Collectivists Common Core Standards Funded By Gates and Department of Educations — Videos

Posted on October 2, 2013. Filed under: American History, Babies, Blogroll, Books, Business, College, Communications, Constitution, Crime, Culture, Economics, Education, Employment, government, government spending, High School, history, Investments, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Literacy, Math, media, People, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Programming, Psychology, Raves, Regulations, Resources, Reviews, Science, Strategy, Technology, Unemployment, Video | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , |

Updated February 16, 2015

US-Map-Common-Core-Copy_0

BL-common-core-update-AUG-2013

The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America

John Stossel – Common Core

Bill Bennett vs Greg Abbott Common Core Debate Fox News Sunday

“Story-Killers: How the Common Core Destroys Minds and Souls” by Terrence O. Moore

BUILDING THE MACHINE – The Common Core Documentary

Reaction To Jeb Bush And Common Core

What do the Common Core State Standards mean to you?

Ben Swann Exposes Common Core Curriculum

Joy Pullmann on Common Core

Problems with Common Core

Brilliant anti-Common Core Speech by Dr. Duke Pesta

Common Core Standards by Dr. Peg Luksik

Arkansas Mother Obliterates Common Core in 4 Minutes!

Problems with Common Core

Classical Education vs. Common Core

Ron Paul: “Common Core is the Last Straw”

PJTV: How the Obama Administration Is Dumbing Down Education

Obama’s Race to the Bottom: US Is Seizing School Power and Setting Lower Education Standards

PJTV: Obama Replacing Classics with Government Propaganda

Common Core State Standards – An Introduction To Marxism 101

FIXING AMERICA’S EDUCATION “BILL GATES” !

Bill Gates at the National Conference of State Legislatures (clip 4)

Bill Gates at the National Conference of State Legislatures (clip 5)

Bill Gates at the National Conference of State Legislatures (clip 6)

Bill Gates: How state budgets are breaking US schools

Why was a parent arrested for protesting Common Core

SHOCKING! Parent Arrested for Objecting to Obama Common Core

Common Core debate: Critics blast new education standards

Reclaiming Education Freedom: The Fight to Stop Common Core National Standards and Tests

“Common Core Common Sense: Why It’s Illiberal and Unconstitutional”

Who Is Behind The Privatization Of Education:Gates, Broad, KIPP, Pearson, WestEd & The Gulen Schools

Bill Bennett Endorses the Common Core

Resource Bank 2013: Confronting the Common Core: Strategic Discussion

Exposing Common Core

Charlotte Iserbyt on The Perils of Common Core

The Problem With Common Core – July 27, 2013 Boise, Idaho

Stopping Common Core National Standards and Tests

The Glenn Beck Program: Common Core and Education

You’ll never guess who is supporting Common Core?

GLENN BECK,Did Bill Gates admit the real purpose of Common Core?

The Government will Control Your Childs Every Move? Common Core Disaster?

The Danger Of Common Core – TheBlazeTV – The Glenn Beck Radio Program – 2013.03.15

Common Core Glenn Beck

Learn the Common Core Standards in 10 Minutes

Common Core: Dangers And Threats To American Liberty And Education

Common Core Standards – Fact and Fiction

Part 1 of 5 Stop the Common Core

Part 2 of 5 Stop the Common Core

Part 3 of 5 Stop the Common Core

Part 4 of 5 Stop the Common Core

Part 5 of 5 Stop the Common Core

Why We Need Common Core: “I choose C.”

The Untold Historical Truth Of American Education – Charlotte Iserby

Norman Dodd on Ford Foundation

Exposing the Tax Exempt Foundations – Dr. Stan Monteith

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Stop Obama’s Common Core Curriculum Standards — Progressive Indoctrination, Standardization And Tracking Of American Children Into Collectivists — Little Boxes — Videos

Big Brother Bill Gates Funds k-12 Tracking of Students With InBloom Database — Invasion of Privacy — Opt Out — Video

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Who is Jeffrey Lord? Why Is He Attacking Ron Paul on Talk Radio Shows Including: Levin, Medved and Bennett? Big Government Interventionist Neoconservative Republican Establishment Hit Man!

Posted on December 30, 2011. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, College, Communications, Economics, Education, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, history, Investments, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, People, Philosophy, Politics, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Security, Talk Radio, Taxes, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

The 1% Are Afraid of Ron Paul 2012 Revolt –

NWO Corporate Minions (MSM Whores) Getting Desperate!

How Ron Paul Would Defend America

Mark Levin and Jeffrey Lord Precious Delicate Utopian Neocons

Mark Levin Interviews Jeffrey Lord On Ron Paul And His Supporters Being Neoliberal

Michael Medved, Jeffery Lord On Ron Paul’s Neoliberal Reeducation

Mark Levin, Ron Paul Hater, Put in His Place

American Spectator Dead Wrong on Ron Paul

SA@TheDC – “I Like Ron Paul Except on Foreign Policy”

SA@The DC – Ron Paul’s Reaganesque Foreign Policy

SA@TAC – A Conservative Foreign Policy Comeback?

 

SA@TheDC – Conservatism for What?

SA@TAC – Ron Paul’s Pledge to America

 

Jack Hunter on FOX News 12-29-11

 

Establishment Media Crucifies Ron Paul On Every Front

“As long as nations cling to protective tariffs, migration barriers, compulsory education, interventionism and etatism, new conflicts capable of breaking out at any time into open warfare will continually arise to plague mankind.”

~Ludwig von Mises, Liberalism, pages 150-151

Jeffrey Lord has been attacking Ron Paul’s non-interventionist foreign policy on various so-called “conservative” talk radio shows and accuses Ron Paul of not being a conservative.

Really, he must be kidding or simply does not know the history of the conservative movement.

Suggest he read George H. Nash’s book, The Conservative Intellectual Movement in America Since 1945.

SA@TAC – The Great Neo-Con: Libertarianism Isn’t ‘Conservative’

If Lord means that Ron Paul is  not a neoconservative, then Lord is correct.

Ron Paul is definitely not a neoconservative.

Congressman Ron Paul, MD – We’ve Been NeoConned

Neoconservatives are right-wing progressives Democrats that became “boat people” and switched to the Republican Party in the 1970s when the Democratic Party nominated George McGovern as their Presidential candidate.

SA@TAC – What’s a ‘Neoconservative?’

 

SA@TAC – Who’s a Republican?

SA@TAC – Is Ron Paul Weird?

Most conservatives and libertarians do not consider neoconservatives as either new or conservative. They are really progressives that want the United States to have an aggressive interventionist foreign policy that supports nation or empire building, the U.S. as policeman of the world and Israel with foreign aid.

Both the progressives and/or neoconservatives that are in the Republican Party establishment are in panic mode that Paul may win the presidential nomination.

I suggest neoconservative Republicans get back in their boats and go back to the Democratic Party, where most of them came from in the first place.

Please take your hitman, Jeffrey Lord, with you.

Big government interventionists pervade the Democratic and Republican party establishments and leaderships.

The Democratic Party is the party of  left-wing progressives that favor the expansion of welfare dependency.

The Republican Party is the party of right-wing progressives that favor the expansion of warfare dependency.

Both favor big government interventionism at home and abroad.

Making government omnipotent with a massive bureaucracy advocating and supporting the warfare and welfare state is the goal of the progressive interventionists of the Democratic and Republican Party establishments.

SA@TheDC – ‘Fixing’ Big Government is Not Conservative

Ron Paul favors limited government and opposes government intervention at home and abroad.

Ron Paul is a conservative traditionalist libertarian that puts faith, family, friends and freedom first.

Paul wants to replace the big government warfare and welfare economy with a limited government peace and prosperity economy.

This is the reason more and more American people are coming to the conclusion that Ron Paul should be President of the United States.

SA@TAC – Constant Conservative Ron Paul

This is the reason Ron Paul is leading in Iowa.

This is the reason Ron Paul will be elected President of the United States.

The Republican Party establishment might talk conservative, but they walk and spend like big government progressives and neocons, which most of them are.

Just look at the Republican Party  budget passed in the House of Representatives. The Fiscal Year 2012 deficit will exceed $1 trillion each year.

This is not limited government.

This is not fiscally responsible.

This is not conservative or libertarian.

The neoconservatives want a war with Iran.

Starting World War III with Iran is the progressive answer to the United States economic problems.

The war on poverty, the war of drugs and the war on terror are all progressive wars of big government interventionists.

The U.S. government led by progressives of both the Democratic and Republican party establishments have lost all three wars that never end.

Those who support big government interventionism at home and abroad are progressive statistist and neoconservatives.

Progressives  are collectivists that oppose individualists with a conservative and libertarian political philosophy.

These progressives are not conservatives.

Do not fall for the neoconservative con men of talk radio that say Ron Paul is not conservative and invite Jeffrey Lord on their shows to smear and discredit Paul.

Most of them are closet neoconservative big government interventionists. This includes talk radio show hosts Levin, Medved, Hewitt and Bennett, just to name a few.

Ron Paul: Iran Sanctions = Act of War

“Interventionism begets economic nationalism. It thus kindles the antagonism resulting in war. An abandonment of economic nationalism is not feasible if nations cling to interference with business. Free trade in international relations requires domestic free trade.”

~Ludwig von Mises, Omnipotent Government, page 66. 

SA@TAC – The End of Right-Wing Progressivism?

This is a massively huge and interventionist government that favors the warfare and welfare dependency of the American people.

 

Gingrich Gone Wild – Might Vote For Obama

SA@TAC – Newt Gingrich is Not a Conservative

Ron Paul Interview w/ Jack Hunter on Foreign Policy & Israel

Jeffrey Lord Doesn’t Know The Founders or Ron Paul

 

Background Articles and Videos

Ron Paul – The Power of Nightmares

Mark Levin Avoids the “Empire” Question

SA@TAC – Joe Sobran’s Conservative Foreign Policy

SA@TAC – Obama Kept Us Safe

Poo Blobs & Jeffrey Lord Try to Say that DropDobbs.com is About Killing Debate, NOT Racist Diatribe

RON PAUL on RUSH LIMBAUGH

Jack Hunter Versus Mark Levin

 

Richard Perle PNAC and AIPAC hawk on why Ron Paul will not win the 2012 election

 

Ron Paul and the Neoliberal Reeducation Campaign

By Jeffrey Lord

“…Neoliberals and Quasi-Cons:

When it comes to foreign policy, Ron Paul and his supporters are not conservatives.

This is important to understand when one realizes that Paul’s views are, self-described, “non-interventionist.”

The fact that he has been allowed to get away with pretending to conservatism on this score is merely reflective of journalists who, for whatever reason, are simply unfamiliar with American history. Ironically, it is precisely because the Paul campaign has not been thoroughly covered that no one pays attention to the historical paternity of what the candidate is saying.

There is no great sin in Paul’s non-interventionist stance (or “isolationist” stance as his critics would have it). There have been American politicians aplenty throughout American history, particularly in the 20th century, who believed precisely as Paul and his enthusiasts do right now. (Paul touts his admiration for the Founding Fathers, but even that is very selective. James Monroe of Monroe Doctrine fame was a considerable interventionist, Washington as a general invaded Canada, and Alexander Hamilton gave rise to Paul’s idea of evil spawn — the Federal Reserve. Interventionists of all types have been with us right from the start.)

The deception — and it is a considerable deception — is that almost to a person those prominent pre-Ron Paul non-interventionist “Paulist” politicians of the 20th century were overwhelmingly not conservatives at all. They were men of the left. The far left.

From three-time Democratic presidential nominee and Woodrow Wilson Secretary of State William Jennings Bryan to powerful Montana Democratic Senator Burton K. Wheeler to FDR’s ex-vice presidential nominee Henry Wallace to the 1968 anti-war presidential candidacy of Minnesota Democratic Senator Eugene McCarthy to 1972 Democratic presidential nominee (and Henry Wallace delegate in 1948) George McGovern, non-interventionists have held prominent positions in the American Left that was and is the Democratic Party.

But of particular interest, and here is where the deception by Paulists is so considerable, the Ron Paul view of foreign policy has been the cornerstone of Republican liberals and progressives. Those who, using current political terminology, would be called the RINOs (Republican In Name Only) of their day. …”

http://spectator.org/archives/2011/08/23/ron-paul-and-the-neoliberal-re/1

 

“…Jeffrey Lord is a former member of the Ronald Reagan administration, journalist, author, and political strategist in Pennsylvania.

Lord earned a degree from Franklin and Marshall College.[1] He first worked as a press aide in the Pennsylvania State Senate.[1] He worked for Pennsylvania Congressman Bud Shuster as Legislative Director and Press Secretary and for U.S. Senator H. John Heinz III as Executive Assistant.[1] Later Lord worked as Chief of Staff to Drew Lewis, who was a Co-chair of the Ronald Reagan presidential campaign.[1] He also served in the Reagan White House as an associate political director.[1] In that position he assisted in the judicial nomination process for several nominees, including Robert Bork.[2] He also worked for Jack Kemp during the Presidency of George H. W. Bush.[1]

Lord now works as a journalist, contributing material to The Weekly Standard, The American Spectator, National Review Online, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Times, the Los Angeles Times, the Philadelphia Inquirer, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, and the Harrisburg Patriot-News. He has appeared as a guest on numerous televisions and radio programs.[1] He also works as a political consultant for Quantum Communications, a Harrisburg-based political strategy firm.[1]

He is the author of The Borking Rebellion, about the confirmation of Federal Judge D. Brooks Smith.[1] It received a generally positive review in the Wall Street Journal.[3]

In July 2010, Jeffrey Lord claimed that the “lynching” of a relative of Shirley Sherrod is fallacious.[4]

In August 2011, Jeffrey Lord wrote an article in The American Spectator which was critical of Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX), and the views of some of Ron Paul’s supporters.[5] It sparked considerable debate within the conservative movement.[6] …”

Jeffrey Lord: When Attacks on Ron Paul Fail, then Attack his Voters

“…

Get this. The reason Ron Paul is polling well in Iowa is because it’s Iowa. Jeffrey Lord is a special kind of dense. He is so dense he doesn’t know he is dense. He keeps repeating the same untruths (that non-interventionism is inherently left-wing) over and over again despite being corrected repeatedly. My reply is below:

I get it. When your attacks on Ron Paul aren’t working, then attack the people who vote for him.

First, you continue with the lie that non-interventionism is inherently left-wing. You have been corrected on this so many times, and I know you read these responses since you reply, that you have no excuse. You are engaging in demagoguery.

Second, you are making the case against yourself and don’t even know it. It is not a coincidence that non-interventionism was the preferred policy of heartland Americans in flyover country. And it is not a coincidence that support for war came from elite internationalists on the East Coast. So if you want to throw your hat in with elitist internationalists then be my guest. I’ll throw mine in with parochial Americans in the Heartland. Lord, you are a shill and you don’t even realize you are a shill. …”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T57yvB4RDHs

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

The Warmongering Progressive Neoconservative Republican Establishment Launches Racist, Anti-Semite and Extremist Smear Attack On Ron Paul With Republican Talk Show Hosts–Videos

Posted on December 28, 2011. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, College, Communications, Economics, Education, Employment, Fiscal Policy, government, government spending, history, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, Monetary Policy, Video, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Jason Lewis Bashes Gop Establishment for smear campaign against Ron Paul pt 1

Jason Lewis Bashes Gop Establishment for smear campaign against Ron Paul pt 2

Jason Lewis Bashes Gop Establishment for smear campaign against Ron Paul pt 3

SA@TAC – What’s a ‘Neoconservative?’

SA@TheDC – “I Like Ron Paul Except on Foreign Policy”

SA@TAC – Ronald Reagan: Isolationist

SA@TheDC – Conservatism’s Future: Young Americans for Liberty

SA@TAC – Who’s a Republican?

Israel and GOP join forces to oust Obama

Congressman Ron Paul, MD – We’ve Been NeoConned

Conservatives and libertarians have been listening to the smear attacks on talk radio by several so-called “conservatives”, mostly neoconservatives and progressives Republicans that favor big government intervention at home and/or abroad.

They are trying to paint Paul as a racist, anti-Semite, and extremist.

Nice try, but the character and record of Ron Paul speaks for itself.

What is extremist is running deficits, where spending exceeds tax revenues, more than $1 trillion for four years in a row and not balancing the budget for another ten years. This is fiscal irresponsibility and madness. Yet this is exactly what both political parties are proposing.

Principled conservatives and libertarians are not buying this smear attack by the Republican establishment and their shills on talk radio.

The Republican Party establishment is cutting their own throats as are those talk radio hosts who lie and mislead the American people about Ron Paul.

The neoconservatives and the progressive Republican Party establishment have become the party of warmongers, not peacemakers.

The Republican Party is the party of government intervention abroad to make the American people dependent upon warfare.

The Democratic Party is the party of government intervention at home to make the American people dependent upon welfare.

Both the Democratic and Republican parties have been captured by progressive big government interventionists with the Democratic Party establishment largely socialist and the Republican Party establishment largely neoconserservatives.

Both parties have been running massive government deficits and running up the national debt to pay for their excessive welfare and warfare programs.

Just keep it up and you will destroy the Republican Party.

If the establishment does keeps it up, I would urge Ron Paul to run as an independent candidate.

I much prefer Ron Paul to win as a Republican, but the progressive and neoconservatives are revealing themselves as being neither conservative or libertarian, but big government interventionists.

As a conservative and libertarian, I will not vote for another progressive and/or neoconservative Republican including Romney, Gingrich,Perry and Santorium.

Suggest conservatives and libertarians do their own homework and research on the candidates.

Stop listening to Bennett, Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin and Hewitt, just to mention a few of the so-called “conservatives”.

They are really shills for the Republican Party, Republicans first, and not conservatives and/or libertarians first.

Bennett, Hewitt and Levin in particular are misleading you about Ron Paul.

While disappointed, I was not surprised.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

Byron York To Host Neoconservative Bill Bennett’s Morning In America Show Tuesday, December 13, 2011–Would Like To Interview Ron Paul–Go On The Show Ron!–Videos!

Posted on December 12, 2011. Filed under: American History, Banking, Blogroll, Books, Business, Communications, Economics, Employment, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, government spending, history, Immigration, Inflation, Investments, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Macroeconomics, media, Microeconomics, Monetary Policy, Money, People, Philosophy, Politics, Public Sector, Raves, Regulations, Religion, Resources, Security, Strategy, Talk Radio, Taxes, Technology, Unemployment, Unions, Video, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , |

The Bill Bennett’s MORNING IN AMERICA

http://www.billbennett.com/pages/aboutus/

Byron York,  Chief Political Correspondent of The Washington Examiner, extended an open invitation to the Republican Presidential candidates to be interviewed on the Bill Bennett talk radio show that York will be guest hosting Tuesday, December 13. from 6-9 a.m.

I believe Bill Bennett has the best talk radio show on the air today.

I also support and will vote for Ron Paul.

Suggest Ron Paul accept Bryon York’s open invitation.

Many Ron Paul supporters, conservative, libertarians and independents will be listening.

Byron York talks about liberal efforts to ‘pre-tar’ the Tea Party protests as a violent movement

Bill Bennett at Values Voter Summit

Ron Paul – Values Voter Summit 2011

Dr. Bill Bennett at Values Voter Summit 2011

BIG DOG – New Ron Paul Ad

Ron Paul Speaks On Dept. of Education – Fox GOP Debate 9/22/11

Ron Paul Wins Values Voter Summit Straw Poll

Brutal & Uncomfortably Tense: Bill Bennett Painfully Grills Gingrich For Attacking Paul Ryan

Bill Bennett and Byron York defend Ronald Reagan

Byron York – Romney could lose nomination

BYRON YORK on WMAL

Background Articles and Videos

Byron York discusses the rapid growth of government on FOX News

Worst Person: “an awkward goodbye” edition Countdown Reports

Inside Ronald Reagan

A Reason Interview

Manuel Klausner from the July 1975 issue

“…REASON: Governor Reagan, you have been quoted in the press as saying that you’re doing a lot of speaking now on behalf of the philosophy of conservatism and libertarianism. Is there a difference between the two?

REAGAN: If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.

Now, I can’t say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals. The strongest man on the block will run the neighborhood. We have government to insure that we don’t each one of us have to carry a club to defend ourselves. But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are travelling the same path.

REASON: Governor, could you give us some examples of what you would consider to be proper functions of government?

REAGAN: Well, the first and most important thing is that government exists to protect us from each other. Government exists, of course, for the defense of the nation, and for the defense of the rights of the individual. Maybe we don’t all agree on some of the other accepted functions of government, such as fire departments and police departments–again the protection of the people. …”

“…REASON: Governor, what about the United Nations? Are you in favor of the United States withdrawing from the UN?

REAGAN: Well, I am in favor of certainly a different policy than we’ve had. I think the United States should have taken a very drastic action; perhaps it should have staged a walk-out at the time of the recognition of Red China. I think that the United Nations today is virtually impotent when you stop to think that countries representing two-thirds of the votes of the United Nations represent less than 10 percent of the world population. It’s a funny thing that everybody who wants one man-one vote doesn’t hold it true for the United Nations!

REASON: Governor if the Republicans were to nominate a candidate that was unacceptable to you in 1976, could you support a Libertarian third party candidate?

REAGAN: I have to wait and see what you’re doing and what you are standing for.

REASON: Are there any particular books or authors or economists that have been influential in terms of your intellectual development?

REAGAN: Oh, it would be hard for me to pinpoint anything in that category. I’m an inveterate reader. Bastiat and von Mises, and Hayek and Hazlitt–I’m one for the classical economists….”

http://reason.com/archives/1975/07/01/inside-ronald-reagan/singlepage

The perplexing and somewhat frightening Ron Paul

By Byron York

“…Republicans dodged a big bullet at the Ames, Iowa, straw poll. If just 77 of  the 4,283 people who voted for Rep. Michele Bachmann had voted instead for Rep.  Ron Paul, then Paul would have won the straw poll. In the end, Bachmann came out  ahead with 28.55 percent of the vote to Paul’s 27.65 percent. No other candidate  was close.

Some well-connected Iowa Republicans viewed it as a bullet dodged because  they had long feared the possibility of a Paul victory.

“It would pour jet fuel on the East Coast narrative that Iowa is just too  nutty to have such an important place in the nominating process,” says one of  those Republicans.

Before the poll, they saw a Paul-Bachmann one-two finish as the worst-case  scenario. They ended up with Bachmann-Paul – a result establishment Republicans  viewed as somewhat better than the other way around – and got a lot of the  criticism anyway.

The criticism came not just from Democrats or so-called Eastern elite RINOs  (Republicans in Name Only).

“Ron Paul is going to destroy this party if they keep him in there,” said  Rush Limbaugh the day after the Aug. 11 Fox News-Washington Examiner debate in  Ames. “This is nuts on parade.”

Key Republicans in Iowa – and around the country, too – are genuinely baffled  by the Paul phenomenon. They understand (and share) many of Paul’s views on the  Constitution and limiting the size and scope of the federal government, even if  they think Paul sometimes goes too far. What perplexes them is Paul’s take on  foreign policy, especially the threat of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons.

Read more: http://www.thenewstribune.com/2011/08/24/1793502/the-perplexing-and-somewhat-frightening.html#ixzz1gKniukUe

 

Ronald Reagan Was No Libertarian

by Gene Healy

“…”Eight dreary, miserable years” of “egregiously statist policies,” Murray Rothbard snarled in Liberty magazine in 1989. My colleague David Boaz was less dyspeptic, but nearly as disappointed, in his introduction to the 1988 Cato Institute volume “Assessing the Reagan Years”: “The Reagan Revolution turned out to be a paper tiger,” he wrote.

[W]e shouldn’t make any president into a plaster saint.

True enough: Reagan was no libertarian. Instead of wrapping ourselves in his mantle, those of us who support deep reductions in government’s size and power should take a clear-eyed look at the Reagan record.

The Cato Institute did just that in “Assessing the Reagan Years,” which showed that under Reagan, federal spending actually increased from 23 percent to 24 percent of gross national product, while payroll tax increases resulted in a net tax increase for most Americans.

Not only did Reagan renege on his promise to abolish President Carter’s new Cabinet departments, Education and Energy, he appointed secretaries dedicated to their preservation.

Carter did more than Reagan to deregulate the economy, the authors explained, and while farm subsidies tripled under Reagan’s watch, Reagan eliminated only one (one!) major federal program, the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act (which was almost immediately reborn under another name).

“On so many issues,” Boaz lamented, the Reagan administration “never even showed up for battle.”

Worse, on one key issue where the president actually showed up, his efforts left the country demonstrably less free.

President Nixon popularized the phrase “the war on drugs,” but Reagan was the first chief executive who really took that metaphor seriously. Via executive order, he declared drug trafficking a “national security threat,” and in a 1986 televised address he invoked World War II, calling drug abuse “a form of tyranny” and imploring Americans to “join us in this great, new national crusade.”

As a result of that failed crusade, the United States now has the highest incarceration rate in the developed world.

Why, then, do most libertarians today remember our 40th president fondly? Edmund Morris captured Reagan’s appeal nicely in a passage from his much-maligned biography, Dutch:

“Across America and Europe, in huge areas of the world where commerce was once state-controlled, Reagan’s philosophy of hard work and earned reward has made Marxism a memory. If [upon signing the ’81 tax cuts] he had laid down his last pen … and said to the press, ‘Ten years from now, you fellows, there are going to be stock markets in Moscow and Shanghai,’ guffaws would have filled the valley. But who can doubt that somewhere deep down (as he leaned back in his chair, put one high-heeled boot on the table, and mugged for the cameras), Dutch believed?”

Few at the time showed that kind of vision, and Reagan deserves enormous credit for it. Still, we shouldn’t make any president into a plaster saint. There’s an unhealthy touch of idolatry in the question, “What would Reagan do?” …”

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=12763

 

Gingrich reaction: Republicans livid, accuse former speaker of hypocrisy in attack on Ryan

By Byron York

“…This morning Republicans are just beginning to assess the damage that former House Speaker and current presidential candidate Newt Gingrich has done to the GOP budget plan currently before Congress.  On “Meet the Press” Sunday, Gingrich denounced House Budget Committee chairman Paul Ryan’s plan to restructure Medicare, saying, “I don’t think right-wing social engineering is any more desirable than left-wing social engineering.  I don’t think imposing radical change from the right or the left is a very good way for a free society to operate.”

On his radio program Monday morning, former Education Secretary Bill Bennett, who knows Gingrich well but is also close to Ryan, reacted angrily to Gingrich’s remarks.  Referring to Ryan’s Medicare plan as “right-wing social engineering” is, Bennett said, “an unforgivable mistake, in my judgment.”  Bennett went on to say that Gingrich “has taken himself out of serious consideration for the [2012] race.”  [Full disclosure: I appear on, and sometimes serve as guest host of, the Bennett program.]

Gingrich’s remarks rankled for three reasons.  One, they hurt the Republican plan.  Two, they were particularly disdainful; Gingrich didn’t just said that he disagreed with Ryan, he referred to Ryan’s plan as “right-wing social engineering.”  And three, they contradicted what Gingrich himself has said about Ryan’s budget.

To make that last point, Bennett played a clip of an interview he conducted with Gingrich on April 5, barely more than a month ago.  At that time, Gingrich was full of praise for the Ryan budget. “Paul Ryan has stepped up to the plate,” Gingrich said.  “This is a very, very serious budget and I think rivals with [what] John Kasich did as budget chairman in getting to a balanced budget in the 1990s, just for the scale and courage involved…”

“Paul Ryan is going to define modern conservatism at a serious level,” Gingrich continued on April 5.  “You can quibble over details but the general shape of what he’s doing will define 2012 for Republicans.”

Reagan was no neocon

By: Gene Healy

“…Reagan had a genuine horror of nuclear weapons, and wanted them abolished. He called mutually assured destruction “the craziest thing I ever heard of.” His three military interventions — Grenada, Lebanon and Libya — were “limited operations of short duration,” and he carefully avoided direct confrontation with the Soviets.

This got Reagan into trouble with the neocons early on. They took to the oped pages to lament “The Muddle in Foreign Policy” (Irving Kristol) and chronicle the “Neoconservative Anguish over Reagan’s Foreign Policy” (Norman Podhoretz).

Incredibly, Podhoretz accused Reagan of “following a strategy of helping the Soviet Union stabilize its empire,” instead of “encouraging the breakdown of that empire from within.”

In Reagan’s Middle East policies, especially, there was much for hawks to rue, such as the administration’s sharp condemnation of Israel’s 1981 “preventive strike” on the Iraqi nuclear reactor at Osirak, and Reagan’s decision to withdraw U.S. peacekeepers from Lebanon after a truck bomb killed more than 200 Marines.

In a 2007 debate, to the chagrin of Rudy Giuliani, Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, invoked Reagan to argue for getting out of the Middle East: “We need the courage of a Ronald Reagan.”

Despite Reagan’s “ringing speeches,” he was “quite circumscribed in his efforts at democracy promotion,” Colin Dueck writes in “Hard Line,” a new history of GOP foreign policy. Reagan viewed the U.S. as a city on a hill, a “model to other countries,” not a crusader state with “an obligation to forcibly promote democracy overseas.”

Most of all, what separates Reagan from his hawkish latter-day admirers was his optimism. He viewed the United States as dynamic and free — and, therefore, strong enough to outlast any enemy.

For the neoconservatives, however, it’s always 1939, and the free world is always under siege, whether from a decrepit Soviet monolith of the 1980s or today’s allegedly “existential threat” presented by several hundred cave-dwelling Islamists.

In the Gorbachev era, Norman Podhoretz accused Reagan of buying into “the fantasy of communist collapse.” Some fantasy.

Reagan had been right when he proclaimed in 1981 that “the West will not contain communism; it will transcend communism,” dismissing it as “a sad, bizarre chapter in human history whose last pages are even now being written.” The Gipper’s threat-addled fans at the Standard could use some of his confidence today.

In recent decades, Republicans have repeatedly honored Reagan’s memory by naming federal buildings after him — a curious tribute indeed. They’d do better to look at his actual record.

In foreign affairs, the Reagan legacy is one of realism and restraint.

Examiner Columnist Gene Healy is a vice president at the Cato Institute and the author of “The Cult of the Presidency.” …”

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Newt Gingrich Running For President As A Big Govenment Interventionist Republican Progressive aka Green “Compassionate” Conservative?–Favors Individual Health Care Mandates While Attacking Paul Ryan As A Right Wing Radical Social Engineer For Proposing A Premium Support or $15,000 Voucher System To Save Medicare From Bankruptcy!–Videos

Posted on May 16, 2011. Filed under: Banking, Blogroll, Business, College, Communications, Economics, Education, Fiscal Policy, Monetary Policy, Money, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Strategy, Video, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , |

Pronk Pops Show 28:May 18, 2011

 

Pronk Pops Show 27:May 9, 2011

 

Pronk Pops Show 26:May 5, 2011

 

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-28

 

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 22 (Part 2)-26

 

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22 (Part 1)

 

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

 

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1-9

 

 Newt Gingrich 2012 Presidential Campaign Launches

 

Krauthammer on Gingrich Medicare Plan Comments: “This Makes Him a Marginal Candidate”

 

 

Coming Up On The John Gibson Radio Show 05/17/11

 

Damage Control

Newt: I oppose the Obamacare mandate. Period.

