A lot of people think the Democratic Party is on the fast track to winning the White House in 2008. Of the many people, the prediction is Barack Hussein Obama will be that Democrat.
With that in mind, the primary theme of Obama is the word “change.” The only defining allusion to the word “change” at this moment is something different from the status quo of Washington politics. Anyone with any sense is aware that a fringe Leftist like Obama is not going to change the status quo of politics in Washington. He will be just as polarizing receiving enmity from the Right as GW received enmity from the Left.
The first item of “change” will be for a Democratic Party President to bring the troops home from Iraq preventing victory which is now just a hands grasp away and probably throwing the oil rich Iraq into a chaos with an Iranian predator next door.
Thus leaving Iraq would probably lead numerable bad things, of which the Saudis and Europe will clamor for the return of the American military to clean up.
A chaotic Iraq will lead to an invasion from the north from Turkey to make sure oil endowed Kurds do not form an independent nation. A chaotic Iraq will lead to a civil war between Sunnis and Shias that has nearly been solved by the current Troop Surge. Then Iran will make its play to either create a Shia Islamist Iraq or simply annex the Shia dominated part of Iraq next door to Iran.
The in between time of the Democrats removing troops from Iraq and an impending chaos in Iraq, an international proclamation that transnational terrorism (of which al Qaeda appears to be the most notorious to Americans) has defeated the most powerful nation in the world – the United States of America – will be shouted from the Islamist roof tops.
This will place some swagger on some goals of transnational Islamist terrorism to spread Islam by further terrorism and embolden Western Islamists to require more concessions in the rule of law to practice Sharia Law as opposed to the Rights and Liberty oriented values of Western Culture.
Since Europeans tend to be appeasement minded lefties supporting many of the issues of why Islamism exists, the rule of law debate between Islam and Western values is already an issue.
In America where Islamist dominated organizations in private yet publicly deluding the American public and Left that they are of a moderate nature, will begin to emulate their Islamist brothers in Europe. The demand for Sharia exclusivity apart from Constitutional Law will begin. This kind of demand will undermine the current Leftist stand on Separation of Church and State as the Islamic religion is given government privileges and perks to practice Islam under government protection and involvement all in the name of the delusion of multiculturalism.
Thus all those years of work by the Left to rid the local, State and Federal government of Christian heritage will become a hypocrisy as Islam is protected by the Government. For example it will be a hate crime for Christians to condemn Islam according to Biblical Scriptures but it will be Freedom of Speech for Islam to proclaim its superiority over all other religions and those religions that criticize Islamic superiority will be a hate crime. Can anyone say self-imposed dhimmitude?
The Islamist deception is already spreading in America’s public domain via the so-called moderate non-profit Islamic organizations and non-profit Islamic civil rights organizations. Islamists are highly involved in American Mosques and American Public and Private Schools.
Steven Emerson recently has wrote a blog post which I found at Political Mavens criticizing the Mainstream Media (specifically the New York Times in this instance) for proclaiming moderate bona fides to obvious Islamists who wish to bring down the American way of life by hook or by crook.
In this case the Islamists are members and speakers the Muslim Students’ Association (MSA), which was directly founded by the Muslim Brotherhood out of Egypt. The Muslim Brotherhood’s roots reach all the way back to the cooperation of Hassan al Banna and Amin el-Husseini that supported and received support from Adolf Hitler due to a mutual hatred of Jews.
Steven Emerson demonstrates there is ABSOLUTELY nothing moderate about the MSA which is highly involved on American University campuses nationally.
Is this the scenario you as an American wish to get rolling by supporting the Democratic Party? God Almighty I pray not! Vote Republican!
JRH
***************************
Soft Pedaling Radical Islam: The New York Times Discovers the MSA
By Steven Emerson
February 21st, 2008
Political Mavens
Neil MacFarquhar’s latest paean to radical Islam appeared in Thursday’s New York Times, “For Muslim Students, a Debate on Inclusion,” in which he praises a known radical leader of the Muslim Students’ Association as some kind of moderate. MacFarquhar begins the story with a sweet vignette about Mertaban’s alleged moderate bona fides:
Amir Mertaban vividly recalls sitting at his university’s recruitment table for the Muslim Students Association a few years ago when an attractive undergraduate flounced up in a decidedly un-Islamic miniskirt, saying “Salamu aleykum,” or “Peace be upon you,” a standard Arabic greeting, and asked to sign up.
