The Audacity of Hope and The Power of Reason

by Colonel Bob Pappas, USMC, Retired

The United States as we have known it for more than two hundred years, has been characterized by independence from foreign domination. Here one has historically had the freedom to be all that one can be, and the opportunity to succeed or fail.

Until the middle of the last century the nation was fairly well insulated from foreign intervention by two vast oceans. With the passage of time and inventiveness that came out of WWII, Korea, Vietnam and the Cold War, those distances have seemingly vanished, and time to traverse them has shrunk to minutes in the space age; and, with the end of the Cold War America's doors were thrown open wide.

This has always been a nation of immigrants, but in the heady days that followed the end of the Cold War, economic prosperity and the need for sources of cheap labor, the nation averted its gaze from the flood of illegal immigrants from around the world.

Included in that flood were 19 young men from the Middle East who had a deadly agenda that put into motion the War on Terror. Only those who deny reality or were too young to know what happened on September 11th, 2001, are oblivious to the danger that spelled for the United States.

What the hell!

Every liberal knows that it was all our fault. Bill Clinton as President for the previous eight years and less than nine months of GW Bush put them over the edge, they just couldn't help themselves, poor bastards.

Whether the President and Congress were right to invade Iraq as the main front of the War on Terror is all but irrelevant at this point in history. We are where we are, and that is in the middle of a fight, the success upon which hinges the nation's future. So, we'd better win, and win it right.

Never before in history has there been such a concerted effort by well meaning but misguided and stupid Americans, lead by the political left (who themselves are not misguided at all, they are dangerous and have a very definitive agenda; and that is to totally change America) and what has become its propaganda arm, the mainstream media, to make a radical change in the course of the ship of state.

The War in Iraq is succeeding day by day thus making it possible for Iraqis to assume increasing responsibility for its security.

Consequently, the focus of the media and political debate has turned inward to the economy.

It is interesting to note that from 2001-2006 the economy recovered from the Clinton recession, flourished and only upon the seating of a majority of Democrats did problems begin to strike. No question it has taken a downturn after 18 months of talking it down by the left and the not so co-incidental timing of ballooning, now collapsing gasoline prices, bursting of the sub-prime mortgage bubble, collapse of overextended banks as well as the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac debacle topped off by a thirty per cent drop in the stock market; if one were astute, one would note that all of that has occurred since the election of the Democrat Congress. I'll bet even Democrats have made the connection.

If one takes the time to do so, one recognizes that there are basically two opinions as to how the nation should function. One is as a Constitutional free market where market forces operate to expand or contract the economy based on supply and demand or some facsimile thereof. The other is a Socialist government-controlled economy where the government owns, plans and controls the marketplace and personal freedom that would otherwise operate in its own interest.

We have just witnessed the single largest government intrusion into the market place in history. Whether it was the right thing to do will be determined by the results 10 to 20 years hence and the extent to which free market forces are allowed to function. By bailing out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac without any consequences to those at every level, from borrower to corporate management and Congressional oversight, Americans forfeited the opportunity to fail as well as to succeed. Both are essential for a vibrant economy, and everyone should have that opportunity with all the risks and rewards that flow from it.

The great economic opportunities that Americans have enjoyed for over two hundred years are now in the balance. If one reads even a modicum of history, one recognizes that it is axiomatic that hand-in-hand with economic opportunity is personal freedom, and to the extent that Government controls one, it inherently controls both. The freedoms that Americans enjoy under their Constitution have been and remain the envy of the world.

I despise robber barons who take what they do not earn, where manipulation is rewarded with monetary wealth, but spiritual emptiness. Witness, Ken Lay, Mr. 'I didn't know what was going on,' but who encouraged employees to invest millions of their incomes and savings all the while knowing full well that Enron was on its way to collapse. He is but one despicable example, and there are plenty of others, including the fired heads of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac both of whom are or were advisers to Senator Obama's campaign.

It is fascinating, if not infuriating that a dictator to the South would tell us that we need to rewrite our Constitution, one supposes along socialist or communist lines. Is it surprising that Obama wants to sit down with Hugo Chavez without pre-condition?

As one who did his time in the hell of Vietnam and has an abiding love and appreciation for our Armed Forces, the Constitution and Nation that they uphold and defend, to walk away from Iraq at this juncture is not only an insult, it would be one more nail in the nation's coffin. The first nail was painfully and clearly driven by the Democrats in 1975 when they cut off funding for the beleaguered people of South Vietnam; with Harry Reid and Senator Obama using the same logic if not the same words with regard to Iraq that were used during that cowardly abandonment.

Senator Obama's desire to take from those who work for a living and 'spread it around' to those who don't is the worst economic nightmare that has come upon this country. Ever! As a small business owner whose gross receipts are well over $450k, but whose net is near zero in the present economy, and who has both faith and hope that hard work and ingenuity will eventually lead to economic prosperity, Obama's economic plan would shut down the business and millions like me if not put me immediately into bankruptcy.

Those who argue that we should 'totally change the system' so that everyone is equal would take away both initiative and freedom. Why should one work 16 hours a day for years if by staying home one keeps more money than by working? How about the ones whose livelihoods would also be terminated absent the work that ones small business generates for them? How about the cash flow through the local bank that is convertible into loans for others?

Those who have a guilt complex over slavery and are basing their planned vote accordingly, need to get over it. Slaves were released nearly 150 years ago. Trillions of dollars have been spent to advance their economic well being, but too many hang onto the past with a vengeance, and that's too bad for everyone. Too many of them believe the nation that expunged the scourge of slavery, that initiated Affirmative Action and thousands of 'programs for the underprivileged,' and that awarded them sub-prime loans, continues to owe them. So their Messiah-in-Chief, Robin Hood, Barrack Hussein Obama plans to take from those who work and distribute it to those who don't. Give me a break!

I support John McCain and Sarah Palin because:

1. They are committed to the Constitutional intent of forming a more perfect union.

2. Committed to appointing Federal Judges who will use their knowledge and experience to uphold and defend the Constitution as it is written, not as liberals would have it be.

3. Committed to preservation of the freedoms that are spelled out in the Constitution's 'Bill of Rights,' in particular the Tenth Article of Amendment. Liberals, look it up.

4. They are committed to insuring that no nation or person will imperil this nation, from without or from within. The former is easy, but the latter more difficult given the 'criminal' stupidity of so many Obama lemmings.

5. They are committed to fostering an environment wherein the economy can flourish through lower taxes and less government intrusion in Americans' lives. Obama's plan would put millions out of business; but the truth is it won't fly. Nor, incidentally, will he.

6. They are committed to making certain that every American now and for generations to come have the opportunity to fulfill their dreams. Under the Obama plan, dreams would be 'spread around.'

7. They are committed to the protection of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Given the Obama agenda, if one is a fetus, run for cover.

If one is a live born botched abortion baby, hope for a compassionate nurse. If one is a sexual pervert, relax your dreams would have come true. If one lives in Kenya, stand by for possible construction of the eastern White House. If you live in Israel, dig your shelters deep because, according to Jesse Jackson you would be abandoned. Shame on any American Jew who would even think of voting for Obama.

