Banks Create Money From Thin Air

DOLLAR DECEPTION:
HOW BANKS SECRETLY CREATE MONEY

Ellen Brown, July 3rd, 2007
http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/dollar-deception.php

Post your comments here


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It has been called "the most astounding piece of sleight of hand ever invented." The creation of money has been privatized, usurped from Congress by a private banking cartel. Most people think money is issued by fiat by the government, but that is not the case. Except for coins, which compose only about one one-thousandth of the total U.S. money supply, all of our money is now created by banks. Federal Reserve Notes (dollar bills) are issued by the Federal Reserve, a private banking corporation, and lent to the government. Moreover, Federal Reserve Notes and coins together compose less than 3 percent of the money supply. The other 97 percent is created by commercial banks as loans.

Don't believe banks create the money they lend? Neither did the jury in a landmark Minnesota case, until they heard the evidence. First National Bank of Montgomery vs. Daly (1969) was a courtroom drama worthy of a movie script. Defendant Jerome Daly opposed the bank's foreclosure on his $14,000 home mortgage loan on the ground that there was no consideration for the loan. "Consideration" ("the thing exchanged") is an essential element of a contract. Daly, an attorney representing himself, argued that the bank had put up no real money for his loan. The courtroom proceedings were recorded by Associate Justice Bill Drexler, whose chief role, he said, was to keep order in a highly charged courtroom where the attorneys were threatening a fist fight. Drexler hadn't given much credence to the theory of the defense, until Mr. Morgan, the bank's president, took the stand. To everyone's surprise, Morgan admitted that the bank routinely created money "out of thin air" for its loans, and that this was standard banking practice. "It sounds like fraud to me," intoned Presiding Justice Martin Mahoney amid nods from the jurors. In his court memorandum, Justice Mahoney stated:

Plaintiff admitted that it, in combination with the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, . . . did create the entire $14,000.00 in money and credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry. That this was the consideration used to support the Note dated May 8, 1964 and the Mortgage of the same date. The money and credit first came into existence when they created it. Mr. Morgan admitted that no United States Law or Statute existed which gave him the right to do this. A lawful consideration must exist and be tendered to support the Note.

The court rejected the bank's claim for foreclosure, and the defendant kept his house. To Daly, the implications were enormous. If bankers were indeed extending credit without consideration – without backing their loans with money they actually had in their vaults and were entitled to lend – a decision declaring their loans void could topple the power base of the world. He wrote in a local news article:

This decision, which is legally sound, has the effect of declaring all private mortgages on real and personal property, and all U.S. and State bonds held by the Federal Reserve, National and State banks to be null and void. This amounts to an emancipation of this Nation from personal, national and state debt purportedly owed to this banking system. Every American owes it to himself . . . to study this decision very carefully . . . for upon it hangs the question of freedom or slavery.

Needless to say, however, the decision failed to change prevailing practice, although it was never overruled. It was heard in a Justice of the Peace Court, an autonomous court system dating back to those frontier days when defendants had trouble traveling to big cities to respond to summonses. In that system (which has now been phased out), judges and courts were pretty much on their own. Justice Mahoney, who was not dependent on campaign financing or hamstrung by precedent, went so far as to threaten to prosecute and expose the bank. He died less than six months after the trial, in a mysterious accident that appeared to involve poisoning. Since that time, a number of defendants have attempted to avoid loan defaults using the defense Daly raised; but they have met with only limited success. As one judge said off the record:

If I let you do that – you and everyone else – it would bring the whole system down. . . . I cannot let you go behind the bar of the bank. . . . We are not going behind that curtain!

From time to time, however, the curtain has been lifted long enough for us to see behind it. A number of reputable authorities have attested to what is going on, including Sir Josiah Stamp, president of the Bank of England and the second richest man in Britain in the 1920s. He declared in an address at the University of Texas in 1927:

The modern banking system manufactures money out of nothing. The process is perhaps the most astounding piece of sleight of hand that was ever invented. Banking was conceived in inequity and born in sin . . . . Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them but leave them the power to create money, and, with a flick of a pen, they will create enough money to buy it back again. . . . Take this great power away from them and all great fortunes like mine will disappear, for then this would be a better and happier world to live in. . . . But, if you want to continue to be the slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let bankers continue to create money and control credit.

Robert H. Hemphill, Credit Manager of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta in the Great Depression, wrote in 1934:

We are completely dependent on the commercial Banks. Someone has to borrow every dollar we have in circulation, cash or credit. If the Banks create ample synthetic money we are prosperous; if not, we starve. We are absolutely without a permanent money system. When one gets a complete grasp of the picture, the tragic absurdity of our hopeless position is almost incredible, but there it is. It is the most important subject intelligent persons can investigate and reflect upon.

Graham Towers, Governor of the Bank of Canada from 1935 to 1955, acknowledged:

Banks create money. That is what they are for. . . . The manufacturing process to make money consists of making an entry in a book. That is all. . . . Each and every time a Bank makes a loan . . . new Bank credit is created -- brand new money.

Robert B. Anderson, Secretary of the Treasury under Eisenhower, said in an interview reported in the August 31, 1959 issue of U.S. News and World Report:

[W]hen a bank makes a loan, it simply adds to the borrower's deposit account in the bank by the amount of the loan. The money is not taken from anyone else's deposit; it was not previously paid in to the bank by anyone. It's new money, created by the bank for the use of the borrower.

How did this scheme originate, and how has it been concealed for so many years? To answer those questions, we need to go back to the seventeenth century.



The Shell Game of the Goldsmiths

In seventeenth century Europe, trade was conducted primarily in gold and silver coins. Coins were durable and had value in themselves, but they were hard to transport in bulk and could be stolen if not kept under lock and key. Many people therefore deposited their coins with the goldsmiths, who had the strongest safes in town. The goldsmiths issued convenient paper receipts that could be traded in place of the bulkier coins they represented. These receipts were also used when people who needed coins came to the goldsmiths for loans.

The mischief began when the goldsmiths noticed that only about 10 to 20 percent of their receipts came back to be redeemed in gold at any one time. They could safely "lend" the gold in their strongboxes at interest several times over, as long as they kept 10 to 20 percent of the value of their outstanding loans in gold to meet the demand. They thus created "paper money" (receipts for loans of gold) worth several times the gold they actually held. They typically issued notes and made loans in amounts that were four to five times their actual supply of gold. At an interest rate of 20 percent, the same gold lent five times over produced a 100 percent return every year, on gold the goldsmiths did not actually own and could not legally lend at all. If they were careful not to overextend this "credit," the goldsmiths could thus become quite wealthy without producing anything of value themselves. Since only the principal was lent into the money supply, more money was eventually owed back in principal and interest than the townspeople as a whole possessed. They had to continually take out loans of new paper money to cover the shortfall, causing the wealth of the town and eventually of the country to be siphoned into the vaults of the goldsmiths-turned-bankers, while the people fell progressively into their debt.

Following this model, in nineteenth century America, private banks issued their own banknotes in sums up to ten times their actual reserves in gold. This was called "fractional reserve" banking, meaning that only a fraction of the total deposits managed by a bank were kept in "reserve" to meet the demands of depositors. But periodic runs on the banks when the customers all got suspicious and demanded their gold at the same time caused banks to go bankrupt and made the system unstable. In 1913, the private banknote system was therefore consolidated into a national banknote system under the Federal Reserve (or "Fed"), a privately-owned corporation given the right to issue Federal Reserve Notes and lend them to the U.S. government. These notes, which were issued by the Fed basically for the cost of printing them, came to form the basis of the national money supply.

Twenty years later, the country faced massive depression. The money supply shrank, as banks closed their doors and gold fled to Europe. Dollars at that time had to be 40 percent backed by gold, so for every dollar's worth of gold that left the country, 2.5 dollars in credit money also disappeared. To prevent this alarming deflationary spiral from collapsing the money supply completely, in 1933 President Franklin Roosevelt took the dollar off the gold standard. Today the Federal Reserve still operates on the "fractional reserve" system, but its "reserves" consist of nothing but government bonds (I.O.U.s or debts). The government issues bonds, the Federal Reserve issues Federal Reserve Notes, and they basically swap stacks, leaving the government in debt to a private banking corporation for money the government could have issued itself, debt-free.



Theft by Inflation

M3, the broadest measure of the U.S. money supply, shot up from $3.7 trillion in February 1988 to $10.3 trillion 14 years later, when the Fed quit reporting it. Why the Fed quit reporting it in March 2006 is suggested by John Williams in a website called "Shadow Government Statistics" (shadowstats.com), which shows that by the spring of 2007, M3 was growing at the astounding rate of 11.8 percent per year. Best not to publicize such figures too widely! The question posed here, however, is this: where did all this new money come from? The government did not step up its output of coins, and no gold was added to the national money supply, since the government went off the gold standard in 1933. This new money could only have been created privately as "bank credit" advanced as loans.

The problem with inflating the money supply in this way, of course, is that it inflates prices. More money competing for the same goods drives prices up. The dollar buys less, robbing people of the value of their money. This rampant inflation is usually blamed on the government, which is accused of running the dollar printing presses in order to spend and spend without resorting to the politically unpopular expedient of raising taxes. But as noted earlier, the only money the U.S. government actually issues are coins. In countries in which the central bank has been nationalized, paper money may be issued by the government along with coins, but paper money still composes only a very small percentage of the money supply. In England, where the Bank of England was nationalized after World War II, private banks continue to create 97 percent of the money supply as loans.