Mr. Mertaban also recalls that his fellow recruiter surveyed the young woman with disdain, arguing later that she should not be admitted because her skirt clearly signaled that she would corrupt the Islamic values of the other members.
“I knew that brother, I knew him very well; he used to smoke weed on a regular basis,” said Mr. Mertaban, now 25, who was president of the Muslim student group at California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, from 2003 to 2005.
Pointing out the hypocrisy, Mr. Mertaban won the argument that the group could no longer reject potential members based on rigid standards of Islamic practice.
Mertaban the non-hypocritical “moderate,” as MacFarquhar would have you believe. Mertaban apparently likes girls in miniskirts – at least enough to not refuse them admission to the MSA.
But what does Mertaban have in store for this flouncing, attractive, be-miniskirted undergrad? Here’s what he told an MSA audience at U.C. Berkeley in April 2007:
So you never compromise on your faith. You be confident in every aspect of life. In every aspect of Islam you are confident. Four wives? Yes men are allowed to have four wives within this context.
Of course, polygamy is illegal in the United States. And Mertaban’s speech that day was not limited to Islamic marital relations. He continued:
Jihad? Yes Jihad! Jihad is the tightest thing in Islam. Don’t compromise on these little things. Be proud of it. Why? Because Islam is a perfect religion. If you sit here and you start saying, ‘Jihad is only an internal this and that,’ you are compromising on your faith.
That’s very moderate, indeed. Of course, you won’t read this in the New York Times, but Mertaban began his speech that day with a stirring defense of none other than Osama Bin Laden, imploring his audience that, no matter what Bin Laden may – or may not – have done, Muslims are obliged to defend him “to the end.” Here’s what he said:
War in Iraq or Afghanistan or Osama bin Laden or Saddam Hussein. Don’t ever compromise on Islam! And don’t ever compromise on your Muslim brothers and sisters in which you have no evidence. Osama bin Laden- I don’t know this guy. I don’t know what he did. I don’t know what he said. I don’t know what happened. But we defend Muslim brothers and we defend our Muslim sisters to the end. Is that clear?
At the same conference, Mertaban defended radical Shi’ite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr on the same grounds:
Time magazine had this one article on Muqtada al-Sadr. Who knows who Muqtada al-Sadr is? He is one of the individuals in Iraq who is one of the leaders of the Shi’a resistance movement against U.S. troops. Anyways, Time magazine dramatizes everything. So here is Muqtada al-Sadr, ok? And I want you to look at my facial expression, because this is very powerful how they used him … They’re attacking Muslims not based on you and how you look and how you look - based on how he looks.
I don’t even know the guy. The guy is probably a tight Muslim. I don’t even know him. I don’t really care too much about him to tell you the truth. But the idea is how they use individuals like that to portray Muslims.
So, according to Mertaban, not only is Muqtada al-Sadr a “tight Muslim,” but Time Magazine should not show images nor report on an influential radical Islamic leader having a major impact in the Iraq war because of how he looks. But again, you won’t read about this speech in the Times, just about how “inclusive” Mertaban is.
Not content to simply downplay one of the MSA’s most radical leaders, MacFarquhar goes on to sanitize the founding of the entire organization. In describing the MSA’s origins, he writes, “Organized in the 1960s by foreign students who wanted collective prayers where there were no mosques, the associations were basically little slices of Saudi Arabia.”
That is a complete whitewash. It is well known that the MSA was not merely founded by “foreign students.” It has been reported in multiple sources that the MSA was formed by members of the Ikhwan, or Muslim Brotherhood. The Chicago Tribune reported just that nearly four years ago:
“While the U.S. Brotherhood was influential from its beginning–in 1963 it helped establish the Muslim Students Association, one of the first national Islamic groups in the U.S.—(American-based Ikhwan leader Ahmed) Elkadi thought the group could expand its reach.”