I oppose B.H.O., a nice guy but personally empty suit and painfully misguided socio-economically, while continuing to struggle with and for his identity. (Yes, I heard Obama's buddy Louis Farrakhan tell Americans and the world that Obama is the Savior.) It's no wonder that Obama is screwed up. He is a pathetic lost soul, the leader of lost souls who don't even know it, nor do they want to know. If one chooses not to believe me, read his books.

Actually, I like Obama and would vote for him if he had his head screwed on straight, but he doesn't and therefore serious and responsible Americans will flood the polls and will not elect Obama as President in his present lost state.

And that, dear reader are a number of the reasons that I support, work for and will vote for John McCain and Sarah Palin.

Semper Fidelis

Hospitals ill equipped to handle victims of dirty bombs

Emergency room doctors and nurses are worrying about hospitals being too ill equipped to handle casualties from a radioactive 'dirty bomb' in a terror attack.

The finding underscores the need for better preparedness training and clearer guidelines for managing such events, the researchers said. A dirty bomb combines conventional explosives and radioactive materials.

"This study suggests many issues urgently need to be addressed in order to meet the challenge posed by radiological terrorism," said the study's co-author, Steven M. Becker, University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) associate professor of public health.

"There is a need for increased information and training on managing radiological events, protecting staff and treating affected patients," he added.

In ranking the six most-voiced concerns, the top worry was that hospitals would be overwhelmed by incoming patients, Becker said. Those patients would likely be a mix of contaminated, injured and contaminated and those fearful of contamination, according to an UAB press release.

The No. two worry was emergency duty (ED) professionals' need to ensure their own family's safety, which is discounted or not mentioned in many preparedness plans, Becker said. This second concern was linked closely to the No. 3 worry that ED staffing would drop below acceptable levels based on staff family needs and fears about radioactivity.

Additionally many study participants disagreed with current federal radiological management guidelines, which state that patient stabilisation and treatment of life-threatening conditions should take precedence over decontamination, Becker said.

"Some stated unequivocally that they would not follow this guideline since they felt it was too dangerous to the hospital and its staff," he said. Past chemical terrorism response training has put decontamination as a first priority.

In addition to highlighting serious gaps in preparedness training, the study points to the need for easy-to-follow pocket guides, posters, ED toolkits and telephone hotlines to help manage radiological events. Also, emergency staffing levels need to better account for ED professionals' concern for family and loved ones.

"It is clear from our results that crucial preparedness work needs to be done to keep hospital EDs ready for current and future threats," said Sarah A. Middleton, program manager in the UAB Department of Paediatrics and co-author on the study. The study was funded by Centres for Disease Control and Prevention.

Their findings were published in Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness, a journal of the American Medical Association.St/jg

Iraq, Al-Qaeda And WMDs, Yet Again

(Compiler's note: A must read. rca)

by John Daum

I am amazed by the cultural amnesia regarding Iraq and al-Qaeda and weapons of mass destruction. It seems that once an idea has become a punch-line on Leno and repeated as a political talking point that that qualifies it is a historical fact. Marilyn Lloyd declares in her pro-Obama opinion piece, "However, there were no weapons of mass destruction or documented ties from 9-11 to this war." Her statement is a popular one and rhetorically effective in this election season, but it just doesn't hold up to anyone with access to any news services.

Let me jog your memory. Saddam Hussein provided funds, shelter and/or training to a variety of terrorist organizations including Abu Nidal, Ansar al-Islam, the Arab Liberation Front, Hamas, the Kurdistan Workers Party, the Mojahedin-e Khalq and the Palestine Liberation Front. There are also well-documented meetings, training sessions and funding of al-Qaeda operatives. I am not suggesting that Iraq was responsible for the 9/11 attacks, but the claim that there was no connection between Iraq and al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups is ahistorical.

As for the "weapons of mass destruction," the case is even more compelling. The intelligence services of France, Britain, Spain, Australia, Japan, Germany, Israel, as well as Jordan, Egypt, Iran and NATO all confirmed the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. As did, I might add, President Clinton, Vice President Gore, Sen. Edward Kennedy, Sen. John Kerry, Sen. Bob Graham, Sen. Barbara Boxer and other prominent Democrats.

One of the most interesting sources about WMD's in Iraq is Saddam himself. The invasion of Iraq yielded 3,000 hours of taped meetings of Hussein and his war cabinet as well as reams of documents related to WMD. In the tapes, Saddam gives instructions on transporting WMD's out of Iraq in the event of an invasion or UN inspections. The tapes also contain Saddam discussing Iraq's "special weapons" programs and quips about fooling UN weapons inspectors.

So where are all the weapons of mass destruction? Demetrius Perricos, president of the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission and successor to Hans Blix, confirmed in June 2004 that Saddam had indeed smuggled WMD's out of Iraq before the war. Fifty-six sorties of commercial jetliners, with their seats removed, transported "aid" to Syria in 2002 when a dam burst there. This is where the WMD's are. Remember, our "diplomacy" via the United Nations provided Saddam with over two years to hide, dismantle and transport his WMD's. All of this information is a few clicks away on from sources like the AP and Reuters and the BBC.

It seems we have forgotten Associated Press stories like the 2003 discovery of 3,000 chemical suits found in military bases in central Iraq and the discovery of nerve gas antidote injectors in An Nasiriyah, Iraq. These types of news stories were commonplace at one time. I remember reading in USA Today about the discovery of schematics from U.S. elementary schools found on a CD-rom in a bunker in Iraq. News stories like this are easy to come by for anyone that is willing to read. Poland purchased 17 chemical weapons warheads for $5,000 each from the Iraqis to keep them off the market. These warheads were found to contain cyclosarin, a nerve agent more deadly than sarin. As recently as August 2005, U.S. troops discovered 1,500 gallons of chemical agents in a warehouse in Mosul, Iraq.

All of the liberals that want to champion the "fact" that no weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq should be profoundly disturbed by that fact along with the rest of us. Hans Blix reported that there are 6,500 chemical weapons and four tons of biological agents that are unaccounted for. It's not a question of "if" Saddam ever had weapons of mass destruction, it's a question of where they are now and who will be in office when they turn up.

Muslim Brotherhood Website: Jihad Against Non-Muslims Is Obligatory

On a website devoted to Ramadhan, the Muslim Brotherhood posted a series of articles by Dr. Ahmad 'Abd Al-Khaleq about Al-Walaa Wa'l-Baraa, an Islamic doctrine which, in its fundamentalist interpretation, stipulates absolute allegiance to the community of Muslims and total rejection of non-Muslims and of Muslims who have strayed from the path of Islam.

In his articles, the writer argues that according to this principle, a Muslim can come closer to Allah by hating all non-Muslims - Christians, Jews, atheists, or polytheists - and by waging jihad against them in every possible manner.

For full report, visit http://www.memriiwmp.org/content/en/report.htm?report=2877.

Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack: A Preventable Homeland Security Catastrophe

(Compiler's note: Must read. rca)

by Jena Baker McNeill and Richard Weitz, Ph.D.
Backgrounder #2199

A major threat to America has been largely ignored by those who could prevent it. An electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack could wreak havoc on the nation's electronic systems—shutting down power grids, sources, and supply mechanisms. An EMP attack on the United States could irreparably cripple the coun­try. It could simultaneously inflict large-scale damage and critically limit our recovery abilities. Congress and the new Administration must recognize the signifi­cance of the EMP threat and take the necessary steps to protect against it.

