence.
So I ask advocates of withdrawal: on what evidence, on what data, have you concluded that pulling U.S. troops out will weaken the insurgency, when every single experience we have had since 2003 suggests that this legislation will strengthen it?
Consider the words of Sheikh Abdul Sattar, one of the leading Sunni tribal leaders in Anbar province who is now fighting on our side against Al Qaeda. This is what he told the New York Times when asked last month what would happen if U.S. troops withdraw. "In my personal opinion, and in the opinion of most of the wise men of Anbar," he said, "if the American forces leave right now, there will be civil war and the area will fall into total chaos."
This is a man whose father was killed by Al Qaeda, who is risking his life every day to work with us—a man who was described by one Army officer as "the most effective local leader in Ramadi I believe the coalition has worked with... in Anbar [since] 2003."
In his remarks earlier this week, the Majority Leader observed that there is "a large and growing population of millions—who sit precariously on the fence. They will either condemn or contribute to terrorism in the years ahead. We must convince them of the goodness of America and Americans. We must win them over."
On this, I completely agree with my friend from Nevada. My question to him, however, and to the supporters of this legislation, is this: how does the strategy you propose in this bill possibly help win over this population of millions in Iraq, who sit precariously on the fence?
What message, I ask, does this legislation announce to those people in Iraq? How will they respond when we tell them that we will no longer make any effort to protect them against insurgents and death squads? How will they respond when we declare that we will be withdrawing our forces—regardless of whether they make progress in the next six months towards political reconciliation? Where will their hopes for a better life be when we withdraw the troops that are the necessary precondition for the security and stability they yearn for?
Do my friends really believe that this is the way to convince Iraqis, and the world, of the goodness of America and Americans? Does anyone in this chamber really believe that, by announcing a date certain for withdrawal, we will empower Iraqi moderates, or enable Iraq's reconstruction, or open more schools for their children, or more hospitals for their families, or freedom for everyone?
Mr. President, with all due respect, this is fantasy.
The third step the Majority Leader proposes is to impose "tangible, measurable, and achievable benchmarks on the Iraqi government."
I am all for such benchmarks. In fact, Senator McCain and I were among the first to propose legislation to apply such benchmarks on the Iraqi government.
But I don't see how this plan will encourage Iraqis to meet these or any other benchmarks, given its ironclad commitment to abandon them—regardless of how they behave.
We should of course be making every effort to encourage reconciliation in Iraq and the development of a decent political order that Sunnis, Shiites, and Kurds can agree on.
But even if today that political solution was found, we cannot rationally think that our terrorist enemies like Al Qaeda in Iraq will simply vanish.
Al Qaeda is not mass murdering civilians on the streets of Baghdad because it wants a more equitable distribution of oil revenues. Its aim in Iraq is not to get a seat at the political table.
It wants to blow up the table—along with everyone seated at it. Al Qaeda wants to destroy any prospect for democracy in Iraq, and it will not be negotiated or reasoned out of existence. It must be fought and defeated through force of arms. And there can be no withdrawal, no redeployment from this reality.
The fourth step that the Majority Leader proposed on Monday is a "diplomatic, economic, and political offensive... starting with a regional conference working toward a long-term framework for stability in the region."
I understand why we are tempted by these ideas. All of us are aware of the justified frustration, fatigue, and disappointment of the American people. And all of us would like to believe that there is a quick and easy solution to the challenges we face in Iraq.
But none of this gives us an excuse to paper over hard truths. We delude ourselves if we think we can wave a legislative wand and suddenly our troops in the field will be able to distinguish between Al Qaeda terrorism and sectarian violence, or that Iraqis will suddenly settle their political differences because our troops are leaving, or that sweet reason alone will suddenly convince Iran and Syria to stop destabilizing Iraq.
Mr. President, what we need now is a sober assessment of the progress we have made and a recognition of the challenges we face. There are still many uncertainties before us, many complexities. Barely half of the new troops that General Petraeus has requested have even arrived in Iraq, and, as we heard from him yesterday, it will still be months before we will know just how effective his new strategy is.
In following General Petraeus' path, there is no guarantee of success—but there is hope, and a new plan, for success.
The plan embedded in this legislation, on the other hand, contains no such hope. It is a strategy of catchphrases and bromides, rather than military realities in Iraq. It does not learn from the many mistakes we have made in Iraq. Rather, it promises to repeat them.
Let me be absolutely clear: In my opinion, Iraq is not yet lost—but if we follow this plan, it will be. And so, I fear, much of our hope for stability in the Middle East and security from terrorism here at home.
I yield the floor.
Friday, April 27, 2007
Why CAIR Dropped it's Lawsuit ...
Why CAIR Dropped Its Lawsuit Against Andrew Whitehead
By Joseph Puder
FrontPageMagazine.com | April 26, 2007
Andrew Whitehead, a former serviceman with the U.S. Navy has a website named Anti-CAIR on which Whitehead accused CAIR of partially funding terrorist organizations. CAIR routinely tries to intimidate the likes of Whitehead in the hope of stifling any criticisms and/or allegations made against it.
On March 31, 2004 CAIR filed a lawsuit against Andrew Whitehead in the Virginia Beach Circuit Court demanding $1 million in damages from Whitehead for what it called “libelous defamation.” The lawsuit, scheduled to begin in the summer of 2006 was dismissed in April 2006.
Last Thursday, April 12, 2007, the Philadelphia/South Jersey chapter of the Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) under the leadership of Regional Director Scott Figelstein, hosted a program with Reed Rubinstein, Esq. of the Washington, DC-based law firm of Greenberg Taurig. The RJC serves as a liaison between the Jewish community and Republican decision makers.
Reed Rubinstein, with the backing of his law firm, provided pro-bono counsel for Andrew Whitehead in the CAIR v. Whitehead lawsuit. Rubinstein is credited with defeating the defamation suit “by an Islamic extremist group against the U.S. Navy enlisted man.”
On January 6, 2004, CAIR attorney Jeremiah A. Denton III of Virginia Beach, VA sent Whitehead a personal and confidential letter in which he cited the alleged defamatory paragraphs on Whitehead’s Anti-CAIR website. He concluded his letter with, “Notwithstanding my recommendation, in lieu of a lawsuit CAIR has asked me to give you the opportunity to voluntarily cease and desist the publication of defamatory statements about CAIR on your website and elsewhere. If you persist in the publication of defamatory remarks about CAIR, or if you elect to publish this personal and confidential letter to any person, a suit will be filed forthwith.”
The “false and defamatory” statements irking CAIR officials made by Whitehead were: CAIR is a “terrorist front organization that is partially funded by terrorists”; CAIR is an “organization founded by Hamas supporters which seeks to overthrow the constitutional government in the U.S”; and, “Why oppose CAIR? CAIR has proven links to, and was founded by, Islamic terrorists…CAIR is here to make radical Islam the dominant religion in the U.S…In addition, CAIR receives direct funding from Islamic terrorist-supporting countries.”
Whitehead, not easily intimidated, responded by filing over 300 separate interrogatories, requests of documents and requests for admission. CAIR then filed an amended “motion for judgement” dropping the allegations regarding CAIR’s ties to Hamas and terror were false and defamatory, some discovery answers, and a motion for protective order. Whitehead then filed a motion to compel, seeking a court order obligating CAIR to answer his information requests.
In court, CAIR was asked to admit that “Hamas murdered innocent civilians” to which it replied: “Objection, calls for legal conclusion…” Questioned as to whether CAIR has had “one or more communications with Abu Musa Marzook?” The Plaintiff’s reply was, “To be subject to Plaintiff’s motion for Protective Order…”, restricting the response to Whitehead’s counsel.
Called to confirm Article Seven of the Hamas Charter which states that “the Hamas has been looking forward to implementing Allah’s promise whatever time it might take. The Prophet, peace be upon him, said: The time will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews, until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him!” CAIR again refused to respond by stating: “CAIR objects because the Hamas Charter speaks for itself and because the Plainiff is without means to obtain current, accurate, and reliable copy of the Hamas Charter.”
Shortly before the court hearing on the motion to compel the case settled. There was no apology, and no retraction. The “false and defamatory” allegations remain posted on Whitehead’s website. CAIR simply did not wish to supply the requested documents.
Rubinstein learned a great deal about CAIR while preparing for the trial. According to Rubinstein CAIR “is not a domestic grassroots organization in the usual sense of the term.” It is, instead, a “top down” group. CAIR, Rubinstein said “was formed by Hamas supporters, apparently as part of an integrated anti-Israel and anti-Jewish strategy.” In addition, Rubinstein observed that, “CAIR is dedicated to spreading Islam in the U.S. and that it is an evangelical organization whose activities are funded by foreign Arabs.”
Steven Emerson, a former CNN reporter who produced “Jihad in America, a PBS documentary on Islamic groups in America, said in a testimony before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Terrorism, in February 1998 that he has “found links between CAIR and the radical Palestinian Islamist group Hamas.” Emerson added, “Pretending to be a civil rights group, CAIR is representative of the new transformation of militant Islamic groups.” Emerson indicated that “CAIR was formed not by Muslim religious leaders throughout the country, but as an offshoot of the Islamic Association of Palestine.”
Why did CAIR drop its lawsuit against Andrew Whitehead? Apparently it feared exposure that would reveal its leaders connections to terrorist groups like Hamas. If that is the case, namely, CAIR’s fear of exposure, why has the media been silent on this matter? Rubinstein explained, “CAIR is protected by the mainstream media,” which he said, “has studiously ignored a decade of evidence, and has, instead, adopted a ‘see no evil, speak no evil’ stance.”
Although CAIR is legal under the constitution, it is important to remember that the Communist party and the neo-Nazi parties in America were legal too. The activities of these organizations, including CAIR, however, is not necessarily sanctioned by the constitution, especially since CAIR represents a “profoundly anti-Semitic and anti-Christian ideology, and relies for its existence and activities on foreign Arab money.” As Rubinstein has put it, “In another time (before the onset of a PC culture), activities such as those CAIR is involved in, would have been labeled as subversive.”
By Joseph Puder
FrontPageMagazine.com | April 26, 2007
Andrew Whitehead, a former serviceman with the U.S. Navy has a website named Anti-CAIR on which Whitehead accused CAIR of partially funding terrorist organizations. CAIR routinely tries to intimidate the likes of Whitehead in the hope of stifling any criticisms and/or allegations made against it.
On March 31, 2004 CAIR filed a lawsuit against Andrew Whitehead in the Virginia Beach Circuit Court demanding $1 million in damages from Whitehead for what it called “libelous defamation.” The lawsuit, scheduled to begin in the summer of 2006 was dismissed in April 2006.
Last Thursday, April 12, 2007, the Philadelphia/South Jersey chapter of the Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) under the leadership of Regional Director Scott Figelstein, hosted a program with Reed Rubinstein, Esq. of the Washington, DC-based law firm of Greenberg Taurig. The RJC serves as a liaison between the Jewish community and Republican decision makers.
