|
News Articles Internet Articles
(2010)
|
Is Islam
claimstaking America? According to Saleb M. Sbenaty, an engineering professor who is overseeing the mosque's expansion, Muslims in the Murfreesboro area have never experienced this level of hostility from the non-Muslim citizens of Murfreesboro before. Not even on Sept. 11, 2001. Shortly after the World Trade Center disaster Sbenatya Syrian Muslimsaid he and his wife, who was wearing a hijab, were in the parking lot of a shopping center in Murfreesboro when they were approached by a small group of local residents who assured them that they had nothing to fear from Murfreeboroites who knew it was radical Muslim extremists who flew two 757s into the twin towers of the World Trade Center, another into the Pentagon and the fourth that crashed near Shanksville, Pennsylvania in Stonycreek Township. Nearly three thousand Americans died on Sept. 11 and there were no random reprisals against Muslims (although the Council on American-Islamic Relations [CAIR] claims more than 1,700 attacks on American Muslims by Christian Americans took place from Sept. 11, 2001 through Feb. 2002 including 289 acts of physical violence and 166 reported cases of discrimination in the workplace). In Murfreesboro, when the local Muslim community which had been holding worship in makeshift worship spacea one bedroom apartment and an office behind a Lube Expressfor 30 years decided to construct a 52,900 square foot mosque on a $320 thousand piece of land for which they had no money to build, they lit a fuse that exploded during the primary election. To raise the money they needed to pay off the land and build their mosque, the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro launched a nationwide fundraising appeal...just like the Ground Zero Mosquewhich, of course, means the Saudi royal family or some other Mideast Muslim "charity" is likely paying for the mosque in Murfreesboro since the Islamic Center in Murfreesboro "raised" $600 thousand from their appeal. As the furor over the Ground Zero Mosque in New York intensified, the local Murfreesboro politicians running for their parties nominations for office used the debate, pro or con, in their talking points on the campaign trail as anti-Muslim sentiment began to grownot only in Murfreesboro and Nashville, but all over the country. A Time Magazine poll taken on Aug. 26, 2010 revealed that 43% of Americans now have an unfavorable view of Muslims. (The percentage is probably much higher, but since it is politically incorrect to hate, dislike or mistrust a racial or ethnic minority, the majority of those surveyed likely kept their honest opinions to themselves.) Americans understand the Ground Zero Mosque is, in the view of the Muslims around the world, far more than a mosque and a community center. In the Islamic world, when Muslims defeat a nation, they build a mosque on the ashes of the defeated enemy's most revered spot. In our case, that revered spot was the nation's financial hub in lower Manhattan: the World Trade Center, since the "god" of the financiers is money. Yet, as the Islamic world
busied itself claimstaking America, the Christian population in Murfreesboro
added 2 + 2 and discovered the answer was still four. Building a $360
thousand mosque in the quiet Nashville suburb of Murfreesboro for 250
Muslim families was, in their mind, the expansion of the Islamic victory
mosque in New York City. While proponents of the Murfreesboro mosque argue
that mosque opponents are displaying religious intolerance by protesting
the construction of the mosque, Christians in Murfreesboro raised concerns
about Islamic radicalism in their city. When Murfreesboroites protested
the mosque with a completely nonviolent march, CNN covered it. Murfreesboro corrections officer Kevin Fisher, a Republican running for the school board, who led the protest march against the mosque, said that those opposed to the mosque intend "...to contend every brick that's laid." Fisher, a Black American who said he has experienced racial intolerance in his life, added that "...This has nothing to do with racism or racial intolerance at all. It's about a difference of opinion. In America, that's okay. Religion. Race. These are just code words used to distract from the real issues. If Home Depot was burying bodies in the water supply I would be equally concerned." The reference to burying a body in the water supply stemmed from the Islamic Center burying a body on their recently purchased property "...without a casket or proper embalming." In point of fact, according to Doug Demosi, the Rutherford County Regional Planning Commission Director, said the Islamic Center applied for permission and, since religious organizations are exempt from some rules, and, Demosi added, it doesn't appear any State regulations were violated. Demosi also said the center does not have approval for any other burials and the Planning Commission said it does not intend to allow a cemetery on the grounds.