Systems Gone Haywire

An EMP is a high-intensity burst of electromagnetic energy caused by the rapid acceleration of charged particles. In an attack, these particles interact and send electrical systems into chaos in three ways: First, the electromagnetic shock disrupts electronics, such as sensors, communications systems, protective systems, computers, and other similar devices. The second component has a slightly smaller range and is similar in effect to lightning. Although protective measures have long been established for lightning strikes, the potential for damage to critical infrastructure from this component exists because it rapidly follows and com­pounds the first component. The final component is slower than the previous two, but has a longer dura­tion. It is a pulse that flows through electricity trans­mission lines—damaging distribution centers and fusing power lines. The combination of the three com­ponents can easily cause irreversible damage to many electronic systems.[1]

An EMP attack on the United States could mate­rialize in two forms: nuclear and non-nuclear. The most devastating form, and most difficult to achieve, is an EMP that results from a nuclear weapon. This form destroys any "unhardened" elec­tronic equipment and electric power system— which means virtually any civilian infrastructure in the United States. The pulse occurs when a nuclear weapon explodes above the visual horizon line at an altitude between 40 and 400 kilometers. The deto­nation of the nuclear warhead releases photons in the form of gamma radiation and x-rays. These energetic particles scatter in every direction away from the blast. Many of the particles descend and interact with the magnetic field lines of the Earth, where they become trapped. The trapped electrons then create an oscillating electric current within the field, which rapidly produces a large electromag­netic field in the form of a pulse. Once the pulse reaches electronic equipment, it negatively interacts with them and either disables, damages, or destroys them. An EMP generated by a nuclear weapon could affect all critical infrastructures that depend on electricity and electronics within the vicinity of the nuclear warhead blast radius. A nuclear weapon with a burst height of approximately 100 kilometers could expose objects located within an area 725 miles in diameter to the effects of EMP.[2]

A non-nuclear, or improvised, EMP is a radio-frequency (rather than gamma or x-ray frequency) weapon. While easier to conceal and not requiring a missile, a non-nuclear EMP must be detonated close to the target and does not produce as much damage as the nuclear version, affecting largely localized areas.[3] But such a weapon could be harnessed as an "E-Bomb" (electromagnetic bomb), a stand-alone weapon that is easier to hide and maneuver. It is dif­ficult to estimate the exact damage of an improvised attack, but in 1993 EMP testing by the U.S. military shut down engine controls 300 meters away at a contractor site.[4] Not large-scale by any means, but damaging enough to cause concern.

It was not until the United States began high-alti­tude testing of nuclear weapons over the Pacific in the early 1960s that the potentially devastating effects of EMP on even distant ground targets attracted widespread attention within the U.S. defense community. In the 1962 Starfish Prime test, during which a nuclear weapon was detonated 400 kilometers (250 miles) above Johnston Island in the Pacific, electrical equipment more than 1,400 kilo­meters (870 miles) away in Hawaii was affected. Street lights, alarms, circuit breakers, and commu­nications equipment all showed signs of distortions and damage.[5]

In 1997 and 1999, the House National Security Committee and the House Military Research and Development Subcommittee held hearings on the potential threats to civilian systems in America from an EMP attack. Congress subsequently established the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from an Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack, also known as the Graham Commission after its chairman, William Graham (former science advisor to President Ronald Reagan). The Commission issued a report in 2004 that evaluated the threat to the U.S. from an EMP attack, ...

More or Please Click Story Link Above for Full Original Story

SHOT IN THE FANNIE MAE

(Compiler's note: Helps in understanding what lead up to the bailout. rca)

Not political - Educational!!!!

ACT! for America’s “Voter Guide 2008

(Compiler's note: Must read. rca)

I am delighted to announce the launch of ACT! for America’s “Voter Guide 2008.” This voter guide is a truly ground-breaking project that injects into the public and electoral debate issues such as sharia law and sharia-compliant finance, issues we are sure many candidates for federal office have never faced before.

The ACT! for America staff emailed and mailed issues questionnaires to over 1,000 candidates for President, U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representatives. To see how candidates responded, please click here.

With the election only two weeks away, people are paying very close attention to what candidates are saying and doing. This is the ideal time to inform people about how candidates stand on the issues we address in the candidate questionnaire.

So I would ask you that, even before you go to our website to check out how candidates have responded, please forward this email to everyone you know. You can forward using our forwarding device, which you’ll find at the very bottom of this email, or simply forward it using your email client.

As you can imagine, this has been a very involved, very time-consuming project, that has required extensive human and financial resources. If you are able to help support the cost of this project with a contribution, please click here. We would greatly appreciate any help you can provide us.

Thank you so much, our patriotic members, for your continued commitment to exposing and resisting the threat of radical Islam. Thank you for rising in defense of our security, our liberty and our values. Thank you for the time and resources you give to this very important effort. With your continued support we will continue to move forward in our mission to roll back the threat that we know is all too real. I give you my promise, that we at ACT! for America are committed to serving you and our country to ensure that our leaders are monitored and held accountable for their decisions and that we will continue to mobilize, educate and give power to the average citizen who is the backbone of our great nation.

Always devoted,



Brigitte Gabriel

Obama & DNC admit all allegations in Berg v. Obama

Obama & DNC Admit All Allegations of Federal Court Lawsuit - Obama’s “Not” Qualified to be President

Obama Should Immediately Withdraw his Candidacy for President

For Immediate Release: - 10/21/08 - Complete contact details and pdfs of this press release and motions filed by plaintiff Berg today are at the end of this article

(Lafayette Hill, Pennsylvania – 10/21/08) - Philip J. Berg, Esquire, the Attorney who filed suit against Barack H. Obama challenging Senator Obama’s lack of “qualifications” to serve as President of the United States, announced today that Obama and tbe DNC “ADMITTED”, by way of failure to timely respond to Requests for Admissions, all of the numerous specific requests in the Federal lawsuit. Obama is “NOT QUALIFIED” to be President and therefore Obama must immediately withdraw his candidacy for President and the DNC shall substitute a qualified candidate. The case is Berg v. Obama, No. 08-cv-04083.

Berg stated that he filed Requests for Admissions on September 15, 2008 with a response by way of answer or objection had to be served within thirty [30] days. No response to the Requests for Admissions was served by way of response or objection. Thus, all of the Admissions directed to Obama and the DNC are deemed “ADMITTED.” Therefore, Obama must immediately withdraw his candidacy for President.

OBAMA - Admitted:

1. I was born in Kenya.

2. I am a Kenya “natural born” citizen.

3. My foreign birth was registered in the State of Hawaii.

4. My father, Barrack Hussein Obama, Sr. admitted Paternity of me.

5. My mother gave birth to me in Mombosa, Kenya.

6. My mother’s maiden name is Stanley Ann Dunham a/k/a Ann Dunham.

7. The COLB [Certification of Live Birth] posted on the website “Fightthesmears.com” is a forgery.

8. I was adopted by a Foreign Citizen.

9. I was adopted by Lolo Soetoro, M.A. a citizen of Indonesia.

10. I was not born in Hawaii.

11. I was not born at the Queens Medical Center in Hawaii.

12. I was not born at Kapi’olani Medical Center for Women and Children in Hawaii.

13. I was not born in a Hospital in Hawaii.

14. I am a citizen of Indonesia.

15. I never took the “Oath of Allegiance” to regain my U.S. Citizenship status.

16. I am not a “natural born” United States citizen.

17. My date of birth is August 4, 1961.

18. I traveled to Pakistan in 1981 with my Pakistan friends.

19. In 1981, I went to Indonesia on my way to Pakistan.

20. Pakistan was a no travel zone in 1981 for American Citizens.

21. In 1981, Pakistan was not allowing American Citizens to enter their country.

22. I traveled on my Indonesian Passport to Pakistan.

23. I renewed my Indonesian Passport on my way to Pakistan.

24. My senior campaign staff is aware I am not a “natural born” United States Citizen.

25. I am proud of my Kenya Heritage.

26. My relatives have requested changes to the portion of my birth certificate that identifies my first name.

27. My relatives have requested changes to the portion of my birth certificate that identifies my last name.

28. My relatives have requested changes to the portion of my birth certificate that identifies my place of birth.

29. I requested changes to the portion of my birth certificate that identifies my first name.

30. I requested changes to the portion of my birth certificate that identifies my last name.

31. I requested changes to the portion of my birth certificate that identifies my place of birth.

32. The document identified as my Indonesian School record from Fransiskus Assisi School in Jakarta, Indonesia is genuine.

33. I went to a Judge in Hawaii to have my name changed.

34. I went to a Senator and/or Congressman or other public official in Hawaii to have my name changed.

35. I had a passport issued to me from the Government of Indonesia.

36. The United States Constitution does not allow for a Person to hold the office of President of the United States unless that person is a “natural born” United States citizen.

37. I am ineligible pursuant to the United States Constitution to serve as President and/or Vice President of the United States.

38. I never renounced my citizenship as it relates to my citizenship to the country of Indonesia.

39. I never renounced my citizenship as it relates to my citizenship to the country of Kenya.

40. I am an Attorney who specializes in Constitutional Law.

41. Kenya was a part of the British Colonies at the time of my birth.

42. Kenya did not become its own Republic until 1963.

43. I am not a “Naturalized” United States Citizen.

44. I obtained $200 Million dollars in campaign funds by fraudulent means.

45. I cannot produce a “vault” (original) long version of a birth certificate showing my birth in Hawaii.

46. My “vault” (original) long version birth certificate shows my birth in Kenya.

47. The only times I was to a Hospital in Hawaii was for check-ups or medical treatments for illnesses.

48. Queens Medical Center in Honolulu, Hawaii does not have any record of my mother, Stanley Ann Dunham (Obama) giving birth to me.

49. Kapi’olani Medical Center for Women and Children in Honolulu, Hawaii does not have any record of my mother, Stanley Ann Dunham (Obama) giving birth to me.

50. I was born in the Coast Province Hospital in Mombasa, Kenya.

51. I represented on my State Bar application in Illinois that I never used any other name other than Barack Hussein Obama.

52. I went by the name Barry Soetoro in Indonesia.

53. My Indonesian school records are under the name of Barry Soetoro.

54. I took an Oath to uphold the United States Constitution when admitted to the State Bar of Illinois to practice Law.

55. I took an Oath to uphold the United States Constitution when I was Sworn into my United States Senate Office.

56. I hold dual citizenship with at least one other Country besides the United States of America.

DNC - Admitted:

1. The DNC nominated Barrack Hussein Obama as the Democratic Nominee for President.

2. The DNC has not vetted Barrack Hussein Obama.

3. The DNC did not have a background check performed on Barrack Hussein Obama.

4.The DNC did not verify Barrack Hussein Obama’s eligibility to serve as President of the United States.

5. The DNC admits Barrack Hussein Obama was born in Kenya.

6. The DNC admits Barrack Hussein Obama is not a “natural born” United States citizen.

7. The DNC admits Barrack Hussein Obama was not born in Hawaii.

8.The DNC admits they have not inquired into Barrack Hussein Obama’s citizenship status.

9. The DNC admits they have a duty to properly vette the Democratic Nominee for President.

10.The DNC admits Lolo Soetoro, M.A., an Indonesian citizen adopted Barrack Hussein Obama.

11. The DNC admits the Credentials Committee has been aware of this lawsuit since August 22, 2008 as the lawsuit was faxed to our Washington D.C. Office on August 22, 2008.

12. The DNC admits their Credentials Committee failed to verify and/or inquire into the credentials of Barack Hussein Obama to serve as the President of the United States.

13. The DNC admits their Credential Committee’s Report failed to address the issues of Barack Hussein Obama’s ineligibility to serve as President of the United States.

14.The DNC admits Howard Dean, Chair Person has and had knowledge Barack Hussein Obama was born in Kenya and ineligible to serve as the President of the United States.

15. The DNC admits Plaintiff and all Democratic citizens of the United States have been personally injured as a result of not having a qualified Democratic Presidential Nominee to cast their votes upon.

16. The DNC admits Plaintiff and all citizens of the United States have a Constitutional Right to vote for the President of the United States and to have two (2) qualified candidates of which to choose from.

17. The DNC admits Plaintiff and all citizens of the United States have a Constitutional right to have a properly vetted Democratic Presidential Nominee of which to cast their vote.

18. The DNC admits an FBI background check is not performed on the Presidential or Vice Presidential Candidates.

19. The DNC admits the United States Constitution does not allow for a Person to hold the office of President of the United States unless that person is a “natural born” United States citizen.

20. The DNC admits they collected donations on behalf of Barack Hussein Obama for his Presidential campaign.

21. The DNC admits Plaintiff and Democratic citizens donated money based on false representations that Barack Hussein Obama was qualified to serve as the President of the United States.

22. The DNC admits if Barack Hussein Obama is elected as President and allowed to serve as President of the United States in violation of our Constitution, it will create a Constitutional crisis.

23. The DNC admits Barack Hussein Obama took an Oath to uphold the United States Constitution.

24. The DNC admits allowing a person who is not a “natural born” citizen to serve as President of the United States violates Plaintiff’s rights to due process of law in violation of the United States Constitution.

25. The DNC admits allowing a person who is not a “natural born” citizen to serve as President of the United States violates Plaintiff’s rights to Equal Protection of the laws in violation of the United States Constitution.

26. The DNC admits the function of the DNC is to secure a Democratic Presidential Candidate who will protect Democratic citizen’s interests, fight for their equal opportunities and fight for justice for all Americans.

27. The DNC admits the Democratic National Committee has been promoting Barack Hussein Obama’s Presidential election knowing he was ineligible to serve as President of the United States.

Our website obamacrimes.com now has 50.7 + million hits. We are urging all to spread the word of our website – and forward to your local newspapers, radio and TV stations. Berg again stressed his position regarding the urgency of this case as, “we” the people, are heading to a “Constitutional Crisis” if this case is not resolved forthwith.

Philip J. Berg, Esquire
555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12
Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531
Cell (610) 662-3005
(610) 825-3134
(800) 993-PHIL [7445]
Fax (610) 834-7659
philjberg@obamacrimes.comThis e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Attachments:

File	Description	File size
Motion for Expedited Ruling on Plaintiff\'s Motion for Order re Req. for Admissi		67 Kb
Obama, Motion for Order deeming Request for Admissions Admitted.pdf		63 Kb
Press Release Obama - DNC Admit All Allegations of Federal Court Lawsuit.