Price inflation is only one problem with this system of private money creation. Another is that banks create only the principal but not the interest necessary to pay back their loans. Since virtually the entire money supply is created by banks themselves, new money must continually be borrowed into existence just to pay the interest owed to the bankers. A dollar lent at 5 percent interest becomes 2 dollars in 14 years. That means the money supply has to double every 14 years just to cover the interest owed on the money existing at the beginning of this 14 year cycle. The Federal Reserve's own figures confirm that M3 has doubled or more every 14 years since 1959, when the Fed began reporting it. That means that every 14 years, banks siphon off as much money in interest as there was in the entire economy 14 years earlier. This tribute is paid for lending something the banks never actually had to lend, making it perhaps the greatest scam ever perpetrated, since it now affects the entire global economy. The privatization of money is the underlying cause of poverty, economic slavery, underfunded government, and an oligarchical ruling class that thwarts every attempt to shake it loose from the reins of power.

This problem can only be set right by reversing the process that created it. Congress needs to take back the Constitutional power to issue the nation's money. "Fractional reserve" banking needs to be eliminated, limiting banks to lending only pre-existing funds. If the power to create money were returned to the government, the federal debt could be paid off, taxes could be slashed, and needed government programs could be expanded. Contrary to popular belief, paying off the federal debt with new U.S. Notes would not be dangerously inflationary, because government securities are already included in the widest measure of the money supply. The dollars would just replace the bonds, leaving the total unchanged. If the U.S. federal debt had been paid off in fiscal year 2006, the savings to the government from no longer having to pay interest would have been $406 billion, enough to eliminate the $390 billion budget deficit that year with money to spare. The budget could have been met with taxes, without creating money out of nothing either on a government print press or as accounting entry bank loans. However, some money created on a government printing press could actually be good for the economy. It would be good if it were used for the productive purpose of creating new goods and services, rather than for the non-productive purpose of paying interest on loans. When supply (goods and services) goes up along with demand (money), they remain in balance and prices remain stable. New money could be added without creating price inflation up to the point of full employment. In this way Congress could fund much-needed programs, such as the development of alternative energy sources and the expansion of health coverage, while actually reducing taxes.

A Virus Called Shariah

A virus called 'Shariah'

Center for Security Policy | Sep 28, 2009
By Frank Gaffney, Jr.

http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/p18189.xml

A Denver airport shuttle driver from Afghanistan who plotted to blow up subway trains in New York City. A Jordanian who tried to destroy one of Dallas' tallest skyscrapers. An American who thought he was detonating a truck bomb aimed at a federal courthouse in Springfield, Illinois.

Law enforcement authorities who successfully stymied these alleged attacks have been at pains to emphasize that there are no connections between the three.

Of course there are.

Maybe it will prove to be the case that the three men at the heart of these interrupted plots - Najibullah Zazi, Hosam Maher Husein Smadi and Michael Finton (also known as Talib Islam) - had no connection in a tactical or operational sense.

Still, it is absurd, and extremely dangerous, to insist that they are not connected in at least one way: What apparently animated all three of these suspects (and perhaps a number of others believed to have been involved in the New York plot who are still at large) is the seditious, supremacist theo-political-legal program authoritative Islam calls "Shariah."

Shariah requires its adherents to engage in jihad - the struggle to bring about the triumph of Islam worldwide through whatever means are available. Shariah explicitly calls for the use of violent techniques designed to instill terror in those who stand in the way of a global Muslim theocracy.

Lethal truck-bombs, pellet-laced explosive vests and backpacks and bombs or hijackers aboard aircraft have already been used for this purpose. It is a matter of time before vastly more destructive weapons of mass destruction (chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear) become available to jihadists who believe that, pursuant to Shariah, they are fulfilling Allah's will when they kill "infidels" or otherwise force them to submit to Islam.

Even more insidious, though, is what Robert Spencer calls "Stealth Jihad." This practice involves using myriad non-violent measures to insinuate Shariah into non-Muslim societies. Adherents demand such concessions as special treatment for them and their faith in public spaces, private corporations, schools, communities and government at every level.

The prime-mover behind these demands is the Muslim Brotherhood, an organization that shares the violent jihadists' commitment to advance Shariah's end-state of a global caliphate, but seek (for the moment, at least) to do so non-violently. The successful prosecution last year of one Brotherhood front, the Holy Land Foundation, established that the organization's mission is "to destroy Western civilization from within...by its own miserable hand." (In the course of the trial, the government also identified virtually every prominent Muslim-American group as Brotherhood affiliates or "friendly" to its purposes.)

What happens as tolerant democratic societies try to accommodate themselves to the stealthy form of jihad, backed by the persistent threat of the violent form - if not its actual occurrence, can be seen in much of Western Europe. For example, France now has 751 zones urbaines sensibles - Muslim-only areas that amount to "no-go" zones for French authorities. In these zones, Shariah rules instead of the laws of the host government, at the expense most notably of women's rights, due process and public order (especially for Jews, Christians and other non-Muslims).

To be sure, accommodations to date to Shariah have not metastasized in the United States to nearly this extent. There are, however, numerous worrisome examples of concessions that have been made here, too. To cite a few: taxpayer-financed footbaths for Muslims installed at state universities; corporations providing Muslim-only prayer rooms and time off for prayers; government-sanctioned discrimination by taxi drivers against passengers deemed "impure" (haram) because they have alcohol or dogs; unhygenic practices in food plants to accommodate the preferences of Muslim workers; government-offered Shariah-compliant mortgages; Islamic proselytizing in public school curricula; etc.

The failure by U.S. and other governments' officials to recognize the connection between Shariah and jihad (of either the violent or stealthy kind) is like refusing to acknowledge that there is a common virus causing an outbreak of swine flu. How could the medical community hope to identify appropriate prophylactic measures (for instance: Keep kids in school or shut the schools down? Take antibiotics or not?) if it were not permitted to understand the nature of the virus. There would certainly be little chance of developing effective vaccines under those circumstances.

We face approximately the same problem if we require our law enforcement, intelligence, homeland security and military personnel to behave as though there is no toxic virus - think of it as the "anti-swine flu," since pork is the ultimate in haram under Shariah - animating those seeking to destroy us, our government and our freedom-loving way of life. At best, we will be able to stop some of the attacks the jihadists are plotting against us. We certainly will not be able to defeat the disease and thereby protect Western civilization from its potential for truly pandemic virulence.

Our natural allies in taking such a stance against Shariah are the many millions of Muslims around the world whose practice of their faith does not involve adherence to this medieval, barbaric and totalitarian program. Indeed, most Muslim immigrants in America came here to get away from Shariah in their native lands. Only by differentiating such Muslims from the carriers of this lethal virus can we hope to inoculate them against the spread of the disease - and enlist their help in protecting the rest of us by keeping American Shariah-free.

Austria In The 30's

Austria in the '30s: Mirror to America
Posted: September 22, 2009
1:00 am Eastern

© 2009

In the past weeks you've heard me talk about the How to Take Back America Conference being held in St. Louis this Friday, Sept. 25, and Saturday, Sept. 26, with speakers like: Gov. Mike Huckabee, "Joe the Plumber," U.S. Reps. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., Trent Franks, R-Ariz., Steve King, R-Iowa, Tom McClintock, R-Calif., Dr. Tom Price, R-Ga., and Three-Star Gen. Jerry Boykin. But someone who'll be there that you didn't hear about is Kitty Werthmann. Kitty was 12 years old when Adolf Hitler took over Austria.

She is 83 with a "vivid memory" of what happened in her homeland next. She witnessed the government take over the banks and the auto industry. Sound familiar? In the last nine months, Obama and the Democrats in Congress have successfully orchestrated the government takeover of Chrysler and General Motors along with countless banks.

She witnessed the "compulsory youth" service and indoctrination. That sounds a little like Obama's call for "mandatory volunteerism" for America's youth.

The government takeover of the schools immediately replaced crucifixes with pictures of Hitler and Nazi flags. "All religious instruction was replaced with physical education," said Werthmann. No prayer was allowed. That all happened here decades ago. It is interesting, however, that Obama's speech to the captive audience in the government schools – complete with the essay assignment about how students could help him achieve his political goals – was replaced once the American people got wind of it. And speaking of government control of education, if the Senate agrees, all student loans will be government issued, according to a bill that passed the House last week.

Werthmann saw what happened next when the government took over the health-care system. Her brother-in-law was a physician, and by the time he got to his office, 40 patients were already waiting in line. And if the medicine they needed wasn't on the "government-approved list," the cost came out of his own salary – "which dwindled down to almost nothing," Werthmann recalled. Sounds like H.R. 3200.

"All research stopped," and in the run-down medical facilities there was a "12-18 month wait for a hospital bed." That sounds like the warnings we've already gotten from Canada and elsewhere.

Are we headed for a Nazi-style totalitarian abyss? Find out in "Defeating the Totalitarian Lie: A Former Hitler Youth Warns America"

Werthman's husband saw what his brother faced and left Germany to practice medicine in the United States. Werthmann said, "He marveled at how modern our hospitals were, and how great our medical care is." That's the medical care Obama wants to replace with socialized medicine.

