Surge Shows Progress: Media Downplays/Attempts New Conspiracy

Katie Couric (as always when something isn't going the Left's way) began Tuesday's CBS Evening News coverage of Iraq on a downbeat note, pointing out how it has been one of the deadliest months in 2007. It's always one of the deadliest months. "At least 114" service men killed so far. Like the media's motto says, "If it bleeds, it LEADS." But the part they don't mention is U.S. and coalition troops have to play by rules, insurgents don't.

Today's, (May 30, 2007) Media Research Center's Cyber alert reports that the Troop Surge in Iraq is Working. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki told CBS News today that even though the murder rate that had dropped since the surge began was slowly climbing back up, "the additional forces here have prevented an even greater catastrophe. There have been many victories in breaking up al Qaeda and other militant cells."

When al-Maliki was asked about the sense of the quality of life to Iraqi people? "There are great shortages in Baghdad because it's the capital and it faces the greatest terrorist threat," but he has great hopes for more progress in the next two or three months. This progress will be at approximately the same time as America's top commanders to report to Congress on the wars status. Not likely there will be many happy Democrats that day.

CBS News national security correspondent David Martin reports that all the troops for the surge are now in Iraq and U.S. military officers say American casualties are likely to go still higher when operations hit full throttle next month. This is a surprise? I have three soda cans on a fence and throw a couple rocks. I hit maybe one or two. I add five more cans and throw the same amount of rocks? Pretty likely i'll hit more than the one or two I did the first try. Has anyone bothered to factor in the recent sporadic upswing in insurgent violence is not only to give the media more sensationalism, but is an act of desparation? Iraqi troops assumed security control of seven more of the eighteen provinces in Iraq. A timetable may not even be necessary.

Then, to top it all off, MSNBC (better known as msLSD) is trying to whip up yet another conspiracy type theory, reporting how the President didn't make a public spectacle of the signing of the war spending compromise. Political analyst Jonathan Alter gave a "death warrant" parallel with Bush not signing it publicly, in an exchange with Keith Olbermann. May 25, 2007's Countdown (to no ratings), had the following exchange between Olbermann and Alter:

Keith Olbermann: "Why such secrecy -- or, at least, out of the public eye -- for the signing of this war funding bill? One would think maybe Mr. Bush would have held a parade for it."

Jonathan Alter: "Well, on some level, I think he knows that he's signing the death warrants of young men and women. This war is going to continue, the policy has failed, he knows it's failing, he's taking one last stab at it with this surge, and he's doubling down, and I think he recognizes that it's deeply unpopular with the American people."

......................... please tell me I don't need to explain how stupid this sounds ...................

I didn't think I would need to.

Information in this article provided by Media Research Center and CBS News .

Anti-War Mouthpiece: Cindy Sheehan Quits Protest Scene

This morning (Tuesday May 29th, 2007) CNN reported that the Lefts most visual and vocal mouthpiece is giving up her protest of the Iraq War. CNN highlighted a few of her reasoning's why she is exiting the anti-war propaganda scene, to include she "is upset that Democrats and anti-war politicians can't end Iraq war" and "that she is exhausted by the personal, financial and emotional toll." CNN also cited that Sheehan intends to "to take what she has left and go home."

Now, as you read in my profile, I am a United States Marine Corps Combat Veteran, of Operation Desert Storm/Shield. Knowing this even though I disagree with Sheehan's views, I believe it was her right to protest the war. I fought for her to have that right. As did everyone who "served" before me. My objection to Cindy's rants were that she used her dead son as a focal point of her agenda. Let me make something totally clear here, we have a "volunteer" military force. NO ONE, is forced to serve in our armed forces. The hand full of gutless wimps you see in the media are a bunch of wussies who only joined the military for the "enlistment bonuses and free college tuition." To them I say, "GOOD RIDDANCE!" Go live in Mexico, or Canada if your so against the war. Take your dishonorable discharge, get out of MY country, and don't EVER come back. If you have no intention of actually having to "fight" when your country calls upon you to do so, THEN DON'T SIGN UP in the armed forces. But if you sign of your own free will, you have no one to blame but yourself.

This is what gets me so steamed over Sheehan's protesting. Not that she was protesting, but what she did WHILE and HOW. Casey Sheehan, a very heroic individual by all accounting's of his actions by others present, joined the Army of his own free will. He served in Charlie Battery, 1st Battalion , 82nd Field Artillery Regiment at at FOB War Eagle in Sadr City. This, after having re-enlisted KNOWING his unit would be sent to Iraq. Doesn't sound forced to me. His unit arrived on March 19, 2004. On April 4, 2004, just a few weeks after arriving, Sheehan was killed in action after volunteering as part of a Quick Reaction Force to rescue American troops. Casey Sheehan was awarded the Purple Heart and Bronze Star Medal with V for Valor posthumously for actions in Iraq April 4, 2004. Like I said, heroic by all accounts to receive such prestigious awards.

Cindy spent her time spewing out hate about how we were "lied" to about the war. Interestingly enough, no one is mentioning how the Bush Administration was working on the same gathered intelligence that Clinton used when he ordered the strikes on Iraq with over 400 Tomahawk cruise missiles and and several days worth of Air sorties by American and British air power. I guess the liberal "puppet masters" pulling Sheehan's strings didn't tell her about that.

Cindy's quiting of the protest scene she claimed was financially taking a toll on her. Funny, she's RICH now that her son is dead. Sheehan was the beneficiary of a $250,000 Service members’ Group Life Insurance (SGLI) policy. Not to mention that during her separation from her husband, there was another Prudential Life Insurance policy (no. 43520001432577) shown in legal documents, paid at the time of his decease. Of which, the amount was never disclosed by her. Sheehan also received a $100,000 death gratuity from the government to cover miscellaneous expenses not covered by the DoD reimbursement. The $100,000 death gratuity is paid to all deaths in the line of duty. So that's $350,000 plus the undisclosed amount? Not to shabby.

Sheehan was also taking quite a bit of heat for the "graves" issue. During her media stint in Crawford, there was a makeshift graveyard set up with approximately 2,000 crosses. Those represented the dead soldiers (up to that time). Several issues arose from this. First of all, Relatives of many of the fallen soldiers showed up and physically removed the crosses of their loved ones themselves. One such individual, Gary Qualls of Temple, Texas, drove to the location and removed the prop wooden cross bearing his son’s name. Qualls said, “I don’t believe in some of the things happening here. I find it disrespectful.” All the while, with all the media in attendance showing the "emotionally torn" Sheehan, her own sons grave remained unmarked and unattended in Vacaville-Elmira Cemetery in Vacaville, California. The Peace Mom couldn't bother with having a headstone or even a wooden cross to mark his passing, but had plenty of time and energy to sob and rant at a fake "marked" site outside the Presidents Ranch.

All in all, it appears that the "Anti-War Mouthpiece" is finally being shut. Whether for actual realistic reasons, or that she's just been torn apart too many times for her rampant inconsistencies or having to back-track to explain "why's" is irrelevant. The fact is, she's finally going away. Let's hope, for good.

Information for this article provided by CNN.com , FrontPageMag.com , WakeUpAmerica.com , TalkingProud.us .

Pulse Opinion Research Results: Immigration Is TOO High

In an Eagle Forum Press release by Jessica Echard, the Senate is NOT in-line with their constituency.

The Senate finished their debate yesterday over the Amnesty-laden bill S.1348 and plan to finish up after the Memorial Day holiday. Several provisions were either added or voted down. Voted down was an amendment to expire guest worker programs within five years and allow Law Enforcement personnel to check legal status in "sanctuary" cities.

Adopted was an amendment to limit imported guest workers to 200,000 per year. Take a look HERE for a lot more information regarding the bill, S.1348 and the proposed amendments, such as granting amnesty to employers for utilizing illegals.

Pulse Opinion Research, a part of Rasmussen Polling, conducted a survey of 1,000 likely voters on May 15, 2007. The results are listed HERE. The results overwhelmingly speak that the people DO NOT want amnesty granted to the 12-20+ million illegals in the country. In fact, it shows that the mass majority of the American public FAVOR attrition through enforcement and that the amount of current in-flow of illegals needs to be reduced.

Also shown by the results is that the MYTH of illegals doing low-wage jobs is irrelevant as a huge majority believe there are plenty of Americans here to fill jobs, employers just need to pay higher wages and treat workers better. This is a good thing as we are already at our LOWEST unemployment rate in decades. I'm sure there are plenty of individuals out of out 4% unemployed out there who will gladly take that "burger-flipping" job to put some food on their table and a roof over their head.

Lastly, important to potential presidential candidates, over half of those polled say they are at least somewhat to very unlikely to support a candidate that supports amnesty.

This National Survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC on May 15, 2007. The margin of sampling error for the survey is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Pulse Opinion Research, LLC is an independent public opinion research firm using automated polling methodology and procedures licensed from Rasmussen Reports, LLC.

Also, be sure to watch the video on YouTube HERE about immigration and it's effects.

Information in this article provided by EagleForum.org , NumbersUSA.com and RasmussenReports.com .

The Rosie Files: The Hasselbeck Strikes Back!

Not one to learn from the mistakes of other Lib-Dems like Kerry and his flip flopping, or Blanco trying to blame everything on the president, Rosie continues in her failing to learn that badmouthing American troops will never score you points. Regardless of what side your on in the political spectrum. Rosie's quote on "The View" the other day suggesting that American soldiers were terrorists were, in her words, "twisted" by what she calls the "crappy shows" that "Elisabeth watches." Seeing how the vast majority of the media has a liberal tilt, that leaves very few shows that Elisabeth could be watching. Here is the Media Research Centers article about the squabble, including video and transcript of the conversation.

O'Donnell condemned Hasselbeck for failing to defend her against reporting by cable channels the week before when O'Donnell had insinuated that U.S. soldiers in Iraq are the real "terrorists." Rosie went as far as to call Hasselbeck a "coward" for not defending her in answering her question of "do you believe I think our troops are terrorists, Elisabeth?" Elisabeth it would appear has had enough of Rosie, (as have the rest of us.) Being the token-conservative on the show, she struck back with "I'll tell you what's cowardly: Asking a rhetorical question that you never answer yourself."

That's not the only question Rosie has failed to answer. As noted on Newsbusters, on Oct. 18th 2006, Bill O'Reilly was on The View to promote his book, Culture Wars. He pressed Rosie as to "Whether she wanted the US to win in Iraq." Rosie refused to answer. She said she doesn't think it's possible. She wants America to be what "the founding fathers wanted it to be." But she wouldn't say that she wanted the US to win in Iraq. According to Rosie, wanting the US to win in Iraq is "antiquated thinking."

The entire incident stemmed over Thursdays remark by Rosie when she said, "I just want to say something. 655,000 Iraqi civilians are dead. Who are the terrorists?" An appalled Elisabeth Hasselbeck demanded: "Wait, who are you calling terrorists now? Americans?" O'Donnell stood her ground: "I'm saying if you were in Iraq, and the other country, the United States, the richest in the world, invaded your country and killed 655,000 of your citizens, what would you call us?"

There's no other way to "perceive" a comment like that. No matter how you look at it, no matter what angle you approach that from, you just called American soldiers, sailors and Marines, terrorists. Hasselbeck was correct in her direct questioning of Rosie, as was the media that actually reported on it. I don't think we've heard the end of Hasselbeck's strong retorts. At least, I HOPE we haven't. There is even speculation now that Rosie will leave the view upwards of three weeks early. How sad. NOT!!! It's more like ABC can't be too happy to be rid of her all the more sooner.

For more of Rosie's wonderful rantings and liberal diatribe, visit HERE.

Cannes Promotes Beastiality Now

This article will be rather brief, as the mere thought of it sickens me. The Cannes film festival awarded a movie of bestiality between men and horses as its "Most Shocking Movie." The article was carried on the SavageNation website, as well as a couple separate pages on News24.com. News24.com.

The film, titled Zoo, attempts to paint the "emotional" factor between these men and the animals who are supposedly "consenting" to the encounters. It depicts the men in a sympathetic light, one that tries to push the viewers to understanding their sexual perversion. I think Mr. Ed might have a little something to say about that. The incident was brought to light, after a man's body was dropped off at a hospital southeast of the city of Seattle on July 2, 2005 after his encounter with the horse.

Enumclaw Police Commander Eric Sortland said, "Basically, his colon was ruptured, along with his lower organs in that region, and he bled out." The ensuing investigation led police - and eventually much of the national media - to the farm where the interaction took place, outing the other (sicko) members of the group. The other members were apparently very diligent in their recording of the incidents as a cache of hundreds of hours of videotaped man-on-beast sex sessions was found hidden in a nearby field. I bet the detectives involved, having to review all that footage were just soooooo thrilled with the task.

Because sex with animals is not barred by law in Washington state, the case is being used by state legislators backing a bill that would make it illegal to have sex with beasts. Let's hope this one DOES pass.

Independent filmmaker Robinson Devor, not to miss the opportunity for a "controversial" film, said he "shies away from prurient imagery, instead enveloping the story in rich photography that gives it a dreamlike beauty overwhelming the sordidness of the subject matter." I'm failing to see ANY form of beauty, period, involved in bestiality. But this seems to be the direction Hollywood will be attempting to turn shortly as Cannes is usually a precursor of future film genres. Also since they are huge promotors of the Gay agenda, this is just another angle for them to exploit towards those ends.

So get ready for Disney's next blockbuster, "Beauty DOES the Beast," which will be released at the same time as "Black ON Stallions," and the "Rescuers: GO Down Under (her skirt)."

If any award was due for this movie, it should have been a Darwin Award, in the category of "Blatant Stupidity Involving Animals," and not an International Film Festival award. Fortunately for the rest of us, we have one less idiot in the world.

Limbaugh, The Lefts Next Imus-like Target

NBC allowed itself to be used as a publicity-machine on Monday according to an article on the Media Research Center, when it attempted to whip up an IMUS-style campaign against Rush Limbaugh for broadcasting the "Barack the Magic Negro" parody. The parody was drawn from a Los Angeles Times op-ed in March about Obama. The article was written by a black writer, David Ehrenstein in which he describes Obama as not being an "Authentic" black. The parody song has an Al Sharpton impersonator singing the same ideal about Obama. Read the Full Media Research Center article here.


The parody was spawned almost instantly and has been around for almost two months since the article was written back in March. Shouldn't there be some sort of a "Statute of Limitations" on being offended? Complaints really don't hold much water if they aren't being issued at the time of offense. Or are we going to begin issuing "Rain Check Complaints" now?


With the knowledge that the parody is two months old, media outlets like NBC are acting like it's a "just happened yesterday" incident. Matt Lauer on "Countdown (to no ratings)" charged: "Rush Limbaugh airing a racially-charged parody about presidential candidate Barack Obama. Is the radio talk show host getting a free pass?" Seems he forgot to add that fact that the origination of this was a BLACK writer. Apparently, Countdown is on-par in ratings these days with Al-Jazzera. So much for "fair and balanced" journalism.


When asked about the parody, Obama doesn't even care. ABC's Jake Tapper noted on his network's "Political Punch" blog, two weeks ago Obama told talk show host Paul W. Smith: "'I don't mind folks poking fun at me,' Obama said. 'That's part of the job.'"


Now, if the guy being made fun of doesn't even mind, what business is it of anyone else? None. But that doesn't seem to stop the media. NBC reporter Michael Okwu presumed Limbaugh guilty of some great offense, and suggested his conservative audience is also culpable: "Media watch dogs say there's no hue and cry to stop Limbaugh because he speaks to a niche audience who either expects this or is willing to let him slide." Okwu included two sound bites from Paul Waldman of the hard-left Media Matters, who ludicrously claimed: "This is basically the radio equivalent of a black-faced, minstrel show." NBC helpfully put some old minstrel video on screen to illustrate the point. "Legitimate satire, or something darker?" Okwu ominously wondered. MSNBC also reran the story.


Top all this off with MS(LSD)'s Keith Olbermann segment on the "Worst Person in the World" the following night, which also interestingly enough featured Rush as the primary object. HERE is the Media Research Centers article about this. Olbermann opined on how Rush believed no one in the drive-by media even listens to his show and thus, takes most of what is said out of context. Olbermann continued, boasting "I happen to know he said all this because today I was actually listening to him while he was on the air." He didn't contradict Limbaugh's point, instead confirmed it as he explained that he only heard Limbaugh's comments because he "was at ABC Radio in New York where I do the Dan Patrick Show from" and "listening from the perfect venue where they pipe in comedian's show and you can't turn it off -- the toilet!" I'd almost be willing to bet that this is were they also do thier "best thinking."

On Rush's website, he has ALL the transcript and information regarding the parody and related info. He even has a warm intro for the left-wingers that should happen to pop in looking for dirt.

"All you Drive-By journalists -- every one of you out there that thinks you have something here on "Barack the 'Magic Negro'" -- I'm going to try to help you and save you. You are going to be profoundly embarrassed if you keep going on this tune and going down this path with thinking there's something here that isn't. All you gotta do is visit www.RushLimbaugh.com. It's on the Internet. You just type that in, hit the ENTER key, and bam! My website comes up, and you can find my remarks the text of the speech or anything you want about this song, what I've said, and you would be fully informed before you start making idiots of yourselves on television."

But we all know, the media outlets aren't bright enough to take the hint.

Islamophobia, The New Buzz Word

The new "buzz word" of the age is Islamophobia, which is beginning to give Global Warming a run for its money in overuse. Islamophobia is being described as the fear of muslims. This new word is getting a lot of play as of late as organizations such as CAIR and OIC push for the muzzling of anyone speaking out against islam. They are trying so hard to silence the public, that they even tried to have a bill passed that would force government agencies to reveal person information of citizens who report "suspicious activities" performed by people of middle eastern appearance in order to sue them.

So let us take a look at this purported unnecessary fear. In an article originally posted on Arab News and picked up by both Fox News, Townhall.com and American Congress for Truth, Islamophobia is being deemed by Islamic Foreign Ministers as being more detrimental than terrorism itself. The OIC describes Islamaphobia as the “deliberate defamation of Islam and discrimination and intolerance of Muslims.” Interesting how there's no specific examples ever given when this word gets tossed around, but apparently it's a rampant problem.

The basis they claim for this is the hatred and discrimination against muslims, which supposedly existed well before 9/11. In the above article at American Congress for truth, writer Michael McBride found that: "in fact it is nearly impossible to directly associate any link between 9/11 and an increase in crimes against Muslims in the US. The best accounting I can find is here at religioustolerance.org, where the outrageous attacks on Muslims after 9/11 translates to 3 dead, one beaten, some threats made, and some property damaged."

This is even less a problem than the supposed "hate crimes" being touted by the gay community on violence based on sexual orientation. But that's a different post.

McBride also mentioned: "Sorry if I am more afraid of Muslims than I am of, let’s say, your run of the mill yokel who made some anti-Muslim remarks on 9/12. Those serving the Prophet have a much higher kill ratio than the Christians, the secularists, the atheists, the agnostics, the Jews, and the Wiccans combined."

"The OIC needs a little perspective. As the second leading inter-governmental organization, behind the UN, it needs to understand that by condemning “discrimination and intolerance,” but not condemning murder and terror, they prove themselves the second biggest hypocritical inter-governmental organization in the world, also still behind the UN. It is inconceivable that an organization supposedly speaking for 57 nations and various other interested parties, can berate other countries for discrimination, while providing no proof or significant harm, but then fail to mention in the least the devastation that has been wrought on the rest of civilized society by Muslim extremists."

Personally, I could really care less what the OIC, CAIR, CIE, or the MSA "want" us to believe, the proof is in the pudding. And after reviewing the vast list of ACTUAL atrocities by muslim extremists against the U.S. and other Western Civilizations all that is left to be said is, "Anyone for Jello?"

Nearing Time For Another Crusade

Since violence seems to be the official language of terrorists, perhaps some more violence on the old "shock and awe" scale on our part is called for these days. Since there is already a global jihad against the west in use by terrorist organizations, perhaps we can call for a global "Crusade" of sorts in response against them.

Essentially, we will either do it now, or a few years down the road, as fewer and fewer places around the world are safe for any westerners (foreign OR domestic) to travel/visit without armed escorts or fear of being blown up. One of America's last allies, P.M. Tony Blair is leaving office soon, which leaves America standing almost alone in the world. I say almost, as Nations like Australia and a scant few others are with us still. Who knows how much longer the rest will last before we truly are alone.

Liberals and Democrats (and even a few Republicans) would have us believe that we can all sit around a table and "compromise" with groups like al-qaeda and hezbollah. This is so far from a realistic possibility, that it's inconceivable that anyone actually believes it. The only thing that these radicals understand is violence. After the death of mohammed around 632 AD, infighting in islam began to grow, reaching epic proportions as rival factions clashed for control. Hence, the current sunni/shia squabbles we've been seeing for the last several decades. They're still fighting for control of the "True" islamic faith.

In a recent post HERE on the American Congress for Truth website, the very first paragraph of the article spells this out perfectly.

Was Osama Right?
BY BERNARD LEWIS, 16 May 2007
Islamists always believed the U.S. was weak. Recent political trends won't change their view.
During the Cold War, two things came to be known and generally recognized in the Middle East concerning the two rival superpowers. If you did anything to annoy the Russians, punishment would be swift and dire. If you said or did anything against the Americans, not only would there be no punishment; there might even be some possibility of reward, as the usual anxious procession of diplomats and politicians, journalists and scholars and miscellaneous others came with their usual pleading inquiries: "What have we done to offend you? What can we do to put it right?"

Contrary to the Political Correctness Police and Historical revisionists views, the original crusades "we're not" ventures by spoiled rich kids of Europe bent on plundering and pillaging the middle east, but was essentially a last ditch effort to defend western civilization from annihilation from the islamic onslaught that had swept half way across Europe. Kind of like what is currently happening in Europe now. The subsequent crusades thereafter, drove the muslim armies back to the middle eastern areas. And THEN, the "reclaiming" of "Holy" lands like Jerusalem.

During the initial "shock and awe" strikes by the United States on Iraqi targets, terrorist leaderships everywhere, had to take a step back and rethink their plans. They were forced to backtrack as they began to believe they may have "misjudged" America's response. Perhaps the "Paper Tiger" theory was incorrect and they would now have to face a more formidable foe than they expected in America. But it didn't take long for politicians and our amazingly lopsided media to begin their brow-beating about how terrible we were for invading iraq. Seeing this, terrorist activities began to pick back up as they saw we truly are all talk and little action. Bombings in Spain, England and elsewhere gave rise to an overnight Anti-American sentiment above what already existed. Government changes began to follow, as more and more supporters waned.

We are already at war with not only the terrorists, but with radical islam. So what's stopping us from simply taking the next step of declaring "a Crusade against radical islam." If anything, we'd just be getting done now, what is only sure to come in the future.

What Religious Persecution You Ask?

Well, the "bobble-heads" in the recently elected majority would like us to all just put down our guns and sit around singing "Kumbayha" because islam is such a peaceful religion. No one seems to get it. With exception to a descent portion of us, the Democrats and Liberals, (which are one and the same these days) are hard charging us down a slope like lemmings over a cliff.

We live in a country, that without a doubt was created based on religion. It can't be argued. The first settlers left England for America for RELIGIOUS freedom. End of story. The Puritans, although so "stuffy" that England told them to get the heck out, came here to worship God as they saw it. They didn't end up here just because they like to take long trips. They weren't the "Frequent Flyer" mileage collectors of the 15th century like some dumbed down textbooks wanted to claim. It was for religious reasons. But I doubt that has anything to do with why so many of our old monuments have judeo-christian influence in, on and around them. Naaahhh, couldn't be.