 

Green Conservatism — Newt Gingrich

 

 

Newt Gingrich – Man vs Nature on Global Warming

 

The Precautionary Principle Who Benefits?

 

 

Nancy Pelosi and Newt Gingrich Commercial on Climate Change

 

Gingrich: I’d Do a Commercial With Al Gore

 

Fox News Disses Newt Gingrich

Buchanan: Newt ‘Out On Left Wing Of Republican Party’

 

Newt Gingrich “1 Out Of Every 6 Americans Is On Food Stamps & To Hide Behind Charges Of Racism!” p.1

Newt Gingrich “1 Out Of Every 6 Americans Is On Food Stamps & To Hide Behind Charges Of Racism!” p.2

 

 

The Laura Ingraham Show – Paul Ryan responds to Newt Gingrich’s criticism of Ryan’s Medicare plan

 

Paul Ryan on the Urgent Need to Save and Strengthen Medicare

Rep Paul Ryan: Reform Medicare – Don’t Raid It

Paul Ryan previews FY2012 budget, pushes back on political attacks

 

Newt Gingrich Was More Supportive Of Individual Mandates Than Mitt Romney

 

In September 2007 I was listening to Neal Boortz when he had Newt Gingrich as a guest. If you listened to the show you would have concluded that Newt Gingrich was going to announce that he was running for President.

The following week Newt Gingrich announced he was not running.

I would have supported Newt Gingrich and voted for him had he run in 2008.

I no longer support Newt Gingrich and would not vote for him in 2012.

I made a mistake in 2008 that I will not repeat in 2012.

Fool me once, shame on you.

Fool me twice, same on me.

I am now supporting Ron Paul for President and hope he will pick Michele Bachmann as a Vice-President running mate.

Neither the Democratic or Republican Parties will balance the budget in the next ten years.

Both Gingrich and Ryan as well as President Obama are protecting the Washington D.C. bureaucracy and political class.

Neither Gingrich nor Ryan would reduce the size and scope of the Federal government.

Glenn Beck on Paul Ryan: We don’t need another John McCain

 

Beck talks to Paul Ryan about GOP Budget

 

Paul Ryan – If We Don’t Get This Budget Under Control Are Kids Will Pay 60 To 70 % In Taxes

 

Congressional Ratings 2010 Released February 2011

http://www.conservative.org/congress-ratings/

 

U.S. Debt Rating Drops to “Negative”

Summary of Outlays, Revenues (Receipts), Deficits, Surpluses Fiscal Years 1980-2010(Nominal Dollars in Millions)
Fiscal Year Outlays Revenues (Receipts) Deficits (-), Surpluses
1980 590,941 517,112 -73,830
1981 678,241 599,272 -78,968
1982 745,743 617,766 127,977
1983 808,364 600,562 -207,802
1984 851,805 666,488 -185,367
1985 946,344 734,037 -212,308
1986 990,382 769,155 -221,277
1987 1,004,017 854,288 -149,730
1988 1,064,417 854,288 -155,178
1989 1,143,744 991,105 -152,639
1990 1,252,994 1,031,958 -221,036
1991 1,324,226 1,054,988 -269,238
1992 1,381,529 1,091,208 -290,321
1993 1,409,386 1,154,335 -255,051
1994 1,461,753 1,258,566 203,186
1995 1,515,742 1,351,790 -163,392
1996 1,560,484 1,453,053 -107,431
1997 1,601,116 1,579,232 -21,884
1998 1,652,458 1,721,728 69,270
1999 1,701,842 1,827,452 125,610
2000 1,788,950 2,025,191 236,241
2001 1,862,846 1,991,082 128,236
2002 2,010,894 1,853,136 157,758
2003 2,159,899 1,782,314 -377,585
2004 2,292,841 1,880,114 -412,727
2005 2,471,957 2,153,611 -318,346
2006 2,655,050 2,406,869 -248,181
2007 2,728,686 2,567,985 -160,701
2008 2,982,544 2,523,991 -458,553
2009 3,517,677 2,104,989 -1,412,688
2010 3,456,213 2,162,724 -1,293,489

For a history of the Federal Government’s Receipts (Revenues), Outlays, and Deficits and Surpluses

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals

Ryan Unveils Much Anticipated 2012 Budget Plan

 

Paul Ryan Path to Prosperity Slide Show 

 

Which Budgets Are Balanced And Living Within The Means of The American People?

Republican Party Budget Proposals

S-1 FY2012 Chairman’s Markup

(Nominal Dollars in Billions)

Fiscal Year Outlays Revenues Deficits Debt Held By Public
2011 3,618 2,230 -1,388 10,351
2012 3,529 2,533 -995 11,418
2013 3,559 2,860 -699 12,217
2014 3,586 3,094 -492 12,801
2015 3,671 3,237 -434 13,326
2016 3,858 3,377 -481 13,886
2017 3,998 3,589 -408 14,363
2018 4,123 3,745 -379 14,800
2019 4,352 3,939 -414 15,254
2020 4,544 4,142 -402 15,681
2021 4,739 4,354 -385 16,071
2012-2021 39,958 34,870 -5,088 n.a.

http://budget.house.gov/UploadedFiles/PathToProsperityFY2012.pdf

Democratic Party Budget Proposals

S-1 FY2012 President’s Budget(Nominal Dollars in Billions)
Fiscal Year Outlays Revenues Deficits Debt Held By Public
2011 3,819 2,174 -1,645 10,856
2012 3,729 2,627 -1,101 11,881
2013 3,771 3,003 -768 12,784
2014 3,977 3,333 -646 13,562
2015 4,190 3,583 -607 14,301
2016 4,468 3,819 -649 15,064
2017 4,669 4,042 -627 15,795
2018 4,876 4,257 -619 16,513
2019 5,154 4,473 -681 17,284
2020 5,442 4,686 -735 18,103
2021 5,697 4,923 -774 18,967
2012-2021 45,952 38,747 -7,205 n.a.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/tables.pdf

Tea Party Budget Proposals

S-1 FY2012 Tea Party’s Balanced/Surplus Budget(Nominal Dollars in Billions)
Fiscal Year Outlays Revenues Surpluses Debt Held By Public
2012 2,500 2,500 0 10,900
2013 2,800 2,800 0 10,900
2014 3,000 3,000 0 10,900
2015 3,200 3,200 0 10,900
2016 3,300 3,300 0 10,900
2017 3,400 3,500 100 10,800
2018 3,500 3,700 200 10,600
2019 3,600 3,900 300 10,300
2020 3,700 4,000 300 10,000
2021 3,800 4,300 500 9,500
2012-2021 32,800 34,200 1,400 n.a.

 

Neither political party is serious about balancing the budget and cutting Federal government spending in the next thirty years, if then.

The so-called fight about the National Debt statutory ceiling or debt is a farce.

 Both political parties periodically increase it when they need to.

Both political parties will agree to increase the National Debt Ceiling by over $1,000 billion to cover just the Fiscal Year 2011 deficist.

Only Ron Paul will balance the budget by closing eight to ten Federal Departments and cutting the budgets of the remaining Departments:

  1. Department of Defense
  2. Department of State
  3. Department of Justice
  4. Department of Treasury 

Only Ron Paul will insist on a balanced budget in Fiscal Year 2012 and opposes any increase in the National Debt ceiling.

Only Ron Paul opposes government intervention at home and abroad.

Only Ron Paul will transform the United States from a warfare and welfare economy with a massive collectivist state to a peace and prosperity economy with a limited constitutional republic.

Join the second American revolution and campaign for liberty!

 

Ron Paul on Morning Joe Talking About Paul Ryan Budget and Foreign Policy

 

 

 

Ron Paul on CNBC Kudlow Report 03-02-2011

 

 

Ron Paul Extreme Or Big Government Extreme!

 

Ron Paul : This Time We Have More Voluteers!

 

Ron Paul : President Isn´t A Dictator!

 

Ron Paul and Liberty on Fox’s Freedom Watch 5/13

 

U.S. Debt Clock

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

 

Background Articles and Videos

Ron Paul: 2012 announcement speech in Exeter, NH 5/13/2011
 
 
 
CNN Poll: Ron Paul does best against Obama in 2012
by Paul Steinhauser
CNN
Fri, May 6th, 2011

“…Who does best against Obama? Paul. The congressman from Texas, who also ran as a libertarian candidate for president in 1988 and who is well liked by many in the tea party movement, trails the president by only seven points (52 to 45 percent) in a hypothetical general election showdown. Huckabee trails by eight points, with Romney down 11 points to Obama. The poll indicates the president leading Gingrich by 17 points, Palin by 19, and Trump by 22 points. …”

http://www.voteronpaul.com/newsDetail.php?CNN-Poll-Ron-Paul-does-best-against-Obama-in-2012-3323

Election 2012: Barack Obama 42%, Ron Paul 41%

Wednesday, April 14, 2010
 
“…Pit maverick Republican Congressman Ron Paul against President Obama in a hypothetical 2012 election match-up, and the race is – virtually dead even. …”
 
 

Gingrich Blasts House GOP’s Medicare Plan

Presidential Candidate Calls It ‘Right-Wing Social Engineering,’ Agrees With Obama About Need for Insurance Mandate

“…White House hopeful Newt Gingrich called the House Republican plan for Medicare “right-wing social engineering,” injecting a discordant GOP voice into the party’s efforts to reshape both entitlements and the broader budget debate.

In the same interview Sunday, on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Mr. Gingrich backed a requirement that all Americans buy health insurance, complicating a Republican line of attack on President Barack Obama’s health law.

The former House speaker’s decision to stick with his previous support for an individual mandate comes days after former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney defended the health revamp he championed as governor, which includes a mandate.

The moves suggest the Republican primary contest, which will include both men, could feature a robust debate on health care, with GOP candidates challenging the Democratic law while defending their own variations. …”

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703509104576325350084379360.html?mod=WSJ_hp_MIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsThird

 

Milton Friedman on Libertarianism (Part 4 of 4)

 

03/17/11: Sen. Rand Paul Introduces Five-Year Balanced Budget Plan

It’s Simple to Balance The Budget Without Higher Taxes

There Are too Many Bureaucrats and They Are Paid too Much

Eight Reasons Why Big Government Hurts Economic Growth

The Empirical Evidence Against Big Government

 

 

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Ron Paul Running For President Of The United States in 2012–It Is Official–The Third Time Is The Charm!–Videos

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Is WordPress Censoring My Post Entitled: An Affront and Threat To The American People–The Ground Zero Mosque–Remembering 9/11 and The Unknown Falling Man–Videos

Posted on March 9, 2011. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Communications, Crime, Culture, Education, Federal Government, government, government spending, history, Immigration, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, People, Philosophy, Politics, Programming, Psychology, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Technology, Video, Wealth | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

First let me say I am a big fan and promoter of WordPress and actually teach college students blogging and the use of WordPress.

When one of my past blog posts suddenly gets ten or more hits, I usually look at the post to see what I wrote and what videos I included.

I do this because over time a number of videos that I embed in the page may have been removed by YouTube and appear as a black sceen. I usually delete them.

Also, I may want to update and expand the post and add new tags and/or categories.

Unfortunately, something very odd is happening with one of my post pertaining to the so-called Ground Zero Mosque, September 11, 2011, Islam–it is  not being displayed!
An Affront and Threat To The American People–The Ground Zero Mosque–Remembering 9/11 and The Unknown Falling Man

While I can still view what I posted in edit view, you cannot view the post on WordPress  except for the title of the post.

Apparently, someone at WordPress has censored my post by not allowing visitors to my blog to see the entire blog post.

Did some group put pressure on WordPress to do this?

I for one want to know exactly what is going on here?

I strongly suspect the inclusion of–Fitna – The Geert Wilders Movie– was the reason why the entire post was censored by WordPress.

YouTube did remove the two  Fitna clips that I had embedded in the blog post and they are displayed as a black screen.

However, you can still view one of the clips on YouTube provided you sign in.

I have included the first part of the video below:

Fitna – The Geert Wilders Movie

Shame on WordPress for not displaying the entire post.

Therefore, I am going to repost the entire post again below and I have added a number of new tags or keywords.

UPDATED AND EXPANDED


 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:911_-_FEMA_-_WTC_impacts_%28graphic%29.png

Fitna (English) Part 1/2 (Full 16min version)

Bill Whittle: Ground Zero Mosque Reality Check

A “Real” Commencement Speech

“O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty (unto Him).”

~Quran, 9:123

“If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without blood shed; if you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.”

~Winston Churchill

American Airlines flight number 11 left gate B32 and took off from Boston’s Logan International airport at 7:59 a.m bound for Los Angeles.

At about 8:46:40 local time, all 92 passengers and crew including five Al-Qaeda Islamic Wahhabi terrorist hijackers aboard American Airlines Flight 11 were killed as it crashed into the North Tower (Tower 1) of the World Trade Center.

Then at 9:03 a.m. United Airlines Flight 175 bound from Boston’s Logan International Airport to Los Angeles International Airport crashes into the South Tower (Tower 2) killing 65 passengers and crew including five Al-Qaeda Islamic Wahhabi terrorist hijackers.

Shortly thereafter at 9:35 a.m. American Airlines Flight 77 crashes into the Pentagon killing all 64 passengers and crew including five Al-Qaeda Islamic Wahhabi terrorist hijackers aboard as well as 125 in the Pentagon.

The only aircraft that did not reach its intended target, the United States Capital building in Washington D.C., was United Airlines Flight 93 bound from Newark International Airport to San Francisco International Airport.

Four Al-Qaeda Islamic Wahhabi terrorists hijacked the plane about forty minutes into the flight. However, several passengers tried to take back the aircraft from the terrorists.

All 44 passengers and crew including the 4 Al-Qaeda Islamic Wahhabi terrorists died at about 10:03 a.m.when the plane crashed into a field near Shanksville in Somerset County, Pennsylvania.

Several hundred people choose to jump to their deaths from both towers to escape from the intense fire and choking smoke in both buildings captured in the “Falling Man” photo and recounted in the 9/11 The Falling Man documentary on YouTube and “The Falling Man” online article in Esquire Magazine:

Credit: The Falling Man, a photograph by Richard Drew for the Associated Press.

9/11 The Falling Man

The Falling Man

By Tom Junod

“…They began jumping not long after the first plane hit the North Tower, not long after the fire started. They kept jumping until the tower fell. They jumped through windows already broken and then, later, through windows they broke themselves. They jumped to escape the smoke and the fire; they jumped when the ceilings fell and the floors collapsed; they jumped just to breathe once more before they died. They jumped continually, from all four sides of the building, and from all floors above and around the building’s fatal wound. They jumped from the offices of Marsh & McLennan, the insurance company; from the offices of Cantor Fitzgerald, the bond-trading company; from Windows on the World, the restaurant on the 106th and 107th floors — the top. For more than an hour and a half, they streamed from the building, one after another, consecutively rather than en masse, as if each individual required the sight of another individual jumping before mustering the courage to jump himself or herself. …”

Read more: http://www.esquire.com/features/ESQ0903-SEP_FALLINGMAN#ixzz0xXdfVMZa

http://www.esquire.com/features/ESQ0903-SEP_FALLINGMAN

People watching the burning towers from surrounding streets were horrified at what they were witnessing as hundreds from all sides of the two towers jumped to their certain deaths to escape the flames and smoke.

After burning for fifty-six minutes the South Tower of the World Trade Center fell at 9:58.

Thirty minutes later the North Tower fell.

Less than two hours from the time the two jet passenger airliners crashed into World Trade Center towers, both buildings had collapsed.

Killed that day were nearly three thousand people from over 70 countries that were in and around the buildings that were destroyed or damaged including over three hundred New York City fireman and policemen who responded to the explosions and fires in the buildings.

Al-Qaeda’s Islamic Wahhabi jihad or struggle by the sword arrived with a vengeance in the United States on September 11, 2001.

Al-Qaeda is a radical network of militants who call for a global jihad or armed struggle with those not of the Islamic faith, including Christians, Jews, Buddhists and Hindus.

Most Al-Qaeda jihadists are from the Sunni branch of Islam and from the fundamentalist Wahhabi sect established in Saudi Arabia. Al-Qaeda wants to establish a new Islamic Caliphate or leader for the Muslim community or Ummah under Sharia or Islamic law. However, Muslims differ as to the interpretation of Sharia or Islamic law.

The two main branches of Islam are Sunni and Shia. The largest branch of Islam is Sunni who comprise between 87% to 90% of all Muslems worldwide according to the Mapping the Global Muslim Population: A Report on the Size and Distribution of the World’s Muslim Population, a new study by the Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life. The smaller Shia branch of Islam comprises between 10% and 13% of the all Muslims worldwide and who are are primarily located in Iran, Pakistan, Iraq, and India. Arabs are primarily Sunni and Iranians or Persians are primarily Shia. There are both Sunni and Shia jihadists who use suicide bombers to attack infidels or those of another religious faith mainly Christians, Jews and Hindus.

However, neither Arabs nor Iranians are the largest populations of Muslims. The countries with the largest Muslim populations include Indonesia, Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, Egypt, and Turkey. In 2010 the world’s population is nearly 7 billion of which nearly 1.6 billion are Muslims or over 22% of the world’s population. There are over 50 countries with a Muslim majority and 57 countries comprising the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) .

The United States with a population of 310 million has a relatively small Muslim population of about 3 million or roughly 1% of the total population of the United States in 2010. The Al-qaeda attackers came primarily from Saudi Arabia with a Muslim population of about 25 million or less than 2% of the world’s Muslim population.

The nineteen Al-Qaeda terrorists were religious fanatics of the Sunni Islam Wahhabi sect, including fifteen Saudi nationals. The Al-Qaeda jihadists had hijacked four commercial airline passenger jets in a coordinated attack on the American people and the United States of America.

The death toll from the Islamic Wahhabi jihad attack on America on September 11, 2001 was 2,995 including the nineteen al-Qaeda terrorist hijackers. There were more deaths on September 11, 2001, than the 2350 deaths, mostly members of the United States Navy and Army, from the surprise Imperial Japanese Navy attack on the United States Navy Pacific fleet docked at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941.

Nearly nine years later a so-called “moderate” Muslem cleric, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, wants to build a thirteen story Islamic community center and mosque less than three blocks from ground zero, the site of the destroyed World Trade Center towers.

The planned site for the Islamic community center and mosque is 45-51 Park Place, called Park 51, is two and half block north and 560 feet from the northern boundary of the World Trade Center site at Vesey street.

Credit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:WTC_Building_Arrangement_and_Site_Plan.svg

Few Americans dispute the property owners’ right to construct such a building provided all city, state and Federal laws are complied with including local zoning laws and receipt of the necessary building permits.

Few Americans dispute the rights of all Americans to practice their religious faith.

Few Americans oppose the exercise of free speech.

The vast majority of Americans, however, consider the proposed community center and mosque to be an insulting affront to the families and friends of those who died on September 11, 2001.

Just because you can do something, does not mean you should.

In fact the Islamic religion considers such an action to be mischief-making or a fitna, a deliberate provocation against the infidels, those not of the Islamic faith including Christians and Jews.

The site of the World Trade Center and the immediate surrounding area is considered hallowed ground for it is the final resting place or cemetery for many of those who died on September 11, 2001 and whose remains were never found.

The American people demand that this Islamic community center and mosque be moved to another location in New York City.

Otherwise, those behind the building of such an insulting affront to the American people will only receive the rightful indignation and shunning they justly deserve and will soon be exposed for who and what they are–stealth jihadists.

Extreme jidahists can be Sunni or Shia and overt militarist jihadists like those of September 11, 2010 or covert stealth jihadists that want to replace the United States Constitution and American law with Sharia or Islamic law and our representative republic with a theocracy.

Stealth jihadists speak of toleration when speaking to infidels or non-believers in Islam

When the jihadists speak to their fellow Muslims, they speak of Islamic global supremacy and return of the Caliphate under Sharia or Islamic law.

Religious toleration has it limits even in the United States. Toleration should be a two-way street. Toleration does not extend to evil. Toleration is not a suicide pact. Yet Saudi Arabia has zero toleration or an absolute ban for any church, temple or synagogue being built in Saudi Arabia and bans all non-believers in Islam from the city of Mecca.

Sharia is a direct and immediate threat to liberty of the American people. The jihadists seek to replace American law and the United States Constitution with Sharia or Islamic law.

Sharia or Islamic law should be banned from the United States and those immigrants advocating it should be deported to their country of origin.

Saudi Arabia funds Islamic community centers and mosques throughout the United States where both militarist and stealth jihadists are cultivated and supported. The majority of terrorist attacks in the last decade have come from extreme Islamic jihadists, from both the Sunni and Shia branches of Islam and with support and encouragement of local mosques and their Imam.

Authors, journalists, politicians and television and talk radio show hosts such as Steven Emerson, Robert Spencer, Geert Wilders, Andrew C. McCarthy, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Bill Bennett, Rush Limbaugh, Laura Ingraham, Mark Levin, and Michael Savage are among those who expose the threat posed by the militarist and stealth jihadists. However, those commenting upon the threat posed by the jihadists are quickly labeled by the jihadists, their supporters and mainstream media as engaging in hate speech and accused of being racists and Islamophobes, having prejudice or bias against those of the Islam faith or Moslems. This is especially true when the Quran and actual speeches and words of the jihadists are quoted or made available for viewing on the Internet at such sites as YouTube.

The American people will remember September 11, 2001 and never forget the fallen. The American people will honor their memories by stopping the ground zero mosque and the militant and stealth jihadists of the sword whether they be Sunni or Shia. The American people will defend their country and their liberty.

 

 

Imam Rauf Exposed, Elimination of Israel, Terrorist Supporting, N’ Word

Newt Gingrich: No Ground Zero Mosque

Newt Gingrich: Ban Sharia – It is” totally abhorrent to the Western World”

ADDED And UPDATED March 3, 2011

Frank Gaffney: Jihad By Other Means

 

“…At fifteen seconds after 9:41 a.m., on September 11, 2001, a photographer named Richard Drew took a picture of a man falling through the sky — falling through time as well as through space. The picture went all around the world, and then disappeared, as if we willed it away. One of the most famous photographs in human history became an unmarked grave, and the man buried inside its frame — the Falling Man — became the Unknown Soldier in a war whose end we have not yet seen. …”

Read more: http://www.esquire.com/features/ESQ0903-SEP_FALLINGMAN#ixzz0xXepMmJc

REVISED AND EXPANDED ON MAY 1 and 5, 2011

Pronk Pops Show 26:May 5, 2011

On May 1, 2011 the President of The United States of America made the following announcement:

President Obama FULL Speech – Osama Bin Laden DEAD – Complete

 

Osama Bin Laden is Killed in Pakistan – 1st May 2011

 

 

CNN: How U.S. found, killed Osama bin Laden

 

“The fight against terror goes on, but tonight America has sent an unmistakable message: No matter how long it takes, justice will be done,”

Former President George W. Bush 

NYC reacts to Osama bin Laden’s death 

 

CNN: Big crowds cheer at White House

Osama Bin Laden Is Dead – What Was Pakistan’s Part – 1st May 2011

US kills Osama bin Laden decade after 9/11 attacks

“…Osama bin Laden, the face of global terrorism and architect of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, was killed in a firefight with elite American forces Monday, then quickly buried at sea in a stunning finale to a furtive decade on the run.

Long believed to be hiding in caves, bin Laden was tracked down in a costly, custom-built hideout not far from a Pakistani military academy. The stunning news of his death prompted relief and euphoria outside the White House and around the globe, yet also deepening fears of terrorist reprisals against the United States and its allies.

“Justice has been done,” President Barack Obama said late Sunday from the White House in an announcement that seemed sure to lift his own political standing.

The military operation took mere minutes, and there were no U.S. casualties.

U.S. Blackhawk helicopters ferried about two dozen troops from Navy SEAL Team Six, a top military counter-terrorism unit, into the compound identified by the CIA as bin Laden’s hideout — and back out again in less than 40 minutes. Bin Laden was shot in the head, officials said, after he and his bodyguards resisted the assault.

Three adult males were also killed in the raid, including one of bin Laden’s sons, whom officials did not name. One of bin Laden’s sons, Hamza, is a senior member of al-Qaida. U.S. officials also said one woman was killed when she was used as a shield by a male combatant, and two other women were injured.

The U.S. official who disclosed the burial at sea said it would have been difficult to find a country willing to accept the remains. Obama said the remains had been handled in accordance with Islamic custom, which requires speedy burial. …”

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110502/ap_on_re_us/us_bin_laden

 

Background Articles and Videos

Bitter Debate at Ground Zero

Added March 9, 2011

Dueling Protests over Ground Zero Mosque

Leader of Ground Zero Mosque Refuses To Disclose Source Of Funding

Ground Zero Mosque 9/11 Liars for Islam, Muhammad said you can lie: Taqiyya

Radical Islam: Saudi Wahhabism responsible for worldwide terror

Robert Spencer on Hannity exposes Imam Rauf on Ground Zero Mosque

Robert Spencer Jihad Watch

Jihad on Campus – Saudis’ Multi-Million Dollar PR Agenda]

Militant Islam in the US – Steven Emerson (1 of 7)

Militant Islam in the US – Steven Emerson (2 of 7)

Militant Islam in the US – Steven Emerson (3 of 7)

Militant Islam in the US – Steven Emerson (4 of 7)

Militant Islam in the US – Steven Emerson (5 of 7)

Militant Islam in the US – Steven Emerson (6 of 7)

Militant Islam in the US – Steven Emerson (7 of 7)

Robert Spencer: Stealth Jihad (1 of 6)

Robert Spencer: Stealth Jihad (2 of 6)

]

Robert Spencer: Stealth Jihad (3 of 6)

Robert Spencer: Stealth Jihad (4 of 6)

Robert Spencer: Stealth Jihad (5 of 6)

Robert Spencer: Stealth Jihad (6 of 6)

Andy McCarthy Discusses The Ground Zero Mosque

Andy McCarthy – The Grand Jihad (5.24.10)

 

ADDED March 9, 2011

 Andrew McCarthy: “The Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotage America”

 

Andy McCarthy Discusses The Ground Zero Mosque

 

Law & Jihad with Andrew McCarthy

Andy McCarthy: “What We Call Terrorism, They Don’t”

First Friday – Andrew C. McCarthy – America’s War on Terror…or is It?

Michael Savage Gets Pissed Off About Jihadists and Terrorism

annity 05/04/2010 w/ Mark Levin

REVISED AND EXPANDED ON MAY 1, 2011

Steve Coll on The Bin Ladens: An Arabian Family in the American Century

The history of the Bin Laden Family-good!-1/6

 

 

The history of the Bin Laden Family-good!-2/6

 

The history of the Bin Laden Family-good!-3/6

 

The history of the Bin Laden Family-good!-4/6

 

The history of the Bin Laden Family-good!-5/6

 

The history of the Bin Laden Family-good!-6/6 

Conversations with History: Steve Coll

September 11 Attacks

The September 11 attacks (often referred to as September 11th or 9/11) were a series of coordinated suicide attacks by al-Qaeda upon the United States on September 11, 2001. On that morning, 19 al-Qaeda terrorists hijacked four commercial passenger jet airliners.[1][2] The hijackers intentionally crashed two of the airliners into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City, killing everyone on board and many others working in the buildings. Both buildings collapsed within two hours, destroying nearby buildings and damaging others. The hijackers crashed a third airliner into the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia, just outside Washington, D.C. The fourth plane crashed into a field near Shanksville in rural Pennsylvania after some of its passengers and flight crew attempted to retake control of the plane, which the hijackers had redirected toward Washington, D.C. There were no survivors from any of the flights.

The death toll of the attacks was 2,995, including the 19 hijackers.[3] The overwhelming majority of casualties were civilians, including nationals of over 70 countries.[4] In addition, there is at least one secondary death – one person was ruled by a medical examiner to have died from lung disease due to exposure to dust from the World Trade Center’s collapse.[5]

The United States responded to the attacks by launching the War on Terrorism. It invaded Afghanistan to depose the Taliban, who had harbored al-Qaeda terrorists. The United States also enacted the USA PATRIOT Act. Many other countries also strengthened their anti-terrorism legislation and expanded law enforcement powers. Some American stock exchanges stayed closed for the rest of the week following the attack and posted enormous losses upon reopening, especially in the airline and insurance industries. The destruction of billions of dollars worth of office space caused serious damage to the economy of Lower Manhattan.

The damage to the Pentagon was cleared and repaired within a year, and the Pentagon Memorial was built adjacent to the building. The rebuilding process has started on the World Trade Center site. In 2006 a new office tower was completed on the site of 7 World Trade Center. 1 World Trade Center is currently under construction at the site and, at 1,776 ft (541 m) upon completion in 2013, it will become one of the tallest buildings in North America. Three more towers were originally expected to be built between 2007 and 2012 on the site. Ground was broken for the Flight 93 National Memorial on November 8, 2009, and the first phase of construction is expected to be ready for the 10th anniversary of the attacks on September 11, 2011.[6] …”

American Airlines Flight 11

American Airlines Flight 11 was a scheduled U.S. domestic passenger flight from Logan International Airport in Boston, Massachusetts to Los Angeles International Airport. It was hijacked by five al-Qaedan terrorists and deliberately crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center in New York City as part of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

Fifteen minutes into the flight, the hijackers injured at least three people, forcefully breached the cockpit, and overpowered the pilot and first officer. Mohamed Atta, a known member of al-Qaeda,[1][2] and trained as a pilot, took over the controls. Air traffic controllers noticed the flight was in distress when the crew stopped responding to them. They realized the flight had been hijacked when Atta mistakenly transmitted announcements for passengers to air traffic control. On board, two flight attendants contacted American Airlines, and provided information about the hijackers and injuries to passengers and crew.

The aircraft crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center at 8:46 local time; the impact killed all 92 people aboard, including the hijackers, plus an unconfirmed number of people in the buildings impact zone. Many people in the streets witnessed the collision, and the Naudet brothers captured the impact on video, as did Pavel Hlava. Mark Burnback and Wolfgang Staehle had a webcam set up that captured the impact through a series of photographs. Before the hijacking was confirmed, news agencies began to report on the incident and speculated that the crash had been an accident. The impact and subsequent fire caused the North Tower to collapse, which resulted in thousands of additional casualties. During the recovery effort at the World Trade Center site, workers recovered and identified dozens of remains from Flight 11 victims (see section Aftermath below), but many other body fragments could not be identified. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_11

American Airlines Flight 77

“…American Airlines Flight 77 was the third flight hijacked as part of the September 11 attacks. It was deliberately crashed into the Pentagon. The flight from Washington Dulles International Airport to Los Angeles International Airport was hijacked by five Islamic extremists less than 35 minutes into the flight. The hijackers stormed the cockpit and forced the passengers to the rear of the aircraft. Hani Hanjour, one of the hijackers who was trained as a pilot, assumed control of the flight. Unknown to the hijackers, passengers aboard were able to make calls to loved ones and relay information on the hijacking.

The aircraft crashed into the western side of the Pentagon at 09:37am EDT. All 64 people on board the aircraft, including the hijackers, and 125 in the building were killed. Dozens of people witnessed the crash and news sources began reporting on the incident within minutes. The impact severely damaged an area of the Pentagon and ignited a large fire. A portion of the Pentagon collapsed and firefighters spent days trying to fully extinguish the blaze. The damaged sections of the Pentagon were rebuilt in 2002, with occupants moving back into the completed areas on August 15, 2002.

The 184 victims of the attack are memorialized in the Pentagon Memorial adjacent to the Pentagon. The 1.93-acre (7,800 m2) park consists of 184 benches, one for each of the victims, arranged according to the year of birth, ranging from 1930 (age 71) to 1998 (age 3). Flight 77’s cuts directly through the park. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_77

United Airlines Flight 175

“… United Airlines Flight 175 was a scheduled U.S. domestic passenger flight from Logan International Airport in Boston, Massachusetts to Los Angeles International Airport, in California. On the morning of September 11, 2001, the flight was hijacked by five al-Qaeda-associated Islamist terrorists, and flown into the South Tower of the World Trade Center in New York City as part of the September 11 attacks. Approximately thirty minutes into the flight, the hijackers forcefully breached the cockpit, and overpowered the pilot and first officer, allowing lead hijacker and trained pilot Marwan al-Shehhi to take over the controls. The aircraft’s transponder was turned off and the aircraft deviated from the assigned flight path for four minutes, before air traffic controllers noticed at 08:51. They made several unsuccessful attempts to contact the cockpit. Several passengers and crew aboard made phone calls from the plane and provided information about the hijackers and injuries to passengers and crew.

The Boeing 767 operating as Flight 175 crashed into the South Tower of the World Trade Center at 09:03, killing all 65 people aboard, including the hijackers. The Flight 175 hijacking was coordinated with that of American Airlines Flight 11, which had struck the top of the North Tower eighteen minutes earlier. The crash of Flight 175 into the South Tower was the only impact seen live on television around the world as it happened. It was upon the loss of Flight 175 that the world realized that the crashes of both aircraft at the World Trade Center were in fact deliberate. The impact and subsequent fire caused the South Tower to collapse, 56 minutes later, resulting in hundreds of additional casualties. During the recovery effort at the World Trade Center site, workers recovered and identified remains from Flight 175 victims (see chapter Aftermath, below), but many other body fragments could not be identified. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_Flight_175

United Airlines Flight 93

“…United Airlines Flight 93 was a United States domestic passenger flight from Newark International Airport in Newark, NJ to San Francisco International Airport in San Francisco, CA that was hijacked on September 11, 2001. Approximately 40 minutes into the flight the hijackers breached the cockpit, overpowered the pilots and took control of the aircraft, diverting it toward Washington, D.C. Several passengers and crew members made telephone calls aboard the flight and learned about the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. As a result of this knowledge, the passengers decided to mount an assault against the hijackers in an attempt to regain control of the aircraft.

The plane crashed in a field in Stonycreek Township, near Shanksville, in Somerset County, Pennsylvania, about 80 miles (130 km) southeast of Pittsburgh and 150 miles (240 km) northwest of Washington, D.C., killing all on board including the four hijackers. Many witnessed the impact from the ground and news agencies began reporting on the event within an hour. The plane fragmented upon impact, leaving a crater, and some debris was blown miles from the crash site. The remains of everyone on board the aircraft were later identified. Subsequent analysis of the flight recorders revealed how the actions taken by the passengers prevented the aircraft from reaching the hijackers’ intended target, thought to be either the White House or the United States Capitol. A permanent memorial is planned for construction on the crash site, with dedication scheduled for 2011, though it has been the subject of criticism.

Of the four aircraft hijacked on September 11 (the others were American Airlines Flight 11, American Airlines Flight 77 and United Airlines Flight 175), United Airlines Flight 93 was the only one that failed to reach its intended target. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks

 

Al-Qaeda

“…Al-Qaeda (pronounced /ælˈkaɪdə/ al-KYE-də or /ælˈkeɪdə/ al-KAY-də; Arabic: القاعدة‎, al-qāʿidah, “the base”), alternatively spelled al-Qaida and sometimes al-Qa’ida, is a militant Islamist group founded sometime between August 1988[6] and late 1989.[7] It operates as a network comprising both a multinational, stateless army[8] and a fundamentalist Sunni movement calling for global Jihad. It is considered a terrorist organization.

Al-Qaeda has attacked civilian and military targets in various countries, most notably the September 11 attacks on New York City and Washington, D.C. in 2001. The U.S. government responded by launching the War on Terror.

Characteristic techniques include suicide attacks and simultaneous bombings of different targets.[9] Activities ascribed to it may involve members of the movement, who have taken a pledge of loyalty to Osama bin Laden, or the much more numerous “al-Qaeda-linked” individuals who have undergone training in one of its camps in Afghanistan, Iraq or Sudan, but not taken any pledge.[10]

Al-Qaeda ideologues envision a complete break from the foreign influences in Muslim countries, and the creation of a new Islamic caliphate. Reported beliefs include that a Christian-Jewish alliance is conspiring to destroy Islam,[11] which is largely embodied in the U.S.-Israel alliance, and that the killing of bystanders and civilians is religiously justified in jihad. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda

Jihad

“…Jihad (pronounced /dʒɪˈhɑːd/; Arabic: جهاد‎ [dʒiˈhæːd]), an Islamic term, is a religious duty of Muslims. In Arabic, the word jihād is a noun meaning “struggle.” Jihad appears frequently in the Qur’an and common usage as the idiomatic expression “striving in the way of Allah (al-jihad fi sabil Allah)“.[1][2] A person engaged in jihad is called a mujahid; the plural is mujahideen. Jihad is an important religious duty for Muslims. A minority among the Sunni scholars sometimes refer to this duty as the sixth pillar of Islam, though it occupies no such official status.[3] In Twelver Shi’a Islam, however, Jihad is one of the 10 Practices of the Religion.

A wide range of opinions exist about the exact meaning of jihad. Muslims use the word in a religious context to refer to three types of struggles: an internal struggle to maintain faith, the struggle to improve the Muslim society, or the struggle in a holy war.[4] The differences of opinion are the result of different interpretation of the two most important sources in Islam, the Qur’an and the ahadith (singular: hadith). For example, the prominent orientalist Bernard Lewis argues that, in the Qur’an and the ahadith jihad implies warfare in the large majority of cases.[5] In a commentary of the hadith Sahih Muslim, entitled al-Minhaj, the medieval Islamic scholar Yahya ibn Sharaf al-Nawawi stated that “one of the collective duties of the community as a whole (fard kifaya) is to lodge a valid protest, to solve problems of religion, to have knowledge of Divine Law, to command what is right and forbid wrong conduct”.[6]

In western societies the term jihad is often translated as “holy war”.[7] Muslim authors tend to reject such an approach, stressing non-militant connotations of the word.[8] In technical literature, the term “holy war” is often used to describe jihad.[9] However, scholars of Islamic studies often stress that both words are not synonymous.[10]

…”

“…Sunni view of Jihad

Jihad has been classified either as al-jihād al-akbar (the greater jihad), the struggle against one’s soul (nafs), or al-jihād al-asghar (the lesser jihad), the external, physical effort, often implying fighting (this is similar to the shiite view of jihad as well).

Gibril Haddad has analyzed the basis for the belief that internal jihad is the “greater jihad”, Jihad al-akbar. Haddad identifies the primary historical basis for this belief in a pair of similarly worded hadith, in which Mohammed is reported to have told warriors returning home that they had returned from the lesser jihad of struggle against non-Muslims to a greater jihad of struggle against lust. Although Haddad notes that the authenticity of both hadeeth is questionable, he nevertheless concludes that the underlying principle of superiority internal jihad does have a reliable basis in the Qur’an and other writings.[31][32]

In contrast, the Hanbali scholar Ibn Qayyim Al-Jawziyya did believe that “internal Jihad” is important[33] but he suggests those hadith as weak which consider “Jihad of the heart/soul” to be more important than “Jihad by the sword”.[34] Contemporary Islamic scholar Abdullah Yusuf Azzam has argued the hadith is not just weak but “is in fact a false, fabricated hadith which has no basis. It is only a saying of Ibrahim Ibn Abi `Abalah, one of the Successors, and it contradicts textual evidence and reality.”[35]

Muslim jurists explained there are four kinds of jihad fi sabilillah (struggle in the cause of God):[36]

  • Jihad of the heart (jihad bil qalb/nafs) is concerned with combatting the devil and in the attempt to escape his persuasion to evil. This type of Jihad was regarded as the greater jihad (al-jihad al-akbar).
  • Jihad by the tongue (jihad bil lisan) is concerned with speaking the truth and spreading the word of Islam with one’s tongue.
  • Jihad by the hand (jihad bil yad) refers to choosing to do what is right and to combat injustice and what is wrong with action.
  • Jihad by the sword (jihad bis saif) refers to qital fi sabilillah (armed fighting in the way of God, or holy war), the most common usage by Salafi Muslims and offshoots of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Some contemporary Islamists have succeeded in replacing the greater jihad, the fight against desires, with the lesser jihad, the holy war to establish, defend and extend the Islamic state.[37]

…”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad

The Saudi 911 hijackers were Wahhabi

“…Most Americans continue to be puzzled by the Saudis. 15 or the 19 hijackers on Sept 11th were Saudia Arabian. Not Taliban. Not Libyan. Not Palestinian. Why? They don’t like our military presence in the country, our culture, our policies, in general they just don’t like us and want us dead. What’s more they’re increasingly unhappy with the ruling Al Saud Family, who a decade ago cut a deal with us for military protection. The Key to understanding the vicious attack on America is in understanding “Wahhabism.”

Wahhabi Clerics control education in Saudi Arabia. They teach that all who do not believe exactly as they do are “enemies.” They also teach holy war against enemies (Die fighting a jihad and you die a martyr with special rewards afterlife.)

The Saudi hijackers were Wahhabi. When they crashed the planes into the World Trade Center and Pentagon they believed they were doing a holy act and ensuring martyrdom. This twisted thinking is a perversion of Islam. The Wahhabis use their wealth to export their twisted message. They target the poor and illiterate with the promise of an education, only to teach religious INTOLERANCE, the oppression of women and terrorist warfare.

The Al Saud Family is worried about civil war. It has been Osama Bin Ladens main objective has ben to terrorize the U.S. out of Saudia Arabia and then incite the Saudi people to help him seize the kingdom and it’s vast oil reserves.

The Al Saud Family regularly pays off the Wahhabi Clerics and Islamic charities simply to avoid civil war. A lot of the money has been funnelled to Osama Bin Laden and the Al Queda network.

If Islamic terrorists were to seize control of Saudia Arabia and its 260 billion barrels of crude oil reserves, they would be ten times more powerful than Iran or Iraq.

While Kuwait is the only Arab Democracy in the Middle East, the Islamic Fundamentalist Party is the fastest growing party there. The Middle East is a ticking time bomb. Islamic extremism is rapidly growing. …”

http://www.warriorsfortruth.com/saudi-wahabbi-religion.html

List of countries by Muslim population

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Muslim_population

Mapping the Global Muslim Population

A Report on the Size and Distribution of the World’s Muslim Population

ANALYSIS October 7, 2009

Executve Summary

“..A comprehensive demographic study of more than 200 countries finds that there are 1.57 billion Muslims of all ages living in the world today, representing 23% of an estimated 2009 world population of 6.8 billion.

While Muslims are found on all five inhabited continents, more than 60% of the global Muslim population is in Asia and about 20% is in the Middle East and North Africa. However, the Middle East-North Africa region has the highest percentage of Muslim-majority countries. Indeed, more than half of the 20 countries and territories1 in that region have populations that are approximately 95% Muslim or greater.

More than 300 million Muslims, or one-fifth of the world’s Muslim population, live in countries where Islam is not the majority religion. These minority Muslim populations are often quite large. India, for example, has the third-largest population of Muslims worldwide. China has more Muslims than Syria, while Russia is home to more Muslims than Jordan and Libya combined.

Of the total Muslim population, 10-13% are Shia Muslims and 87-90% are Sunni Muslims. Most Shias (between 68% and 80%) live in just four countries: Iran, Pakistan, India and Iraq.

These are some of the key findings of Mapping the Global Muslim Population: A Report on the Size and Distribution of the World’s Muslim Population, a new study by the Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life. The report offers the most up-to-date and fully sourced estimates of the size and distribution of the worldwide Muslim population, including sectarian identity.

Previously published estimates of the size of the global Muslim population have ranged widely, from 1 billion to 1.8 billion.2 But these commonly quoted estimates often have appeared without citations to specific sources or explanations of how the figures were generated.

The Pew Forum report is based on the best available data for 232 countries and territories. Pew Forum researchers, in consultation with nearly 50 demographers and social scientists at universities and research centers around the world, acquired and analyzed about 1,500 sources, including census reports, demographic studies and general population surveys, to arrive at these figures – the largest project of its kind to date. (See Methodology for more detail.)

The Pew Forum’s estimate of the Shia population (10-13%) is in keeping with previous estimates, which generally have been in the range of 10-15%. Some previous estimates, however, have placed the number of Shias at nearly 20% of the world’s Muslim population.3 Readers should bear in mind that the figures given in this report for the Sunni and Shia populations are less precise than the figures for the overall Muslim population. Data on sectarian affiliation have been infrequently collected or, in many countries, not collected at all. Therefore, the Sunni and Shia numbers reported here are expressed as broad ranges and should be treated as approximate. …”

http://pewforum.org/Mapping-the-Global-Muslim-Population.aspx

How Many Muslims in the United States?

by Daniel Pipes
April 22, 2003

updated Nov 22, 2009

“…Islam is widely touted as “the fastest growing religion in the United States,” so how does one explain that The World Almanac and Book of Facts has these figures for Muslims in the United States:

  • 1997 edition (p. 644) says 5.1 million
  • 2003 edition (p. 635) says 2.8 million

No, the population did not actually decrease; to understand this reduction in the estimate, see my October 2001 analysis, “How Many U.S. Muslims?” In it, I report on two recent surveys, by the American Religious Identification Survey 2001 and Tom Smith of the University of Chicago, which found the number of U.S. Muslims to be under two million. So, it appears that the almanac’s editors stopped accepting the overblown Islamist estimates as accurate and instead relied on scholarly and reliable work. A good round estimate is that Muslims make up just under 1 percent of the U.S. population. (April 22, 2003) …”

http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2003/04/how-many-muslims-in-the-united-states

Organisation of the Islamic Conference

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organisation_of_the_Islamic_Conference

 

THE FOUNDATION OF THE NEW TERRORISM

“…Islam
Islam (a word that literally means “surrender to the will of God”) arose in Arabia with what Muslims believe are a series of revelations to the Prophet Mohammed from the one and only God, the God of Abraham and of Jesus. These revelations, conveyed by the angel Gabriel, are recorded in the Qur’an. Muslims believe that these revelations, given to the greatest and last of a chain of prophets stretching from Abraham through Jesus, complete God’s message to humanity. The Hadith, which recount Mohammed’s sayings and deeds as recorded by his contemporaries, are another fundamental source. A third key element is the Sharia, the code of law derived from the Qur’an and the Hadith.

Islam is divided into two main branches, Sunni and Shia. Soon after the Prophet’s death, the question of choosing a new leader, or caliph, for the Muslim community, or Ummah, arose. Initially, his successors could be drawn from the Prophet’s contemporaries, but with time, this was no longer possible. Those who became the Shia held that any leader of the Ummah must be a direct descendant of the Prophet; those who became the Sunni argued that lineal descent was not required if the candidate met other standards of faith and knowledge. After bloody struggles, the Sunni became (and remain) the majority sect. (The Shia are dominant in Iran.) The Caliphate-the institutionalized leadership of the Ummah-thus was a Sunni institution that continued until 1924, first under Arab and eventually under Ottoman Turkish control.

Many Muslims look back at the century after the revelations to the Prophet Mohammed as a golden age. Its memory is strongest among the Arabs. What happened then-the spread of Islam from the Arabian Peninsula throughout the Middle East, North Africa, and even into Europe within less than a century-seemed, and seems, miraculous.6 Nostalgia for Islam’s past glory remains a powerful force.

Islam is both a faith and a code of conduct for all aspects of life. For many Muslims, a good government would be one guided by the moral principles of their faith. This does not necessarily translate into a desire for clerical rule and the abolition of a secular state. It does mean that some Muslims tend to be uncomfortable with distinctions between religion and state, though Muslim rulers throughout history have readily separated the two.

To extremists, however, such divisions, as well as the existence of parliaments and legislation, only prove these rulers to be false Muslims usurping God’s authority over all aspects of life. Periodically, the Islamic world has seen surges of what, for want of a better term, is often labeled “fundamentalism.”7 Denouncing waywardness among the faithful, some clerics have appealed for a return to observance of the literal teachings of the Qur’an and Hadith. One scholar from the fourteenth century from whom Bin Ladin selectively quotes, Ibn Taimiyyah, condemned both corrupt rulers and the clerics who failed to criticize them. He urged Muslims to read the Qur’an and the Hadith for themselves, not to depend solely on learned interpreters like himself but to hold one another to account for the quality of their observance.8

The extreme Islamist version of history blames the decline from Islam’s golden age on the rulers and people who turned away from the true path of their religion, thereby leaving Islam vulnerable to encroaching foreign powers eager to steal their land, wealth, and even their souls.

Bin Ladin’s Worldview
Despite his claims to universal leadership, Bin Ladin offers an extreme view of Islamic history designed to appeal mainly to Arabs and Sunnis. He draws on fundamentalists who blame the eventual destruction of the Caliphate on leaders who abandoned the pure path of religious devotion.9 He repeatedly calls on his followers to embrace martyrdom since “the walls of oppression and humiliation cannot be demolished except in a rain of bullets.”10 For those yearning for a lost sense of order in an older, more tranquil world, he offers his “Caliphate” as an imagined alternative to today’s uncertainty. For others, he offers simplistic conspiracies to explain their world.

Bin Ladin also relies heavily on the Egyptian writer Sayyid Qutb. A member of the Muslim Brotherhood11 executed in 1966 on charges of attempting to overthrow the government, Qutb mixed Islamic scholarship with a very superficial acquaintance with Western history and thought. Sent by the Egyptian government to study in the United States in the late 1940s, Qutb returned with an enormous loathing of Western society and history. He dismissed Western achievements as entirely material, arguing that Western society possesses “nothing that will satisfy its own conscience and justify its existence.”12

Three basic themes emerge from Qutb’s writings. First, he claimed that the world was beset with barbarism, licentiousness, and unbelief (a condition he called jahiliyya, the religious term for the period of ignorance prior to the revelations given to the Prophet Mohammed). Qutb argued that humans can choose only between Islam and jahiliyya. Second, he warned that more people, including Muslims, were attracted to jahiliyya and its material comforts than to his view of Islam; jahiliyya could therefore triumph over Islam. Third, no middle ground exists in what Qutb conceived as a struggle between God and Satan.All Muslims-as he defined them-therefore must take up arms in this fight.Any Muslim who rejects his ideas is just one more nonbeliever worthy of destruction.13

Bin Ladin shares Qutb’s stark view, permitting him and his followers to rationalize even unprovoked mass murder as righteous defense of an embattled faith. Many Americans have wondered, “Why do ‘they’ hate us?” Some also ask, “What can we do to stop these attacks?”

Bin Ladin and al Qaeda have given answers to both these questions. To the first, they say that America had attacked Islam; America is responsible for all conflicts involving Muslims. Thus Americans are blamed when Israelis fight with Palestinians, when Russians fight with Chechens, when Indians fight with Kashmiri Muslims, and when the Philippine government fights ethnic Muslims in its southern islands. America is also held responsible for the governments of Muslim countries, derided by al Qaeda as “your agents.” Bin Ladin has stated flatly, “Our fight against these governments is not separate from our fight against you.”14 These charges found a ready audience among millions of Arabs and Muslims angry at the United States because of issues ranging from Iraq to Palestine to America’s support for their countries’ repressive rulers.

Bin Ladin’s grievance with the United States may have started in reaction to specific U.S. policies but it quickly became far deeper. To the second question, what America could do, al Qaeda’s answer was that America should abandon the Middle East, convert to Islam, and end the immorality and godlessness of its society and culture: “It is saddening to tell you that you are the worst civilization witnessed by the history of mankind.” If the United States did not comply, it would be at war with the Islamic nation, a nation that al Qaeda’s leaders said “desires death more than you desire life.”15 …”

http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report_Ch2.htm

Mosque of Mischief, Mundus Volt Decipi

“…We keep hearing that the only issue at hand is whether building the Ground Zero Mosque is legal or not. We keep hearing that opposing this mosque is un-American and makes us just like the enemy. In short, those who oppose a mosque are bigots.

This is, of course, a tactic employed by the left to narrow the debate, a tactic used to deny the very existence of Jihad. It’s also a way of smearing those who want to know more about the ideology of Imam Rauf and to find out if this mosque is terror-financed.

Questions: If Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is revealed as an Islamist supremacist and the financing as dirty money, would it make a difference to those who support the building of the mosque?

If it makes no difference that Rauf is an Islamist who wants America to become Sharia compliant, then you are enabling Salafist Islam, an ideology that is, at the core, dedicated to the eradication of Western civilization.

If it does make a difference then we should exercise due diligence and investigate Rauf and the already murky financing behind the mosque? …”

http://www.seraphicpress.com/archives/2010/08/mosque_of_misch.php

Sharia

“…Sharia (شريعة Šarīʿa; [ʃaˈriːʕa], “way” or “path”) is the sacred law of Islam. All Muslims believe Sharia is God’s law, but they have differences among themselves as to exactly what it entails.[1] Modernists, traditionalists and fundamentalists all hold different views of Sharia, as do adherents to different schools of Islamic thought and scholarship. Different countries and cultures have varying interpretations of Sharia as well.

Muslims believe all Sharia is derived from two primary sources, the divine revelations set forth in the Qur’an, and the sayings and example set by the Islamic Prophet Muhammad in the Sunnah. Fiqh, or “jurisprudence,” interprets and extends the application of Sharia to questions not directly addressed in the primary sources, by including secondary sources. These secondary sources usually include the consensus of the religious scholars embodied in ijma, and analogy from the Qur’an and Sunnah through qiyas. Shia jurists replace qiyas analogy with ‘aql, or “reason”. Where it enjoys official status, Sharia is applied by Islamic judges, or qadis. The imam has varying responsibilities depending on the interpretation of Sharia. While the term is commonly used to refer to the leader of communal prayers, the imam may also be a scholar, religious leader or political leader. Sharia deals with many topics addressed by secular law, including crime, politics and economics, as well as personal matters such as sexuality, hygiene, diet, prayer, and fasting.

Introduction (or reintroduction) of Sharia is a longstanding goal for Islamist movements in Muslim countries. Some Muslim minorities in Asia (e.g. India) have attained institutional recognition of Sharia to adjudicate their personal and community affairs. In Western countries, where Muslim immigration is more recent, Muslim minorities have introduced Sharia family law, for use in their own disputes, with varying degrees of success (e.g. Britain’s Muslim Arbitration Tribunal). Attempts to impose Sharia have been accompanied by controversy,[2][3][4][5] violence,[6][7][8][9][10][11] and even warfare (cf. Second Sudanese Civil War) [12][13][14][15].

…”

 

Pearl Harbor

“…Pearl Harbor, or Pu’uloa, is a lagoon harbor on the island of Oʻahu, Hawaiʻi, west of Honolulu. Much of the harbor and surrounding lands is a United States Navy deep-water naval base. It is also the headquarters of the U.S. Pacific Fleet. The attack on Pearl Harbor by the Empire of Japan on December 7, 1941, brought the United States into World War II. …”

“…Aircraft and midget submarines of the Imperial Japanese Navy began an attack on the U.S. The Americans had deciphered Japan’s code earlier and knew about a planned attack before it actually occurred. However, due to difficulty in deciphering intercepted messages, the Americans failed to discover Japan’s target location before the attack occurred.[6] Under the command of Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, the attack was devastating in loss of life and damage to the U.S. fleet. At 06:05 on December 7, the six Japanese carriers launched a first wave of 183 planes composed mainly of dive bombers, horizontal bombers and fighters.[7] The Japanese hit American ships and military installations at 07:51. The first wave attacked military airfields of Ford Island. At 08:30, a second wave of 170 Japanese planes, mostly torpedo bombers, attacked the fleet anchored in Pearl Harbor. The battleship Arizona was hit with an armor piercing bomb which penetrated the forward ammunition compartment, blowing the ship apart and sinking it within seconds. Overall, nine ships of the U.S. fleet were sunk and 21 ships were severely damaged. Three of the 21 would be irreparable. The overall death toll reached 2,350, including 68 civilians, and 1,178 injured. Of the military personnel lost at Pearl Harbor, 1,177 were from the Arizona. The first shots fired were from the destroyer Ward on a midget submarine that surfaced outside of Pearl Harbor; Ward sank the midget sub at approximately 06:55, about an hour before the assault on Pearl Harbor. Japan would lose 29 out of the 350 planes they attacked with. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_Harbor

Pearl Harbor

“…In Pearl Harbor were 96 vessels, the bulk of the United States Pacific Fleet. Eight battleships of the Fleet were there, but the aircraft carriers were all at sea. The Commander in Chief of the Pacific Fleet (CINCPAC) was Admiral Husband E. Kimmel. Army forces in Hawaii, including the 24th and 25th Infantry Divisions, were under the command of Lt. Gen. Walter C. Short, Commanding General of the Hawaiian Department. On the several airfields were a total of about 390 Navy and Army planes of all types, of which less than 300 were available for combat or observation purposes.

The Japanese air attack on Pearl Harbor and on the airfields of Oahu began at 0755 on December 7, 1941 and ended shortly before 1000. Quickly recovering from the initial shock of surprise, the Americans fought back vigorously with antiaircraft fire. Devastation of the airfields was so quick and thorough that only a few American planes were able to participate in the counterattack. The Japanese were successful in accomplishing their principal mission, which was to cripple the Pacific Fleet. They sunk three battleships, caused another to capsize, and severely damaged the other four.

All together the Japanese sank or severely damaged 18 ships, including the 8 battleships, three light cruisers, and three destroyers. On the airfields the Japanese destroyed 161 American planes (Army 74, Navy 87) and seriously damaged 102 (Army 71, Navy 31).

The Navy and Marine Corps suffered a total of 2,896 casualties of which 2,117 were deaths (Navy 2,008, Marines 109) and 779 wounded (Navy 710, Marines 69). The Army (as of midnight, 10 December) lost 228 killed or died of wounds, 113 seriously wounded and 346 slightly wounded. In addition, at least 57 civilians were killed and nearly as many seriously injured.

The Japanese lost 29 planes over Oahu, one large submarine (on 10 December), and all five of the midget submarines. Their personnel losses (according to Japanese sources) were 55 airmen, nine crewmen on the midget submarines, and an unknown number on the large submarines. The Japanese carrier task force sailed away undetected and unscathed.

On December 8, 1941, within less than an hour after a stirring, six-minute address by President Franklin D. Roosevelt, Congress voted, with only one member dissenting, that a state of war existed between the United States and Japan, and empowered the President to wage war with all the resources of the country.

Four days after Pearl Harbor, December 11, 1941, Germany and Italy declared war on the United States. Congress, this time without a dissenting vote, immediately recognized the existence of a state of war with Germany and Italy, and also rescinded an article of the Selective Service Act prohibiting the use of American armed forces beyond the Western Hemisphere. …”

http://www.worldwar2history.info/Pearl-Harbor/

Wahhabi

“…Wahhabi (Arabic: Al-Wahhābīyya‎ الوهابية) or Wahhabism is a conservative Sunni Islamic sect based on the teachings of Muhammad ibn Abd-al-Wahhab, an 18th century scholar from what is today known as Saudi Arabia, who advocated to purge Islam of what he considered innovations in Islam. Wahhabism is the dominant form of Islam in Saudi Arabia.[1] It is often referred to as a “sect”[1] or “branch”[2] of Islam, though both its supporters and its opponents[3] reject such designations. It has developed considerable influence in the Muslim world through the funding of mosques, schools and other means from Persian Gulf oil wealth.[4]

The primary doctrine of Wahhabi is Tawhid, or the uniqueness and unity of God.[5] Ibn Abdul Wahhab was influenced by the writings of Ibn Taymiyya and questioned medieval interpretations of Islam, claiming to rely on the Qur’an and the Hadith.[5] He preached against a “perceived moral decline and political weakness” in the Arabian Peninsula and condemned idolatry, the popular cult of saints, and shrine and tomb visitation.[5]

The term “Wahhabi” (Wahhābīya) was first used by opponents of ibn Abdul Wahhab.[2] It is considered derogatory by the people it is used to describe, who prefer to be called “unitarians” (Muwahiddun).[6]

The terms “Wahhabi”, “Salafi” (and also sometimes Ahle Hadith) are often used interchangeably, but Wahhabi has also been called “a particular orientation within Salafism”, [2] an orientation some consider ultra-conservative. [7][8] …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahhabi

DAY OF INFAMY 2001

 

Ground Zero mosque modeled after notorious 9/11 mosque?

 

Founder of hijackers’ D.C. worship center partners with N.Y. imam pushing shariah

“…The New York imam behind the Ground Zero mosque has struck a partnership with the founder of the so-called 9/11 mosque in the Washington suburbs that gave aid and comfort to some of the 9/11 hijackers, WND has learned.

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf counts the lead trustee of the Dar al-Hijrah Islamic Center among partners in his Cordoba Initiative, which features a 13-story mosque and a “cultural center” for his project to bring shariah, or Islamic law, to America.

Families of 9/11 victims oppose construction of the proposed site so close to Ground Zero.

Jamal Barzinji, one of the founders of the radical Muslim Brotherhood in America, also founded Dar al-Hijrah in Falls Church, Va., which is run by the pro-jihad Brotherhood. The mosque has been tied to numerous terrorism plots, including the 9/11 attacks.

The dots are finally being connected! Find out what Islam has planned for you: Get “Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That’s Conspiring to Islamize America.”

In December 2008, the Brotherhood’s U.S. think tank — the International Institute of Islamic Thought, or IIIT – hosted Rauf. During their meeting, IIIT’s leadership, including Barzinji, “pledged cooperation and support” for Rauf’s project, according to this screenshot of the description of the event from IIIT’s scrubbed Web archives.

Rauf’s partner Barzinji is a founder and director of IIIT, which is under active federal investigation for funneling funds to Palestinian terrorists. Its Herndon, Va., offices were raided by federal agents after 9/11.

The U.S. government has accused Barzinji of being “closely associated” with the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Hamas and other terrorist organizations. He has not been charged with a crime, however. …”

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=194617

SAUDI ARABIA’S EXPORT OF RADICAL ISLAM

by Adrian Morgan

http://www.sullivan-county.com/x/fox_imm.htm

Ground Zero mosque debate swirls in world capitals

The Ground Zero mosque debate is garnering increased attention in the world press, with Muslims coming down on both sides of the proposed center two blocks from the former World Trade Center.