Kitty recalled the massive welfare system funded by 60-70 percent tax increases in an effort to "spread the wealth." Wow, there's an interesting phrase. Did I mention that "Joe the Plumber" will also be at the conference?

"The media was taken over by the government right away," Kitty recalls. "We got free radios and the radio stations were government-run. If you listened to a foreign radio station like the BBC, there was capital punishment," said Werthmann.

They had Joseph Goebbels; we have Mark Lloyd, the diversity czar, who is already poised to shut down private radio stations like his hero Hugo Chavez did – threatening licenses and waging outrageous fines on stations (up to $25 million dollars) who say things he doesn't like.

"We heard only what was on the radio," she said. "We couldn't get information from anywhere." Kind of like we'll be if the government takes over not only radio, but the Internet, as well. Senate bills 773 and 778, introduced by Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., would do just that – handing over control of one of our last bastions of free speech to none other than Barack Obama.

But now, Obama is poised to "bail out the newspaper industry," ushering in an official "state-run media." Sen. Ben Cardin, D-Md., has already introduced S. 673, the so-called "Newspaper Revitalization Act," providing the means. While most in the media already tow the official state line, Obama doesn't like those unruly blogs. It's a lot easier when you can silence people like Rep. Joe Wilson for speaking out against you – and then outlawing accurate words like "lie" from being said on the House floor.

"Each person was allotted ration cards like a pound of sugar per month." Werthmann said. "If your grandma died, and you used her ration card to buy sugar, the grocery store would report you. Then, the Gestapo showed up, but rather than arrest you, they recruited you as informant of your neighbors, boss, friends and family. You couldn't trust anybody, not even the mailman," Werthmann added. Weekly reports were required or arrests were made.

Sounds a little like Obama's recruitment of government informants, i.e. the "snitch program," to turn in offenders for "fishy" speech. No arrests just yet, but the Department of Homeland Security has already tagged pro-family Americans as "the most dangerous domestic terrorism threat in the United States."

While Austria and Germany didn't have a "green movement," Werthmann said relatives living there under the European Union have experienced "a tripling of their energy bills." The House has also already initiated the government takeover of energy by passing the Cap-and-trade bill – which will tax us for heating our homes and driving to work. Obama, himself, said our bills would "skyrocket" as a result.

Werthmann said it took five years for Hitler to rise to a dictatorship, and is amazed at how fast history is repeating itself here. "It has to be done fast," she added, "so people won't catch on."

"Those of us who sailed past the Statute of Liberty came to a country of unbelievable freedom and opportunity." Werthmann concluded. "After America, there is no place to run."

Last night I watched a movie about Dietrich Bonhoeffer. After all, he was in a battle against National Socialists, too. It cost him his life. We need to rise up now to stop it before it comes to that.

Stadiums, Hotels Warned of Terrorists

Stadiums, Hotels Warned of Terrorists

By DEVLIN BARRETT and EILEEN SULLIVAN

AP

DENVER (Sept. 22) — Counterterrorism officials have issued security bulletins to police around the nation about terrorists' desire to attack stadiums, entertainment complexes and hotels — the latest in a flurry of such internal warnings as investigators chase a possible bomb plot in Denver and New York.

In the two bulletins – sent to police departments Monday and obtained by The Associated Press – officials said they know of no specific plots against such sites, but urged law enforcement and private companies to be vigilant. These two bulletins followed on the heels of a similar warning about the vulnerabilities of mass transit systems.

The bulletin on stadiums notes that an al-Qaida training manual specifically lists "blasting and destroying the places of amusement, immorality, and sin... and attacking vital economic centers" as desired targets of the global terror network.

A joint statement from DHS and FBI said while the agencies "have no information regarding the timing, location or target of any planned attack, we believe it is prudent to raise the security awareness of our local law enforcement partners regarding the targets and tactics of previous terrorist activity.

A bulletin issued about possible terrorist plots notes that an al-Qaida manual calls for "blasting and destroying the places of amusement, immorality, and sin." That, authorities said, would include stadiums, like Chicago's Soldier Field.

Officials noted the law enforcement bulletins are not intended for the public. Bulletins – particularly about hotels as possible targets – are common, and often don't make news. However, a half-dozen alerts issued in the last week have received increased attention amid the ongoing investigations in New York and Denver. The first of these, about hydrogen peroxide-based explosives, specifically referred to the investigation in New York.

Separately, law enforcement officials said a Colorado man may have been planning with others to detonate backpack bombs on New York City trains in a terrorism plot similar to past attacks on London's and Madrid's mass-transit systems.

The investigation and the earlier warning about mass transit system have already prompted officials around the nation to step up patrols.

Two law enforcement officials speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss details of the investigation told The Associated Press late Monday that more than a half-dozen individuals were being scrutinized in the alleged plot.

In a statement, the FBI says that "several individuals in the United States, Pakistan and elsewhere" are being investigated.

Investigators say Najibullah Zazi, a 24-year-old Afghanistan-born immigrant who is a shuttle van driver at the Denver airport, played a direct role in the terror plot that unraveled after an overnight 1,600-mile trip from Denver to New York City around the anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks. He made his first court appearance Monday and remains behind bars.

Zazi and two other defendants have not been charged with any terrorism counts, only the relatively minor offense of lying to the government. But the case could grow to include more serious charges as the investigation proceeds.

Backpacks and cell phones were seized last week from apartments in Queens, where Zazi visited.

Zazi has publicly denied being involved in a terror plot, and defense lawyer Arthur Folsom dismissed as "rumor" any notion that his client played a crucial role.

Publicly, law enforcement officials have repeatedly said they are unaware of a specific time or target for any attacks. Privately, officials speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the case said investigators have worried most about the possible use of backpack bombs on New York City trains, similar to attacks carried out in London in 2005 and Madrid in 2004.

Backpack bombs ripped apart four commuter trains and killed 191 people in Madrid on March 11, 2004. On July 7 the next year, bombing attacks in London killed 52 subway and bus commuters.

In a bulletin issued Friday, the FBI and Homeland Security Department warned that improvised explosive devices are the most common tactic to blow up railroads and other mass transit systems overseas. And they noted incidents in which bombs were made with peroxide.

In that bulletin, obtained by The AP, officials recommended that transit systems conduct random sweeps at terminals and stations and that law enforcement make random patrols and board some trains and buses.

Investigators feared Zazi may have been involved in a potential plot involving hydrogen peroxide-based explosives, according to two law enforcement officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the investigation.

The FBI said they found notes on bomb-making instructions that appear to match Zazi's handwriting, and discovered his fingerprints on materials – batteries and a scale – that could be used to make explosives. He also made a trip to Pakistan last year in which he received al-Qaida explosives and weapons training, the government said.

Zazi, a legal resident of the U.S. who immigrated in 1999, told the FBI that he must have unintentionally downloaded the notes on bomb-making as part of a religious book and that he deleted the book "after realizing that its contents discussed jihad."

A strange sequence of events began to unfold nearly two weeks ago when Zazi – already under surveillance by federal agents – rented a car in Colorado and made the 1,600-mile trek across the heartland to New York. He told reporters that he went to New York to resolve an issue with a coffee cart he owned.

He went to his friend's place in Queens. Once there, his car was towed and authorities confiscated his computer. He was told by an NYPD informant that detectives were asking about him, and decided to cut the trip short and fly back to Colorado, authorities said.

Their surveillance blown and their main suspect flying back to Colorado, officials speeded up the investigation and launched raids on several Queens apartments in a search for explosives, but found none.

Zazi and his 53-year-old father, Mohammed Wali Zazi, were arrested Saturday in Denver. Ahmad Wais Afzali, 37, was arrested in New York, where he is an imam at a mosque in Queens. The three are accused of making false statements to the government. If convicted, they face eight years in prison.

Associated Press Writers Ivan Moreno, P. Solomon Banda, and Catherine Tsai in Denver, and Tom Hays in New York contributed to this report.

Apostacy, Human Rights, and Rifqa Bary

Apostasy and the Islamic Nations

By Andrew G. Bostom

http://www.americanthinker.com/printpage/?url=http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/09/apostasy_and_the_islamic_natio.html

September 21, 2009

The 1990 Cairo Declaration, or so-called "Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Islam", was drafted and subsequently ratified by all the Muslim member nations of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC). Now a 57 state collective which includes every Islamic nation on earth, the OIC, currently headed by Turkey's Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, thus represents the entire Muslim umma (or global community of individual Muslims), and is the largest single voting bloc in the United Nations (UN).

Both the preamble and concluding articles (24 and 25) make plain that the OIC's Cairo Declaration is designed to supersede Western conceptions of human rights as enunciated, for example, in the US Bill of Rights, and the UN's 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The opening of the preamble to the Cairo Declaration repeats a Koranic injunction affirming Islamic supremacism, (Koran 3:110; "You are the best nation ever brought forth to men...you believe in Allah"), and states,

"Reaffirming the civilizing and historical role of the Islamic Ummah which Allah made the best nation..."

The preamble continues,

"Believing that fundamental rights and universal freedoms in Islam are an integral part of the Islamic religion and that no one as a matter of principle has the right to suspend them in whole or in part or violate or ignore them in as much as they are binding divine commandments, which are contained in the Revealed Books of God and were sent through the last of His Prophets to complete the preceding divine messages thereby making their observance an act of worship and their neglect or violation an abominable sin, and accordingly every person is individually responsible -- and the Ummah collectively responsible -- for their safeguard."

