Story 1: When Will The Chinese People Overthrow The Communist Party of China? — Massive Censorship By Controlling The Internet — Videos

Posted on December 26, 2017. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Books, Chinese, Communications, Computers, Computers, Crisis, Cult, Documentary, Elections, Employment, Energy, External Hard Drives, Faith, Family, Foreign Policy, Freedom, Friends, Genocide, government, Health Care, history, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, Media Streamers, Mobile Phones, Natural Gas, Newspapers, Non-Fiction, Oil, People, Photos, Radio, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Religious, Reviews, Security, Speech, Spying, Strategy, Success, Talk Radio, Technology, Television, Television, Terrorism, Torture, Video, War, Wealth, Weapons, Welfare, Wisdom, Work, World War II, Writing | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , |

See the source imageSee the source image

See the source image

See the source image

How Does China’s Government Work?

Why China And Taiwan Hate Each Other

China’s Internet Censorship Explained

Taiwan Declares It’s Been a Country the WHOLE TIME | China Uncensored

Michael Anti: Behind the Great Firewall of China

What is China censoring online? | CNBC Explains

 

China internet: ‘I know we’re being suppressed but it doesn’t affect me’

How China Is Changing Your Internet | The New York Times

Tension Is Rising Between the U.S. and China Over Taiwan. Here’s What You Need to Know

Here’s Why China’s Territorial Disputes May Lead to War

Videographic: What does China want? | The Economist

Why China is building islands in the South China Sea

Xi Jinping ‘most powerful Chinese leader since Mao Zedong’ – BBC News

[中南海]Chinese Presidential Residence – White House of China

Xi Jinping Biography | Xi Jinping daughter | Xi Jinping net worth | Xi Jinping pronunciation

How Xi Jinping Went From Feeding Pigs to Ruling China

China’s Communist party enshrines Xi Jinping ideology in constitution

China’s Future MEGAPROJECTS (2016-2050’s)

China hands down harshest sentence yet in crackdown on activists

By Christian Shepherd

Reuters 

China sentenced a prominent rights activist to eight years in jail for subversion on Tuesday, his lawyer said, the harshest sentence passed in a government crackdown on activism that began more than two years ago.

In a separate case, a rights lawyer avoided criminal punishment despite being found guilty of inciting subversion, because he admitted his crimes, the Chinese court trying him said.

Wu Gan, a blogger better known by his online name “Super Vulgar Butcher”, plans to appeal against the eight-year sentence handed down by the Tianjin Municipality’s No. 2 Intermediate People’s Court, his lawyer, Yan Xin, told Reuters.

The harshness of the sentence prompted the German embassy in Beijing to issue a statement expressing disappointment.

Wu regularly championed sensitive cases of government abuses of power, both online and in street protests. He was detained in May 2015 and charged with subversion.

The activist criticized China’s political system online and used performance art to create disturbances, as well as insulting people and spreading false information, according to a statement from the court posted on its website.

“He carried out a string of criminal actions to subvert state power and overthrow the socialist system and seriously harmed state security and social stability,” the court said.

Before his arrest, Wu used his platform to cast doubt on the official version of events in an incident in early May 2015, in which a police officer shot a petitioner in a train station in northern Heilongjiang province.

Wu’s refusal to bow to pressure or admit guilt likely explains his harsh sentence, said Kit Chan, Hong Kong-based director of China Human Rights Lawyers Concern Group.

“Wu Gan is being punished for his non-conformity,” she said.

His sentence is the most severe in what rights groups have called an unprecedented attack on China’s rights activists and lawyers, known as the 709 crackdown, which began in full force on July 9, 2015.

The hardline approach to rights activism has shown no sign of softening as Chinese President Xi Jinping enters his second five-year term in office.

In the other case concluded on Tuesday, rights lawyer Xie Yang received no punishment after being found guilty of inciting subversion and disrupting court order, the Changsha Intermediate People’s Court said on social media.

The court released a video of the proceedings, in which Xie said he accepted the outcome and would not appeal. He also thanked authorities and said he will be a law-abiding citizen.

Xie had worked on numerous cases deemed sensitive by Chinese authorities, such as defending supporters of Hong Kong’s pro-democracy protests. In May, he confessed to the charges against him in what rights groups called a scripted “sham” trial.

In January, Xie’s wife and lawyer released detailed accounts of torture suffered by Xie at the hands of the authorities, which were widely reported on in the international media.

Chinese state media branded those reports “fake news” and said the accounts were concocted as a means of gaining attention. Xie’s lawyer told Reuters he stands by the account.

“In both cases these have been serious concerns about violations of due process of law,” the German embassy in Beijing said in a statement.

The decision to hand down both sentences the day after Christmas, when there would likely be less attention from diplomats and international observers, “reeks of cynical political calculation”, said Patrick Poon, Hong Kong-based researcher for Amnesty International.

Asked about the verdicts, China’s foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying told a regular briefing that Amnesty is biased when it comes to China and should not be believed, adding that China abides by the rule of law.

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/china-hands-down-harshest-sentence-yet-multi-rights-023955698.html

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

Obama’s Non-Transparent Federal Communications Commission Chairman Wheeler Refuses To Testify Before Congress or Publish Online The Proposed Draft Internet Regulations Pertaining To Net Neutrality (332 Page Final Draft) Before Voting on Thursday, February 26, 2015 — Government Bureaucrats Messing With The Internet and Freedom of Speech — Time To Abolish The FCC — It Is All About Money and Power — Videos

Posted on February 26, 2015. Filed under: American History, Articles, Blogroll, Business, Communications, Computers, Computers, Constitution, Corruption, Documentary, Economics, Education, Employment, Family, Federal Communications Commission, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, Freedom, Friends, government spending, Health Care, history, Homes, Investments, IRS, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Literacy, media, Money, National Security Agency (NSA_, Obamacare, People, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Press, Programming, Raves, Regulations, Strategy, Talk Radio, Taxes, Technology, Video, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Project_1

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts

Pronk Pops Show 422: February 25, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 421: February 20, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 420: February 19, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 419: February 18, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 418: February 16, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 417: February 13, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 416: February 12, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 415: February 11, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 414: February 10, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 413: February 9, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 412: February 6, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 411: February 5, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 410: February 4, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 409: February 3, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 408: February 2, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 407: January 30, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 406: January 29, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 405: January 28, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 404: January 27, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 403: January 26, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 402: January 23, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 401: January 22, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 400: January 21, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 399: January 16, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 398: January 15, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 397: January 14, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 396: January 13, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 395: January 12, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 394: January 7, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 393: January 5, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 392: December 19, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 391: December 18, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 390: December 17, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 389: December 16, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 388: December 15, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 387: December 12, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 386: December 11, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 385: December 9, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 384: December 8, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 383: December 5, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 382: December 4, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 381: December 3, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 380: December 1, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 379: November 26, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 378: November 25, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 377: November 24, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 376: November 21, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 375: November 20, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 374: November 19, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 373: November 18, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 372: November 17, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 371: November 14, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 370: November 13, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 369: November 12, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 368: November 11, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 367: November 10, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 366: November 7, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 365: November 6, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 364: November 5, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 363: November 4, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 362: November 3, 2014

Story 1: Obama’s Non-Transparent Federal Communications Commission Chairman Wheeler Refuses To Testify Before Congress or Publish Online The Proposed Draft Internet Regulations Pertaining To  Net Neutrality (332 Page Final Draft) Before Voting on Thursday, February 26, 2015 — Government Bureaucrats Messing With The Internet and Freedom of Speech — Time To Abolish The FCC — It Is All About Money and Power — Videos

obama-dictator-uniformobama_dictatorobama-dictator

fcc-tom-wheelerfcc-board-members voted for government takeover of internet

Three Democrats Voted For Government Regulation, Taxation and Control of Internet

obama_plans_net_grab

FCC’s Ajit Pai: Net Neutrality is a “Solution That Won’t Work to a Problem That Doesn’t Exist”

Internet Rejoices as FCC Imposes Strict Net Neutrality Rules

Sources: Wheeler Tweaks Net Neutrality Plan After Google Push

GOP Leader Slams FCC Ahead of Net Neutrality Vote

Sen. John Thune hammered the Federal Communications Commission ahead of a vote on net neutrality rules Thursday, which the South Dakota Republican termed a “partisan-line vote.”

“This will be the first time … where the Internet is going to be subject to the heavy-hand of regulation as opposed to the light touch that’s been utilized for so long up until this point,” Thune said. “And I hope that Feb. 26 doesn’t go down in history as the time when the Internet moved from something that was driven by free-market innovation to something that’s driven by bureaucratic decision making.”

The Truth About ‘Net Neutrality’ – FCC Rules Tomorrow. Please watch, & please circulate!

Net Neutrality will destroy the internet

The Truth About Net Neutrality

Limbaugh on “Net Neutrality”: Obama Exploits Ignorance of Young People to Seize Control of Internet

FCC Chairman Details His Net Neutrality Proposal

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler’s plan would apply to ISPs and wireless carriers. It will go to a full vote later this month.

FCC Chairman Signals New Net Neutrality Rules – IGN News

President Obama’s Statement on Keeping the Internet Open and Free

President Obama Makes Strong Pro Net Neutrality Statement…But Why?

Net Neutrality Explained. Simply and Accurately!

HOUSE CHAIR DEMANDS FCC NET NEUTRALITY GAG ORDER LIFTED

Chairman of the House Oversight Committee Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) demanded yesterday that the Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler make public the details of the proposed net neutrality regulations that will regulate the Internet under the same rules as the old AT&T monopoly.

Chaffetz also asked the FCC Chair to appear and answer questions at the House Oversight hearing Wednesday, prior to the planned Agency vote on the draft rules now scheduled for Thursday.

The 332-page final draft FCC order was only delivered to the four other FCC commissioners three weeks ago. When Wheeler delivered the document, he took the unusual step of issuing a “gag order” to prevent its release before the FCC vote.

The FCC was forced to revisit “net neutrality” rules because the agency’s egregious 2010 effort at writing “Open Internet Rules” was thrown out in January 2014 by the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in Verizon v. FCC. Although the appeals court agreed the FCC had the authority to regulate broadband services, they rejected the FCC’s potentially biased micro-managing of the Internet.

Chairman Wheeler tried to ramrod President Obama’s net neutrality proposal through the FCC on May 15, 2014. It was understood at the time that Wheeler was trying to maximize FCC breadth for the new rules by basing the legal authority of his proposal on parts of both Title II of the Communications Act of 1934 and the Telecommunications Act of 1996. But the day before the meeting, his fellow Democratic Commissioners, Jessica Rosenworcel and Mignon Clyburn, pushed back on the rush to regulate after being bombarded by consumers who wanted to preserve an open Internet.

In a blog post at the time, Commissioner Clyburn noted, “over 100,000 Americans have spoken” via email, calls and letters. Commissioner Rosenworcel added that she also wanted the FCC to delay consideration of the rules after the torrent of public response.

Breitbart reported on February 9 in “Republican FCC Member Warns Net Neutrality is Not Neutral” that Ajit Pai, as one of two Republican Commissioners on the FCC, tweeted, “I wish the public could see what’s inside.” Pai included a selfie of himself holding the huge document in front of a picture of Obama. The posture of the photo was clearly meant to depict the president as George Orwell’s “Big Brother.”

Pai later released a statement: “President Obama’s plan marks a monumental shift toward government control of the Internet. It gives the FCC the power to micromanage virtually every aspect of how the Internet works,” he said. “The plan explicitly opens the door to billions of dollars in new taxes on broadband… These new taxes will mean higher prices for consumers and more hidden fees that they have to pay.”

The Breitbart article generated over 4,600 comments and set off a firestorm on the Drudge Report as the public realized that the FCC process seemed fundamentally biased due to a lack of transparency and full disclosure prior to such an important regulatory vote. The public was also incensed that the free-for-all Internet was about to be subject to up to $16 billion a year in FCC user taxes and fees.

Congressman Chaffetz also sent Wheeler a letter questioning whether the FCC had been “independent, fair and transparent” in fashioning the rules to supposedly protect Internet content. “Although arguably one of the most sweeping new rules in the commission’s history, the process was conducted without using many of the tools at the chairman’s disposal to ensure transparency and public review,” Chaffetz added.

Representative Chaffetz included in the letter that there is a precedent for the FCC Chairman to make rules public before a vote. In 2007, Chairman Kevin Martin released to the public new media ownership rules, and the entire FCC testified in a House hearing prior to the final vote.

An elected official who supported the FCC postponement in 2007, Chaffetz notes, was Senator Barack Obama. “He specifically noted while a certain proposal ‘may pass the muster of a federal court, Congress and the public have the right to review any specific proposal and decide whether or not it constitutes sound policy. And the commission has the responsibility to defend any new proposal in public discourse and debate.”

With political fireworks going off yesterday, Republican FCC commissioners Michael O’Rielly and Ajit Pai late in the day asked Wheeler to postpone Thursday’s vote and release the draft Internet regulatory proposal for a 30 day public comment period.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/02/24/house-chair-demands-fcc-net-neutrality-gag-order-lifted/

Dear FCC: Rethink The Vague “General Conduct” Rule

 BY CORYNNE MCSHERRY

For many months, EFF has been working with a broad coalition of advocates to persuade the Federal Communications Commission to adopt new Open Internet rules that would survive legal scrutiny and actually help protect the Open Internet. Our message has been clear from the beginning: the FCC has a role to play, but its role must be firmly bounded.

Two weeks ago, we learned that we had likely managed the first goal—the FCC is going to do the right thing and reclassify broadband as a telecommunications service, giving it the ability to make new, meaningful Open Internet rules.  But we are deeply concerned that the FCC’s new rules will include a provision that sounds like a recipe for overreach and confusion: the so-called “general conduct rule.”

According to the FCC’s own “Fact Sheet,” the proposed rule will allow the FCC to review (and presumably punish) non-neutral practices that may “harm” consumers or edge providers. Late last week, as the window for public comment was closing, EFF filed a letter with the FCC urging it to clarify and sharply limit the scope of any “general conduct” provision:

[T]he Commission should use its Title II authority to engage in light-touch regulation, taking great care to adhere to clear, targeted, and transparent rules. A “general conduct rule,” applied on a case-by- case basis with the only touchstone being whether a given practice “harms” consumers or edge providers, may lead to years of expensive litigation to determine the meaning of “harm” (for those who can afford to engage in it). What is worse, it could be abused by a future Commission to target legitimate practices that offer significant benefits to the public . . .