More conclusive information linking the MSA to the Muslim Brotherhood came out during last year’s Hamas-fundraising trial in Dallas against the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF). A 1991 document entered into evidence titled “Shura Council Report on the future of the Group: Work paper #1,” (”Group” is the code name for the Ikhwan) stated:
In 1962, the Muslim Students Union was founded by a group of the first Ikhwans in North America and Meetings of the Ikhwan became conferences and Students Union Camps.
That history matters. The Muslim Brotherhood, an 80-year-old social and religious order established in Egypt, seeks a global Islamic state governed by Shariah law as its ultimate objective. Its guiding ideologues have served as the inspiration for virtually all Sunni terrorist organizations from Hamas and Islamic Jihad to Al Qaeda.
Other exhibits from the HLF trial, dated in the early 1990s, show Muslim Brotherhood members in the U.S. saw their role as a “grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”
And while MacFarquhar writes of the MSA, “That past has given the associations a reputation in some official quarters as a possible font of extremism,” he immediately undercuts that by adding, “but experts in American Islam believe college campuses have become too diverse and are under too much scrutiny for the groups to foster radicals.”
And yet he makes no attempt to cover the fact that MSA’s routinely invite radical Islamic speakers who justify suicide bombing and make virulent anti-Semitic and anti-American statements. We are just simply to believe there is some kind of “debate” going on concerning “inclusion.”
Well, let’s talk about inclusion. Here’s radical Imam Abdul Malik Ali speaking at an MSA event at San Francisco State University in April 2002:
Brothers and sisters. Stop calling them suicide bombers!
When a person commits suicide, they are depressed! When a person commits suicide, they are without hope! When a person commits suicide they are losing their patience. They are in a state of despair! These brothers–and sisters– before they go out on their martyr missions, are doing videotapes, and they are saying “Yeeeuuhh! I’m doing this! I’m doing this!” And their mothers are right next to them saying, “Go ahead and go!”
I wonder which side of the “inclusiveness” debate Mr. MacFarquhar thinks suicide bombers belong to. Or what MacFarquhar would write about this, as Malik Ali continued:
You cannot win against a people like this! Because you have Israelis whose ideology is so bankrupt–You never hear an Israeli talkin’ about “I hope I’m going to die.” They want to live, they want to live. And once you go up against a people who love death, more than you love life, you in trouble man! You in serious trouble!
Very inclusive, indeed. Another MSA favorite speaker is Mohammed al-Asi. At a 2002 MSA event at the University of California, Irvine, al-Asi had posed his own unique contribution to the inclusiveness debate, telling the crowd:
If the only thing the Israelis and their mentors, and their sponsors and their superiors in Washington DC are going to understand is the use of force, than that’s the language we’re going to communicate with, we’re going to use force. And whatever was taken by force can only be retrieved by force.
Not every story is going to be an investigation. But every story, even soft features with appealing anecdotal leads, require some real reporting and a challenge to the assumptions and conclusions a reporter reaches. As we have pointed - out - repeatedly, there is no evidence of this in MacFarquhar’s reporting.
You can look it up.
____________________
Does America Really Want a Dem in the White House?
John R. Houk
© February 25, 2008
___________________
Soft Pedaling Radical Islam: The New York Times Discovers the MSA
Steven Emerson bio: Steven Emerson is an internationally recognized expert on terrorism and national security and considered one of the leading world authorities on Islamic extremist networks, financing and operations. He now serves as the Executive Director of The Investigative Project on Terrorism, one of the world’s largest archival data and intelligence institutes on Islamic and Middle Eastern terrorist groups. Mr. Emerson and his staff frequently provide briefings to US government and law enforcement agencies, Members of Congress and Congressional committees, and print and electronic media, both national and international. Since 9-11, Mr. Emerson has testified and briefed Congress dozens of times on terrorist financing and operational networks of Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hizzbollah, Islamic Jihad, and the rest of the worldwide Islamic militant spectrum. He and his organization have been quoted or profiled in hundreds of newspaper and television stories since 09-11.
Mr. Emerson started The Investigative Project on Terrorism in late 1995, following the broadcast of his documentary film, “Jihad in America,” on Public Television. The film exposed MORE …
Copyright (c) 2006 [sic] POLITICAL MAVENS. All Rights Reserved.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment