And So I Go: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow

Archive for the ‘Islam’ Category

I sincerely hope you all are paying very close attention to the Benghazi hearings going on now.   Obama and Hillary lied and lied and lied and the voters continued to believe the Liar in Chief! and elected him.   I watched the hearings Wednesday and was not at all surprised at what I heard.  In fact, those of you who have been watching actually knew the story.  Secretary of Defense Panetta told the same story as the three whistleblowers Wednesday if you were willing to read between the lines, or hear what he was carefully “not saying”.  This isn’t over by any means and I sincerely hope it takes Obama down as some are predicting.  But since it takes the Senate to dispose of a president and the Senate is controlled by Harry Reid I am not holding my breath.  I do however continue to believe that even tho they claim to be Democrats there are still some decent truth seeking Senators who will simply finally had to swallow so much cess that they will revolt and demand Obama and his thugs be replaced in the White House.     It really is beyond belief to have the bugling Joe Biden as President but I don’t see him as evil but simply stupid.   I also see him as someone who wants to be liked so I think he will go along with some more reasonable legislation that the Republicans are offering.

The following article from Heritage is good because it offers a time line of the Benghazi cover-up that will help you understand better what is now coming out.  BB

 

Ghosts of Benghazi

The White House might have wanted to mute its response to the terrorist attack in Benghazi for fear of inflaming Anti-American sentiment. Perhaps the President did not want to acknowledge a successful attack by an al-Qaeda affiliate on the anniversary of 9/11—right before a national election. Maybe it was just all “Keystone Kops” at the national command authority on the night four Americans were killed at their posts. It could be a bit of all three. The problem is, nine months later, we still don’t know for sure.

Dramatic hearings are expected today as Gregory Hicks, a State Department official who was on the ground in Libya during the 9/11 attack when four Americans died, talks to a House panel.

Some of his testimony from pre-hearing interviews with committee staff has already been released to the press. It includes claims that a Special Forces team that could have helped save lives and safeguard evidence and classified materials at the U.S. facility had been ordered to “stand down.” In addition, Hicks contends that from the outset, the ambassador’s team knew that they were under attack and reported that to Washington.

Hicks’s testimony follows a House Republican Conferencereport and a detailed article on the “Benghazi Talking Points” in The Weekly Standard that further call into question the credibility of the Obama Administration’s response.

What is becoming increasingly clear is that (1) the Administration bungled security before the incident; (2) the response to the assault was disjointed and inadequate; and (3) the Administration made a consistent and considerable effort to hide these facts.

The timeline still does not add up.

benghazi-video

>>> Watch our video on the Benghazi information timeline

That Hicks is only just now being allowed to testify before Congress reinforces concerns that the Administration continues to slow-roll the truth coming out. Yet the White House continues to stick to the increasingly incredulous line that it has been forthcoming at every step.

Just recently, the White House press spokesperson defended the State Department’s internal review of the attack as “rigorous and unsparing,” even after the State Department Inspector General announced it is investigating the conduct of the panel that produced the report.

Fundamental questions about the security breakdown in Benghazi still have not been fully answered. With a White House that is still in denial about sharing the truth, it remains up to the Congress to press for answers and the press the Administration to take its responsibility of protecting our personnel overseas more seriously than protecting its political reputation at home.

First off:  full disclosure:  I am a second generation immigrant.  the legal kind however.  My maternal grandparents came to america in steerage with hardly a dime in the pockets in 1910.    At that time the only government program available to immigrants was   public school classes in English.  A program that by the way was a good one! and therefore was dropped!    Immigrants were on their own to sink or swim or rely on other immigrants  until they found a job.  there was also none of this bringing every relative including kissin’ counsins over once the first immigrant made it into the country.  Damned if my grandparents didn’t make it and even go so far as to thrive without the benefit of tax payer dollars.  How dare they!!?!!

Todays immigrants just don’t have these same amenities to greet them the moment they step off the boat or plan.  Todays immigrants are immediately met by your federal government officials to help them sign up for all the juicy government welfare programs and handouts that we Americans have made available to any new comers to our shores.  AND, this also seems to apply to illegal immigrants.   Yes I know Dear Reader, it isn’t nice and is considered an insult to call these dear people “illegal aliens”  or even “illegal”.  they are instead according to our own State Department to be referred to as “undocumented citizens”.

Now we have our Congressmen busy working to get the immigrants  or Hispanic vote which Obama got 71% of in the 2012 election.  So both parties, Republican and Democrat, are busy trying to out do each other with goodies for these people.  Now please understand,  I know that something has to be done about the illegal aliens we already have in this country.  I also assure you that if I lived in Central America I would be  one of the first to break my butt getting across the Rio Grande River!   Yes I would!  I have been to Mexico and the poverty is so bad that after one week I insisted my husband turn the RV around and head north as fast as possible because I simply could not stand seeing another child with a swollen belly  ( swollen bellies in children is a sure sign of  gross hunger!).    So yes,  I Brenda Bowers would move Heaven and Hell and defy every American in this fabulous country to get over here and be able to get a job and feed my family.  And I would, I am pretty sure, commit a whole lot of the available low level crimes to stay here!
But speaking as an American whose grandparents were among those who left Europe to come to this land of promise and freedom,  we simply can not afford any more of the “starving masses yearning to be free” out there.  We need to seal off our borders RIGHT NOW.  Even if it takes placing our troops on our borders.  As it stands with the drug dealers and  our own government passing out weapons on our borders they are war zones right now anyhow!   Then after sealing our borders we need to do something to get a handle on just how amany and who the people are who are here already.  Not to get them sign up for every government welfare program out there but to get a head count and to see that they begin the process of becoming Americans citizens sometime in the future, but only if they are obeying our laws and contributing to our society.

 

With all of the above in mind I thought perhaps you would find this latest Heritage Foundation article of interest. Sincerely ,   BB

American Families Cannot Afford the Cost of Amnesty

Our nation is going broke, and now is not the time to increase burdens on American families.

The Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act (S. 744)—commonly called the “Gang of Eight bill” after the eight Senators who came up with it, Charles Schumer (D-NY), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Michael Bennet (D-CO), John McCain (R-AZ), Jeff Flake (R-AZ), Marco Rubio (R-FL), and Lindsey Graham (R-SC)—includes amnesty for some 11 million unlawful immigrants. That amnesty would further burden taxpayers and weaken our fiscal situation. Congress should not rush to pass the bill without understanding the cost to the American taxpayer, especially when key research identifying and calculating those costs is nearly complete.

We have more than $12 trillion in public debt and tens of trillions of dollars more in unfunded obligations that we have no way to afford, thanks to promises made by past and present politicians. With this in mind, today’s political leaders must consider the fiscal impact of amnesty and a path to citizenship that would enable millions of unlawful immigrants to qualify for costly welfare and entitlement programs.

Simply put, what would this cost taxpayers, present and future? Would this make their burdens lighter, or double down on debt and unaffordable promises to be repaid by future generations?

Leaders from both parties have repeatedly failed to consider properly the long-term effects of their policies. That is why we are in such a predicament. For too many politicians, long-term thinking extends only to the next election, at most six years away. Unfortunately, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the legislative branch’s official scorekeeper, does not help much in this regard, as it often looks at costs for only the next 10 years.

We’ve seen legislative myopia again and again as politicians put off tough choices for the future or make our fiscal picture worse with new and expanded government programs we cannot afford, like Medicare prescription drug benefits or Obamacare. The biggest losers are future generations.

Former House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX) once noted that three groups spend other people’s money: thieves, children, and politicians—and all three need supervision. Robert Rector of The Heritage Foundation helps provide the information needed for the American people to keep watch over politicians playing with immigration laws and our tax money. Rector is most famous for his work pioneering welfare reform and enjoys a sterling reputation as one of the nation’s leading authorities on government social programs.

When he last crunched the numbers during the 2007 amnesty debate, Rector calculated that a general amnesty would cost some $2.5 trillion after considering what legalized immigrants would likely pay in taxes and receive in government assistance. With government only getting bigger (again, see Obamacare), it is likely he will calculate an even higher price tag in 2013. Hishighly anticipated research is nearing completion. His research from five years ago and the anticipated update are a central part of the debate.
Some amnesty proponents are trying to convince themselves that the immigration bill won’t cost much. On the surface, they have some good talking points, noting that “registered provisional immigrants” (the name given to aliens who entered or stayed in the U.S. unlawfully but would get amnesty under the bill) are not eligible for government benefits. Of course that would last only until, at the very latest, they become citizens. (More likely, there will be pressure in future years to speed up both citizenship and eligibility.)

In just a short time, they would be entitled to the same massive array of government programs as everyone else, including expensive retirement income and health programs that are already severely underfunded. The average unlawful immigrant has a 10th grade education, and low-skill immigrants on average take more in government benefits than they pay in taxes at every stage of their lives.

America’s families are already burdened with taxes to support a bloated welfare and overburdened entitlement system that is badly in need of reform. This situation would get far worse under amnesty.

Read the Morning Bell and more en español every day atHeritage Libertad.

 

ONE MORE NOTE:  the two monsters who killed people in Boston, the so-called Boston Bombers were immigrants.    They and their parent were brought to the United States under our all too generous program for people who felt their lives were in danger in their own country and then given every possible welfare program available.  That was 10 years ago.  The parents returned to Russia so apparently their lives were not that threatened.  The oldest  child a man of 26 who had been in the United States living on welfare all this time and at age 26 bombed and killed and injured Americans!   So much for immigrants to our country in this enlightened age when we tax payers thru our elected officials roll out the welcome mat and pour our hard earned tax dollars into their open palms.  Sincerely, Brenda Bowers

It is my belief that Israel is now taking out Hamas in the Gaza Strip first before they take out Iran.  Sort of a clean up operation on their borders and a warning to the rest of the Arab world to stand down while  they go after Iran.   All of the Middle Eastern countries want Iran taken out and they also want Israel to be the one to do it so they can then raise Holy Hell about it and the inhumanity of killing all the innocent Iranians so brutally.  The bombs to take out Iran’s nuclear program will of necessity have to kill many thousands of Iran’s population because the Iranian government made sure to place the nuclear facilities directly under or in population centers!!   this is very common practice among the Muslims who care nothing for human beings.

The Israelis  will of course have to make a ground advance in order to get the missile sites in Gaza without killing off a lot of civilians.  Israel is concerned for killing children whereas the terrorist use the children (schools and hospitals) as  shields from which to launch their weapons.  To use missiles to take out these missile sites would kill so many, so Israel must send in its soldiers to get the weapons.

As usual the world is against Israel and it’s right to exist.  Obama did his level best to support Hamas  with his  officious statement that “Israel has a right to defend itself” then going on to warn against a ground offensive warning that that would destroy any peace negotiations.  Like these so-called “peace negotiations” have been going on since the 1880′s !!    Yes, I know Israel was not even formed until 1948,   but the talking about a homeland for the dispersed Jews started a century before that.  The homeland that was given to them by God Himself !  If you believe the Bible you must then believe that the Jews were given the land of Canaan by God Himself.  They are the only people whom God Himself gave a homeland of their own and after 5000 years of living on that land except for short periods when they were driven out, they were finally dispersed all over the Earth.    It is long past time for the Jew to return and no man or group on Earth has the right to take away what God has given.  Oddly enough the very people who are denying the Jews claim to believe in the Bible; both the Christians and the Muslims believe in the Old Testament and claim it as the oldest portion of their holy book.  How ironic is that?

Anyhow, the following article is a good summation of what is happening and just by chance happens to back up my own thoughts on the matter  :).  BB

The Escalating Conflict Between Hamas and Israel

By James Phillips

Over the last four days, militants in Gaza have fired more than 840 rockets at Israel. Hamas rockets have reached the outskirts of Jerusalem and Tel Aviv for the first time, thanks to the smuggling of Iranian rockets into Gaza. The increasing range and sophistication of Palestinian rockets has expanded the reach of terrorists, who now can threaten up to half of Israel’s population.

Israel has intercepted 302 of those rockets with its Iron Dome missile defense system, according to the Israel Defense Forces. Iron Dome, on which the U.S. has collaborated, has proven its worth and underscored the importance of missile defense in future U.S. military budgets.

Meanwhile, Iran is seeking—successfully—to keep the pot boiling at Israel’s expense to distract international attention from its nuclear program. A leaked International Atomic Energy Agency report indicates that Iran could soon double the number of centrifuges at its Fordo facility from 700 to 1,400.

President Obama spoke out on the fighting yesterday, saying Israel has the right to defend itself against Hamas’s missile attacks from Gaza. But he urged Israel not to launch a ground assault in Gaza, saying it would put Israeli soldiers, as well as Palestinian citizens, at greater risk and hamper an already vexing peace process.

“If we see a further escalation of the situation in Gaza, the likelihood of us getting back on any kind of peace track that leads to a two-state solution is going to be pushed off way into the future,” Obama said.

This public statement will only strengthen Hamas’s determination to continue its rocket terrorismand reap the propaganda benefits from Israeli retaliatory air strikes, because the President’s statement lowers the perceived risks of an Israeli ground intervention. Moreover, it is continued Palestinian terrorism that is the chief barrier to peace, not Israel’s legitimate efforts to protect its own citizens from indiscriminate Palestinian terrorist attacks.

Egypt, Turkey, and the Arab League have heavily criticized Israel and called for a halt of air strikes. Hamas is an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood and hopes to pull in Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood-dominated regime to tilt the balance against Israel. Egypt’s government will seek to have its cake and eat it, too, in the sense that it will use the crisis to denounce Israel, support Hamas, and play to anti-Israeli sentiments at home while trying to mediate a ceasefire behind the scenes that enhances its influence and justifies continued U.S. and Western aid.

If they genuinely wanted to stop the bloodshed, then these leaders should pressure Hamas to stop the bombardment, which triggered the crisis.

Obama, too, should aim primarily at restraining Hamas, not Israel.

Hamas, as usual, is bent on advancing its radical Islamist agenda at the expense of Palestinian national interests. It is a revolutionary movement more interested in destroying Israel than in building a Palestinian state or protecting Palestinians from another humanitarian tragedy that it has engineered.

Israel has called up 75,000 reservists and massed armor and at least 30,000 troops along the border, underscoring that it is serious about launching a ground intervention if Hamas continues its indiscriminate bombardment of Israeli civilians.

The U.S. needs to stand with Israel against terrorism and support its right to defend itself against a ruthless enemy that hides among Palestinian civilians to launch rockets indiscriminately at Israeli civilians. Hamas routinely uses children as shields. There can be no Israeli–Palestinian peace until Hamas and other Islamists are defeated and discredited.

James Phillips is the Senior Research Fellow for Middle Eastern Affairs in the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies at The Heritage Foundation. He has written extensively on Middle Eastern issues and international terrorism since 1978.

Newsletter from  ACT for AMERICA.

August 14, 2012

This couldn’t happen here, could it?

Dear Lew and Brenda,

Yes it could—and is.

In fact, the title of the article below (highlights added), posted at the Gatestone Institute website, could just as easily be “How Political Correctness is Transforming American Education.” 

To find just one example, click here to check out the report we released earlier this year, “Education or Indoctrination: The Treatment of Islam in 6ththrough 12th Grade American Textbooks.”

You’ll learn that the typical textbook fails to note that the 9/11 terrorists were radical Muslims and fails to inform students that the state of Israel was created by a UN resolution in 1947.

Most of what is mentioned below is already beginning to happen in America. For example, a couple years ago students at a Boston-area middle school were taken on a field trip to a mosque. The boys were invited to kneel and pray while teachers stood by and did nothing. Can you imagine the outcry from faculty and the ACLU if this had happened at a Christian church?


How Political Correctness Is Transforming British Education

by Soeren Kern
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3170/british-education-political-correctness#.UAQtSmOuuGk.facebook

In Cheshire, two students at the Alsager High School were punished by their teacher for refusing to pray to Allah as part of their religious education class.

In Scotland, 30 non-Muslim children from the Parkview Primary School recently were required to visit the Bait ur Rehman Ahmadiyya mosque in the Yorkhill district of Glasgow (videos here and here). At the mosque, the children were instructed to recite the shahada, the Muslim declaration of faith which states: “There is no god but Allah and Mohammed is his messenger.” Muslims are also demanding that Islamic preachers be sent to every school in Scotland to teach children about Islam, ostensibly in an effort to end negative attitudes about Muslims.

British schools are increasingly dropping the Jewish Holocaust from history lessons to avoid offending Muslim pupils, according to a report entitled, Teaching Emotive and Controversial History, commissioned by the Department for Education and Skills.

British teachers are also reluctant to discuss the medieval Crusades, in which Christians fought Muslim armies for control of Jerusalem: lessons often contradict what is taught in local mosques.

In an effort to counter “Islamophobia” in British schools, teachers now are required to teach “key Muslim contributions such as Algebra and the number zero” in math and science courses, even though the concept of zero originated in India.

In the East London district of Tower Hamlets, four Muslims were recently jailed for attacking a local white teacher who gave religious studies lessons to Muslim girls; and 85 out of 90 schools have implemented “no pork” policies.

Schools across Britain are, in fact, increasingly banning pork from lunch menus to avoid offending Muslim students. Hundreds of schools have adopted a “no pork” policy, according to a recent report by the London-based Daily Telegraph.

The culinary restrictions join a long list of politically correct changes that gradually are bringing hundreds of British primary and secondary education into conformity with Islamic Sharia law.

The London Borough of Haringey, a heavily Muslim district in North London, is the latest school district to switch to a menu that is fully halal (religiously permissible for Muslims).

The Haringey Town Council recently issued “best practice” advice to all schools in its area to “ban all pork products in order to cater for the needs of staff and pupils who are not permitted contact with these for religious reasons.”

Local politicians have criticized the new policy as pandering to Muslims, and local farmers, who have pointed out that all schools in Britain already offer vegetarian options, have accused school administrators of depriving non-Muslim children of a choice.

Following an outcry from non-Muslim parents, the town council removed the guidance from its website, although the new policy remains in place.

At the Cypress Junior School, in Croydon, south London, school administrators announced in the school newsletter dated June 1, 2012 that the school has opted for a pork-free menu “as a result of pupil and parental feedback.”

The announcement states: “Whilst beef, chicken, turkey and fish will all feature, as well as the daily vegetarian and jacket potato or pasta option, the sausages served will now be chicken rather than pork.”

In Luton, an industrial city some 50 kilometers (30 miles) north of London where more than 15% of the population is now Muslim, 23 out of 57 schools have banned pork.

In the City of Bradford, a borough of West Yorkshire in Northern England where there are now twice as many practicing Muslims that there are practicing Anglicans, 24 out of 160 schools have eliminated pork from their menus. In Newham (East London), 25 out of 75 schools have banned pork.

Other pork-free schools include Cranford Park Primary School in Hayes (Middlesex), and Dog Kennel Hill Primary in East Dulwich (South London).

The Borough of Harrow in northwest London was among the first in Britain to encourage halal menus. In 2010, Harrow Council announced plans to ban pork in the borough’s 52 state primary schools, following a switch by ten secondary schools to offer halal-only menus.

According to the UK-based National Pig Association, which represents commercial pork producers, “It is disappointing that schools cannot be sufficiently organized to give children a choice of meat. Sausages and roast pork are staples of a British diet and children enjoy eating them. If products can be labeled with warnings that they contain nuts and vegetarian dishes can be made and kept separate from meat dishes, [we] don’t see why the same can’t apply to pork.”

Lunch menus are not the only area in which “cultural sensitivity” is escalating in British schools.

In West Yorkshire, the Park Road Junior Infant and Nursery School in Batley has banned stories featuring pigs, including “The Three Little Pigs,” in case they offend Muslim children.