“…Abd Al-Rahman Al-Rashed, general manager of Al-Arabiya television, also criticized the project in a column titled “A House of Worship or a Symbol of Destruction?” in the Arab daily A-Sharq Al-Awsat on Sunday.

“Muslims do not aspire for a mosque next to the September 11 cemetery,” Mr. Al-Rashed wrote. He added that “the mosque is not an issue for Muslims, and they have not heard of it until the shouting became loud between the supporters and the objectors, which is mostly an argument between non-Muslim US citizens!”

Shakib Bin-Makhlouf, president of the Federation of Islamic Organizations in Europe, told Arab News that he supports the proposed Islamic center and appreciated President Obama coming out in support of it. “Islam has nothing to do with the events that happened on 9/11,” Mr. Bin-Makhlouf told the agency. “Unfortunately, the media has contributed in tying terrorism to Islam. When a non-Muslim commits an act of terror, no one refers to his religion.”

As the so-called “Ground Zero Mosque” has turned into a political debating ground, it’s also become a barometer for the world to assess how America treats Muslims. One British blogger suggested that the mosque is evidence that America is experiencing the same “Islamitization” allegedly happening in Europe, where many Europeans worry that Muslims are gaining undue influence. In a pointed summary of the project, Qatar-based newspaper Al Jazeera writes:

Critics say it would be inappropriate to build a mosque on the “hallowed ground” of Ground Zero.

Yet there is already a mosque two blocks north of the Cordoba House site, Masjid Manhattan, which has been open since 1970.

As several commentators have pointed out, there is also a strip club – New York Dolls – just one block north of the mosque site. No one has complained about that profaning of the sacred. …”

 

Timeline: Osama bin Laden, over the years

 

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/05/02/bin.laden.timeline/index.html

 

 

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

 

Andrew McCarthy–The Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotaged America–Videos

Steve Coll– The Bin Ladens: An Arabian Family in the American Century; Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001 –Videos

Stealth Jihad–Terror From Within–Videos

Steve Emerson, Executive Director of The Investigative Project on Terrorism Will Release Explosive Information of Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf,The Promoter of The Ground Zero Mosque, Where He Supports Extreme Radical Religious Fanatics Including Moslem Brotherhood and Saudi Wahhabi Islam!

Steve Emerson–American Jihad: The Terrorist Living Among Us–Videos

Robert Spencer–Stealth Jihad–Videos

Robert Spencer–The Truth About Muhammad–Videos

Terrorists Among Us: Jihad in America–Videos

Obsession: Radical Islams War Against the West–Videos

Terrorists Among Us: Jihad in America–Videos

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Ron Paul Wins CPAC 2011 Presidential Preference Straw Poll and Is Excluded From Fox News Poll–The Republican Establishment Must Be Running Scared–Videos

Posted on February 14, 2011. Filed under: Banking, Blogroll, Communications, Demographics, Economics, Education, Employment, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, history, Immigration, Investments, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, Monetary Policy, Money, Music, People, Philosophy, Politics, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Taxes, Video, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , |

“…I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution, or that have failed their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is “needed” before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later be attacked for neglecting my constituents’ “interests,” I shall reply that I was informed that their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can. …” 

~Senator Barry Goldwater, The Conscience of A Conservative (1960), p. 15

 

The Conscience Of A Conservative

  

“Man is not free unless government is limited.”

 
~President Ronald Reagan
 

Ronald Reagan on Limited Government 

 

Ron Paul: A 2012 Revolution

 

Ron Paul On Morning Joe SLAMS Obama: “He’s A Warmonger”!

 

And the Winner Is… RON PAUL!

http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2011/02/cpac-2011-straw-poll-results-and.html

RON PAUL WINS CPAC 2012 STRAW POLL

 

CPAC Poll Aftermath: Can Ron Paul Trump Critics in 2012?

 

Is CPAC Straw Poll Relevant?

 

“…LAKE JACKSON, TEXAS – After receiving news that he won the 2011 Presidential Preference Straw Poll at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), Congressman Ron Paul issued the following statement:

“I am honored by the outpouring of support that I received in winning the CPAC Straw Poll. Events like this energize me and give me tremendous incentive to keep up the fight for Liberty and our Constitution.

“This win is bigger then just me, it is about the message of Liberty that resonates with so many across the country. Young people in particular, who participated so strongly in this poll, understand that restoring our Freedom is the key to our future prosperity. I remain optimistic that our message will spread and help the next generation recapture the wonderful traditions that made America the greatest nation in human history.”

CPAC is widely considered the largest and most important gathering of Conservatives in the country. Dr. Paul captured 30 percent of the vote, beating the second place finisher by 7 points. No one else in the field exceeded 6 percent. …”

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/#40738

Ron Paul won the  2011 CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference) Presidential Preference Straw Poll receiving 30% of the 3,742 votes cast.

Fox News released a poll on Friday, February 11, 2011 in which Ron Paul was excluded.

Here is the question and results from the raw data:

“…The Fox News Poll is conducted under the joint direction of Anderson Robbins Research (D) and
Shaw & Company Research (R). The poll is based on live telephone interviews with a national
sample of 911 registered voters, and was conducted February 7-9, 2011 in the evenings.
Landline and cell phone telephone numbers were randomly selected for inclusion in the survey
using a probability proportionate to size method, which means that phone numbers for each state
are proportional to the number of voters in each state.
Results based on the full sample have a margin of error of ± 3%. Results among subgroups have
larger sampling errors, including: Democrats (n = 389) ± 5%; Republicans (n = 354) ± 5%;
Independents (n = 147) ± 8%.
Results from Fox News polls before February 2011 were conducted by Opinion Dynamics Corp.

Questions 1-2 released separately.
3. – 16. I’m going to read you a list of names — for each one please tell me if you think that
person would make a good president or not. If you have never heard of a person, please just say
so. (RANDOMIZE) SCALE: 1. Yes 2. No 3. (Don’t know – vol.) 4. Never heard of
*** YES Ratings Summary ***
% Yes – All % Yes – GOP
Mike Huckabee 34 55
Mitt Romney 33 54
Newt Gingrich 23 43
Sarah Palin 23 40
Jeb Bush 21 39
Donald Trump 19 23
Chris Christie 18 29
Tim Pawlenty 13 21
Haley Barbour 11 16
Michele Bachmann 10 16
Rick Santorum 9 15
Mitch Daniels 8 13
John Thune 6

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/021111_2012_election_web.pdf

Well the Republican establishment and their supporters at Fox News are at it again in trying to marginalize Ron Paul should he decide to run again 2012.

The Republican establishment and their supporters at Fox News  should be sacred–real scared.

If Ron Paul runs he will win.

I consider myself a long time member of the conservative movement starting with Senator Goldwater in 1964 and finally seeing Governor Ronald Reagan elected in 1980 and again in 1984.

I am still waiting for another conservative or libertarian candidate to get the nomination of the Republican Party in 2012.

I am so fed up with the Republican Party that I now consider myself an independent.

The Republican establishment especially the country club or progressive Rockefeller/Bush Republicans opposed both Goldwater, Reagan, and Paul as candidates for President.

There is a long history of progressives in the Republican party and both Bushes and McCain are just recent examples.

The recent Fox News poll reflects this.

Neither Mike Huckabee or Mitt Romney is among the top five conservative or libertarian choices for a candidate for President in 2012.

My choice in 2008 was Newt Gingrich.

My choice in 2012 is Ron Paul with Michele Bachmann as his Vice-President running mate on a Republican ticket. 

Both Gingrich and Paul will most likely run in 2012.

I made the mistake many Republicans are again making in dismissing Ron Paul without first listening to his position on a number of issues.

When I finally did examine his positions on the issues, I had to admit, I had made a big mistake in not supporting him in 2008 and dismissing him.

Ron Paul has been a principled conservative and libertarian for decades.

He not only talks the talk but walks the walk.

When both Donald Trump and Bill Bennett dismiss him they are making the same mistake I did in 2008.

Ron Paul Courageously Speaks the Truth

 

While neither Trump or Bennett have run for public office, Ron Paul has won 11 consecutive political races for Congress in progressive Bush country where Paul was also repeatedly dismissed by the Republican establishment.

Ron Paul’s message resonates with  young, working and older voters as well as Republicans, Democrats and independents.

Ron Paul’s message is to transform the United States warfare and welfare economy with a massive and ever expanding collectivist government to a peace and prosperity economy with a limited in size and scope constitutional government. 

Ron Paul wants a strong national defense where the military is used in declared wars as set forth in the United States Constitution.

Ron Paul is the choice of conservatives and libertarians who oppose government intervention both at home and abroad.

As both a conservative and tea party movement member I endorse a Ron Paul/Michele Bachmann Republican Party ticket in 2012.

The American people are listening now.

Join the campaign for liberty.

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/

Ron Paul CPAC 2011 Speech–Videos

Ron Paul: A New Hope

 

Ron Paul 2012: A Libertarian Renaissance?

 

 

Background Articles and Videos

Fox News Poll: Obama Crushing Jeb Bush, Beating 2012 GOP Field

“…The poll had Obama with 54 percent and Bush with 34 percent. A poll from Fox News taken back in September found it much closer with Obama at 45 percent and Bush at 37 percent.

The poll also had Obama leading other Republican candidates. He led former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney 48 percent to 41 percent and led former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee by a similar margin, 49 percent to 41 percent. Obama crushed former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin by more than 20 points, 56 percent to 35 percent. The president was ahead of former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich by 20 points, beating him 55 percent to 35 percent.

The poll of 911 registered voters was taken between Feb. 7-9 and had a margin of error of +/- 3 percent. …”

http://www.sunshinestatenews.com/blog/fox-news-poll-obama-crushing-jeb-bush-beating-2012-gop-field

RON PAUL EXPOSED (IN HIS OWN WORDS)

 

Ann Coulter endorses Ron Paul in 2012

 

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Michele Bachmann–CPAC 2011 Keynote Address–Videos

Newt Gingrich at CPAC 2011–Videos

David Horowitz’s CPAC 2011 Keynote Speech–Videos

Rand Paul CPAC 2011 Speech–Videos

Ron Paul CPAC 2011 Speech–Videos

Paul Ryan CPAC 2011 Speech–Videos

“Ron Paul Can’t Be Elected!”–Donald Trump CPAC Speech–Another Progressive Outted–Videos

The Tea Party’s Dream Ticket For 2012–Ron Paul/Michele Bachmann–Campaign For Liberty–Videos

Time To End The Federal Reserve System For Failing To Maintain Price Stability or The Purchasing Power of The U.S. Dollar–End The Federal Reserve Banking Cartel For Currency Debasement!–Videos

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Republican Leadership and Establishment Sells Out The Tea Party Movement–Kill The Obama/Republican Bad Deal!

Posted on December 10, 2010. Filed under: Agriculture, Banking, Blogroll, College, Communications, Economics, Education, Employment, Farming, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, government, government spending, Investments, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, Monetary Policy, Money, People, Philosophy, Politics, Rants, Raves, Video, War, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , |

Rush – You Have To Ask Yourself What Was The Point Of The Election

 

Brett gives details Krauthammer a big win for Obama but more debt

 

 

Dick Morris Calls Tax Cut Deal “A Surrender”

 

Michael Savage Dec 10 2010

 

 

News From the Cartoons – Bush Tax Cuts

 

Extending the bush tax cuts explained.

 

Will Obama’s Tax Cut Extension Boost Economy?

Suspend SS Payroll Tax? Robbing Peter to pay Paul?

 

Conservatives Oppose Extension of Jobless Benefits

 

House Democrats Reject Obama Tax Compromise

 

Mike Pence: It’s ‘Unconscionable’ the Democrats Didn’t Vote on Bush Tax Cuts Extension

Laffer Curve: Obama gets it? Is Obama a supply-sider now? Extending Bush tax cuts?

 

The Democratic Party’s Communist Dream

The Communist Manifesto

  1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
  2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
  3. Abolition of all right of inheritance.
  4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
  5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
  6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
  7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
  8. Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
  9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equitable distribution of the population over the country.
  10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production.[12]

~Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Communist_Manifesto

The U.S. Constitution? Or Obama’s Communist Manifesto? :: WHICH ONE, AMERICA? You MUST Choose!

The Tea Party Movement is against increases in Federal Government spending, subsidies, regulations and higher taxes.

The Tea Party Movement is for limited government and immigration, free enterprise, fiscal responsibility and a strong national defense.

The Tea Party Movement wants comprehensive tax reform–either a one rate flat income tax or a national retail sales consumption tax–the FairTax, preferably the latter.

Until this happens the Bush tax rates should be made permanent  with no estate and gift taxes.

As a minimum the Bush tax rates should be made permanent including those on  personal and corporate  income, capital gains and interest, and estate and gift taxes.

If the Democrats want another extension of unemployment benefits then the they must agree to the three lower rate brackets for all Americans.

Otherwise let the Democratic Party and President will be responsible for the large tax increase in the middle of a recession with over 30 million Americans seeking a full time job.

If you want to  “stimulate” the economy and avoid the Great Recession becoming the Obama Depression, cut the existing tax bracket  rates  and have three tax bracket instead of the current six brackets.

The Republican Party should replace the current six rates of 10%, 15%, 25%, 28%, 33% and 35% with three new lower rates of  10%, 20%,  and 30%.

 For single taxpayers  the 10% bracket would be for taxable income up to the first $100,000.

 For single taxpayers  the 20% bracket would be for income  from $100,000 to $25o,000.

 For single taxpayers  the 30% bracket would be for income exceeding $250,000.

 For married taxpayers  the 10% bracketwould be for taxable income up to the first $200,000 taxpayers.

 For married taxpayers  the 20% bracket would be for income up from $200,000 to $500,000.

 Formarried taxpayers  the 30% bracket would be for income exceeding $500,000.

The Democratic Party and President Obama wants to replace the current six rate brackets of 10%, 15%, 25%, 28%, 33% and 35% with five new higher tax  brackets  of 15%, 28%, 31%, 36% and 39.6%.

Sell three lower tax brackets to the American people.

Which do you think the American people will want?

Certainly not higher tax rates and taxes when 30,000,000 Americans are looking for full-time jobs!

The Tea Party Movement wants balanced or surplus budgets which means cutting Federal expenditures by at least $1,000 billion per year. This  requires the closing of  ten Federal Departments, several agencies and over a thousand programs.

Stop subsidizing alternative  energy such as ethanol, unemployment, and illegal immigration.

Permanently shut-down  the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce,   Education, Energy,  Housing and Urban Development, Health and Human Resources, Interior,  Labor and Transportation.

The Obama/Republican  deal extending existing tax rates by two years does not do any of  the above.

Instead the proposed bad deal would  increase Federal Government expenditures and subsidies  by at least another $200 billion or more per year.

This is a complete sellout of the Tea Party Movement.

The Republican Party establishment better get with the program or else face defeat in the next election like they did in 2006 and 2008!

Either the Republican establishment leadership walks away from this sellout of the Tea Party movement or the Tea Party Movement will demand new leadership or a third party to replace both the Democratic and Republican progressive parties.

Any Republican who votes for the Obama/Republican so-called deal will be replaced when they come up for election.

The time has come for the Republican establishment to show leadership and not appeasement to the big government interventionists–progressive radical socialists of the Democratic Party.

Kill The Deal!

Otherwise replace the Republican leadership in the House and Senate.

Remember what happened to the last Republican President who said “read my lips no new taxes” and then reneged on his promise.

This will happen to every Republican who votes for this deal.

Kill Obama’s Bad Deal!

The proposed bad deal is a trap.

If Republicans vote for this bad deal, Obama will blame another failed so-called stimulus bill on the Republicans and say he tried tax cuts and they did not work.

Only  Marxists, progressives and the Democratic Party want and expect the tax rates to rise in 2011 to pay for the growing scope and size of government.

Larry Kudlow, Republican and radio/television commentor, is profound wrong when he repeatedly says that the extension of existing tax rates is a tax cut. This is the same nonsense that cutting the rate of growth in government spending is a spending cut.

Both are an attempt to deceive the American people.

The American people want a permanent extension to the existing rates and/or real tax reform such as the flat tax or the FairTax.

The American people want real spending cuts exceeding $1,000 billion per year and not more subsidies for ethanol and alternative energy.

The American people are tired of being robbed and held hostage by the progress radical socialists of the Demoratic Party.

Kill Obama’s Bad Deal.

The Tea Party movement will be taking names of those Republicans who voted for  this economic and political bad deal.

Run, do not walk, away from the so-called Obama/Republican proposed tax bill to extend current tax rates for two years.

Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin, and Goldberg are right and Kudlow, Krauthammer,  Bennett, and the Republican establishment and ruling class are wrong both economically and politically.

The Tea Party movement agrees with Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin and Goldberg.

 

Mark Levin – We Need Leaders, We Need Leaders That Know What There Doing

Time for the Republican party to stop playing defense and go on the offense.

Time for the FairTax.

The FairTax: It’s Time

Stop the sellout of the Tea Party Movement! 

Kill the Bad Deal.

Rolling Stones – You Can’t Always Get What You Want (Live 1969)

 

 

The Big Chill Funeral Alex

 

One or both political parties are slowly committing suicide.

May they rest in peace.

 

 

Background Articles and Videos

  

December 13, 2010

The Lesson of the Tax Deal and the Deficit: Teach Your Kids Chinese

 

“…Of course, federal budget accounting is odd, to say the least.  An extension of existing tax rates is not any new stimulus, but it counts as new deficit, since the current rates were supposed to expire at the end of 2010 and then rise to levels in effect before the 2001 and 2003 cuts.  Since the federal government is now borrowing about forty cents to support every dollar of federal spending, the failure to raise tax rates (or cut spending) does lead to additional deficit spending in the future.  Both Republicans and Democrats were quick to say that what they did this week was necessary because the economy is so weak, and in the end, the deal will help fix that.  Since both Republicans and Democrats routinely vote to increase spending and cut taxes when the economy is strong, the only common denominator is that in good times or bad, the deficit increases.

Republicans have been arguing that they have won the ideological battle over tax rates, since the Obama administration accepted in the end that it is a bad idea to raise tax rates in a weak economy and that lower tax rates are stimulative.  On the other hand, the Democrats won an ideological battle, too, since the Republicans have argued that the prior stimulus bill passed in February 2009 was an expensive failure (it was) but are now accepting that a new stimulus package is needed. 

 

The compromise reached this week will have about $300 billion in what could be called new stimulus out of the trillion in total cost over two years, all to be financed with new debt.  Extending tax rates and unemployment insurance already in place does not count as new stimulus.

 

Will that new stimulus money do the trick for the economy in the next year or two, when $862 billion did not do much the last two years? …”
 
 

Voters Put Spending Cuts Ahead of Deficit Reduction

“First things first. Despite official Washington’s increasing fixation on the federal budget deficit, most voters think cutting federal spending is a bigger priority.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 57% of Likely U.S. Voters think reducing federal government spending is more important than reducing the deficit. Thirty-four percent (34%) put reducing the deficit first.  (To see survey question wording, click here.)

It’s telling to note that while 65% of Mainstream voters believe cutting spending is more important, 72% of the Political Class say the primary emphasis should be on deficit reduction.

Most voters are still not convinced, even with a new Republican majority in the House, that Congress will actually cut government spending substantially over the next year.  GOP voters are among the most doubtful.

Sixty-nine percent (69%) of voters, in fact, are pessimistic about what Congress will accomplish in terms of government spending. …”

“…Seventy-four percent (74%) of Republicans and 50% of voters not affiliated with either of the major parties say cutting spending is more important than reducing the deficit. Democrats are more narrowly divided on the question.

Most conservatives and moderates say spending cuts should come first, but most liberals say deficit reduction is paramount.

Voters have consistently said in surveys for years that increased government spending hurts the economy, while decreased spending has a positive effect on the economy.  But they expect government spending to rise during the Obama years.

Americans overwhelmingly anticipate that the federal government will have to dramatically cut spending like France and Britain are doing now, and a sizable number suggest that even Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid may have to be on the cutting block. …”

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/federal_budget/december_2010/voters_put_spending_cuts_ahead_of_deficit_reduction

Who Pays Income Taxes and how much?

Tax Year 2008

Percentiles Ranked by AGI AGI Threshold on Percentiles Percentage of Federal Personal Income Tax Paid
Top 1% $380,354 38.02
Top 5% $159,619 58.72
Top 10% $113,799 69.94
Top 25% $67,280 86.34
Top 50% $33,048 97.30
Bottom 50% <$33,048 2.7
Note: AGI is Adjusted Gross Income
Source: Internal Revenue Service http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html


Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

An Affront and Threat To The American People–The Ground Zero Mosque–Remembering 9/11 and The Unknown Falling Man

Posted on August 20, 2010. Filed under: Blogroll, Communications, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, People, Politics, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Religion, Security, Strategy, Talk Radio, Technology, Transportation, War, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

UPDATED AND EXPANDED


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:911_-_FEMA_-_WTC_impacts_%28graphic%29.png

Fitna (English) Part 1/2 (Full 16min version)

Bill Whittle: Ground Zero Mosque Reality Check

 A “Real” Commencement Speech

“O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty (unto Him).”

~Quran, 9:123

“If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without blood shed; if you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.”

~Winston Churchill

American Airlines flight number 11  left gate B32  and took off from Boston’s Logan International airport at 7:59 a.m  bound for Los Angeles.

At about 8:46:40 local time, all 92 passengers and crew including five Al-Qaeda Islamic Wahhabi  terrorist hijackers  aboard American Airlines Flight 11  were killed as it crashed into the North Tower (Tower 1) of the World Trade Center.

Then at 9:03 a.m. United Airlines Flight 175 bound from Boston’s Logan International Airport to Los Angeles International Airport crashes into the South Tower (Tower 2)  killing 65 passengers and crew including five Al-Qaeda Islamic Wahhabi  terrorist hijackers.

Shortly thereafter at 9:35 a.m. American Airlines Flight 77 crashes into the Pentagon killing all 64 passengers and crew including five Al-Qaeda Islamic Wahhabi  terrorist hijackers aboard as well as 125 in the Pentagon.

The only aircraft that did not reach its intended target, the United States Capital building in Washington D.C., was United Airlines Flight 93 bound from Newark International Airport to San Francisco International Airport.

Four Al-Qaeda Islamic Wahhabi  terrorists hijacked the plane about forty minutes into the flight. However, several passengers tried to take back the aircraft from the terrorists.

All 44 passengers and crew including the 4 Al-Qaeda Islamic Wahhabi  terrorists died at about 10:03 a.m.when the plane crashed into a field near Shanksville in Somerset County, Pennsylvania.

Several hundred people choose to jump to their deaths from both towers to escape from the intense fire and choking smoke in both buildings captured in the “Falling Man” photo and recounted  in the 9/11 The Falling Man documentary on YouTube and “The Falling Man” online article in Esquire Magazine:

Credit: The Falling Man, a photograph by Richard Drew for the Associated Press.

9/11 The Falling Man

The Falling Man

By Tom Junod

“…They began jumping not long after the first plane hit the North Tower, not long after the fire started. They kept jumping until the tower fell. They jumped through windows already broken and then, later, through windows they broke themselves. They jumped to escape the smoke and the fire; they jumped when the ceilings fell and the floors collapsed; they jumped just to breathe once more before they died. They jumped continually, from all four sides of the building, and from all floors above and around the building’s fatal wound. They jumped from the offices of Marsh & McLennan, the insurance company; from the offices of Cantor Fitzgerald, the bond-trading company; from Windows on the World, the restaurant on the 106th and 107th floors — the top. For more than an hour and a half, they streamed from the building, one after another, consecutively rather than en masse, as if each individual required the sight of another individual jumping before mustering the courage to jump himself or herself. …”

Read more: http://www.esquire.com/features/ESQ0903-SEP_FALLINGMAN#ixzz0xXdfVMZa

http://www.esquire.com/features/ESQ0903-SEP_FALLINGMAN

People watching the burning towers from surrounding streets were horrified at what they were witnessing as hundreds from all sides of the two towers jumped to their certain deaths to escape the flames and smoke.

After burning for fifty-six minutes  the South Tower of the World Trade Center fell at 9:58.

Thirty minutes later the North Tower fell.

Less than two hours from the time the two jet passenger airliners crashed into World Trade Center towers, both buildings had collapsed.

Killed  that day were nearly three thousand people  from over 70 countries that were in and around the buildings that were destroyed or damaged including  over three hundred New York City fireman and policemen who responded to the explosions and fires in the buildings.

Al-Qaeda’s Islamic Wahhabi  jihad or struggle by the sword arrived with a vengeance in the United States on September 11, 2001.

Al-Qaeda is a radical  network of militants who call for a global jihad or armed  struggle with those not of the Islamic faith, including Christians, Jews, Buddhists and Hindus.

Most Al-Qaeda jihadists are from the Sunni branch of Islam and from the fundamentalist Wahhabi sect established in Saudi Arabia. Al-Qaeda wants to establish a new Islamic Caliphate or leader for the Muslim community or Ummah under Sharia or Islamic law.  However, Muslims differ as to the interpretation of Sharia or Islamic law.

The two main branches of Islam are Sunni and Shia. The largest branch of Islam is Sunni who  comprise between 87% to 90% of all Muslems worldwide according to the Mapping the Global Muslim Population: A Report on the Size and Distribution of the World’s Muslim Population, a new study by the Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life. The smaller Shia branch of Islam comprises between 10% and 13% of the all Muslims worldwide and who are are primarily located in Iran, Pakistan, Iraq, and India.  Arabs are primarily Sunni and Iranians or Persians are primarily Shia. There are both Sunni and Shia jihadists who use suicide bombers to attack infidels or those of another religious faith mainly Christians, Jews and Hindus.

However, neither Arabs nor Iranians are the largest populations of Muslims. The countries with the largest Muslim populations include Indonesia, Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, Egypt, and Turkey. In 2010 the world’s population is  nearly 7 billion of which nearly 1.6 billion are Muslims  or over 22% of the world’s population. There are over 50 countries with a Muslim majority and 57 countries  comprising the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) .

 The United States with a population of 310 million has a relatively small Muslim population of about 3 million or roughly 1% of the total population of the United States in 2010. The Al-qaeda attackers came primarily from Saudi Arabia with a Muslim population of about 25 million or less than 2% of the world’s Muslim population.

The nineteen Al-Qaeda terrorists were religious  fanatics of the  Sunni Islam Wahhabi sect, including fifteen Saudi nationals. The Al-Qaeda jihadists had hijacked four commercial airline passenger jets in a coordinated attack on the American people and the United States of America.

The death toll from the Islamic Wahhabi jihad attack on America on September 11, 2001 was 2,995 including the nineteen al-Qaeda terrorist hijackers. There were more deaths on September 11, 2001, than the 2350 deaths, mostly members of the United States  Navy and Army, from the surprise Imperial Japanese Navy attack on the United States Navy Pacific fleet docked at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941.

Nearly nine years later a so-called “moderate” Muslem cleric, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, wants to build a thirteen story Islamic community center and mosque less than three blocks from ground zero, the site of the destroyed World Trade Center towers.

The planned site for the Islamic community center and mosque is  45-51 Park Place, called Park 51, is two and half block north and 560 feet from the northern boundary of the World Trade Center site at Vesey street.

Credit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:WTC_Building_Arrangement_and_Site_Plan.svg

Few Americans dispute the property owners’  right to construct such a building provided all city, state and Federal laws are complied with including local zoning laws and receipt of the necessary building permits.

Few Americans dispute the rights of all Americans to practice their religious faith.

Few Americans oppose the exercise of free speech.

The vast majority of Americans, however, consider the proposed community center and mosque to be an insulting affront to the families and friends of those who died on September 11, 2001.

Just because you can do something, does not mean you should.

In fact the Islamic religion considers such an action to be mischief-making or a fitna, a deliberate provocation against the infidels, those not of the Islamic faith including Christians and Jews.

The site of the World Trade Center and the immediate surrounding area is considered hallowed ground for it is the final resting place or cemetery for many of those who died on September 11, 2001 and whose remains were never found.

The American people demand that this Islamic community center and mosque be moved to another location in New York City.

Otherwise, those behind the building of such an insulting affront to the American people will only receive the rightful indignation and shunning they justly deserve and will soon be exposed for who and what they are–stealth jihadists.

Extreme jidahists can be Sunni or Shia and  overt militarist jihadists like those of  September 11, 2010 or covert  stealth jihadists that want to replace the United States Constitution and American law with Sharia or Islamic law and our representative republic with a theocracy.

Stealth jihadists speak of toleration when speaking to infidels or non-believers in Islam

When the jihadists speak to their fellow Muslims, they speak of Islamic global supremacy and return of the Caliphate under Sharia or Islamic law.

Religious toleration has it limits even in the United States. Toleration should be a two-way street. Toleration does not extend to evil. Toleration is not a suicide pact. Yet  Saudi Arabia has zero toleration or an absolute ban for any church, temple or synagogue being built in Saudi Arabia  and bans all non-believers in Islam from the city of  Mecca.

Sharia is a direct and immediate threat to liberty of the American people. The jihadists seek to replace American law and the United States Constitution with Sharia or Islamic law.

Sharia or Islamic law should be banned from the United States and those immigrants advocating it should be deported to their country of origin.

Saudi Arabia funds Islamic community centers and mosques throughout the United States where both militarist and stealth jihadists are cultivated and supported. The majority of terrorist attacks in the last decade have come from extreme Islamic jihadists, from both the Sunni and Shia branches of Islam and with support and encouragement of  local mosques and their  Imam.

Authors, journalists, politicians and television and talk  radio show hosts such as Steven Emerson, Robert Spencer, Geert Wilders, Andrew C. McCarthy, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Bill Bennett, Rush Limbaugh, Laura Ingraham, Mark Levin, and  Michael Savage are among those who expose the threat posed by the militarist and stealth jihadists. However, those commenting upon the threat posed by the jihadists are quickly labeled by the jihadists, their supporters and mainstream media as engaging in hate speech and accused of being racists and Islamophobes, having prejudice or bias against those of the Islam faith or Moslems. This is especially true when the Quran and actual speeches and words of the jihadists are quoted or made available for viewing on the Internet at such sites as YouTube.

The American people will remember September 11, 2001 and never forget the fallen. The American people will honor their memories by stopping the ground zero mosque and the militant and stealth jihadists of the sword whether they be Sunni or Shia. The American people will defend their country and their liberty.