In its concluding articles 24 and 25, the Cairo Declaration maintains, [article 24], "All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Shari'a"; and [article 25] "The Islamic Shari'a is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification to any of the articles of this Declaration."

These statements capture the indelible influence of the Islamic religious law Shari'a -- the Cairo Declaration claiming supremacy based on "divine revelation," which renders sacred and permanent the notion of inequality between the community of Allah, and the infidels. Thus we can see clearly the differences between the Cairo Declaration, which sanctions the gross inequalities inherent in the Shari'a, and its Western human rights counterparts (the US Bill of Rights; the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights), which do not refer to any specific religion or to the superiority of any group over another, and stress the absolute equality of all human beings.

Enshrined in the First Amendment of the US Bill of Rights is the guarantee that laws may not be made that interfere with religion "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.". Absent the right to freedom of thought, or conscience, other rights such as the right to freedom of speech are rendered meaningless. US Supreme Court Justice Benjamin Cardozo reasoned elegantly in Palko v. Connecticut (1937) that,

"Freedom of thought... is the matrix, the indispensable condition, of nearly every other form of freedom. With rare aberrations a pervasive recognition of this truth can be traced in our history, political and legal."

This principle of freedom of conscience is also upheld in article 18 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which further makes explicit the fundamental right to change one's religion,

"Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

The gravely negative implications of the OIC's Shari'a-based Cairo Declaration are most apparent in its transparent rejection of freedom of conscience in Article 10, which proclaims:

"Islam is the religion of unspoiled nature. It is prohibited to exercise any form of compulsion on man or to exploit his poverty or ignorance in order to convert him to another religion, or to atheism."

Ominously, articles 19 and 22 reiterate a principle stated elsewhere throughout the document, which clearly applies to the "punishment" of so-called "apostates" from Islam:

"[19d] There shall be no crime or punishment except as provided for in the Shari'a."
"[22a] Everyone shall have the right to express his opinion freely in such manner as would not be contrary to the principles of the Shari'a.
[22b] Everyone shall have the right to advocate what is right, and propagate what is good, and warn against what is wrong and evil according to the norms of Islamic Shari'a.
[22c] Information is a vital necessity to society. It may not be exploited or misused in such a way as may violate sanctities and the dignity of Prophets, undermine moral and ethical values or disintegrate, corrupt or harm society or weaken its faith."

Punishment by death for apostasy from Islam is firmly rooted in Islam's foundational texts -- both the Koran (verses such as 2:217 , 4:89, and their classical exegesis by renowned Koranic commentators such as Qurtubi, Baydawi, Ibn Kathir, and Suyuti) and the hadith (i.e., collections of the putative words and deeds of the Muslim prophet Muhammad, as compiled by pious Muslim transmitters), as well as the sacred Islamic Law (the Shari'a). For example, Muhammad is reported to have said "Kill him who changes his religion," in hadith collections of both Bukhari and Abu Dawud. There is also a consensus by all four schools of Sunni Islamic jurisprudence (i.e., Maliki, Hanbali, Hanafi, and Shafi'i), as well as Shi'ite jurists, that apostates from Islam must be put to death. Averroes (d. 1198), the renowned philosopher and scholar of the natural sciences, who was also an important Maliki jurist, provided this typical Muslim legal opinion on the punishment for apostasy:

"An apostate...is to be executed by agreement in the case of a man, because of the words of the Prophet, ‘Slay those who change their din [religion]'...Asking the apostate to repent was stipulated as a condition...prior to his execution."

The contemporary (i.e., 1991) Al-Azhar (Cairo) Islamic Research Academy endorsed manual of Islamic Law, 'Umdat al-Salik (pp. 595-96) states:

"Leaving Islam is the ugliest form of unbelief (kufr) and the worst.... When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostasizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed. In such a case, it is obligatory...to ask him to repent and return to Islam. If he does it is accepted from him, but if he refuses, he is immediately killed."

This doctrinal and historical legitimacy of Shari'a-mandated killing of apostates from Islam is affirmed by Heffening in his scholarly review for the authoritative, mainstream academic reference work, the Encyclopedia of Islam:

"In Fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) , there is unanimity that the male apostate must be put to death...A woman, on the other hand, is imprisoned...until she again adopts Islam, ..[or] she also is put to death." [Heffening, W. "Murtadd." Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition. Edited by: P. Bearman , Th. Bianquis , C.E. Bosworth , E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs.]

As noted by historian David Littman, writing in early 1999, Adama Dieng, then a prominent Muslim Senegalese jurist, alerted the international community to the Cairo Declaration's profoundly dangerous impact. Dieng, speaking for the International Commission of Jurists and the Paris-based International Federation of Human Rights at the Commission on Human Rights in February, 1992, decried the Cairo Declaration, which under the rubric of Shari'a, deliberately restricted certain fundamental freedoms and rights -- most notably, freedom of conscience. He also argued that the Cairo Declaration introduced "in the name of defense of human rights," unacceptable discrimination against non-Muslims and women, while sanctioning the legitimacy of heinous practices -- Shari'a-compliant punishments (from corporal punishments, to mutilation, and stoning) -- "which attack the integrity and dignity of the human being."

Pew Survey data published just this past August 13, 2009 reflect, starkly, the depth and prevalence of popular support among the Muslim masses for these hideous views -- sanctioned by their theo-political Islamic leadership within the OIC -- and antithetical to our foundational Western freedoms. Specifically, the Pew findings reveal that among Pakistani Muslims, there is

"...broad support for harsh punishments: 78% favor death for [apostates] those who leave Islam; 80% favor whippings and cutting off hands for crimes like theft and robbery; and 83% favor stoning adulterers."

These hard data provide a clear, irrefragable global context for any rational, objective consideration of the ongoing plight of apostates from Islam, such as 17 year-old Rifqa Bary.

Shame on all those in our government, law enforcement, and chattering classes who willfully ignore this context.

Opinion: Health Care Legislation

From Michael Connelly - Retired attorney, Constitutional Law Instructor
Carrollton, Texas

House Bill 3200

Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House
Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied
it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional
law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were
being discussed might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse
than what I had heard or expected.



To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its
implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the
media are saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care,
particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are
involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion
services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members
of the medical profession.

The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out
of business and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions
about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal
bureaucrats and most of them will not be health care professionals.
Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of
necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled.


However, as scary as all of that it, it just scratches the surface.
In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention
of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a
convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the
Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been
contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions
of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been
destroyed.

The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of
power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the
U.S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama
Administration authority in a number of different areas over the
lives of the American people and the businesses they own. The irony is
that the Congress doesn't have any authority to legislate in most of those
areas to begin with. I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S.
Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of
Congress to regulate health care.


This legislation also provides for access by the appointees of the
Obama administration of all of your personal healthcare information,
your personal financial information, and the information of your
employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a direct violation
of the specific provisions of the 4th Amendment to the
Constitution protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures.
You can also forget about the right to privacy. That will have been
legislated into oblivion regardless of what the 3rd and
4th Amendments may provide.


If you decide not to have healthcare insurance or if you have private
insurance that is not deemed "acceptable" to the "Health Choices
Administrator" appointed by Obama there will be a tax imposed on you.
It is called a "tax" instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid
application of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment.
However, that doesn't work because since there is nothing in the law
that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is
definitely depriving someone of property without the "due process of
law.


So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate
so much out the original ten in the Bill of Rights that are
effectively nullified by this law. It doesn't stop there though. The
9th Amendment that provides: "The enumeration in the
Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or
disparage others retained by the people;" The 10th
Amendment states: "The powers not delegated to the United States by
the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved
to the States respectively, or to the people." Under the provisions of
this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the
states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas
that once were theirs to control.


I could write many more pages about this legislation, but I think you
get the idea. This is not about health care; it is about seizing
power and limiting rights. Article 6 of the Constitution requires the
members of both houses of Congress to "be bound by oath or
affirmation" to support the Constitution. If I was a member of
Congress I would not be able to vote for this legislation or anything
like it without feeling I was violating that sacred oath or
affirmation. If I voted for it anyway I would hope the American
people would hold me accountable.


For those who might doubt the nature of this threat I suggest they
consult the source.

Here is a link to the Constitution:

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html


And another to the Bill of Rights:

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html


There you can see exactly what we are about to have taken from us.

Michael Connelly

Retired attorney,

Constitutional Law Instructor

Carrollton, Texas

Arpaio Goes After Acorn

Friday, September 18, 2009
Sheriff Joe Arpaio Goes After ACORN

[https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiXE4fjlq_JrXuUTZfJ6mrl7bI_iqIJWUaOOBYigYgHugHVvgesU0JG3TIhZNjBsYg9-bZzd4mcq3wgTBt0u-gCairz7tSy7IAQ9IFhiTxDxz2c1-vUqzQXQW8c-QB1crRF5_wl/s1600-h/arpaio.jpg]
Back in July a class action suit was filed against America's Sheriff, Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County Arizona. Sheriff Joe is the guy who has become famous for the tough way he treats criminals including making them live in tents and having to wear pink prison uniforms. Over in the last three years Arpaio has been a one-man homeland security agent, he has handed over 22,616 illegal immigrants to ICE for deportation.

Of course those in the PC Police are not happy with the Sheriff, Racist Agitator Al Sharpton has threatened to protest, Eric Holder is investigating him for racial profiling, and there is even a class action racial discrimination suit against him, all because he is trying to keep people who have come into the country illegally from staying in the country.

Apparently among the organizations helping with the lawsuit against the Sheriff is ACORN, so Sheriff Joe is going after the group for mis-using its funds.

Arpaio subpoenas ACORN, says funds misused

[https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSw9u_c4Kab0LjryrgA7ydgOtczCuyuUGbWaXOO6rTZl3Sqr6bM2gVjNMCT9gnChgDJnbiSYLAfCz_am0cTsUDz359yspoH0FSZh9xCFj7cauiVF4OEoJ8JYmbuAV27XBbU0QG/s1600-h/pinkpq5.jpg]


Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio is subpoenaing records from the ACORN

The sheriff’s office seeking information regarding the group’s involvement with Arpaio critics on Melendres v. Arpaio, a case brought by a Mexican national claiming he was unfairly treated and the victim of racial profiling by deputies.

“I believe the organization used state and federal funds meant to help poor people to conduct a campaign against me and my officers,” said Arpaio in a statement. “These records will show, I believe, that ACORN is in bed with the anti-immigration enforcement organizations, which continue to demonstrate in front of my office trying to thwart my officers from enforcing state and federal law.”

ACORN has called for Arpaio to resign and opposes his immigration raids. The group could not immediately be reached for comment.

The group has come under fire recently for offering tax advice to people posing as prostitutes and pimps. ACORN also has also been questioned for alleged voter fraud and the U.S. Senate voted earlier this week to cut off federal funding for the group. community activist group saying is could be using government funds meant for housing and social services to wage a campaign against his immigration enforcement.

Fair Tax Now

The FairTax Plan features:

* no federal income taxes,
* no payroll taxes,
* no self-employment taxes,
* no capital gains taxes,
* no gift or estate taxes,
* no alternative minimum taxes,
* no corporate taxes,
* no payroll withholding,
* no taxes on Social Security benefits or pension benefits,
* no personal tax forms,
* no personal or business income tax record keeping, and
* no personal income tax filing whatsoever.

It is a lot to ask you to invest, $50 or $100. But this is the big one; this is the drive to win. We get started big, we get started right, and we can do it! If we all pitch in, we will overcome the special interests, the politically privileged class. We will close the IRS; repeal the 16th Amendment, and make our federal taxes fair and equitable forever.

I am a volunteer Director, and have personally invested $200. By investing $200, I have given at least twice what you will invest today.

How much return can you expect for your investment? It is so great you probably cannot even calculate it. Go ahead, try: No more income taxes. No more capital gains taxes. No more death taxes. No more Social Security taxes. No more payroll taxes, withholding for Social Security and Medicare. No more taxes on Social Security benefits or pension benefits. No more self-employment taxes. No more taxes on interest, stocks, pensions, or the sale of your home.

Just a sales tax on new items which everyone, including those here illegally or who earn money via illegal means, pays. No special breaks for certain classes of people or products or companies. Everyone is treated the same, equitably, fairly.

Eighty economists, including the Nobel Prize winning economist Dr. Vernon L. Smith have called upon Congress to pass the FairTax.

Alan Greenspan says a consumption tax, such as the FairTax, "could certainly meet the fundamental criteria of being simple, fair, and pro-growth."

Retired Federal Reserve Bank Board of Governors Member Wayne Angell says, "the economic benefits of the FairTax Plan are compelling. The FairTax Plan eliminates the tax bias against work, saving, and investment, which would lead to higher rates of economic growth, faster growth in productivity, more jobs, lower interest rates, and a higher standard of living for the American people."

The FairTax will put trillions of dollars into our economy as funds which are in offshore banks and investments in income tax avoidance schemes comes home—enough to create an economic boom for a generation or more.

Every investment of $50 or $100 earns a full year's membership in your FairTax organization. We will mail your Membership Card out to your right away when you invest.

But more importantly, you will be making the best investment of your life: just think what ridding the nation of $100 donors will receive a copy of The FairTax Solution by Ken Hoaglandeverything but a sales tax will do for us, for our children, for our grandkids, for our beloved nation.

Undecided on whether to invest $50 or $100? Let me help. Invest $100 and you not only receive a year’s FairTax membership but I will reserve a first-edition, personally signed copy of my upcoming book: The FairTax Solution. It will be published in March of next year, and FairTax.org will mail your copy out to you at no cost if you will invest $100 now in your National FairTax campaign.

Watch your National Campaign Fund grow! Do your part!

Act now! Invest $50 or $100.

If not now, when? If not us, who?

Urgently yours,

Ken Hoagland
FairTax Director

"Jimmy Carter Is An Old Fool"

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE!!!

September 17, 2009

Contact: (213) 804-1872

Rev. Peterson: Jimmy Carter Is An Old Fool!

LOS ANGELES—Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson, Founder and President of BOND Action, Inc., repudiated former President Jimmy Carter for his statement this week on NBC News that the growing opposition to Barack Obama “is based on the fact that he’s a black man.” The following is Rev. Peterson’s statement:

“Jimmy Carter’s remarks are outrageous and prove that he’s an old fool. Carter is just the latest mouthpiece to join the chorus of left-wing liberals in playing the race card. Columnist Maureen Dowd and members of the Congressional Black Caucus have made similar remarks in an effort to silence the opposition and keep blacks on the Democrats plantation.

“This past weekend’s grass-roots tea party event which drew more than a million people to the Capitol has terrified Democrats and caused them to launch an orchestrated smear campaign against white conservatives and other concerned Americans.

“Carter claims that the growing backlash against Obama is based on the fact that ‘he’s black’, but if that was the case why did so many white Americans vote for him as president? Wasn’t he black during the election season? The only ones obsessed about Obama’s race are left-wing Democrats.

“Democrats don’t understand that the American people are sick and tired of the out-of-control spending and culture of corruption they see coming from Washington. The tea parties are a legitimate movement born out of a deep fundamental concern about the direction and decline of this great nation.

“I encourage all freedom-loving Americans, especially whites, to not be intimidated by these false and baseless accusations. Continue speaking out and holding rallies and we will stop this administration—don’t let up!”

BOND Action, Inc. is a 501 (c) (4) cultural action organization, which exists to educate motivate and rally Americans to greater involvement in the moral, cultural and political issues that threaten our great country. Contributions to BOND Action, Inc. are NOT tax-deductible, but are confidential. For more information call (877) WE-ACT-77 (932-2877) or visit www.bondaction.org.

Equifax, A Precaution:

This is somewhat off my main theme, but I feel it's important just the same.

Equifax, A Precaution

Signing up for Score Watch? What they promise and what you get are not the same. Plus, they don't really care.

The website says 'Get 2 credit scores for $9.95'. What it really means is 'Get 2 credit scores for $9.95 EACH', a small, but important distinction calculated to increase profits with no additional effort on their part.

After getting a credit score and half assed credit report I waited a full month before accessing my second report (which they led me to believe was included). The second report was exactly the same as the first report, as was the score.

I complained to customer service, which appears to be in India. They told me that a second report will not necessarily be different from the first report. They then proceeded to withdraw another $9.95 from my checking account.

I complained to customer service yet again because now I have paid twice for one score. They told me in so many words that you get what you get.

I complained yet again (always by email, to document the responses) and was dismissed. I asked for a refund and was told no refunds. They apparently have a license to steal.

So, I drafted a letter to :

Governors' Office of Consumer Affairs
2 Martin Luther King Jr. Drive SE, Suite 356
Atlanta, Ga 30334-4600

in which I documented all that has passed between me and Equifax, as well as my idea of a solution.

I then drafted a letter to:

Equifax Credit Information Services
PO Box 740241
Atlanta, GA 30374

in which I quoted from emails and described that at no time did anyone offer to help, but implied that I should shut up and go away.

They have a monopoly on the FICO score, so at some point you will probably have to do some business with them. Folks, all I can say is know what you may be in for before purchasing products from an off shore, greedy, indifferent corporation like Equifax. They have been sanctioned dozens of times by the FTC (Federal Trade Commission) for poor respose to customer complaints, but show no sign of honoring consumer rights.

Open Letter To AARP

This was sent to Mr. Barry Rand who is the new Executive Director of AARP



Dear Mr. Rand,
Recently you sent us a letter encouraging us to renew our lapsed membership in AARP by the requested date. I know it is not what you were looking for, but this is the most honest response I can give you. Our gap in coverage is merely a microscopic symptom of the real problem, a deepening lack of faith.


While we have proudly maintained our membership for several years and have long admired the AARP goals and principles, regrettably, we can no longer endorse it's abdication of our values. Your letter specifically stated that we can count on AARP to speak up for our rights, yet the voice we hear is not ours. Your offer of being kept up to date on important issues through DIVIDED WE FAIL presents neither an impartial view nor the one we have come to embrace. We do believe that when two parties agree all the time on everything presented to them, one is probably not necessary. But, when the opinions and long term goals are diametrically opposed, the divorce is imminent. This is the philosophy which spawned our 200 years of government.


Once upon a time, we looked forward to being part of the senior demographic. We also looked to AARP to provide certain benefits and give our voice a power we could not possibly hope to achieve on our own. AARP gave us a sense of belonging which we no longer enjoy. The Socialist politics practiced by the Obama administration and empowered by AARP serves only to raise the blood pressure my medical insurance strives to contain. Clearly a conflict of interest there!


We do not understand the AARP posture, feel greatly betrayed by the guiding forces whom we expected to map out our senior years and leave your ranks with a great sense of regret. We mitigate that disappointment with the relief of knowing that we are not contributing to the problem anymore by renewing our membership. There are numerous other organizations which offer discounts without threatening our way of life or offending our sensibilities.


This Presidential Administration scares the living daylights out of us. Not just for ourselves, but for our proud and bloodstained heritage,but even more importantly for our children and grandchildren. Washington has rendered Soylent Green a prophetic cautionary tale rather than a nonfiction scare tactic. I have never in my life endorsed any militant or radical groups, yet now I find myself listening to them. I don't have to agree with them to appreciate the fear which birthed their existence. Their borderline insanity presents little more than a balance to the voice of the Socialist mindset in power. Perhaps I became American by a great stroke of luck in some cosmic uterine lottery, but in my adulthood I CHOOSE to embrace it and nurture the freedoms it represents as well as the responsibilities it requires.


Your website generously offers us the opportunity to receive all communication in Spanish. ARE YOU KIDDING??? Someone has broken into our 'house', invaded our home without our invitation or consent. The President has insisted we keep the perpetrator in comfort and learn the perp language so we can communicate our reluctant welcome to them.
I DON'T choose to welcome them.
I DON'T choose to support them.
I DON'T choose to educate them.
I DON'T choose to medicate them, pay for their food or clothing.
American home invaders get arrested.
Please explain to me why foreign lawbreakers can enjoy privileges on American soil that Americans do not get?
Why do some immigrants have to play the game to be welcomed and others only have to break & enter to be welcomed?


We travel for a living. Walt hauls horses all over this great country, averaging over 10,000 miles a month when he is out there. He meets more people than a politician on caffeine overdose. Of all the many good folks he enjoyed on this last 10,000 miles, this trip yielded only ONE supporter of the current administration. One of us is out of touch with mainstream America. Since our poll is conducted without funding, I have more faith in it than one which is power driven.

We have decided to forward this to everyone on our mailing list, and will encourage them to do the same. With several hundred in my address book, I have every faith that the eventual exponential factor will make a credible statement to you..
I am disappointed as hell.
I am scared as hell.
I am MAD as hell, and I'm NOT gonna take it anymore!


~ .\|/. ~
<(©¿©)>
Keep Smilin'
LZ

Be Encouraged

Remembering a Fallen Soldier…

Remembering What We Are Up Against
and Why We Must – and Will – Prevail

by Brigitte Gabriel

Dear ****,

I don’t believe I’ve ever written a letter quite like this to you before. Indeed, it is difficult to write this without tears welling up in my eyes.

It started as a rainy Friday morning in late August. I was flying from my presentation in Springfield, Missouri, to my next destination connecting through Atlanta. Little did I know that what I was about to experience that day was going to shake me to the depth of my soul, inflame my passion for our country (I didn't think it was possible to be more passionate) and remind me why ACT! for America is so important to our security and the future of America.

I looked out my window at gloomy Atlanta as the plane took off, closed my eyes and pictured home and my loving family meeting me at the airport with open arms, smiles and kisses, waiting to whisk me off to Outback Steak House for dinner as planned.

It was a quiet, uneventful flight. No beverage service. No announcements from the captain — until we landed at our final destination:

"Welcome to "......." . Ladies and Gentleman we have a special request to ask of you. We are carrying on this plane today a fallen soldier brought home from Afghanistan. His body is accompanied by Sgt. "......". Please kindly allow Sgt. "...." to deplane first so he can do his job in escorting the body below. We will leave the seat belt sign on until the body has been taken off the plane. Then when the seat belt sign is turned off, you can deplane."

The plane continued slowly down the runway as the captain’s shocking announcement reverberated among the passengers. As we taxied closer to our gate, tears began to flow as we saw a police car, a military hearse, and a team of Marines standing in formation waiting to carry the body.

And the saddest scene of all — his family, wife and children, all lined up against the wall waiting for him.

Burning tears were flowing down my face as my heart sank into utter pain and agony at such a sight. We always hear about this on the news and feel sad but to experience it in person is completely different.

We pulled up to our gate and Sgt. "...." stood up in all his gloriously decorated uniform, opened up the overhead compartment carrying a folded American flag and a back pack, and started walking out of the plane amid the clapping and tears of all of us on board.

No one in the plane even touched their cell phone. People were transfixed, staring out the window, sharing our respect and sorrow. At that moment we were not Democrats, Republicans or Independents. We were Americans soberly watching one of our own come home in a coffin draped with an American flag.

As they removed the body from the plane, two men holding his wife started walking towards the plane as the wife covered her face and began sobbing. She was followed by her children. The Marines walked in formation and carried his body to the hearse.

We started getting out of our seats and deplaning without a word from anyone except the sounds of crying coming from different people looking out the window as they walked out of the plane.

As I entered the airport, people were standing in lines and rows facing the window watching all this.

Some men were saluting the body. We all stood next to each other, honoring this soldier until his body was finally in the hearse and he was driven off the tarmac.

It was the most sobering, heartbreaking, and patriotic scene. As I cried for the following few hours sitting with my family at home eating Chinese take-out for dinner (I just wasn’t up to going out for dinner), I was reminded of why we need to continually remind Americans that we are at war.

Our men and women are fighting and dying overseas to protect America from an enemy who is not only fighting us across the globe but also advancing here at home.

Just because we have not been successfully attacked at home doesn't mean our enemy has forgotten about us. Their tactics have become more sophisticated. They not only wish to attack us militarily, they are moving at full speed in the advance of their cultural Jihad invading America.

Islamic foot-washing basins in airports; Shariah finance being introduced by American banks; college campuses designating Islamic prayer rooms for Muslims only; Islamic compounds practicing Shariah law springing up across America; public schools using our tax dollars to indoctrinate American students into Islam; demands by Muslim parents that their children be provided private prayer rooms in their public schools; Muslim workers demanding special workplace accommodations no other religious person would ask for; and the list goes on.

As history demonstrates, only organized resistance will stop this. Unopposed by organized resistance, the advance of cultural Jihad in Europe has proceeded to the point that many think a full-blown “Eurabia” is inevitable and irreversible.

And even if we win the war against Islamic terrorism, but lose the struggle against cultural Jihad here at home, we may protect our safety but lose our liberties and our way of life. I just don’t believe this young man who fell on the field of battle would consider that a victory.

“Freedom” is not just freedom from the physical harm our Islamist enemies want to inflict on us. It is freedom from the tyranny and oppression of shariah Islamic law and the supremacist political ideology our enemies are determined to impose upon us.

So, just as that soldier was on the front lines of this war overseas, we are on the “front lines” here at home. That soldier was part of the “organized resistance” in Afghanistan. We are part of the “organized resistance” here in America.

We cannot afford to fail in our military missions overseas. Failure would embolden and empower Islamists throughout the world.

We also cannot afford to fail here at home.

This is why I appeal to you to take heart and help me continue building ACT! for America. We are the only nationwide organized resistance to this threat. As I said, we are the front lines here at home.

Our families, our communities and our nation are depending on us, even though many do not yet realize it.

For instance, two years ago ACT helped pass the bill in Congress that protects every citizen from lawsuits when they report suspicious activity in public places.

How many Americans know this happened? Very few. Yet they are now protected from lawsuits, which means America is safer as a result.

I know there are other issues right now, such as health care and the economy, that are dominating the attention of the American people. And I understand why that is.

But for those of us, you and me, who grasp the seriousness of the threat of radical Islam, we must continue to do everything we can to make sure that the reason 9/11 occurred is not forgotten. That the reason we are fighting in Afghanistan is not forgotten.

We must continue to push forward, to inform, organize, and ring the alarm bells, even when it feels like a lot of people aren’t paying attention right now or don’t seem to “get it.”

Because there are many good Americans out there ready to respond to our message, if we can only get it to them.

Because we are the modern “Paul Revere's,” the messengers who are warning America even when a lot of America is preoccupied with other matters. It is estimated that over 2/3 of the colonists either were loyal to Britain or were indifferent to the political struggles the colonies were experiencing in 1776.

Yet, through the leadership and sacrifice of the remaining colonists, independence was declared and Britain was defeated.

How I wish I could be standing in your presence this very moment, to grasp your hands, look into your eyes, and say “be encouraged!”

We will win this struggle against radical Islam. It won’t be tomorrow, or next year, but we will, in time, prevail — so long as good, patriotic Americans like you do not lose hope and keep taking action.

We are winning victories, and we will continue to win more – and bigger – victories, so long as good, patriotic Americans like you do not lose hope and keep taking action.

Let’s remember how far we have come together. In less than two years we have built the largest grassroots organization in America dedicated to combating the threat of radical Islam, with 62,000 members and 315 local chapters.

Be encouraged!

I want to close with this. Last week, when Guy Rodgers and I were at the EMP conference in Niagara, NY, the president of a national security organization sat down with us and thanked us profusely for what ACT! for America is doing and has already accomplished.