Reed Rubinstein, with the backing of his law firm, provided pro-bono counsel for Andrew Whitehead in the CAIR v. Whitehead lawsuit. Rubinstein is credited with defeating the defamation suit “by an Islamic extremist group against the U.S. Navy enlisted man.”
On January 6, 2004, CAIR attorney Jeremiah A. Denton III of Virginia Beach, VA sent Whitehead a personal and confidential letter in which he cited the alleged defamatory paragraphs on Whitehead’s Anti-CAIR website. He concluded his letter with, “Notwithstanding my recommendation, in lieu of a lawsuit CAIR has asked me to give you the opportunity to voluntarily cease and desist the publication of defamatory statements about CAIR on your website and elsewhere. If you persist in the publication of defamatory remarks about CAIR, or if you elect to publish this personal and confidential letter to any person, a suit will be filed forthwith.”
The “false and defamatory” statements irking CAIR officials made by Whitehead were: CAIR is a “terrorist front organization that is partially funded by terrorists”; CAIR is an “organization founded by Hamas supporters which seeks to overthrow the constitutional government in the U.S”; and, “Why oppose CAIR? CAIR has proven links to, and was founded by, Islamic terrorists…CAIR is here to make radical Islam the dominant religion in the U.S…In addition, CAIR receives direct funding from Islamic terrorist-supporting countries.”
Whitehead, not easily intimidated, responded by filing over 300 separate interrogatories, requests of documents and requests for admission. CAIR then filed an amended “motion for judgement” dropping the allegations regarding CAIR’s ties to Hamas and terror were false and defamatory, some discovery answers, and a motion for protective order. Whitehead then filed a motion to compel, seeking a court order obligating CAIR to answer his information requests.
In court, CAIR was asked to admit that “Hamas murdered innocent civilians” to which it replied: “Objection, calls for legal conclusion…” Questioned as to whether CAIR has had “one or more communications with Abu Musa Marzook?” The Plaintiff’s reply was, “To be subject to Plaintiff’s motion for Protective Order…”, restricting the response to Whitehead’s counsel.
Called to confirm Article Seven of the Hamas Charter which states that “the Hamas has been looking forward to implementing Allah’s promise whatever time it might take. The Prophet, peace be upon him, said: The time will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews, until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him!” CAIR again refused to respond by stating: “CAIR objects because the Hamas Charter speaks for itself and because the Plainiff is without means to obtain current, accurate, and reliable copy of the Hamas Charter.”
Shortly before the court hearing on the motion to compel the case settled. There was no apology, and no retraction. The “false and defamatory” allegations remain posted on Whitehead’s website. CAIR simply did not wish to supply the requested documents.
Rubinstein learned a great deal about CAIR while preparing for the trial. According to Rubinstein CAIR “is not a domestic grassroots organization in the usual sense of the term.” It is, instead, a “top down” group. CAIR, Rubinstein said “was formed by Hamas supporters, apparently as part of an integrated anti-Israel and anti-Jewish strategy.” In addition, Rubinstein observed that, “CAIR is dedicated to spreading Islam in the U.S. and that it is an evangelical organization whose activities are funded by foreign Arabs.”
Steven Emerson, a former CNN reporter who produced “Jihad in America, a PBS documentary on Islamic groups in America, said in a testimony before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Terrorism, in February 1998 that he has “found links between CAIR and the radical Palestinian Islamist group Hamas.” Emerson added, “Pretending to be a civil rights group, CAIR is representative of the new transformation of militant Islamic groups.” Emerson indicated that “CAIR was formed not by Muslim religious leaders throughout the country, but as an offshoot of the Islamic Association of Palestine.”
Why did CAIR drop its lawsuit against Andrew Whitehead? Apparently it feared exposure that would reveal its leaders connections to terrorist groups like Hamas. If that is the case, namely, CAIR’s fear of exposure, why has the media been silent on this matter? Rubinstein explained, “CAIR is protected by the mainstream media,” which he said, “has studiously ignored a decade of evidence, and has, instead, adopted a ‘see no evil, speak no evil’ stance.”
Although CAIR is legal under the constitution, it is important to remember that the Communist party and the neo-Nazi parties in America were legal too. The activities of these organizations, including CAIR, however, is not necessarily sanctioned by the constitution, especially since CAIR represents a “profoundly anti-Semitic and anti-Christian ideology, and relies for its existence and activities on foreign Arab money.” As Rubinstein has put it, “In another time (before the onset of a PC culture), activities such as those CAIR is involved in, would have been labeled as subversive.”
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
The Silliest Thing ...
Now this is the silliest thing I've ever heard ...
After traveling all day in the Jihad Watch Maxwell Roadster, I just arrived at Boise State University in Idaho, where I'll be speaking tonight -- unless the Muslim Students Association gets its way, as they're circulating a petition to bar me from speaking. I'm told that one Muslim woman here on campus, demonstrating a grasp beyond her years of the use of victimhood as a political tool, told a local TV station that she feared for her life because I was coming to campus.
Yes, it's true, my friends. Muslims must fear for their lives, because every day, somewhere in the U.S., fiendish Islamophobes beat them senseless, stop them on buses and murder them, blow up their schools, kidnap, torture, and murder them, and announce their plans to conquer and Christianize their countries.
Of course, if you click on the links, you'll see that "Islamophobes" did none of those things, but Muslims did them all in the last few days. Need this young Boise State coed fear for her life because of me? Well, let's look at the record: just how many Muslims in America have I killed? None. How many have I called for to be killed? None. How many Muslims in America have been killed because they were Muslims? None. While Christians and other non-Muslims must live in fear for their lives every day in countries like Iraq (where Christians have been kidnapped and murdered), Indonesia (where those three Christian schoolgirls were beheaded), and Pakistan (where there was a spate of shootings in churches and church schools a few years ago), none of these things are happening to Muslims in the United States.
In this country, Muslims may practice their religion freely, and authorities often work to accommodate them. There are incidents of bigotry, but these are minor, and sometimes trumped-up. The only fly in the ointment is that sometimes people like me come around -- with a message of hate, they say, but that is just manipulative propaganda designed to get people of good will to turn away. In reality, tonight I will deliver a message of reality, a real inconvenient truth, about how the jihadists use the core texts of Islam to justify their actions and make recruits among peaceful Muslims. Instead of wringing her hands and retailing outrageous libels and hyperbole about me on television, this Muslim woman would do better to work to combat that reality within the Islamic community.
And if she made any headway, all of us could breathe easier.
Posted by Robert at April 24, 2007 04:26 PM
After traveling all day in the Jihad Watch Maxwell Roadster, I just arrived at Boise State University in Idaho, where I'll be speaking tonight -- unless the Muslim Students Association gets its way, as they're circulating a petition to bar me from speaking. I'm told that one Muslim woman here on campus, demonstrating a grasp beyond her years of the use of victimhood as a political tool, told a local TV station that she feared for her life because I was coming to campus.
Yes, it's true, my friends. Muslims must fear for their lives, because every day, somewhere in the U.S., fiendish Islamophobes beat them senseless, stop them on buses and murder them, blow up their schools, kidnap, torture, and murder them, and announce their plans to conquer and Christianize their countries.
Of course, if you click on the links, you'll see that "Islamophobes" did none of those things, but Muslims did them all in the last few days. Need this young Boise State coed fear for her life because of me? Well, let's look at the record: just how many Muslims in America have I killed? None. How many have I called for to be killed? None. How many Muslims in America have been killed because they were Muslims? None. While Christians and other non-Muslims must live in fear for their lives every day in countries like Iraq (where Christians have been kidnapped and murdered), Indonesia (where those three Christian schoolgirls were beheaded), and Pakistan (where there was a spate of shootings in churches and church schools a few years ago), none of these things are happening to Muslims in the United States.
In this country, Muslims may practice their religion freely, and authorities often work to accommodate them. There are incidents of bigotry, but these are minor, and sometimes trumped-up. The only fly in the ointment is that sometimes people like me come around -- with a message of hate, they say, but that is just manipulative propaganda designed to get people of good will to turn away. In reality, tonight I will deliver a message of reality, a real inconvenient truth, about how the jihadists use the core texts of Islam to justify their actions and make recruits among peaceful Muslims. Instead of wringing her hands and retailing outrageous libels and hyperbole about me on television, this Muslim woman would do better to work to combat that reality within the Islamic community.
And if she made any headway, all of us could breathe easier.
Posted by Robert at April 24, 2007 04:26 PM
Friday, April 20, 2007
FED Wiring SS Benefits to Mexico
Fed wiring Social Security payments to illegals?
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55301
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
Federal Reserve headquarters in Washington
Amid the U.S. government's acknowledgment of rampant document and
benefit fraud, the Federal Reserve is wiring 26,000 Social Security
payments every month to Mexicans south of the border.
Officials with the Federal Reserve and Social Security Administration
insist payments are not going to illegal aliens but admit they cannot be
certain. Meanwhile, the Department of Homeland Security has launched a
new task force to address the "growing" problem of benefit fraud,
including in the Social Security Administration.
Jean Tate, spokeswoman for the Federal Reserve, said 26,000 of the
27,000 payments made monthly via the Fed's "Directo a Mexico" service
are for Social Security recipients.
Mark Lassiter, spokesman for the Social Security Administration, told
WND he was not familiar with the Fed's Directo a México program.
Still, he insisted the payments had to be going to legal beneficiaries
of Social Security.
"For example, if I am a U.S. citizen and I retire to Mexico, I can
continue to draw my Social Security benefits while I am in Mexico," he
explained. "Or maybe the person is a Mexican citizen who was legally in
the U.S. and had a work-authorized Social Security number."
Lassiter told WND he was unaware of any study the Social Security
Administration had conducted on the 26,000 monthly payments made through
Directo a México.
He said he had no breakdown of the characteristics of the recipients.
Still, Lassiter insisted it was "highly unlikely" any of these 26,000
were receiving payments illegally in Mexico.
"You have to have a legally issued Social Security number that
authorizes you to work to get Social Security credit for those
earnings," Lassiter explained to WND. "But I don't have specific
breakdowns of these 26,000 recipients in Mexico that you're talking
about."
Lassiter suggested filing a Freedom of Information Act request to get
more details on the recipients.
"I have confidence that when we determine that someone is eligible for
Social Security benefits, we are determining that the person is legally
eligible for Social Security benefits," Lassiter said.
Nevertheless, on Dec. 6 the Department of Homeland Security announced
the creation of the Document and Benefit Fraud Task Force, an
inter-agency group created "to combat the growing problems of document
fraud and immigration benefits fraud."
The Inspector General's office of the Social Security Administration was
listed as one of the participating agencies.
No ID required
The Federal Reserve introduced Directo a México in fall 2005 to allow
U.S. financial institutions to utilize the Fed's Automated Clearing
House channel to remit payments to Mexico.
Directo a México is a joint market effort between the Federal Reserve
and the Banco de México, the central banks of the U.S. and Mexico,
respectively.
According to the Federal Reserve, in 2005 the amount of funds
transferred to Mexico reached more than $30 billion, up from $16.6
billion in 2004. The remittance market to Mexico has experienced
double-digit growth in recent years.