Imam Rauf Exposed, Elimination of Israel, Terrorist Supporting, N’ Word

Newt Gingrich: No Ground Zero Mosque

Newt Gingrich: Ban Sharia – It is” totally abhorrent to the Western World”

“…At fifteen seconds after 9:41 a.m., on September 11, 2001, a photographer named Richard Drew took a picture of a man falling through the sky — falling through time as well as through space. The picture went all around the world, and then disappeared, as if we willed it away. One of the most famous photographs in human history became an unmarked grave, and the man buried inside its frame — the Falling Man — became the Unknown Soldier in a war whose end we have not yet seen. …”

Read more: http://www.esquire.com/features/ESQ0903-SEP_FALLINGMAN#ixzz0xXepMmJc

Background Articles and Videos

Bitter Debate at Ground Zero

Dueling Protests over Ground Zero Mosque

Leader of Ground Zero Mosque Refuses To Disclose Source Of Funding

Ground Zero Mosque 9/11 Liars for Islam, Muhammad said you can lie: Taqiyya

Radical Islam: Saudi Wahhabism responsible for worldwide terror

Robert Spencer on Hannity exposes Imam Rauf on Ground Zero Mosque

Robert Spencer Jihad Watch

Jihad on Campus – Saudis’ Multi-Million Dollar PR Agenda]

Militant Islam in the US – Steven Emerson (1 of 7)

Militant Islam in the US – Steven Emerson (2 of 7)

Militant Islam in the US – Steven Emerson (3 of 7)

Militant Islam in the US – Steven Emerson (4 of 7)

Militant Islam in the US – Steven Emerson (5 of 7)

Militant Islam in the US – Steven Emerson (6 of 7)

Militant Islam in the US – Steven Emerson (7 of 7)

Robert Spencer: Stealth Jihad (1 of 6)

Robert Spencer: Stealth Jihad (2 of 6)

]

Robert Spencer: Stealth Jihad (3 of 6)

Robert Spencer: Stealth Jihad (4 of 6)

Robert Spencer: Stealth Jihad (5 of 6)

Robert Spencer: Stealth Jihad (6 of 6)

Andy McCarthy Discusses The Ground Zero Mosque

Andy McCarthy – The Grand Jihad (5.24.10)

Law & Jihad with Andrew McCarthy

Andy McCarthy: “What We Call Terrorism, They Don’t”

First Friday – Andrew C. McCarthy – America’s War on Terror…or is It?

Michael Savage Gets Pissed Off About Jihadists and Terrorism

annity 05/04/2010 w/ Mark Levin

September 11 Attacks

The September 11 attacks (often referred to as September 11th or 9/11) were a series of coordinated suicide attacks by al-Qaeda upon the United States on September 11, 2001. On that morning, 19 al-Qaeda terrorists hijacked four commercial passenger jet airliners.[1][2] The hijackers intentionally crashed two of the airliners into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City, killing everyone on board and many others working in the buildings. Both buildings collapsed within two hours, destroying nearby buildings and damaging others. The hijackers crashed a third airliner into the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia, just outside Washington, D.C. The fourth plane crashed into a field near Shanksville in rural Pennsylvania after some of its passengers and flight crew attempted to retake control of the plane, which the hijackers had redirected toward Washington, D.C. There were no survivors from any of the flights.

The death toll of the attacks was 2,995, including the 19 hijackers.[3] The overwhelming majority of casualties were civilians, including nationals of over 70 countries.[4] In addition, there is at least one secondary death – one person was ruled by a medical examiner to have died from lung disease due to exposure to dust from the World Trade Center’s collapse.[5]

The United States responded to the attacks by launching the War on Terrorism. It invaded Afghanistan to depose the Taliban, who had harbored al-Qaeda terrorists. The United States also enacted the USA PATRIOT Act. Many other countries also strengthened their anti-terrorism legislation and expanded law enforcement powers. Some American stock exchanges stayed closed for the rest of the week following the attack and posted enormous losses upon reopening, especially in the airline and insurance industries. The destruction of billions of dollars worth of office space caused serious damage to the economy of Lower Manhattan.

The damage to the Pentagon was cleared and repaired within a year, and the Pentagon Memorial was built adjacent to the building. The rebuilding process has started on the World Trade Center site. In 2006 a new office tower was completed on the site of 7 World Trade Center. 1 World Trade Center is currently under construction at the site and, at 1,776 ft (541 m) upon completion in 2013, it will become one of the tallest buildings in North America. Three more towers were originally expected to be built between 2007 and 2012 on the site. Ground was broken for the Flight 93 National Memorial on November 8, 2009, and the first phase of construction is expected to be ready for the 10th anniversary of the attacks on September 11, 2011.[6] …”

American Airlines Flight 11

American Airlines Flight 11 was a scheduled U.S. domestic passenger flight from Logan International Airport in Boston, Massachusetts to Los Angeles International Airport. It was hijacked by five al-Qaedan terrorists and deliberately crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center in New York City as part of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

Fifteen minutes into the flight, the hijackers injured at least three people, forcefully breached the cockpit, and overpowered the pilot and first officer. Mohamed Atta, a known member of al-Qaeda,[1][2] and trained as a pilot, took over the controls. Air traffic controllers noticed the flight was in distress when the crew stopped responding to them. They realized the flight had been hijacked when Atta mistakenly transmitted announcements for passengers to air traffic control. On board, two flight attendants contacted American Airlines, and provided information about the hijackers and injuries to passengers and crew.

The aircraft crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center at 8:46 local time; the impact killed all 92 people aboard, including the hijackers, plus an unconfirmed number of people in the buildings impact zone. Many people in the streets witnessed the collision, and the Naudet brothers captured the impact on video, as did Pavel Hlava. Mark Burnback and Wolfgang Staehle had a webcam set up that captured the impact through a series of photographs. Before the hijacking was confirmed, news agencies began to report on the incident and speculated that the crash had been an accident. The impact and subsequent fire caused the North Tower to collapse, which resulted in thousands of additional casualties. During the recovery effort at the World Trade Center site, workers recovered and identified dozens of remains from Flight 11 victims (see section Aftermath below), but many other body fragments could not be identified. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_11

American Airlines Flight 77

“…American Airlines Flight 77 was the third flight hijacked as part of the September 11 attacks. It was deliberately crashed into the Pentagon. The flight from Washington Dulles International Airport to Los Angeles International Airport was hijacked by five Islamic extremists less than 35 minutes into the flight. The hijackers stormed the cockpit and forced the passengers to the rear of the aircraft. Hani Hanjour, one of the hijackers who was trained as a pilot, assumed control of the flight. Unknown to the hijackers, passengers aboard were able to make calls to loved ones and relay information on the hijacking.

The aircraft crashed into the western side of the Pentagon at 09:37am EDT. All 64 people on board the aircraft, including the hijackers, and 125 in the building were killed. Dozens of people witnessed the crash and news sources began reporting on the incident within minutes. The impact severely damaged an area of the Pentagon and ignited a large fire. A portion of the Pentagon collapsed and firefighters spent days trying to fully extinguish the blaze. The damaged sections of the Pentagon were rebuilt in 2002, with occupants moving back into the completed areas on August 15, 2002.

The 184 victims of the attack are memorialized in the Pentagon Memorial adjacent to the Pentagon. The 1.93-acre (7,800 m2) park consists of 184 benches, one for each of the victims, arranged according to the year of birth, ranging from 1930 (age 71) to 1998 (age 3). Flight 77’s   cuts directly through the park. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_77

United Airlines Flight 175

“… United Airlines Flight 175 was a scheduled U.S. domestic passenger flight from Logan International Airport in Boston, Massachusetts to Los Angeles International Airport, in California. On the morning of September 11, 2001, the flight was hijacked by five al-Qaeda-associated Islamist terrorists, and flown into the South Tower of the World Trade Center in New York City as part of the September 11 attacks. Approximately thirty minutes into the flight, the hijackers forcefully breached the cockpit, and overpowered the pilot and first officer, allowing lead hijacker and trained pilot Marwan al-Shehhi to take over the controls. The aircraft’s transponder was turned off and the aircraft deviated from the assigned flight path for four minutes, before air traffic controllers noticed at 08:51. They made several unsuccessful attempts to contact the cockpit. Several passengers and crew aboard made phone calls from the plane and provided information about the hijackers and injuries to passengers and crew.

The Boeing 767 operating as Flight 175 crashed into the South Tower of the World Trade Center at 09:03, killing all 65 people aboard, including the hijackers. The Flight 175 hijacking was coordinated with that of American Airlines Flight 11, which had struck the top of the North Tower eighteen minutes earlier. The crash of Flight 175 into the South Tower was the only impact seen live on television around the world as it happened. It was upon the loss of Flight 175 that the world realized that the crashes of both aircraft at the World Trade Center were in fact deliberate. The impact and subsequent fire caused the South Tower to collapse, 56 minutes later, resulting in hundreds of additional casualties. During the recovery effort at the World Trade Center site, workers recovered and identified remains from Flight 175 victims (see chapter Aftermath, below), but many other body fragments could not be identified. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_Flight_175

United Airlines Flight 93

“…United Airlines Flight 93 was a United States domestic passenger flight from Newark International Airport in Newark, NJ to San Francisco International Airport in San Francisco, CA that was hijacked on September 11, 2001. Approximately 40 minutes into the flight the hijackers breached the cockpit, overpowered the pilots and took control of the aircraft, diverting it toward Washington, D.C. Several passengers and crew members made telephone calls aboard the flight and learned about the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. As a result of this knowledge, the passengers decided to mount an assault against the hijackers in an attempt to regain control of the aircraft.

The plane crashed in a field in Stonycreek Township, near Shanksville, in Somerset County, Pennsylvania, about 80 miles (130 km) southeast of Pittsburgh and 150 miles (240 km) northwest of Washington, D.C., killing all on board including the four hijackers. Many witnessed the impact from the ground and news agencies began reporting on the event within an hour. The plane fragmented upon impact, leaving a crater, and some debris was blown miles from the crash site. The remains of everyone on board the aircraft were later identified. Subsequent analysis of the flight recorders revealed how the actions taken by the passengers prevented the aircraft from reaching the hijackers’ intended target, thought to be either the White House or the United States Capitol. A permanent memorial is planned for construction on the crash site, with dedication scheduled for 2011, though it has been the subject of criticism.

Of the four aircraft hijacked on September 11 (the others were American Airlines Flight 11, American Airlines Flight 77 and United Airlines Flight 175), United Airlines Flight 93 was the only one that failed to reach its intended target. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks

 

Al-Qaeda

“…Al-Qaeda (pronounced /ælˈkaɪdə/ al-KYE-də or /ælˈkeɪdə/ al-KAY-də; Arabic: القاعدة‎, al-qāʿidah, “the base”), alternatively spelled al-Qaida and sometimes al-Qa’ida, is a militant Islamist group founded sometime between August 1988[6] and late 1989.[7] It operates as a network comprising both a multinational, stateless army[8] and a fundamentalist Sunni movement calling for global Jihad. It is considered a terrorist organization.

Al-Qaeda has attacked civilian and military targets in various countries, most notably the September 11 attacks on New York City and Washington, D.C. in 2001. The U.S. government responded by launching the War on Terror.

Characteristic techniques include suicide attacks and simultaneous bombings of different targets.[9] Activities ascribed to it may involve members of the movement, who have taken a pledge of loyalty to Osama bin Laden, or the much more numerous “al-Qaeda-linked” individuals who have undergone training in one of its camps in Afghanistan, Iraq or Sudan, but not taken any pledge.[10]

Al-Qaeda ideologues envision a complete break from the foreign influences in Muslim countries, and the creation of a new Islamic caliphate. Reported beliefs include that a Christian-Jewish alliance is conspiring to destroy Islam,[11] which is largely embodied in the U.S.-Israel alliance, and that the killing of bystanders and civilians is religiously justified in jihad. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda

Jihad

“…Jihad (pronounced /dʒɪˈhɑːd/; Arabic: جهاد‎ [dʒiˈhæːd]), an Islamic term, is a religious duty of Muslims. In Arabic, the word jihād is a noun meaning “struggle.” Jihad appears frequently in the Qur’an and common usage as the idiomatic expression “striving in the way of Allah (al-jihad fi sabil Allah)“.[1][2] A person engaged in jihad is called a mujahid; the plural is mujahideen. Jihad is an important religious duty for Muslims. A minority among the Sunni scholars sometimes refer to this duty as the sixth pillar of Islam, though it occupies no such official status.[3] In Twelver Shi’a Islam, however, Jihad is one of the 10 Practices of the Religion.

A wide range of opinions exist about the exact meaning of jihad. Muslims use the word in a religious context to refer to three types of struggles: an internal struggle to maintain faith, the struggle to improve the Muslim society, or the struggle in a holy war.[4] The differences of opinion are the result of different interpretation of the two most important sources in Islam, the Qur’an and the ahadith (singular: hadith). For example, the prominent orientalist Bernard Lewis argues that, in the Qur’an and the ahadith jihad implies warfare in the large majority of cases.[5] In a commentary of the hadith Sahih Muslim, entitled al-Minhaj, the medieval Islamic scholar Yahya ibn Sharaf al-Nawawi stated that “one of the collective duties of the community as a whole (fard kifaya) is to lodge a valid protest, to solve problems of religion, to have knowledge of Divine Law, to command what is right and forbid wrong conduct”.[6]

In western societies the term jihad is often translated as “holy war”.[7] Muslim authors tend to reject such an approach, stressing non-militant connotations of the word.[8] In technical literature, the term “holy war” is often used to describe jihad.[9] However, scholars of Islamic studies often stress that both words are not synonymous.[10]

…”

“…Sunni view of Jihad

Jihad has been classified either as al-jihād al-akbar (the greater jihad), the struggle against one’s soul (nafs), or al-jihād al-asghar (the lesser jihad), the external, physical effort, often implying fighting (this is similar to the shiite view of jihad as well).

Gibril Haddad has analyzed the basis for the belief that internal jihad is the “greater jihad”, Jihad al-akbar. Haddad identifies the primary historical basis for this belief in a pair of similarly worded hadith, in which Mohammed is reported to have told warriors returning home that they had returned from the lesser jihad of struggle against non-Muslims to a greater jihad of struggle against lust. Although Haddad notes that the authenticity of both hadeeth is questionable, he nevertheless concludes that the underlying principle of superiority internal jihad does have a reliable basis in the Qur’an and other writings.[31][32]

In contrast, the Hanbali scholar Ibn Qayyim Al-Jawziyya did believe that “internal Jihad” is important[33] but he suggests those hadith as weak which consider “Jihad of the heart/soul” to be more important than “Jihad by the sword”.[34] Contemporary Islamic scholar Abdullah Yusuf Azzam has argued the hadith is not just weak but “is in fact a false, fabricated hadith which has no basis. It is only a saying of Ibrahim Ibn Abi `Abalah, one of the Successors, and it contradicts textual evidence and reality.”[35]

Muslim jurists explained there are four kinds of jihad fi sabilillah (struggle in the cause of God):[36]

  • Jihad of the heart (jihad bil qalb/nafs) is concerned with combatting the devil and in the attempt to escape his persuasion to evil. This type of Jihad was regarded as the greater jihad (al-jihad al-akbar).
  • Jihad by the tongue (jihad bil lisan) is concerned with speaking the truth and spreading the word of Islam with one’s tongue.
  • Jihad by the hand (jihad bil yad) refers to choosing to do what is right and to combat injustice and what is wrong with action.
  • Jihad by the sword (jihad bis saif) refers to qital fi sabilillah (armed fighting in the way of God, or holy war), the most common usage by Salafi Muslims and offshoots of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Some contemporary Islamists have succeeded in replacing the greater jihad, the fight against desires, with the lesser jihad, the holy war to establish, defend and extend the Islamic state.[37]

…”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad

The Saudi 911 hijackers were Wahhabi

“…Most Americans continue to be puzzled by the Saudis. 15 or the 19 hijackers on Sept 11th were Saudia Arabian. Not Taliban. Not Libyan. Not Palestinian. Why? They don’t like our military presence in the country, our culture, our policies, in general they just don’t like us and want us dead. What’s more they’re increasingly unhappy with the ruling Al Saud Family, who a decade ago cut a deal with us for military protection. The Key to understanding the vicious attack on America is in understanding “Wahhabism.”

Wahhabi Clerics control education in Saudi Arabia. They teach that all who do not believe exactly as they do are “enemies.” They also teach holy war against enemies (Die fighting a jihad and you die a martyr with special rewards afterlife.)

The Saudi hijackers were Wahhabi. When they crashed the planes into the World Trade Center and Pentagon they believed they were doing a holy act and ensuring martyrdom. This twisted thinking is a perversion of Islam. The Wahhabis use their wealth to export their twisted message. They target the poor and illiterate with the promise of an education, only to teach religious INTOLERANCE, the oppression of women and terrorist warfare.

The Al Saud Family is worried about civil war. It has been Osama Bin Ladens main objective has ben to terrorize the U.S. out of Saudia Arabia and then incite the Saudi people to help him seize the kingdom and it’s vast oil reserves.

The Al Saud Family regularly pays off the Wahhabi Clerics and Islamic charities simply to avoid civil war. A lot of the money has been funnelled to Osama Bin Laden and the Al Queda network.

If Islamic terrorists were to seize control of Saudia Arabia and its 260 billion barrels of crude oil reserves, they would be ten times more powerful than Iran or Iraq.

While Kuwait is the only Arab Democracy in the Middle East, the Islamic Fundamentalist Party is the fastest growing party there. The Middle East is a ticking time bomb. Islamic extremism is rapidly growing. …”

http://www.warriorsfortruth.com/saudi-wahabbi-religion.html

List of countries by Muslim population

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Muslim_population

Mapping the Global Muslim Population

A Report on the Size and Distribution of the World’s Muslim Population

ANALYSIS October 7, 2009

Executve Summary

“..A comprehensive demographic study of more than 200 countries finds that there are 1.57 billion Muslims of all ages living in the world today, representing 23% of an estimated 2009 world population of 6.8 billion.

While Muslims are found on all five inhabited continents, more than 60% of the global Muslim population is in Asia and about 20% is in the Middle East and North Africa. However, the Middle East-North Africa region has the highest percentage of Muslim-majority countries. Indeed, more than half of the 20 countries and territories1 in that region have populations that are approximately 95% Muslim or greater.

More than 300 million Muslims, or one-fifth of the world’s Muslim population, live in countries where Islam is not the majority religion. These minority Muslim populations are often quite large. India, for example, has the third-largest population of Muslims worldwide. China has more Muslims than Syria, while Russia is home to more Muslims than Jordan and Libya combined.

Of the total Muslim population, 10-13% are Shia Muslims and 87-90% are Sunni Muslims. Most Shias (between 68% and 80%) live in just four countries: Iran, Pakistan, India and Iraq.

These are some of the key findings of Mapping the Global Muslim Population: A Report on the Size and Distribution of the World’s Muslim Population, a new study by the Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life. The report offers the most up-to-date and fully sourced estimates of the size and distribution of the worldwide Muslim population, including sectarian identity.

Previously published estimates of the size of the global Muslim population have ranged widely, from 1 billion to 1.8 billion.2 But these commonly quoted estimates often have appeared without citations to specific sources or explanations of how the figures were generated.

The Pew Forum report is based on the best available data for 232 countries and territories. Pew Forum researchers, in consultation with nearly 50 demographers and social scientists at universities and research centers around the world, acquired and analyzed about 1,500 sources, including census reports, demographic studies and general population surveys, to arrive at these figures – the largest project of its kind to date. (See Methodology for more detail.)

The Pew Forum’s estimate of the Shia population (10-13%) is in keeping with previous estimates, which generally have been in the range of 10-15%. Some previous estimates, however, have placed the number of Shias at nearly 20% of the world’s Muslim population.3 Readers should bear in mind that the figures given in this report for the Sunni and Shia populations are less precise than the figures for the overall Muslim population. Data on sectarian affiliation have been infrequently collected or, in many countries, not collected at all. Therefore, the Sunni and Shia numbers reported here are expressed as broad ranges and should be treated as approximate. …”

http://pewforum.org/Mapping-the-Global-Muslim-Population.aspx

How Many Muslims in the United States?

by Daniel Pipes
April 22, 2003

updated Nov 22, 2009

“…Islam is widely touted as “the fastest growing religion in the United States,” so how does one explain that The World Almanac and Book of Facts has these figures for Muslims in the United States:

  • 1997 edition (p. 644) says 5.1 million
  • 2003 edition (p. 635) says 2.8 million

No, the population did not actually decrease; to understand this reduction in the estimate, see my October 2001 analysis, “How Many U.S. Muslims?” In it, I report on two recent surveys, by the American Religious Identification Survey 2001 and Tom Smith of the University of Chicago, which found the number of U.S. Muslims to be under two million. So, it appears that the almanac’s editors stopped accepting the overblown Islamist estimates as accurate and instead relied on scholarly and reliable work. A good round estimate is that Muslims make up just under 1 percent of the U.S. population. (April 22, 2003) …”

http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2003/04/how-many-muslims-in-the-united-states

Organisation of the Islamic Conference

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organisation_of_the_Islamic_Conference

 

THE FOUNDATION OF THE NEW TERRORISM

“…Islam
Islam (a word that literally means “surrender to the will of God”) arose in Arabia with what Muslims believe are a series of revelations to the Prophet Mohammed from the one and only God, the God of Abraham and of Jesus. These revelations, conveyed by the angel Gabriel, are recorded in the Qur’an. Muslims believe that these revelations, given to the greatest and last of a chain of prophets stretching from Abraham through Jesus, complete God’s message to humanity. The Hadith, which recount Mohammed’s sayings and deeds as recorded by his contemporaries, are another fundamental source. A third key element is the Sharia, the code of law derived from the Qur’an and the Hadith.

Islam is divided into two main branches, Sunni and Shia. Soon after the Prophet’s death, the question of choosing a new leader, or caliph, for the Muslim community, or Ummah, arose. Initially, his successors could be drawn from the Prophet’s contemporaries, but with time, this was no longer possible. Those who became the Shia held that any leader of the Ummah must be a direct descendant of the Prophet; those who became the Sunni argued that lineal descent was not required if the candidate met other standards of faith and knowledge. After bloody struggles, the Sunni became (and remain) the majority sect. (The Shia are dominant in Iran.) The Caliphate-the institutionalized leadership of the Ummah-thus was a Sunni institution that continued until 1924, first under Arab and eventually under Ottoman Turkish control.

Many Muslims look back at the century after the revelations to the Prophet Mohammed as a golden age. Its memory is strongest among the Arabs. What happened then-the spread of Islam from the Arabian Peninsula throughout the Middle East, North Africa, and even into Europe within less than a century-seemed, and seems, miraculous.6 Nostalgia for Islam’s past glory remains a powerful force.

Islam is both a faith and a code of conduct for all aspects of life. For many Muslims, a good government would be one guided by the moral principles of their faith. This does not necessarily translate into a desire for clerical rule and the abolition of a secular state. It does mean that some Muslims tend to be uncomfortable with distinctions between religion and state, though Muslim rulers throughout history have readily separated the two.

To extremists, however, such divisions, as well as the existence of parliaments and legislation, only prove these rulers to be false Muslims usurping God’s authority over all aspects of life. Periodically, the Islamic world has seen surges of what, for want of a better term, is often labeled “fundamentalism.”7 Denouncing waywardness among the faithful, some clerics have appealed for a return to observance of the literal teachings of the Qur’an and Hadith. One scholar from the fourteenth century from whom Bin Ladin selectively quotes, Ibn Taimiyyah, condemned both corrupt rulers and the clerics who failed to criticize them. He urged Muslims to read the Qur’an and the Hadith for themselves, not to depend solely on learned interpreters like himself but to hold one another to account for the quality of their observance.8

The extreme Islamist version of history blames the decline from Islam’s golden age on the rulers and people who turned away from the true path of their religion, thereby leaving Islam vulnerable to encroaching foreign powers eager to steal their land, wealth, and even their souls.

Bin Ladin’s Worldview
Despite his claims to universal leadership, Bin Ladin offers an extreme view of Islamic history designed to appeal mainly to Arabs and Sunnis. He draws on fundamentalists who blame the eventual destruction of the Caliphate on leaders who abandoned the pure path of religious devotion.9 He repeatedly calls on his followers to embrace martyrdom since “the walls of oppression and humiliation cannot be demolished except in a rain of bullets.”10 For those yearning for a lost sense of order in an older, more tranquil world, he offers his “Caliphate” as an imagined alternative to today’s uncertainty. For others, he offers simplistic conspiracies to explain their world.

Bin Ladin also relies heavily on the Egyptian writer Sayyid Qutb. A member of the Muslim Brotherhood11 executed in 1966 on charges of attempting to overthrow the government, Qutb mixed Islamic scholarship with a very superficial acquaintance with Western history and thought. Sent by the Egyptian government to study in the United States in the late 1940s, Qutb returned with an enormous loathing of Western society and history. He dismissed Western achievements as entirely material, arguing that Western society possesses “nothing that will satisfy its own conscience and justify its existence.”12

Three basic themes emerge from Qutb’s writings. First, he claimed that the world was beset with barbarism, licentiousness, and unbelief (a condition he called jahiliyya, the religious term for the period of ignorance prior to the revelations given to the Prophet Mohammed). Qutb argued that humans can choose only between Islam and jahiliyya. Second, he warned that more people, including Muslims, were attracted to jahiliyya and its material comforts than to his view of Islam; jahiliyya could therefore triumph over Islam. Third, no middle ground exists in what Qutb conceived as a struggle between God and Satan.All Muslims-as he defined them-therefore must take up arms in this fight.Any Muslim who rejects his ideas is just one more nonbeliever worthy of destruction.13

Bin Ladin shares Qutb’s stark view, permitting him and his followers to rationalize even unprovoked mass murder as righteous defense of an embattled faith. Many Americans have wondered, “Why do ‘they’ hate us?” Some also ask, “What can we do to stop these attacks?”

Bin Ladin and al Qaeda have given answers to both these questions. To the first, they say that America had attacked Islam; America is responsible for all conflicts involving Muslims. Thus Americans are blamed when Israelis fight with Palestinians, when Russians fight with Chechens, when Indians fight with Kashmiri Muslims, and when the Philippine government fights ethnic Muslims in its southern islands. America is also held responsible for the governments of Muslim countries, derided by al Qaeda as “your agents.” Bin Ladin has stated flatly, “Our fight against these governments is not separate from our fight against you.”14 These charges found a ready audience among millions of Arabs and Muslims angry at the United States because of issues ranging from Iraq to Palestine to America’s support for their countries’ repressive rulers.

Bin Ladin’s grievance with the United States may have started in reaction to specific U.S. policies but it quickly became far deeper. To the second question, what America could do, al Qaeda’s answer was that America should abandon the Middle East, convert to Islam, and end the immorality and godlessness of its society and culture: “It is saddening to tell you that you are the worst civilization witnessed by the history of mankind.” If the United States did not comply, it would be at war with the Islamic nation, a nation that al Qaeda’s leaders said “desires death more than you desire life.”15  …”

http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report_Ch2.htm

Mosque of Mischief, Mundus Volt Decipi

“…We keep hearing that the only issue at hand is whether building the Ground Zero Mosque is legal or not. We keep hearing that opposing this mosque is un-American and makes us just like the enemy. In short, those who oppose a mosque are bigots.

This is, of course, a tactic employed by the left to narrow the debate, a tactic used to deny the very existence of Jihad. It’s also a way of smearing those who want to know more about the ideology of Imam Rauf and to find out if this mosque is terror-financed.

Questions: If Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is revealed as an Islamist supremacist and the financing as dirty money, would it make a difference to those who support the building of the mosque?

If it makes no difference that Rauf is an Islamist who wants America to become Sharia compliant, then you are enabling Salafist Islam, an ideology that is, at the core, dedicated to the eradication of Western civilization.

If it does make a difference then we should exercise due diligence and investigate Rauf and the already murky financing behind the mosque? …”

http://www.seraphicpress.com/archives/2010/08/mosque_of_misch.php

Sharia

“…Sharia (شريعة Šarīʿa; [ʃaˈriːʕa], “way” or “path”) is the sacred law of Islam. All Muslims believe Sharia is God’s law, but they have differences among themselves as to exactly what it entails.[1] Modernists, traditionalists and fundamentalists all hold different views of Sharia, as do adherents to different schools of Islamic thought and scholarship. Different countries and cultures have varying interpretations of Sharia as well.

Muslims believe all Sharia is derived from two primary sources, the divine revelations set forth in the Qur’an, and the sayings and example set by the Islamic Prophet Muhammad in the Sunnah. Fiqh, or “jurisprudence,” interprets and extends the application of Sharia to questions not directly addressed in the primary sources, by including secondary sources. These secondary sources usually include the consensus of the religious scholars embodied in ijma, and analogy from the Qur’an and Sunnah through qiyas. Shia jurists replace qiyas analogy with ‘aql, or “reason”. Where it enjoys official status, Sharia is applied by Islamic judges, or qadis. The imam has varying responsibilities depending on the interpretation of Sharia. While the term is commonly used to refer to the leader of communal prayers, the imam may also be a scholar, religious leader or political leader. Sharia deals with many topics addressed by secular law, including crime, politics and economics, as well as personal matters such as sexuality, hygiene, diet, prayer, and fasting.

Introduction (or reintroduction) of Sharia is a longstanding goal for Islamist movements in Muslim countries. Some Muslim minorities in Asia (e.g. India) have attained institutional recognition of Sharia to adjudicate their personal and community affairs. In Western countries, where Muslim immigration is more recent, Muslim minorities have introduced Sharia family law, for use in their own disputes, with varying degrees of success (e.g. Britain’s Muslim Arbitration Tribunal). Attempts to impose Sharia have been accompanied by controversy,[2][3][4][5] violence,[6][7][8][9][10][11] and even warfare (cf. Second Sudanese Civil War) [12][13][14][15].

…”

 

Pearl Harbor

“…Pearl Harbor, or Pu’uloa, is a lagoon harbor on the island of Oʻahu, Hawaiʻi, west of Honolulu. Much of the harbor and surrounding lands is a United States Navy deep-water naval base. It is also the headquarters of the U.S. Pacific Fleet. The attack on Pearl Harbor by the Empire of Japan on December 7, 1941, brought the United States into World War II. …”

“…Aircraft and midget submarines of the Imperial Japanese Navy began an attack on the U.S. The Americans had deciphered Japan’s code earlier and knew about a planned attack before it actually occurred. However, due to difficulty in deciphering intercepted messages, the Americans failed to discover Japan’s target location before the attack occurred.[6] Under the command of Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, the attack was devastating in loss of life and damage to the U.S. fleet. At 06:05 on December 7, the six Japanese carriers launched a first wave of 183 planes composed mainly of dive bombers, horizontal bombers and fighters.[7] The Japanese hit American ships and military installations at 07:51. The first wave attacked military airfields of Ford Island. At 08:30, a second wave of 170 Japanese planes, mostly torpedo bombers, attacked the fleet anchored in Pearl Harbor. The battleship Arizona was hit with an armor piercing bomb which penetrated the forward ammunition compartment, blowing the ship apart and sinking it within seconds. Overall, nine ships of the U.S. fleet were sunk and 21 ships were severely damaged. Three of the 21 would be irreparable. The overall death toll reached 2,350, including 68 civilians, and 1,178 injured. Of the military personnel lost at Pearl Harbor, 1,177 were from the Arizona. The first shots fired were from the destroyer Ward on a midget submarine that surfaced outside of Pearl Harbor; Ward sank the midget sub at approximately 06:55, about an hour before the assault on Pearl Harbor. Japan would lose 29 out of the 350 planes they attacked with. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_Harbor

Pearl Harbor

“…In Pearl Harbor were 96 vessels, the bulk of the United States Pacific Fleet. Eight battleships of the Fleet were there, but the aircraft carriers were all at sea. The Commander in Chief of the Pacific Fleet (CINCPAC) was Admiral Husband E. Kimmel. Army forces in Hawaii, including the 24th and 25th Infantry Divisions, were under the command of Lt. Gen. Walter C. Short, Commanding General of the Hawaiian Department. On the several airfields were a total of about 390 Navy and Army planes of all types, of which less than 300 were available for combat or observation purposes.