In Nottingham, the Greenwood Primary School cancelled a Christmas nativity play; it interfered with the Muslim festival of Eid al-Adha. In Scarborough, the Yorkshire Coast College removed the words Christmas and Easter from their calendar not to offend Muslims.

Also in Cheshire, a 14-year-old Roman Catholic girl who attends Ellesmere Port Catholic High School was branded a truant by teachers for refusing to dress like a Muslim and visit a mosque.

In Stoke-on-Trent, schools have been ordered to rearrange exams, cancel swimming lessons and stop sex education during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. In Norwich, theKnowland Grove Community First School has axed the traditional Christmas play to “look at some of the other great cultural festivals of the world.”

Meanwhile, the politically correct ban on pigs in Britain also extends to toys for children. A toy farm set called HappyLand Goosefeather Farm recently removed pigs in order to avoid offending Muslims.

The pig removal came to public attention after a British mother bought the toy as a present for her daughter’s first birthday. Although the set contained a model of a cow, sheep, chicken, horse and dog, there was no pig, despite there being a sty and a button which generated an “oink” sound.

After the mother complained, the Early Learning Centre (ELC), which manufactures the toy, responded: “Previously the pig was part of the Goosefeather Farm. However due to customer feedback and religious reasons this is no longer part of the farm.”

After a public outcry, however, ELC later reversed its decision: “We recognize that pigs are familiar farm animals, especially for our UK customers. We have taken the decision to reinstate the pig and to no longer sell the set in international markets where it might create an issue.”

As many of you know I am very much concerned with the influence Muslims are having in our country and our government.  I do not consider myself a prejudiced person but after reading and studying the Koran I can not understand how any decent human being can follow a religion that is so full of hate.  When someone tries to tell you that Islam is a religion of peace and love please just go to the Koran and read it for yourself.  Any religion that tells its people to kill other human beings is NOT a religion of love and the Koran tells its people to kill any who do not accept the Koran.

The fact to that the Muslims have been trying for decades to  take over the laws of the United States as they have the laws in several European countries and institute their own Sharia laws.  The irony of this is that they are using our own laws to do this.  And their activity has increased ten fold during these past three years under Obama because he is a President who looks with favor on Islam.  He even refuses to allow  a crime that is without a doubt an act of a Muslim acting as believer in Islam and doing what the Koran instructs in killing American non-believers  a hate crime.  Or acknowledging that it was a Muslim crime  with the killing of 13 American soldiers by a Muslim soldier at Fort Hood!  This crime isn’t even being allowed to be labeled  anything but a crime of violence by an American against Americans with no religious motive!

If you doubt any of this please go to the topic cloud in the right hand column and check out the articles on this blog dealing with Muslims and jihad.   Se especially the article about the Muslim text books and what they are teaching their children in  their schools right here in the United States.  Its chilling!  BB

 

So I have followed closely the efforts of Rep. Michelle Bachmann and others in trying to bring investigations into the influence Muslims have in our government.  Here is the latest update on their efforts:


IMPORTANT AND TIME-SENSITIVE
LEGISLATIVE ACTION ALERT!

ACT! FOR AMERICA GRASSROOTS MAKE THEIR VOICES
HEARD ON CAPITOL HILL: SEND OVER 10,600 E-MAILS TO
THEIR FEDERAL LEGISLATORS!

Dear Lew & Brenda,

Over the last few days, ACT! for America’s grassroots have demonstrated a massive force of support for Representative Michele Bachmann and her colleagues Representatives Trent Franks, Louie Gohmert, Thomas Rooney, and Lynn Westmoreland, who recently called for investigations into the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood within certain federal agencies.

See the congressional letters calling for this investigation by CLICKING HERE.

Last week, we asked you to send an e-mail to your Members of the U.S. Congress in support of the legislators’ request. We also stressed that the tangential issue upon which the mainstream media, as well as other politicos (many of whom should know better) were focusing, should not be the main focal point. The issue is whether the Muslim Brotherhood has positioned itself in our highest levels of government. The American people deserve to know.

David N. Bossie, President of Citizens United, offered what we feel is an excellent assessment of, and response to, the overall issue. We think you’ll enjoy reading it, which you can do by CLICKING HERE.

While 10,600 e-mails to Capitol Hill is a great start, we know that there are many, many more Americans who support an investigation into the Muslim Brotherhood’s influence within our government. The only way our federal legislators are going to understand that this level of support exists is if they hear from their constituents. If you have not yet taken the 5 minutes necessary to make your voice heard in the U.S. Capitol, PLEASE do so now by following the simple steps below.

***Action Item***

Please click HERE to be taken to the Contact Congress page of our website. Click on the Alert in the red box entitled: Support Members of Congress Calling for Muslim Brotherhood Investigation. From there, follow the easy directions and send your e-mails to those who represent you in the House and Senate. It should take no more than 5 minutes of your time.

Note: As you follow the directions to send your e-mail, you will see that we have provided a sample letter addressing this matter. We encourage you to modify the letter as you see fit to personalize it. AS ALWAYS, PLEASE BE RESPECTFUL AND PROFESSIONAL. OTHERWISE, THIS EFFORT WILL NOT BE EFFECTIVE!

Finally, please forward this Alert to everyone you know who shares our concerns about the Muslim Brotherhood and how the U.S. Government is addressing this threat. Through our online system, writing your e-mail will take only a matter of minutes to make your voice heard. And if we ALL act together, it will be a powerful and effective voice that every Member of the U.S. Congress will hear.

Please act NOW! Thank you for all that you do.

REMEMBER, YOUR VOICE COUNTS!
IF EACH OF US DOES JUST A LITTLE, TOGETHER WE CAN
ACCOMPLISH A LOT!

 

These stories referrals are from the Tea Party Patriots Newsletter.  many of them you have probably seen in the news recently like the Muslim students at a private  Catholic University suing to have all symbols of Christianity remove because they are offensive.  The Catholic  university will probably cave.

But I hadn’t heard that New York City is planning to become a sanctuary city but am not at all surprised to hear it.  BB

October 28, 2011
Dear Patriots,
Were you aware that New York City is getting ready to declare itself a Sanctuary City? I wasn’t either until I read the first story posted here. Please read the article then take the appropriate actions. I have posted links to contact the New York City Council Members as well as the Speaker of the Council. Unfortunately, I was unable to locate any Contact information on Mayor Bloomberg. This is just totally Unbelievable!!! The story on the catholic university is another scary news piece! Check them out and be sure to let us know where you stand and any ideas for activism you may have!
Mellie Buckner, Assistant Natl Director

New York ‘Sanctuary’ City…Home of the Illegal Alien
http://borderwatchmen.patriotactionnetwork.com/2011/10/28/new-York-sanctuary-city-home-of-the-illegal-alien/

Muslim Students at Catholic University complain about Religious Symbols
http://islamshariawatchmen.patriotactionnetwork.com/2011/10/28/muslim-students-at-catholic-university-complain-about-religious-symbols/

Part 2: CEO Peter Schiff confronts Occupy Wall Streets ’99%rs
http://thepatriotcaucus.com/2011/10/28/part-2-ceo-peter-schiff-confronts-occupy-wall-streets-%E2%80%9999rs%E2%80%99/

Obama’s Health Care Law Penalizes Marriage, Analysts Say  http://healthcarehorserace.com/2011/10/28/95/

The Results of Islam’s Teaching on Women & Sharia Law http://terrorismwatchmen.patriotactionnetwork.com/2011/10/28/the-results-of-islams-teaching-on-women-sharia-law/

 

I need to share this with my readers.  It is Glenn Beck’s production  “Rumor of Wars”  Part II.  How near is the end of times and from where will it come?  Will you be among those on the side of God’s Chosen People?   You will be able to access this documentary on my Facebook wall.  Sorry I simply didn’t know how to put it on my blog.  Remember: This Old Broad is illiterate when it comes to gadgets more complicated that a 1950′s telephone! BB

As you watch this video you will see  at the end they state that the United States isn’t in the Biblical picture and offer reasons why our country is not a player considering we have historically been a firm allie of Israel until Obama and we have been the world leader during the past century.  We are in fact considered the last world leader standing.   One reason given is that we will have destroyed ourselves as a world leader by then and this dog and pony show now being played out in Washington may very well be the killing blow.    Interesting. BB

I will be bringing you more from Glenn Beck’s  programing and his GBTV (Glenn Beck Television)  as you must subscribe and pay for membership and I know not all of you care to do that.  I followed Mr. Beck on FOXNEWS and have continued to follow him into ( or onto) his own media as I sincerely  believe he is an honest man.

I want to add here however that we must all beware of following false prophets so judge all you hear and all you see according to the truth of that tiny spark of God that our Father placed within us at our creation.  It will never lead you astray, but men will.  BB

Shariah Law on America’s Shores: Townhall Magazine Examines ‘Terror’s Secret Weapon’ | The Blaze.

 

You  may think the worst of Islam is not here in America but you need to think again.  It is here!  and it is growing with the help of liberal/progressive judges.  another wake up call People.  BB

Shariah Law on America’s Shores: Townhall Magazine Examines ‘Terror’s Secret Weapon’

The impending threat of radical Islam is not one that stops at America’s borders.  A detailed new analysis featured in the April issue of Townhall Magazine, posted here as an online exclusive for Blaze readers, examines how Muslim radicals are aggressively using liberal courts, American businesses and outspoken activists inside our own country to implement Islamic Shariah law — an uncompromising religious code that runs counter to freedoms preserved in the American Constitution.

——————-

The Shariah Threat
by Kathy Jessup

A judge refuses a protection order for a woman raped by her Muslim husband, ruling the man’s abuse is allowed under Shariah law.

(Image: Townhall Magazine)

A cartoonist is in hiding after a tongue-in-cheek “Everybody Draw Mohammed Day” promotion earned her a fatwa death order for violating a Shariah edict banning drawing the Muslim prophet’s image.

A Shariah-compliant investment fund is camouflaged as a charity and funnels more than $12 million to finance Hamas suicide bombers.

Not exactly shocking in some Muslim countries where strict adherence to centuries-old rules, based on Islamic teachings, shines a spotlight on stonings and beheadings.

But these occurred recently in the United States.

Now “honor killings,” publicly funded accommodations for Islamic prayer and billions in Wall Street investments linked to potentially dangerous terror activities are raising political and constitutional questions in America.

Can or should Shariah law co-exist with the Judeo-Christian foundations of U.S. jurisprudence and the Constitution? Will imposition of Islamic-based edicts, enabled by so-called religious tolerance and political correctness, open the door to radical forms of the religion in Western democracies?  (Can anyone really think it possible for Sharia and democracy to co-exist except some liberal bone headed fool?   Any yet these questions are actually being asked  in our colleges and universities and law schools! BB)

A growing number of states are drafting constitutional amendments to prohibit state judges from applying Islamic or international law in deciding cases. But even the 70 percent of voters who passed Oklahoma’s measure in November hasn’t settled the issue for Sooners.

When the director of the Oklahoma chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) challenged the amendment in court, a federal judge granted a preliminary injunction, ruling the amendment could be interpreted to single out Shariah law and discredit Islam, violating the First Amendment.

WHAT IS SHARIAH LAW?

Shariah (meaning “path” in Arabic) codifies the words, practices and teaching of Islam’s Prophet Mohammed, serving as a guide/law for everything from Muslims’ family and religious practices to financial transactions.

Several hundred years after the death of Mohammed, the prophet’s model living practices were assembled into the hadith, initially melding Islam and local customs. Various hadiths eventually developed into four schools of Sunni thought and one that guides Shiites. Each differs in the degree they draw from the Koran, Islamic thought and community practices.

Shariah identifies five hadd offenses, serious charges resolved by an Islamic judge. They are unlawful sexual intercourse (adultery or sex outside marriage), falsely accusing unlawful sexual intercourse, consuming wine (sometimes all alcohol), theft and highway robbery.

Punishments ordered for hadd crimes by conservative Shariah schools—stonings, executions, amputations and beatings—shock Western sensibilities. However, Ali Mazrui, of the Institute for Global Cultural Studies, says less severe penalties are more typically imposed.

Still, Islam has not uniformly banned so-called “honor killings,” genital mutilation, pre-teen marriages, polygamy, and divorce and inheritance rules that undercut the standing of women. Testimony from non-Muslims and even Muslim women is given less weight than that of Muslim men.

The size of a country’s Islamic population and its level of religious orthodoxy typically influence the degree to which Shariah law is inculcated in national legal codes.

A Shariah law officer canes a woman in front of a mosque in Banda Aceh, Indonesia, who violated strict laws forbidding contact between unmarried men and women. (AP)

Conservative Muslim countries including Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Yemen and Iran declare Islam the official religion and Shariah the source of law. In more secular Muslim countries where Islamists are the minority, Shariah has gradually gained legal legitimacy through local customs. Other countries, including Turkey and Azerbaijan, enforce separation of state and religion, sometimes resulting in political clashes.

Some countries operate a dual system where Shariah is applied to family law, while secular statutes govern criminal cases. For example, Britain introduced Shariah tribunals in 2008 that apply Islamic law to inheritance, marriage and divorce disputes where the parties all agree to the jurisdiction.

SHARIAH AND THE UNITED STATES

In 2009, Dalia Mogahed, an Obama administration adviser on Muslim affairs, told a British television audience that the West misunderstands Shariah law, calling its perceptions of Islamic tenants “oversimplified.”

But deaths, abuse and threats involving Muslim women in the United States and Canada have put a Western face on facets of Shariah that had been cloaked in long-standing Middle East practices.

Pakistani-born Muzzammil Hassan was convicted in February for beheading his wife inside the Buffalo, N.Y., television studio the couple had created to promote Islamic cultural understanding. Jurors didn’t buy Hassan’s story that he suffered spousal abuse and killed his wife in self-defense. Hassan had been served with divorce papers the week before, and his children testified he had been the abuser in the couple’s relationship.

In 2008, a New Jersey judge ruled Shariah permitted a Moroccan man to rape his Muslim wife, despite state law making it a crime. The New Jersey Appeals Court overturned that decision and remanded the case, finally allowing the woman to get a restraining order against her husband while she sought a divorce. The appeals court decision said neither Shariah law, giving a husband physical authority over his wife, nor Muslim beliefs on the role of women provided the man an exemption from criminal intent under U.S. statutes.

“[T]he [trial] judge determined to except defendant from the operation of the State’s statutes as a result of his religious beliefs,” the appeals judges wrote. “In doing so, the judge was mistaken.”

Irfan Aleem went to a Pakistani embassy and performed talaq in 2007, exercising Shariah provisions that he said allowed him to divorce his wife Farah by proclaiming his intention three times. Although married several decades earlier in Pakistan, the couple had lived in Maryland for 20 years. Irfan said Shariah allowed Farah no claim on a lucrative pension he would receive from his job with the World Bank.

Maryland judges didn’t agree, ruling the Shariah practices were “contrary to public policy of this state.” The decision set aside the divorce Irfan had quickly proclaimed and afforded Farah a right to claim marital property in a Maryland divorce.

Honor murder victims Amina and Sarah Said of Texas were featured on Stop Islamization of America’s Freedom Taxi campaign in Chicago to raise awareness of the horrors of honor killing. (AP)

The deaths of at least 10 women in the United States and Canada have been linked to so-called Islamic “honor killings” in the last seven years.

In 2004, a 14-year-old girl who had been raped in Newfoundland was strangled by her father and brother to “restore the family honor.” A 20-year-old daughter of Afghan parents was shot dead in 2006, allegedly because she had moved in with her fiancé before their wedding. The killer was her brother.

In Ontario, a 16-year-old was stabbed to death in 2007 by her father while her mother held her down. The teenager had reportedly fought with her parents over wearing a hijib, a Muslim head covering. In another Canadian case, three teenage girls were drowned in their father’s car in 2009. Also found dead was their father’s first wife, who relatives say he never divorced. The father, his current wife and the girls’ 18-year-old brother were all charged with first-degree murder. Relatives told the media the killings were precipitated by one daughter’s dating decisions.

A Muslim father in Texas shot his two teenage daughters, Amina and Sarah Said, to death in January 2008. The murders allegedly were prompted by the girls having “unsanctioned boyfriends.” Later that year, a Pakistani man beat his 25-yearold daughter to death in Atlanta, reportedly because she opposed her arranged marriage.

Rifqa Bary, an Ohio teenager, made headlines in 2009 when she fled to Florida and foster care, saying she feared she would be the victim of a Muslim “honor killing” for her decision to convert to Christianity. She continued her religious choice a year later when she turned 18.

In a situation much like the 2008 Muslim assassination order against Danish cartoonist Kurt Westergaard, Seattle cartoonist Molly Norris went into hiding at the FBI’s recommendation last spring after her “Everybody Draw Mohammed Day” hit Facebook. A Seattle newspaper said Norris is “essentially wiping away her identity” in reaction to a fatwa urging her killing issued by Anwar al-Awlaki, the radical Muslim cleric connected to the Fort Hood killings, the attempted Christmas Day airline bombing over Detroit and the failed Times Square bombing.

And in February, radical Muslims announced plans to take their demand for American Shariah to the White House, calling for thousands of Islamists to rally on Pennsylvania Avenue March 3. But just hours before the rally was scheduled to begin, its organizer, British Muslim cleric Anjem Choudary, called it off, alleging the cause had been “distorted by the media.”

Choudary said the demonstration was merely “postponed until we gather even more Muslims;” no new rally date was announced.

In an online video statement, Choudary said Muslims are obligated to implement Shariah law “immediately, wherever we are in the world,” and he said America can reverse “poverty, child abuse, rape, robberies, theft, crime and anarchy-type scenarios” only after the United States embraces the Islamic code for living. In the meantime, Choudary predicted “the dollar will soon lose its status.”

British Muslim Cleric Anjem Choudary (AP)

“We believe the whole of the world must be under Shariah,” Choudary said. “America is not blessed by God. The American dream has become a nightmare.” Other elements of America’s Shariah debate are more nuanced. Some, like CBSNews.com’s political reporter Brian Montopoli, believe Shariah fears are “overblown at best,” and Jeffry Goldberg, The Atlantic’s national correspondent, said, “A Martian takeover of New Jersey is more likely than the imposition of a caliphate, or of Muslim law, on America.”

Ibrahim Hooper, a spokesman for CAIR, says the enjoined Oklahoma amendment is “an indication of growing anti-Muslim sentiment.” Hooper said CAIR has “not found any conflict between what a Muslim needs to do to practice their faith and the Constitution or any other American laws. We are, in fact, relying on the Constitution as our last line of defense.”

But conservative Jewish blogger Pamela Geller delivers an aggressive “creeping Shariah” warning: “It’s a drip, drip, drip, drip, drip. [In] the mosqueing of the workplace where you’re imposing prayer times on union contracts, non-Muslim workers have to lengthen their day. It’s wrong.”

Consider the political reaction Americans would have seen if these Muslim accommodations had instead been made for Christians:

  • The Christian Science Monitor reported a California elementary school made accommodations when it absorbed Muslim students from a shuttered charter school, including revising its instructional schedule to add a 15-minute “recess” after lunch to allow Muslim students to pray in a separate room. The school district’s attorney defended it, saying “the Muslim faith requires specificity of prayer obligations … that most other religions do not,” a claim questioned by even some Muslims. Pork also was removed from school-lunch menus, according to media reports.
  • In Massachusetts, where a firehouse was ordered to take down a “Merry Christmas” greeting, public middle school students took a “cultural diversity” field trip to a local mosque, where the boys participated in Islamic prayers while girls were excluded.These public school incidents are not isolated instances.

    “Starting about two years ago, school attorneys have been asking more and more questions about accommodations for Muslim students,” said Lisa Soronen, senior staff attorney for the National School Boards Association.

  • Four Christian evangelists attending a July Muslim cultural festival in Dearborn, Mich., were arrested for “disorderly conduct to ensure they did not provoke violence from others attending,” according to a Detroit media report. The four said they were attempting to engage in a dialogue about faith. Shariah law prohibits Christians from engaging Muslims about Christianity.
  • The University of Michigan-Dearborn, where about 10 percent of students are Muslim, spent $25,000 to install two foot-washing stations on campus to accommodate ablutions before Islamic daily prayers. The university said it is one of about 18 U.S. higher education institutions providing the unusual facilities, calling its decision “a reflection of our values of respect, tolerance, and safe accommodation of student needs.”

The Michigan Civil Liberties Union mounted no challenge, saying the foot baths have “no [religious] symbolic value.”

“They’re in a regular restroom and could be just as useful to a janitor filling up buckets, or someone coming off the basketball court as to Muslim students,” said Kary Moss, MCLU director.

  • Thomas More Law Center, a conservative, public-interest law firm headquartered in Michigan, is challenging the constitutionality of federal bailout money to investment firm AIG, claiming AIG’s involvement in Shariah-compliant financing violated the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause. A federal district judge in Michigan ruled that despite the fact the bailout gave the federal government an 80 percent ownership in AIG, there was no evidence the government’s money had funded “religious indoctrination.” And if there were evidence, the court said the $153 million of federal bailout money used to support Shariah compliance was an insignificant portion of the total $47.5 billion the government provided AIG.

That ruling is being appealed.

THE POWER OF MONEY

Conservative author Dick Morris says airplanes may have taken down the Twin Towers, but he predicts Shariah-compliant investing of billions in Western financial markets has the potential to “hijack our institutions, our social policies and ultimately our values in the name of Islamic rule.”

Huge oil profits and unease with their own Middle Eastern financial institutions brought Islamic investors to Wall Street in the 1990s in search of special funds that would meet Shariah restrictions. But it was complicated turf for bankers who knew investing but not Shariah.

Enter Sheikh Muhammad Taqi Usmani, a former Pakistani Shariah Appellate Court justice, hired by Dow Jones in 1999 to help establish a process that could attract trillions of investment dollars, generating handsome commissions and agency earnings.

In just a decade, most major U.S. and European investment firms have retained Shariah advisors and paid them millions. Those advisors assure Muslim investors their gains are not connected to interest charges, pork farming, alcohol, pornography or Western defense industries—all activities prohibited by Shariah.

But are those adviser fees—paid to highly placed Muslims—or the billions of dollars in “donations” financial institutions must contribute to specified Islamic “charities” in exchange for an investment’s Shariah stamp of approval actually bankrolling deadly extremist activities? Morris followed the money in his 2009 book “Catastrophe,” reporting that the U.S. government shut down at least three of the largest charities for financing terrorism.

The seal of the Muslim Brotherhood

In a 2008 article titled “Jihad Comes to Wall Street,” Alex Alexiev, vice president for research at the Center for Security Policy, called Shariah-compliant investing “an essential part of radical Islam’s efforts to insinuate itself into Western societies in order to destroy them from within.”

It’s also been a bumpy road for some of those hired consultants. Dow Jones severed ties with Usmani after the Center for Security Policy detailed some of Usmani’s writings, including one that urged Muslims living in the West to “conduct violent Jihad against the infidels at every opportunity.”

The CSP identified another paid Shariah investment advisor, Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, as a member of the Muslim Brotherhood.

According to Morris, Shariah-compliant funds must donate a small percentage of annual earnings to Islamic charities designated by the advisory boards. Those amounts are not inconsequential. For example, a typical 2.5 percent contribution can amount to billions of dollars.

And if a Shariah-compliant fund is found to have earnings from an outlawed investment activity, the advisors can “purify” those gains by donating more to the approved charities. Morris calls some of the charities “thinly veiled fronts for terrorist organizations such as Hamas and Hezbollah.”

Is the lure of trillions of dollars from Muslim portfolios strong enough to open civil law to expanding Shariah influences?

Consider Great Britain where, just a few years ago, then-Prime Minister Gordon Brown said he wanted London to become the world’s Islamic-finance capital. Britain’s most senior judge subsequently proclaimed the country’s Muslims can use “Islamic legal principles” as long as the punishments and divorce rulings comply with English law.

According to Morris, that’s already made U.K. Muslims eligible for extra benefits if they have more than one wife, even though polygamy—allowed under Shariah law—is illegal in Britain.

TOLERANCE: AN ASSET OR A WEDGE?

Janet Levy, a prolific writer on Islam and national security, asks why Islam “is sacred, supreme and beyond reproach” in the United States, while other religions are “freely criticized, lampooned in cartoons and denigrated in artwork?” She concludes America is already embracing de facto Shariah law.

“Our uniquely American virtues of tolerance and freedom have worked against us to produce intolerance and oppression,” Levy says. “This has led to the stealthy introduction of Shariah law and a climate in which criticisms of Mohammed and Islam are no longer possible without serious repercussions.”

Are political correctness and moves to cool the osmosis of the American melting pot fundamentally changing us? Is the arena of ideas—where Americans have historically tested competing beliefs—being shut down so as not to offend?

Recall 1960 when Americans considered it fair game to question Democrat John F. Kennedy about whether he would look first to his Catholicism or to the Constitution in making presidential decisions. Former Massachusetts Republican Gov. Mitt Romney’s Mormon faith has come under scrutiny during his political campaigns, sans shouts of profiling.

European nations that have led the West’s embrace of Shariah law have recently begun to retreat from their policies of “multiculturalism,” suggesting failure to maintain a single national identity has actually cultivated Islamic extremism in countries like Britain.

In a February speech at the Munich Security Conference, British Prime Minister David Cameron argued European “multiculturalism has been a failure” that’s fostered Islamic extremism, adding that the West has been “cautious, frankly even fearful” of standing up to it.

“We have even tolerated these segregated communities behaving in ways that run completely counter to our values,” Cameron said. “This hands-off tolerance has only served to reinforce the sense that not enough is shared. … What we see—and what we see in so many European countries—is a process of radicalization.”

(Image: Townhall Magazine)

Something also gets jumbled in the translation when East/West cultures talk about democracy and its relationship with religion.

In 2008 polling conducted by the University of Maryland’s Program on International Policy Attitudes, 82 percent of Egyptians said a democratic political system should govern their nation. At the same time, 73 percent said they supported stronger application of Islamic law in Egypt.

Of those, 68 percent said Egypt’s government should apply Shariah law to regulate moral behavior; 64 percent supported using traditional punishments like stoning for adulterers; 62 percent want the government to police women’s dress; and 59 percent said Shariah rules should be used to provide for Egypt’s poor.

So what does this all mean for Shariah in America?

The U.S. Constitution does not assign superiority to a particular religion. However, the idea that liberty is man’s God-given—not government-granted—right is a Judeo-Christian principle. America is exceptional because the people—regardless of how or whether they embrace God—allow government limited power.

America does not vest all authority in a theocratic government, where law and even daily life is dictated by a single religious code. But that does not mean the United States is Islamophobic, says New Jersey blogger George Berkin.

“[S]upporting the [Oklahoma amendment] does not make one anti-Islamic. But not being anti-Islamic does not mean that we should not insist that American legal principles—not foreign ones—apply here.”

Kathy Jessup is an award-winning, veteran journalist in Michigan whose writing career has focused on government, politics and criminal justice.

» Egypt Reminds Us We Are Running Out Of Time – Not Oil – Big Government.

This is a great article on Egypt, the world and the United States as things stand now.  These are my thoughts exactly but the author expresses them much better than I can.   If you will recall my first comment blog on this Egypt thing was that perhaps now our government would seriously decide that we the United States should at long last use our own resources and make ourselves oil, and all sources of energy,   independent of the entire world.  We have the  enough oil to last at least two hundred years and enough coal and natural gas for that long and more before we find ourselves needing another energy source.  In two hundred years surely we will have learned enough to harness the suns energy or some other as yet unknown source so I don’t think we need to hesitate to tap our own supplies.  This has been my opinion since I became aware of our countries energy needs way back when in history—-remember I am an old broad :).

Of more importance even than the United States oil supply is the relationships  that will be the outcome of this seismic shift in the Middle East.  How far will it spread and what or whom will rise to the top of the heap.   The entire world, at least the entire Western world has “dependent” ties to the Middle East.  What will happen if the revolution spreads?  What will happen if extreme Muslims rise to the top?  What will happen to the European nations who are already having difficulty with their multi-cultural societies that shut Muslims out and have now created a Muslim nation within their nations?  So many questions and no real answers; we just have to wait for developments.

And while we are waiting we have in the White House a fool who enjoys hearing himself make unfortunately asinine statements and speeches.  BB

Egypt Reminds Us We Are Running Out Of Time – Not Oil

by Thomas Del Beccaro

What is going to happen next in Egypt?  According to Mubarak, “the result will be extremism and radical Islam.”  Others aren’t so sure.  What is certain is that the risk factor in the Middle East has risen again.  That means the world’s oil supply is at risk as well.  A wise country would do what it could to insulate its people from that risk.  It is beyond a serious question as to whether the United States will.

Revolutions are not things of certainty. For instance, once underway, the ideals and prospects for the French Revolution once were touted by the likes of our own Jefferson and Madison. Washington, the soldier among the three, was far more circumspect.  The freedom won by the likes of the Marquis Lafayette in the early days of the French Revolution was lost not long after in the ensuing chaos.  Lafayette, the same man who helped win our Revolution, would eventually be jailed for years while many thousands died in The Terror before Napoleon dashed any hope for democracy.  So much for the foresight of our 3rd and 4th Presidents – they fanned the early embers only to see those embers engulf a nation.  (Perhaps a lesson for nations today: keep your mouths shut!  No hope that Obama will  listen or leanr. BB)

Our current President encouraged those taking part in the first Act of Egypt’s current drama.  Given that it was the military of Egypt that removed an intransigent Mubarak and now run its streets, it can hardly be said that freedom has been assured.  The difficult part lies ahead.  The only certainty in front of us now is uncertainty.  (I will say here that the Egyptians Army at least at the top is heavy with people who have studied and trained in the United States with several top generals being graduates of our military academies. As a result the Army has always had a rapport with our Army if not our government.  Don’t know how this will help but it certainly can’t hurt.  BB)

Returning to the French Revolution, its effects were hardly restricted to the French.   International trade was affected and the rise of Napoleon brought serious concerns of war in the United States and actual wars to Europe.  Egypt may play a similar role today.

Will Mubarak be right about the future of Egypt?

He points out that ‘We see the democracy the United States spearheaded in Iran and with Hamas, in Gaza, and that’s the fate of the Middle East.’”  If Mubarak is right then Israel will be surrounded by sworn enemies on virtually every side.  The risk to international trade in oil and beyond would be significant.  Even if he is wrong, the trajectory of Israel’s enemies threatens our economic security.

Of course, the threat to the United States is self-imposed. Never has history recorded that a super power has elevated commerce to a level of dependence on those doing it harm. We indeed are the first such power that directly funds, in staggering amounts, those countries that harbor or fund our most principal enemies – and we have done so not for a moment in time but for years on end. History will hardly forgive such an error.  (Even if the people of the Middle East generally like Americans and envy our way of life and freedoms they hate our government for what Washington has done to keep them under the yoke of dictators for decades.   we the People allowed this to happen!  While we were wallowing in our  affluence we turned either a blind eye or no eye at on on Washington.  It is just now that we are seeing how this neglect has almost lost us our liberties. Soon we will take notice of what our government has done to make America hated all over the world.  Will We the People pay the price for this neglect? BB)

By failing to tap our own plentiful resources, that one policy decision has meant:

(1) that the price of oil is therefore artificially high,

(2) that we pay an inflated price for oil with dollars that fund terrorists,

(3) that we pay excessive foreign aid to buy “stability” among the troubled nations of the region,

(4) that we have higher defense budgets and more wars,

(5) that we have less jobs here at home,

(6) that we subsidize Americans who cannot afford the artificially high oil prices we helped create, and

(7) that we generally endure a self-imposed, lower standard of living.  (This one may surprise some of you, but just give it some thought.  All the jobs we would have for Americans if we tapped  our own resources.  How much money we would have in taxes with a booming economy and thus much in taxes as well as saved by not funding the tyrants and buying friendships.  And, far fewer wars and “interests” to protect.  Better lives for all including those who protect uour country!    Our potential is to be the riches and most advanced country in the world just for changing our governments negative involvement in the world! BB)

It has been our national policy to do so much damage to ourselves as no civilizations before us has.

Now with the potential explosion of the Middle East staring us in the face, we face the potential of $5, $6 and $7 a gallon gasoline prices if not worse.

A wise country would plan ahead to avoid such danger.  We would hire American workers, to tap American resources, to lower the price of oil, to reduce government subsidies to our citizens, to reduce the amount of money going to terrorists and the states that fund them, to lessen the need for foreign aid and to lower our defense budgets if not the need for war – all in the name of security and preserving our standard of living.  So many benefits could flow from the reversal of one bad policy decision.

We would do all of that because if Jefferson and Madison could be wrong on France – I have no doubt that this Administration – which can hardly run this government – will be wrong in its estimates on how Egypt will fare.


See topic cloud at bottom of page for specific topics.

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 93 other followers

BB’s file cabinet

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 93 other followers