"Approximately 250 institutions are enrolled nationwide in Directo a
México," Tate told WND. "However, enrollment in the program does not
mean that an institution is using it."
Tate noted there "seems to be a concentration of the financial
institutions using the Directo a México program, in corridors found in
the Carolinas, Arkansas, Kentucky, Tennessee, Illinois, Iowa, Wisconsin,
Colorado, Oklahoma, Texas and California."
Still, U.S. banks and credit unions currently account for no more than 3
percent of all remittances sent to Mexico.
A leading player in the remittance market remains Western Union.
A key competitive marketing strategy for Directo a México has been to
reduce the cost of remittance transfers.
Tate told WND financial institutions tend to charge from $2 to $5 per
transfer, compared with a much larger average cost for making a
remittance transfer through Western Union.
Using the "Money in Minutes" calculator on the Western Union website, a
$100 transfer from New Jersey to Mexico requires a $5 fee, compared to a
$25 fee for a $500 transfer.
Also, Directo a México prices conversions of the U.S. dollar to the
Mexican peso competitively, according to a fixed formula that does not
change regardless of the amount being transferred.
The explanation for why banks and credit unions using Directo a México
have such a low share in the remittance market compared to Western Union
may in part be in the identification requirements needed in the two
programs.
Tate told WND that in the Directo a México program, each financial
institution determines which ID documents it chooses to accept, but all
participating Directo a México financial institutions are restricted by
the approved options specified in the Patriot Act.
Western Union will accept the Matricula Consular cards issued to Mexican
nationals by Mexican consulates in the United States, even though
Mexican nationals frequently obtain multiple cards and counterfeits are
commonly available.
Mexican consulates regularly issue Matricula Consular cards to Mexican
illegal immigrants in the U.S.
Western Union spokeswoman Kristin Kelly declined comment, explaining to
WND that her company is currently in a quiet period pending release of
earnings.
WND called a Western Union 800 number and confirmed that a Matricula
Consular card would be sufficient for an illegal alien to wire money to
Mexico.
The telephone assistant explained the identification of the sender was
important only if there was a problem with the transfer and the sender
wanted a refund.
The assistant also explained the money transfer could be made using a
credit card or a debit card over the telephone or on the Internet.
The Western Union 800 number explained the wire transfer fee was $5 for
the first $100 transferred and 5 percent of the principal for amounts
larger than $100.
Social Security totalization
As WND previously reported, after refusing to release the document for
three and a half years, the Social Security Administration in January
finally made public a totalization agreement that "would allow millions
of illegal Mexican workers to draw billions of dollars from the U.S.
Social Security Trust Fund."
The disclosure was forced by a Freedom of Information Act request filed
by the TREA Senior Citizens League, a non-partisan seniors advocacy
group.
On June 29, 2004, the Social Security totalization agreement with Mexico
was signed by the U.S. Commissioner of Social Security and the director
general of the Mexican Social Security Institute. The agreement has not
yet been signed by President Bush.
Once Bush signs the agreement, which can be done without receiving
congressional approval, the House of Representatives or the Senate would
have 60 days to vacate the agreement by voting to reject it.
The U.S. currently has Social Security totalization agreements with 21
countries, but none with Mexico. The Social Security international
agreements are designed to allow workers to combine earnings from
foreign countries with earnings in the U.S. to qualify for U.S. Social
Security benefits.
The agreement with Mexico would allow a Mexican worker to qualify for
U.S. Social Security benefits with just six quarters (18 months) of U.S.
employment. Typically a U.S. worker who turns 62 after 1990 needs 40
calendar quarters (120 months) to receive U.S. Social Security benefits.
The problem is further compounded because only about 40 percent of
non-government workers in Mexico participate in Mexico's state
retirement system, whereas 96 percent of America's non-government
workers participate in Social Security.
In February 2004, Congress passed H.R. 743, known as the Social Security
Protection Act. The bill included a provision by Sen. Charles Grassley,
R-Iowa, then the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, that
prohibits illegal aliens, as well as their spouses and dependents, from
any claim to Social Security benefits for work they performed while in
the U.S. illegally.
A loophole in the bill, however, permits use of the quarters spent
working illegally in the U.S. if the person were to obtain legal working
status subsequently.
Moreover, the totalization agreement with Mexico would seem to lift the
requirements of the Social Security Protection Act for Mexicans working
in the U.S. illegally.
In September 2003, the U.S. General Accounting Office estimated a Social
Security totalization agreement with Mexico would cost $78 million in
the first year and would grow to $650 billion (in constant 2002 dollars)
in 2050.
The GAO admitted even this estimate was low given that the totalization
agreement provides an additional incentive for millions more Mexicans to
enter and work in the United States.
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55301
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
Federal Reserve headquarters in Washington
Amid the U.S. government's acknowledgment of rampant document and
benefit fraud, the Federal Reserve is wiring 26,000 Social Security
payments every month to Mexicans south of the border.
Officials with the Federal Reserve and Social Security Administration
insist payments are not going to illegal aliens but admit they cannot be
certain. Meanwhile, the Department of Homeland Security has launched a
new task force to address the "growing" problem of benefit fraud,
including in the Social Security Administration.
Jean Tate, spokeswoman for the Federal Reserve, said 26,000 of the
27,000 payments made monthly via the Fed's "Directo a Mexico" service
are for Social Security recipients.
Mark Lassiter, spokesman for the Social Security Administration, told
WND he was not familiar with the Fed's Directo a México program.
Still, he insisted the payments had to be going to legal beneficiaries
of Social Security.
"For example, if I am a U.S. citizen and I retire to Mexico, I can
continue to draw my Social Security benefits while I am in Mexico," he
explained. "Or maybe the person is a Mexican citizen who was legally in
the U.S. and had a work-authorized Social Security number."
Lassiter told WND he was unaware of any study the Social Security
Administration had conducted on the 26,000 monthly payments made through
Directo a México.
He said he had no breakdown of the characteristics of the recipients.
Still, Lassiter insisted it was "highly unlikely" any of these 26,000
were receiving payments illegally in Mexico.
"You have to have a legally issued Social Security number that
authorizes you to work to get Social Security credit for those
earnings," Lassiter explained to WND. "But I don't have specific
breakdowns of these 26,000 recipients in Mexico that you're talking
about."
Lassiter suggested filing a Freedom of Information Act request to get
more details on the recipients.
"I have confidence that when we determine that someone is eligible for
Social Security benefits, we are determining that the person is legally
eligible for Social Security benefits," Lassiter said.
Nevertheless, on Dec. 6 the Department of Homeland Security announced
the creation of the Document and Benefit Fraud Task Force, an
inter-agency group created "to combat the growing problems of document
fraud and immigration benefits fraud."
The Inspector General's office of the Social Security Administration was
listed as one of the participating agencies.
No ID required
The Federal Reserve introduced Directo a México in fall 2005 to allow
U.S. financial institutions to utilize the Fed's Automated Clearing
House channel to remit payments to Mexico.
Directo a México is a joint market effort between the Federal Reserve
and the Banco de México, the central banks of the U.S. and Mexico,
respectively.
According to the Federal Reserve, in 2005 the amount of funds
transferred to Mexico reached more than $30 billion, up from $16.6
billion in 2004. The remittance market to Mexico has experienced
double-digit growth in recent years.
"Approximately 250 institutions are enrolled nationwide in Directo a
México," Tate told WND. "However, enrollment in the program does not
mean that an institution is using it."
Tate noted there "seems to be a concentration of the financial
institutions using the Directo a México program, in corridors found in
the Carolinas, Arkansas, Kentucky, Tennessee, Illinois, Iowa, Wisconsin,
Colorado, Oklahoma, Texas and California."
Still, U.S. banks and credit unions currently account for no more than 3
percent of all remittances sent to Mexico.
A leading player in the remittance market remains Western Union.
A key competitive marketing strategy for Directo a México has been to
reduce the cost of remittance transfers.
Tate told WND financial institutions tend to charge from $2 to $5 per
transfer, compared with a much larger average cost for making a
remittance transfer through Western Union.
Using the "Money in Minutes" calculator on the Western Union website, a
$100 transfer from New Jersey to Mexico requires a $5 fee, compared to a
$25 fee for a $500 transfer.
Also, Directo a México prices conversions of the U.S. dollar to the
Mexican peso competitively, according to a fixed formula that does not
change regardless of the amount being transferred.
The explanation for why banks and credit unions using Directo a México
have such a low share in the remittance market compared to Western Union
may in part be in the identification requirements needed in the two
programs.
Tate told WND that in the Directo a México program, each financial
institution determines which ID documents it chooses to accept, but all
participating Directo a México financial institutions are restricted by
the approved options specified in the Patriot Act.
Western Union will accept the Matricula Consular cards issued to Mexican
nationals by Mexican consulates in the United States, even though
Mexican nationals frequently obtain multiple cards and counterfeits are
commonly available.
Mexican consulates regularly issue Matricula Consular cards to Mexican
illegal immigrants in the U.S.
Western Union spokeswoman Kristin Kelly declined comment, explaining to
WND that her company is currently in a quiet period pending release of
earnings.
WND called a Western Union 800 number and confirmed that a Matricula
Consular card would be sufficient for an illegal alien to wire money to
Mexico.
The telephone assistant explained the identification of the sender was
important only if there was a problem with the transfer and the sender
wanted a refund.
The assistant also explained the money transfer could be made using a
credit card or a debit card over the telephone or on the Internet.
The Western Union 800 number explained the wire transfer fee was $5 for
the first $100 transferred and 5 percent of the principal for amounts
larger than $100.
Social Security totalization
As WND previously reported, after refusing to release the document for
three and a half years, the Social Security Administration in January
finally made public a totalization agreement that "would allow millions
of illegal Mexican workers to draw billions of dollars from the U.S.
Social Security Trust Fund."
The disclosure was forced by a Freedom of Information Act request filed
by the TREA Senior Citizens League, a non-partisan seniors advocacy
group.
On June 29, 2004, the Social Security totalization agreement with Mexico
was signed by the U.S. Commissioner of Social Security and the director
general of the Mexican Social Security Institute. The agreement has not
yet been signed by President Bush.
Once Bush signs the agreement, which can be done without receiving
congressional approval, the House of Representatives or the Senate would
have 60 days to vacate the agreement by voting to reject it.
The U.S. currently has Social Security totalization agreements with 21
countries, but none with Mexico. The Social Security international
agreements are designed to allow workers to combine earnings from
foreign countries with earnings in the U.S. to qualify for U.S. Social
Security benefits.
The agreement with Mexico would allow a Mexican worker to qualify for
U.S. Social Security benefits with just six quarters (18 months) of U.S.
employment. Typically a U.S. worker who turns 62 after 1990 needs 40
calendar quarters (120 months) to receive U.S. Social Security benefits.
The problem is further compounded because only about 40 percent of
non-government workers in Mexico participate in Mexico's state
retirement system, whereas 96 percent of America's non-government
workers participate in Social Security.
In February 2004, Congress passed H.R. 743, known as the Social Security
Protection Act. The bill included a provision by Sen. Charles Grassley,
R-Iowa, then the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, that
prohibits illegal aliens, as well as their spouses and dependents, from
any claim to Social Security benefits for work they performed while in
the U.S. illegally.
A loophole in the bill, however, permits use of the quarters spent
working illegally in the U.S. if the person were to obtain legal working
status subsequently.
Moreover, the totalization agreement with Mexico would seem to lift the
requirements of the Social Security Protection Act for Mexicans working
in the U.S. illegally.
In September 2003, the U.S. General Accounting Office estimated a Social
Security totalization agreement with Mexico would cost $78 million in
the first year and would grow to $650 billion (in constant 2002 dollars)
in 2050.
The GAO admitted even this estimate was low given that the totalization
agreement provides an additional incentive for millions more Mexicans to
enter and work in the United States.
Monday, April 16, 2007
Sleeper Cells in the US and Canada
Sleeper Cells in the United States and Canada
By Dave Gaubatz
There is every reason to suspect that we will endure suicide missions by Islamist sleeper cells. They are already in place. They are waiting for the right time. I know this from experience.
I have worked over 15 years as a U.S. Federal Agent, a U.S. State Department Arabic linguist, and the first civilian Federal Agent deployed into Iraq at the start of Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003. Since returning from Iraq I have been involved in terrorism analysis, specifically the mindset of terrorists. During my extensive research on sleeper cells I have talked with hundreds of people from the Middle East from all walks of life, and have talked with Iraqi Government officials, Iraqi military, and Iraqi police officers. In addition I have interviewed numerous counter-terrorism specialists in the U.S. and abroad. In the last year alone I have trained over 4000 U.S. Law Enforcement officers in Basic Investigative Arabic and counter-terrorism. The conclusion of my research is the title of this article.
Before I departed for the Middle East in 2003 I had been assigned to Kirtland AFB, NM. Kirtland has some of the best scientists in the world working on U.S. Government projects. I had been working closely with these scientists who specialized in nuclear energy, directed energy, laser technology, bio-weapons and more. I fully understand the impact if suicide bombers begin progressing from conventional explosives to unconventional methods.
The Middle East
In Jan 2003, I was assigned to Arar Air Base Saudi Arabia. Arar is located near the border of Iraq. My mission was to interact with Saudi military officials in order to determine the support we could expect from the Saudi government, to determine if Iraqis were monitoring the activities of the U.S. forces at Arar, and to infiltrate the encampments of the Bedouin community (Saudis and Iraqis living in the desert of Arar). This involved leaving the relatively safe confines of Arar Air Base and driving to the Bedouin camps.
It was most important the Saudis did not know we were leaving the compound because they had forbidden us to do so. Four U.S. special Agents would use our ATV's and/or four wheel drive vehicles to conduct these missions. The Saudi Government had active spies collecting information pertaining to our troop strength, our weapons, and any other intelligence they could obtain. The Saudis were providing the intelligence to the Saudi Government, and we were very confident it was also being passed to Iraqi intelligence.
During January 2003 and Feb 2003, Saudi Intelligence officers would boast that the American military was overreacting about Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. Their bravery changed as we approached the invasion of Iraq in Mar 2003. The high-ranking Saudi officers were scrambling to obtain gas masks and other protective equipment. They knew their equipment was substandard and they wanted U.S.-made protective equipment. We gave them some of ours. The Saudi Intelligence officers were visibly frightened about a potential chemical, biological, or nuclear attack and expressed their fears. This was my first confirmation Saddam Hussein still had WMD material and the capability to use them.
The Saudis knew Saddam had WMD and would use them if he had the opportunity.
When I arrived in Nasiriyah, Iraq (after the start of war) my team and I immediately began interviewing (in the field) Iraqis from all walks of life to determine where the WMD sites were located. At the beginning of the war Iraqis were very helpful and provided us exact locations and proof WMD was at certain locations (primarily southern Iraq because Saddam knew the UN Weapons Inspectors had seldom inspected any locations in this area). They had always focused in northern Iraq.
Four primary suspected WMD sites were located. We tried from April until July 2003 to have the Iraq Survey Group come and excavate these sites. They advised us they did not have the manpower nor the heavy equipment needed to excavate the sites, which were underground bunkers (beneath waterways). We were frustrated. I have received information from various sources that the WMD I had attempted to have excavated was subsequently looted (after the war) and transferred to Syria.
While in Iraq we determined the following:
1. Russian activity in Iraq had been rampant several months prior to the war and up until the day before the invasion.
2. Iranians were infiltrating southern Iraq by the thousands and were preparing to assist insurgents in removing U.S. forces from Iraq.
3. We found numerous pieces of evidence indicating WMD were in Iraq before the war began and some were still in Iraq.
4. I and other agents were informed by Iraqis that a civil war would erupt and violence against U.S. forces would increase due to the Iranian and Russian influence.
All of this information was provided through intelligence channels, but was ignored. Today we are seeing the results of our intelligence being ignored in 2003.
Vulnerability at home
Upon returning from Iraq I left Federal Service to pursue a career educating U.S. law enforcement in the U.S. I wrote a book titled "Arabic for law enforcement and military". During my lectures to local, county, and state law enforcement officers it was revealed the true first line defenders in the U.S. are not trained nor prepared to combat terrorism in the U.S. (through no fault of their own). The local law enforcement agencies were not receiving adequate funds or assistance from the Federal Government to fight terrorism. The majority advised they were supposed to be the first line defenders, but in actuality they did not even know what Al-Qaeda meant, and/or could not point out Iraq or Iran on a map. They had no Arabic language training.
I began conducting research and talking with experts from various fields and determined three significant facts that I corroborated by further research:
1. The terrorists groups such as Hezbollah, Hamas, and Al-Qaeda each had different leaders and to some degree operated in different ways, but they each had the same two goals (destroy Israel and destroy America and any country that supported either).
2. Our nuclear research centers were very vulnerable to an attack and the potential for a suicide bomber using a dirty radiological bomb from these facilities was and is a high probability. Note: Vic Walter and Brian Ross of ABC News did an excellent report on the lack of security at these facilities. I received an enormous amount of information from individuals associated with Russian nuclear programs that there is nuclear material being sold on the black market and nuclear material is in the hands of Islamic Extremists.
3. Terrorist sleeper cells are located primarily in North Carolina, Michigan, and Canada. The "sleepers" are prepared to conduct terrorist attacks within the U.S., and nuclear material is available to them. "Prepared" in this instance indicates they have the necessary tools to carry our their attacks and are prepared to die.
About nine months ago a lady from Morehead City, NC contacted me and asked for assistance because she had been ignored by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS), the FBI, and local law enforcement. Her allegation: A group of people who were citizens of Lebanon was operating from NC and was involved in financially supporting Hezbollah. The members were also befriending United States Marine Corps personnel (to include the Marine Corps Base Commander at Cherry Point USMC Base). The Lebanese citizens had free access to the Marine Corps base and had frequent parties with USMC members. She had ledgers; photographs of U.S. Marines with the Lebanese members, numerous passports (some falsified), duplicate drivers licenses, social security cards, and financial transactions log books both in Arabic and English. I obtained the information from her and conducted research. I turned my information over to the NCSBI office.
Less than a week ago I met several citizens from the Middle East who are familiar with terrorist groups, their methodology, and more importantly the mindset of terrorists (specifically Al-Qaeda). They believe violence in Iraq will increase and the number of U.S. troops in Iraq is not a factor. The largest percentage of U.S. troops in Iraq are support troops and not combat troops. From the beginning of 2003 until now the number of troops who actually engage insurgents is actually less than 5% of all assigned troops in the region. Al-Qaeda now has a strong hold in Iraq and they will not let go. Terrorist operations are active in the U.S. and are being operated/financed in Michigan. U.S. citizens need to understand there are people trained and prepared to carry our suicide missions in the U.S. and nothing is off limits. Churches, malls, and even the schools our children attend are not off limits to suicide bombers. It is only a relatively short time before the U.S. will begin seeing suicide terrorist missions.
I will continue to research terrorism related issues in the U.S. and Canada and will bring forward the results. My next project is to follow Dr. Paul William's investigation into McMaster University located in Canada. My initial research indicates terrorists are being educated here with the approval of some university administrators. I have contacted the university and informed them of this project and will give them an opportunity to respond to each piece developed during my research on terrorism at McMaster. McMaster is not alone when it comes to nuclear reactors located on major university sites. Nuclear reactors are located on a large number of major university campuses in the U.S. There locations are not classified and are described on the internet.
Children are the ones who suffer in wartime and I want to prevent any child from ever having to experience a terrorist attack.
To assist me in my endeavors to uncover the truths behind terrorist cells in Canada and the U.S. contact me at pdgaubatz@yahoo.com or visit my website.
By Dave Gaubatz
There is every reason to suspect that we will endure suicide missions by Islamist sleeper cells. They are already in place. They are waiting for the right time. I know this from experience.
I have worked over 15 years as a U.S. Federal Agent, a U.S. State Department Arabic linguist, and the first civilian Federal Agent deployed into Iraq at the start of Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003. Since returning from Iraq I have been involved in terrorism analysis, specifically the mindset of terrorists. During my extensive research on sleeper cells I have talked with hundreds of people from the Middle East from all walks of life, and have talked with Iraqi Government officials, Iraqi military, and Iraqi police officers. In addition I have interviewed numerous counter-terrorism specialists in the U.S. and abroad. In the last year alone I have trained over 4000 U.S. Law Enforcement officers in Basic Investigative Arabic and counter-terrorism. The conclusion of my research is the title of this article.
Before I departed for the Middle East in 2003 I had been assigned to Kirtland AFB, NM. Kirtland has some of the best scientists in the world working on U.S. Government projects. I had been working closely with these scientists who specialized in nuclear energy, directed energy, laser technology, bio-weapons and more. I fully understand the impact if suicide bombers begin progressing from conventional explosives to unconventional methods.
The Middle East
In Jan 2003, I was assigned to Arar Air Base Saudi Arabia. Arar is located near the border of Iraq. My mission was to interact with Saudi military officials in order to determine the support we could expect from the Saudi government, to determine if Iraqis were monitoring the activities of the U.S. forces at Arar, and to infiltrate the encampments of the Bedouin community (Saudis and Iraqis living in the desert of Arar). This involved leaving the relatively safe confines of Arar Air Base and driving to the Bedouin camps.
It was most important the Saudis did not know we were leaving the compound because they had forbidden us to do so. Four U.S. special Agents would use our ATV's and/or four wheel drive vehicles to conduct these missions. The Saudi Government had active spies collecting information pertaining to our troop strength, our weapons, and any other intelligence they could obtain. The Saudis were providing the intelligence to the Saudi Government, and we were very confident it was also being passed to Iraqi intelligence.
During January 2003 and Feb 2003, Saudi Intelligence officers would boast that the American military was overreacting about Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. Their bravery changed as we approached the invasion of Iraq in Mar 2003. The high-ranking Saudi officers were scrambling to obtain gas masks and other protective equipment. They knew their equipment was substandard and they wanted U.S.-made protective equipment. We gave them some of ours. The Saudi Intelligence officers were visibly frightened about a potential chemical, biological, or nuclear attack and expressed their fears. This was my first confirmation Saddam Hussein still had WMD material and the capability to use them.
The Saudis knew Saddam had WMD and would use them if he had the opportunity.
When I arrived in Nasiriyah, Iraq (after the start of war) my team and I immediately began interviewing (in the field) Iraqis from all walks of life to determine where the WMD sites were located. At the beginning of the war Iraqis were very helpful and provided us exact locations and proof WMD was at certain locations (primarily southern Iraq because Saddam knew the UN Weapons Inspectors had seldom inspected any locations in this area). They had always focused in northern Iraq.
Four primary suspected WMD sites were located. We tried from April until July 2003 to have the Iraq Survey Group come and excavate these sites. They advised us they did not have the manpower nor the heavy equipment needed to excavate the sites, which were underground bunkers (beneath waterways). We were frustrated. I have received information from various sources that the WMD I had attempted to have excavated was subsequently looted (after the war) and transferred to Syria.
While in Iraq we determined the following:
1. Russian activity in Iraq had been rampant several months prior to the war and up until the day before the invasion.
2. Iranians were infiltrating southern Iraq by the thousands and were preparing to assist insurgents in removing U.S. forces from Iraq.
3. We found numerous pieces of evidence indicating WMD were in Iraq before the war began and some were still in Iraq.
4. I and other agents were informed by Iraqis that a civil war would erupt and violence against U.S. forces would increase due to the Iranian and Russian influence.
All of this information was provided through intelligence channels, but was ignored. Today we are seeing the results of our intelligence being ignored in 2003.
Vulnerability at home
Upon returning from Iraq I left Federal Service to pursue a career educating U.S. law enforcement in the U.S. I wrote a book titled "Arabic for law enforcement and military". During my lectures to local, county, and state law enforcement officers it was revealed the true first line defenders in the U.S. are not trained nor prepared to combat terrorism in the U.S. (through no fault of their own). The local law enforcement agencies were not receiving adequate funds or assistance from the Federal Government to fight terrorism. The majority advised they were supposed to be the first line defenders, but in actuality they did not even know what Al-Qaeda meant, and/or could not point out Iraq or Iran on a map. They had no Arabic language training.
I began conducting research and talking with experts from various fields and determined three significant facts that I corroborated by further research:
1. The terrorists groups such as Hezbollah, Hamas, and Al-Qaeda each had different leaders and to some degree operated in different ways, but they each had the same two goals (destroy Israel and destroy America and any country that supported either).
2. Our nuclear research centers were very vulnerable to an attack and the potential for a suicide bomber using a dirty radiological bomb from these facilities was and is a high probability. Note: Vic Walter and Brian Ross of ABC News did an excellent report on the lack of security at these facilities. I received an enormous amount of information from individuals associated with Russian nuclear programs that there is nuclear material being sold on the black market and nuclear material is in the hands of Islamic Extremists.
3. Terrorist sleeper cells are located primarily in North Carolina, Michigan, and Canada. The "sleepers" are prepared to conduct terrorist attacks within the U.S., and nuclear material is available to them. "Prepared" in this instance indicates they have the necessary tools to carry our their attacks and are prepared to die.
About nine months ago a lady from Morehead City, NC contacted me and asked for assistance because she had been ignored by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS), the FBI, and local law enforcement. Her allegation: A group of people who were citizens of Lebanon was operating from NC and was involved in financially supporting Hezbollah. The members were also befriending United States Marine Corps personnel (to include the Marine Corps Base Commander at Cherry Point USMC Base). The Lebanese citizens had free access to the Marine Corps base and had frequent parties with USMC members. She had ledgers; photographs of U.S. Marines with the Lebanese members, numerous passports (some falsified), duplicate drivers licenses, social security cards, and financial transactions log books both in Arabic and English. I obtained the information from her and conducted research. I turned my information over to the NCSBI office.
Less than a week ago I met several citizens from the Middle East who are familiar with terrorist groups, their methodology, and more importantly the mindset of terrorists (specifically Al-Qaeda). They believe violence in Iraq will increase and the number of U.S. troops in Iraq is not a factor. The largest percentage of U.S. troops in Iraq are support troops and not combat troops. From the beginning of 2003 until now the number of troops who actually engage insurgents is actually less than 5% of all assigned troops in the region. Al-Qaeda now has a strong hold in Iraq and they will not let go. Terrorist operations are active in the U.S. and are being operated/financed in Michigan. U.S. citizens need to understand there are people trained and prepared to carry our suicide missions in the U.S. and nothing is off limits. Churches, malls, and even the schools our children attend are not off limits to suicide bombers. It is only a relatively short time before the U.S. will begin seeing suicide terrorist missions.
I will continue to research terrorism related issues in the U.S. and Canada and will bring forward the results. My next project is to follow Dr. Paul William's investigation into McMaster University located in Canada. My initial research indicates terrorists are being educated here with the approval of some university administrators. I have contacted the university and informed them of this project and will give them an opportunity to respond to each piece developed during my research on terrorism at McMaster. McMaster is not alone when it comes to nuclear reactors located on major university sites. Nuclear reactors are located on a large number of major university campuses in the U.S. There locations are not classified and are described on the internet.
Children are the ones who suffer in wartime and I want to prevent any child from ever having to experience a terrorist attack.
To assist me in my endeavors to uncover the truths behind terrorist cells in Canada and the U.S. contact me at pdgaubatz@yahoo.com or visit my website.
Saturday, April 14, 2007
Islam's 20 Year Plan for US
ROM JOSEPH FARAH'S G2 BULLETIN
Author sees Islam's 20-year plan for U.S.
Arab-American author outlines secret
20-year strategy to undermine country
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: August 4, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern
Editor's note: Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin is an online, subscription intelligence news service from the creator of WorldNetDaily.com – a journalist who has been developing sources around the world for the last 25 years.
© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com
A refugee from the Muslim Middle East thinks he has discovered Islam's 20-point plan for conquering the United States by 2020 – a plan revealed in the latest issue of Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin.
Anis Shorrosh, author of ''Islam Revealed'' and ''The True Furqan,'' is a Christian Arab-American who emigrated from Arab-controlled Jerusalem in January 1967.
''The following is my analysis of Islamic invasion of America, the agenda of Islamists and visible methods to take over America by the year 2020,'' Shorrosh says. ''Will Americans continue to sleep through this invasion as they did when we were attacked on 9/11?''
1. Terminate America's freedom of speech by replacing it with statewide and nationwide hate-crime bills.
2. Wage a war of words using black leaders like Louis Farrakhan, Rev. Jesse Jackson and other visible religious personalities who promote Islam as the religion of African-Americans while insisting Christianity is for whites only. What they fail to tell African-Americans is that it was Arab Muslims who captured them and sold them as slaves. In fact, the Arabic word for black and slave is the same, ''Abed.''
3. Engage the American public in dialogues, discussions, debates in colleges, universities, public libraries, radio, TV, churches and mosques on the virtues of Islam. Proclaim how it is historically another religion like Judaism and Christianity with the same monotheistic faith.
4. Nominate Muslim sympathizers to political office to bring about favorable legislation toward Islam and support potential sympathizers by block voting.
5. Take control of as much of Hollywood, the press, TV, radio and the Internet as possible by buying the related corporations or a controlling stock.
6. Yield to the fear of the imminent shut-off of the lifeblood of America – black gold. America’s economy depends on oil and 41 percent of it comes from the Middle East.
7. Yell ''foul, out-of-context, personal interpretation, hate crime, Zionist, un- American, inaccurate interpretation of the Quran'' anytime Islam is criticized or the Quran is analyzed in the public arena.
8. Encourage Muslims to penetrate the White House, specifically with Islamists who can articulate a marvelous and peaceful picture of Islam. Acquire government positions and get membership in local school boards. Train Muslims as medical doctors to dominate the medical field, research and pharmaceutical companies. (Ever notice how numerous Muslim doctors in America are, when their countries need them more desperately than America?) Take over the computer industry. Establish Middle Eastern restaurants throughout the U.S. to connect planners of Islamization in a discreet way.
9. Accelerate Islamic demographic growth via:
Massive immigration (100,000 annually since 1961).
Use no birth control whatsoever – every baby of Muslim parents is automatically a Muslim and cannot choose another religion later.
Muslim men must marry American women and Islamize them (10,000 annually). Then divorce them and remarry every five years – since one can't legally marry four at one time. This is a legal solution in America.
Convert angry, alienated black inmates and turn them into militants (so far 2,000 released inmates have joined al-Qaida worldwide). Only a few ''sleeper cells'' have been captured in Afghanistan and on American soil.
10. Reading, writing, arithmetic and research through the American educational system, mosques and student centers (now 1,500) should be sprinkled with dislike of Jews, evangelical Christians and democracy. There are currently 300 exclusively Muslim schools in the U.S. which teach loyalty to the Quran, not the U.S. Constitution. In January of 2002, Saudi Arabia’s Embassy in Washington mailed 4,500 packets of the Quran and videos promoting Islam to America's high schools – free of charge. Saudi Arabia would not allow the U.S. to reciprocate.
11. Provide very sizeable monetary Muslim grants to colleges and universities in America to establish ''Centers for Islamic studies'' with Muslim directors to promote Islam in higher-education institutions.
12. Let the entire world know through propaganda, speeches, seminars, local and national media that terrorists have hijacked Islam, when in truth, Islam hijacked the terrorists.
13. Appeal to the historically compassionate and sensitive Americans for sympathy and tolerance towards Muslims in America who are portrayed as mainly immigrants from oppressed countries.
14. Nullify America's sense of security by manipulating the intelligence community with misinformation. Periodically terrorize Americans with reports of impending attacks on bridges, tunnels, water supplies, airports, apartment buildings and malls.
15. Form riots and demonstrations in the prison system demanding Islamic Sharia as the way of life, not America's justice system.
16. Open numerous charities throughout the U.S., but use the funds to support Islamic terrorism with American dollars.
17. Raise interest in Islam on America's campuses by insisting freshman take at least one course on Islam.
18. Unify the numerous Muslim lobbies in Washington, mosques, Islamic student centers, educational organizations, magazines and papers by Internet and an annual convention to coordinate plans, propagate the faith and engender news in the media.
19. Send intimidating messages and messengers to the outspoken individuals who are critical of Islam and seek to eliminate them by hook or crook.
20. Applaud Muslims as loyal citizens of the U.S. by spotlighting their voting record as the highest percentage of all minority and ethic groups in America.
Shorrosh is a member of the Oxford Society of Scholars, has traveled in 76 countries, and is a lecturer and producer of TV documentaries. ''Islam Revealed'' is a bestseller now in its eighth printing. His forthcoming 10th book, from which the 20-point plan is abridged, is titled ''Islam: A Threat or a Challenge.''
''The True Furqan'' is also available for viewing on Islam-Exposed.org. Shorrosh's new website is Focusing-on-Islam.com.
Author sees Islam's 20-year plan for U.S.
Arab-American author outlines secret
20-year strategy to undermine country
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: August 4, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern
Editor's note: Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin is an online, subscription intelligence news service from the creator of WorldNetDaily.com – a journalist who has been developing sources around the world for the last 25 years.
© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com
A refugee from the Muslim Middle East thinks he has discovered Islam's 20-point plan for conquering the United States by 2020 – a plan revealed in the latest issue of Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin.
Anis Shorrosh, author of ''Islam Revealed'' and ''The True Furqan,'' is a Christian Arab-American who emigrated from Arab-controlled Jerusalem in January 1967.
''The following is my analysis of Islamic invasion of America, the agenda of Islamists and visible methods to take over America by the year 2020,'' Shorrosh says. ''Will Americans continue to sleep through this invasion as they did when we were attacked on 9/11?''
1. Terminate America's freedom of speech by replacing it with statewide and nationwide hate-crime bills.
2. Wage a war of words using black leaders like Louis Farrakhan, Rev. Jesse Jackson and other visible religious personalities who promote Islam as the religion of African-Americans while insisting Christianity is for whites only. What they fail to tell African-Americans is that it was Arab Muslims who captured them and sold them as slaves. In fact, the Arabic word for black and slave is the same, ''Abed.''
3. Engage the American public in dialogues, discussions, debates in colleges, universities, public libraries, radio, TV, churches and mosques on the virtues of Islam. Proclaim how it is historically another religion like Judaism and Christianity with the same monotheistic faith.
4. Nominate Muslim sympathizers to political office to bring about favorable legislation toward Islam and support potential sympathizers by block voting.
5. Take control of as much of Hollywood, the press, TV, radio and the Internet as possible by buying the related corporations or a controlling stock.
6. Yield to the fear of the imminent shut-off of the lifeblood of America – black gold. America’s economy depends on oil and 41 percent of it comes from the Middle East.
7. Yell ''foul, out-of-context, personal interpretation, hate crime, Zionist, un- American, inaccurate interpretation of the Quran'' anytime Islam is criticized or the Quran is analyzed in the public arena.
8. Encourage Muslims to penetrate the White House, specifically with Islamists who can articulate a marvelous and peaceful picture of Islam. Acquire government positions and get membership in local school boards. Train Muslims as medical doctors to dominate the medical field, research and pharmaceutical companies. (Ever notice how numerous Muslim doctors in America are, when their countries need them more desperately than America?) Take over the computer industry. Establish Middle Eastern restaurants throughout the U.S. to connect planners of Islamization in a discreet way.
9. Accelerate Islamic demographic growth via:
Massive immigration (100,000 annually since 1961).
Use no birth control whatsoever – every baby of Muslim parents is automatically a Muslim and cannot choose another religion later.
Muslim men must marry American women and Islamize them (10,000 annually). Then divorce them and remarry every five years – since one can't legally marry four at one time. This is a legal solution in America.
Convert angry, alienated black inmates and turn them into militants (so far 2,000 released inmates have joined al-Qaida worldwide). Only a few ''sleeper cells'' have been captured in Afghanistan and on American soil.
10. Reading, writing, arithmetic and research through the American educational system, mosques and student centers (now 1,500) should be sprinkled with dislike of Jews, evangelical Christians and democracy. There are currently 300 exclusively Muslim schools in the U.S. which teach loyalty to the Quran, not the U.S. Constitution. In January of 2002, Saudi Arabia’s Embassy in Washington mailed 4,500 packets of the Quran and videos promoting Islam to America's high schools – free of charge. Saudi Arabia would not allow the U.S. to reciprocate.
11. Provide very sizeable monetary Muslim grants to colleges and universities in America to establish ''Centers for Islamic studies'' with Muslim directors to promote Islam in higher-education institutions.
12. Let the entire world know through propaganda, speeches, seminars, local and national media that terrorists have hijacked Islam, when in truth, Islam hijacked the terrorists.
13. Appeal to the historically compassionate and sensitive Americans for sympathy and tolerance towards Muslims in America who are portrayed as mainly immigrants from oppressed countries.
14. Nullify America's sense of security by manipulating the intelligence community with misinformation. Periodically terrorize Americans with reports of impending attacks on bridges, tunnels, water supplies, airports, apartment buildings and malls.
15. Form riots and demonstrations in the prison system demanding Islamic Sharia as the way of life, not America's justice system.
16. Open numerous charities throughout the U.S., but use the funds to support Islamic terrorism with American dollars.
17. Raise interest in Islam on America's campuses by insisting freshman take at least one course on Islam.
18. Unify the numerous Muslim lobbies in Washington, mosques, Islamic student centers, educational organizations, magazines and papers by Internet and an annual convention to coordinate plans, propagate the faith and engender news in the media.
19. Send intimidating messages and messengers to the outspoken individuals who are critical of Islam and seek to eliminate them by hook or crook.
20. Applaud Muslims as loyal citizens of the U.S. by spotlighting their voting record as the highest percentage of all minority and ethic groups in America.
Shorrosh is a member of the Oxford Society of Scholars, has traveled in 76 countries, and is a lecturer and producer of TV documentaries. ''Islam Revealed'' is a bestseller now in its eighth printing. His forthcoming 10th book, from which the 20-point plan is abridged, is titled ''Islam: A Threat or a Challenge.''
''The True Furqan'' is also available for viewing on Islam-Exposed.org. Shorrosh's new website is Focusing-on-Islam.com.
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
CAIR And ADC Praise Pelosi
CAIR And ADC Praise Pelosi Trip While Keith Ellison Cavorts With Hamas Supporter
April 9, 2007 - San Francisco, CA - PipeLineNews.org - The Islamist beneficiaries of Speaker Pelosi's visit to the Middle East have praised the trip, knowing that undermining the war on terror is supportive of their agenda.
Pelosi's donning of a headscarf in Syria and Riyadh was seized upon by Arab commentators who understand it as a symbol of dhimmitude.
In a PR statement released by the Council on American Islamic Relations in California, the Hamas front group expressed their approval of Pelosi's visit to the Ummayad Mosque in Damascus, and her undercutting of the administration's Middle East policy:
"We applaud Speaker Pelosi's initiative to use constructive dialogue as a tool for resolving conflicts. America's stature in the Islamic world has been harmed by the Bush administration's emphasis on the use of military force, or the threat of force, rather than dialogue and diplomacy…In particular, Speaker Pelosi's visit to the Umayyad mosque in Damascus will contribute greatly to promoting mutual understanding between the West and the Muslim world. It is through mutual understanding that religious divisions and extremism can be challenged and reduced…We urge President Bush to implement the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group by working with Congress and Speaker Pelosi to formulate a new strategy that focuses on diplomacy and dialogue, not military force and belligerent rhetoric."
The Arab American Anti Discrimination Committee [ADC] which bills itself as the largest "Arab- American grassroots organization" [which is heavily funded by Wahhabist Saudi Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal] stated:
" Proactive steps in engaging in dialogue with key players in the Middle East that is vital to achieving peace in the area and securing the long-term national interests of the United States."
On the visit to Saudi Arabia Pelosi also displayed the Democrat party's hypocrisy on human rights and women's issues resplendent in legislator's chair - a position no women can hold in Saudi Arabia. Pelosi said, "it's a nice view from here this chair is very comfortable" but refrained from criticizing the Kingdom for their oppression treatment of women.
She did, however use the media coverage to imply that the Saudis were only marginally less committed to women's rights than was the United States, replying in Riyadh on Thursday to a question about how she felt about the absence of female Saudi council members, "I am very pleased that after 200-plus years in the U.S. we finally have a speaker. It took us a long time."
Also traveling with Pelosi was CAIR's first congressman, Minnesota Democrat Keith Ellison, the first Muslim elected to the national legislature.
The Minnesota Democrat is scheduled to meet today with the mufti of Jerusalem, Muhammed Hussein, at the Al Aqsa mosque compound in Jerusalem's Old City.
Hussein recently appeared on a Gaza Strip Hamas radio program and called Israeli government efforts to provide safe access for Muslims to the mosque "an aggression" and further incited listeners, calling "on the Palestinian people to unite and unify the efforts to protect Jerusalem."
April 9, 2007 - San Francisco, CA - PipeLineNews.org - The Islamist beneficiaries of Speaker Pelosi's visit to the Middle East have praised the trip, knowing that undermining the war on terror is supportive of their agenda.
Pelosi's donning of a headscarf in Syria and Riyadh was seized upon by Arab commentators who understand it as a symbol of dhimmitude.
In a PR statement released by the Council on American Islamic Relations in California, the Hamas front group expressed their approval of Pelosi's visit to the Ummayad Mosque in Damascus, and her undercutting of the administration's Middle East policy:
"We applaud Speaker Pelosi's initiative to use constructive dialogue as a tool for resolving conflicts. America's stature in the Islamic world has been harmed by the Bush administration's emphasis on the use of military force, or the threat of force, rather than dialogue and diplomacy…In particular, Speaker Pelosi's visit to the Umayyad mosque in Damascus will contribute greatly to promoting mutual understanding between the West and the Muslim world. It is through mutual understanding that religious divisions and extremism can be challenged and reduced…We urge President Bush to implement the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group by working with Congress and Speaker Pelosi to formulate a new strategy that focuses on diplomacy and dialogue, not military force and belligerent rhetoric."
The Arab American Anti Discrimination Committee [ADC] which bills itself as the largest "Arab- American grassroots organization" [which is heavily funded by Wahhabist Saudi Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal] stated:
" Proactive steps in engaging in dialogue with key players in the Middle East that is vital to achieving peace in the area and securing the long-term national interests of the United States."
On the visit to Saudi Arabia Pelosi also displayed the Democrat party's hypocrisy on human rights and women's issues resplendent in legislator's chair - a position no women can hold in Saudi Arabia. Pelosi said, "it's a nice view from here this chair is very comfortable" but refrained from criticizing the Kingdom for their oppression treatment of women.
She did, however use the media coverage to imply that the Saudis were only marginally less committed to women's rights than was the United States, replying in Riyadh on Thursday to a question about how she felt about the absence of female Saudi council members, "I am very pleased that after 200-plus years in the U.S. we finally have a speaker. It took us a long time."
Also traveling with Pelosi was CAIR's first congressman, Minnesota Democrat Keith Ellison, the first Muslim elected to the national legislature.
The Minnesota Democrat is scheduled to meet today with the mufti of Jerusalem, Muhammed Hussein, at the Al Aqsa mosque compound in Jerusalem's Old City.
Hussein recently appeared on a Gaza Strip Hamas radio program and called Israeli government efforts to provide safe access for Muslims to the mosque "an aggression" and further incited listeners, calling "on the Palestinian people to unite and unify the efforts to protect Jerusalem."
Wednesday, April 04, 2007
Islam's Plan
Islam’s “Plan” To Take Over the USA
in 20 Years
As reported by Anis Shorrosh, author of “Islam Revealed”
as well as in Joseph Farah’s G2 Bulletin
and WorldNetDaily.com on August 4, 2003.
1. Terminate America's freedom of speech by replacing it with statewide and nationwide hate-crime bills.
2. Wage a war of words using black leaders like Louis Farrakhan, Rev. Jesse Jackson and other visible religious personalities who promote Islam as the religion of African-Americans while insisting Christianity is for whites only. What they fail to tell African-Americans is that it was Arab Muslims who captured them and sold them as slaves. In fact, the Arabic word for black and slave is the same, ''Abed.''
3. Engage the American public in dialogues, discussions, debates in colleges, universities, public libraries, radio, TV, churches and mosques on the virtues of Islam. Proclaim how it is historically another religion like Judaism and Christianity with the same monotheistic faith.
4. Nominate Muslim sympathizers to political office to bring about favorable legislation toward Islam and support potential sympathizers by block voting.
5. Take control of as much of Hollywood, the press, TV, radio and the Internet as possible by buying the related corporations or a controlling stock.
6. Yield to the fear of the imminent shut-off of the lifeblood of America – black gold. America’s economy depends on oil and 41 percent of it comes from the Middle East.
7. Yell ''foul, out-of-context, personal interpretation, hate crime, Zionist, un- American, inaccurate interpretation of the Quran'' anytime Islam is criticized or the Quran is analyzed in the public arena.
8. Encourage Muslims to penetrate the White House, specifically with Islamists who can articulate a marvelous and peaceful picture of Islam. Acquire government positions and get membership in local school boards. Train Muslims as medical doctors to dominate the medical field, research and pharmaceutical companies. (Ever notice how numerous Muslim doctors in America are, when their countries need them more desperately than America?) Take over the computer industry. Establish Middle Eastern restaurants throughout the U.S. to connect planners of Islamization in a discreet way.
9. Accelerate Islamic demographic growth via:
Massive immigration (100,000 annually since 1961).
Use no birth control whatsoever – every baby of Muslim parents is automatically a Muslim and cannot choose another religion later.
Muslim men must marry American women and Islamize them (10,000 annually). Then divorce them and remarry every five years – since one can't legally marry four at one time. This is a legal solution in America.
Convert angry, alienated black inmates and turn them into militants (so far 2,000 released inmates have joined al-Qaida worldwide). Only a few ''sleeper cells'' have been captured in Afghanistan and on American soil.
10. Reading, writing, arithmetic and research through the American educational system, mosques and student centers (now 1,500) should be sprinkled with dislike of Jews, evangelical Christians and democracy. There are currently 300 exclusively Muslim schools in the U.S. which teach loyalty to the Quran, not the U.S. Constitution. In January of 2002, Saudi Arabia’s Embassy in Washington mailed 4,500 packets of the Quran and videos promoting Islam to America's high schools – free of charge. Saudi Arabia would not allow the U.S. to reciprocate.
11. Provide very sizeable monetary Muslim grants to colleges and universities in America to establish ''Centers for Islamic studies'' with Muslim directors to promote Islam in higher-education institutions.
12. Let the entire world know through propaganda, speeches, seminars, local and national media that terrorists have hijacked Islam, when in truth, Islam hijacked the terrorists.
13. Appeal to the historically compassionate and sensitive Americans for sympathy and tolerance towards Muslims in America who are portrayed as mainly immigrants from oppressed countries.
14. Nullify America's sense of security by manipulating the intelligence community with misinformation. Periodically terrorize Americans with reports of impending attacks on bridges, tunnels, water supplies, airports, apartment buildings and malls.
15. Form riots and demonstrations in the prison system demanding Islamic Sharia as the way of life, not America's justice system.
16. Open numerous charities throughout the U.S., but use the funds to support Islamic terrorism with American dollars.
17. Raise interest in Islam on America's campuses by insisting freshman take at least one course on Islam.
18. Unify the numerous Muslim lobbies in Washington, mosques, Islamic student centers, educational organizations, magazines and papers by Internet and an annual convention to coordinate plans, propagate the faith and engender news in the media.
19. Send intimidating messages and messengers to the outspoken individuals who are critical of Islam and seek to eliminate them by hook or crook.
20. Applaud Muslims as loyal citizens of the U.S. by spotlighting their voting record as the highest percentage of all minority and ethic groups in America.
in 20 Years
As reported by Anis Shorrosh, author of “Islam Revealed”
as well as in Joseph Farah’s G2 Bulletin
and WorldNetDaily.com on August 4, 2003.
1. Terminate America's freedom of speech by replacing it with statewide and nationwide hate-crime bills.
2. Wage a war of words using black leaders like Louis Farrakhan, Rev. Jesse Jackson and other visible religious personalities who promote Islam as the religion of African-Americans while insisting Christianity is for whites only. What they fail to tell African-Americans is that it was Arab Muslims who captured them and sold them as slaves. In fact, the Arabic word for black and slave is the same, ''Abed.''
3. Engage the American public in dialogues, discussions, debates in colleges, universities, public libraries, radio, TV, churches and mosques on the virtues of Islam. Proclaim how it is historically another religion like Judaism and Christianity with the same monotheistic faith.
4. Nominate Muslim sympathizers to political office to bring about favorable legislation toward Islam and support potential sympathizers by block voting.
5. Take control of as much of Hollywood, the press, TV, radio and the Internet as possible by buying the related corporations or a controlling stock.
6. Yield to the fear of the imminent shut-off of the lifeblood of America – black gold. America’s economy depends on oil and 41 percent of it comes from the Middle East.
7. Yell ''foul, out-of-context, personal interpretation, hate crime, Zionist, un- American, inaccurate interpretation of the Quran'' anytime Islam is criticized or the Quran is analyzed in the public arena.
8. Encourage Muslims to penetrate the White House, specifically with Islamists who can articulate a marvelous and peaceful picture of Islam. Acquire government positions and get membership in local school boards. Train Muslims as medical doctors to dominate the medical field, research and pharmaceutical companies. (Ever notice how numerous Muslim doctors in America are, when their countries need them more desperately than America?) Take over the computer industry. Establish Middle Eastern restaurants throughout the U.S. to connect planners of Islamization in a discreet way.
9. Accelerate Islamic demographic growth via:
Massive immigration (100,000 annually since 1961).
Use no birth control whatsoever – every baby of Muslim parents is automatically a Muslim and cannot choose another religion later.
Muslim men must marry American women and Islamize them (10,000 annually). Then divorce them and remarry every five years – since one can't legally marry four at one time. This is a legal solution in America.
Convert angry, alienated black inmates and turn them into militants (so far 2,000 released inmates have joined al-Qaida worldwide). Only a few ''sleeper cells'' have been captured in Afghanistan and on American soil.
10. Reading, writing, arithmetic and research through the American educational system, mosques and student centers (now 1,500) should be sprinkled with dislike of Jews, evangelical Christians and democracy. There are currently 300 exclusively Muslim schools in the U.S. which teach loyalty to the Quran, not the U.S. Constitution. In January of 2002, Saudi Arabia’s Embassy in Washington mailed 4,500 packets of the Quran and videos promoting Islam to America's high schools – free of charge. Saudi Arabia would not allow the U.S. to reciprocate.
11. Provide very sizeable monetary Muslim grants to colleges and universities in America to establish ''Centers for Islamic studies'' with Muslim directors to promote Islam in higher-education institutions.
12. Let the entire world know through propaganda, speeches, seminars, local and national media that terrorists have hijacked Islam, when in truth, Islam hijacked the terrorists.
13. Appeal to the historically compassionate and sensitive Americans for sympathy and tolerance towards Muslims in America who are portrayed as mainly immigrants from oppressed countries.
14. Nullify America's sense of security by manipulating the intelligence community with misinformation. Periodically terrorize Americans with reports of impending attacks on bridges, tunnels, water supplies, airports, apartment buildings and malls.
15. Form riots and demonstrations in the prison system demanding Islamic Sharia as the way of life, not America's justice system.
16. Open numerous charities throughout the U.S., but use the funds to support Islamic terrorism with American dollars.
17. Raise interest in Islam on America's campuses by insisting freshman take at least one course on Islam.
18. Unify the numerous Muslim lobbies in Washington, mosques, Islamic student centers, educational organizations, magazines and papers by Internet and an annual convention to coordinate plans, propagate the faith and engender news in the media.
19. Send intimidating messages and messengers to the outspoken individuals who are critical of Islam and seek to eliminate them by hook or crook.
20. Applaud Muslims as loyal citizens of the U.S. by spotlighting their voting record as the highest percentage of all minority and ethic groups in America.
Send Mail to Agent Ramos
Write To Jailed Border Patrol Agent Ramos -He Needs Your Mail
A DAY IN THE LIFE OF RAMOS:
Agent Ramos is in a federal prison cell - after he was brutally beaten by Latino inmates he was moved to solitary confinement for his safety. It seems that anyone who sits in solitary confinement is treated like a hardened vicious criminal. Remember Ramos had to be moved to prevent other evil vicious criminals from killing him. His cell is about the size of a bathroom - he sits there 23 hours a day. There is a small window; but it is painted dark gray. He is allowed out of his cell one hour a day "for a walk."
Reading material is forbidden. The family and advocates have pleaded with prison officials to let Agent Ramos be provided with reading material, after all his sentence did not require him to be treated as a prisoner in solitary confinement -it is to prevent other prisoners from attacking him. But prison staff responded by saying they must enforce the rule- no reading material allowed in solitary confinement.
The 911 Families sought to present Agent Ramos with a Holy Bible; prison officials stated Agent Ramos, in solitary confinement, could not receive the Holy Bible.
The 911 Families and members of congress contacted prison officials. After extreme pressure, the prison allowed Agent Ramos to receive the Bible. Agent Ramos is allowed no photos in his cell...sleeps on a cot. Agent Ramos can only read one book, the Bible, but:
AGENT RAMOS CAN READ ALL OF THE MAIL SENT TO HIM!
HERE IS THE REQUEST DIRECTLY FROM AGENT RAMOS BELOW:
Agent Ramos would like you to send him letters! His wife, Monica, and father-in-law, Joe, said yesterday: "PLEASE write to Agent Ramos America."
Monica said Agent Ramos used to receive about 50 letters a day - now he is only getting 10 letters a day, or less. Agent Ramos said the prison staff gage how much America supports him via his mail volume.
PLEASE write Agent Ramos once a week or more! PLEASE get your children and grandchildren to send Agent Ramos a letter! Have your friends and relatives write a letter - hold an AGENT RAMOS LETTER WRITING party.
The letters must be addressed EXACTLY as follows.
You cannot send him a postcard: ONLY a letter in an envelope to:
Ignacio Ramos #58079-180 FCI
Yazoo City Medium Federal Correctional Institution
P. O. Box 5888
Yazoo City, MS 39194
The Minuteman Civil Defense Corps fully supports any and all Rallies and protests held in support of freeing Agents Ramos and Compean.
A DAY IN THE LIFE OF RAMOS:
Agent Ramos is in a federal prison cell - after he was brutally beaten by Latino inmates he was moved to solitary confinement for his safety. It seems that anyone who sits in solitary confinement is treated like a hardened vicious criminal. Remember Ramos had to be moved to prevent other evil vicious criminals from killing him. His cell is about the size of a bathroom - he sits there 23 hours a day. There is a small window; but it is painted dark gray. He is allowed out of his cell one hour a day "for a walk."
Reading material is forbidden. The family and advocates have pleaded with prison officials to let Agent Ramos be provided with reading material, after all his sentence did not require him to be treated as a prisoner in solitary confinement -it is to prevent other prisoners from attacking him. But prison staff responded by saying they must enforce the rule- no reading material allowed in solitary confinement.
The 911 Families sought to present Agent Ramos with a Holy Bible; prison officials stated Agent Ramos, in solitary confinement, could not receive the Holy Bible.
The 911 Families and members of congress contacted prison officials. After extreme pressure, the prison allowed Agent Ramos to receive the Bible. Agent Ramos is allowed no photos in his cell...sleeps on a cot. Agent Ramos can only read one book, the Bible, but:
AGENT RAMOS CAN READ ALL OF THE MAIL SENT TO HIM!
HERE IS THE REQUEST DIRECTLY FROM AGENT RAMOS BELOW:
Agent Ramos would like you to send him letters! His wife, Monica, and father-in-law, Joe, said yesterday: "PLEASE write to Agent Ramos America."
Monica said Agent Ramos used to receive about 50 letters a day - now he is only getting 10 letters a day, or less. Agent Ramos said the prison staff gage how much America supports him via his mail volume.
PLEASE write Agent Ramos once a week or more! PLEASE get your children and grandchildren to send Agent Ramos a letter! Have your friends and relatives write a letter - hold an AGENT RAMOS LETTER WRITING party.
The letters must be addressed EXACTLY as follows.
You cannot send him a postcard: ONLY a letter in an envelope to:
Ignacio Ramos #58079-180 FCI
Yazoo City Medium Federal Correctional Institution
P. O. Box 5888
Yazoo City, MS 39194
The Minuteman Civil Defense Corps fully supports any and all Rallies and protests held in support of freeing Agents Ramos and Compean.
Monday, April 02, 2007
Why Iranians Take Hostages
Why Iranians Take Hostages
By Alan Caruba
I often fear that the vast ignorance of Americans and others around the world concerning the history of Islam condemns them to be pawns in the hands of the Iranians and other Muslim leaders who reflect why Islam came to be and how it has conducted itself since the death of its founder.
The recent "incident" in which 15 British sailors were taken hostage by the Iranians (and you can substitute any radical Islamic group such as Hamas, Hezbollah, or al Qaeda committing other similar acts) and the subsequent "diplomatic" effort totally ignores the fact that these same Iranians took American diplomats hostage in 1979. Our subsequent failure to mete out a severe military retribution has brought us to the current prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran.
You may have noticed that, every time the United States leaves a war unfinished, we end up having to deal with the same bad people whether they are the North Koreans, the Iranians, or, in the case of Iraq, the return in 003 after the botched victory in 1991. The only purpose of war is to leave one's enemies utterly without the will to repeat their bad behavior. By contrast, we have excellent relations with Japan and Germany.
It should be noted, too, that the Iranians have shown absolutely no regard for the Geneva Convention, having paraded their hostages on television and forced them to make false statements under threat of death. The loudest voices about the proper adherence to the Convention have, of course, been raised against the United States.
The powerful hold that Islam has on the minds and hearts of Middle Eastern Muslims is deeply rooted in its very beginnings. This "religion" that Mohammed invented had as its purpose a justification for looting other towns and tribes in the name of Allah. Thievery, banditry, the sale of slaves, the imposition of taxes and tribute, were all set in place when in March 623 Muhammed said, "I was ordered to fight all men until they say 'There is no god but Allah."
Islam, which translates "submission", is all about war, the division of the booty that results, and the subjugation of those who are conquered. This explains why, alone among the three major monotheistic religions, Islam has produced absolutely nothing that one can call progress.
Centuries later, in November 2001 Osama bin Laden announced "I was ordered to fight the people until they say there is no god but Allah, and his prophet Muhammed." Not a single new idea has issued forth from Islam since its founding.
Islam divides the world between itself and what it calls "the world of war" by which it means all others who are not Muslims. The entire early history of Islam under Muhammed was one of looting and pillage as, one by one, those who responded to his banner, calling him a prophet, realized that there were profits to be had in conquering those around them.
On Mohammed's death, Islam almost immediately divided into warring parties over who would inherit his mantle as caliph. The Sunnis and the Shiites are still fighting one another over that. Islam is one long history of war, treachery and deceit.
In his book, "Islamic Imperialism: A History", Efraim Karsh relates a story of the struggle between the Abbasids and the declining Umayyads, two Muslim dynasties in 883 AD. The leader of the Abbasids, Abul Abbas, called himself "the bloodshedder." Karsh relates:
"In an attempt to prevent any backlash from supporters of the fallen dynasty, the Abbasids embarked on a murderous spree. In Mecca and Medina scores of Umayyads were rounded up and murdered in detention. In the Iraqi garrison town of Wasit the governor laid down his weapons in return for a personal guarantee of safe conduct by the caliph, only to be treacherously murdered. In Palestine, the newly appointed governor of Syria invited a group of eighty prominent Umayyads to a banquet, slaughtered them all, then sat calmly among the corpses to finish his meal."
In the aftermath of he 1991 defeat of the Iraqis who were driven from Kuwait by a coalition led by American forces, Saddam's generals met in Safwan to accept surrender terms. What they got was a promise of U.S. withdrawal and the right to use their helicopters for "transportation." What they did was use those helicopters as gun ships to slaughter thousands of Shiites and Kurds who showed any inclination to resist the further rule of Saddam Hussein. The result of that miscalculation were "no-fly zones" over two thirds of Iraq that were maintained for twelve years until the second invasion in March 2003.
Today, as the U.S. media puts the various battles between Shiites and Sunnis on the front pages, Americans wonder why are these two Muslim groups are blowing up each other's mosques? Why are they murdering each other? Why are Iraq's neighbors, Iran and Syria, maneuvering to secure whatever they can gain from the effort to (1) rid Iraq of the American-led coalition forces and (2) pick up the spoils of a divided and easly conquered Iraqi nation?
An easy reading of Islamic history and a common sense response to today's events tell us that the Iranians will continue to probe for weakness among its enemies, the Americans, the British, the other members of the European Union, and of course, those Gulf nations who will have to confront an nuclear armed Iran if they are permitted to continue. Any failure to respond to their outrages will earn their contempt and further rumblings of war.
"We will continue to export our revolution throughout the world.until the calls 'there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah' are echoed all over the world." Iran's Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in 1979.
Want to hear the call to prayer in your neighborhood? All we have to do is leave Iraq.
By Alan Caruba
I often fear that the vast ignorance of Americans and others around the world concerning the history of Islam condemns them to be pawns in the hands of the Iranians and other Muslim leaders who reflect why Islam came to be and how it has conducted itself since the death of its founder.
The recent "incident" in which 15 British sailors were taken hostage by the Iranians (and you can substitute any radical Islamic group such as Hamas, Hezbollah, or al Qaeda committing other similar acts) and the subsequent "diplomatic" effort totally ignores the fact that these same Iranians took American diplomats hostage in 1979. Our subsequent failure to mete out a severe military retribution has brought us to the current prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran.
You may have noticed that, every time the United States leaves a war unfinished, we end up having to deal with the same bad people whether they are the North Koreans, the Iranians, or, in the case of Iraq, the return in 003 after the botched victory in 1991. The only purpose of war is to leave one's enemies utterly without the will to repeat their bad behavior. By contrast, we have excellent relations with Japan and Germany.
It should be noted, too, that the Iranians have shown absolutely no regard for the Geneva Convention, having paraded their hostages on television and forced them to make false statements under threat of death. The loudest voices about the proper adherence to the Convention have, of course, been raised against the United States.
The powerful hold that Islam has on the minds and hearts of Middle Eastern Muslims is deeply rooted in its very beginnings. This "religion" that Mohammed invented had as its purpose a justification for looting other towns and tribes in the name of Allah. Thievery, banditry, the sale of slaves, the imposition of taxes and tribute, were all set in place when in March 623 Muhammed said, "I was ordered to fight all men until they say 'There is no god but Allah."
Islam, which translates "submission", is all about war, the division of the booty that results, and the subjugation of those who are conquered. This explains why, alone among the three major monotheistic religions, Islam has produced absolutely nothing that one can call progress.
Centuries later, in November 2001 Osama bin Laden announced "I was ordered to fight the people until they say there is no god but Allah, and his prophet Muhammed." Not a single new idea has issued forth from Islam since its founding.
Islam divides the world between itself and what it calls "the world of war" by which it means all others who are not Muslims. The entire early history of Islam under Muhammed was one of looting and pillage as, one by one, those who responded to his banner, calling him a prophet, realized that there were profits to be had in conquering those around them.
On Mohammed's death, Islam almost immediately divided into warring parties over who would inherit his mantle as caliph. The Sunnis and the Shiites are still fighting one another over that. Islam is one long history of war, treachery and deceit.
In his book, "Islamic Imperialism: A History", Efraim Karsh relates a story of the struggle between the Abbasids and the declining Umayyads, two Muslim dynasties in 883 AD. The leader of the Abbasids, Abul Abbas, called himself "the bloodshedder." Karsh relates:
"In an attempt to prevent any backlash from supporters of the fallen dynasty, the Abbasids embarked on a murderous spree. In Mecca and Medina scores of Umayyads were rounded up and murdered in detention. In the Iraqi garrison town of Wasit the governor laid down his weapons in return for a personal guarantee of safe conduct by the caliph, only to be treacherously murdered. In Palestine, the newly appointed governor of Syria invited a group of eighty prominent Umayyads to a banquet, slaughtered them all, then sat calmly among the corpses to finish his meal."
In the aftermath of he 1991 defeat of the Iraqis who were driven from Kuwait by a coalition led by American forces, Saddam's generals met in Safwan to accept surrender terms. What they got was a promise of U.S. withdrawal and the right to use their helicopters for "transportation." What they did was use those helicopters as gun ships to slaughter thousands of Shiites and Kurds who showed any inclination to resist the further rule of Saddam Hussein. The result of that miscalculation were "no-fly zones" over two thirds of Iraq that were maintained for twelve years until the second invasion in March 2003.
Today, as the U.S. media puts the various battles between Shiites and Sunnis on the front pages, Americans wonder why are these two Muslim groups are blowing up each other's mosques? Why are they murdering each other? Why are Iraq's neighbors, Iran and Syria, maneuvering to secure whatever they can gain from the effort to (1) rid Iraq of the American-led coalition forces and (2) pick up the spoils of a divided and easly conquered Iraqi nation?
An easy reading of Islamic history and a common sense response to today's events tell us that the Iranians will continue to probe for weakness among its enemies, the Americans, the British, the other members of the European Union, and of course, those Gulf nations who will have to confront an nuclear armed Iran if they are permitted to continue. Any failure to respond to their outrages will earn their contempt and further rumblings of war.
"We will continue to export our revolution throughout the world.until the calls 'there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah' are echoed all over the world." Iran's Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in 1979.
Want to hear the call to prayer in your neighborhood? All we have to do is leave Iraq.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)