The Japanese air attack on Pearl Harbor and on the airfields of Oahu began at 0755 on December 7, 1941 and ended shortly before 1000. Quickly recovering from the initial shock of surprise, the Americans fought back vigorously with antiaircraft fire. Devastation of the airfields was so quick and thorough that only a few American planes were able to participate in the counterattack. The Japanese were successful in accomplishing their principal mission, which was to cripple the Pacific Fleet. They sunk three battleships, caused another to capsize, and severely damaged the other four.

All together the Japanese sank or severely damaged 18 ships, including the 8 battleships, three light cruisers, and three destroyers. On the airfields the Japanese destroyed 161 American planes (Army 74, Navy 87) and seriously damaged 102 (Army 71, Navy 31).

The Navy and Marine Corps suffered a total of 2,896 casualties of which 2,117 were deaths (Navy 2,008, Marines 109) and 779 wounded (Navy 710, Marines 69). The Army (as of midnight, 10 December) lost 228 killed or died of wounds, 113 seriously wounded and 346 slightly wounded. In addition, at least 57 civilians were killed and nearly as many seriously injured.

The Japanese lost 29 planes over Oahu, one large submarine (on 10 December), and all five of the midget submarines. Their personnel losses (according to Japanese sources) were 55 airmen, nine crewmen on the midget submarines, and an unknown number on the large submarines. The Japanese carrier task force sailed away undetected and unscathed.

On December 8, 1941, within less than an hour after a stirring, six-minute address by President Franklin D. Roosevelt, Congress voted, with only one member dissenting, that a state of war existed between the United States and Japan, and empowered the President to wage war with all the resources of the country.

Four days after Pearl Harbor, December 11, 1941, Germany and Italy declared war on the United States. Congress, this time without a dissenting vote, immediately recognized the existence of a state of war with Germany and Italy, and also rescinded an article of the Selective Service Act prohibiting the use of American armed forces beyond the Western Hemisphere. …”

http://www.worldwar2history.info/Pearl-Harbor/

Wahhabi

“…Wahhabi (Arabic: Al-Wahhābīyya‎ الوهابية) or Wahhabism is a conservative Sunni Islamic sect based on the teachings of Muhammad ibn Abd-al-Wahhab, an 18th century scholar from what is today known as Saudi Arabia, who advocated to purge Islam of what he considered innovations in Islam. Wahhabism is the dominant form of Islam in Saudi Arabia.[1] It is often referred to as a “sect”[1] or “branch”[2] of Islam, though both its supporters and its opponents[3] reject such designations. It has developed considerable influence in the Muslim world through the funding of mosques, schools and other means from Persian Gulf oil wealth.[4]

The primary doctrine of Wahhabi is Tawhid, or the uniqueness and unity of God.[5] Ibn Abdul Wahhab was influenced by the writings of Ibn Taymiyya and questioned medieval interpretations of Islam, claiming to rely on the Qur’an and the Hadith.[5] He preached against a “perceived moral decline and political weakness” in the Arabian Peninsula and condemned idolatry, the popular cult of saints, and shrine and tomb visitation.[5]

The term “Wahhabi” (Wahhābīya) was first used by opponents of ibn Abdul Wahhab.[2] It is considered derogatory by the people it is used to describe, who prefer to be called “unitarians” (Muwahiddun).[6]

The terms “Wahhabi”, “Salafi” (and also sometimes Ahle Hadith) are often used interchangeably, but Wahhabi has also been called “a particular orientation within Salafism”, [2] an orientation some consider ultra-conservative. [7][8] …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahhabi

DAY OF INFAMY 2001

Ground Zero mosque modeled after notorious 9/11 mosque?

Founder of hijackers’ D.C. worship center partners with N.Y. imam pushing shariah

“…The New York imam behind the Ground Zero mosque has struck a partnership with the founder of the so-called 9/11 mosque in the Washington suburbs that gave aid and comfort to some of the 9/11 hijackers, WND has learned.

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf counts the lead trustee of the Dar al-Hijrah Islamic Center among partners in his Cordoba Initiative, which features a 13-story mosque and a “cultural center” for his project to bring shariah, or Islamic law, to America.

Families of 9/11 victims oppose construction of the proposed site so close to Ground Zero.

Jamal Barzinji, one of the founders of the radical Muslim Brotherhood in America, also founded Dar al-Hijrah in Falls Church, Va., which is run by the pro-jihad Brotherhood. The mosque has been tied to numerous terrorism plots, including the 9/11 attacks.

The dots are finally being connected! Find out what Islam has planned for you: Get “Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That’s Conspiring to Islamize America.”

In December 2008, the Brotherhood’s U.S. think tank — the International Institute of Islamic Thought, or IIIT – hosted Rauf. During their meeting, IIIT’s leadership, including Barzinji, “pledged cooperation and support” for Rauf’s project, according to this screenshot of the description of the event from IIIT’s scrubbed Web archives.

Rauf’s partner Barzinji is a founder and director of IIIT, which is under active federal investigation for funneling funds to Palestinian terrorists. Its Herndon, Va., offices were raided by federal agents after 9/11.

The U.S. government has accused Barzinji of being “closely associated” with the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Hamas and other terrorist organizations. He has not been charged with a crime, however. …”

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=194617

SAUDI ARABIA’S EXPORT OF RADICAL ISLAM

by Adrian Morgan

http://www.sullivan-county.com/x/fox_imm.htm

Ground Zero mosque debate swirls in world capitals

The Ground Zero mosque debate is garnering increased attention in the world press, with Muslims coming down on both sides of the proposed center two blocks from the former World Trade Center.

“…Abd Al-Rahman Al-Rashed, general manager of Al-Arabiya television, also criticized the project in a column titled “A House of Worship or a Symbol of Destruction?” in the Arab daily A-Sharq Al-Awsat on Sunday.

“Muslims do not aspire for a mosque next to the September 11 cemetery,” Mr. Al-Rashed wrote. He added that “the mosque is not an issue for Muslims, and they have not heard of it until the shouting became loud between the supporters and the objectors, which is mostly an argument between non-Muslim US citizens!”

Shakib Bin-Makhlouf, president of the Federation of Islamic Organizations in Europe, told Arab News that he supports the proposed Islamic center and appreciated President Obama coming out in support of it. “Islam has nothing to do with the events that happened on 9/11,” Mr. Bin-Makhlouf told the agency. “Unfortunately, the media has contributed in tying terrorism to Islam. When a non-Muslim commits an act of terror, no one refers to his religion.”

As the so-called “Ground Zero Mosque” has turned into a political debating ground, it’s also become a barometer for the world to assess how America treats Muslims. One British blogger suggested that the mosque is evidence that America is experiencing the same “Islamitization” allegedly happening in Europe, where many Europeans worry that Muslims are gaining undue influence. In a pointed summary of the project, Qatar-based newspaper Al Jazeera writes:

Critics say it would be inappropriate to build a mosque on the “hallowed ground” of Ground Zero.

Yet there is already a mosque two blocks north of the Cordoba House site, Masjid Manhattan, which has been open since 1970.

As several commentators have pointed out, there is also a strip club – New York Dolls – just one block north of the mosque site. No one has complained about that profaning of the sacred. …”

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Andrew McCarthy–The Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotaged America–Videos

Stealth Jihad–Terror From Within–Videos

Steve Emerson, Executive Director of The Investigative Project on Terrorism Will Release Explosive Information of Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf,The Promoter of The Ground Zero Mosque, Where He Supports Extreme Radical Religious Fanatics Including Moslem Brotherhood and Saudi Wahhabi Islam!

Steve Emerson–American Jihad: The Terrorist Living Among Us–Videos

Robert Spencer–Stealth Jihad–Videos

Robert Spencer–The Truth About Muhammad–Videos

Terrorists Among Us: Jihad in America–Videos

Obsession: Radical Islams War Against the West–Videos

Terrorists Among Us: Jihad in America–Videos

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

Steve Emerson, Executive Director of The Investigative Project on Terrorism Will Release Explosive Information of Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf,The Promoter of The Ground Zero Mosque, Where He Supports Extreme Radical Religious Fanatics Including Moslem Brotherhood and Saudi Wahhabi Islam!

Posted on August 18, 2010. Filed under: Communications, Cult, Culture, Demographics, Economics, Federal Government, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, Language, Law, Life, People, Philosophy, Politics, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Religion, Resources, Taxes, Technology, Uncategorized, Video, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , |

 Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf.jpg

Imam Rauf

World Trade Center Attacks

Saudi Arabia-Exporter & Financier Of Wahabi Terrorism Around The World 1/2

Saudi Arabia-Exporter & Financier Of Wahabi Terrorism Around The World 2/2

The Third Jihad: Radical Islam vs. Human Rights

Muslim Brotherhood – From Wahhabi Islam To Islamic Jihad – 1/2

Muslim Brotherhood – From Wahhabi Islam To Islamic Jihad – 2/2

Inside Story – The Muslim Brotherhood – 26 Feb 08 – Part 1

Inside Story – The Muslim Brotherhood – 26 Feb 08 – Part 2

SAUDI ROYALS MAKE PACT WITH WAHHABI ISLAM TO EXPORT TERROR

Radical Islam: Saudi Wahhabism responsible for worldwide terror

Of Mosques and Men: Reflections on the Ground Zero Mosque

No mosque at Ground Zero

Last Tuesday, August 17th on Bill Bennett’s Morning in America talk radio show guest Steve Emerson disclosed that next week he will release  information based on lecture audio tapes over ten years of Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf.

Podcast of Steve Emerson Interview

http://media.townhall.com/townhall/bennett/SteveEmerson2.mp3

Imam Rauf, the cleric of the planned ground zero mosque in New York City, and often described as a ” moderate Moslem”  makes comments supportive of extreme radical religious fanatics including the Moslem Brotherhood and Saudi Wahhabi Islam.

Fifteen of the nineteen September 11, 2001 terrorists were Saudi nationals of  Wahhabi Islam.

Also, about 80% of the funding for new mosques in the United States come from Saudi Wahhabi Islam.

Big old media broadcasters (BOMB) including major television networks as well as print media, newspapers and magazines continue to defend the so-called “moderate Moslem” Imam Rauf and frame the ground zero mosque issue as one of religious toleration.

According to Emerson, Iman Rauf is a wolf in sheep’s clothing and an apologist for extreme radical Islam.

Big old media broadcasters (BOMB) fails to investigate the who, what, when, why behind the building of a radical mosque just three blocks from ground zero, the site of the World Trade Center.

This reminds many of the same unwillingness of BOMB to investigate the friends and background of Barack Obama during the 2008 Presidential campaign.

Instead it was new media including Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Fox News, together with talk radio show hosts Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, Michael Savage, and Laura Ingraham just to name a few and bloggers such as Michelle Malkin who continually exposed the progressive radical friends including Bill Ayers, Reverend Wright, and Rashid Khalidi and many others.

Barack Obama Friends Sean Hannity Special

While  ruling elite intellectuals and media are blind to the religious fanatics of Islam and their threat to the United States of America, the American people are not and overwhelmingly oppose the building of a mosque at ground zero.

Next Monday the American people will be listening to Bill Bennett’s Morning In America talk radio show and Steve Emerson’s revelations about Iman Raud.

Bill Bennett’s Morning in America

http://www.billbennett.com/

“..I]t has become abundantly clear in the second half of the twentieth century that Western Man has decided to abolish himself. Having wearied of the struggle to be himself, he has created

his own boredom out of his own affluence,
his own impotence out of his own erotomania,
his own vulnerability out of his own strength;

himself blowing the trumpet that brings the walls of his own city tumbling down, and, in a process of auto-genocide, convincing himself that he is too numerous, and labouring accordingly with pill and scalpel and syringe to make himself fewer in order to be an easier prey for his enemies; until at last, having educated himself into imbecility, and polluted and drugged himself into stupefaction, he keels over a weary, battered old brontosaurus and becomes extinct. …”

~Malcome Muggeride, from his essay “Jesus: The Man Who Lives,” in Seeing Through the Eye: Malcolm Muggeridge on Faith, ed. Cecil Kuhne (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2005), 16.

Has America Had It? Malcolm Muggeridge

 

Background Articles and Videos

Steven Emerson Discusses Recent Terrorist Handbook

  

Militant Islam in the US – Steven Emerson (1 of 7)

The Investigative Project on Terrorism

Militant Islam in the US – Steven Emerson (2 of 7)

Militant Islam in the US – Steven Emerson (3 of 7)

Militant Islam in the US – Steven Emerson (4 of 7)

Militant Islam in the US – Steven Emerson (5 of 7)

Militant Islam in the US – Steven Emerson (6 of 7)

Militant Islam in the US – Steven Emerson (7 of 7)

http://www.investigativeproject.org/

Steve Emerson

Steven Emerson, is an American journalist and author, who writes about national security, terrorism, and Islamic extremism.

Emerson is the author of six books, and co-author of two more. His television documentary Jihad in America won the 1994 George Polk Award for best Television Documentary, and top prize for best investigative reporting from Investigative Reporters and Editors. He is also the Executive Director of the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT), a data-gathering center on Islamist groups.[1][2] Emerson frequently testifies before Congressional committees on al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, and other terrorist organizations.[3] …”

“…

Emerson is also the founder and Executive Director of The Investigative Project, a large intelligence archive on Islamist groups around the world.[2] He started the Project in 1995, after the broadcast of Jihad in America. Since September 2001, Emerson has testified before committees of both houses of Congress many times on terrorist funding and on the operational structures of groups including al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, and Islamic Jihad.[2] He has also given interviews debunking 9/11 conspiracy theories, and is a contributing expert to the Counterterrorism Blog.[31]

 
“…Emerson has been referred to by The New York Times as “an expert on intelligence”, and by the New York Post as “the nation’s foremost journalistic expert on terrorism”.[32][33]

Richard Clarke, former head of counter-terrorism for the United States National Security Council, said of Emerson:

“I think of Steve as the Paul Revere of terrorism … We’d always learn things [from him] we weren’t hearing from the FBI or CIA, things which almost always proved to be true.”[34]

In March 2004, Newsweek ran an article entitled “How Clarke ‘Outsourced’ Terror Intel; the Former Counterterrorism Chief Tapped a Private Researcher to Develop Intelligence on Al-Qaeda. The Disclosure Sheds New Light on White House Frustrations with the FBI”. The article detailed the high level of reliance Clarke placed on Emerson’s information, in lieu of that of the FBI.[35] …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Emerson

Raheel Raza: Muslim mischief in Manhattan

By RAHEEL RAZA and TAREK FATAH

“…New York currently boasts at least 30 mosques so it’s not as if there is pressing need to find space for worshippers. The fact we Muslims know the idea behind the Ground Zero mosque is meant to be a deliberate provocation to thumb our noses at the infidel. The proposal has been made in bad faith and in Islamic parlance, such an act is referred to as “Fitna,” meaning “mischief-making” that is clearly forbidden in the Koran.

The Koran commands Muslims to, “Be considerate when you debate with the People of the Book” – i.e., Jews and Christians. Building an exclusive place of worship for Muslims at the place where Muslims killed thousands of New Yorkers is not being considerate or sensitive, it is undoubtedly an act of “fitna.” …”

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/muslims-261529-mosque-understand.html

Wahhabi

“…Wahhabi (Arabic: Al-Wahhābīyya‎ الوهابية) or Wahhabism is a conservative Sunni Islamic sect based on the teachings of Muhammad ibn Abd-al-Wahhab, an 18th century scholar from what is today known as Saudi Arabia, who advocated to purge Islam of what he considered innovations in Islam. Wahhabi Muslims advocate hateful material; they discourage one another from building relations with non-Muslims and ‘western countries’ (source?).

Wahhabism is the dominant form of Islam in Saudi Arabia.[1] It is often referred to as a “sect”[1] or “branch”[2] of Islam, though both its supporters and its opponents[3] reject such designations. It has developed considerable influence in the Muslim world through the funding of mosques, schools and other means from Persian Gulf oil wealth.[4]

The primary doctrine of Wahhabi is Tawhid, or the uniqueness and unity of God.[5] Ibn Abdul Wahhab was influenced by the writings of Ibn Taymiyya and questioned medieval interpretations of Islam, claiming to rely on the Qur’an and the Hadith.[5] He preached against a “perceived moral decline and political weakness” in the Arabian Peninsula and condemned idolatry, the popular cult of saints, and shrine and tomb visitation.[5]

The term “Wahhabi” (Wahhābīya) was first used by opponents of ibn Abdul Wahhab.[2] It is considered derogatory by the people it is used to describe, who prefer to be called “unitarians” (Muwahiddun).[6]

The terms “Wahhabi”, “Salafi” (and also sometimes Ahle Hadith) are often used interchangeably, but Wahhabi has also been called “a particular orientation within Salafism”, [2] an orientation some consider ultra-conservative. [7][8] …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahhabi

What is a Wahhabi and What is Wahhabism?

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

An Affront and Threat To The American People–Ground Zero Mosque and Community Center

Steve Emerson, Executive Director of The Investigative Project on Terrorism Will Release Explosive Information of Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf,The Promoter of The Ground Zero Mosque, Where He Supports Extreme Radical Religious Fanatics Including Moslem Brotherhood and Saudi Wahhabi Islam!

Steve Emerson–American Jihad: The Terrorist Living Among Us–Videos

Robert Spencer–Stealth Jihad–Videos

Robert Spencer–The Politically Incorrect Guide To Islam–Videos

Terrorists Among Us: Jihad in America–Videos

Obsession: Radical Islams War Against the West–Videos

Just Because You Can Build A Mosque At Ground Zero Does Not Mean You Should: The Two Faces of President Obama–Let Me Be Clear–I Am An Agent Provocateur!

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Memo To Bill Bennett: Economists For Your Morning In America Show: Sowell, Woods, Goodman, Higgs, Mitchell, Boskin, and Lazear

Posted on July 21, 2010. Filed under: Blogroll, College, Economics, Education, Employment, Energy, Farming, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, government, government spending, Health Care, history, Immigration, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, Monetary Policy, People, Philosophy, Politics, Raves, Regulations, Resources, Strategy, Taxes, Video | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , |

“The first lesson of economics is scarcity: There is never enough of anything to satisfy all those who want it. The first lesson of politics is to disregard the first lesson of economics.”

~Thomas Sowell

 

Bill,

A caller to your July 21, 2010 show made an excellent suggestion that in addition to having Bryon York on every Monday morning that you have economists on your show on a regular basis.

Since every day there is one or more stories in the news that an economist could easily comment upon, I suggest the following seven savvy conservative or classical liberal economists/economic historians for a  interview with you in one or more segments of your show:

Monday: Thomas Sowell

Thomas Sowell on the Housing Boom and Bust

Tuesday: Thomas E. Woods/ John C. Goodman

Keynesian Predictions vs. American History | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

John Goodman on Health Care Reform

Wednesday: Robert Higgs

Robert Higgs on C-SPAN2’s Book TV, Part 1 of 3

Thursday: Dan Mitchell

There Are too Many Bureaucrats and They Are Paid too Much

Friday: Michael Boskin/Edward Lazear

Edward Lazear and Michael Boskin — Economic Headwinds

I look forward to Bryon York’s insights on Monday morning and the above economists would take your radio show to the next level.

Better watch out Rush and Glenn.

Great Show.

Raymond

” Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidise it”

~President Ronald Reagan

Addendum

“…The most important player on Ronald Reagan’s economic team is Ronald Reagan. The person most responsible for creating the economic program that came to be known as Reaganomics is Reagan himself. For over twenty years he observed the American economy, read and studied the writings of some of the best economists in the world, including the giants of the free market economy — Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman — and he spoke and wrote on the economy, going through the rigorous mental discipline of explaining his thoughts to others. Over the years he made all the key decisions on the economic strategies he finally embraced. He always felt comfortable with his knowledge of the field and he was in command all the way. …”

~Martin Anderson, in Revolution (1988), p. 164

PS

The Presidential History of Golf

Byron York talks about liberal efforts to ‘pre-tar’ the Tea Party protests as a violent movement

 

Background Articles and Videos

Bill Bennett’s Morning in America

http://www.billbennett.com/

 

Book TV: Bill Bennett on Radio and Writing

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40aMjFjZh6A

 

In Depth: Bill Bennett

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhPa2SSfQx4

 

Thomas Sowell

http://www.tsowell.com/

“…Thomas Sowell (born June 30, 1930), is an American economist, social critic, political commentator and author. He often writes as an advocate of laissez-faire economics. He is currently a senior fellow of the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. In 1990, he won the Francis Boyer Award, presented by the American Enterprise Institute. In 2002 he was awarded the National Humanities Medal for prolific scholarship melding history, economics, and political science. In 2003, he was awarded the Bradley Prize for intellectual achievement.[1] …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Sowell

Thomas E. Woods

http://www.thomasewoods.com/

“…Thomas E. Woods, Jr. (born August 1, 1972) is an American historian and New York Times bestselling author.[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Woods

John C. Goodman

 

http://www.ncpa.org/about/john-c-goodman

 

“…John C. Goodman is a libertarian economist and the founding president of the Dallas based, conservative think-tank the National Center for Policy Analysis.[1] The Wall Street Journal called Goodman the “father of Health Savings Accounts [1]. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_C._Goodman

 

Robert Higgs

 http://www.independent.org/aboutus/person_detail.asp?id=489

 “…Robert Higgs (born 1 February 1944) is an American economist of the Austrian School and a libertarian anarchist. His writings in economics and economic history have most often focused on the causes, means, and effects of government growth. …”

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Higgs

Dan Mitchell 

http://www.cato.org/people/daniel-mitchell 

  

“…Dan Mitchell is a libertarian economist, senior fellow at the Cato Institute. He is one of the nation’s experts on the flat tax[citation needed] and has been the leading international voice in the fight to preserve tax competition, financial privacy, and fiscal sovereignty…”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_J._Mitchell

Michael J. Boskin

 

“…Michael Jay Boskin (born September 23, 1945 in New York City) is the T. M. Friedman Professor of Economics and Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University. He also is Chief Executive Officer and President of Boskin & Co., an economic consulting company.[1][2] …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Boskin

Edward Lazear

 

http://www.hoover.org/fellows/9826

 

“…Edward Paul “Ed” Lazear (born 1948) is an award-winning American economist, considered the founder of personnel economics, and was the chief economic advisor to President George W. Bush. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Lazear

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Economists

The Battle For The World Economy–Videos

Frederic Bastiat–The Law–Videos

Walter Block–Videos

Walter Block–Introduction To Libertarianism–Videos

Hunter Lewis–Where Keynes Went Wrong–Videos

Thomas DiLorenzo–The Economic Model of the Fascist State–Videos

Richard Ebeling–America’s New Road to Serfdom and the Continuing Relevance of Austrian Economics –Videos

Paul Edward Gottfried–Fascism, Anti-Fascism, and the Welfare State–Videos

David Gordon–Five Best Books on the Current Crisis–Video

David Gordon–The Confused Literature of Globalization–Videos

Friedrich Hayek–Videos

Henry Hazlitt–Economics In One Lesson–Videos

Robert Higgs–The Complex Path of Ideological Change–Videos

Robert Higgs–The Great Depression and the Current Recession–Videos

Robert Higgs–Why Are Politicians Always Trying to Scare Us?–Videos

Jörg Guido Hülsmann–The Ethics of Money Production–Videos

Jörg Guido Hülsmann–The Life and Work of Ludwig von Mises–Videos

Milton Friedman–Videos

Milton Friedman on Education–Videos

Milton Friedman–Debate In Iceland–Videos

Milton Friedman–Free To Choose–On Donahue –Videos

Israel Kirzner–On Entrepreneurship–Vidoes

Paul Krugman–Videos 

Hunter Lewis–Where Keynes Went Wrong–Videos 

Liberal Fascism–Jonah Goldberg–Videos

Ludwig von Mises–Videos

Dan Mitchell–Videos

Robert P. Murphy–Videos

Robert P. Murphy–Government Stimulus: Repeating the mistakes of the Great Depression–Videos

Gary North–Keynes and His Influence–Take The North Challenge–Videos

The Fountainhead, Atlas Shrugged and The Ideas of Ayn Rand

George Gerald Reisman–Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian–Videos

Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr–How Empires Bamboozle the Bourgeoisie–Videos

Murray Rothbard–Videos

Murray N. Rothbard–Introduction to Economics: A Private Seminar–Videos

Murray Rothbard–Libertarianism–Video

Rothbard On Keynes–Videos

Murray Rothbard– What Has Government Done to Our Money?–Videos

Peter Schiff–Videos

Schiff, Forbes and Bloomberg Nail The Financial Crisis and Recession–Mistakes Were Made–Greed, Arrogance, Stupidity–Three Chinese Curses!

Larry Sechrest–The Anticapitalists: Barbarians at the Gate–Videos

L. William Seidman on The Economic Crisis: Causes and Cures–Videos

Amity Shlaes–Videos

Julian Simon–Videos

Julian Simon–The Ultimate Resource II: People, Materials, and Environment–Videos

Thomas Sowell and Conflict of Visions–Videos

Thomas Sowell On The Housing Boom and Bust–Videos

Econ Talk With Thomas Sowell–Videos

Peter Thiel–Videos

Thomas E. Woods, Jr.–Videos

Thomas E. Woods–The Economic Crisis and The Federal Reserve–Videos

Tom Woods–Lectures On Liberty–Videos

Thomas E. Woods–The Market Economy–Videos

Tom Woods On Personal Rights and Property Ownership

Tom Woods–Smashing Myths and Restoring Sound Money–Videos

Tom Woods–Who Killed The Constitution

Tom Wright On The FairTax–Videos

Banking Cartel’s Public Relations Campaign Continues:Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke On The Record

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Is Bill Bennett A Classical Liberal, a.k.a. A Libertarian or A Neoconservative? His Listeners Would Like To Know.

Posted on July 14, 2010. Filed under: Blogroll, Books, Communications, Demographics, Economics, Education, Employment, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, government, government spending, history, Immigration, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, Monetary Policy, People, Philosophy, Politics, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Religion, Resources, Taxes, Video, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Revised and Updated December 23, 2014

“I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism.”

~President Ronald Reagan

On Wednesday, July 14, I was listening to Bill Bennett’s talk show Morning In America, currently my favorite talk radio show.

http://www.billbennett.com/pages/meetourteam/

A caller was making a comment when Bill responded that he is a “classical liberal”  and had been one for a very long time.

This surprised me for I thought he and his executive producer, Seth Leibsohn, were neoconservatives.

The conservative movement has two major wings the traditionalists and the libertarians.

I would call or label my political philosophy or views traditionalist libertarian or classical liberal or conservative.

However like Hayek, my own preference is classical liberal.

This is especially the case when I am playing with American progressives and liberals who do not have a clue as to what I am talking about.

Both wings of the conservative movement may on occasion agree with the neoconservatives and even admire and respect their writings,  however many conservatives do not consider neoconservatives to be  either new or conservative and are insulted if you call them a neocon.

Neoconservatives–Not New and Not Conservative–American Empire Interventionists

I fully supported President Bush’s response to the  Islamic religious fanatics’ terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001.

Unfortunately, President Bush was simply too slow in changing the leadership and strategy of both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars when they were not working.

Thomas Barnett: The Pentagon’s new map for war and peace

Barack Hussein Obama: Cavalier Commander-in-Chief vs. Thomas P.M. Barnett: Prescient Planner

The neoconservatives were largely responsible for the strategy for both the Afganistan and Iraq wars.

Many of Bill’s interviews with authors and experts  in the foreign policy area are identified or called, rightly or in some cases wrongly, a neoconservatives.

While I accept Bill’s answer, I still suspect he is closet neoconservative.

Your loyal audience would appreciate some amplification and clarity as to the category of your political philosophy.

UPDATE:

 Bill on July 18, 2010 in commenting upon a caller’s remark stated he was not a libertarian.

Most classical liberals and libertarians in America would equate the two.

TAKE IT TO THE LIMITS: Milton Friedman on Libertarianism

Apparently Bill is a neoconservative after all.

 I am not surprised.

Newsmakers Interview: Bill Bennett

William J. Bennett Promotes Conservative Principles

Who are the NeoConservatives?

Ron Paul Calls Out Neoconservatives By Name

The Neoconservative Agenda | John F. McManus

LewRockwell.com Podcast #28 – What is Neoconservatism?

Israeli Lobby corrupts congress and drags USA into wars

John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt – The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy

Iraq, the Neocons and the Israel Lobby – John Mearsheimer

Pat Buchanan: “Bush and the neocons” to blame for Iraq crisis, not Obama

Neoconservatists – Who They Are and Their Powers in the Government ( Documentary )

The War Party. Zionism and American NeoCon foreign policy. Part 1 of 5

The War Party. Zionism and American NeoCon foreign policy. Part 2 of 5

The War Party. Zionism and American NeoCon foreign policy. Part 3 of 5

The War Party. Zionism and American NeoCon foreign policy. Part 4 of 5

The War Party. Zionism and American NeoCon foreign policy. Part 5 of 5

SA@TAC – The Great Neo-Con: Libertarianism Isn’t ‘Conservative

SA@Takimag – Mark Levin Avoids the “Empire” Question

SA@Takimag – Axis of the Expendable: Frum vs. Limbaugh

SA@Takimag – Why Mark Levin Hates Glenn Beck

Victor Gold Speech pt1

Victor Gold Speech pt2

Victor Gold Speech pt3

Neo-cons: Invasion of the Party Snatchers Part 1

Neo-cons: Invasion of the Party Snatchers Part 2

Irving Kristol 1/6 – Father of Neoconservatism

Irving Kristol 2/6 – Father of Neoconservatism

Irving Kristol 3/6 – Father of Neoconservatism

Irving Kristol 4/6 – Father of Neoconservatism

Irving Kristol 5/6 – Father of Neoconservatism

Irving Kristol 6/6 – Father of Neoconservatism

Douglas Murray – Neoconservatism (1/3)

Douglas Murray – Neoconservatism (2/3)

Douglas Murray – Neoconservatism (3/3)

Rothbard on Neoconservatives

Rothbard on the Drug War

Rothbard on the ‘best’ US president

Rothbard on Ron Paul

 

The Current State of World Affairs | Murray N. Rothbard

 

“Neoconservatives are the boat people of the McGovern revolution.”

~Patrick J. Buchanan, Where the Right Went Wrong
 

Background Articles and Videos

The Repellent Neoconservatives

by Murray N. Rothbard

“…Once upon a time in America, there was a left and a right and a center, and within these clearly discernible segments of the ideological spectrum there were distinctly calibrated gradations. Everyone could find an ideological niche without much trouble, and knew pretty well where everyone else stood too. Everyone knew who were the good guys and bad guys, and the varying degrees of rectitude of the guys in between.

By now it is almost a cliché that the old ideological points of reference are no more; that left, right, and center cannot be identified even with a scorecard. One way of describing these changes is to say that left and right have been collapsing toward the center, that is, toward the locus of power. Interests of state have increasingly taken over, leading the “responsible” elements within each ideological group more and more to resemble one another.

We have reached the final pages of Orwell’s Animal Farm, in which the pigs, who had previously been the vanguard of the successful animal revolution against man, now walk erect and even live in the farmhouse, and “the creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from Pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.” Specifically, it has become almost impossible to distinguish “responsible” National Review conservatism from right-wing social democracy or from neoconservatism, and even, in some respects, from left-liberalism or the democratic socialism of the Robert Heilbroner variety. …”

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard231.html

A STRATEGY FOR THE RIGHT

By Murray N. Rothbard

“…So, to sum up: the problem is that the bad guys, the ruling classes, have gathered unto themselves the intellectual and media elites, who are able to bamboozle the masses into consenting to their rule, to indoctrinate them, as the Marxists would say, with “false consciousness.” What can we, the right-wing opposition, do about it?

One strategy, endemic to libertarians and classical liberals, is what we can call the “Hayekian” model, after F.A. Hayek, or what I have called “educationism.” Ideas, the model declares, are crucial, and ideas filter down a hierarchy, beginning with top philosophers, then seeping down to lesser philosophers, then academics, and finally to journalists and politicians, and then to the masses. The thing to do is to convert the top philosophers to the correct ideas, they will convert the lesser, and so on, in a kind of “trickle-down effect,” until, at last, the masses are converted and liberty has been achieved.

First, it should be noted that this trickle-down strategy is a very gentle and genteel one, relying on quiet mediation and persuasion in the austere corridors of intellectual cerebration. This strategy fits, by the way, with Hayek’s personality, for Hayek is not exactly known as an intellectual gut-fighter.

Of course, ideas and persuasion are important, but there are several fatal flaws in the Hayekian strategy. First, of course, the strategy at best will take several hundred years, and some of us are a bit more impatient than that. But time is by no means the only problem. Many people have noted, for example, mysterious blockages of the trickle. Thus, most real scientists have a very different view of such environmental questions as Alar than that of a few left-wing hysterics, and yet somehow it is always the same few hysterics that are exclusively quoted by the media. The same applies to the vexed problem of inheritance and IQ testing. So how come the media invariably skew the result, and pick and choose the few leftists in the field? Clearly, because the media, especially the respectable and influential media, begin, and continue, with a strong left-liberal bias.

More generally, the Hayekian trickle-down model overlooks a crucial point: that, and I hate to break this to you, intellectuals, academics and the media are not all motivated by truth alone. As we have seen, the intellectual classes may be part of the solution, but also they are a big part of the problem. For, as we have seen, the intellectuals are part of the ruling class, and their economic interests, as well as their interests in prestige, power and admiration, are wrapped up in the present welfare-warfare state system.

Therefore, in addition to converting intellectuals to the cause, the proper course for the right-wing opposition must necessarily be a strategy of boldness and confrontation, of dynamism and excitement, a strategy, in short, of rousing the masses from their slumber and exposing the arrogant elites that are ruling them, controlling them, taxing them, and ripping them off. …”

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/ir/Ch1.html

 

The Irrepressible Rothbard

 

 

 
 
 
 

INVADE THE WORLD

 By  Murray Rothbard

“…When Communism and the Soviet Union collapsed several years ago, it seemed evident that a massive reevaluation of American foreign policy had to get under way. For the duration of the Cold War, U.S. foreign policy was simply a bipartisan interventionist crusade against the Soviet Union, and the only differences were precisely how far the global intervention should go.

But when the Soviet Union fell apart, a rethinking seemed absolutely necessary, since what could form the basis of U.S. policy now? But among the intellectual pundits and elites, the molders of U.S. and even world opinion, virtually no rethinking has occurred at all. Except for Pat Buchanan and us paleos, U.S. foreign policy had proceeded as usual, as if the Cold War collapse never happened. How? Buchanan and the “neo-isolationists” urged that American intervention be guided strictly by American national interest. But the liberal/neocon alliance, now tighter than ever before (now that Soviet Communism, which the neocons were harder on, has disappeared), pretended to agree, and then simply and cunningly redefined “national interest” to cover every ill, every grievance, under the sun. Is someone starving somewhere, however remote from our borders? That’s a problem for our national interest. Is someone or some group killing some other group anywhere in the world? That’s our national interest. Is some government not a “democracy” as defined by our liberal-neocon elites? That challenges our national interest. Is someone committing Hate Thought anywhere on the globe? That has to be solved in our national interest.

And so every grievance everywhere constitutes our national interest, and it becomes the obligation of good old Uncle Sam, as the Only Remaining Superpower and the world’s designated Mr. Fixit, to solve each and every one of these problems. For “we cannot stand idly by” while anyone anywhere starves, hits someone over the head, is undemocratic, or commits a Hate Crime.

It should be clear that there is now virtually no foreign policy distinction between the liberals and the neocons, the Tony Lewises and Bill Safires, Commentary and the Washington Post. Wherever the problem is, the liberal-neocon pundits and laptop bombardiers are all invariably whooping it up for U.S. intervention, for outright war, or for the slippery-slope favorite of “sanctions.” Sanctions, the step-by-step escalation of intervention, is a favorite policy of the warmongers. Calling for immediate bombing or invading of Country X as soon as a grievance starts would seem excessive and even nutty to most Americans, who don’t feel the same sense of deep commitment to the U.S.A. as Global Problem-Solver as do the pundits and elites. And sanctions can temporarily slake the thirst for belligerence. And so it’s sanctions: starving the villains, cutting off transportation, trade, confiscating their property in terms of financial assets, and finally, when that doesn’t work, bombing, sending troops, etc. Troops are usually sent first as purely “humanitarian” missionaries, to safeguard the “humane” aid of the UN “peacekeepers.” But in short order, the benighted natives, irrationally turning against all this help and altruism, begin shooting at their beloved helpers, and the fat is in the fire, and the U.S. must face the prospects of sending troops who are ordered to shoot to kill. …”

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/ir/Ch34.html

Neoconservatism Versus Libertarianism

by Justin Raimondo, April 29, 2004

“…The editors of National Review led a smear campaign against conservatives and libertarians who opposed the war, deeming them “Unpatriotic Conservatives,” and yet now these same people are repeating the arguments of Patrick J. Buchanan, Lew Rockwell, myself, adopting the paleoconservatives critique of “democratic” imperialism. Like Brooks, the National Review editorial makes some minor criticisms of the Bush policy as imperialism “on the cheap,” but the main problem, as far as they are concerned, is:

“An intellectual mistake made prior to the occupation: an underestimation in general of the difficulty of implanting democracy in alien soil, and an overestimation in particular of the sophistication of what is fundamentally still a tribal society and one devastated by decades of tyranny. This was largely, if not entirely, a Wilsonian mistake. The Wilsonian tendency has grown stronger in conservative foreign-policy thought in recent years, with both benefits (idealism should occupy an important place in American foreign policy, and almost always has) and drawbacks (as we have seen in Iraq, the world isn’t as malleable as some Wilsonians would have it).”

One can hardly find anything in this with which to disagree – except to note that one of the biggest and most energetic promoters of this mistaken Wilsonian tendency has been none other than National Review. What else is one to make of Michael Ledeen’s constant paeans to the glories of what he calls “creative destruction” in the Middle East, and countless articles in that magazine urging the extension of the war into Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and beyond? Wasn’t it Rich Lowry, the editor of National Review, who infamously suggested the nuking of Mecca as a prelude to the occupation of Saudi Arabia. I suppose one could claim that the mindset of Lowry and his co-thinkers and fellow editors owes more to Dr. Strangelove than to Woodrow Wilson, but this hardly exculpatory. Second only to The Weekly Standard, none have been louder or more consistent in calling for war in the Middle East than National Review.

What is appalling is the utter dishonesty of their arguments: yesterday, Pat Buchanan was an “unpatriotic conservative” for making the very same arguments against the neoconservative’s democracy fetish as National Review now borrows and claims as its own. It was Buchanan, after all, who recently wrote:

“Bush’s world democratic revolution is Wilsonian imperialism, which contains an inherent and perhaps fatal contradiction. Imperialism means we decide the government a nation will have and how its foreign policy shall be oriented. Democracy means they decide. What do we do if we impose democracy on Iraq, and the Iraqis use their freedom to vote to throw us out and confront Israel and claim Kuwait as their long-lost province?”

Buchanan wrote that in the beginning of April, but he had been saying it long before the wisdom of the principle ever dawned on the editors of National Review. In 1999, he outlined what he called a “New Americanism”:

“We need a new foreign policy rooted neither in the Wilsonian Utopianism of the Democrat Party nor the Pax Americana of the Republican think tanks and little magazines, a policy that reflects the goodness and greatness of this Republic, but also an awareness that we were not put on this earth to lord it over other nations. The true third way is a New Americanism that puts America first, but ‘goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy,’ that defends America’s freedom, frontiers, citizens, security, and vital interests, but harbors no desire to impose our vision on any other people.” …”

http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2004/04/28/neoconservatism-versus-libertarianism/

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Collectivism: Socialism, Communism, Progressivism and Fascism

Progressivism America’s Cancer–Videos

The Battle For The World Economy–Videos

Walter Block–Videos

Thomas DiLorenzo–The Economic Model of the Fascist State–Videos

G. William Domhoff: Who Runs America–Videos

Jonah Goldberg–Liberal Fascism–Videos

Paul Edward Gottfried–Fascism, Anti-Fascism, and the Welfare State–Videos

G. Edward Griffin- On Individualism vs. Collectivism–Videos

Robert Higgs–The Complex Path of Ideological Change–Videos

Mark Levin–Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto–Videos

Jeffrey Miron–Obamaomics–Videos

Gary North–Keynes and His Influence–Take The North Challenge–Videos

George Gerald Reisman–Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian–Videos

Today’s Progressives–Obama’s Radical Socialist Democratic Party

The Racist Test for Judge Sonya Sotomayor and President Obama–Racism Unmasked!

Calling and Raising The Stakes for Race Card Players–Obama and Sotomayor

George Soros: Government Interventionist and Global Socialist–Obama’s Puppeter Master–Videos

George Soros: Barack Obama’s Money Man and Agenda Puppeter

The Cloward-Piven Strategy Of The Progressive Radical Socialists: Wrecking The U.S. Economy By Massive Government Dependence, Spending, Deficits, Debts, Taxes And Regulations!

President Barack Obama’s Role Model–President Franklin D. Roosevelt–The Worse President For The U.S. and World Economies and The American People–With The Same Results–High Unemployment Rates–Over 25 Million American Citizens Seeking Full Time Jobs Today–Worse Than The Over 13 Million Seeking Jobs During The Worse of The Great Depression!

Progressives

Progressive Radical Socialist Health Care Plan Written In Prison By Convicted Felon Richard Creamer!

Obamanomics–New Deal Progressive Radical Socialist Interventionism

Eugenics, Planned Parenthood, Population Control, and Designer Babies–Videos

The Great Depression and the Current Recession–Robert Higgs–Videos

The Obama Depression: Lessons Learned–Deja Vu!

Lord Christopher Monckton–Climate Change–Treaty–Videos

Progressive Radical Socialist Canned Criticism of American People: Danger, Profits, and Wrong Thinking

The Battle For The World Economy–Videos

Broom Budget Busting Bums: Replace The Entire Congress–Tea Party Express and Patriots–United We Stand!

Obama’s Civilian National Security Force–Youth Corp Wave–Friendly Fascism Faces–Cons–Crooks–Communists–Communities–Corps!

Obama’s Hidden Agenda and Covert Cadre of Marxists, Communists, Progressives, Radicals, Socialists–Far Left Democrats Destroying Capitalism and The American Republic

Yuri Bezmenov On KGB Soviet Propaganda and Subversion–Videos

The Bloody History of Communism–Videos

Obama Youth–Civilian National Security Force–National Socialism–Hitler Youth–Brownshirts– Redux?–Collectivism!

American Progressive Liberal Fascism–The Wave of The Future Or Back To Past Mistakes?

Today’s Progressives–Obama’s Radical Socialist Democratic Party

President Obama–Killer of The American Dream and Market Capitalism–Stop The Radical Socialists Before They Kill You!

The Progressive Radical Socialist Family Tree–ACORN & AmeriCorps–Time To Chop It Down

It Is Official–America On The Obama Road To Fascism–Thomas Sowell!

President Obama and His Keynesian Spending Cult of The Fascist Democrat Radicals–FDRs

Economists

The Battle For The World Economy–Videos

Frederic Bastiat–The Law–Videos

Walter Block–Videos

Walter Block–Introduction To Libertarianism–Videos

Yaron Brook–Videos

Thomas DiLorenzo–The Economic Model of the Fascist State–Videos

Richard Ebeling–America’s New Road to Serfdom and the Continuing Relevance of Austrian Economics –Videos

Paul Edward Gottfried–Fascism, Anti-Fascism, and the Welfare State–Videos

David Gordon–Five Best Books on the Current Crisis–Video

David Gordon–The Confused Literature of Globalization–Videos

Friedrich Hayek–Videos

Henry Hazlitt–Economics In One Lesson–Videos

Robert Higgs–The Complex Path of Ideological Change–Videos

Robert Higgs–The Great Depression and the Current Recession–Videos

Robert Higgs–Why Are Politicians Always Trying to Scare Us?–Videos

Jörg Guido Hülsmann–The Ethics of Money Production–Videos

Jörg Guido Hülsmann–The Life and Work of Ludwig von Mises–Videos

Milton Friedman–Videos

Milton Friedman on Education–Videos

Milton Friedman–Debate In Iceland–Videos

Milton Friedman–Free To Choose–On Donahue –Videos

Israel Kirzner–On Entrepreneurship–Vidoes

Paul Krugman–Videos

Liberal Fascism–Jonah Goldberg–Videos

Ludwig von Mises–Videos

Robert P. Murphy–Videos

Robert P. Murphy–Government Stimulus: Repeating the mistakes of the Great Depression–Videos

Gary North–Keynes and His Influence–Take The North Challenge–Videos

The Fountainhead, Atlas Shrugged and The Ideas of Ayn Rand

George Gerald Reisman–Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian–Videos

Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr–How Empires Bamboozle the Bourgeoisie–Videos

Murray Rothbard–Videos

Murray N. Rothbard–Introduction to Economics: A Private Seminar–Videos

Murray Rothbard–Libertarianism–Video

Rothbard On Keynes–Videos

Murray Rothbard– What Has Government Done to Our Money?–Videos

Peter Schiff–Videos

Schiff, Forbers and Bloomberg Nail The Financial Crisis and Recession–Mistakes Were Made–Greed, Arrogance, Stupidity–Three Chinese Curses!

Larry Sechrest–The Anticapitalists: Barbarians at the Gate–Videos

L. William Seidman on The Economic Crisis: Causes and Cures–Videos

Amity Shlaes–Videos

Julian Simon–Videos

Julian Simon–The Ultimate Resource II: People, Materials, and Environment–Videos

Thomas Sowell and Conflict of Visions–Videos

Thomas Sowell On The Housing Boom and Bust–Videos

Econ Talk With Thomas Sowell–Videos

Peter Thiel–Videos

Thomas E. Woods, Jr.–Videos

Thomas E. Woods–The Economic Crisis and The Federal Reserve–Videos

Tom Woods–Lectures On Liberty–Videos

Thomas E. Woods–The Market Economy–Videos

Tom Woods On Personal Rights and Property Ownership

Tom Woods–Smashing Myths and Restoring Sound Money–Videos

Tom Woods–Who Killed The Constitution

Tom Wright On The FairTax–Videos

Banking Cartel’s Public Relations Campaign Continues:Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke On The Record

 

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

William J. Bennett–The Great Books–Videos

Posted on June 22, 2010. Filed under: Blogroll, Books, Comedy, Communications, Culture, Federal Government, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, history, Law, liberty, Life, Links, People, Philosophy, Politics, Raves, Religion, Resources, Video, Wisdom | Tags: , , |

Bill Bennett on The Great Books: Introduction (1 of 5)

Bill Bennett on The Great Books: Introduction (2 of 5)

Bill Bennett on The Great Books: Introduction (3 of 5)

Bill Bennett on The Great Books: Introduction (4 of 5)

Bill Bennett on The Great Books: Introduction (5 of 5)

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Michael Barone–Our First Revolution–Videos

Posted on April 13, 2010. Filed under: Blogroll, Communications, Culture, Demographics, Economics, Employment, Entertainment, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, Health Care, history, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, Medicine, Monetary Policy, People, Philosophy, Politics, Psychology, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Science, Security, Strategy, Taxes, Technology, Video, War, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , |

Michael Barone

Why Did You Write The Book “Our First Revolution”

What Was Glorious About The Glorious Revolution?

The Causes of The Glorious Revolution

Religious Tolerance and the Glorious Revolution

Where Did The Idea of a “Bill of Rights” Come From

How the founders differed from the English Bill of Rights

Book TV: Michael Barone, “The Almanac of American Politics”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1ynJjX6Fjk

Michael Barone – Part 1

Michael Barone – Part 2

Define ’09: Michael Barone

“…Michael Barone, senior writer and columnist for U.S. News & World Report, Fox News commentator and a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, delivered the annual Donald J. Sutherland Lecture at Hofstra University, speaking on “The 2008 Elections: Are Americans Moving to the Left?” on Thursday, March 5, 2009 …”

Michael Barone & Ramesh Ponnuru On Conservatism and Barack Obama

NRA News: Michael Barone Of Fox News With Cam Edwards

American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research

SCHOLARS & FELLOWS

Michael Barone

Resident Fellow

http://www.aei.org/scholar/128

Today on  Bill Bennett’s Morning America talk radio show, Bill broadcast an excellent pre-recorded  interview with Michael Barone that I hope he will consider repeating again Wednesday and post on YouTube for those who missed the interview.

http://www.billbennett.com/

Background Articles and Videos

Michael Barone

“….Michael Barone (born 1944 in Highland Park, Michigan) is an American political analyst, pundit and journalist. He is best known for being the principal author of The Almanac of American Politics, a reference work concerning US governors and federal politicians, and published biennially by National Journal. Barone is also a regular commentator on United States elections and political trends for the Fox News Channel. In April 2009, Barone joined the Washington Examiner, leaving his position of 18 years at US News and World Report[1]. He is based at the American Enterprise Institute as a resident fellow[2].

Barone is a Senior Political Analyst for the Washington Examiner, where he writes a twice weekly column and contributes to their Beltway Confidential blog. He is also a frequent contributor during Fox News Channel’s election coverage. His political views are generally conservative. Barone has said he is not a religious believer, although he is sympathetic to and respectful of socially conservative believers.

His commentary has been concerned with the topic of immigration. Perhaps partly as a result of being a descendant of Italian immigrants, Barone takes an optimistic view of contemporary immigration into the US. He says that Hispanic immigration has parallels to the Italian experience and that, given the right circumstances, that current and future Hispanic and other immigrants can become Americanized and assimilated, just as the Italians were.

He is the author of several books:

  • Our Country: The Shaping of America from Roosevelt to Reagan (Free Press, 1990)
  • The New Americans: How the Melting Pot can work Again (Regnery Publishing, 2001)
  • Hard America, Soft America: Competition vs. Coddling and the Battle for the Nation’s Future (Crown Forum, 2004)
  • Our First Revolution: The Remarkable British Upheaval that Inspired America’s Founding Fathers (Crown Publishers, 2007), a history of the Glorious Revolution of 1688 and how it led to the American Revolution. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Barone_(pundit)

What 1946 Can Tell Us About 2010

By Michael Barone Tuesday, April 6, 2010

It is interesting to look back at the biggest Republican victory of the last 80 years, the off-year election of 1946. What’s similar and what’s different today?

“…Recent polls tell me that the Democratic Party is in the worst shape I have seen during my 50 years of following politics closely. So I thought it would be interesting to look back at the biggest Republican victory of the last 80 years, the off-year election of 1946. Republicans in that election gained 13 seats in the Senate and emerged with a 51–45 majority there, the largest majority that they enjoyed between 1930 and 1980. And they gained 55 seats in the House, giving them a 246–188 majority in that body, the largest majority they have held since 1930. The popular vote for the House was 53% Republican and 44% Democratic, a bigger margin than Republicans have won ever since. And that’s even more impressive when you consider that in 1946 Republicans did not seriously contest most seats in the South. In the 11 states that had been part of the Confederacy, Democrats won 103 of 105 seats and Republicans won only 2 seats in east Tennessee. In the 37 non-Confederate states, in contrast, Republicans won 246 of 330 seats, compared to only 85 for Democrats.

There are some intriguing similarities between the political situation in 1946 and the political situation today. …”

http://www.american.com/archive/2010/april/what-1946-can-tell-us-about-2010

Roger L. Simon and Michael Barone

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NGp5J32d68&feature=related

Michael Barone Interview

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Philip Bobbitt–Terror and Consent–Videos

Patrick J. Buchanan–Churchill, Hitler, and The Unnecessary War–Videos

Joseph J. Ellis–His Excellency: George Washington–Videos

Milton Friedman–Free To Choose–On Donahue –Videos

Jonah Goldberg–Liberal Fascism–Videos

Peter Huber–The Bottomless Well–Videos

Donald Kagan–On The Origins Of War–Videos

George Lakoff–Videos

Mark Levin–Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto–Videos

Andrew C. McCarthy–Willful Blindness–Videos

James Piereson–Camelot and The Cultural Revolution–Videos

Ayn Rand–Videos

The Fountainhead, Atlas Shrugged and The Ideas of Ayn Rand

Yaron Brook On Capitalism and Atlas Shrugged–Videos

John Stossel On Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged

Daniel Suarez–Daemon and Freedom TM–Videos

Peter Robinson–Conversations With Authors–Videos

Murry Rothbard–For A New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto–Audio Book

Murray Rothbard– What Has Government Done to Our Money?–Videos

Amity Shlaes–The Forgotten Man–Videos

Thomas Sowell and Conflict of Visions–Videos

Thomas Sowell On The Housing Boom and Bust–Videos

Marc Thiessen’s Courting Disaster–A Clear and Present Danger To The American People–President Barack Obama!

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Obama/Ayers Latest Joint Creative Writing Project: Domestic Extremism Lexicon?–Videos

Posted on May 5, 2009. Filed under: Blogroll, Communications, Economics, Immigration, Law, Links, People, Politics, Quotations, Raves, Video | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

dictionary

RULE 8

 “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.”

Rule 12

“Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”

~Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals

http://www.geocities.com/WallStreet/8925/alinsky.htm

Extremism In The Defense Of Liberty Is No Vice

Government and Liberty – Right Wing Extremism

“Crappy Nappy’s” DHS Attacks Americans…. Again!

Iraq Veterans are terrorists – Janet Napolitano

Michele Bachmann calls to question Napolitano DHS regarding right wing extremist document

Republicans take to the floor to call to question the recent Homeland Security department memo referring to conservatives as “right-wing extremists” who pose a potential threat to the security of the nation. Rep. Bachmann urges her to answer questions before Congress and potentially tender her resignation.

Bachmann: Has DHS Sec. Gone “Stark Raving Mad”?

Lou Dobbs Reports On Latest DHS Extremism Lexicon

Department of Homeland Security Calls Military Veterans “terrorist!”

Looks like the creative writing team of Obama/Ayers are at it again with a new mini-dictionary of domestic extremism.

Who better to prepare an extremist dictionary than an Alinsky community organizer and an unrepentant terrorist.

Michael Savage – DHS Monitoring “Right-Wing Extremism”

Michael Savage Files Lawsuit Against Dept. of Homeland Security Demanding Names on List 

Right-Wing Extremist DHS Document EXPOSED!

Homeland Security targets Americans, are you next?

“…Those of you who are not in any of those groups mentioned in this fascist report may be thinking it is good to watch them you need to remember what Pastor Martin Niemoller wrote in reference to the Nazis in Europe:
“When the Nazis came for the communists, I remained silent; I was not a communist.
Then they locked up the social democrats, I remained silent; I was not a social democrat.
Then they came for the trade unionists, I did not speak out; I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, I did not speak out; I was not a Jew.
When they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me.”
For warned is forearmed, and remember: history DOES repeat itself. …”

EMERGENCY; Warning to All U.S.A. Citizens – Obama and Ayers

Napolitano Defends DHS’s Right-Wing Extremist Threat Report & Release of Terror Interrogation Memos

Some of definitions in the domestic extremism dictionary appear to describe citizens exercising their rights of free speech and assembly at Tea Parties:

aboveground (U//FOUO) A term used to describe extremist groups or individuals who operate overtly and portray themselves as
law-abiding.

alternative media (U//FOUO) A term used to describe various information sources that provide a forum for interpretations of events and issues that differ radically from those presented in mass media products and outlets.

anti-immigration extremism
(U//FOUO) A movement of groups or individuals who are vehemently opposed to illegal immigration, particularly along the U.S. southwest border with Mexico, and who have been known to advocate or engage in criminal activity and plot acts of violence and terrorism to advance their extremist goals. They are highly critical of the U.S. Government’s response to illegal immigration and oppose government programs that are designed to extend “rights” to illegal aliens, such as issuing driver’s licenses or national identification cards and providing in-state tuition, medical benefits, or public education.

decentralized terrorist movement
(U//FOUO) A movement of groups or individuals who pursue shared ideological goals through tactics of leaderless resistance independent of any larger terrorist organization.

leaderless resistance
(U//FOUO) A strategy that stresses the importance of individuals and small cells acting independently and anonymously outside formalized organizational structures to enhance operational security and avoid detection. It is used by many types of domestic extremists.

patriot movement (U//FOUO)

A term used by rightwing extremists to link their beliefs to those commonly associated with the American Revolution. The patriot movement primarily comprises violent antigovernment groups such as militias and sovereign citizens.
(also: Christian patriots, patriot group, Constitutionalists, Constitutionist)

rightwing extremism (U//FOUO)

 A movement of rightwing groups or individuals who can be broadly divided into those who are primarily hate-oriented, and those who are mainly antigovernment and
reject federal authority in favor of state or local authority. This term also may refer to rightwing extremist movements that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.
(also known as far right, extreme right)

(U) Reporting Notice:
(U) DHS encourages recipients of this document to report information concerning suspicious or criminal
activity to DHS and the FBI. The DHS National Operations Center (NOC) can be reached by telephone at
202-282-9685 or by e-mail at NOC.Fusion@dhs.gov. For information affecting the private sector and
critical infrastructure, contact the National Infrastructure Coordinating Center (NICC), a sub-element of the
NOC. The NICC can be reached by telephone at 202-282-9201 or by e-mail at NICC@dhs.gov. The FBI
regional phone numbers can be found online at http://www.fbi.gov/contact/fo/fo.htm. When available,
each report submitted should include the date, time, location, type of activity, number of people and type of
equipment used for the activity, the name of the submitting company or organization, and a designated
point of contact.
(U) For comments or questions related to the content or dissemination of this document, please contact the
DHS/I&A Production Branch at IA.PM@hq.dhs.gov, IA.PM@dhs.sgov.gov, or IA.PM@dhs.ic.gov.

http://www.tdbimg.com/files/2009/04/30/-hsra-domestic-extremism-lexicon_165213935473.pdf

If you blog about the Tea Parties, call talk radio shows or host a talk radio show,  you are definitely a member of the  above-ground alternative media.

You are certainly not part of big mass media aka government propaganda.

If you are an individual organizing and/or attending Tea Party events you may be considered part of a leaderless resistence or be a member of the decentralized terrorist movement.

Remember the professional politicians of both political parties  in Washington D.C. are terrorified that 3 million plus American people show up on July 4, 2009 in Washington, D.C.!

If you are like 3 out of 4 Americans who oppose illegal immigration and amnesty and are critical of the Federal Government’s unwillingness to enforce immigration laws you are a anti-immigration extremist.

If you oppose issuing driver’s licenses or national identification cards and providing in-state tuition, medical benefits, or public education for illegal immigrants, you are definitely an anti-immigration extremist.

If you are dedicated to a single issue such as pro-life and oppose abortion, you are now a right-wing extremist.

If you are a strict constructionist regarding the US constitution you are part of the patriot movement.

If you home school your children and have them read Bill Bennett’s and John T.E. Cribb’s The American Patriot’s Almanic, you and your children are part of the patriot movement.

The American Patriot’s Almanac by William J. Bennett and John T.E. Cribb

“…Best-selling author and educator Dr. William J. Bennett is a master of the story that is the United States. And in The American Patriot’s Almanac, Bennett distills the American drama into three hundred sixty-five entries-one for each day of the year. Fascinating in its detail and singular in its grasp of the big themes, Bennett’s Almanac will make anyone a fan of history, assembling even some of the most obscure details. Even better, it will make of everyone a patriot. …”

If you describe your activities as part of the Second American Revolution you are also part of the patriot movement and are a right-wing extremist.

Remember any one to the right of President Obama’s radical socialist Democrat Party is considered to be right-wing.

If you disagree with President Obama, you are obviously a right-wing extremist.

The American people are all right-wing extremists now.

The Obama/Ayers writing team are using the tactics of radical socialist Saul Alinsky:

Voters Beware: The Radical Rules of Saul Alinsky and Leftist Democrats

How do you respond to the lastest Obama/Ayers creative writing project?

Join the Second American Revolution

we_the_people

The Meaning of Independence Day

Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights

Second American Revolution–Tea Party Celebrations–Washington Fair–July 4, 2009–An Open Invitation To The American People

American People’s Plan = 6 Month Tax Holiday + FairTax = Real Hope + Real Change!–Millions To March On Washington D.C. Saturday, July 4, 2009!

Millions of Rightwing Extremists To March On Washington D.C. Fair–Celebrating Independence Day Tea Parties and Chanting “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice!”

Please Spread The Message of Liberty

liberty_bell1

 “Proclaim liberty throughout the land to all its inhabitants.”

 Let Freedom Ring

Exposure is the best deterent against the lunatic left and their creative writing projects.

The Tea Party Americans are really getting on the nerves of the radical socialist Democratic Party.

The Domestic Extremism Lexicon was rescinded once the patriot’s movement above ground alternative media made the American people aware of it.

text1

Domestic Extremism Lexicon

Prepared by the Strategic Analysis Group and the Extremism and Radicalization Branch, Homeland

Environment Threat Analysis Division.

(U//FOUO) Homeland Security Reference Aids—prepared by the DHS/Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A)—provide baseline information on a variety of homeland security issues. This product is one in a series of reference aids designed to provide operational and intelligence advice and assistance to other elements of DHS, as well as state, local, and regional fusions centers. DHS/I&A intends this background information to assist federal, state, local, and tribal homeland security and law enforcement officials in conducting analytic activities. This product provides definitions for key terms and phrases that often appear in DHS analysis that addresses the nature and scope of the threat that domestic, non-Islamic extremism poses to the United States. Definitions were derived from a variety of open source materials and unclassified information, then further developed during facilitated workshops with DHS intelligence analysts knowledgeable about domestic, non-Islamic extremism in the United States.

http://www.tdbimg.com/files/2009/04/30/-hsra-domestic-extremism-lexicon_165213935473.pdf

Background Articles and Videos

Who Wrote Dreams From My Father?

By Jack Cashill

“…The public is asked to believe Obama wrote Dreams From My Father on his own, almost as though he were some sort of literary idiot savant.  I do not buy this canard for a minute, not at all.  Writing is as much a craft as, say, golf.  To put this in perspective, imagine if a friend played a few rounds in the high 90s and then a few years later, without further practice, made the PGA Tour.  It doesn’t happen. …”

“A steady attack on the white race…  served as the ballast that could prevent the ideas of personal and communal responsibility from tipping into an ocean of despair.”

As a writer, especially in the pre-Google era of Dreams, I would never have used a metaphor as specific as “ballast” unless I knew exactly what I was talking about.  Seaman Ayers most surely did. …”

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/who_wrote_dreams_from_my_fathe_1.html

Obama’s Peeps! Castro, Chavez, Alinsky and Ayers

By JB Williams

“…A few weeks ago, the Obama administration made it clear to the world, that they do not consider people like Bin Laden, or organizations like Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad or Hamas, to be “terrorists” and went so far as to rename the international “war on terror,” the “overseas contingency operation,” so as not to further offend any of these folks.

Then, his Department of Homeland Security issued a new “terror report” redefining “terrorists” to include legal American citizens openly opposed to illegal immigration, abortion, socialism, and people who trample on their First, Second, Ninth and Tenth Amendment Rights, aka, “rightwing extremists.” The Founders were “Domestic Terrorists” According to Obama’s DHS

Now, Obama Seeks Equal Partnerships in Hemisphere, namely, with Castro’s Communist Cuba and Communist thug Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, both of whom despise everything America is or ever was… and always will. …”

“…The enemy can operate right out in the open if their agenda is so extreme that it is hard for the average citizen to believe. And that is exactly where America is today.

Despite literally hundreds of anti-American signals from the new administration, most Americans remain full of “hope” for “change,” without ever grasping the very real forms of “change” taking place right before their eyes.

Obama’s peeps are not average Americans. They are run of the mill anti-Americans, of both the foreign and domestic sorts. They are his birds of a feather, and together, they are indeed “making history.”

When the average Americans catches up, and realizes that the anti-American changes underway in America are of the sort that foreign enemies of our state welcome them with open arms, they will have second thoughts about the changes they had once hoped for… …”

http://www.rightsidenews.com/200904184434/editorial/obama-s-peeps-castro-chavez-alinsky-and-ayers.html

Saul Alinsky: the Puppet Master

by Burt Prelutsky

“…Saul Alinsky, who died in 1972, at the age of 63, was a Chicago Marxist. Among his many books was one titled “Rules for Radicals,” in which he explained to his acolytes, “The most effective means are whatever will achieve the desired results.” It took Alinsky 11 words to paraphrase Karl Marx’s far more succinct “The ends justify the means.”

Alinsky, by the way, dedicated that particular book to Lucifer, whom he coyly referred to as “the first radical.”

The reason I’m bringing up Alinsky 26 years after he wound up in a place where he could personally autograph his book for Beelzebub is because his disciples are still very much with us. For instance, he just happened to be the subject of Hillary Rodham’s senior honors thesis at Wellesley College. It was such a glowing homage that, in 1968, a most appreciative Alinsky offered her a job in Chicago, but Ms. Rodham, as we all know, had bigger fish to fry. However, when she became America’s First Lady, the White House asked Wellesley to restrict access to the paper, and Wellesley wisely obliged, just as Princeton did when the Obamas requested that Michelle’s racist screed be removed from circulation.

Many people, once they grow up, would be embarrassed if people knew what they were drinking or smoking during their college days, but leftists don’t even want us to know what they were thinking.

But it wasn’t just young Ms. Rodham who had a connection to the late, unlamented Saul Alinsky. Thirteen years after the Chicago radical died, a group of his most devoted disciples hired 24-year-old Barack Obama to be a community organizer in South Chicago. …”

http://townhall.com/columnists/BurtPrelutsky/2008/09/19/saul_alinsky_the_puppet_master?comments=true

Barack Obama and Alinsky’s Rules for Psychopaths

By James Lewis

“…Alinsky’s personality fits the definition of a psychopath — someone who has no guilt or shame toward others. But Alinsky also discovered how to teach psychopathic behavior to college students. That is the key to his success: To persuade hundreds of thousands of ignorant young people that it is much more moral to be immoral. Or, as Bill Ayers famously said, “Bring the Revolution home; kill your parents.”

Bill Ayers is now a highly influential professor of education. That is not an accident; it reflects a deliberate program of radical agitation and propaganda through the school systems. If you want to know who brought down American education, Bill Ayers is part of the answer.
A lot of the Boomer Left is marked by psychopathic behavior, in politics and in the rest of life.  That is why the actions of the Left are so shocking to many of us. 
Alinsky’s disciples — including Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama — have a warlike political style. They learned politics as war from the Master. Obama is so well-trained in Alinsky tactics that he used to teach workshops on it. That is why Obama can knowingly violate Federal law against usurping the presidential power to negotiate with Iraq before ever getting elected. Actual election to head of state by the voters means nothing, just as it means nothing to Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer, who have negotiated with Syria and the Muslim Brotherhood in clear violation of law while serving in Congress. …”
Rules for Radicals

By Saul Alinsky – 1971

Saul Alinsky

“…Saul David Alinsky (January 30, 1909, Chicago, Illinois – June 12, 1972, Carmel, California) was an American community organizer and writer. He is generally considered to be the founder of modern community organizing in America, the political practice of organizing communities to act in common self-interest.[1] Alinsky is sometimes said to have coined the term “Think globally, act locally.”[2]

“…The documentary The Democratic Promise: Saul Alinsky and His Legacy,[5] states that “Alinsky championed new ways to organize the poor and powerless that created a backyard revolution in cities across America.” Many important community and labor organizers came from the “Alinsky School,” including Ed Chambers and Tom Gaudette. Alinsky formed the Industrial Areas Foundation in 1940. Chambers became its Executive Director after Alinsky died. Since its formation, hundreds of professional community and labor organizers and thousands of community and labor leaders have attended its workshops. Fred Ross, who worked for Alinsky, was the principal mentor for Cesar Chavez and Dolores Huerta.[6][7] In Hillary Clinton’s senior honors thesis at Wellesley College, Clinton noted that Alinsky’s personal efforts were a large part of his method.[8] She later noted that although she agreed with his notion of self-empowernment she disagreed with his assessment that the system could only change from the outside.[8] In her memoir, Living History, Hillary Clinton wrote that Alinsky offered her a job after she graduated from Wellesley College, but she chose instead to attend Yale Law School.Alinsky’s teachings influenced Barack Obama in his early career as a community organizer on the far South Side of Chicago.[7][8] Working for Gerald Kellman’s Developing Communities Project, Obama learned and taught Alinsky’s methods for community organizing.[7][9] Several prominent national leaders have been influenced by Alinsky’s teachings,[7] including Ed Chambers,[5] Tom Gaudette, Michael Gecan, Wade Rathke,[10][11], and Patrick Crowley.[12]

Alinsky is often credited with laying the foundation for the grassroots political organizing that dominated the 1960s.[5] Later in his life he encouraged stockholders in public corporations to lend their votes to “proxies”, who would vote at annual stockholders meetings in favor of social justice. While his grassroots style took hold in American activism, his call to stockholders to share their power with disenfranchised working poor only began to take hold in U.S. progressive (social liberalism) circles in the 1990s, when shareholder actions were organized against American corporations.

When describing power, Alinsky could be irreverent:

“Rules for Radicals” begins with an unusual tribute: “From all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins – or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom – Lucifer.”

Again, his views on power:

Alinsky advises his followers that the poor have no power and that the real target is the middle class: “Organization for action will now and in the decade ahead center upon America’s white middle class. That is where the power is. … Our rebels have contemptuously rejected the values and the way of life of the middle class. They have stigmatized it as materialistic, decadent, bourgeois, degenerate, imperialistic, war-mongering, brutalized and corrupt. They are right; but we must begin from where we are if we are to build power for change, and the power and the people are in the middle class majority.” …”

The Devil Is In the Details: Another Obama Connection You Ought to Know About

“…But had McCain really gone after Ayers AND Wright AND Alinsky-Lucifer, all at once, he would have had a strong argument that Obama was, and is, well out of the mainstream.  And then all the information about Tony Rezko, Emil Jones, and the scandal-ridden Daley machine, would be all the more compelling to reporters and voters, because, as they would have to admit, a “pattern has emerged.”

And, for that matter, let’s talk about the great state of Illinois, where three governors in the last 40 years—Otto Kerner, Dan Walker, and George Ryan—ended up not only convicted, but imprisoned.   And a fourth, incumbent Rod Blagojevich, may also end up in the clink.   That’s quite a streak of corruption. And what does Obama have to say about any of that?  And what did he know, and when did he know it?

If the McCain campaign had been on its game, its opposition researchers would have gone through every single day of Obama’s life since he first set foot in Chicago in 1987.  Everyone he met, everything he did.  And then, having amassed all that information, the McCainiacs would have made the rest of us know about it—in a sustained, organized, and unrelenting volley.

That’s how you win a presidential campaign, even amidst hard times for your party.”

http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/10/23/jpinkerton_1023/

Alinski’s Rules: Must Reading In Obama Era

By PHYLLIS SCHLAFLY

“…The organizer must “rub raw the resentments of the people of the community, fan the latent hostilities of many of the people to the point of overt expression. . . . stir up dissatisfaction and discontent.”

Alinsky trained his community organizers to adopt a “middle-class identity” and familiarity with their “values and problems.” After achieving “the priceless value of his middle-class experience,” he will “begin to dissect and examine that way of life as he never has before.”

Alinsky’s trainees are instructed to return to the suburban scene of the middle class with its variety of organizations, from PTAs to League of Women Voters, consumer groups, churches and clubs. Alinsky boasted: “With rare exceptions, our activists and radicals are products of and rebels against our middle-class society. . . . Our rebels have contemptuously rejected the values and way of life of the middle class.”

Put “Rules for Radicals” on your must-read list if you want to understand much of contemporary politics. …”

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=318470857908277

New DHS Memo Revealed

by Benjamin Sarlin

“First, the Department of Homeland Security came under fire for a memo that warned of “right-wing extremists” that that pose a danger to the First, First the Department of Homeland Security came under fire for a memo that warned of “right-wing extremists” that that pose a danger to the United States. Now, The Daily Beast publishes a new DHS memo that throws dozens more groups—Mexican separatists, black nationalists, Nordic mystics—under the bus.”
“…While the DHS offered no reason as to why the memo was recalled, the date of the decision coincides with a flap that broke out only days earlier, on March 23. Fox News found that a DHS fusion center, a satellite office used by the department to gather local intelligence on possible terrorist threats, was citing support for third-party candidates like Ron Paul or Bob Barr as a possible criteria for identifying “militia members.” It was the latest skirmish in an ongoing dispute over fusion centers, another of which had warned that Muslim advocacy groups deserved monitoring in order to block a possible conspiracy to implement Sharia law in America.

“This is just one of a series of these reports that have been leaking recently,” Mike German, policy counsel at the ACLU’s Washington DC legislative office, told The Daily Beast. “I guess I can understand the interest in making sure there is some common understanding of the terms they’re using. The problem with it obviously is the terms and descriptions are so overly broad that many people who are simply advocating for issues they believe in, or don’t even advocate but just hold opinions that are described here, would be greatly offended at being called an extremist and having their views being monitored by the government.” …”

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-04-30/who-you-calling-an-extremist/

Disagree with Obama?
Gov’t has eyes on you

By Roger Hedgecock

“…On Feb. 20, 2009, Missouri’s Department of Public Safety issued a report to all law enforcement in the state entitled “Missouri Information Analysis Center Strategic Report: The Modern Militia Movement.”

The report linked people holding conservative views on immigration, abortion, the U.N., the New World Order, etc., to dangerous and violent “militias” that Missouri law enforcement were instructed to be on guard against. Conservative opinions were demonized and made the subject of law enforcement scrutiny.

The report was leaked. National and state public reaction was strong and negative, and Missouri retracted the report and apologized.

This victory was short lived. The substance of the report is back, this time distributed to “federal, state, local, and tribal counterterrorism and law enforcement officials …” by the U.S. Department of Homeland Securityas an “assessment” dated April 7, 2009, entitled “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment.” …”

“…This report smacks of profiling and harassing American citizens based on their political views, and specifically based on their opposition to the Obama administration’s proposals.

This used to be called “democracy” and “free speech” protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution. But under Obama, “Homeland Security” has become an instrument of oppression of opposing points of view.”

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=94799

Obama’s Response to your Tea Party Movement

Pt 1 Rightwing Extremism Homeland Security Profiling Intelligence Update

Pt 2 Rightwing Extremism Homeland Security Profiling Intelligence Update

Pt 3 Rightwing Extremism Homeland Security Profiling Intelligence Update

Napolitano Comes on Morning Joe… with Conditions

Napolitano Answers Critics of DHS Extremism Report

 Homeland Security Report Upsets Veterans 

Michael Savage Files Lawsuit Against Dept. of Homeland Security Demanding Names on List

Homeland Security?

Homeland Security Checkpoint: Video Blog – Day 1

Homeland Security Checkpoint: Video Blog – Day 2

Homeland Security Checkpoint: Video Blog – Day 3

Post details: ‘Homeland Security’ Checkpoint: Day 3

https://www.checkpointusa.org/blog/index.php/2008/01/21/p83

Obama Supresses Free Speech About Bill Ayers

Obama’s terrorist connections – William Ayers

Devastating Video, Obama talks about job Ayers gave him

Terrorist Bill Ayers says: I did Black Hat SEO with Obama!

Amazing Ayers Audio Unearthed from Same Week Obama worked with him! Extremist Ayers and Obama views matched almost word for word !

Saul Alinsky Takes the White House

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

 Millions of Rightwing Extremists To March On Washington D.C. Fair–Celebrating Independence Day Tea Parties and Chanting “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice!”

Protest Out-of-Control Federal Government Spending and Taxes–Attend A Tax Day Tea Party in Your City or Town!

Second American Revolution–Tea Party Celebrations–Washington Fair–July 4, 2009–An Open Invitation To The American People

American People’s Plan = 6 Month Tax Holiday + FairTax = Real Hope + Real Change!–Millions To March On Washington D.C. Saturday, July 4, 2009!

Tea Parties Take Off In Texas–Spreading Nationwide–Are You Going To Washington Fair? Millions Celebrate The Second American Revolution–Saturday, July 4, 2009

Operation Family Freedom (OFF): Millions Celebrate Washington Fair, Saturday, July 4, 2009–The Second American Revolution

The United States is Broke!–Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Time For GM and Ford Is Now!

Voters Beware: The Radical Rules of Saul Alinsky and Leftist Democrats

Alan Keyes on Immigration

The Cost of Comprehensive Immigration Reform–McCain and Obama Are Hopeless–It is the Economy Stupid!

Presidential Candidates on Illegal Immigration, Criminal Alien Removal and Social Service Benefits

 US Immigration Videos

Why immigration will be the number 1 political issue in the 2008 Presidential Election! — Gum Balls

President Obama Delays E-Verify–Shame On You Mr. President!

One Big Awful Mistake America (OBAMA): Veterans Will Now Lead The Fight To Defeat Radical Socialism!

The Signed “Stimulus Package” Did Not Include Funding for E-Verify and Border Fence Construction–Less Jobs And Security for American Citizens

Inside the Meltdown: Who Was Withdrawing From Money Market Funds On September 16-18, 2008 and Why?

The Mother of All Bailouts–2 to 3 Trillion Dollars–$2,000,000,000–$3,000,000,000!–Rewarding Greed, Arrogance and Stupidity–Pay for Play!

Bad Government Intervention Requires Bad Government Bank-The Road Map Out Of The World Economic Crisis–Stabilize–Stimulate–Strengthen–Simultaneously!

President Obama’s Sales Pitch–Buy My Government Dependency Package–I Won The Election!–No Sale–The American People Want Their Money Back!

President Barack Obama Peddling The Government Dependency Package (GDP) and Fear Mongering The Raw Deal!

Pelosi’s Porky Pigout Poison Package–Economy Wrecker and Job Destroyer–Have A Blue Christmas 2009!

BO’s Raw Deal: Obama’s Two Year Recession and Two Year Hyperinflation–Hopeless & Small Change!

Boycott Bailedout Businesses and Banks

Ban Bailouts–Stop Inflation Now (SIN)–Stop Socialism of Losses!

The Sovereign Wealth Fund Threat: Are Chinese Communists Behind Rush In Passing Bailout Bill?

The United States is Broke!–Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Time For GM and Ford Is Now!

Recession–Recession–Recession–Scaring People–Have A Hot Dog!

It Is Official–The U.S. Economy Has Been In A Recession for 11 Months and Continuing!

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 9 so far )

The Talk Radio Audiences Revolt Against Fairness Doctrine

Posted on October 25, 2008. Filed under: Blogroll, Communications, Economics, Links, People, Politics, Rants, Regulations, Talk Radio, Video | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

 

“Do you feel lucky, well do you punk!”

 

Dirty Harry – Clint Eastwood

 

http://www.talkers.com/main/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=17&Itemid=34

 

Those Democrat and Republican members of Congress that are seriously considering bringing back the Fairness Doctrine are playing with dynamite.

Over 100 million Americans are listening to talk radio everyday.

Mess with talk radio and you will have a ten million men and women march on Congress.

Unfortunatley, many members of Congress are that arrogant and stupid to try.

Just another example of socialism–“spread the wealth around”.

Go ahead, Make my day!

Sudden Impact – “Go Ahead. Make My Day”


 

Background Articles and Videos

 

Boehner on so-called ‘Fairness Doctrine’ – 6/28/07

 

Fairness Doctrine” — Feinstein Outlawing Talk Radio

 

Debate over the Fairness Doctrine on Fox News Sunday

 

Kucinich Discusses Fairness Doctrine on Lou Dobbs

 

Accuracy in Media – Group Condemns Congressional Hypocrisy

Dem Sen On Fairness Doctrine

 

2008 UP & COMING ” POLITICAL EARTHQUAKE ( FAIRNESS DOCTRINE ) ” / PART 13

 

Rep. Pence: Fairness Doctrine and “Freedom Works”

 

Fairness Doctrine

“The Fairness Doctrine was a policy of the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) that required the holders of broadcast licenses both to present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that was (in the FCC’s view) honest, equitable, and balanced. The United States Supreme Court has upheld the Commission’s general right to enforce such a policy where channels are limited, but the courts have generally not considered that the FCC is obliged to do so.[1] The FCC has since withdrawn the Fairness Doctrine, prompting some to urge its reintroduction through either Commission policy or Congressional legislation.[2] …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine

 

Why the Fairness Doctrine is Anything But Fair

by Adam Thierer

“…If the fairness standard is reinstituted, the result will not be easier access for controversial views. It will instead be self-censorship, as stations seek to avoid requirements that they broadcast specific opposing views. With the wide diversity of views available today in the expanding broadcast system, there is a simple solution for any family seeking an alternative viewpoint or for any lawmaker irritated by a pugnacious talk-show host. Turn the dial.”

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Regulation/EM368.cfm

 

Here it comes: Sen. Bingaman heralds Fairness Doctrine return

By Michelle Malkin

“…N.M. Sen. Jeff Bingaman cheers the return of the Fairness Doctrine as a “higher calling,” via the Jim Villanucci show on KKOB.

Radio Equalizer has the scoop.

Tilling the soil for the Chicago gangland thugs… ”

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/10/22/here-it-comes-sen-bingaman-heralds-fairness-doctrine-return/

 

The history and possible revival of the Fairness Doctrine

by Nat Hentoff

“…The term “Fairness Doctrine” exemplifies what George Orwell called “Newspeak”: it uses language to mask the deleterious effects of its purported meaning. The Fairness Doctrine itself was in effect from 1949 until 1987. It required that radio broadcasts devote a reasonable amount of time to the discussion of controversial issues of public importance, and that the broadcaster do that fairly by offering reasonable opportunity for opposing viewpoints to be heard. If the Federal Communications Commission found a radio station in repeated violation of this Doctrine, it could take away the station’s license — a business form of capital punishment. …”

“…Before the Fairness Doctrine was ended, at least for the time being, in 1987 — Congressman Hinchey could yet prevail if the Democrats retake Congress — Richard Salant, head of CBS News while the Doctrine was flourishing, said to me:

Suppose the English government had told Tom Paine that he could go ahead and publish all he liked — but only if at the back of his pamphlets he also printed the Royal Governor’s views. That command, far from the implementation of free speech, would have been just the opposite. It’s a restriction of speech if, in order to be allowed to express your own views, [the government demands] you also have to present those of someone arguing on the other side.

James Madison did not have the bifurcation of free speech in mind when he submitted his draft of the First Amendment.”

http://www.thepanamanews.com/pn/v_12/issue_04/opinion_07.html

 

Group Led By Clinton’s John Podesta Outlines Assault of Conservative Radio

“…With that in mind, the left-leaning Center for American Progress published a report Thursday detailing how conservatives dominate the talk radio dial, and exactly what needs to be done legislatively for liberals to wrest control over this medium (emphasis added throughout):

  • Restore local and national caps on the ownership of commercial radio stations.
  • Ensure greater local accountability over radio licensing.
  • Require commercial owners who fail to abide by enforceable public interest obligations to pay a fee to support public broadcasting.

Imagine that.

 

For those unfamiliar with the Center, its President and CEO is none other than John Podesta, the former Chief of Staff for President Bill Clinton. And:

  • The Executive Vice President for Management is Sarah Rosen, who was also a member of the Clinton administration.
  • Senior Vice President for Development Debbie Goldberg worked for the Clinton campaign.
  • Senior Vice President and Director David Halperin was a speech writer for President Clinton.
  • Vice President of Communications Jennifer Palmieri was Clinton’s White House Deputy Press Secretary.
  • Senior Vice President for External Affairs Winnie Stachelberg worked at the Office of Management and Budget under Clinton.
  • Vice President of Finance and Operations Brad Kiley worked for the Clinton administration.
  • Ditto Peter Rundlet, Anna Soellner, Debbie Fine, and Michelle Jolin.

In reality, the staff and Senior Fellows listing of this Center reads like a Clinton administration Who’s Who. …”

http://www.newsbusters.org/node/13642

Center for American Progress

“The Center for American Progress is an American liberal political policy research and advocacy organization. Its website describes it as “…a nonpartisan research and educational institute dedicated to promoting a strong, just and free America that ensures opportunity for all.”[1]

Its President and Chief Executive Officer is John Podesta, who served as chief of staff to then U.S. President Bill Clinton. Located in Washington, D.C., the Center for American Progress has a campus outreach group, Campus Progress, and a sister advocacy organization, the Center for American Progress Action Fund. …”

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_American_Progress

 

Center for American Progress

http://www.americanprogress.org/

 

Fairness Doctrine Watch: Sen. Stabenow makes new pro-gagging noise

By Michelle Malkin

“…You know grass-roots conservatives on talk radio and in New Media are getting under the Democrats’ skin when they publicly renew their Fairness Doctrine agenda again.See.

Loud Folks, keep cranking it up. …” 

 

Shame, Cubed
Three separate reasons to be appalled, each more disgusting than the last.

By Bill Whittle

“The Drudge Report this morning led off with a link to audio of Barack Obama on WBEZ, A Chicago Public Radio station. And this time, candidate Obama was not eight years old when the bomb went off.

Speaking at a call-in radio show in 2001, you can hear Senator Obama say things that should profoundly shock any American – or at least those who have not taken the time to dig deeply enough into this man’s beliefs and affiliations.

Abandon all Hope, Ye Who Enter Here:

 

Barack Obama, in 2001:

“You know, if you look at the victories and failures of the Civil Rights movement, and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded was to vest formal rights in previously dispossessed peoples. So that I would now have the right to vote, I would now be able to sit at a lunch counter and order and as long as I could pay for it, I’d be okay, but the Supreme Court never entered into the issues of re-distribution of wealth, and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society.

“And uh, to that extent, as radical as I think people tried to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution – at least as it’s been interpreted, and Warren Court interpreted it in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties: [it] says what the states can’t do to you, says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf.

“And that hasn’t shifted, and one of the, I think, the tragedies of the Civil Rights movement was because the Civil Rights movement became so court-focused, uh, I think that there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change. And in some ways we still suffer from that.”

A caller then helpfully asks:

“The gentleman made the point that the Warren Court wasn’t terribly radical. My question is (with economic changes)… my question is, is it too late for that kind of reparative work, economically, and is that the appropriate place for reparative economic work to change place?”

Obama replies:

“You know, I’m not optimistic about bringing about major redistributive change through the courts. The institution just isn’t structured that way. [snip] You start getting into all sorts of separation of powers issues, you know, in terms of the court monitoring or engaging in a process that essentially is administrative and takes a lot of time. You know, the court is just not very good at it, and politically, it’s just very hard to legitimize opinions from the court in that regard.

So I think that, although you can craft theoretical justifications for it, legally, you know, I think any three of us sitting here could come up with a rationale for bringing about economic change through the courts.”

…”

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YmFhYzIzMGQ1Y2FlMTA4N2M1N2VmZWUzM2Y4ZmNmYmI=

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 5 so far )

Memo To Senator McCain: Turn Sarah Palin Loose

Posted on September 30, 2008. Filed under: Blogroll, Life, Links, Music, People, Politics, Raves, Video | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

The Young Divas – Turn Me Loose

 

Memo To: Senator McCain

Subject: Turn Sarah Loose 

It is time to turn Governor Sarah Palin loose on the conservative base with interviews on talk radio.

Start with the diva of conservative talk radio, Laura Ingraham.

Follow this with interviews with the following conservative and libertarian talk show hosts:

Bill Bennett

Mike Gallagher

Neal Boortz

Glenn Beck

Rush Limbaugh

Sean Hannity

Mark Levin

Michael Reagan

Dennis Miller

Monica Crowlely

John Gibson

Hugh Hewitt

Michael Medved

Dennis Prager

Michael Savage

Dr. Laura Schlessinger

If you do this you will win.

The choice is yours.

Sunny & The Sunliners “Talk To Me” (OLDIE)

 

Cream – Sunshine of your Love

Hugh Hewitt got Sarah call and Bill Bennett replayed today on his show, Morning in America:

Sarah Palin on the Hugh Hewitt Show

Great interview.

Private Palin call your Mother you little stinker!

Governor Palin call Laura Ingraham Thursday!

Your are on a roll, go down the above list.

Ronald Reagan “Morning in America”

 

Background Articles and Videos

Sarah Palin: Babies, Guns, Jesus

“…RUSH: This is Sarah Palin and her accomplishments.  Obama cannot make a speech like this.PALIN:  In serving as the team mom and coaching some basketball on the side, I got involved in the PTA and then was elected to the city council and then elected mayor of my hometown where my agenda was to stop wasteful spending and cut property taxes and put the people first! (cheers and applause)  I was then appointed ethics commissioner and chairman of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission.  And when I found corruption there, I fought it hard and I held the offenders to account. (cheers and applause)   Along with fellow reformers in the great state of Alaska, as governor, I stood up to the old politics as usual — to the special interests, to the lobbyists, the big oil companies, and the good old boy network. (cheers and applause)   When oil and gas prices went up so dramatically and the state revenues followed with that increase, I sent a large share of that revenue directly back to the people of Alaska — and we are now… (cheers and applause)   We’re now embarking on a $40 billion natural gas pipeline to help lead America to energy independence.RUSH:  She’s doing it. 
PALIN:  I signed major ethics reforms and I appointed both Democrats and independents to serve in my administration, and I championed reform, toned the abuses of earmark spending by Congress.  In fact, I told Congress, “Thanks, but no thanks,” on that Bridge to Nowhere.  If our state wanted a bridge, I said we’d build it ourselves.
RUSH:  Sarah Palin: babies, guns, Jesus.  Hot damn! …”   

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_082908/content/01125111.guest.html

 

Palin Will Spend More Time With Couric, Cont’d   [Byron York]

“…Some Republicans believe the McCain campaign made a fundamental mistake in the Palin rollout by focusing on those traditional broadcast networks.  (The only other interview Palin has done was with Sean Hannity on Fox News.)  Palin is the person who almost single-handedly repaired John McCain’s relations with the conservative base, and a base media strategy might have been a more effective one.  If, a week or so after the Republican convention, Palin had done a lot of talk radio — Limbaugh, Hannity, Ingraham, Levin, Bennett, Hewitt, etc. — she would have had widespread exposure to the voters most favorably disposed to her.  Of course the campaign press corps would have complained, but they would also probably have been forced to use snippets from Palin’s talk-radio interviews, which means that what Palin said in a friendly atmosphere would ultimately make its way to an even wider audience, one that includes independents and undecided voters.  After that radio immersion period — starting, say, about now — Palin would do interviews with everyone.

P.S. One more thought. I know I stressed talk radio above, but it would probably have been wiser for the McCain team to have fashioned a rollout combining talk radio, the blogosphere, and local news outlets in key states.  Debuting Palin on a network newscast seems like, well, an old-fashioned kind of strategy.  It certainly wasn’t a fresh approach. …”

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NTQ1MDEzYmM1MWQ2NTg4MTYwN2Q1NTVkMDE0MjU2Njk=

 

Sarah Palin on Glenn Beck

 

Alaska Governor Sarah Palin on Larry Kudlow

 

Charlie Rose – Sarah Palin

 

CNN Brown: ‘Free Sarah Palin

 

Chicago Trib’s news priorities: Nude Palin trumps economy

By Michelle Malkin

Financial crisis? What financial crisis? How about that nude Sarah Palin painting by a PDS-infected artist who used his naked daughter as the model?

Ick: …”

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/09/30/chicago-tribs-news-priorities-nude-palin-trumps-economy/ 

 

LOL

Red State Update: Palin-Biden Debate (In Anticipation Of)

 

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Guys and Gals Gaga and Giddy Over Governor Sarah Palin

The Unsinkable Sarah Palin for The American People vs. Condescending Charlie Gibson for The American Elites

Sweet Sarah Palin Knocks Out Bitter Barack Obama

Knight of Faith Sarah Palin vs. Knight of Infinity Barack Obama

Conservative Turnout Will Determine the Outcome of The Presidential 2008 Race Between McCain vs. Obama

Slugger McCain Hits a Grand Slam Homerun: Selects Alaskian Governor Sarah Palin as Vice-President Running Mate!

The 2008 U.S. Presidential Election–Wedge Issues Now (WIN)?

New Poll: McCain/Palin Will Win 50 States!–Obama/Biden Will Win 57 States?

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 11 so far )

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...