Accordingly, if the Commission intends to adopt a “general conduct rule” it should spell out, in advance, the contours and limits of that rule, and clarify that the rule shall be applied only in specific circumstances.

Unfortunately, if a recent report from Reuters is correct, the general conduct rule will be anything but clear. The FCC will evaluate “harm” based on consideration of seven factors: impact on competition; impact on innovation; impact on free expression; impact on broadband deployment and investments; whether the actions in question are specific to some applications and not others; whether they comply with industry best standards and practices; and whether they take place without the awareness of the end-user, the Internet subscriber.

There are several problems with this approach.  First, it suggests that the FCC believes it has broad authority to pursue any number of practices—hardly the narrow, light-touch approach we need to protect the open Internet. Second, we worry that this rule will be extremely expensive in practice, because anyone wanting to bring a complaint will be hard-pressed to predict whether they will succeed. For example, how will the Commission determine “industry best standards and practices”? As a practical matter, it is likely that only companies that can afford years of litigation to answer these questions will be able to rely on the rule at all. Third, a multi-factor test gives the FCC an awful lot of discretion, potentially giving an unfair advantage to parties with insider influence.

We are days away from a final vote, and it appears that many of the proposed rules will make sense for the Internet. Based on what we know so far, however, the general conduct proposal may not. The FCC should rethink this one.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/02/dear-fcc-rethink-those-vague-general-conduct-rules

FCC Chair Refuses to Testify before Congress ahead of Net Neutrality Vote

by ANDREW JOHNSON February 25, 2015 10:19 AM

Two prominent House committee chairs are “deeply disappointed” in Federal Communications Commission chairman Tom Wheeler for refusing to testify before Congress as “the future of the Internet is at stake.”

Wheeler’s refusal to go before the House Oversight Committee on Wednesday comes on the eve of the FCC’s vote on new Internet regulations pertaining to net neutrality. The committee’s chairman, Representative Jason Chaffetz (R., Utah), and Energy and Commerce Committee chairman Fred Upton (R., Mich.) criticized Wheeler and the administration for lacking transparency on the issue.

“So long as the chairman continues to insist on secrecy, we will continue calling for more transparency and accountability at the commission,” Chaffetz and Upton said in a statement. “Chairman Wheeler and the FCC are not above Congress.”

The vote on the new Internet regulations is scheduled for Thursday. The FCC’s two Republican commissioners have asked Wheeler to delay the vote to allow more time for review. The changes would allow the commission to regulate the Internet like a public utility, setting new standards that require the provision of equal access to all online content.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/414380/fcc-chair-refuses-testify-congress-ahead-net-neutrality-vote-andrew-johnson

 

President Obama Urges FCC to Implement Stronger Net Neutrality Rules

President Obama today asked the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to take up the strongest possible rules to protect net neutrality, the principle that says Internet service providers (ISPs) should treat all internet traffic equally.

The President has been a strong and consistent advocate of net neutrality since his first presidential campaign.

President Obama’s plan would reclassify consumer broadband services under what’s known as Title II of the Telecommunications Act. It would serve as a “basic acknowledgement of the services ISPs provide to American homes and businesses, and the straightforward obligations necessary to ensure the network works for everyone – not just one or two companies.”

The plan involves four commonsense steps that some service providers already observe:

No blocking. If a consumer requests access to a website or service, and the content is legal, your ISP should not be permitted to block it. That way, every player—not just those commercially affiliated with an ISP — gets a fair shot at your business.

No throttling. Nor should ISPs be able to intentionally slow down some content or speed up others — through a process often called “throttling”—based on the type of service or your ISP’s preferences.

Increased transparency. The connection between consumers and ISPs — the so-called “last mile” — is not the only place some sites might get special treatment. So, I am also asking the FCC to make full use of the transparency authorities the court recently upheld, and if necessary to apply net neutrality rules to points of interconnection between the ISP and the rest of the Internet.

No paid prioritization. Simply put: No service should be stuck in a “slow lane” because it does not pay a fee. That kind of gatekeeping would undermine the level playing field essential to the Internet’s growth. So, as I have before, I am asking for an explicit ban on paid prioritization and any other restriction that has a similar effect.

Ultimately, the FCC is an independent agency and the decision is theirs alone. But President Obama believes his plan is the best way to safeguard the incredible resource the Internet has become for all of us — so that an entrepreneur’s fledgling company has the same chance to succeed as established corporation’s, and so that access to a high school student’s blog isn’t unfairly slowed down to make way for advertisers with more money.

Nearly 4 million public comments were submitted to the FCC as part of the latest comment period, with overwhelming support for the principles the President is calling for.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2014/11/10/president-obama-urges-fcc-implement-stronger-net-neutrality-rules

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts Portfolio

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 422 

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 414-421

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 408-413

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 400-407

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 391-399

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 383-390

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 376-382

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 369-375

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 360-368

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 354-359

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 346-353

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 338-345

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 328-337

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 319-327

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 307-318

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 296-306

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 287-295

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 277-286

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 264-276

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 250-263

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 236-249

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 222-235

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 211-221

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 202-210

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 194-201

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 184-193

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 174-183

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 165-173

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 158-164

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 151-157

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 143-150

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 135-142

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 131-134

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 124-130

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 121-123

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 118-120

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 113 -117

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 112

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 108-111

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 106-108

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 104-105

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 101-103

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98-100

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 01-09

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

Someone At WordPress Is Censoring My Post On Ron Paul–Shame On WordPress–Videos

Posted on April 26, 2011. Filed under: American History, Banking, Blogroll, Books, Business, Climate, College, Communications, Crime, Culture, Demographics, Economics, Education, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, Health Care, history, Investments, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, Monetary Policy, Money, People, Philosophy, Politics, Programming, Psychology, Rants, Raves, Security, Strategy, Talk Radio, Taxes, Technology, Video, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , |

Today I posted a rather long post on the recent announcement by Ron Paul that he was forming an exploratory committee to see if he should run for President of the United States in 2012.

Someone at WordPress has twice used either a script and/or CSS to hide my post.

The first time none of my post could be seen even in edit view.

Fortunately, I had a copy of the post and reposted it.

I also added a number of Ron Paul related previous posts at the bottom of the page under the heading Related Posts At Pronk Palisades.

These links were not appearing after I reposted the post.

Apparently, someone at WordPress was inserting a header with an id attribute with a number that hides the display of the links using an external cascading style sheet (CSS).

I deleted this html markup and the links worked fine.

Several hours later, I returned to the blog post to again find the entire post not being displayed once again.

At least this time I could see my post in edit view.

This is the third time one of my post has been censored by WordPress.

WordPress is also deleting or hiding links to past posts as well.

Once it encounters a link to post that it wants to censor, anything after the post link is hidden or deleted as well.

I am calling out WordPress for this inappropriate behavior.

Shame on them.

WordPress should investigate this situation and take appropriate action against the employee who is doing this.

WordPress should also apologize to the WordPress community for I strongly suspect that this is not an isolated incident and that I am not the only one that is experiencing this.

I will again post the earlier post to see what happens.

My original post is now being displayed for now and the post is displayed below as well.

I have added some additional material to the original post.

I await a communication from WordPress as to what is going on!

“Over grown military establishments are under any form of government inauspicious to liberty, and are to be regarded as particularly hostile to republican liberty.”

‘Tis our true policy to steer clear of permanent Alliances, with any portion of the foreign world.”

~George Washington

Four Years Ago

 

Ron Paul Releases Presidential Exploratory Committee

 

Barry Goldwater, Jr. Endorses Ron Paul

 

Ron Paul: A New Hope

 

Now

 

Ron Paul Why I Want To Be President

 

Ron Paul for President

 

Ron Paul 2012: “Freedom Is Popular” – 6 Year Old Homeschooler Knows What Liberty Means

 

Ron Paul To Form Presidential Exploratory Committee

 

Ron Paul interviewed by Stephen Colbert 4/25/2011


Ron Paul to Announce 2012 Bid

 

Ron Paul on The View 04/25/11

 

American’s Takeoff To Peace And Prosperity vs. America’s Road To Serfdom

Ron Paul vs. Barack Obama for President – Rasmussen Poll 1% Difference

 

Ron Paul : Where Do You “Bernanke” Get The Authority To Print Money Out Of Thin Air?

 

CNN Downplays Ron Paul’s Electability… This Is So 2008

 

Thomas Woods interviews Ron Paul on Peter Schiff Show 4/20/11

 

My political philosophy is classical liberalism.

In America a classical liberal is commonly identified as a libertarian and occasionally a conservative.

Classical liberals or libertarians favor a government that is limited in both size and scope and takes the form of a constitutional republic.

I became a classical liberal when Senator Barry Goldwater ran for President in 1964 when I read his book, The Conscience of A Conservative.

Mr. Conservative: Goldwater On Goldwater

 

Barry Goldwater, A True Conservative

The Conscience Of A Conservative

Freedom is the Only Solution

Ever since I have considered myself a member of the conservative movement and a traditional libertarian.

Today I am an independent and support the tea party movement and their candidates for public office. 

Senator Barry Goldwater lost to President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964 for the office of President of The United States.

President Johnson was largely responsible for America’s war in Vietnam, the war on poverty and socialized medicine, namely Medicare.

The Democrats lost both the war in Vietnam and the war on poverty.

Socialized medicine in the form of Medicare while still popular with American people, Medicare is running massive deficits that will only become larger as the baby boom generation turn age 65 and becomes eligible for Medicare starting in 2011.

Today Medicare is actually costing more than ten times the estimated cost when it was originally passed in 1965.

Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid must be reformed and controlled and owned by the individual and not by the Federal Government.

Otherwise Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid will become insolvent and the promises made to the American people broken.

I.O.U.S.A. Bonus Reel: Social Security+Medicare Projections

The Real Fiscal Cancer that will Bankrupt the United States

I.O.U.S.A. Bonus Reel: A $53 Trillion Federal Financial Hole

 

Baby boomers and Medicare spell rationing


Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan opposed socialized medicine and warned of its cost in 1964.

Ronald Reagan Speaks Out Against Socialized Medicine

The Very Best of Ronald Reagan

The only Presidential candidate that I trust to do the right thing in addressing the above issues is Ron Paul.

The only Presidential candidate that has consistently supported a constitutional republic is Ron Paul.

The only Presidential candidate that has consistently voted for limited government in both size and scope is Ron Paul.

The only Presidential candidate that has consistently opposed government interventionism in the economy at home and nation building abroad is Ron Paul.

If you want to return the United States of America to a peace and prosperity economy with a constitutional republic, support and vote for Ron Paul.

If you want the continuation of the United States of America’s warfare and welfare economy with a collectivist tyrannical state, you will have many choices from both the Democratic and Republican parties.

I plan to support and vote for Ron Paul in 2012.

I hope and pray he gets the Republican nomination as their candidate for President of the United States of America.

I hope and pray that Ron Paul and the Republican Party choose Michele Backmann as his running mate for Vice-President of the United States.

Ron Paul / Michele Bachmann Student Town Hall @ UofMN – Sponsored by YAL – 2 of 9

The third time is the charm.

Obama and Congress to Murder More American Soldiers and Tax You for the Wars

Message for Democrats and Republicans from the Late Senator Barry Goldwater

Government is Oppression

Barry Goldwater Jr. Introduces Ron Paul

Join the second American Revolution and campaign for liberty.

“Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.”
“The Constitution is the guide which I never will abandon”

~George Washington

 

Background Articles and Videos

Ron Paul : The Drug War Has Killed More People Than The Drugs! (Part 1/6)

Ron Paul : The Drug War Has Killed More People Than The Drugs! (Part 2/6)

 

Ron Paul : The Drug War Has Killed More People Than The Drugs! (Part 3/6)

Ron Paul : The Drug War Has Killed More People Than The Drugs! (Part 4/6)

Ron Paul : The Drug War Has Killed More People Than The Drugs! (Part 5/6)

Ron Paul : The Drug War Has Killed More People Than The Drugs! (Part 6/6)

 

Ron Paul Will Rock You

Money Bomb May 5, 2011

 

Ron Paul Launches Presidential Campaign

“…Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, whose outspoken libertarian views and folksy style made him a cult hero during two previous presidential campaigns, will announce on Tuesday that he’s going to try a third time.

Sources close to Paul, who is in his 12th term in the House, said he will unveil an exploratory presidential committee, a key step in gearing up for a White House race. He will also unveil the campaign’s leadership team in Iowa, where the first votes of the presidential election will be cast in caucuses next year.

Paul, 75, ran as the Libertarian Party candidate in 1988, finishing with less than one half a percent of the vote. After more than a decade as a Republican congressman, Paul gave it another shot in the 2008 presidential election, gaining attention for being the only Republican candidate calling for the end to the war in Iraq and for his “money bomb” fundraising strategy, which brought in millions of dollars from online donors in single-day pushes.

Paul took 10 percent of the vote in the Iowa caucuses and 8 percent in New Hampshire’s primary. He finished second, with 14 percent of the vote, in the Nevada caucuses, and eventually finished fourth in the Republican nominating process with 5.6 percent of the total vote. Paul’s campaign book, The Revolution: A Manifesto also reached No. 1 on The New York Times best-seller list in 2008. …”

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

2012 Presidential bid: Third time could be the charm for Ron Paul

“…Republican Congressman Ron Paul is expected to announce the formation of a presidential exploratory committee on Tuesday, a key step in any bid for the White House and a third attempt for the White House from the congressman.

They say the third time is the charm, and one likely does not need to tell that to Republican congressman Ron Paul. However, on Tuesday Mr. Paul intends to announce the formation of his presidential exploratory committee, according to a National Journalreport.

Congressman Paul, active in his twelfth term as a House legislator and known for his decidedly Libertarian views, will make a third run for the White House in what appears to be shaping up to be a considerably crowded Republican presidential contest.

“Paul, 75, ran as the Libertarian Party candidate in 1988, finishing with less than one half a percent of the vote,” Cameron Joseph reported for the National Journal. “After more than a decade as a Republican congressman, Paul gave it another shot in the 2008 presidential election, gaining attention for being the only Republican candidate calling for the end to the war in Iraq and for his ‘money bomb’ fundraising strategy, which brought in millions of dollars from online donors in single-day pushes.”

Mr. Paul has been an influential voice for a new generation of Republicans in Congress, and many of his positions have been attributed to Tea Party sentiments that have managed to make their way into mainstream Republican discourse and have posed a considerable challenge to the Obama administration and the remaining Democratic majority in the Senate following the 2010 mid-term elections this past November.

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/305997#ixzz1KdjFuwyy

Medicare

“…Medicare is a social insurance program administered by the United States government, providing health insurance coverage to people who are aged 65 and over, or who meet other special criteria. Medicare operates similarly to a single-payer health care system.[1]

The program also funds residency training programs for the vast majority of physicians in the United States.

The Social Security Act of 1965 was signed into law on July 30, 1965, by President Lyndon B. Johnson as amendments to existing Social Security legislation. At the bill-signing ceremony, Johnson enrolled former President Harry S. Truman as the first Medicare beneficiary and presented him with the first Medicare card, and Truman’s wife Bess, the second.[2] …”

“…Costs and funding challenges

The costs of Medicare doubled every four years between 1966 and 1980.[47] According to the 2004 “Green Book” of the House Ways and Means Committee, Medicare expenditures from the American government were $256.8 billion in fiscal year 2002. Beneficiary premiums are highly subsidized, and net outlays for the program, accounting for the premiums paid by subscribers, were $230.9 billion.

Medicare spending is growing steadily in both absolute terms and as a percentage of the federal budget. Total Medicare spending reached $440 billion for fiscal year 2007 or 16% of all federal spending and grew to $599 billion in 2008 which was 20% of federal spending.[48] The only larger categories of federal spending are Social Security and defense. Given the current pattern of spending growth, maintaining Medicare’s financing over the long-term may well require significant changes.[49]

According to the 2008 report by the board of trustees for Medicare and Social Security, Medicare will spend more than it brings in from taxes this year (2008). The Medicare hospital insurance trust fund will become insolvent by 2019.[49][50][51][52] Shortly after the release of the report, the Chief Actuary testified that the insolvency of the system could be pushed back by 18 months if Medicare Advantage plans that provide more health care services than traditional Medicare and pass savings onto beneficiaries were paid at the same rate as the traditional fee-for-service program. He also testified that the 10-year cost of Medicare drug benefit is 37% lower than originally projected in 2003, and 17% percent lower than last year’s projections.[53] The New York Times wrote in January 2009 that Social Security and Medicare “have proved almost sacrosanct in political terms, even as they threaten to grow so large as to be unsustainable in the long run.”[54]

Spending on Medicare and Medicaid is projected to grow dramatically in coming decades. While the same demographic trends that affect Social Security also affect Medicare, rapidly rising medical prices appear a more important cause of projected spending increases. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has indicated that: “Future growth in spending per beneficiary for Medicare and Medicaid—the federal government’s major health care programs—will be the most important determinant of long-term trends in federal spending. Changing those programs in ways that reduce the growth of costs—which will be difficult, in part because of the complexity of health policy choices—is ultimately the nation’s central long-term challenge in setting federal fiscal policy.” Further, the CBO also projects that “total federal Medicare and Medicaid outlays will rise from 4 percent of GDP in 2007 to 12 percent in 2050 and 19 percent in 2082—which, as a share of the economy, is roughly equivalent to the total amount that the federal government spends today. The bulk of that projected increase in health care spending reflects higher costs per beneficiary rather than an increase in the number of beneficiaries associated with an aging population.”[55]

…”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_(United_States)

The Conscience of a Conservative

“…The Conscience of a Conservative is a book published under the name of Arizona Senator and 1964 Republican presidential candidate Barry Goldwater in 1960. The book reignited the American conservative movement and made Barry Goldwater a political star. The book has influenced countless conservatives in the United States, helping to lay the foundation for the Reagan Revolution in 1980.[1]

The book was ghostwritten by L. Brent Bozell Jr., brother-in-law of William F. Buckley.[1] Bozell and Buckley had been members of Yale’s debate team. They had co-authored the controversial book, McCarthy and His Enemies, in 1955. Bozell had been Goldwater’s speechwriter in the 1950s, and was familiar with many of his ideals. The first edition, 1960, is 123 pages in length and was published in the United States. The book covers such topics as education, labor unions and policies, civil rights, agricultural policy and farm subsidies, social welfare programs, and income taxation. The book is considered to be a significant statement of politically and economically American conservative ideas which were to gain influence during the following decades.[1] …”

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

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

The Washington Political Elites of Both Parties Are Not Serious About Balancing The Federal Budget And Funding Entitlement Liabilities–Send In The Clowns–Don’t Bother There Here–Videos

Ron Paul, Michele Bachmann And Rand Paul–Stop Spending Money You Don’t Have!–Balance The Budget–Tea Party Budget Gets It Right–Videos

Ron Paul Tells The Truth–The Political Elites Are Not Serious About Cutting The Budget–The Coming Collapse Of The Dollar And Inflation–Videos

The FairTax (National Consumption Sales Tax) vs. The Flat Tax (One Rate Federal Income Tax)–Who Pays The Most Federal Individual Income Tax? Videos

Prescient Congressman Ron Paul On Government Interventionism–July 10, 2003 On Floor Of The House of Representatives–Videos

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

WordPress Is At It Again In Censoring Posts–This Time On The April 15, 2011 Opening Of Atlas Shrugged Movie and March On Washington D.C.–Videos

Posted on April 15, 2011. Filed under: Babies, Banking, Blogroll, Climate, College, Communications, Economics, Education, Employment, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, Investments, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, Monetary Policy, Money, People, Philosophy, Politics, Rants, Raves, Talk Radio, Video, War, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , |

The New Internet 2 and Censorship

Internet Censorship Alert! Alex Jones exposes agenda to ‘blacklist’ dissenting sites

I repeatedly tried to add a link under Related Posts On Pronk Palisades to my previous post on Ayn Rand and the link was not showing up.

The link below did not appear on this post as well under “Here are the links.”

The link shows up in edit view but when you update the post and then preview it, the link is not displayed.

I noticed that an ad on the Atlas Shrugged movie opening appeared on one of my posts about Ayn Rand.

Shame on WordPress once again.

Apparently WordPress has a script that searches for specific language.

When such a link or language is found, it  hides both the link and any content that follows the link or language.

I encountered a similar situation and posted this with the link below, which is also deleted and does not appear below.

I do however see the post in edit view.

These posts are getting increasing visits.

You should see two links below, but you will see white space instead of the two links!

Here are the links.

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

Atlas Shrugged Part 1 Opens April 15, 2011–See The Movie and March On Washington D.C. For Tea Party Rally On April 15!–Videos

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

Speak Up America–Videos

Posted on January 21, 2011. Filed under: Blogroll, Economics, Education, Federal Government, government, government spending, Health Care, history, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Philosophy, Politics, Psychology, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Video, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , |

Glenn Beck-01/20/11-A

Glenn Beck-01/20/11-B

Glenn Beck-01/20/11-C

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

FCC Threat To Freedom with Net Neutrality Or Government Regulation of The Internet–Videos

Posted on December 22, 2010. Filed under: Blogroll, Communications, Economics, Education, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, government, government spending, Language, liberty, Life, Links, People, Philosophy, Politics, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Security, Taxes, Video, Wealth | Tags: , , , , , , |

“Socialism and interventionism. Both have in common the goal of subordinating the individual unconditionally to the state.”

“It is indeed one of the principal drawbacks of every kind of interventionism that it is so difficult to reverse the process.”

~Ludwig von Mises

Will Net Neutrality Save the Internet?

 

Net Neutrality for Dummies: Will the FCC control the Internet?

 

FCC’s Net Neutrality : Freedom Watch News w/ Judge Andrew Napolitano 12/3/10

 

Washington Approves Net Neutrality Rule – The Internet Just Became More Expensive

 

ITTN: Net Neutrality, Part 1

 

FCC Approves Proposed Net Neutrality Rule

 

Divided FCC Adopts New Rules Governing Internet Traffic

 

Ron Paul on Net Neutrality

 

 

FCC Internet Powergrab – Peter Schiff Radio 12-21-10 Net Neutrality

 

FCC want to kill internet with Net Neutrality! Stand up people!

 

Google Plans To Kill Web In Internet Takeover Agenda

 

There is no need for the government to regulate the Internet.

Let the marketplace determine access and pricing on the Internet.

The Internet is not broke, do not fix it with government intervention or regulation of the Internet.

Leave it to the progressive radical socialists to screw up the Internet through government regulation.

“It is indeed one of the principal drawbacks of every kind of interventionism that it is so difficult to reverse the process.”

~Ludwig von Mises

 

 

Background Articles and Videos

Judge Napolitano and Shelly Roche Discuss Net Neutrality on Freedom Watch

 

U.S. attempting to regulate the Internet

 

Internet Regulation – Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights

Internet Gets New Rules of the Road

By AMY SCHATZ And SHAYNDI RAICE

“…Consumers for the first time got federally approved rules guaranteeing their right to view what they want on the Internet. The new framework could also result in tiered charges for web access and alter how companies profit from the network.

The Federal Communications Commission on Tuesday voted 3-2 to back Chairman Julius Genachowski’s plan for what is commonly known as “net neutrality,” or rules prohibiting Internet providers from interfering with legal web traffic. President Barack Obama said the FCC’s action will “help preserve the free and open nature of the Internet.”

The move was prompted by worries that large phone and cable firms were getting too powerful as Internet gatekeepers.

Most consumers haven’t had a problem viewing whatever they want online; few instances have arisen of an Internet provider blocking or slowing services.

Rather, the FCC rules are designed to prevent potential future harms and they could shape how Americans access and use the Internet years from now. In the future, the Internet industry will be increasingly centered around the fastest-growing categories of Internet traffic—online video, gaming and mobile services, analysts say. Cisco Systems Inc., the broadband network provider, has forecast those services could quadruple by 2014. …”
Read more: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703581204576033513990668654.html#ixzz18sU1nVBZ

Net Neutrality

  

  The Death of The Internet?

 

Barack Obama: On Net Neutrality

 

Sen. Ted Kennedy supports Net Neutrality

 

Mike McCurry on Net Neutrality

 

Paul Misener of Amazon.com on net neutrality 

 

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

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

Yaron Brook: When Is It Too Late?–Videos

Posted on September 9, 2010. Filed under: Blogroll, Communications, Crime, Culture, Demographics, Economics, Education, Federal Government, government, government spending, history, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, People, Philosophy, Politics, Quotations, Raves, Regulations, Security, Taxes, Video, War, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , |

Too Late to Apologize: A Declaration

Background Articles and Videos

 

“Apologize” One Republic Music Video

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

Political Correctness, The Ground Zero Mosque and Stealth Jidah–Videos

Posted on September 4, 2010. Filed under: Blogroll, Books, College, Communications, Crime, Culture, Economics, Education, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, government spending, history, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, Monetary Policy, People, Philosophy, Politics, Quotations, Raves, Regulations, Religion, Resources, Strategy, Video, War, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

 

 

“God is our purpose, the Prophet our leader, the Quran our constitution, jihad our way and dying for God our supreme objective.”

~Muslim Brotherhood motto

“It is man’s capacity for justice that makes democracy possible, but it is his tendenecy to injustice that makes it necessary.”

~Reinhold Niebuhr, The Children of Light and the children of Darkness, page 17.

“Individuals may see the moral light and voluntarily give up their unjust posture; but, as Reinhold Niebuhr has reminded us, groups tend to be more immoral than individuals.”

~Maring Luther King, Jr., “Letter from Birmingham Jail


The Islamic Infiltration, Part 1: Inside Our Government, Armed With Our Secrets (PJTV)

The Islamic Infiltration, Part 2: From Influence to Insurrection (PJTV)

Bill Whittle: Ground Zero Mosque Reality Check

No Mosque at Ground Zero

Kill the Ground Zero Mosque TV Ad

If you ever worked on a newspaper staff, the Associated Press Stylebook is considered “the journalist’s bible” by editors, reporters and commentators. The Associated Press 2010 Stylebook and Briefing on Media, 45 ed. “provides fundamental guidelines on spelling, grammar, punctuation and usage, with special sections on social media, reporting business and sports.”

Recently I wrote an article where both the headline and the story used the phrase “ground zero mosque” to describe the proposed 13 story mosque and community center to be built less than six hundred feet from the World Trade Center site in New York City. Both were edited out of the story.

Tom Kent, Deputy Managing Editor for Standards and Production for the Associated Press sent out a memo on not using the phrase “ground zero mosque” when referring to the proposed Islamic community center and mosque to be built near the World Trade Center site:

“…Here is some guidance on covering the NYC mosque story, with assists from Chad Roedemeier in the NYC bureau and Terry Hunt in Washington:

1. We should continue to avoid the phrase “ground zero mosque” or “mosque at ground zero” on all platforms. (We’ve very rarely used this wording, except in slugs, though we sometimes see other news sources using the term.) The site of the proposed Islamic center and mosque is not at ground zero, but two blocks away in a busy commercial area. We should continue to say it’s “near” ground zero, or two blocks away. …”

http://www.ap.org/pages/about/pressreleases/pr_081910b.html

Apparently the “ground zero mosque” shorthand description must be offending some so-called “moderate Muslims”. The problem is that many of the “moderate Muslims” are actually stealth jihadists who have the same agenda as the militant jihadists of September 11, 2001.

On September 1, 2010 the Council on American-Islam Relations launched a  National PSA Campaign with several public service announcements (PSAs) that are available for viewing on YouTube and running on television stations. The PSAs have first responders to the al-Qaeda Islamic Wahhabi terrorist hijackers attack of September 11, 2001 that are Muslims recounting what happened that day. The PSAs are posted by CAIR on YouTube (CAIR ‘9/11 Happened to Us All’ PSA, Firefighter (30-Second) and (CAIR ‘9/11 Happened to Us All’ PSA, Medical Responder (30-Second)).

CAIR ‘9/11 Happened to Us All’ PSA, Firefighter (60-Second)

CAIR ‘9/11 Happened to Us All’ PSA, Medical Responder (30-Second)

A third CAIR PSA, ‘We Have More in Common than We Think’, has “interfaith leaders” of the Christian, Jewish, and Islamic faiths stating in part “if we do not have our rights,” “at the heart of American freedom”, “ you do not your rights.” All three PSA are very effective because most American are tolerant of people practicing their religious faith and oppose the establishment by the government of  any one religion as being superior to other religions.

CAIR ‘We Have More in Common than We Think’ PSA, Interfaith (30-Second)

Who exactly is the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)? The CAIRtv channel on YouTube says they are “America’s largest Muslim civil liberties and advocacy group with 35 offices and chapters nationwide and in Canada.”

Steven Emerson, a widely recognized independent investigative expert on Islamic terrorism describes in detail the background of CAIR in his book, American Jihad, The Terrorists Living Among Us, and concludes with this revealing passage on pages 202 and 203:

“Steve Pomerantz, former chief of the Counterterrorism Section of the FBI and former assistant director of the FBI, says: “CAIR has defended individuals involved in terrorist violence, including Hamas leader Musa abu Marzook….The modus operandi has been to falsely tar as ‘anti-Muslim’ the U.S. government, counter-terrorist officials, writers, journalists and others who have investigated or exposed the threat of Middle-East based terrorism…Unfortunately, CAIR is but one of the new generation of new groups in the United States that hide under a veneer of ‘civil right’ or ‘academic’ status but in fact are tethered to a platform that supports terrorism.”

“Seif Ashmawy, former publisher of Voice of Peace, wrote: “It is a known fact that both AMC [American Muslim Council] and CAIR have defended, apologized for and rationalized the actions of extremist groups and leaders such as convicted World Trade Center conspirator Sheikh Omar Abdul Rahman, Egyptian extremists, Hassan al-Turabi, the Sudanese National Islamic Front, and extremist parliamentarians from the Jordian Islamic Action Front and others who called for the overthrow of the Egyptian government….As a proud American Muslim…I bow to no one on my defense of Muslim civil rights, but CAIR..champion[s] extremists whose views do not represent Islam.”…”

Robert Spencer who was criticized by CAIR at their press conference said in his book the Stealth Jihad on page 102:

“CAIR has clearly emerged as the leading advocacy group for Muslims in the United States. When government officials and journalists need a Muslim perspective, they are likely to turn to CAIR, which they assume is a prime example of a moderate, patriotic American Muslim organization”

This assumption is not true as Steven Emerson points out in his book American Jihad on pages 201 and 202:

“…After September 11, 2001, and up until the U.S. Government froze the assets of the Holy Land foundation in December, CAIR’s Web site included a feature, “What you can do for the victims of the WTC and Pentagon attacks,” with a link to the Web site of HLF(“Donate through the Holy Land Foundation”). …”

Robert Spencer concluded on page 105 of his Stealth Jihad book that:

“…Perhaps the biggest blow to CAIR’s moderate facade came on June 4, 2007, when the Justice Department named CAIR an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation jihad terror funding case. Identifying CAIR as a present and past member of “the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee and/or its organizations,” Federal prosecutors stated that CAIR was a participant in a criminal conspiracy on behalf of the jihad terror group Hamas which allegedly received funding from the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLFRD”), a now defunct charity that was supported by CAIR….”

CAIRs Tie to Terrorism

When such inconvenient facts are brought up by investigative reporters and journalists, they are quickly labeled as “Islamophobes”. Robert Spencer describes in detail CAIR tactics in Chapter Three, Silencing The Critics, of his book, Stealth Jihad, on pages 51 and 52:

“…Groups such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Muslim-American Society (MAS) have learned from the past mistakes of many U.S.-based Islamic leaders that aggressive public pronouncements and threats uttered against Islam’s perceived enemies bring unwelcome attention and undermine their pretensions of being mainstream civil rights organizations. So they have adopted a different strategy to silence critics of jihadism and Islamic supremacism: they label them as “bigots”, “hatemongers”, and “Islamophobe.”

“In the U.S., playing the race card can in some ways be even more effective than death threats. If a U.S.-based Islamic group announced a death fatwa against an American writer, that organization would be denounced in the media as “extremist” and possibly trigger a police investigation. But if the group cries “racism” against the same writer, liberal as well as conservative media figures hop to shun and denounce the accused “racist,” for bigotry and racism are the cardinal sins of the U.S. public square.”

An excellent example of CAIR ’s tactics of attempting to silence and smear its critics can be found on the CAIRtv channel on YouTube. The video clip, Video: CAIR Launches National PSA Campaign, is the press conference preceding the preview of the CAIR PSA campaign at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. on September 1, 2010.  Nihad Awad, the Executive Director of CAIR, stated in part:

“The controversy over Park 51 in lower Manhattan is a fabricated controversy. It is designed to pit Americans against each other and divide our society. Although a local but vocal minority has launched this campaign against Muslims. This group is mainly headed by Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer. They know very well the American Muslim community is part of the society. But they harbor anti-Muslim feelings and they want to stoke anti-Muslim sentiment in the society by exploiting 9/11 and legitimate fears that some Americans have. They turn this fear into fear mongering; and free speech became hate speech. It led to hate crimes and as you have seen nation-wide, we have seen Muslims are being attacked just because they are Muslim. Places of worship have been vandalized including future construction sites like the Islamic center in Tennessee. …”

Video: CAIR Launches National PSA Campaign

Robert Spencer in Chapter Five, THE FACE OF ISLAMIC MODERATION? CAIR, MPAC AND OTHER “MODERATE” MUSLIM GROUPS  of his book Stealth Jihad, describes in detail the history and associations of CAIR and Nihad Awad and their stealth jihad on page 102.

“…Though pursing a radical agenda, these organizations realized that extremists pronouncements and activities would be counter-productive, resulting in negative media attention and even criminal investigations. So they’ve adopted a new modus operandi—the stealth jihad. Instead of publicly proclaiming the inevitable arrival of sharia in the United States, they attempt to Islamize the United States quietly, through a long-term strategy aimed at undermining national security, forcing ever greater accommodation of Islamic practices, and minimizing any criticism whatsoever of Islam or of virtually any Muslim individual. …”

Robert Spencer on CAIR’s ‘Stealth Jihad’

Robert Spencer on Islamic-Jihadism (1/4)

Robert Spencer on Islamic-Jihadism (2/4)

Robert Spencer on Islamic-Jihadism (3/4)

Robert Spencer on Islamic-Jihadism (4/4)

Radical jihadists, both militant (violent) and stealth (non-violent), want to accomplish the following in the United States:

  • Replace the United States Constitution and American law with Sharia or Islamic law.
  • Replace our democratic representative republic with an Islamic state or theocracy.
  • Replace our President with a religious leader or caliphate.
  • Establish Islam as the country’s religion that is superior to and dominates all other religions of the United States and where infidels or non-believers in Islam such as Christians and Jews would pay a tax, the jizya, with “willing submission, and feel themselves subdued” (Qur’an 9:29). 

Sharia Law and Islamic Democracy – Daniel Pipes

Time For A New ‘Team B’ to Understand Jihad

The militant and stealth jihadists differ mainly over the methods used to accomplish their goals.   

In Steven Emerson’s and the Investigative Project on Terrorism’s book, Jihad Incorporated: A Guide to Militant Islam in the US on page 346 the roots of both militant and stealth jihad can be found in the Muslim Brotherhood.      

Richard Clark is the former National Coordinator for Security and Infrastructure Protection under Presidents Clinton and Bush. In testifying before the Senate Committee on Banking in October 2003 he stated:    

“… While the overseas operations of Islamist terrorist organizations are generally segregated and distinct, the opposite holds in the United States. The issue of terrorist financing in the United States is a fundamental example of the shared infrastructure levered by HAMAS, Islamic Jihad and Al Qaeda, all of which enjoy a significant degree of cooperation and coordination within our borders. The common link here is the extremist Muslim Brotherhood–all of these organizations are descendants of the membership and ideology of the Muslim Brothers.” 

The founder of the Muslim Brotherhood in 1928 was Hasan Al-Banna, an Egyptain school teacher and Islamist political reformer. Hasan Al-Banna unconstrained vision of Islam is revealing in its breadth and scope:

“Islam is a comprehensive system which deals with all spheres of life. It is a country and homeland or a government and a nation. It is conduct and power or mercy and justice. It is a culture and a law or knowledge and jurisprudence. It is material and wealth or gain and prosperity. It is Jihad and a call or army and a cause. And finally, it is true belief and correct worship.”

The Message of the Teachings, Hasan Al-Banna http://www.almoltaqa.ps/english/showthread.php?t=16037

Today the Muslim Brotherhood is the largest and most influential Islamic international political organization.  

In Robert Spencer’s book the Stealth Jihad: How Radical Islam Is Subverting America without Guns or Bombs on page 16 the goals of the Muslim Brotherhood in the United States are explained by Mohamed Akram of the Muslim Brotherhood:      

“[ Muslim Brotherhood]…must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah’s religion is made victorious over all religions.”   

 The Associated Press apparently is one of those unwitting hands of the stealth jihadists. The question that should be answered by the Associated Press is did any individual or organization either directly or indirectly bring pressure on AP to ban the use of ground zero mosque in their stories. If so, who communicated with them on the subject? What exactly was said?     

Why should these questions need to be answered?      

The AP memo continued with the following “guidance”:

“…2. here is a succinct summary of President Obama’s position:    

Obama has said he believes Muslims have the right to build an Islamic center in New York as a matter of religious freedom, though he’s also said he won’t take a position on whether they should actually build it. …”      

The Associated Press apparently wants to get the Obama party line or spin out to all its AP subscribers. The vast majority of Americans agree with Charles Krauthammer, Pulitzer Prize-winning syndicated columnist, political commentator and physician, as to what President Obama should have done, namely appealed to Muslims not to build the ground zero mosque.

Krauthammer: Obama Should Have Appealed to Muslims Not to Build Ground Zero Mosque

In a August 31, 2010 Quinnipiac University poll of 1,497 New York residents surveyed, 71% said the mosque should be voluntarily relocated and 71% want Andrew Cuomo, the Attorney General of New York State to investigate the finances of the group funding the ground zero mosque. A poll of likely voters by Rasmussen Reports found similar opposition to the ground zero mosque:

“…A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 85% of U.S. voters say they are now following news stories about the mosque planned near Ground Zero. That’s a 34-point jump from a month ago when only 51% said they were following the story. 

The new finding includes 58% who are following the story very closely, up from 22% in mid-July.

Now 62% oppose the building of a mosque near where the World Trade Center stood in Lower Manhattan, compared to 54% in the previous survey. Twenty-five percent (25%) favor allowing the mosque to go ahead, and 13% more are not sure.”

The Associated Press’ memo never addressed the question as to where exactly is ground zero. Immediately after September 11, 2001 a much larger area than just the World Trade Center site was referred to as ground zero. Ground zero included everything below Chambers Street in New York City, which is five blocks north of Vesey Street, the northern border of the World Trade Center site. The ground zero mosque site on Park Place is just two blocks north of Vesey Street. 

Far more important and potentially more damaging to the safety and security of the American people and the United States is the banning of such “religious” terms as Islamic extremism, jihad, Islam and Sharia from the National Security Strategy Document by President Obama’s advisors that was reported by the Associated Press on April 7, 2010 in a story entitled, “Obama bans terms Jihad, Islam.”

bill whittle PJTV Obama censors threat

This is dangerous because by banning such words or phrases you are refusing to call ideas or actions by their proper name, names that even our avowed Islamic extremist enemies use in describing their intentions, plans and actions.  This goes beyond political correctness into political censorship and reminds one of George Orwell’s novel 1984. What individuals and organizations have been pressuring the President and his advisors to ban these terms from National Security documents?   Are these organizations stealth jihadists with links to the Muslim Brotherhood or other jihadist’s organizations?

If you doubt political correctness and censorship cannot kill people, remember Major Nidal Malik Hasan, that killed 12 soldiers and one civilian and wounded30 more at Fort Hood on November 5, 2009 while  shouting the Muslim expression “Allahu Akbar.”  Political correctness in the Army discouraged many officers from reporting and making a formal complaint about Major Hasan’s repeated statements about his hating America, its non-Muslim majority and the military. If the Major had been a white supremacist  he would have been discharged by Army, but a Muslim supremacist was given a pass and 13 people died. Political correctness and censorship kills.

Islam and the Left’s Assault on Free Speech – Steven Emerson (1 of 2)

Islam and the Left’s Assault on Free Speech – Steven Emerson (2 of 2)

Steve Emerson: Was Major Hasan A Ticking Timebomb? (11.9.09)

Lt. Col. Ralph Peters: USA Sick with Political Correctness (11.9.09)

Major Nidal Malik Hasan’s Jihad warning signs ignored by politically correct military – Fort Hood

Remember September 11, 2010 by reflecting upon the words in The 9/11 Commission Report, page 13:

“…We learned about an enemy who is sophisticated, patient, disciplined and lethal. The enemy rallies broad support in the Arab and Muslim world by demanding redress of political grievances, but its hostility towards us and our values is limitless. Its purpose is to rid the world of religious and political pluralism, the plebiscite and equal rights for woman. It makes no distinction between military and civilian targets. Collateral damage is not in its lexicon. …”

The goals and agenda of the militant and stealth jihadists are the same; they only differ as to tactics. The ground zero mosque should never be built for it is an insulting affront to the families and friends of those who died on 9/11 and only encourages the militant and stealth jihadists.

The American people can remember the people who died on September 11, 2001 by reading The 9/11 Commission Report (available online at http://9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf ) and Robert Spencer’s book The Stealth Jihad: How Radical Islam Is Subverting America without Guns or Bombs or watch his “Stealth Jihad and Islamization of the West” videos on YouTube. However, be prepared to be called an Islamophobe by the stealth jihadists among us.

“This is the American moment in world history, the one for which we shall forever be judged. Just as in politics the responsibility of the fate of freedom in the world has devolved upon our regime, so the fate of philosophy in the world has devolved upon our universities, and the two are related as they have never been before. The gravity of our given task is great, and it is very much in doubt how the future will judge our stewardship.”

~Alan Bloom, The Closong of the American Mind, page 382.

Background Articles and Videos

The Middle East with Daniel Pipes

Islam and the Left’s Assault on Free Speech – Andrew McCarthy (1 of 2)

Islam and the Left’s Assault on Free Speech – Andrew McCarthy (2 of 2)

Muslim Brotherhood ‘Conspiracy’ to Subvert America

CAIR Revealed

Hot Air Video: The speech that CAIR didn’t want you to hear

Jihad Watch: The “Islam is Peace” Campaign

Charles Krauthammer Exposes Obama Hypocrisy on No Rush to Judgment

Should Mosque, Islamic Center Be Built Near Ground Zero?