I wish you could have seen his face and heard his words. This is a man who has served at high levels of government and been around Washington politics for decades.

His message to us – and ultimately to you – was that ACT! for America is KEY to all our efforts to defeat radical Islam. He has watched us grow, witnessed our activism, and rejoiced for our victories.

So I’ll say it again. Be encouraged!

Always devoted,

Brigitte Gabriel

Goodbye 40

Sunday, September 06, 2009 11:08 PM
GOODBYE 40


[It is now the month of elul, the month preceding Rosh Hashana, the new year. Normally I go to shul in pre-dawn darkness, the only other living things visible being the packs of wild dogs that roam the streets. Now the streets are alive with people rushing to say selichot, the pre-Rosh Hashana penitential prayers.

Sefardi Jews start to say the penitential prayers at the beginning of the month. Ashkenazim say the prayers a week before Rosh Hashana.

Is it that the Sefardim have so much more to atone for? Hardly. They are just so much more flamboyant about everything. Even penitence.]



[During an intermission at one of the IPO rehearsals we attended – see Goodbye 39 – Rachel and our host went backstage for a cup of coffee. Rachel returned and said “It’s mostly Russian being spoken back there”.

No surprise. Years ago I was told that when the IPO was organizing a European tour they were told in Vienna that “we had a Jewish orchestra here last month. The Leningrad Philharmonic.”]



[Damn the cats!

A situation that was driving us nuts has taken a dramatic turn for the worse.

Up to three weeks ago we faced six cats, only one of which was a real problem.

There was Chaleria, my favorite.

There was Muffy-the-Slut, who appeared late morning and early evening, when things were slow at the cathouse where she works.

There were Muffy’s three kittens, now equal in size to their mother, including One-Eyed Jack who, upon lifting its tail, was revealed to be One-Eyed Jacqueline.

These five are reasonably well-behaved, and if they congregated in front of our door did so quietly.

And then there was Shitsi. This monstrous dropping from an earlier Muffy litter, this non-stop howler, forever scratching at our screen door, brought out the worst in both Rachel and my self. Our hatred for the beast reached quite irrational levels. However often we chased her away, she returned. It got to the point where we both wanted her dead, no matter how.

Rachel demanded action, now!

I announced a multi-stage plan. Stage One, to get them all away from our front door. To that end I moved the water bowls around to the back of the house, and fed them only near the bowls. It took a few days but they got used to being served at the rear, and started hanging out where the goodies were due to appear. A bonus was that I enjoyed their company while hanging laundry. It was a drag shlepping around to the back, but I figured on solving that with Stage Two.

True, as I had to admit to Rachel, I hadn’t yet formulated Stage Two. But at least Stage One was working.

Two weeks ago, disaster.

We awoke to find Shitsi lying on her side in front of our door, nursing five tiny furballs. Not only that, but sneering a short distance away was Paramour 2, another Muffy-produced monstrosity.

Feeding them around the back was no longer feasible as Shitsi could not leave her still-sightless spawn.

So now they are twelve, at the door 24/7, and I’m still trying to figure out Stage Two.]



[[aside: A dear lady in Jerusalem always writes, whenever I’ve complained about the cats, offering to send a platoon, squad, brigade, division to capture and neuter them. My response remains negative. If, however, she is prepared to capture and neuter human beings, my response is enthusiastically affirmative and I have a list of worthy potential neuterinos and neuterinas all ready.]]



[Lest you think the Nature scene is all bleak, a happy note. Aghast at a tsunami of dog poop on our lawn, I was told to place bottles of water near favorite poopoisies. These bottles act both as mirror and magnifying glass, and frighten the beasts into thinking larger beasts are facing them. I was skeptical, but it works. Praise the Lord for the stupidity of dogs.]



GOODBYE 40

BETRAYED BY OUR OWN or ARE JEWS GENETICALLY STUPID?



Good friends from the States visited recently, people who share my views of both the American and Israeli governments. I brought up a subject that had apparently slipped under their radar, that of the Youth Corps which BHO is planning and which will serve as an army of enforcers for government policy.

My friends were incredulous. “Oh, Moshe” one said, “what you have suffered here in Israel has totally warped your judgment.”

“Not in America, Moshe” said another. “Our democratic traditions are too strong for anything like that to happen.”

But it is precisely because of my experience here that I see it happening in the States. One of our hopes prior to the expulsion was that our soldiers – our boys and girls! – both religious and secular would refuse to take part.

The government was as concerned about this as we were hopeful. For an entire year prior to the expulsion the troops were ‘prepared’ by psychiatrists and psychologists who worked to convince them we were the enemies of peace.

The indoctrination worked. For all the pictures you see of crying soldiers, the great majority performed stone-faced, like robots. Of the 10,000 troops who took part, a grand total of 65 refused to participate.

The groundwork is now being prepared in the States. Anti BHO protestors are already being labeled “right wing terrorists”. And I’m certain the shrinks are already in place, preparing programs to convince the Youth Corps that democracy can be protected only by crushing opponents of the government.

The USA will soon be the USSA. The United Socialist States of America.



Of course we won’t be around to see it. The situation worsens here daily. Netanyahu is lauded for his adept twisting and turning; no big deal for an invertebrate.

What really infuriates me [yes, I know, everything infuriates me, but for the purpose of this letter, let’s pretend…] is that so many of my ideological fellows take heart from polls showing that close to 70% of genetically Jewish Israelis believe the expulsion was wrong. We refuse to see they believe it was wrong only because none of the stated goals was achieved.

The expulsion was wrong, period. If all of the stated goals had been achieved the expulsion would still have been wrong.

Boneless Bibi was much applauded because he made a speech saying Jews would never again remove Jews from their homes. Ignored was the follow-up phrase, “without the proper preparation”.

The same speech was made by one of “our own”, Prof. Daniel Hirshkovitz, head of the National Religious Party and Minister for Barbie Dolls. He made it clear that only if a quid pro quo was guaranteed would he agree to Jews being expelled.



Rachel dragged me to a meeting of those planning to move to Lachish. A representative of a construction company was making a pitch. I was apoplectic when I learned the rep was Benzi Lieberman, still a member of the Yesha Council. This was the gentleman who led our people at Kfar Maimon, when 30,000 supporters faced 5000 exhausted police and soldiers. The gentleman, through complicity or incompetence or cowardice – probably all three – sabotaged our efforts to get these supporters to Gush Katif.

Clearly, in Israel nothing succeeds like failure. Instead of crawling back under a rock, this lizard now is trying to sell us homes to replace the ones he was instrumental in our losing. But that situation is standard for this Felafel Republic.

What shrivels my heart is our total lack of self-respect in politely listening to his sales pitch.



One of the privileges of senility is being allowed to repeat oneself. Over. And over. And over. So I won’t apologize for the following:

In the future – assuming there is a future – if history is still being written – probably in Arabic – the Beginning of the End for the State of Israel will be dated to the expulsion of the Jews – by the Jews – from Gush Katif.



[Shabbat marked our 47th wedding anniversary. And we were alone. Remarkably, blessedly alone. I don’t know how Rachel has put up with me all these years. Were we Catholics, she would be destined for sainthood.

At one point in our ruminations she said “I thought you were a mature responsible adult when we married. But you were just an overgrown kid, and remained that way until reaching old age.”

If that’s not true love, I don’t know what is.]



moshe

What If He Is Right !

Take the three minutes to read this.
Maybe he is wrong.
What if he is right?

David Kaiser is a respected historian whose published works have covered a broad range of topics, from European Warfare to American League Baseball. Born in 1947, the son of a diplomat, Kaiser spent his childhood in three capital cities: Washington D.C. , Albany , New York , and Dakar , Senegal .. He attended Harvard University , graduating there in 1969 with a B.A. in history. He then spent several years more at Harvard, gaining a PhD in history, which he obtained in 1976. He served in the Army Reserve from 1970 to 1976.

He is a professor in the Strategy and Policy Department of the United States Naval War College. He has previously taught at Carnegie Mellon, Williams College and Harvard University . Kaiser's latest book, The Road to Dallas, about the Kennedy assassination, was just published by Harvard University Press.



Dr. David Kaiser


History Unfolding

I am a student of history. Professionally, I have written 15 books on history that have been published in six languages, and I have studied history all my life. I have come to think there is something monumentally large afoot, and I do not believe it is simply a banking crisis, or a mortgage crisis, or a credit crisis. Yes these exist, but they are merely single facets on a very large gemstone that is only now coming into a sharper focus.

Something of historic proportions is happening. I can sense it because I know how it feels, smells, what it looks like, and how people react to it. Yes, a perfect storm may be brewing, but there is something happening within our country that has been evolving for about ten to fifteen years. The pace has dramatically quickened in the past two.

We demand and then codify into law the requirement that our banks make massive loans to people we know they can never pay back? Why?

We learned just days ago that the Federal Reserve, which has little or no real oversight by anyone, has "loaned" two trillion dollars (that is $2,000,000,000,000) over the past few months, but will not tell us to whom or why or disclose the terms. That is our money. Yours and mine. And that is three times the $700 billion we all argued about so strenuously just this past September. Who has this money? Why do they have it? Why are the terms unavailable to us? Who asked for it? Who authorized it? I thought this was a government of "we the people," who loaned our powers to our elected leaders. Apparently not.

We have spent two or more decades intentionally de-industrializing our economy.. Why?

We have intentionally dumbed down our schools, ignored our history, and no longer teach our founding documents, why we are exceptional, and why we are worth preserving. Students by and large cannot write, think critically, read, or articulate. Parents are not revolting, teachers are not picketing, school boards continue to back mediocrity. Why?

We have now established the precedent of protesting every close election (violently in California over a proposition that is so controversial that it simply wants marriage to remain defined as between one man and one woman. Did you ever think such a thing possible just a decade ago?) We have corrupted our sacred political process by allowing unelected judges to write laws that radically change our way of life, and then mainstream Marxist groups like ACORN and others to turn our voting system into a banana republic. To what purpose?

Now our mortgage industry is collapsing, housing prices are in free fall, major industries are failing, our banking system is on the verge of collapse, social security is nearly bankrupt, as is Medicare and our entire government. Our education system is worse than a joke (I teach college and I know precisely what I am talking about) - the list is staggering in its length, breadth, and depth.. It is potentially 1929 x ten...And we are at war with an enemy we cannot even name for fear of offending people of the same religion, who, in turn, cannot wait to slit the throats of your children if they have the opportunity to do so.


And finally, we have elected a man that no one really knows anything about, who has never run so much as a Dairy Queen, let alone a town as big as Wasilla , Alaska .. All of his associations and alliances are with real radicals in their chosen fields of employment, and everything we learn about him, drip by drip, is unsettling if not downright scary (Surely you have heard him speak about his idea to create and fund a mandatory civilian defense force stronger than our military for use inside our borders? No? Oh, of course. The media would never play that for you over and over and then demand he answer it. Sarah Palin's pregnant daughter and $150,000 wardrobe are more important.)

Mr. Obama's winning platform can be boiled down to one word: Change. Why?

I have never been so afraid for my country and for my children as I am now.

This man campaigned on bringing people together, something he has never, ever done in his professional life. In my assessment, Obama will divide us along philosophical lines, push us apart, and then try to realign the pieces into a new and different power structure. Change is indeed coming. And when it comes, you will never see the same nation again.

And that is only the beginning..

As a serious student of history, I thought I would never come to experience what the ordinary, moral German must have felt in the mid-1930s In those times, the "savior" was a former smooth-talking rabble-rouser from the streets, about whom the average German knew next to nothing. What they should have known was that he was associated with groups that shouted, shoved, and pushed around people with whom they disagreed; he edged his way onto the political stage through great oratory. Conservative "losers" read it right now.

And there were the promises. Economic times were tough, people were losing jobs, and he was a great speaker. And he smiled and frowned and waved a lot. And people, even newspapers, were afraid to speak out for fear that his "brown shirts" would bully and beat them into submission. Which they did - regularly. And then, he was duly elected to office, while a full-throttled economic crisis bloomed at hand - the Great Depression. Slowly, but surely he seized the controls of government power, person by person, department by department, bureaucracy by bureaucracy. The children of German citizens were at first, encouraged to join a Youth Movement in his name where they were taught exactly what to think. Later, they were required to do so. No Jews of course,

How did he get people on his side? He did it by promising jobs to the jobless, money to the money-less, and rewards for the military-industrial complex. He did it by indoctrinating the children, advocating gun control, health care for all, better wages, better jobs, and promising to re-instill pride once again in the country, across Europe , and across the world. He did it with a compliant media - did you know that? And he did this all in the name of justice and .... . .. change. And the people surely got what they voted for.

If you think I am exaggerating, look it up. It's all there in the history books.


So read your history books. Many people of conscience objected in 1933 and were shouted down, called names, laughed at, and ridiculed. When Winston Churchill pointed out the obvious in the late 1930s while seated in the House of Lords in England (he was not yet Prime Minister), he was booed into his seat and called a crazy troublemaker. He was right, though. And the world came to regret that he was not listened to.

Do not forget that Germany was the most educated, the most cultured country in Europe. It was full of music, art, museums, hospitals, laboratories, and universities. And yet, in less than six years (a shorter time span than just two terms of the U. S. presidency) it was rounding up its own citizens, killing others, abrogating its laws, turning children against parents, and neighbors against neighbors.. All with the best of intentions, of course. The road to Hell is paved with them.

As a practical thinker, one not overly prone to emotional decisions, I have a choice: I can either believe what the objective pieces of evidence tell me (even if they make me cringe with disgust); I can believe what history is shouting to me from across the chasm of seven decades; or I can hope I am wrong by closing my eyes, having another latte, and ignoring what is transpiring around me..

I choose to believe the evidence. No doubt some people will scoff at me, others laugh, or think I am foolish, naive, or both. To some degree, perhaps I am. But I have never been afraid to look people in the eye and tell them exactly what I believe-and why I believe it.

I pray I am wrong. I do not think I am. Perhaps the only hope is our vote in the next elections.

David Kaiser
Jamestown , Rhode Island
United States


This is not the time to be quietly enjoying your retirement or taking a long holiday weekend to "get away from it all".
No; this is a time when every American must be asking themselves, "What can I do to help change the direction of our country?
How can I help remove from office the Representative or Senator who is not listening to the will of the people because they have sold their soul to the special interest group(s)?
What individuals and what organizations are sincerely working to improve our schools and help our children gain a better understanding of their heritage and history?"
Together, WE, the people, are unstoppable! Together, we can change direction before it is too late and our precious liberties are lost!
Stand up, America! Its GAME ON!!

Obama The Mortal

Obama, the Mortal

By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, September 4, 2009

What happened to President Obama? His wax wings having melted, he is the man who fell to earth. What happened to bring his popularity down further than that of any new president in polling history save Gerald Ford (post-Nixon pardon)?

The conventional wisdom is that Obama made a tactical mistake by farming out his agenda to Congress and allowing himself to be pulled left by the doctrinaire liberals of the Democratic congressional leadership. But the idea of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi pulling Obama left is quite ridiculous. Where do you think he came from, this friend of Chávista ex-terrorist William Ayers, of PLO apologist Rashid Khalidi, of racialist inciter Jeremiah Wright?

But forget the character witnesses. Just look at Obama's behavior as president, beginning with his first address to Congress. Unbidden, unforced and unpushed by the congressional leadership, Obama gave his most deeply felt vision of America, delivering the boldest social democratic manifesto ever issued by a U.S. president. In American politics, you can't get more left than that speech and still be on the playing field.

In a center-right country, that was problem enough. Obama then compounded it by vastly misreading his mandate. He assumed it was personal. This, after winning by a mere seven points in a year of true economic catastrophe, of an extraordinarily unpopular Republican incumbent, and of a politically weak and unsteady opponent. Nonetheless, Obama imagined that, as Fouad Ajami so brilliantly observed, he had won the kind of banana-republic plebiscite that grants caudillo-like authority to remake everything in one's own image.

Accordingly, Obama unveiled his plans for a grand makeover of the American system, animating that vision by enacting measure after measure that greatly enlarged state power, government spending and national debt. Not surprisingly, these measures engendered powerful popular skepticism that burst into tea-party town-hall resistance.

Obama's reaction to that resistance made things worse. Obama fancies himself tribune of the people, spokesman for the grass roots, harbinger of a new kind of politics from below that would upset the established lobbyist special-interest order of Washington. Yet faced with protests from a real grass-roots movement, his party and his supporters called it a mob -- misinformed, misled, irrational, angry, unhinged, bordering on racist. All this while the administration was cutting backroom deals with every manner of special interest -- from drug companies to auto unions to doctors -- in which favors worth billions were quietly and opaquely exchanged.

"Get out of the way" and "don't do a lot of talking," the great bipartisan scolded opponents whom he blamed for creating the "mess" from which he is merely trying to save us. If only they could see. So with boundless confidence in his own persuasiveness, Obama undertook a summer campaign to enlighten the masses by addressing substantive objections to his reforms.

Things got worse still. With answers so slippery and implausible and, well, fishy, he began jeopardizing the most fundamental asset of any new president -- trust. You can't say that the system is totally broken and in need of radical reconstruction, but nothing will change for you; that Medicare is bankrupting the country, but $500 billion in cuts will have no effect on care; that you will expand coverage while reducing deficits -- and not inspire incredulity and mistrust. When ordinary citizens understand they are being played for fools, they bristle.

After a disastrous summer -- mistaking his mandate, believing his press, centralizing power, governing left, disdaining citizens for (of all things) organizing -- Obama is in trouble.

Let's be clear: This is a fall, not a collapse. He's not been repudiated or even defeated. He will likely regroup and pass some version of health insurance reform that will restore some of his clout and popularity.

But what has occurred -- irreversibly -- is this: He's become ordinary. The spell is broken. The charismatic conjurer of 2008 has shed his magic. He's regressed to the mean, tellingly expressed in poll numbers hovering at 50 percent.

For a man who only recently bred a cult, ordinariness is a great burden, and for his acolytes, a crushing disappointment. Obama has become a politician like others. And like other flailing presidents, he will try to salvage a cherished reform -- and his own standing -- with yet another prime-time speech.

But for the first time since election night in Grant Park, he will appear in the most unfamiliar of guises -- mere mortal, a treacherous transformation to which a man of Obama's supreme self-regard may never adapt.