Hopefully New Yorkers understand that the Cordoba House Mosque is monument to what Islam views as their victory against the Great Satan in New York on Sept. 11, 2001. On Aug. 24, a defiant Mayor Bloomberg insisted that the mosque must be built near Ground Zero, declaring "...we must do what is right, not what is easy. And we must put our faith in the freedoms that have sustained our great country for more than 200 years." He made that statement at a Ramadan dinner at Gracie Mansion, adding there can be no middle ground when it comes to religious liberty." Bloomberg insisted
that building the mosque was the best way to fight terrorism. Bloomberg
is wrong. His decision and the use of his office to let the Cordoba
House Initiative erect a monument to Islam's "victory"
in destroying the Great American Satan has angered not only New Yorkers
but Americans all over the United States. And, it has nothing to do with
Islamophobia. If Bloomberg wants to hold political office after selling out the American people, perhaps he should move to Riyadh, Tehran or Baghdad. Bloomberg would like to be the governor of New York. New Yorkers need to make sure that never happens. If you spend any time watching the Muslim community across the United States, you will be a first hand witness the attempt of the Islamic world to Islamize the United States with the help of social progressive politicians who [a] believe that one religion is no different than the next, and that any religion works since, in their view, there is no God anyway; and [b] made a pact with the Muslim world to keep Muslim oil flowing to the United States and, in violation of the Constitution, to create a national religion based on Shari'a law. If we had been paying attention over the last few years we, as a nation, would have witnessed the attempt of the Muslim world to Islamize America city-by-city, county-by-county, mosque-by-mosque. In Nashville, two other mosques were initially funded. One was abandoned, the other was built. At the end of the first Iraq war under Bush-41 Nashville had become the "gateway city" for Muslim refuges from Iraq and Kuwait emigrating to the United States. Two decades later Nashville and its surrounding bedroom communities had become an oasis for Muslims. The Memphis Commercial Appeal reported in a 2008 article that Greater Memphis was the home of an estimated 10 to 15 thousand Islamics. The Memphis Islamic Center raised $800 thousand to buy the land their mosque sits on and another $3.65 million to build the mosque. But regardless of claimed membership that theoretically funded the financing of the mosques in Murfreesboro, Nashville and Memphis, the government of Saudi Arabia began financing the construction of mosques and Islamic schools in several countries. The Saudi newspaper Ain al-Yaqeen reported that the Saudis have financed the construction of up to 2,000 mosques around the world. Currently there are 1,510 Islamic Centers or mosques in the United States, with several more in the planning or construction phase. Among the mosques financed by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia are the Masjid Ibrahim Mosque in Kingman, Arizona, the Darul Islah Mosque in Teaneck, New Jersey, the King Fahd Mosque, built in 1998 in Culver City, California and the Islamic Cultural Center in Rome, Italy. The Culver City Mosque cost the Saudi government $8 million. The mosque in Rome? Fifty million. When you're competing with the Vatican, $8 million won't cut it. Eighty percent of the mosques in the United States have been build since 1980. Interestingly, 25% of the mosque attendees in the United States earn less than $20 thousand. 93% of the mosques in the United States provide cash stipends to the poor families in their congregations. In other words, in the United States, the Muslims buy converts. Mosque attendance has increased by 75% since 1975. Twenty-nine percent of those who attend the mosques in the United States are converts to Islam. The majority of these converts are racial minorities.
Sweden
seeks WikiLeaks founder Julian On Saturday, less than a
day after issuing the warrant, Swedish authorities said the rape charge
resulted from an unfounded allegation of rape. Police still want to question
Assange about one other case involving the suspicions of rape and
one accusation of sexual molestation. On his Twitter page, Assange wrote that "...[t]he charges are without basis and their issue at this moment is deeply disturbing." Assange implied that the accusations were part of a dirty trick campaign against the WikiLeaks founder who has been strongly criticized by the Pentagon and by Barack Obama. "We were warned to expect dirty tricks. Now we have the first one...Expression is a tabloid. No one here has been contacted by Swedish police. Needless to say, this will prove hugely distracting." Fearing that fellow traveler and White House resident Barack Obama was planning to have him extradited to the United States where he could be charged with revealing top secret US military documents, the 39-year old convicted Australian computer hacker, Assange, went to Sweden last week (where a couple of his WikiLeaks servers are located) to apply for a publishing certificate in Stockholm in order to take advantage of the laws in Sweden that protect whistleblowers. When queried by the media on Friday when the rape charge was initially filed, Karin Rosander, a spokesperson for the Swedish Prosecution Authority confirmed that Assange is suspected of at least one count of rape and one charge of sexual molestation. Assange, now 39, was born in Townsville, Queensland in 1971. His parents met at an anti-Vietnam War demonstration. His mother was so anti-establishment that she did not want her son to go to school believing it would instill an unhealthy respect for authority in her son. During his childhood he attended 37 different schools because his mother, who worked for a touring theater group, traveled throughout Australia during his growing years. Today, he lives the same nomadic life of his youth. He has no permanent, nor even temporary, address he calls his own. His personal possessions include a laptop computer and a rucksack of belongings. Assange lives on the hospitality of fellow travelerssocial progressives around the worldwho put him up for brief periods of time as he travels the globe. Those acquaintances, and the handful of well-to-do socialists who finance WikiLeaks, view the convicted computer hacker as a heroic crusader, which makes him a celebrity whenever he comes to town. His mother introduced him
to computers at an early age. With his sharp mind and an "outsider
mentality," he entered the world of hacking, setting up a group that
became known as International Subversives. Assange has been
called the "Robin Hood of Hacking." Among the websites
he has hacked are the US Department of Defense and NASA. Among file footage
hacked by Assange is a helicopter cockpit video shows civilians shot in
Baghdad. The video was hacked and prepared for release on WikiLeaks
through the Icelandic Digital Freedom Society. While Assange
claims the Department of Defense files he recently releasedand
the 15,000 files he is preparing to releasewere given to him, it
appears Assange has the ability to hack into the Department of
Defense website at will, and it's just as likely that he secured the files
himself as it is that someone with access to them gave them up. US authorities
have charged Pfc. Bradley Mannings, 22, with disseminating the
top secret video which they believe he turned over to WikiLeaks.
Assange has
said the files he released came from soldiers with whom he came into contact
after publishing a vast database of army equipment used in Iraq and Afghanistan.
In 1989 the Australian government linked Assange to what the media called the "audacious attack" on NASA's computer. During the investigation, Assange monitored the police who were investigating him. He, or others in collusion with him, left messages for the detectives conducting the investigation on their computers. In December, 1995 Judge Leslie Ross of Melbourne's County Court, fined Assange $2,100 Australian dollars, telling Assange that the accused was driven by a desire to "...be empowered by his access to high security files." The Berlin-based Wau Holland
Foundation that manages the finances of WikiLeaks acknowledged
that the fund received £330,000.00 thus far in 2010. The Foundation
has issued checks totaling about £25,000.00 to Assange through
the first half of this year. Wau Holland, was born Herwart Holland-Moritz on Dec. 12, 1951. He was a co-founder of the Chaos Computer Club, the world's oldest computer hacking club. The hackers became world famous when they hacked into Germany's banking system and got 134 thousand Deutsche Marks. They returned the money the following day, advising the banks to increase their security to prevent hackers from looting their vaults. He then began to publish a computer hackers' magazine for club members. When Holland-Moritz died of a brain stem stroke on July 29, 2001, five club members formed the Wau Holland Foundation believing they had a social obligation to expose everythingwithout regard for the consequences. Holland-Moritz's family funded the startup of the tax exempt foundation with €62,000. Assange noted that he recently hosted a seminar for the Socialist Democratic Party in Sweden. He further announced that he would write bimonthly columns for a leftwing Swedish newspaper.
Sarkozy
party chief said Europe In Feb., 2010 Sarkozy called a 27-nation summit to halt illegal immigration in the European Union and, in particular, into France. The French president demanded that the EU seal its borders along the Mediterranean to prevent illegals from Muslim Asia Minor from entering Italy, Greece, Cyprus and Spain where migrant trafficking networks would transport them into France. At the end of the meeting, which was held in Brussels, the 27 interior ministers voted to implement a European police force similar to ICE (Immigration Control & Enforcement) in the United States. The EU immigration control police would bolster Frontex, the EU agency currently responsible for external border security for all of the EU nations. More than any other
nation in Europe, France is plagued with illegals from everywhere. In
July Sarkozy was accused of "ethnic cleansing" by the
French human rights organization, GISTI (Group for Information and
Support To Immigrants). when he ordered the expulsion of thousands
of illegal gypsies. A GISTI spokesman said the group wanted to stress
its support "for equal rights between French people of all origins
and foreigners or supposed foreigners." On March 1, 2010, GISTI
announced the day would be called "24-Hours Without Us"
to "...protest against the fate meted out to foreigners, legal
or undocumented." (Why don't they call them what they are. They
are illegal aliens. Since they have no legal right to be there, they are
illegal.) Illegals, from wherever they came to wherever the arrived, need
to be deported. GISTI told the European InterPress Service [IPS]
that many essential jobs throughout France are done by immigrants (i.e.,
illegal aliens). (I suspect they use the same trite justification used
by US politicians who favor amnesty in the United States: their illegals
are only taking the jobs that no self-respecting Frenchman (or interchangeably,
American) would do.) GISTI wanted every illegal in France to [a]
not work that day and [b] not to consume any food or drink purchased
from French stores or French restaurants. This was pretty much like the
Hispanic protest to Arizona enacting an immigration law that would force
Arizona officials to enforce federal immigration laws. In the one day
they boycotted every business in the State, Arizonians said it was the
best day in the State for years. Most noticeably, they said, everyone
in the stores and restaurants spoke English. Eric Besson, the French Immigration Minister told the immigration summit in Brussels that "...Faced with the worsening situation in the Mediterranean, which is the scene of daily irregular-immigration dramas, France has not ceased, since the summer of 2009, to alert the EU to the major challenges posed by the illegal migration networks in this strategic region for the Schengen Area. People are dying every day in the Mediterranean, anonymously, victims of the cynicism and the greed of modern day slavers. People are entering illegally every day into the Schengen Area from the Mediterranean, sometimes in a sincere search for protection, but most often without this motive." Besson proposed 29 measures for the EU to vote on. He told the Immigration Ministers at the summit that France would like to see systematic operational cooperation between the EU and the countries within the union from which the migrants emigrate from or use as transit points. In particular, Besson said an enforcement agreement needed to be reached with Turkey and Libya from which most of the migrant-trafficking networks operate. In September of 2009 Besson called for the European Union to put together a plan of action to establish common land and sea patrols as well as to collect and share data about migrant traffickers after eight African migrants drowned off the coast of Morocco when their overloaded boat sank as it headed for Europe. Dozens of people, Besson noted, have died in their attempt to reach European countries and the prospect of a better life. The French Coordination
for the Right to Asylum [CFDA] (which is comprised of 20 groups including
Amnesty International) who believe illegals from anywhere in the world
have the right to emigrate to France, noted that the "right to asylum"
is now being profoundly recast in Europe, with a "climate of suspicion"
being created around those seeking refuge. Rosenthal argued that most of the undocumented migrants in France come from war-torn Iraq and Afghanistan, the two countries that accounted for most of the asylum-seekers that arrived in the industrialized nations last year. Somalia, also in the grip of civil war, was the third largest source of asylum-seekers. All of these emigrants are Muslim. They are the faces you see on the news holding placards warning the Europeans they are about to experience their own 9-11, or signs that say: "Islam will dominate the world," or behead, kill, slay or butcher "...those who insult Islam." When the French government expelled a group of undocumented migrants from an airport hanger in Calais recently, the French asylum group SoS Sans Papiers asked the question, "Why is there such aggression by the State against migrants forced to flee from wars, violence and misery?" Perhaps it is because all of these illegals are Muslims who immediately join up with radical Muslims in Europe and attempt to create the same types of violence in those nations they left behind in Iraq, Afghanistan, or Somalia. The question someone should be asking the asylum groups who believe illegals from anywhere in the world have an "inherent right" to asylum "on demand" because the country they wish to invade is more prosperous than the one they left is how asylum-seeking became an inalienable right in countries where civil rights do not exist? The right to prosperity is not an inalienable righteven in the United States. It is an inherent right only in the minds of communists who created that philosophy to justify stealing the wealth of the middle class thorugh taxation under the pretext of elevating the underclass as they reduce all people to serfdom. What America offers through what few laws still protect the free enterprise system (which the social progressives have been trying hard to destroy since 1913), is opportunity. What each American does with that opportunity is up to them. No one owes them a living. We all live in imperfect nations. Most of the emigrants who settled this nation in the 17th and 18th centuries were born under a monarchy they grew to hate. They didn't pack up and leave, expecting some other nation to take them in and provide them with a free living. Farmers, mechanics, preachers and teachers took up their muskets and fought a decade long revolution against a tyrant king, tyrant laws and tyrant taxes. In the end our forefathers won their liberty and shaped the greatest nation in the history of the world. Like the "migrants" who illegally enter France, those who sneak across our borders in the dead of night come here, they say, seeking opportunity. Yet, like those who illegally enter France and the other democratic industrialized nations of the world, once they arrive, they devote their efforts to changing the new nation into the country they chose to leave behind.