The Next Moves of Radical Islam – Robert Spencer

Newt Gingrich: No Ground Zero Mosque

Newt Gingrich: Jihadist = Person who seeks to impose Sharia

Newt Gingrich: Freedom Will Prevail

Mosque Debate Part 1

Mosque Debate Part 2

Mosque Debate Part 3

Mosque Debate Part 4

Muslim Brotherhood in America – Orlando Mosque Finances Hamas Fundraiser

Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)

“…The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is America’s largest Muslim civil liberties advocacy organization that deals with civil advocacy and promotes human rights. It is headquartered on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., with regional offices nationwide and in Canada.[1]

Through media relations, lobbying, and education, CAIR presents what it views as an Islamic perspective on issues of importance to the American public, and seeks to empower the American Muslim community and encourage its social and political activism. Annual banquets, through which CAIR raises the majority of its funds, are attended by American politicians, statesmen, interfaith leaders, activists and media personalities.[1]

The organization was dealt a significant blow to its reputation in the United States after it was named an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas funding case.[2] The FBI no longer works with CAIR outside of criminal investigations due to its status as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation case.[3][4][5] …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_on_American-Islamic_Relations

Muslim Mafia

“…Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That’s Conspiring to Islamize America is a 2009 book by U.S. State Department-trained Arabic linguist and former U.S. Air Force Office of Special Investigations special agent Paul David Gaubatz, and investigative journalist and Hoover Institute fellow Paul Sperry. According to the Charlotte Observer, it “portrays the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) as a subversive organization allied with international terrorists.”[1]

The book prompted endorsements from a number of conservative writers and requests by several conservative members of the United States Congress for investigations into CAIR’s possible terrorist links and undue influence. It also prompted denouncements from CAIR, media outlets and other members of Congress. The manner in which its source documents were obtained led CAIR to sue one of the authors. …”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEb-USpe6jM&feature=related

 

Reinhold Niebuhr

“…Karl Paul Reinhold Niebuhr (pronounced /ˈraɪnhoʊld ˈniːbʊər/; June 21, 1892 – June 1, 1971) was an American theologian and commentator on public affairs. Niebuhr was the archetypal American intellectual of the Cold War era. Starting as a leftist minister in the 1920s indebted to theological liberalism, he shifted to the new Neo-Orthodox theology in the 1930s, explaining how the sin of pride created evil in the world. He attacked utopianism as useless for dealing with reality, writing in The Children of Light and the Children of Darkness (1944):

“Man’s capacity for justice makes democracy possible; but man’s inclination to injustice makes democracy necessary.”

His realism deepened after 1945 and led him to support American efforts to confront Soviet communism around the world. A powerful speaker and lucid author, he was the most influential minister of the 1940s and 1950s in public affairs. Niebuhr battled with the religious liberals over what he called their naïve views of sin and the optimism of the Social Gospel, and battled with the religious conservatives over what he viewed as their naïve view of Scripture and their narrow definition of “true religion.” He was a leader of liberal intellectuals and supported many liberal causes,

His long-term impact involves relating the Christian faith to “realism” in foreign affairs, rather than idealism, and his contribution to modern “just war” thinking. Niebuhr’s perspective had a great impact on many liberals, who came to support a “realist” foreign policy.[1] His influence has been acknowledged by such recent leaders of American foreign policy as Jimmy Carter, Madeleine Albright, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, as well as John McCain[2]. …”

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

Allan Bloom

“..Allan David Bloom (September 14, 1930 – October 7, 1992) was an American philosopher, classicist, and academic. He studied under David Grene, Leo Strauss, Richard McKeon and Alexandre Kojève. He subsequently taught at Cornell University, the University of Toronto, Yale University, École Normale Supérieure of Paris, and the University of Chicago. Bloom championed the idea of ‘Great Books’ education. Bloom became famous for his criticism of contemporary American higher education, with his views being expressed in his bestselling 1987 book, The Closing of the American Mind.[1] Although Bloom was characterized as a conservative in the popular media, Bloom explicitly stated that this was a misunderstanding, and made it clear that he was not to be affiliated with any conservative movements.[2] Saul Bellow, Bloom’s friend and teaching partner at the University of Chicago, wrote a novel based on his colleague entitled Ravelstein. …”

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

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

The Third Jihad: Radical Islam’s Vision for America–Videos

CAIR Launches National PSA Campaign–Videos

Robert Spencer: Stealth Jihad: Islam’s War against the West–Videos

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

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

Stealth Jihad–Terror From Within–Videos

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

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

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 )

“Ground Zero Mosque” Is Now Politically Incorrect–The Associated Press Style Guide and Memo

Posted on August 30, 2010. Filed under: Blogroll, Communications, Culture, Education, Foreign Policy, government spending, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, People, Philosophy, Politics, Raves, Regulations, Video, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

No Mosque at Ground Zero

No mosque at Ground Zero

“God is our purpose, the Prophet our leader, the Quran our constitution, jihad our way and dying for God our supreme objective.”

~Muslim Brotherhood  (Ikhwan ul Muslimoon) or Society of the Muslim Brothers motto written by its founder, Hassan al-Banna in 1928.

http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/355.pdf

If you ever worked on a newspaper staff, the Associated Press Style Guide is considered ” the journalist’s  bible” by editors, reporters and  commentators. The AP Style Guide “provides fundamental guidelines on spelling, grammar, punctuation and usage, with special sections on social media, reporting business and sports.”  Recently I wrote an article where both the headline and the story used the phrase ” ground zero mosque”  to describe the proposed 13 story mosque and community center to be built less than three block from the World Trade Center site in New York City. The article included both a map and a description of how far the proposed Islamic community center and mosque was from the World Trade Center site.

Tom Kent, Deputy Managing Editor for Standards and Production for the Associated Press sent out a memo on not using the phrase “ground zero mosque” when referring to the proposed Islamic community center and mosque to be built near the World Trade Center site:

“…Here is some guidance on covering the NYC mosque story, with assists from Chad Roedemeier in the NYC bureau and Terry Hunt in Washington:  1. We should continue to avoid the phrase “ground zero mosque” or “mosque at ground zero” on all platforms. (We’ve very rarely used this wording, except in slugs, though we sometimes see other news sources using the term.) The site of the proposed Islamic center and mosque is not at ground zero, but two blocks away in a busy commercial area. We should continue to say it’s “near” ground zero, or two blocks away. …”

http://www.ap.org/pages/about/pressreleases/pr_081910b.html …”

Apparently the “ground zero mosque” shorthand description must be offending some so-called “moderate Muslims”. The problem is that many of the “moderate Muslims” are actually stealth jihadists who have the same agenda as the militant jihadists of September 11, 2001.  Radical jihadists, both militant and stealth, want to replace American law and the United States Constitution by  sharia or Islamic law and our representative republic with an Islamic state or Caliphate with a religious leader at its head. They differ mainly as to the methods used to accomplish their goals.

In Steven Emerson’s and the Investigative Project on Terrorism’s book, Jihad Incorporated: A Guide to Militant Islam in the US, the roots of both militant and stealth jihad can be found in the Muslim Brotherhood.

Richard Clark is former National Coordinator for Security and Infrastructure Protection under Presidents Clinton and Bush. In testifying before the Senate Committee on Banking in October 2003 he stated:

“[I]t is now widely known that every major Islamist terrorist organization, from HAMAS to Islamic Jihad to Al Qaeda, has leveraged the financial resources and institutions of the United States to build their capabilities. We face a highly developed enemy in our mission to stop terrorist financing. While the overseas operations of Islamist terrorist organizations are generally segregated and distinct, the opposite holds in the United States. The issue of terrorist financing in the United States is a fundamental example of the shared infrastructure levered by HAMAS, Islamic Jihad and Al Qaeda, all of which enjoy a significant degree of cooperation and coordination within our borders. The common link here is the extremist Muslim Brotherhood–all of these organizations are descendants of the membership and ideology of the Muslim Brothers.”

~Jidha Incorporated:  A Guide to Militant Islam in the US, page 346.

In Robert Spencer’s book the Stealth Jihad: How Radical Islam Is Subverting America without Guns or Bombs on page 16 the goals of the Muslim Brotherhood in the United States are explained by Mohamed Akram of the Muslim Brotherhood:

“[ Muslim Brotherhood]…must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah’s religion is made victorious over all religions.”

The Associated Press apparently is one of those unwitting hands of the stealth jihadists.

The question that should be posed to the Associated Press is did any individual or organization either directly or indirectly bring pressure on AP to ban the use of ground zero mosque in their stories. If so, who communicated with them on the subject? What  exactly was said?

Why should these questions be posed?

Point 2 of the AP memo stated:

“2. Here is a succinct summary of President Obama’s position:

Obama has said he believes Muslims have the right to build an Islamic center in New York as a matter of religious freedom, though he’s also said he won’t take a position on whether they should actually build it. …”

Looks like the Associated Press wants to get the progressive party line out to all its AP subscribers in case they were not following the story very closely and did not have the politically correct spin.

Unfortunately the vast majority of Americans agree with Charles Krauthammer as to what President Obama should have done, namely appealed to Muslims not to build the ground zero mosque as seen on this YouTube video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaO5SiFmIcU&p=CB362BFCF091C33B&playnext=1&index=17

Krauthammer: Obama Should Have Appealed to Muslims Not to Build Ground Zero Mosque

The AP memo never addressed the question as  to where exactly is ground zero.  Immediately after September 11, 2001 a much larger area than just the World Trade Center site was referred to as ground zero. Ground zero included everything below Chambers Street, which is five blocks north of Vesey Street, the northern border of the World Trade Center site and would include the proposed ground zero mosque site on Park Place just two blocks north of Vesey Street. This fact is conveniently overlooked and not even mentioned in the AP memo.

AP Memo: Don’t Call it Ground Zero Mosque

While I am all in favor of consistent style and appreciate the Associated Press’ style guide, substance not style and political correctness should be of primary concern of any news story and commentary.  In fairness to the Associated Press, publications can and do ignore AP styles for the simply reason it is a style guide not a government edict, mandate or regulation.

Far more important and potentially more damaging to the security of the United States is the banning of the terms Islamic extremism and jihad from National Security Strategy and related documents by President Obama’s advisors that was reported by the Associated Press in April 2010.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/obama-bans-terms-islam-and-jihad-from-u-s-security-document-1.909

This is political correctness run amok and appears to cross the line into political censorship by the Obama Administration.

This is dangerous because you are refusing to call things by their real name that even our avowed  enemies use in describing their intentions, plans and actions.

Was political censorship of words such as Islamic extremist, jihad, Sharia, and Islam at the specific orders of President Obama?

If not, who ordered these and others words be expunged from National Security documents?

What individuals and organizations have been pressuring the President and his advisors to ban these terms from National Security documents?

Are these organizations stealth jihadists with links to the Muslim Brotherhood, other stealth jihadist’s or even militant jihadist’s organizations?

The American people want to know the truth as to what exactly is going on here?

Time for a long overdue press conference and some clarity and transparency, Mr. President.

Obama Bans “Islam”

Obama Bans Jihad and Islamic Extremism Terrorism Terms

Stealth Jihad: Islam’s War against the West – Robert Spencer (1 of 6)

The Third Jihad: US Homegrown Terror Threat

As we approach September 11, 2010, we should reflect upon the words in The 9/11 Commission Report, page 13:

“…We learned about an enemy who is sophisticated, patient, disciplined and lethal. The enemy rallies broad support in the Arab and Muslim world by demanding redress of political grievances, but its hostility towards us and our values is limitless. Its purpose it to rid the world of religious and political pluralism, the plebiscite and equal rights for woman. It makes no distinction between military and civilian targets. Collateral damage is not in its lexicon. …”

The goals and agenda of the militant and stealth jihadists are the same, they only differ as to tactics.

The ground zero mosque should never be built for it is an affront to the families and friends of those who died on 9/11.

The American people and their political and military leaders cannot and should not ignore or evade the jihadist among us.

To do so shows weakness and  only invites further militant and stealth jihadist attacks on our country, institutions and people.

“All Muslims must make jihad –Jihad is an obligation from Allah on every Muslim and cannot be ignored or evaded.”

~Hassan al-Banna, Founder Muslim Brotherhood


Background Articles and Videos

Mosque Built at Ground Zero…

AP Standards Center issues staff advisory on covering New York City mosque”…

AP Standards Center issues staff advisory on covering New York City mosque

Associated Press Deputy Managing Editor for Standards and Production Tom Kent sent the following note to the staff about covering the New York City mosque story and then discussed the guidance and reaction in a Facebook entry headlined “Behind the News: Describing the proposed NYC mosque.”

Aug. 19, 2010

Colleagues,

Here is some guidance on covering the NYC mosque story, with assists from Chad Roedemeier in the NYC bureau and Terry Hunt in Washington:

1. We should continue to avoid the phrase “ground zero mosque” or “mosque at ground zero” on all platforms. (We’ve very rarely used this wording, except in slugs, though we sometimes see other news sources using the term.) The site of the proposed Islamic center and mosque is not at ground zero, but two blocks away in a busy commercial area. We should continue to say it’s “near” ground zero, or two blocks away.

WE WILL CHANGE OUR SLUG ON THIS STORY LATER TODAY from “BC-Ground Zero Mosque” to “BC-NYC Mosque.”

In short headlines, some ways to refer to the project include:

_ mosque 2 blocks from WTC site
_ Muslim (or Islamic) center near WTC site
_ mosque near ground zero
_ mosque near WTC site

We can refer to the project as a mosque, or as a proposed Islamic center that includes a mosque.

It may be useful in some stories to note that Muslim prayer services have been held since 2009 in the building that the new project will replace. The proposal is to create a new, larger Islamic community center that would include a mosque, a swimming pool, gym, auditorium and other facilities.

2. Here is a succinct summary of President Obama’s position:

Obama has said he believes Muslims have the right to build an Islamic center in New York as a matter of religious freedom, though he’s also said he won’t take a position on whether they should actually build it.

For additional background, you’ll find below a Fact Check on the project that moved yesterday.

Tom

http://www.ap.org/pages/about/pressreleases/pr_081910b.html

2010 AP Stylebook

“the journalist’s bible”

http://www.apstylebook.com/

Obama bans terms `Islam` and `jihad` from U.S. security document

Document under President Bush cited ‘militant Islamic radicalism’ as greatest conflict of 21st century.

By The Associated Press

“…President Barack Obama’s advisers will remove religious terms such as “Islamic extremism” from the central document outlining the U.S. national security strategy and will use the rewritten document to emphasize that the United States does not view Muslim nations through the lens of terror, counterterrorism officials said.

The change is a significant shift in the National Security Strategy, a document that previously outlined the Bush Doctrine of preventative war and currently states: The struggle against militant Islamic radicalism is the great ideological conflict of the early years of the 21st century. …”

http://www.haaretz.com/news/obama-bans-terms-islam-and-jihad-from-u-s-security-document-1.909

Media Masks Mosque: AP Bans “Ground Zero Mosque”

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2010/08/media-masks-mosque-ap-bans-ground-zero-mosque.html

“…The Society of the Muslim Brothers, often simply الإخوان Al-Ikhwān, The Brotherhood or MB) is a Sunni transnational movement and the largest political opposition organization in many Arab states.[1] The world’s oldest and largest Islamic political group,[1] it was founded in 1928, in Egypt by the schoolteacher Hassan al-Banna.

The Brotherhood’s stated goal is to instill the Qur’an and Sunnah as the “sole reference point for … ordering the life of the Muslim family, individual, community … and state”.[2] Since its inception in 1928 the movement has officially opposed violent means to achieve its goals,[3][4] with some exceptions such as in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict or to overthrow secular Ba’athist rule in Syria (see Hama massacre). This position has been questioned, particularly by the Egyptian government, which accused the group of a campaign of killings in Egypt after World War II.[5]

The Muslim Brotherhood is banned in Egypt, and members have been arrested for their participation in it.[6] As a means of circumventing the ban, supporters run for office as independents.[7] The Egyptian government in one case responded by obstructing voters,[8] despite Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak’s promise to have a “free and fair election.”[9]

Outside of Egypt, the group’s political activity has been described as evolving away from modernism and reformism towards a more traditional, “rightist conservative” stance.  For example, the Muslim Brotherhood party in Kuwait opposes suffrage for women.[10] The Brotherhood condemned terrorism and the 9/11 attacks,[11][12] but whether or not it has ties to terrorism is a matter of dispute.[13] Its position on violence has also caused disputes within the movement, with advocates of violence at times breaking away to form groups such as the Al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya (The Islamic Group) and Al Takfir Wal Hijra (Excommunication and Migration).[14]

Among the Brotherhood’s more influential members was Sayyid Qutb. Qutb was the author of one of Islamism’s most important books, Milestones, which called for the restoration of Islam by re-establishing the Sharia and by using “physical power and Jihad for abolishing the organizations and authorities of the Jahili system,”[15] which he believed to include the entire Muslim world.[16] While studying at university, Osama bin Laden claimed to have been influenced by the religious and political ideas of several professors with strong ties to the Muslim Brotherhood including both Sayyid Qutb and his brother Muhammad Qutb. However, once Al Qaeda was fully organized, they denounced the Muslim Brotherhood’s reform through nonviolence and accused them of “betraying the cause of Islam and abandoning their ‘jihad’ in favour of forming political parties and supporting modern state institutions”.[17][18]

The Brotherhood is financed by contributions from its members, who are required to allocate a portion of their income to the movement. Some of these contributions are from members who live in oil-rich countries.[19] …”

Beliefs

In the group’s belief, the Quran and Sunna constitute a perfect way of life and social and political organization that God has set out for man. Islamic governments must be based on this system and eventually unified in a Caliphate. The MB goal, as stated by Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna was to reclaim Islam’s manifest destiny, an empire, stretching from Spain to Indonesia.[20] It preaches that Islam enjoins man to strive for social justice, the eradication of poverty and corruption, and political freedom to the extent allowed by the laws of Islam. The Brotherhood strongly opposes Western colonialism, and helped overthrow the pro-western monarchies in Egypt and other Muslim nations during the early 20th century.

On the issue of women and gender the Muslim Brotherhood interprets Islam very traditionally. Its founder called for “a campaign against ostentation in dress and loose behavior,” “segregation of male and female students,” a separate curriculum for girls, and “the prohibition of dancing and other such pastimes…”[21] The MB is a movement, not a political party, but members have created political parties in several countries, such as the Islamic Action Front in Jordan and Hamas in Gaza and the West Bank. These parties are staffed by Brotherhood members but kept independent from the MB to some degree

http://en.wikipedia.org

The Muslim Students Association and the Jihad Network By: FrontPage Magazine
FrontPageMagazine.com | Thursday, May 08, 2008

“…As revealed in documents seized by the FBI and entered as evidence in a Texas court, the Muslim Students Association is a legacy project of the Muslim Brotherhood.[1] The Brotherhood is an organization formed by a Hitler-admiring Muslim named Hasan al-Bannain Egypt in 1928.[2] It was designed to function as the spearpoint of the Islamo-fascist movement and its crusade against the West.

The Brotherhood spawned al-Qaeda and Hamas.[3] Its doctrines make up the core of the terrorist jihad conducted by organizations such as Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, Hamas and the government of Iran.[4] Its agendas have been clear since its creation: infiltration, subversion and global terror with world conquest as the goal.

…To establish one Islamic state of united Islamic countries, one nation under one leadership whose mission will be to reinforce adherence to the law of Allah…and the strengthening of the Islamic presence in the world arena….The goal…is the establishment of a world Islamic state.[5]

The first target was the “near enemy” – the Arab states that al-Banna and his followers felt had betrayed Islam. The United States – the “far enemy” – would not become a specific focus of the Brotherhood until many years later.

The organization’s aspirations for world dominion seemed like a fantasy until the Iranian revolution of 1979. But that event showed the jihadists that they could conquer and govern a state and use it as a base for Islamic revolution elsewhere. There was no doubt who the enemy was. The Iranian leader Ayatollah Khomeni coined the phrase “Great Satan” and “Little Satan” to demonize the United States and Israel and mark them for destruction. …”

http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=30339

Afghan Jihad – Afghanistan

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

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

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

Stealth Jihad–Terror From Within–Videos

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

Robert Spencer–Stealth Jihad–Videos

Robert Spencer–The Truth About Muhammad–Videos

Robert Spencer: Stealth Jihad: Islam’s War against the West–Videos

Terrorists Among Us: Jihad in America–Videos

Obsession: Radical Islams War Against the West–Videos

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

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 )

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 )

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 )

Censorship Commissar for AM and Internet Talk Radio–Henry Waxman–The Face of Progressive Liberal Fascism!

Posted on February 18, 2009. Filed under: Blogroll, Communications, Economics, Philosophy, Politics, Rants, Raves, Security, Strategy, Talk Radio, Technology, Video | Tags: , , , , , , |

 

 

Henry Waxman Foe of Freedom Speech on The Internet and Talk Radio

Henry Waxman Foe of Freedom Speech on The Internet and Talk Radio

 

United States Constitution

Bill of Rights

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html 

 

“…The Fairness Doctrine has no place in our First Amendment regime. It puts the head of the camel inside the tent and enables administration after administration to toy with TV or radio in order to serve its sordid or its benevolent ends. …Under our Bill of Rights people are entitled to have extreme ideas, silly ideas, partisan ideas. The same is true, I believe, of TV and radio. …”

~Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas

U.S. Supreme Court

COLUMBIA BROADCASTING v. DEMOCRATIC COMM., 412 U.S. 94 (1973)

412 U.S. 94

COLUMBIA BROADCASTING SYSTEM, INC. v. DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
No. 71-863.Argued October 16, 1972
Decided May 29, 1973  

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=412&invol=94

 

President John F Kennedy Secret Society Speech version 2

 

The above Representative and attorney would like to destroy the United States Constitution for which he swore an oath to defend and protect!

Sir, what do you not understand about the words “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or press…”

This is how Progressive Liberal Fascist subvert the US Constitution” as reported by the American Spectator in an article entitled In All Fairness by The Prowler: 

 

“…Senior FCC staff working for acting Federal Communications Commissioner Michael Copps held meetings last week with policy and legislative advisers to House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman to discuss ways the committee can create openings for the FCC to put in place a form of the “Fairness Doctrine” without actually calling it such. 

Waxman is also interested, say sources, in looking at how the Internet is being used for content and free speech purposes. “It’s all about diversity in media,” says a House Energy staffer, familiar with the meetings. “Does one radio station or one station group control four of the five most powerful outlets in one community? Do four stations in one region carry Rush Limbaugh, and nothing else during the same time slot? Does one heavily trafficked Internet site present one side of an issue and not link to sites that present alternative views? These are some of the questions the chairman is thinking about right now, and we are going to have an FCC that will finally have the people in place to answer them.” 

“…One idea Waxman’s committee staff is looking at is a congressionally mandated policy that would require all TV and radio stations to have in place “advisory boards” that would act as watchdogs to ensure “community needs and opinions” are given fair treatment. Reports from those advisory boards would be used for license renewals and summaries would be reviewed at least annually by FCC staff.  …”  

Who I listen to on a AM or internet radio  is none of your business or the business of other professional politicians.

If you do not like what is being said on talk radio or the internet, turn your radio or computer off or go to another station or site.

I turned off my TV off many years ago for the simple reason I was tired of the bias, distortions and lies of the liberal progressive socialists pretending to being objective.

I have also cancelled subscriptions to several magazines for the same reason.

If you think you are going to “shut-up” your political opponents, forget it.

Talk radio is now going after your censorship initiatives and guess what you deserve it for breaking your oath of office.

The hosts of talk radio will not shut-up and the listeners of talk radio will not stop listening.

This long list of AM and Internet talk radio hosts clearly illustrates that competition, freedom and independence  is alive and well on both AM and Internet radio:

 

audiencechart

TalkStreamLive’s Top 100 Talk Radio Shows 2008

1 Tammy Bruce
2 Laura Ingraham
3 Rush Limbaugh
4 Michael Savage
5 Glenn Beck
6 Sean Hannity
7 Mark Levin
8 Neal Boortz
9 Dennis Miller
10 George Noory
11 Monica Crowley
12 Bill Bennett
13 Michael Medved
14 Bill O’Reilly
15 MANCOW
16 Dennis Prager
17 Hugh Hewitt
18 Dr. Laura
19 Rusty Humphries
20 Mike Gallagher
21 Lan Lamphere – Patriot Brigade Radio
22 The Lion’s Den – Plains Radio Network
23 IMUS
24 Jerry Doyle
25 The Right Perspective
26 Alex Jones
27 Paranormal Radio
28 Larry Elder
29 Roger Hedgecock
30 Quinn & Rose
31 Michael Reagan
32 John Batchelor
33 Phil Hendrie
34 Lou Dobbs
35 Dave Ramsey
36 Art Bell
37 Lars Larson
38 Kim Komando
39 John Gibson
40 Larry Kudlow
41 Bill Cunningham
42 Walton & Johnson
43 Randi Rhodes
44 G. Gordon Liddy
45 Howie Carr
46 Jay Severin
47 Stephanie Miller
48 Ed Schultz
49 Robert Scott Bell
50 Adam Carolla
51 Outlaw Radio
52 Bob Grant
53 Bill Handel
54 Roy Masters
55 Al Rantel
56 Clark Howard
57 Brian and The Judge
58 Bob Brinker
59 Mark Simone
60 Thom Hartmann
61 The Captains AMERICA
62 Bob & Tom
63 Tom Sullivan
64 Steve Malzberg
65 Barbara Simpson
66 Leo Laporte
67 Ian Punnett
68 Alan Colmes
69 Jackie Mason
70 Michael Smerconish
71 Tom Leykis
72 Armstrong & Getty
73 Curtis Sliwa
74 Dr. Joy Browne
75 Mike McConnell
76 BUBBA the love sponge
77 Rachel Maddow
78 Bruce Williams
79 Bill Press
80 Wake Up America
81 Doug McIntyre
82 Midnight Trucking
83 Julie Briggs
84 Mark Belling
85 Pat Gray
86 J.D. Hayworth
87 Frosty, Heidi & Frank
88 Jim Bohannon
89 Joey Reynolds
90 Janet Parshall
91 Rollye James
92 Rob, Arnie & Dawn Show
93 Jon Arthur Live
94 Chuck Harder
95 Phil Valentine
96 John & Ken
97 Michael Graham
98 Content Black Woman
99 GUNNY BOB
100 Michele McPhee 

  

Shame on you Representative Waxman for trying to censor AM and Internet talk radio through the FCC with local political activists, aka censorship commissars, on advisory boards.

You are beginning to sound and act like a socialist from the past speaking on radio:

Suggest Mr. Waxman listen to the words of President John F. Kennedy in the above speech paying particular attention to the closing sentence and the words “born to be: free and independent.”

“…And so it is to the printing press–to the recorder of man’s deeds, the keeper of his conscience, the courier of his news–that we look for strength and assistance, confident that with your help man will be what he was born to be: free and independent.”

~President John F. Kennedy

http://www.jfklibrary.org/Historical+Resources/Archives/Reference+Desk/Speeches/JFK/003POF03NewspaperPublishers04271961.htm

 

 

 

Glenn Beck: What’s the Difference Between Barack Obama and Hugo Chavez?

 

Fairness Doctrine or Media Control Doctrine? | An In-Depth Discussion

 

Fairness Doctrine = Censorship Doctrine = World War III

 

O’Reilly Factor: Laura Ingraham On the Fairness Doctrine

 

“Fairness Doctrine” — Feinstein Outlawing Talk Radio

 

Kucinich Discusses Fairness Doctrine on Lou Dobbs

 

Bill Clinton On The Fairness Doctrine

 

Jackie Mason Vlog33 What’s Fair About The Fairness Doctrine?

 

Obama and The Fairness Doctrine

 

Sen. Charles Schumer – Fairness Doctrine

 

Will The Fairness Doctrine Return?

 

Background Articles and Videos

 

Thomas E Woods – Principles of 98

In All Fairness

“…The House Energy and Commerce Committee is also looking at how it can put in place policies that would allow it greater oversight of the Internet. “Internet radio is becoming a big deal, and we’re seeing that some web sites are able to control traffic and information, while other sites that may be of interest or use to citizens get limited traffic because of the way the people search and look for information,” says on committee staffer. “We’re at very early stages on this, but the chairman has made it clear that oversight of the Internet is one of his top priorities.” 

“This isn’t just about Limbaugh or a local radio host most of us haven’t heard about,” says Democrat committee member. “The FCC and state and local governments also have oversight over the Internet lines and the cable and telecom companies that operate them. We want to get alternative views on radio and TV, but we also want to makes sure those alternative views are read, heard and seen online, which is becoming increasingly video and audio driven. Thanks to the stimulus package, we’ve established that broadband networks — the Internet — are critical, national infrastructure. We think that gives us an opening to look at what runs over that critical infrastructure.”  …” 

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/02/16/in-all-fairness/1

 

Henry Waxman

Henry Arnold Waxman (born September 12, 1939 in Los Angeles, California) is an American politician. He has represented California’s 30th congressional district (map) in the U.S. House of Representatives since 1975. Waxman, a Democrat, is considered to be one of the most influential liberal members of Congress. His district includes much of the western part of the city of Los Angeles, as well as West Hollywood, Santa Monica and Beverly Hills. Before his election to Congress, he served six years in the California State Assembly.

With the Democrats’ victory in the 2006 midterm elections, Waxman became chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, the principal investigative committee of the House. He was the committee’s ranking Democrat from 1997 to 2007. In 2009, he will begin serving as the Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, as a result of beating former chairman John Dingell in a 137-122 secret vote of House Democrats on November 20, 2008. …”

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

 

 

Friday the 13th Fairness Doctrine Watch

By Michelle Malkin

 

“…It’s Friday the 13th. Jason is a Democrat wielding his knife against conservative talk radio. They are all coming out of the woodwork now.

Harkin:

Iowa Senator Tom Harkin, a Democrat, defends his support of bringing back the Fairness Doctrine for broadcasting. The doctrine had required radio and television stations to cover controversial issues of public importance and give and opportunity for all sides to be heard.

The Fairness Doctrine was eliminated in 1987, but calls for reviving it had surfaced again recently. Harkin says it’s something he supports. Harkin says a few years ago he found out that the taxpayer funded Armed Forces Radio was running the Rush Limbaugh show, but weren’t running any “progressive” talk.

“So I came out and said if the taxpayers are paying for it, at least our armed services individuals ought to have at least the benefit of hearing the other side of the story, to quote Paul Harvey,” Harkin says. Conservatives like Iowa Congressman Steve King, a Republican, believe the move is an attempt to silence conservatives like Limbaugh. King issued a statement in response to Harkin saying information is now easily accessible in many forms and the Senator “wants to squelch your First Amendment rights in favor of Chinese-style censorship.”

Harkin says he’s just trying to be fair.

Bill Clinton: …”

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/02/13/friday-the-13th-fairness-doctrine-watch/

 

Michael Savage on “Fairness Doctrine” Controversy – Free Speech Endangerment – Aired Live 2/13/09

 

Inhofe on the Fairness Doctrine

 

Rep. Mike Pence on the Fairness Doctrine


 

 

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Memo To Radical Socialists: They Will Not Shutup and We Will Not Stop Listening!

The Talk Radio Audiences Revolt Against Fairness Doctrine

Barack Obama’s Socialist Green Commissar Carol Browner

 

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 34 so far )

Memo To Radical Socialists: They Will Not Shutup and We Will Not Stop Listening!

Posted on January 30, 2009. Filed under: Communications, Economics, Law, Links, People, Politics, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Strategy, Talk Radio, Technology, Uncategorized, Video | Tags: , , , , , , , , |

audiencechart

“Never get into an argument with a talk radio show  host that has millions of listeners.”

~Pronk Palisades

President Obama made a big mistake when he suggested that Republicans stop listening to Rush Limbaugh.

A very big mistake for many reasons on many levels.

Rush is right. The Republican Party has not been listening to him for several years and they have been losing elections.

Since I listen to several talk shows including Rush, when a President attacks or criticises a talk show host, he is indirectly attacking their loyal listeners.

Most talk show listeners are likely voters that will remember when the next election comes around.

I am on the same page as Bill, Neal, Glen, Rush, Sean, Mark, Laura, Michael, John , and Monica just to name a few, that also hope that President Obama  completely fails in his attempt to implement his socialist agenda.  President Obama is an economy wrecker and job destroyer.

I do not want to get along with Democrats, I want to defeat them!


Rush Limbaugh on Hannity: Does Rush Want Obama to Succeed?

Rush Limbaugh on Hannity Part 2: The Future of Conservatism

Conservatives Dominate Talk Radio – CAP’s Palmieri on FNC

“Fairness Doctrine” — Feinstein Outlawing Talk Radio

Rush Limbaugh: I hope Obama ‘Fails’

Rush Limbaugh and Barack Obama…

Background Articles and Videoes

REZ ZINGS GOP FOE IN A $TIMULATING TALK

“…President Obama warned Republicans on Capitol Hill today that they need to quit listening to radio king Rush Limbaugh if they want to get along with Democrats and the new administration.

“You can’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done,” he told top GOP leaders, whom he had invited to the White House to discuss his nearly $1 trillion stimulus package….”

http://www.nypost.com/seven/01232009/news/politics/prez_zings_gop_foe_in_a_timulating_talk_151572.htm

List of most-listened-to radio programs

“…Show, and weekly listeners in 2008

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-listened-to_radio_programs

Conservatives top talk radio

“…Conservatives and right-leaners still rule the talk-radio universe.

Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Michael Savage are the top three “most important” talk radio hosts in the country, according to the annual “Heavy Hundred” list released yesterday by Talkers magazine, an industry publication.

Laura Schlessinger is in fourth place followed by Glenn Beck, Laura Ingraham, Don Imus, Ed Schultz, Mike Gallagher and Neal Boortz.

They are all genuine stars according to Michael Harrison, who edits the magazine. More than 5,000 radio hosts across the country were among the contenders; the judgment criteria included audience numbers, media buzz and more subjective fare — the “total flavor” of a host, according to Mr. Harrison.

“The legends go marching on. These are truly great radio personalities who have proven themselves, who have real history. Rush, Sean, Michael, Dr. Laura — they’re right up there with people like Arthur Godfrey. They really are legends,” Mr. Harrison said.

He rejects the idea that talk radio is strictly conservative territory, though.

“American talk radio is not all right-wing political chatter. There’s a lot of diversity. Sure, we have our conservative stars. We’ve also got liberal talkers, or people like George Noory covering the paranormal and Kim Kommando on computers,” Mr. Harrison said. …”

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/feb/14/conservatives-top-talk-radio/

NewsMax Top 25 Radio Hosts

http://w3.newsmax.com/radio_hosts.cfm

TalkStreamLive’s Top 100 Talk Radio Shows 2008

1 Tammy Bruce
2 Laura Ingraham
3 Rush Limbaugh
4 Michael Savage
5 Glenn Beck
6 Sean Hannity
7 Mark Levin
8 Neal Boortz
9 Dennis Miller
10 George Noory
11 Monica Crowley
12 Bill Bennett
13 Michael Medved
14 Bill O’Reilly
15 MANCOW
16 Dennis Prager
17 Hugh Hewitt
18 Dr. Laura
19 Rusty Humphries
20 Mike Gallagher
21 Lan Lamphere – Patriot Brigade Radio
22 The Lion’s Den – Plains Radio Network
23 IMUS
24 Jerry Doyle
25 The Right Perspective
26 Alex Jones
27 Paranormal Radio
28 Larry Elder
29 Roger Hedgecock
30 Quinn & Rose
31 Michael Reagan
32 John Batchelor
33 Phil Hendrie
34 Lou Dobbs
35 Dave Ramsey
36 Art Bell
37 Lars Larson
38 Kim Komando
39 John Gibson
40 Larry Kudlow
41 Bill Cunningham
42 Walton & Johnson
43 Randi Rhodes
44 G. Gordon Liddy
45 Howie Carr
46 Jay Severin
47 Stephanie Miller
48 Ed Schultz
49 Robert Scott Bell
50 Adam Carolla
51 Outlaw Radio
52 Bob Grant
53 Bill Handel
54 Roy Masters
55 Al Rantel
56 Clark Howard
57 Brian and The Judge
58 Bob Brinker
59 Mark Simone
60 Thom Hartmann
61 The Captains AMERICA
62 Bob & Tom
63 Tom Sullivan
64 Steve Malzberg
65 Barbara Simpson
66 Leo Laporte
67 Ian Punnett
68 Alan Colmes
69 Jackie Mason
70 Michael Smerconish
71 Tom Leykis
72 Armstrong & Getty
73 Curtis Sliwa
74 Dr. Joy Browne
75 Mike McConnell
76 BUBBA the love sponge
77 Rachel Maddow
78 Bruce Williams
79 Bill Press
80 Wake Up America
81 Doug McIntyre
82 Midnight Trucking
83 Julie Briggs
84 Mark Belling
85 Pat Gray
86 J.D. Hayworth
87 Frosty, Heidi & Frank
88 Jim Bohannon
89 Joey Reynolds
90 Janet Parshall
91 Rollye James
92 Rob, Arnie & Dawn Show
93 Jon Arthur Live
94 Chuck Harder
95 Phil Valentine
96 John & Ken
97 Michael Graham
98 Content Black Woman
99 GUNNY BOB
100 Michele McPhee

Sample Size: 642,247 Unique Listening Sessions

Source: TalkStreamLive.com

http://talkstreamlive.wordpress.com/2009/01/01/talkstreamlives-top-100-talk-radio-shows-2008/

 Apparently Senator Stabenow did not get my memo to radical socialists.

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. …” 

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

The Talk Radio Audiences Revolt Against Fairness Doctrine

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 3 so far )

Bot or Human Political Correctness On Youtube?

Posted on January 25, 2009. Filed under: Babies, Communications, Law, Links, People, Politics, Strategy, Technology, Video | Tags: , , , |

While I have been a big fan of Youtube, I recently ran across this video:

OBAMA SUPPORTERS GOT YouTube MANAGEMENT TO THREATEN TO SHUT US DOWN!

 

 

In going back to old blog posts I have noticed a similiar pattern.

I will illustrate a point with one or more videos that have been posted on YouTube that I have embedded on my blog post.

Increasingly when the user clicks on the video to play it, a message is displayed that the video has been deleted by the user or deleted for copyright infringement.

Since almost all the posts were critical of now President Obama, I started to do some checking.

In most cases the video was still on Youtube, but now with a slightly different title.

The user apparently did not delete the video, YouTube did for whatever reason.

Looks like we have either a leftist bot or human playing the political correctness game of censorship.

Keep it up and those posting videos on YouTube will find another place to post their videos.

Did someone call Google or YouTube from either the Obama campaign or from the Democratic Party and request the video be deleted?

Or did the Obama campaign call their friends at the networks and request they call YouTube?

Time for some answers.

We are watching.

 

Background Articles and Videos

YouTube Caught CENSORING Ron Paul

ALEX JONES – YOUTUBE CENSORSHIP

Banned From YouTube?

Conservatives Perceive YouTube Bias, Launch New Video-Sharing Site

 

Banned from YouTube?

Railing against YouTube, two Republican White House veterans have launched QubeTV as a conservative alternative.”The 2008 campaign will be dominated by video and in particular by user-generated video,” says QubeTV founder Charlie Gerow, a former aide in the Ronald Reagan White House.

“There are a vast array of young conservative activists and operatives out there armed with cell phones or hand-helds that are going to capture the next ‘macaca’ moment or John Kerry bad joke and put them on Qube TV,” says Gerow, whose Pennsylvania strategic media firm, Quantum Communications, created the Web site.

Gerow insists YouTube banned a video by conservative blogger Michelle Malkin about radical Islamists.

Responding to that incident, a statement on the Web site reads: “We fly the conservative flag here at QubeTV, and we will not be about banning or deleting conservatives.”

YouTube takes issue with Gerow’s assertion that the site is banning conservative content.

“That’s flat out incorrect,” says a spokesman for YouTube, who asked not to be identified by name.

A statement provided to ABC News by YouTube elaborated: “Our site provides an equal opportunity for both sides of the political spectrum and embraces voter interaction with the candidates with no regard to party affiliation.”

YouTube says its users, not YouTube employees, police the site. However, if users flag inappropriate content, YouTube managers review it and remove the offending video from the site. …”

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Story?id=3137127&page=1

Censorship of Ron Paul, Part 1

 

 Censorship of Ron Paul, Part 2

 

Ron Paul Censored on YouTube
 

 

EFF Gets Involved in Election Video Takedown Spat

“… The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is going after several television networks for issuing YouTube takedown notices on campaign videos.

EFF on Monday penned a letter to CBS, Fox, NBC Universal, and the Christian Broadcasting Network, and asked that they stop issuing Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) takedown notices on campaign videos posted to YouTube.

“It is our sincere hope that, in the final days of this election season, you will stop sending DMCA takedown notices that target the use of short clips of news footage in election-related videos, whether posted by the presidential campaigns or by individual citizens expressing their views,” wrote Fred von Lohmann, a senior intellectual property attorney at EFF.

Republican presidential hopeful John McCain’s campaign last week sent a letter to YouTube requesting that it give a “full legal review” to all DMCA takedown notices aimed at videos from political candidates and campaign.

YouTube later rejected that request, but EFF said the problem is not with the video hosting site but with the networks that issue the takedown requests in the first place.

The McCain campaign identified CBS, CBN, and Fox as copyright owners who have targeted political videos on YouTube, while NBC has admitted to submitting takedown notices for videos from the Obama campaign, von Lohmann wrote.

“We understand your organizations’ desire to be seen as neutral, but given the extremely short nature of the clips at issue and the context in which these clips appear, it is unlikely that anyone would believe that the use of the clips by a candidate means that your organizations are somehow supporting that candidate,” he said.

Instead, these uses are “paradigmatic examples of fair use,” von Lohmann said.  …”

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2332981,00.asp

 

Activist Groups Push Nets to Keep Political Videos on YouTube

“…Public-interest groups are calling on some TV networks to quit making copyright claims that force YouTube to take down pointed videos from presidential candidates and political activists during the last weeks of the campaign.

In letters today to CBS, Fox, NBC Universal, the Christian Broadcast Network and YouTube, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the American Civil Liberties Union, Public Knowledge and the Stanford Fair Use Project reiterated their position that use of less than 10 seconds of the candidates’ TV appearances in the videos furthers democracy and should be “fair use” and not subject to copyright claims all the time. The letters also asked the networks at least not to make any requests in the campaign’s closing days.

“As we enter the final days of election season, we call on each of your organizations to stop sending notices. … Not only are such notices contrary to law, but they also threaten to silence an exciting new source of political expression,” said the letter, signed by Fred von Lohmann, senior intellectual property attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Both the public-interest groups and some political campaigns have complained that the four networks have made copyright claims that are too broad, prompting YouTube to remove videos that should remain publicly available.

On Oct. 13, the McCain-Palin campaign complained some of the copyright requests were “overreaching.” The campaign said then the requests have resulted in “the removal of non-infringing campaign videos from YouTube, thus silencing political speech.”

Mr. von Lohmann’s letter today dismissed the networks’ worries that the appearance of their video in clips would make the networks seem partisan.

“We understand your organizations’ desire to be seen as neutral, but given the extremely short nature of the clips at issue and the context in which these clips appear, it is unlikely that anyone would believe the use of the clips by a candidate means that your organizations are somehow supporting the candidate,” said the letter. …”

http://www.dvrepublic.org/story.php?n=1391&x=2

Fox News Likes YouTube Censorship?

 

YOUTUBE CENSORSHIP: THE NAMES AND FACES BEHIND IT

 

YouTube Censorship Rant

 

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

 

 Daniel Suarez–Daemon–Bots Are Taking Over!

 

 

 

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

The Missing SNL Bailout Skit: Censorship Under A Democratic Party Obama Regime

Posted on October 8, 2008. Filed under: Blogroll, Comedy, Economics, Immigration, Investments, Links, Politics, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Talk Radio, Video | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

 

 

SNL Skit – Banned (NBC Claiming Copyright – Bullcrap!)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SK9dt0yqpIk

http://patdollard.com/2008/10/it-is-here-the-banned-snl-skit-cannot-hide-from-louie/

 

O’Reilly Factor: Laura Ingraham On the Fairness Doctrine

 

Liberal Fascists Against Free Speech on Talk Radio

 

LOL 

Rush Limbaugh and Free Speech

 

Sarah Palin is change…


 

 

Democratic Party leaders ordered the pulling of the very funny SNL bailout skit after their financial backers complained that the truth really hurts.

SNL complied on orders from the network bosses.

I feel their pain.

I did not get to watch it.

This is just a taste of what is in store should the Democratic Party control the Senate, House and Presidency.

Free speech under radical socialism means do not reveal the truth even in a skit.

The Democratic Party and some Republicans would also like to destroy talk radio.

The recent bailout bill resulted in Congress being bombarded by telephone calls and e-mails opposing the bill by 99 to 1.

This also happened with the comprehensive immigration bill.

Once the American people became aware of what the American elites of both parties were trying to pull they made the call and sent the e-mail.

Should the American elites mess with talk radio and try to destroy it, millions of Americans will march on Washington–it will not be pretty.

What the American elites will not admit is that talk radio each day has an audence of over 100 million listeners.

Most talk show listeners have several favorite talk radio shows that they enjoy listening to both driving to work and when working listening to online over the web.

The bailout bill should have been defeated.

The American people are watching to see who really is bailout.

The American people are also watching the latest FCC end run by the left to use diversity and localism to stop talk radio.

Nice try but we are on to your tactics.

The American elites are playing with fire and they will get burned.

 

The forbidden skit: Full transcript and screenshots of SNL’s Soros/Sandler bailout satire
By Michelle Malkin

‘NBC is furiously erasing its tracks. Any attempts to upload the forbidden SNL bailout skit skewering George Soros and his left-wing subprime schemer friends Herbert and Marion Sandler will likely be squashed. So, I transcribed the whole comedy sketch for you and provided screenshots for the 7-minute video that has disappeared from NBC and Hulu. (Pat Dollard’s blog has posted the full clip on its server. Thanks to Ms. Underestimated for the .wmv file.)

The hits on the Sandlers ( “People who should be shot”) and Soros ( “Owner, Democratic Party”) occur near the end of the skit. …”

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/10/07/the-forbidden-skit-full-transcript-and-screenshots-of-snls-sorossandler-bailout-satire/

 

The missing SNL bailout skit — and the Soros connection

By Michelle Malkin 

“…Over the weekend, I watched a hilarious, dead-on, and surprisingly honest skit on Saturday Night Live about the craptastic bailout and its Democrat roots. The skit called out Fannie/Freddie and featured Nancy Pelosi dragging out various sob-story “victims” — who turned out to be a parade of deadbeats and schemers. I was going to post the video for you tonight, but I can’t.

The video has been pulled. Vanished into thin air. (Go here for full transcript and screenshots.)

Where did it go and why?

I have a theory.

One of the rapacious couples featured in the skit was Herbert and Marion Sandler (portrayed by Darrell Hammond and Casey Wilson). Unlike the other composite figures, the Sandlers are a real-life couple.

Also lampooned: Left-wing billionaire George Soros.

As Todd Thurman at Heritage notes, the Sandlers are left-wing moguls who built “a mortgage company whose major product was subprime mortgages and they sold it to Wachovia for $24.2 billion in 2006. And what do the Sandlers do when they are not peddling subprime garbage? They are busy writing checks to leftist groups like the Center for American Progress, the American Civil Liberties Union, and Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN). Yes that ACORN.”

The Sandlers are seething over the skit. And George Soros must be livid as well. Anyone else smell a legal threat behind the disappearance of the vid?

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/10/06/the-missing-snl-bailout-skit-and-the-soros-connection/ 

 

“Fairness Doctrine” = Unfair = censorship

 

President Rush Limbaugh. Half Hour News Hour

 

Background Articles and Videos

 

Why Rush Wins
It’s not terribly complicated.By Byron York

“…What motivates him came through in our discussion of his years on the air before the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine. When he told of being ordered by station management not to discuss controversial topics — pretty much standard procedure at the time — it was clear how frustrating he found the situation. But his frustration seemed to come not so much from being forbidden to discuss politics on the air as from being forbidden from discussing anything interesting on the air.

“The real practical effect of the Fairness Doctrine was to shut down all controversial programming, because management would not deal with complaints,” Limbaugh told me. “So when you did listen to talk shows on the radio, they were dull and boring and horrible.”

“…The bottom line isn’t really about politics. It’s about radio. If Limbaugh were a liberal, we’d probably be talking about why liberals dominate talk radio. So you can talk about ownership and diversity all you want. But the bottom line is that Limbaugh simply knows radio, and what works on radio, better than anyone else in the world. That’s why he wins.”  

http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/summary_0199-6848744_ITM

 

Stanley Kurtz’s Fairness Doctrine Preview   [Guy Benson]

“…Stanley Kurtz’s appearance on the Milt Rosenberg radio program in Chicago last night provided an unsettling look into the authoritarian tactics being employed by the Obama campaign to stifle and intimidate its critics.

I happened to be in the WGN studios for the entire affair because my friend, Zack Christenson, produces the show in question. He was aware of my previous reporting on the Obama-Ayers connection and kindly invited me to sit in on the two-hour interview. (For full disclosure, I work for two other radio stations in Chicago, WIND, and WYLL).

As I arrived at the downtown Chicago studios a few hours before show time, the phones began ringing off the hook with irate callers demanding Kurtz be axed from the program. It didn’t take long to discover that the Obama campaign—which had declined invitations to join the show for its duration to offer rebuttals to Kurtz’s points—had sent an “Obama Action Wire” e-mail to its supporters, encouraging them to deluge the station with complaints.

Why? Because, naturally, Kurtz is a “right-wing hatchet man,” a “smear merchant” and a “slimy character assassin” who is perpetrating one of the “most cynical and offensive smears ever launched against Barack.”

Evidently, much of Obama nation is composed of obedient and persistent sheep. They jammed all five studio lines for nearly the entire show while firing off dozens of angry emails. Many vowed to kick their grievances up the food chain to station management. After 90 minutes of alleged smear peddling, Milt Rosenberg (a well-respected host whose long-form interview show has aired in Chicago for decades) opened the phone lines, and blind ignorance soon began to crackle across the AM airwaves. The overwhelming message was clear: The interview must be put to an end immediately, and the station management should prevent similar discussions from taking place. …”

“…Team Obama is fast becoming the campaign that cried “smear.” They labeled the National Right to Life committee “liars” for providing evidence of some unpleasant facts about their candidate’s record on a series of infanticide votes. This tendency to lash out and engage in baseless name-calling not only smacks of desperation; it also may foreshadow an Obama presidency’s strategy in handling unfavorable media reports and sources.  …”

If anyone still believes reinstating the Fairness Doctrine isn’t a top priority for the American Left, last night’s example offered a stark and alarming wake-up call. Still not convinced? For goodness sake, read Jonah’s book.

UPDATE: Here is the podcast of the full show.

 http://media.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZmRhYmE3NzFlMTljNTdmZGQ3MjhkYTVjNzdmMjVhMzE=

 

Right Wing Radio — The Eternal Enemy   [Jonah Goldberg]

“…Let’s stipulate that the report is accurate about the fact that conservatives dominate talk radio. Who among us is shocked by this very old news? What I find simply amazing is that liberals see nothing wrong with using the state to police media content when they don’t like the content.

Does anyone really believe liberals would even entertain this renewed passion for the fairness doctrine if talk radio were overwhelmingly liberal? It just strikes me as so transparently opportunistic and unprincipled. If a conservative were to argue that the state should get involved in making Hollywood, or the biggest newspapers, or the broadcast news networks, or leading museums, publishing houses, or universities less liberal, liberals would justifiably scream bloody murder about censorship and propaganda.

Yes, yes, I know that they are public airwaves, blah blah blah. But every industry relies on some public accommodation of some kind. Museums and universities get major subsidies, tax breaks etc, newspapers are given all sorts of special considerations, from access to government workings and legal leeway in the courts. Indeed, many leading journalists argue for the de facto licensing of elite journalists by making them immune from prosecution under whistleblower and other laws against leaking. And the biggest newspapers are also deeply involved in radio and tv broadcasting. And let’s not even discuss public broadcasting.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YWE3MThlMjgyMGRiZmQ4ZThjODhlNzFlNDIxYzYwZWY=

 

The Fairness Doctrine at Work

By William Tate

“…For those not familiar with the Fairness Doctrine, it was a Federal Communications Commission policy that required radio and TV stations to, in effect, provide equal time on matters of public importance. A station which did not do so ran the risk of losing its broadcast license, something which Rupert Murdoch once famously compared to having a license to print money.

The Fairness Doctrine was originally intended to encourage a public dialogue on controversial issues by ensuring that both sides of a topic were aired. As a former radio and TV journalist, I can assure you that the opposite was true. Station owners were afraid that their licenses would be yanked if there was the slightest possibility that they could be accused of violating the doctrine; it was far safer to simply avoid controversial matters.
That, and its questionable constitutionality, caused the Reagan-era F.C.C. to repeal the Fairness Doctrine. Within months, Rush Limbaugh’s program was nationally syndicated, and radio programming has never been the same. Many industry observers credit Rush with single-handedly saving the AM band, one reason he has achieved cult-like status among broadcasters.
Liberals often seemed perplexed by the success of conservatives in talk radio and the abject failure of liberal talk radio (see Air America, Jim Hightower, Ed Schultz, etc.), another example of how their belief in government regulation blinds them to the way the free market operates. It’s the law of supply and demand. Liberals have long had multiple media outlets to turn to: government-supported PBS and NPR, the broadcast networks, the newsweeklies, the Times and the Post, and the rest of the legacy media. …”

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/06/the_fairness_doctrine_at_work.html

 

FCC Tries to Hush Rush

Jim Boulet Jr.

“…The “Hush Rush” crowd’s dream has been to revive the so-called “Fairness Doctrine,” which once required any radio station airing a conservative program to provide equal time for the liberal view. The doctrine’s advocates have tried using the democratic process, but to no avail whatsoever: In 2007, the U.S. House of Representatives rejected the latest effort 309 to 115.

Yet regulations proposed on January 28 by the Federal Communications Commission would effectively reinstate the Fairness Doctrine via something called “localism.” This is legislation by stealth — most of the Fairness Doctrine’s opponents might not know about it until it’s too late. All opportunity for public comment on FCC’s proposal ceases on June 11, 2008.

Which isn’t to say it was impossible to see this coming. The Left has long sought new ways of bringing back the Fairness Doctrine, and their latest gambit features a sizable dose of political correctness.

In 2007, the Center for American Progress issued a report, “The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio,” that cleverly recasts the Fairness Doctrine as “localism” by stating that “any effort to encourage more responsive and balanced radio programming will first require steps to increase localism.”

The center’s report also urged quotas by race and sex for radio-station ownership, because a survey of all “10,506 licensed commercial radio stations reveals that stations owned by women, minorities, or local owners are statistically less likely to air conservative hosts or shows.” …”

“…Radio-station managers know that their job security is endangered by anything that might conceivably cause trouble for the station owners who employ them. Also, those purporting to represent minority interests often take political correctness to new levels. Think of the Council for American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), whose touchiness is already legendary — what would such a group do if legally guaranteed influence over radio programming? CAIR has equally touchy affiliates in 19 states.

Should the FCC prevail, radio stations will return to the sort of programming that predominated during the days of the Fairness Doctrine, only filtered by 2008-style political correctness. Instead of full debate on controversial issues such as amnesty for illegal aliens, AM radio will become a herd of independent minds, a vast “Air America” from sea to shining sea in which never a conservative word is heard.

The FCC’s regulations are so far along that the Bush administration’s proposed rule-making moratorium will not stop them.

Congress could pass a resolution of disapproval. Or, President Bush might ask the FCC to find other things to occupy its time. …”

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YjMzZGIyYTMzYmM5ZmI5YzViNWQxYjAyZWRiMzA2YzY=&w=MQ==

 

Flash: SNL rewriting bailout skit, “didn’t meet their standards“

By Michelle Malkin 

 

“…Peter Viles at L.A. Land reports that Saturday Night Live is rewriting its forbidden Soros/Sandler-bashing
bailout skit because it “didn’t meet their standards.”

Translation: It didn’t meet George Soros’s and the Sandlers’ standards!

The scoop: …”

“…George Soros:

Owner, Democratic Party.

Owner, NBC.

***

I’m told the rewrite will remove the “People who should be shot” chyron below the Sandlers.

As for standards…

Commenter madmonk: “Standard[s]? What standards? They ‘joked’ about incest in the Palin family. So again… what standards?”

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/10/07/flash-snl-rewriting-bailout-skit-didnt-meet-their-standards/

 

Debate over the Fairness Doctrine on Fox News Sunday

 

“Fairness Doctrine” — Feinstein Outlawing Talk Radio

 

FCC Commissioner: Fairness Doctrine Could Lead To Government Regulation Of Web

 

Rep. Roy Blunt addresses the Fairness Doctrine

 

Gov. Romney On The Fairness Doctrine

LOL

 

SNL Sarah Palin Interview vs Real Sarah Palin

 

Sarah Palin, Tina Fey on SNL

 

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

 

Media Matters: Mendacities & Money Matters More

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 3 so far )

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...