Cowering in the Geopolitical Corner: When We’re Weak, We’re Vulnerable

by Nicholas Guariglia

If one were to sum up the public mood for the past seven years, it would go something like this: from September 11, 2001 until January 2008, the public largely overlooked a healthy economy because it was upset with what it considered to be a failed foreign policy. But now, since the beginning of this year, the sustained gains from the military surge have allayed fears about Iraq, and the struggling economy – high energy prices, a federal deficit, collapsing entitlement programs, a housing bubble crisis – has emerged to the forefront of the public’s worries.

During tough economic times, it is human nature for citizens to pull in their financial reins; to spend less, to invest less, and to save more. Therefore, psychologically, people expect the same to occur on a national level. Government expands to “save the day.” Trade becomes inward, more protectionist to “protect” American-made goods. Exports go down. And abroad, despots get a strange look in their eye, and some very dangerous thoughts in their minds. Our enemies become hungry wolves encircling a wounded rabbit. ....

.... There’s a lesson to be learned here, and it is this: when the cat’s away, the mice will play.

If history is any indication, we can be certain of two things: 1) when the United States is economically weak, our enemies exploit that weakness; 2) when we elect new presidents, our enemies challenge their resolve.

It happened to Truman, who lost China to the communists, allowed Stalin to get the bomb, and settled with an ugly draw on the Korean peninsula.

It happened to Eisenhower, who lost the space race to Moscow, and Cuba to Castro.

It happened to Kennedy, whose naiveté in meetings with Khrushchev convinced the Soviet Politburo he could be had, starting a missile crisis that nearly destroyed the world.

It happened to Carter, who once mocked his fellow Americans for having an “inordinate fear” of communism, only to see the Russians gobble up Afghanistan and violate his precious arms control agreements he was sure they would honor. His “holy man” Khomeini overtook our embassy, effectively ending Carter’s chances at reelection and ruining his legacy.

It happened to Reagan with the Marine barracks in Beirut.

It happened to George H.W. Bush with Noriega and Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait.

It happened to Clinton with Milosevic, Saddam’s inspection violations and attempts to assassinate George Bush Sr., and al Qaida’s attacks on our embassies.

And of course, it happened to George W. Bush (is reference to 9/11 even needed?).

Al Qaeda, an organization which has only existed for two U.S. presidential administrations, challenged both President Clinton in the first months of his presidency — the 1993 World Trade Center bombing — and President Bush Jr. in the first months of his first-term with the second World Trade Center attack. Al Qaeda even attacked the USS Cole before Bush’s inauguration.

Sen. Obama’s election would be the first time that these two geopolitical phenomena combined into one. His socialistic and protectionist economic policies would not only further the recession, thus making us more vulnerable than we already are, but his juvenile freshman outlook of the world would cause al Qaeda, Hezbollah, Iran, et al, to salivate with eager anticipation. ...

....Within the next four years, I fear that one or more foreign events will occur — upheaval in Pakistan, the nuclearization of Iran, a Russian invasion of another European ally, a Chinese attack on Taiwan, more North Korean roguery, another war in Lebanon, the collapse of Iraq, an all-out attempt to liquidate Israel, a catastrophic terrorist attack — that will overshadow, dwarf, and to some degree exasperate, our current anxieties on the home-front. And it will be then, and only then, that we will all collectively realize what we have done as a country, in electing a young, unknown novice — a weak man, to put it bluntly — over the well-known steady-hand and statesmanship of the elder John McCain.

Egads! - Biden Guarantees International Crisis if Obama Elected

Could Senator Biden be warning us that Senator Obama is not prepared to be Commander in Chief of the world superpower’s armed forces? Or, as John Bolton, former United States Ambassador to the United Nations put it, “Leaders around the world see Obama as soft, untested, weak and very naïve”….

“Mark my words," Senator Biden warned ominously, “It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We're about to elect a brilliant 47-year-old senator president of the United States of America. Remember I said it standing here if you don't remember anything else I said. Watch, we're gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy."

"I can give you at least four or five scenarios from where it might originate," Biden said at a fund raiser, mentioning the Middle East and Russia as possibilities. "And he's gonna need help. And the kind of help he's gonna need is, he's gonna need you - not financially to help him - we're gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him.”

And with that, the foot-in-the-mouth Senator from Delaware scored yet another major gaffe (a gaffe is what happens when politicians inadvertently tell the truth): just two weeks before the election, he reminded voters exactly what it is they do not at all like about this young rookie, a newcomer with no military experience who remains untested on the stage of grave world dangers and threats to our country and families.

All over America tonight, citizens are looking at each other and saying, “Oh yeah, that was it…we don't want a rookie like Obama as president of the globe’s mightiest superpower. His well known skittishness in the face of determined and ruthless forces will invite aggression from our enemies, and they will want to know just what America is now willing to do. We need a McCain who our enemies won't dare test. Our enemies did that once – tested a new but tough-minded president - and they won’t make that mistake again,” as they then will reflect on the fact that America has not been attacked since 9/11.

But it should be noted that, in all the previous tests of a new American president who was not tough-minded (Senator Obama – please put down that white flag!), we failed. Think of one who responded by doing nothing (Clinton with Mogadishu or the first World Trade Center attack – it was no surprise that 9/11 would follow), or think of one who courted aggression because of his greenhorn qualities (think of Kennedy, Kruschev and the Cuban Missile Crisis), and you have the scenario that awaits us. The world will want to test this one unknown young man to see how the United States will respond to more dead Americans, and to more shattered American families.

On the other hand, when tough-minded presidents come into office, America’s enemies scatter like cockroaches under a spray of Raid. Think Ronald Reagan and the fact that the Iranian hostages, held for 444 days under the weak-kneed Jimmy Carter, were formally released into United States custody on January 20, 1981, minutes after Reagan was sworn in.

Joe Biden went on to admit, " Because it's not gonna be apparent initially, it's not gonna be apparent that we're right. I promise you, you all are gonna be sitting here a year from now going, 'Oh my God, why are they there in the polls? Why is the polling so down? Why is this thing so tough?' We're gonna have to make some incredibly tough decisions in the first two years. So I'm asking you now, I'm asking you now, be prepared to stick with us. Remember the faith you had at this point because you're going to have to reinforce us. There are gonna be a lot of you who want to go, 'Whoa, wait a minute, yo, whoa, whoa, I don't know about that decision'."

And therein lies another problem. Here Biden openly admits that they probably won’t get it right from the get-go, just as Obama had to try three times to register a proper response to Russia when it barreled into Georgia. Doesn’t inspire much confidence, does it? McCain, very familiar with Russia and how to handle them, responded correctly and appropriately from the moment the crisis began. In fact, the invasion of Georgia highlighted McCain’s leadership and experience in world affairs over Obama by his handling of a foreign crisis. McCain was quick to condemn Russian aggression, saying it was a matter of “urgent moral and strategic importance to the United States…a clear violation of international law,” calling on Russia to “immediately and unconditionally cease operations and withdraw all forces from sovereign Georgia.” At that moment, Obama was still floating ideas about how to respond, as he did over the next three really embarrassing days.

Biden emphasized that the mountainous Afghanistan-Pakistan border is of particular concern, with Osama bin Laden "alive and well" and Pakistan "bristling with nuclear weapons."

"You literally can see what these kids are up against, our kids in that region," Biden said in recalling when his helicopter was forced down due to a snowstorm there. "The place is crawling with al Qaeda. And it's real." Well, we could have told you that, Senator Biden. And based on how your candidate has stated time and again he’d like to deal with al-Qaeda (that is, run in the opposite direction), it does not make us feel safe that you two are on the threshold of a place where you probably should not be.

The American people will decide on November 4^th whether you should be there, but it is quite possible that, on this day, they will remember that Senator McCain has seen America’s enemies up close and personal, looked them right in the eye, face-to-face, and in so doing, he has been tested over the years as few in this country have. Americans don’t want to be “tested” (read: see more dead American bodies in our homeland) when our economy is in crisis and we are already fighting in two hot wars. We don’t need another American city reduced to chaos and rubble.

This is precisely what people are worried about, and a tested and experienced McCain is much more likely to get it right than an untested ingénue with attitude, who has no understanding of how at risk America is. As Senator Biden himself said of Senator Obama’s candidacy, “This is no time for on-the-job training. Lives will be lost.”

For this reason, we are grateful to Senator Biden for reminding us just what is at stake here. Yes, we have economic woes, but Americans will at least live through that. Another attack on our soil will not guarantee that Americans will live through it, and it will certainly not guarantee that we will respond in a way that will keep America’s enemies further at bay.

- The Editors of FamilySecurityMatters.org

Massive Fund Raising Misdeeds Prove Obama is Bought, But Who owns Him?

(Compiler's note: A must read article. rca)

Paul Hollrah

Having dug through the FEC and Obama's contribution reports, is the damning information there enough to get Obama defeated, if not impeached? ....

In July, Obama boasted that, as of May 31, his contributor base numbered some 1.5 million people, with one-fourth, or $66.25 million of his $265 million, coming from those contributing $2,000, or more... some 33,200 people. Thus, the remainder, or $198.75 million, came from some 1.47 million people, each contributing $5, $10, $20... or, as Obama assured us, "whatever they could afford."

While it is true that Obama is the kind of guy who could read Bill Clinton's golf scorecard and make it sound convincing, simple arithmetic should have told him that $198.75 million dollars cannot be contributed by 1.47 million people in "$5, $10, or $20" amounts. Each of those 1.47 million people would have had to contribute, on average, $135 to create a pool of $198.75 million... and that simply does not happen. It has never happened before in American politics and it is not happening now.

But now, just days before the election, the Obama campaign has compounded their sins. They are now reporting that their contributor base has increased from 1.5 million to 2.5 million and that the total amount raised now approaches $600 million. If we can assume that 25% of their contributions still come from individuals giving $2,000 to $2,300, that base has now grown from 33,200 individuals to 65,000 in a time span of just three months, and the number of individuals contributing modest amounts... "$5, $10, $20, or whatever they could afford"... is now up from 1.47 million to 2.43 million, each contributing, on average, $185.

Anyone who believes that is actually happening will believe almost anything. So how are they doing it?

In our July 25 column we pointed out that UBS Americas, headed by Robert Wolf... along with George Soros, one of Obama's top two money men... had been accused of highly unethical and illegal banking practices in six months of hearings by the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. According to an article in The Nation, UBS Americas, a subsidiary of UBS, of Zurich, Switzerland, has advised wealthy Americans, including many of our worst villains, how to shelter funds from the IRS, as well as from prosecutors, creditors, disgruntled business associates, family members, and each other.

In a Statement of Facts in the recent criminal trial of former UBS executive Bradley Birkenfeld, it was alleged that UBS took extraordinary steps to help American clients manage their Swiss accounts without alerting federal authorities. For example, UBS advised American clients to avoid detection by using Swiss credit cards to withdraw funds, to destroy all existing off-shore banking records, and to misrepresent the receipt of funds from their Swiss accounts as loans from the Swiss bank. According to The Nation, UBS established an elaborate training program which taught bank employees how to avoid surveillance by U.S. Customs and law enforcement, falsify visas, encrypt communications, and secretly move money in and out of the country... "

It is the perfect instrument for funneling illegal campaign contributions into the coffers of an unscrupulous American politician. Putting two and two together, I suggested that a very wealthy individual, or cartel, wishing to influence the election of the President of the United States, could transfer unlimited sums of money through this device. A U.S. recipient, such as the Obama campaign, could receive hundreds of thousands of individual contributions via Swiss credit card transfers, with fictitious payees being entered by teams of paid staffers working in a "boiler room" setting. The owners of the Swiss accounts would receive periodic statements indicating: a) debits of varying amounts, up to $2,300 each, and b) offsetting credits provided by the cartel, or by the wealthy, but unnamed, "international financier."

For most of the super wealthy, especially those attempting to hide income and assets from U.S. authorities, an unexplained debit and credit of $2,300, or less, would not even raise an eyebrow. So who would ever know the source of such contributions? No one.

Now, in an October 20 article in Newsmax, writer Kenneth Timmerman provides details from Federal Election Commission records that give substantial weight to my theory. In studying Obama's FEC filings, Newsmax found more than 2,000 donors who had given substantially more than their $4,600 limit ($2,300 in the primaries and $2,300 in the General Election). The law requires that such excess contributions must be returned to the donor within 60 days of the donor going over his/her limit. However, many of the donors contacted by Newsmax said that they had not been contacted by the Obama campaign and that they had not received refunds.

But these are relatively minor infractions compared to 66,383 highly suspicious contributions, from 37,265 donors, whose contributions were not rounded to even dollar amounts. For example, Timmerman tells us that John Atkinson, an insurance agent in Burr Ridge, Illinois, gave a total of $8,724.26. He gave in odd amounts such as $188.67, $1,542.06, $876.09, $388.67, $282.20, $195.66, $118.15, and one of $2,300.

Sandra Daneshinia, a self-employed caregiver of Los Angeles, made 36 separate contributions totaling $7,051.12. Thirteen of her contributions were later refunded. However, in an odd coincidence those 13 refunds, in amounts such as $233.88 and $201.44, came to an even $2,300, the maximum amount allowable in any one election.

One contributor interviewed by Newsmax, Ronald J. Sharpe, Jr., a retired schoolteacher from Rockledge, Florida, is reported to have given $13,800... $9,200 over his limit. However, Mr. Sharpe does not remember giving that much money to Obama, nor has anyone from the campaign ever contacted him about a refund.

Of the 66,383 contributions in odd amounts, 44,410 were in unrounded amounts of less than $100, 15,269 contributions were in unrounded amounts of between $101 and $999, and 704 contributions were in odd amounts greater than $1,000.

Lest anyone suggest that these 37,265 donors either emptied their piggy banks or emptied their pockets and purses periodically and just sent it all to Obama, pennies and all, allow me to suggest something a tiny bit more Macheavellian. Those 66,383 contributions are the proceeds of conversions of foreign currency, smuggled into the country in foreign credit card receipts, and converted to U.S. dollars.

According to a Newsmax analysis, the Obama campaign finance reports contain some 370,500 unique names... a far cry from the 2.5 million contributor base claimed by the campaign. Of course, when your money is coming in large chunks from offshore accounts, such as hundreds of thousands of dollars at a time from the Middle East and from Third World African countries, then laundered though UBS accounts in Zurich, it takes a bit of creativity to put authentic-sounding names on all of it for the FEC records.

How massive is this crime? Since the Obama campaign has refused to disclose their complete contributor list (they continue to hide the identities of some 2 million donors), as the McCain campaign has done, Newsmax estimates that "Obama is financing his presidential campaign with anywhere from $13 million to a whopping $63 million from overseas credit cards or foreign currency purchases."

Given the massive voter registration fraud committed by Obama's supporters, the fraudulent votes already cast in early voting by itinerant out-of-state voters, and the massive crime involved in accepting tens of thousands of illegal foreign contributions, John McCain and Sarah Palin simply must close the gap in the closing days of the campaign. If not, we will inaugurate a man on January 20 who will have to be impeached before his wife has a chance to measure the White House for new draperies.

U.S. Headed for Capitalism/Socialism Hybrid

By: Arnaud de Borchgrave

No German minister will have held such sway over Germany's economy since Albert Speer was put in charge of the country's entire production capacities by Adolf Hitler in 1942.

According to the Financial Times, such was the power turned over to German Finance Minister Peer Steinbruck last week. A little late in the day to rattle thousands of German gazillionaires who have long concealed their wealth next door in Switzerland — or further afield in the tiny island nations of the Caribbean, Cyprus, Mauritius in the Indian Ocean, Nauru and Vanuatu in the Pacific, and the lesser-known emirates of the Gulf (e.g., Sharjah, part of the United Arab Emirates).

The global financial meltdown had numerous Paul Reveres as messengers of coming battles. Two years ago, congressional committees heard testimony from experts who described derivatives as "a ticking global time bomb."

Unregulated hedge funds, which have been making 30 percent or more a year for their wealthy clients ($1 million, and $5 million to $10 million initiation fees), were shortcuts to the exploding billionaires club (up from 350 to 1,150 in less than a decade). To make it in the top 25 hedge funds, managers made approximately $400 million a year — each.

Joe the plumber wouldn't know how to describe a hedge fund. Not surprising, as it is a de facto closed club for wealthy individuals and institutions, which use aggressive strategies unavailable to mutual funds, including selling short, program trading, swaps, arbitrage and derivatives.

Two years ago, a top trader at Goldman Sachs was rewarded with a $70 million year-end bonus out of $16.5 billion earmarked for fringe benefits that year. He was insulted. Thought he was worth a lot more. So he turned it down, quit, created his own hedge fund, and made $320 million his first year. Median income for four-person American families: $61,000.

In September's market turmoil, withdrawals from U.S. hedge funds alone hit $43 billion. A total of $150 billion is expected to exit before year's end, which compels managers to sell assets worth about $400 billion. Some fund managers offered to wave fees if their clients agreed to stay on till March. Liquidity is now the mantra for the mega-rich.

Casino capitalism, crony capitalism or bandit capitalism, call it what you will, except democratic. So a course correction to the left in the United States Nov. 4 will surprise no one.

The hedge funds alone produced almost $200 billion for their guilt-edged portfolios — out of $2 trillion. Fund managers take 20 percent of any and all profits on top of 1 percent to 2 percent of assets as annual management fees.

European officials have compared the current global financial upheaval and the European Union's response with the collapse of the Soviet empire beginning Nov. 9, 1989, with the fall of the Berlin Wall and with al-Qaida's Sept. 11, 2001, attacks against the twin towers and the Pentagon, the two symbols of U.S. financial and military power.

The 15 European nations that adopted a common euro currency concluded this was a propitious time to curb superstar emoluments. Similar warnings echoed in London and Washington.

America's European allies are calling for a new Bretton Woods, the historic New Hampshire conference at the end of World War II that created the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund — and acknowledged the United States as the world's financial and economic leader that it has been ever since.

The Europeans have concluded the global nerve center in Washington needs rebooting. Some are even saying a new economic system, a sort of hybrid of capitalism and socialism, will spring from the current wreckage on the edge of the precipice.

State-sponsored recapitalization of banks to avoid a meltdown is the first step in that direction.

The first manifestation of this new economic phenomenon was the way the United States forced nine major banks to accept partial nationalization. In jeopardy now is the system that allowed the United States to borrow $2 billion to $3 billion a day from the rest of the world to maintain the world's highest standard of living, based on conspicuous consumption, at a time of growing world shortages.

Iceland, a NATO ally, was the first "First World" nation to go belly up. The small, riches-to-rags island of 350,000 people, who read more books per capita than any other country in the world, also made a living as banker to a wide variety of tax dodgers.

They were all wiped out, including 300,000 Britishers who kept money on ice below their national radar screens, when Iceland declared bankruptcy and appealed to Russia for a $5 billion loan.

Pakistan, one of the world's eight nuclear powers, and a "major non-NATO ally, was also bankrupt. Its new president, Asif Zardari, who returned from his meeting with President Bush empty-handed, as nothing could be guaranteed pending a clean slate in Washington, flew off to China to seek $1.5 billion.

China is also Pakistan's longtime close friend that has been granted anchorage rights at the new naval base of Gwadar in Baluchistan on the Arabian Sea, near the mouth of the Gulf of Oman and the Persian Gulf. China also has concession rights for developing vast mineral resources near the tri-border area of Pakistan, Iran, and Afghanistan.

The presidential election — short of an October surprise — looms as a likely Republican trainwreck. The postmortems will run billions of words. The national debt during Mr. Bush's eight years in the White House has almost doubled to $10 trillion. And next year's budget is projected to run a $500 billion deficit, a sharp plunge from the $750 billion surplus projected when Bill Clinton left office. Americans without health insurance have grown by 7 million, while average premiums have almost doubled. And U.S. forces have been fighting for a year longer than they did in World War II.

The 83 percent of Americans who have told pollsters they believe the United States is headed in the wrong direction abroad also list "improving America's standing in the world" as a priority objective for the new president. "A genuine and complete reform" of the world's financial architecture, as wide-ranging as Bretton Woods was for the post-World War II world, is now the challenge posed by the European allies.

SENIOR AL QAIDA LEADER REPORTED KILLED IN PAKISTAN

from World-Check

Bilal Abdullah (UID 657012) and Mohammed Asha (UID 652144) are currently on trial in London. They are charged with conspiring to murder and causing explosions. They are alleged to have been behind the June 2007 car bomb attacks in London and at Glasgow's International airport. Asha was reportedly the mastermind behind the attacks and the financier. Both deny the charges. Our Terrorism and Insurgency Research Unit (TIRU) will be monitoring the events closely and updating the profiles with verdicts and sentences if applicable as soon as the information becomes available. ....

Welcome to Islamberg: the terrorists of Middle America?

(Compiler's note: This is a must read article. rca)

By Wes Vernon

The enemy is here?

Investigative reporter Paul Williams has located at least 13 of these facilities in America. They are generally located in remote, rural, or outskirt suburban communities — possibly in an effort to draw as little attention to themselves as possible.

These compounds — at least one of which is about 70 acres — have been described by investigators as having unmarked walls of "gated" structures, with guard shacks where armed men stand ready to ward off any strangers.

They are home to members of Jamaat al-Fuqra ("Community of the Impoverished"). Williams traces the origins of this group to Palestinian cleric Sheikh Mubarak Ali Gilani.

In his book The Day of Islam, the Annihilation of America and the Western World, Williams quotes Gilani as stating that the purpose of his group is to "purify Islam through violence." The gated communities "were set up to serve as havens where young Muslims — primarily inner-city black men who became [Muslim] converts in prison — could begin a new life." The sheikh describes the compounds as "Hamaats."

Anywhere near you?

As of the book's publication (last year), the "communities" were located in Hancock, N.Y.; Deposit, N.Y.; Hyattsville, Md.; Red House, Va.; Falls Church, Va.; Macon, Ga.; York, S.C.; Dover, Tenn.; Buena Vista, Colo.; Talihina, Okla.; Tulane County, Calif.; Commerce, Calif.; and Onalaska, Wash.

All — as you will notice — are located away from densely populated urban centers — the better to avoid curious strangers.

Military-style discipline

The findings of Williams and of Douglas Hagmann, chief investigative officer of the Northeast Intelligence Network (NIN) — focus mainly on the facility at Hancock, N.Y. It is described as a "boot camp with trailers for recruits, a firing range, and a military training area replete with obstacle courses." It also contains "two central structures for religious training, education, and community gatherings."

Its own university

Sheikh Gilani has even ventured into academia to further his cause. Every year, his International Quranic Open University sends scores of American Muslims to Pakistan "reportedly for guerilla training." They are granted a degree in higher education on the condition that they return to the "Hamaats" (encampments) back in their home countries. Gilani has written that the highest duty of the university students is to wage jihad against "the oppressors of Muslims."

Citizens of what is called "Islamberg" and the other Fuqra communes are required to sign an oath saying, "I shall always hear and obey and whenever given the command, I shall readily fight for Allah's sake."

Terrorists in your neighborhood?

The aforementioned Douglas Hagmann — whose NIN agency is a multi-state licensed private investigative company with many Fortune 500 clients, and a member of the International Counter-Terrorism Officers Association — has submitted the following among the results of his probe in Hancock, much of it from people living near the compound:

1. "We hear bursts of gunfire all the time, and we know that there is military-like training going on there. Those people are armed and dangerous."
2. "We don't even slow down when we drive by. They own this mountain and they know it, and there is nothing we can do but move, and we can't even do that. Who wants to buy a property next to that?"

For obvious reasons, Hagmann said, the residents did not want to be identified. They are easy targets, as it is.

Small explosions and automatic and large caliber weaponry are heard. No one not affiliated with their organization is allowed to enter. No marked law enforcement vehicle is ever seen entering there. Most visitors to the compound — numerous and frequent — use late model SUVs, many with license plates from Michigan, Ohio, South Carolina, and Tennessee. Unmarked box trucks deliver unknown items, many drivers appearing to be of Middle Eastern origin. Many guests are in Middle Eastern attire.

Crime

Over the years, writes Williams, "Numerous members of Jamaat al-Fuqra have been convicted in courts of such crimes as conspiracy to commit murder, firebombing, smuggling, and workers compensation fraud." Others are leading suspects in ten unsolved assassinations and seventeen fire bombings.

In 2001, a resident of the Red House, Va., community was charged in the murder of a sheriff's deputy. And by 2004, investigators had evidence purportedly linking the group to D.C. Beltway "sniper killer" John Allen Muhammad and London "shoe bomber" Richard Reid. Also, Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl — according to news dispatches — was killed while trying to secure an interview with Sheikh Gilani in Pakistan.

Different tactics in different locations?

Not all of the thirteen Islamic compounds are exactly alike. Some are more overtly troubling than others. Locals who have reported back to their home news media and in web postings leave the impression in the composite that some of the camps have a better sense of public relations with the neighboring community.

As noted above, the Hancock, N.Y., and Red House, Va., facilities have caused deep concern about the issue of militarism. In York, S.C., on the other hand, Gilani's operation is — on its face — not seen as necessarily militarist. But reports of the more militant operations elsewhere have circulated — mostly by word of mouth — and locals there tend to believe the facility's "open community events" are for show — public relations — or as one suspicious York resident has put it — "a clever PR effort to put a friendly face on an organization that has a much darker history."

Reports not pretty

On a PBS news program, reporter Deborah Amos featured findings by investigator Susan Fenger, who had probed the group in Colorado. She says there are numerous links between Al-Fuqra and al-Qaeda.

Law enforcement, anyone?

The authorities, local and federal, appear very reluctant to deal with what are obviously training sites for jihad. What does it take to galvanize them into action? Are they afraid? Afraid of harassment accusations from the ACLU? Afraid of being demagogued by politicians who argue that we can't take preventive action until millions are killed? What do we do then? Read them their Miranda rights? What does it take?

What we need on Capitol Hill is a revival of the House and Senate committees that used to investigate subversion on our soil. Don't hold your breath for that to happen. Any chance the major presidential candidates might say something about this? Now we're really dreaming over the top.

Powder-laced letters sent to banks in 9 cities

WASHINGTON – At least 30 letters containing suspicious powder have been mailed to Chase banks in nine cities but so far appear to be harmless, authorities said Tuesday.

The FBI said it was investigating "a series of letters sent to banks around the country."

"These threat letters contain a powder substance," the FBI said in a statement. "At this point, field tests on the powder have been negative. Additional testing will be completed. Even sending a hoax letter is a serious crime."

A law enforcement official said the letters were mailed to Chase bank branches in or near Atlanta; Chicago; Columbus, Ohio; Dallas; Denver; Newark, N.J.; New York City; Oklahoma City; and Washington.

The letters all appear to be from the same source and were sent from Texas, the official said. They began showing up at the banks on Monday, according to the official who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the matter publicly.

A city official in suburban Chicago, where two letters showed up at a Chase credit card processing center, said they were mailed from Amarillo, Texas. ....

Offshore Oil Rigs Risk Hitting CW Dumps, Expert Says

Companies scouring the New Jersey coastline for new sources of oil and natural gas might unintentionally release U.S. chemical warfare material submerged in the Atlantic Ocean during the 20th century, the Press of Atlantic City reported Sunday (see GSN, Oct. 19, 2006).

Between World War I and the early 1970s, the U.S. Army plunged roughly 64 million pounds of chemical weapons into U.S. waters. Coordinates for many of the dumping sites were not recorded, and ocean currents might have shifted some of the lethal materials, which include mustard blister agent and sarin and VX nerve agents, according to a Congressional Research Service report published last year.

Material dropped near New Jersey beginning in 1957 included 48 1-ton containers of lewisite, 4,577 bulk containers of mustard agent, nearly 9,000 M55 rockets carrying VX or sarin and 38 bulk containers filled with the nerve agents.

"If you put an oil platform on top of one of those piles, it will be a concern. You don't want to be on a platform on top of this stuff," said environmental health expert Richard Albright. “There is enough of this stuff out there that they will want to check and see if the area is clear."

In September, U.S. lawmakers voted to permit oil and gas exploration 50 miles from the east and west coastlines. States must sign off on drilling before work could begin. Approval would not be needed to drill farther than 100 miles from shore.

No scientific studies have examined the potential effects of oil drilling on the chemical weapons deposits, Albright said.

"If they hit a site with their depth charge, there is going to be a problem. There's a risk there, but not enough to not do the drilling," he said, adding that breaking open a chemical-weapon container “could be a threat to the guys who may be breathing it before they even know it” (Donna Weaver, Press of Atlantic City, Oct. 19).