Now here we are centuries later, and judeo-christian principles are still under attack. Sites such as ScienceBlogs lists organizations like the Traditional Values Coalition in it's Stupid Bigots Edition and suggests that TVC is pro-hate crime based on thier opposition of H.R. 1592 and S. 1105 which only serves to create a protected class of the Gay community. All about the supposed "hate speech" that evil pastors allegedly spew out when they denounce homosexuality and other deviant behaviors in their sermons.

Organizations like Persecution.com , weekly report on Christians overseas being attacked, arrested, ran out, etc. One example is here:

PAKISTAN: Muslim Radicals Introduce Anti-Christian Law; Christians Receive Threatening Letters – VOM Sources
The Voice of the Martyrs sources in Pakistan report that Muslim radicals have introduced a law in Parliament that any Muslim who converts to Christianity should be killed. Although the details are sketchy, intercede for this situation and ask God to move so this law does not go into effect. Pray God encourages Christians in Pakistan to be a witness for Him in spite of persecution.

CHARSADDA – On May 7, 2007, Christians in the Charsadda District received letters warning them to shut their churches and convert to Islam. The letter that set a 10-day deadline said, "All Christians should convert to Islam within 10 days or leave Charsadda. We will execute all of you if you don't convert to Islam." Copies of the handwritten letter were delivered to two churches and several Christian homes in Charsadda. Even though the police have been alerted, Christians in the area are concerned for their safety. A similar letter was delivered to believers in Mardan district. Pray God gives Christians in Charsadda courage to stand for Him. Ask for protection and peace to surround them during these uncertain times.

Top all this off with a daily healthy dose of the American Communists and Liberals Union, and solo-artists like Michael Newdow constantly pushing the same 'ol-schtik of "Separation of church and state." This is just amazing, Jefferson writes a letter to a Danbury Baptist Pastor saying that it isn't the federal governments place to "ESTABLISH" a national religion, and all of a sudden the "ACKNOWLEDGMENT" of God on a dollar bill causes grief. It should also be noted that Newdow is divorced, and his daughter lives with the mother. Both mother and daughter are Christians, and the daughter has NO problem with saying "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, as Newdow claims.

Well Over 90% of the country believes in God according to a poll conducted by Fox News. That being said, exactly when did ANYONE say it was mandatory for that remaining, under 10% batch, to "go forth and believe." They didn't. If your not religious enough, or at all to worship a god, then don't. Get over yourselves. Don't say the "One nation under God" part of the Pledge if you don't believe in a god, but stop making yourselves look so stupid by trying to deprive the rest of us of it.

Establishment = Church of England as example. Acknowledgment = Thank You.

Is it necessary to even say anymore?

Fort Dix Morons in country illegaly for 20 years

Three of the six idiots arrested last week who ploted an attack on Fort Dix Military base had been in country illegaly for about 20 years! This was revealed in an article written by By Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball for Newsweek, and also reposted by American Congress for Truth.

This does not bode well for pro-amnesty immigration supporters. Immigration reform advocates point to this as a "tighter enforcement can aide in preventing terroristic activities" here in America although, an application for asylum was filed in 1989 by the family of three suspects stalled inside the federal bureaucracy for 16 years due to a paperwork "backlog."

Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, a private group that lobbies for tougher U.S. immigration controls, complained that government oversights like the ones that evidently plagued the Duka case are "par for the course" in what he calls "our don't ask, don't tell immigration system. We make it as easy as possible for illegal aliens to live here. 'No' never means 'no'." Krikorian said that immigration bureaucrats were less at fault for these kinds of delays than policy makers who fail to make sure that laws on the books are vigorously enforced.

The source familiar with the Duka case said that the three Duka brothers-Dritan, Eljvir and Shain-are believed to have first entered the United States illegally in 1984 by crossing from Mexico at Brownsville, Texas.

In 1989, federal immigration records indicate, the Duka brothers' father contacted U.S. immigration authorities seeking to regularize the status of several members of the family-including Dritan, Eljvir and Shain-through a claim of asylum. For nearly two decades, American authorities were aware that members of the family were inside the United States, and that they had probably come here illegally. While the asylum application was underconsideration, the government effectively suspended any effort to deport family members as illegal aliens.

After the Duka's filed the asylum application, it languished for 16 years in the bowels of the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), the notoriously inefficient Justice Department agency which was responsible for processing-and, where appropriate, deporting-immigrants to the United States. The family's asylum claim got stuck for 16 years at INS because of a bureaucratic paperwork backlog of more than 100,000 asylum applications. The official said asylum claims routinely sat in "filing cabinets" for a decade or more.

The Duka family's immigration record shows that in 1995-six years after the family's initial asylum application was filed with the government-the family tried to take advantage of a new immigration lottery system that granted lucky applicants permanent residence status based partly on ethnic diversity. But this application also apparently ended up in some kind of bureaucratic limbo.

By 2005, the former INS bureaucracy had been transferred from the Justice Department to the new Department of Homeland Security, where officials were under pressure from Congress and the public to eliminate immigration backlogs and crack down on aliens who had entered the United States illegally.

By late 2005, said the source familiar with the Duka's immigration history, Homeland Security officials had taken a look at the Dukas's suspicious file and notified both the new Homeland investigations bureau, known as ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement), and the FBI. Before a thorough immigration fraud investigation could be conducted, however, the Philadelphia-area Joint Terrorism Task Force, responding to a tip-off from a Circuit City clerk who was disturbed at the contents of a video a customer wanted to have copied, launched the undercover terrorism investigation which resulted in the arrests of three Duka brothers and three other men on charges of plotting to attack Fort Dix and other targets in the NewJersey area.

The Duka brothers and the three other defendants in the case are currently being held in custody without bail on temporary charges filed by the Feds. The temporary charges are expected to be superseded by a criminal indictment in the near future, said Michael Riley, a lawyer for Shain Duka, one of the arrested brothers. Shain Duka, his brothers Dritan and Eljvir, and the three other men arrested in the case all maintain their innocence, Riley said. He added that it is his understanding that details obtained by NEWSWEEK about the Duka family's immigration history are "pretty accurate."

You Democrats STILL want those open borders now? I'm sure the ACLU still does. As does CAIR.

Welcome to Islamberg, the Official Paramilitary Camp of New York

And now with a new threat of violence against someone who also posted this story! On Friday May 11th 2007, an article was posted on Canada Free Press written By Paul L. Williams Ph.D., (author of THE DAY OF ISLAM) with the assistance of Douglas Hagmann, Bill Krayer and Michael Travis. In his article, Williams detailed an islamic Paramilitary compound located within a dense forest at the foothills of the Catskill Mountains on the outskirts of Hancock, New York.

The area is pretty rugged and perilous as the surroundings of the compound are inhabited by rattlesnakes, wolves, etc. There is what is described as a "Sentry" post at the entry road. The entire area is surrounded by No Trespassing signs. The roadway into the compound which is washed out and rutted, has been dubbed "muslim Lane." People DON'T venture here of their own will. Locals in the surrounding area say they often here gunfire, and a Vietnam Vet living nearby has described what he believes to be explosives. Townsfolk avoid the area out of fear.

Islamberg is a branch of muslims of the Americas Inc., a tax-exempt organization formed in 1980 by Pakistani cleric sheikh mubarak ali gilani, who refers to himself as "the sixth sultan ul faqr," gilani, has been directly linked by court documents to jamaat ul-fuqra or "community of the impoverished," an organization that seeks to "purify" islam through violence.

Though primarily based in Lahore, Pakistan, jamaat ul-fuqra has operational headquarters in New York and openly recruits through various social service organizations in the U.S., including the prison system. Members live in hamaats or compounds, such as islamberg, where they agree to abide by the laws of jamaat ul-fuqra, which are considered to be above local, state and federal authority. Additional hamaats have been established in Hyattsville, Maryland; Red House, Virginia; Falls Church, Virginia; Macon, Georgia; York, South Carolina; Dover, Tennessee; Buena Vista, Colorado; Talihina, Oklahoma; Tulare Country, California; Commerce, California; and Onalaska, Washington. Others are being built, including an expansive facility in Sherman, Pennsylvania.

Before becoming a citizen of islamberg or any of the other fuqra compounds, the recruits - - primarily inner city black men who became converts in prison - - are compelled to sign an oath that reads: "I shall always hear and obey, and whenever given the command, I shall readily fight for Allah's sake."

Even though jamaat ul-fuqra has been involved in terror attacks and sundry criminal activities, recruited thousands of members from federal and state penal systems, and appears to be operating paramilitary facilities for militant muslims, it remains to be placed on the official US Terror Watch List. On the contrary, it continues to operate, flourish, and expand as a legitimate nonprofit, tax-deductible charity. Sounds like it's time to EXPAND that list a bit!

Read the full article by Williams, and a MAP revealing the many locations of jamaat ul-fuqra's involvements HERE.

Shortly after this article was released it was copy-posted by another blogger, a US war veteran Scott Grayban. The story was carried by varying sources ranging from Micheal Savage to littlegreenfootballs.com. Apparently, some one didn't like the article and physically threatened Grayban over the phone.

Grayban received two phone calls on Sunday night (May 13th, 2007) from a foreigner, threatening his life. The caller used a hacked phone (or internet line) to disguise the location from which he was calling. The caller told Scott the precise street on which he lives, that he lives across from an auto shop, that he has a solar panel in his apartment window and the make of the car he drove to the mall on Saturday. These aren't details anyone could obtain from Google Earth.

Read the full article regarding the threat, and the .jpeg of the phone call printout HERE.

So, this so-called "religion of peace," really does want peace? Yeeeeaaaahhh, and if you still believe that, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.

Jihadist Handbook: Strike The Western Economy

Terrorists targeting ideals revealed in an e-newsletter distributed by the American Congress for Truth on May 13th 2007. The newsletter, seen in full Here, reveals that primary targets of terrorists include "Economic" locales. This would explain one reason why ultimately, the World Trade Towers were targeted as they were pinnacles of the "Western Economy."

Note: This article is drawn in part from the piece entitled "Unraveling al-Qa`ida's Target Selection Calculus," written by Sammy Salama for the Combating Terrorism Center at the United States Military Academy, West Point, in December 2006. To get the FULL impact of the info posted here, you really MUST read the entire article posted HERE. Please read it as it is seriously more in depth than my post alone.

Al Qiada's targets are the subject of a lot of literature and speculation as some believe they chose high profile locales for the media buzz. Others believe they chose targets based on body count. And there are some who believe their targets are for goal-oriented results, or soft targets due to the difficulty of attacking military or secured establishments. But captured operations manuals and open source literature reveal a more sinister set of goals. Targets are being selected aimed at crippling the Western Economies as they believe this to be the best way of reducing U.S. and Western influences in the middle east and other locales. They see it as a "if the U.S. is spending all it's money and resources guarding all these softer targets, the U.S. won't be able to fully support diplomatic regimes elsewhere." And this will eventually bring about severing U.S. muslim alliances that have been created with our recent incursions.

To understand this line of reasoning, the overall agenda is to create a slow, long term "Bleed" of American resources. We can see this with all the updated security we see around the country on a daily basis. Extra security and screening at airports and harbors. Extended training of our emergency services. Increased port security/patrols. The expense of detection equipment such as Nuclear/Chemical/Biological gear. By continuing to hinder America at home with continued expense, terrorist organizations, like Al Qiada believe that eventually the American economy will crumble and will no longer be able to sustain its presences overseas.

For an example of this thought process, here's an example. The following excerpt is from Sawt al-Jihad (Voice of Jihad), the official publication of al-Qa`ida in Saudi Arabia, illustrate the rationale behind al-Qa`ida's target selection:

What Else Is There to Say about September 11?

Since September 11th America has been spending billions of dollars to protect its infrastructure and interests around the world... The attacker determines the timing of the strike. He will carry out a concentrated strike one time at a weak point and then sit in ambush again. So the enemy will look for a gap and close it, not necessarily where he was hit but all other similar targets. So striking the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania means protecting every American embassy in the world. Striking the [U.S.S.] Cole at sea means protecting all American assets in the seas. Diversifying targets means protecting all American things in every land that may have terrorists!!

Pretty devious don't you think? Especially since we are a pretty materialistic nation.

Based on al-Qa`ida's own description of its calculus and explanation of its targeting rationale, one must assume that this network is most likely to target facilities and establishments of high economic value on the U.S. mainland. Such facilities include but are not limited to airports, bus stations, train stations, subways, ports, financial districts, financial buildings, malls, markets, resorts, planes, ships, oil installations, hotels, sports arenas, theaters and embassies. As illustrated previously, al-Qa`ida's stated objective is to cause the greatest possible economic damage as well as force the United States to spend excessive resources on guarding and protecting facilities all over the United States in order to ultimately bring down the U.S. economy, the source of American military power and hegemony.

Al-Qa`ida is still likely to attempt to attack the American homeland. Attacking U.S. territory offers al-Qa`ida many advantages, primarily through its symbolic value as well as its indication of the network's reach and perseverance. More importantly, as discussed previously, such an attack would further the goal of stressing the United States economically. Continuously attacking the American homeland also causes further rifts between the United States and its Arab and Muslim allies, an objective which is among al-Qa`ida's foremost strategic goals. This point was argued by Ayman al-Zawahiri, the network's second in command in 2001:

The masters in Washington and Tel Aviv are using the [Muslim] regimes to protect their interest and to fight the battle against the Muslims on their behalf. If the shrapnel from the battle reaches their homes and their bodies, they will trade accusations with their agents about who is responsible for this. In that case, they will face one of two bitter choices: Either personally wage the battle against the Muslims, which means the battle will turn into clear-cut jihad against infidels, or they reconsider their plans after acknowledging the failure of the brute and violent confrontation against Muslims. Therefore, we must move the battle to the enemy's grounds to burn the hands of those who ignite fire in our countries.

This is a MUST READ article for those wanting a better understanding of what our enemy is attempting.

ABC's Gun Control "Myth-Lie-and-Stupidity" Broadcast

Friday May 4th 2007's ABC broadcast came with a surprising twist, actual SUPPORT for gun ownership. Who would have ever thought that would happen? On Friday's 20/20, ABC anchor John Stossel discussed the self-defensive benefits of gun ownership, debunking the myth that "gun control reduces crime." The segment aired during 20/20's recurring series, "Myths, Lies & Downright Stupidity," based on Stossel's book of the same title.

Stossel cited several factors, to include the recent overturn of Washington D.C.'s 30-year old ban on firearms, how crime, particularly violent crime spiked upwards since the ban was in place, and had outtakes from prisoners who stated that they didn't care about the gun laws, they didn't obey them anyways. The segment also included how Kenesaw, Georgia has a law mandating that citizens own firearms, while not enforced, it puts the odds against criminals who don't know if they are attempting to victimize an armed citizen or not. Residents in Kenesaw describe the town as being very peaceful. Local Law Enforcement in the town describe the sharp decline in crime, particularly violent crime, since the law was enacted.

Stossel described two instances in which guns were used by law-abiding citizens to stop criminals, including students at the Appalachian School of Law who went to their cars and retrieved their guns after a gunman attacked their school in January 2002.

Stossel: "Having a gun changes the balance of power. And here's a controversial idea: Some Virginia Tech students say they wish students had been allowed to carry guns because one of them might have stopped the killer before he shot so many people. And that's what happened five years ago at the Appalachian School of Law. Hearing shots, two students went to their cars, got their guns, and helped restrain this shooter until police arrested him."

Unfortunately, the law that would have allowed them to carry was voted down. So much for them being able to protect themselves in Virginia Tech. Read the Roanoke Times article here: http://www.roanoke.com/news/roanoke/wb/wb/xp-50658 .

One of the plaintiffs in the Washington D.C. case was Tom Palmer, who has actually had to use a firearm in the past to defend himself. "If someone gets into your house, which would you rather have, a handgun or a telephone? You can call the police if you want, and they'll get there, and they'll take a picture of your dead body. But they can't get there in time to save your life. The first line of defense is you."

Stossel wrapped up his report with, "So gun control isn't necessarily crime control. In fact, the National Academy of Sciences reviewed hundreds of studies and could not document a single gun regulation that reduced violent crime or murder."

Ya think? So maybe there's more to the NRA trying to protect peoples Firearms Rights. And with the possibility of terroristic incidents happening in our streets, wouldn't it be a good idea for MORE legally armed citizens roaming about?

For more about this broadcast, see the MRC's post here:
http://www.mrc.org/cyberalerts/2007/cyb20070507.asp#4 .

Kathleen Sebelius follows in Kathleen Blanco's footsteps

Kansas Democratic Governor Kathleen Sebelius, is taking great pains to follow in another failed Democratic Governors footsteps, Kathleen Blanco. You may remember after hurricane Katrina Blanco, along with her sidekick Ray Nagin, spent the majority of her "air time" in press interviews trying to blame the Bush Administration for how terrible Federal response from FEMA was in Louisiana. Nagan actually managed to wisen up enough, and distanced himself far enough away from Blanco to get himself re-elected. While Blanco, dead set on trying to shift all the blame for her vast failures to the Bush Administration, was unable to generate any public support and had to withdraw from running for another term. It's likely that Blanco, couldn't even generate enough support these days to be nominated for city Jester, let alone any public office. That's what can happen when the public sees through your B.S.

Fast forward to May 2007. Kansas Democratic Governor Kathleen Sebelius seems determined to follow this same path. Sebelius, while offered enormous resources by the White House had she only made the request for them, preferred to use the opportunity to gain her "15 minutes of Fame." An op-ed in the Wichita Eagle, by Kansas Senator Pat Roberts who spoke with President Bush on Saturday afternoon--almost 24 hours after the storm--Mr. Bush said the only thing he needed for a disaster declaration was a request from the Kansas governor. So, after getting off the phone with the President, Senator Roberts called Sebelius and told her to submit the request. Why did the governor have to wait until Roberts made a phone call? The President himself even called Sebelius to see if she needed anything. All she has requested to date is F.M. radios.

All of this controversy spawned after a major tornado ravaged the town of Greensburg Kansas. Governor Kathleen Sebelius said "Much of the National Guard equipment usually positioned around the state to respond to emergencies is gone. She said not having immediate access to things like tents, trucks and semitrailers will really handicap the rebuilding effort. The Kansas National Guard has about 40 percent of the equipment it is allotted because much of it has been sent to Iraq."

Greensburg Kansas is a town of approximately 1,500 residents. Taking that into consideration, how much in the way of resources is actually needed for recovery? Approximately 88% of Kansas' National Guard manpower is available. Add to that another 83,000 National Guard troops available from neighboring states. Also available are almost 400 transport and construction class trucks, 350+ humvees and a hand full of helicopters. Out of this "meager, insufficient, resource bare," amount, Sebelius has apparently deployed upwards of approximately 500 National Guard troops. We haven't even counted the resources that could be utilized from Military bases such as McConnell AFB in Wichita which has its own civil engineering squadron, complete with heavy construction equipment, trucks, generators, and hundreds of trained personnel. Ditto for the Army assets at Fort Riley and Fort Leavenworth.

The State Adjutant General, Maj. Gen. Bunting, notes "We've been over the town twice now — all of our partners around the state, the experts from cities with technical search-and-rescue, we've done everything we can. Some of this rubble is 20, 30 feet deep. That's where we've spent all our efforts, and we'll do it again today."

In the end, Sebelius is wasting her future in politics playing the "blame-game" in what was originally a very manageable disaster. When politicians place their own wants above the welfare of the people they govern, it can only get ugly for them. This will be no exception. Once the word spreads in Kansas of what the actual facts are, Sebelius may be more than out of a job in the future, but might even find it necessary to leave the state. Hopefully, she won't come here to California, we have enough problems as it is, without adding a Blanco pt.2 to the list.

Excerpts for this article provided by:
http://confederateyankee.mu.nu/archives/225570.php

http://state29.blogspot.com/2007/05/democrat-kansas-governor-kathleen.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/08/AR2007050802238.html?nav=rss_print/asection

http://www.kcbs.com/pages/424076.php?contentType=4&contentId=472199

The Rising Storm, Jihad In Our Streets

Who would have ever thought, that something as harmless as paintball could be the beginning of the bloodbath that will swiftly wash upon our shores. In a recent posting by J. Grant Swank, Jr. (ArriveNet Editorials - May 04, 2007) -- says "These killers are known as "paintball jihadists" in that they practice in paintball game style what they have planned for America’s streets. They are already training others in "urban combat" using paintball guns. They will engage in paramilitary-style training right under our noses, and lie about it to our faces. They are protected, in some cases, by the religious Imams, some who even encourage or schedule such outings." Read the full posting here: http://editorials.arrivenet.com/society/article.php/11383.html .

The imams aren't the only ones protecting them. The bogus hate crimes bill, H.R. 1592 which passed the house on May 3rd of 2007, will also protect this behavior. See my previous post here: http://hoopyfrooddude.blogspot.com/2007/05/hr-1592-bogus-hate-crimes-bill-passes.html . Per H.R. 1592, discrimination of the "perceived" nature of the people participating in such activities would be considered a hate crime and will be prosecutable under federal guidelines. I suggest you give a stern talking-to of your representatives about this. The Senate version, S 1105 will be voted on soon. Stop this stupidity in its tracks by encouraging your ELECTED representatives to vote against it.

Once zealots like this get a foothold, they never stop, and will sacrifice any and all around them, including themselves to further a "World under islamic rule." Douglas J. Hagmann, Director, Northeast Intelligence Network, reports that American officials already know of the process. However, both government and media are muffling the details. "The ‘insider’ reports are very troubling and are purposely being downplayed by official sources and go largely unreported in the media."

Press blocks like this, and enormously downplayed incidents are occurring more often than not, expecially by the large media outlets as can be seen with the recent foiled planned attack at Fort Dix. On Tuesday, May 2, 2007, a federal indictment was unsealed in the U.S. federal court in St. Louis naming eight Islamic men as defendants in a case involving the buying, selling or hiding of automatic weapons, an anti-personnel mine and other explosives. So far, media outlets, such as CBS are reporting only six defendants.

Furthermore, as reported by the Media Research Center, on Tuesday night, following a week in which the CBS Evening News attracted the fewest viewers in decades, the producers decided the Katie Couric-anchored newscast needed an injection of an Olbermann-esque twist: The arrests of six Islamists, for plotting to use automatic weapons to murder troops at Fort Dix, matches the hype around previous captures which fizzled. Armen Keteyian framed his story around how since 9/11 "more than 400,000 names have come under one form of government surveillance or another -- from watch lists to wiretaps. But only a handful of terrorists have been convicted in cases with concrete ties to al-Qaeda." Keteyian highlighted how cases that "start out as larger, bolder terrorism cases, turn into lesser offenses. According to a study by the NYU Center on Law and Security, of the 550 terrorism cases since 9/11, only 163 individuals have been prosecuted on terrorism charges." The group's Karen Greenburg then asserted: "The conclusion would be that we've made a lot of hoopla about a number of cases on the grounds of terrorism at the beginning, and they haven't panned out to be terrorism cases."

Keith Olbermann dutifully echoed the CBS spin, only with more of an edge as he derided the "extensive and entirely credulous coverage" and dismissed the capture: "The FBI has arrested six morons." On Tuesday's Countdown on MSNBC, he charged: "The flaw, though, in the breathless reporting of the purported terror cell: The Bureau [FBI] infiltrated the six person group after its members took video of themselves, practicing with assault weapons, brought the tape to a photo store and had it transferred to DVD. The details of the supposed plot don't seem to hold together that well either, though that did not stop extensive and entirely credulous coverage on TV, the Internet, in print today. The men supposedly had plans to gain access to the base disguised as pizza delivery guys, then cut the power somehow, then quote, 'hit four, five or six Humveees and light the whole place and retreat without any losses.' And take the tape of yourselves practicing and have it copied at FotoMat. In other words, the FBI has arrested six morons." Read the full report here: http://www.mrc.org/cyberalerts/2007/cyb20070509.asp#1 .

Whether the media likes it or not, if "only" 163 people were charged and imprisoned for terrorist activities, that's 163 terrorist activities that WON'T happen. That's is 163 carbombs that won't go off in Times Square at rush hour. It's 163 armed gunmen pulling a "Columbine-like" massacre in our schools, elementary, collegiate or otherwise. That's 163 "London subway" style bombings that won't see the light of day. That's 163 more 9/11's we won't have to suffer through. 163 terrorist attacks is 163 terrorist attacks, no matter how much the media downplays it.

If there is ever a time for LESS gun control, now would be the time. American citizens need to be allowed to carry. Because no one knows what area WILL BE hit by those that HAVEN'T been caught yet.

H.R. 1592, the BOGUS Hate Crimes Bill Passes

It should be no surprise, that with a LIBERAL-Democratic controlled House that America would take another step towards Self-Annihilation. May 3rd, 2007 saw another beginning of the end attempt to strip Americans of their right of "Freedom of Speech," when the House passed H.R. 1592 by a vote of 237 FOR and 180 AGAINST. View the results here to see how your representatives voted: http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll299.xml . Now the Senate will consider it's version of the bill known as S 1105. America's only hope of survival in the future is that the President upholds his promise to VETO these bogus bills, and that a two thirds majority isn't mustered to pass them anyways.

It should also be no shock to know that CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) practically "wet" themselves in excitement about the passage of this bill. They've only been supporting this kind of legislation since 2005.

With the passage of this bill, and should it actually become law, the people who reported the 6 imams on the U.S. Airways flight for strange behavior, could be prosecuted for "Hate Crimes!" That's right. It will be a hate crime now to report these behaviors, and to top it off, prosecuted under Federal guidelines. Under H.R. 1592, the law would allow the Attorney General to provide federal assistance to local law enforcement to aid investigations of crimes motivated by "...prejudice based on the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation or perceived orientation..." of the victim.

Is this what we really need to waste precious federal resources on? With all the hoopla the media made about "how terrible a job FEMA did during Katrina.." do we really need to tie up even more federal resources investigating a cross dresser being called names? Or, as in the case of the imams booted from an airline, stereotyping based on behaviors? I thought not.

The very nature of this bill itself is prejudiced. In the same manner that it would prevent any voice from speaking out against islamic jihadists, it provides special protections for those very same anti-American sentiments. Even the ACLU, and its overwhelming support for the gay community praised the passage of this bill. Read THEIR article here: http://www.aclu.org/lgbt/gen/29605prs20070503.html . It's just too bad they are so stupid that they don't even understand that under Shia law, there ARE NO GAYS. Gays better learn to like women, and lesbians better start meeting guys, or you'll get beheaded.

For more articles about this pathetic legislation, visit the following links:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55392

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2007/05/cair_cheering_t.html

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/016297.php

http://www.americancongressfortruth.com/ArchDetails.aspx?id=196

So, that all being said, start kicking your Representatives in the rear and get them in gear. That is, unless you WANT to become muslim. Only other alternative is death. Think about it.

al Qaeda in Nashville?

Any one up for a game of "Cowboys and Terrorists?" This seems to be becoming more of a possibility as the Grant Fraud Investigations in Nashville Tenn., continue.

On April 4th 2007, American Congress for Truth released an article regarding grant fraud investigations being linked to al Qaeda in Nashville. The article, written by Jerry Gordon and Lyn Andrea Andersen, can be read here: http://www.americancongressfortruth.com/ArchDetails.aspx?id=169 . In the article it describes the growth in Nashville’s immigrant population was a product of a Clinton Administration initiative in the 1990’s by the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) to vector refugees away from the traditional gateway cities to the nation’s interior. It also details some of the many incidents, (which are growing at a steady pace) by the immigrants against US citizens, to include the two students run down by a Somali immigrant cab driver after an argument regarding the Holocaust.

More importantly though, is the funneling of funds to terrorist networks such as al Qaeda. The Al-Barakaat money transfer investigations were prompted by allegations that funds repatriated to Somalia by the system – some $40 million annually- were diverted to al Qaeda. Indictments were brought by federal prosecutors in the U.S. against four of the involved persons, to include Abdirizak Musse Hassan, the head of the Somali Community Center of Nashville (SCCN).

But that's not all, go to the full article and read about more fraud.

On May 2nd 2007, American Congress for Truth released a followup article regarding these investigations also written by Jerry Gordon and Lyn Andrea Andersen. You can read the full article here: http://www.americancongressfortruth.com/ArchDetails.aspx?id=194 .

ACT credits the start of the investigation to a tip by an ACT member having written to the website asking for assistance. ACT also credited Channel 4 News I-team at NBC affiliate in Nashville, WSMV.

The follow-up article includes a statement from U.S. Representative Jim Cooper in Nashville:

“I think it is a very upsetting story. I get mad every time I see even a dollar of taxpayer money misspent. It looks like in this case hundreds of thousands of dollars were wasted or misspent. I think we welcome the diversity in our community but it also worries me that there may be a safety issue here. This is an amazing and troublesome story. We need to make sure that this is solved and solved quickly.”

It should be noted that Nashville now boasts six Mosques for the growing Muslim community. Nashville is being referred to these days as a "blue city in a red state.” Between 1990 and 1999 the foreign born population grew by over 203% from less than 13,000 to more than 40,000 out of the consolidated Nashville-Davidson population of over 607,000. Foreign born residents in Nashville now account for one in seven residents.

The investigations into these fraud incidents is still ongoing, as the Nashville Channel 4 WSMV I-Team investigative segments airing this week and next will certainly provide the ‘disinfectant of public exposure’ on this story. So continue to visit the American Congress for Truth website to check for updates.

Mr. Gordon is a Member of the Board of American Congress for Truth and Ms. Andersen is an independent counter-terrorism analyst.

"Shut up and Sing".. My Favorite quote!

There are times in life, when we sometimes regret the freedoms we have. Then we kick ourselves in the rear and soldier on through life. We say things that we may actually mean, or we say things just to "fit into the current environment," or we say things that get taken the wrong way. Any way you slice it, you can't please everyone all the time with everything you say.

The Dixie Chicks found this out the hard way with their anti-Bush rant in a 2003 concert in London. The lead singer Natalie Maines, during the concert blurted out that she was ashamed that Bush was from Texas. What followed there after was a firestorm of "Anti-Dixie-Chicks" criticism. Everything from radio stations refusing to play their music anymore, to mass amounts of hate mail. People were disgusted with what was done by the band. And more disturbed by the fact that it was done overseas in an Allied country, being England.

With all the outpouring of dislike for the band, they pressed on sticking with their stance. I was never much of a Dixie Chicks fan in the first place, but I did develop a slight bit of respect for the band for their "sticking to their guns" choice, even though I disagreed with their views. At least they had the courage to stand behind their choice, unlike many other celebrities these days.

Shortly there after, a documentary was made about the band, and their lives after the controversial statement. The film was titled, "Dixie Chicks: Shut up and sing." It followed them through their home life, time in the studios, etc. Eventually, the criticism died down, and in some respects, ended. We moved on with life and pushed the incident into the corner to be forgotten, hopefully.

But what of the movie? Specifically the title itself, it's become a tag line that should be bestowed on a bulk of hollywoodies these days. Actors such as Alec Baldwin (and many others) declaring that, "if Bush is elected, I'll move out of the country." Yet they are still here, blasting away with their hatred. Many bands have followed the Dixie Chicks' lead by turning their concerts into political platforms. What happened to the music?

The music industry wonders why it's losing money hand over fist to internet piracy. Music sales of CD's continually drop, with some slight increase in legal online downloads, but nothing significant. Perhaps it because people paying $100.00 for a concert ticket have absolutely NO DESIRE to sit through a political convention with some music in between rants. Hence the reason people aren't paying for music as much these days. They got ripped off for $100.00 bucks during the last concert they went to since the band spent an hour out of the hour and a half concert tossing out their, "I hate Bush, I hate America, I hate..." And since they couldn't get a refund, they are just balancing out their loss.

Freedom of speech. One of the most widely misinterpreted rights, is the problem itself. Some will say, "well it's their right to spew anti-American sentiments during a concert!" On this point, they would be correct. They do have that right, they can say whatever they want. BUT, do they have to do it DURING their concert? Can't it wait until after the concert? They are celebrities, don't they have their own P.R. personnel that can release statements to media outlets? Can't they, with all their prestige, fame if you will, coax their way into a news cast interview after the concert and spew away then? Fans are going to your concerts for the MUSIC! Not your views!

So raise the curtain! Strike up the band! And above all else, SHUT UP AND SING!

Gun Control And ABC's Bias About Findings

On April 24th, 2007, a Media Research Center article here: http://www.mrc.org/cyberalerts/2007/cyb20070424.asp#1 , reported ABCnews.com's burying of a poll taken that previous Sunday. A full two minutes was dedicated to the polling results. But the most interesting result that the poll revealed was, when "asked the primary cause of gun violence, far more Americans blamed the effects of popular culture (40 percent) or the way parents raise their children (35 percent) than the availability of guns (18 percent)," was omitted. Only 18%! That's a pretty staggering difference when media hype claims regularly, that Americans want more gun control. George Stephanopoulos did point out however "a strong majority of Americans, 52 to 29, prefer enforcing existing laws to passing new laws." Less than 50% believe new laws would have any effect anyways.

Like I've been saying in all my previous posts involving Gun Control, we don't need MORE laws, just BETTER laws. Virginia's Governor, in lieu of the recent Virginia Tech shootings, recently took steps in this direction. It is now mandated that persons reported for mental health problems, (I can only assume they mean violent mental illness at this time,) will be added to the Insta-Check system, which would have prevented Cho from buying his weapons in the first place. Not MORE, just BETTER. Keep that in mind. The National Rifle Association has also supported measures like this in the past. They are working with Congress regarding these measures.

Brit Hume on his Tuesday Grapevine segment DID let ABC's cat out of the bag by revealing the buried polling statistics. Read it here: http://www.mrc.org/cyberalerts/2007/cyb20070425.asp#5 .

Hume's first "Grapevine" item on the April 24 Special Report with Brit Hume: "If you're wondering why the apparent popular support for gun control does not seem to translate into legislative action, there is ample illustration in the latest ABC News poll taken after the Virginia Tech shootings. 61 percent of the respondents said they favor stronger gun control laws, but as to whether they would do any good, 49 percent said yes, 50 percent said no. And by a 52-to-29 margin, respondents said they prefer enforcing existing gun laws to passing new ones. ABC devoted nearly two minutes to the poll during last night's evening newscast -- but never mentioned one of the most interesting results. When asked the primary source of gun violence, 40 percent said popular culture, and 35 percent said the way parents raise their children. Only 18 percent blamed the availability of guns."

For more information about Firearms Bias, read the book: The Bias Against Guns: Why Almost Everything You've Heard About Gun Control Is Wrong (2003), by Dr. John R. Lott, Jr. And for a brief overview of this book: http://www.iliberty.org/Books/bookid.1896/book_detail.asp .

Genocide Defined... Islam

As posted on American Congress for Truth on Apr. 30th, 2007: http://www.americancongressfortruth.com/ArchDetails.aspx?id=192 , the U.N.'s definition of Genocide is, “any… acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such…”

Amazingly enough, this is exactly what the koranic version of jihad and dhimmitude promote, pretty much through the entire book. Here are just a few of the Sura's that show this:

Allah is an enemy to unbelievers. - Sura 2:98

On unbelievers is the curse of Allah. - Sura 2:161

Fight unbelievers who are near to you. 9:123 (different translation:Believers! Make war on the infidels who dwell around you. Let them find harshness in you. (another source: ) Ye who believe! Murder those of the disbelievers....

Muhammad is Allah's apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another. Through them, Allah seeks to enrage the unbelievers. - 48:29

Prophet! Make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal sternly with them. Hell shall be their home, evil their fate. - 66:9

Allah has cursed the unbelievers and proposed for them a blazing hell. - 33:60

Unbelievers are enemies of Allah and they will roast in hell. - 41:14

O believers, take not Jews and Christians as friends; they are friends of each other. Those of you who make them his friends is one of them. God does not guide an unjust people. - 5:54

Make war on them until idolatry is no more and Allah's religion reigns supreme - 8:39

It is not for any Prophet to have captives until he has made slaughter in the land. - 8:67

Allah will humble the unbelievers. Allah and His apostle are free from obligations to idol-worshipers. Proclaim a woeful punishment to the unbelievers. - 9:2-3

When the sacred months are over, slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them. - 9:5

Believers! Know that idolators are unclean. - 9:28

The unbelievers among the People of the Book and the pagans shall burn forever in the fire of hell. They are the vilest of all creatures. - 98:51

People of the Book... which could be any number of religious faiths, but usually a reference to Jewish and/or Judeo-Christian faiths.

The same can be said of the dhimmitude, a policy of deliberate Cultural obliteration as seen here:

For those not killed by the invading Muslims, they might be allowed to live as dhimmis; their lives are spared if they surrender to a set of humiliating and oppressive laws and regulations that demand subservience and guarantee the eventual extinction of their culture.

The Pact of umar is a fundamental document in prescribing the condition of tolerated "People of the Book" (Jews and Christians) living within Muslim-controlled states.

ARTICLES OF THE PACT OF uMAR
We Christians:
1 - We shall not build, in our cities or in their neighborhood, new monasteries,
2 - churches,
3 - convents,
4 - or monks' cells,
5 - nor shall we repair, by day or by night, such of them as fall in ruins
6 - or are situated in the quarters of the Muslims. . . .
7- We shall not give shelter in our churches or in our dwellings to any spy,
8 - nor hide him from the Muslims. We shall not teach the koran to our children.
9 - We shall not manifest our religion publicly
10 - nor convert anyone to it.
11 - We shall not prevent any of our kin from entering Islam if they wish it.
12 - We shall show respect toward the Muslims, and
13 - we shall rise from our seats if they wish to sit.
14 - We shall not seek to resemble the Muslims by imitating any of their garments, the headgear, the turban, footwear, or the parting of the hair.
15 - We shall not speak as they do,
16 - nor shall we adopt their honorific names.
17 - We shall not mount on saddles,
18- nor shall we gird swords nor bear any kind of arms nor carry them on our persons.
19 - We shall not engrave Arabic inscriptions on our seals.
20 - We shall not sell fermented drinks. (i.e. Alcohol)
21 - We shall not display our crosses or our books in the roads or markets of the Muslims.
22 - We shall only use clappers in our churches very softly.
23 - We shall not raise our voices in our church services or in the presence of Muslims,
24 - nor shall we raise our voices when following our dead.
25 - We shall not show lights on any of the roads of the Muslims or in their markets.
26 - We shall not bury our dead near the Muslims.
27 - We shall not take slave who have been allotted to the Muslims.
28 - We shall not build houses over-topping the houses of the Muslims.

Consider for a moment, is this the way you want to live? Do you have children?, and do you want THEM to grow up under this type of oppression? This is the future of America if people don't start standing up for their Rights.