Veil Of Politics
The 20-page order, signed by U.S. District Judge Jorge A. Solis, cites “ample evidence” that CAIR participated in a “criminal conspiracy” led by the Holy Land Foundation, Hamas’s main fundraising arm in the U.S.
Federal Judge Confirms CAIR ~ Are Hamas Terrorists: Hamas Grew Out Of The Muslim Brotherhood. Hamas grew out of the Muslim Brotherhood, a religious and political organization founded in Egypt with branches throughout the Arab world.
In Pakistan the Muslim Brotherhood in the form of the Jamaat-e Islami supported the overthrow of Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto by General Zia ul-Haq. Bhutto was hated by the British globalists for withdrawing Pakistan from the British Commonwealth, for implementing nationalistic policies, for leaning towards the Soviets and for seeking to develop nuclear energy.
Hamas is a U.S. State Department-designated terrorist organization that professes to be a “Nation of Jihad”.1, 2
CAIR is a front organization of Hamas.3
At least 54 Members of Congress are aiding, working with, taking money from and/or acting as a front for CAIR (i.e., Hamas, i.e., a U.S. State Department-designated terrorist organization).4
The Palestine Authority has long been considered an entity supporting terrorism.5, 6, 7, 8 Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have given nearly $600 Million in taxpayer money to the Palestine Authority.9
Barack Obama and his Administration have close ties with Islamic radicals, CAIR, terrorists and terrorist organizations and they have implemented an agenda that supports terrorism.10, 11
The publicly available evidence is abundant, clear as glass and cannot be ignored by any rational person. 54 Congressmen, Obama and Hillary are aiding terrorists and should be immediately arrested.
Okay, America, it’s time for us to force our government to drop its charade. We have terrorists, communists, socialists and criminals running our country and driving it into the dirt.12 Now we have clear and sufficient evidence to demand a historic investigation of these criminal elements.
If the new House of Representatives does not immediately investigate, prosecute, impeach and/or jail these people for crimes, then America must assume that Republicans are active members of a now openly visible, terrorist Mafia organization that cannot be trusted to run the USA in the interest of law-abiding citizens. In fact, if the GOP House does not take immediate action on this terrorist issue, logic would dictate to any reasonable person that terrorists have captured our government and that citizens must act immediately to protect themselves and their country from further harm or potential death.
You don’t want to live in a terrorist country, do you? Send this article to your Congressman today and tell that anything short of IMMEDIATE public investigations and/or arrests beginning on January 5, 2011 is not an acceptable response. Spread the word to your family and friends! ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!
The passage of SB1028/HB1353 (Material Support to Designated Entities Act of 2011) in the Tennessee Legislature on May 21, 2011 after months of controversy, and inaccurate and misleading reporting in local and national media marks a sea-change moment in America’s awareness and understanding of, and response to, the threat of Islam and its doctrine of jihad.
The bill passed the Tennessee Senate with 26 Yes, and 3 No; the vote in the House was 76 Yes, 16 No, and 1 Present/Not Voting. This bi-partisan support for a bill that does nothing if not increase the ability of the legal and law enforcement authorities of Tennessee to better protect the citizens of that state from terrorist threats (including organizations/entities that encourage/support terrorism) shows that a certain rationality has returned to public discourse, and re-focused the response of government, at least in Tennessee, from politically correct falsehoods and multicultural wishful thinking, to a more pragmatic acceptance of threats and a realistic approach to terrorism prevention.
When the bill is signed into law by Tennessee Governor Bill Haslam once an entity has been designated as a terrorist organization, it is a felony for anyone to knowingly help that entity with money, advice or any other aid.
Previous versions of the bill had included the words “jihad” and “Sharia” but the passed version of the bill does not. In fact, there is no differentiation made in the passed legislation between any specific ideology, or religious views that might encourage terrorism, or violence. All those who might support “entities” or “organizations” designated as a terrorist organization whatever their religious or ideological views might be, will fall under the purview of this new law.
The bi-partisan passage of the “Material Support to Designated Entities Act” in Tennessee is an official acknowledgment of realities and a long overdue response on the part of high level politicians in America that threats (and actions) of jihad and terrorism are the results of a specific ideology. The bill did not pass in a political vacuum.
Less than two weeks before the bill’s passage, Geert Wilders, the persecuted Dutch Freedom Party leader, drew thousands to his “A Warning to America” speech in Nashville on May 12, 2011. Wilders can see in his own country what it means to be losing a civilizational war against Islam.
Tennessee is a hotbed of resistance to political Islam. The Middle Tennessee ACT (Act for America) chapter is the largest in America and has brought in monthly speakers on the nature and danger of political Islam. Their events routinely draw hundreds.
Nearby, the city of Murfreesboro has also recently started an ACT chapter. Murfreesboro has been the site of a spirited and lengthy resistance to Islam by opposing the construction of a local huge mosque/Islamic center.