Obama insists
he inherited what When Obama spoke at a retreat of congressional Republicans in Baltimore on Jan. 29, 2010, Congressman Jeb Hensarling [R-TX] asked Obama if his "...new budget, like your old budget, triple the national debt and continue to take us down the path of increasing the cost of government to almost 25% of our economy?" Obama shot back, saying
"...when we came into office, the deficit was $1.3 trillion. So
when you say that suddenly I've got a monthly deficit that's higher than
the annual deficit left by Republicans, that's factually just not true,
and you know it's not true. And what is true is that we came in already
with a $1.3 trillion deficit before I passed any law. Obama, who uses history as a playbook (since history verifies how the public will likely respond to the ploys of their national leaders), was called out on the practice by his media ally, the Washington Post, on June 12 in an article by Ben Pershing. Pershing aptly quoted a remark by New York Times reporter Peter Baker from a June 11 article (the other half of the bobble-head Siamese Twins doll). Baker noted that blaming the guy who came before doesn't work for long., noting that "...Obama wastes few opportunities to remind the country that the problems are not of his making...But at a certain point, a new president assumes ownership of the problems and finds himself answering for his own actions. For Mr. Obama...some advisors say that moment may be coming soon." The question is: how did Obama manage to convince so many people that the generational debt this nation owes was Bush's making? Before we commence to the finger-pointing, let's make one thing clear from the gitgo. Debt is not created by the White House. Debt in created by Congress. Constitutionally, it's created by the House of Representatives. Constitutionally, all spending bills must originate in the House. The Senate may concur on them, but the House is responsible for spending...and the debt your children, grandchildren and great grandchildren get saddled with are gifts from the House of Representatives. So, regardless what spending bills the guy in the Oval Office wants is just thata Christmas wish listuntil the House of Representatives fills his stocking. Ultimately, the Constitution makes them responsible for the debt by giving them two year terms of office so the voters can fire them if they don't like the debt they are burdened with. And, the voters can demand that the new Congress repeal those spending measuresand fire them if they don't. Furthermore, if a politician campaigns on a promise to repeal spending laws and fails to keep his word, the politician can be recalled and removed from office. The American people need to understand their rights under the covenant called the Constitution of the United States. When you look at "Bush-43 debt" you have to stop at 2007, because his Partythe GOPlost the House and Senate in the midterm Election of 2006. In Jan. 2007, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi began to control the purse strings of America. In 2007, Bush-43 got so tough on spending, that when the House was putting together the omnibus appropriations bill of 2008, Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid simply sat on it until 2009 because Bush-43 would have vetoed it. Instead, Congress bypassed Bush-43 and enacted continuing resolutions to keep the government running until they got a more spending-friendly guy in the White House. When Obama took office, Congress quickly passed a massive, pork laden spending bill to fund the government for 2009without a single Republican vote. (By the way, a lot of porkincluding a $4 billion gratuity under the Community Development Block Grant for ACORNwas stuck in that bill.) Now, keeping in mind that Congress, not the White House, creates debt, let's take off the rose-colored glasses and look at the rising debt through a prism of honesty. On Jan. 7, 2009 (two weeks before Obama took office) the Congressional Budget Office projected the deficit for fiscal year 2009 at $1.2 trillion. (Note: this cannot be called Bush's debt since Congress refused to submit a budget for f2009, and used continuing resolutions to bypass the White House. Thus, the deficit spending for f2009 must lay at the feet of the Democratic majority in Congress who used continuing resolutions and not a law signed by Bush-43 to keep the spending alive in 2009.) Obama didn't think about that when he called it a Bush-43 $1.3 trillion deficit.) Since that deficit was actually created by Congress and not the White House, we need to blame the House and Senate for the sleight-of-hand that created the spending. As I recall, Senator Barack Hussein Obama [D-IL] was one of those who voted to bypass Bush-43. So, I guess, it's rightly his deficit after all. The Congressional Budget Office also reported the 10-year debt projection at $3.1 trillion. Obama said the projection was $8 trillion. He lied. He knew the programs he had initiated would push the debt throttle over $8 trillion, and he was covering his butt by anchoring down a "media figure" that would make it appear that the $8 trillion in long-term debt foreshadowed his Administration. The Democrats own the deficits that began to accrue in 2007 since they owned Congress from that time. The Bush-43 deficits are those which accrued from 2001 to Jan., 2007 because that is the period of time his party ruled Congress and controlled the creation and flow of debt. Thus, Bush created a $400 billion deficit by the end of 2004, but began cutting back in 2005. In 2007, his deficit was only about $200 billion. The $450 billion deficit in 2008 belongs to Nancy Pelosi. The $1.85 trillion debt in 2009 rightly belongs to the Democrats since most of those pieces of legislation passed without any, or minimal GOP support, which was not needed by the Democratic super majority. Don't let Barack Obama play Roosevelt and blame his predecessor for his bad social progressive spending habits.y.
|
||
|
|||