In the political background of the bill’s passage were the lobbying efforts of the Tennessee Eagle Forum, led by Bobbie Patray (known as “Ms. Bobbie” to every politician who sits in the Tennessee Legislature or the governor’s mansion). She is a political force unto herself and was involved in the passage of three other bills that resist Islam.
Senate Republican Caucus Chairman Bill Ketron and House Speaker Pro Tem Judd Matheny have proven to be strong leaders by weathering a full court press against the bill by the “main stream” media at the local and national levels. Nashville’s mainstream newspaper, The Tennessean, ran a Sunday front page article creating the “Big Lie” that the bill would prohibit Sharia law and make it illegal to practice Islam in Tennessee.
The “Big Lie” resulted in a small media storm that caused Al Jazeera, New York Times, Fox and others to show up and record what they apparently hoped would be the modern day equivalent of the Scope’s “Monkey Trial“, held in Dayton, TN in 1925.
CAIR announced its national fund-raising campaign had topped its goal of $1 million thanks in part to the standing-room-only banquet Saturday evening attended by more than 1,000 people, including Kucinich and Rep. Nick Rahall, D-W.Va.
“We would like to thank all those who helped us reach our fund-raising goal,” said CAIR Chairman Omar Ahmad. “These added resources will enable us to continue and expand our work defending civil rights and promoting a positive image of Islam.”
Kucinich has taken part in other CAIR events recently, including a Ramadan iftar, or fast breaking, on Capitol Hill hosted by Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich.
CAIR organized a protest at the Legislature. The ACLU weighed in to oppose the bill (for many, reason enough to support the bill). Adherents of Islam packed committee meetings and attended sessions with the bill’s sponsors – to no avail.
When the votes were counted, it was a bipartisan group of concerned Americans who won over an energized Muslim Brotherhood, the ACLU, and a biased newspaper. The passage of this bill is a significant step by the state of Tennessee in resisting the Islamic attack on our civilization.
It has often been suggested since 9/11 that any discussion of Islam in which the doctrine of jihad was criticized was an offense against religious tolerance, multiculturalism, (and political correctness) mainly due to the contra-rational concept so prevalent after the jihadist attacks in New York, Washington, Pennsylvania, Bali, Mumbai, Kenya, Israel, Beslan, London, Madrid and hundreds of other places, that Islam is a hijacked “religion of peace.”
Only after adherents of Islam (i.e., Muslims) gave non-adherents real cause to fear Islam (9/11) and those who implemented its doctrine of jihad did the term “Islamophobia” enter common usage. The passage of the Material Support bill in Tennessee overturns the false concept that legitimate discussions of the threat of Islamic jihad doctrine are somehow inherently bigoted by acknowledging, through bi-partisan supported legislation, that such discussions are based on facts and critical reasoning.
Tennessee is famous across the country for its friendly and hospitable people. In fact, the United States is known across the world for these same traits of culture. Adherents of Islam in Tennessee are allowed to freely practice their religion; this bill does not in any way interfere with the legal practice of any faith.
The Tennessee Material Support bill is not about religious intolerance or bigotry nor is open discussion about Koran, Sira, and Hadith, and what some adherents of Islam do on account of these sacred Islamic texts. The continued tolerance for Islam in the United States in this post-9/11 world is a significant commentary on the openness and decency of the American people and our ongoing difficulty in accepting that a religious ideology could be the source of so much hatred, violence, and intolerance.
Those who commit violence due to the Islamic doctrine of jihad have been telling us clearly – through their videos, publications, public statements, writings, organizational charters, and acts – that their motives are entirely in line with the ideology of Islam and that they are meeting their jihad obligations as laid out to them (as adherents) in the doctrine to which they adhere. Bin Laden himself was quite clear on this point, as were his jihadist minions on 9/11 and afterward. We have not been very good listeners.
Since the horror of 9/11 many Americans continue to refuse to accept that our world now is riven by an ideological conflict on account of which the fate of the United States and of the entire West now is at stake. We are still a House divided.
Abraham Lincoln, in his famous “House Divided” speech, delivered in Springfield, Illinois, June 16, 1858, regarding a different matter (“slavery agitation”) said:
In my opinion, it (slavery agitation) will not cease until a crisis shall have been reached and passed. “A house divided against itself cannot stand.” I believe this government cannot endure, permanently, half slave and half free.
Now, in our own great ideological war brought upon us (due only to the fact that we exist), and not caused by us – it is clear that our country (and the West in general) cannot long endure half realist/learned, and half denialist /ignorant.
It seems altogether fitting and proper that the former Confederate state of Tennessee should set the pace for realistic engagement in this civilizational war to defend our freedoms and Constitutional Republic.
Who could have known that ten years would be required for reality to shatter our dreams of what we want the world to be, and replace our fantasies of coexistence and global brotherhood with the truth of the existence of people and ideologies whose purpose is nothing less than our destruction and all those who live and think as we do?
This acceptance of the lessons of distant and recent history and of our finally paying attention to the words, actions, and foundational doctrines of our enemies is nothing more and nothing less than a culture-awakening “moment of truth.”
There should be no calumny associated with speaking the truth. There ought to be an acceptance of reality for what it is, rather than a rejection of it because it is not what we’d prefer.
The actions of the Tennessee legislature in passing SB1028/HB1353 are laudable for many reasons first and foremost that it accepts reality for what it is, and takes concrete legal steps to secure the people of that state from ongoing threats of terror and violence. There is no civilization that can sustain itself with passive denialism and Utopian wishful thinking.
Perhaps it is not excessive rhetoric at all to suggest that the passage of the “Material Support to Designated Entities Act” in Tennessee marks a turn-of-the-tide moment in recent American history. Perhaps more rational voices – supported by history, evidence, and the actions of those whose purpose is our destruction – will be heard with more patient and open ears in halls of learning and law across the country, and Tennessee’s model of acceptance of the truth will sweep the land from east to west and north to south.
What remains now is for Tennessee Governor Bill Haslam to sign the bill into law.
Please consider sending Governor Haslam a note via email (firstname.lastname@example.org) mentioning that you support Tennessee bill SB1028/HB1353 (Material Support to Designated Entities Act) and that you strongly hope that he will affix his signature to it.
Co-authored with Dr. Bill Warren
Principle I states, “Any person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefor and liable to punishment.”
Principle II states, “The fact that internal law does not impose a penalty for an act which constitutes a crime under international law does not relieve the person who committed the act from responsibility under international law.”
Principle III states, “The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime under international law acted as Head of State or responsible government official does not relieve him from responsibility under international law.”
Principle IV states: “The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him”.
This principle could be paraphrased as follows: “It is not an acceptable excuse to say ‘I was just following my superior’s orders’”.
Previous to the time of the Nuremberg Trials, this excuse was known in common parlance as “Superior Orders“. After the prominent, high profile event of the Nuremberg Trials, that excuse is now referred to by many as “Nuremberg Defense“. In recent times, a third term, “Lawful orders” has become common parlance for some people. All three terms are in use today, and they all have slightly different nuances of meaning, depending on the context in which they are used.Barry Soetoro
Nuremberg Principle IV is legally supported by the jurisprudence found in certain articles in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which deal indirectly with conscientious objection. It is also supported by the principles found in paragraph 171 of the Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status which was issued by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). Those principles deal with the conditions under which conscientious objectors can apply for refugee status in another country if they face persecution in their own country for refusing to participate in an illegal war.
Principle V states, “Any person charged with a crime under international law has the right to a fair trial on the facts and law.”
Principle VI states,
“The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:
(a) Crimes against peace:
- (i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;
- (ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i).
(b) War crimes:
Violations of the laws or customs of war which include, but are not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation of slave labor or for any other purpose of the civilian population of or in occupied territory; murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the Seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.
Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhumane acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial, or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime.”
Principle VII states, “Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity as set forth in Principle VI is a crime under international law.”
And trials there must be. No matter the cost, the nest of vipers on Capitol Hill, and all of the traitors in the government at large, must be brought to task for their behavior, or a free America is doomed.
“Muslims are the vilest of animals…”
“Show mercy to one another, but be ruthless to Muslims”
“How perverse are Muslims!”
“Strike off the heads of Muslims, as well as their fingertips”
“Fight those Muslims who are near to you”
“Muslim mischief makers should be murdered or crucified”
Hate speech? Incitement to violence? Sounds like it to us, but a knowledgeable Muslim would have to disagree. Why would Muslims not consider this to be hate speech? How is it that we can post these quotes with full certainty that CAIR won’t be contacting the media (or Congress) with wild-eyed accusations of Islamophobia? Well, for one thing, we don’t actually agree with any of these disgusting statements, of course. But the real reason is that Muslims themselves honestly believe these quotes to be the literal, eternal word of Allah. In fact, CAIR is promoting this hate speech on their own website! It is actively propagating the very literature that contains these comments, even while sanctimoniously claiming that it is working against hate and violence. But… isn’t CAIR a Muslim organization? What’s the catch? Well, if you haven’t guessed it already, these are quotes from the Qur’an in which we’ve replaced the word ‘Christian’, ‘Jew’ or ‘unbeliever’ with the word ‘Muslim.’ Here is how they actually appear in the literature that groups like CAIR are pushing:
Sura (8:55) – Surely the vilest of animals in Allah’s sight are those who disbelieve
Sura (48:29) – Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves
Sura (9:30) – And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah… Allah (Himself) fights against them. How perverse are they!
Sura (8:12) – I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them
Sura (9:123) – O you who believe! Fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness
Sura (5:33) – The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement