"A nation's best defense is an educated citizenry" - Thomas Jefferson ------- Our enemy is coming again and we must be prepared ... our worst must be better than their best! – The Center for Strategic Information Application (CSIA) provides focused news - occasional analysis and interpretation ---- Recommended searches "absolutely" -"must read" - "troubling" - "9/11" - "jihad" - "sharia" - "Federal Reserve" - "Sibel".
HARTFORD, Conn. – Howard Rosenblatt voted for U.S. Sen. Christopher Dodd five years ago. He won't do that again.
"It's time for Chris to resign," said the 62-year-old owner of Rosenblatt's department store in Naugatuck, Conn., a working-class borough of more than 30,000. "He sits on the Senate banking commission, and he had his hands on funny money loans."
Earl Reilly, a 59-year-old factory worker from Naugatuck, shares Rosenblatt's anger with the state's senior senator.
"Don't get me started on Dodd," he said. "He's been doing the job too long, and he's got a hole in his canoe and it's sinking."
While Dodd, 64, has only recently found himself in the nation's political hot seat because of his role in the AIG bonus debacle, it has become clear that his issues with voters back home have been festering for two years. The AIG controversy appears to have exacerbated his popularity problems. ....
Four Oakland police officers were shot and critically wounded this afternoon and a suspect killed after a car stop went bad.
Two of the officers were gunned down about 1:15 p.m. after they pulled over a car in the 7400 block of MacArthur Boulevard, not far from the Eastmont Town Center. Two other officers were shot two hours later when a SWAT team went after the suspect, who had barricaded himself in an apartment building at Hillside Street and 74th Avenue.
The suspect, who has not been identified, shot at the officers, who "returned fire in defense of their lives," said Officer Jeff Thomason, a department spokesman. The suspect, whom police believe was acting alone, was killed.
"We've received four officers in the trauma center," said Patricia VanHook, a Highland Hospital spokeswoman who said no other information was available.
About 100 officers were gathered outside the entrance to the hospital's emergency room, waiting desperately for information about their wounded friends and colleagues. Some of them were wearing SWAT gear, while others were wearing baseball jerseys after having raced from a game.
While the Alameda County coroner was called to the hospital in response to the shooting, information could be slow in coming, Thomason said.
"This is a highly sensitive situation that we're dealing with right now," he said. "We're still trying to notify family members that their family members were hurt."
First reports of the incident came from a 911 call at 1:16 p.m., reporting that two officers had been shot, possibly with an assault-type rifle. The suspect fled from the scene, sparking a huge manhunt that involved officers from at least five different law enforcement agencies.
Another 911 call reportedly told police that the suspect was in an apartment building just blocks from the original shooting. Officers went to the building and went into the building, where the final shootings took place.
Oakland police opened a substation at the Eastmont Mall in 1992, responding to neighborhood complaints about crime and violence in the area. But the substation, built in an old tire shop, did not end the neighborhood's problems.
In 1996, a rowdy rap concert in the mall turned into a melee, with a crowd lobbing bottles and rocks at police, cars and buses. Some of the concert-goers started racing their cars up and down the streets, and two men died after their car crashed through the fence of a nearby school playground.
In 1999, an Oakland police technician was shot at outside the police substation. In 2002, Michelle Horton of San Leandro was shot and killed as she drove on Bancroft Avenue near the mall.
Chronicle staff writers David R. Baker and John Wildermuth contributed to this report
U.S. law-making is riddled with slapdash, incompetence and gamesmanship
By Terence Corcoran
Helicopter Ben Bernanke’s Federal Reserve is dropping trillions of fresh paper dollars on the world economy, the President of the United States is cracking jokes on late night comedy shows, his energy minister is threatening a trade war over carbon emissions, his treasury secretary is dithering over a banking reform program amid rising concerns over his competence and a monumentally dysfunctional U.S. Congress is launching another public jihad against corporations and bankers.
As an aghast world — from China to Chicago and Chihuahua — watches, the circus-like U.S. political system seems to be declining into near chaos. Through it all, stock and financial markets are paralyzed. The more the policy regime does, the worse the outlook gets. The multi-ringed spectacle raises a disturbing question in many minds: Is this the end of America?
Probably not, if only because there are good reasons for optimism.
This audio will be heard more & more -- it is time that "We the People" of these United States present a stimulus of our own to our current and soon to be past elected government leaders. The gov't has long forgotten that they work for us!
"Outrage" is the word on everyone’s lips to describe the fat bonuses being paid with taxpayer funds to the failed executives at AIG -- and it is an outrage.
It’s an outrage that the American people are being asked to pay for the bad behavior of people who should have known better, be they reckless traders on Wall Street or reckless borrowers on Main Street.
But the cure for our outrage is not merely, as President Obama is demanding, that AIG be prevented from paying its executives. The $165 million in planned bonuses -- as manifestly undeserved as it is -- is chicken feed compared to the $170 billion in taxpayer funds AIG has received so far.
Nor is it acceptable to ask Americans to keep throwing their tax dollars at failed companies and their leaders.
The answer is an old fashioned one: AIG should choose between receivership or bankruptcy. It should not be allowed to choose more bailouts from the taxpayer.
Restore the Rule of Law: Allow Failing Corporations to go Bankrupt
Under U.S. law, Chapter 11 bankruptcy allows a company to reorganize. Chapter 7 allows a company to dissolve itself.
The choices for AIG, as both an insurance and non-insurance company, are more complicated, but ultimately boil down to the same options. And for other companies either receiving or looking to receive a bailout from the taxpayers, the option should instead be bankruptcy.
Bankruptcy would send a needed message to U.S. investors: Don’t assume the government will bail you out when you do something stupid.
And most importantly, bankruptcy would replace the rule of politicians over U.S. financial institutions with the rule of law.
Geithner Didn’t Inherit the Policy of Throwing Billions at Failing Companies -- He Helped Create It
Because when it comes to Washington’s handling of the financial crisis, so far we’ve had the rule of politicians, not the rule of law.
Most prominent among the politicians in question is Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.
As Americans’ level of outraged has risen, so has the level of finger pointing by Geithner and others for the mess we’re in.
But Treasury Secretary Geithner is disingenuous at best and untruthful at worst when he says that he “inherited the worst fiscal situation in American history.”
The truth is that Secretary Geithner didn’t inherit the policy of throwing billions of taxpayer dollars at failing companies -- he helped create it.
Even before he was Treasury Secretary -- when he was still head of the New York Federal Reserve -- Geithner was so deeply involved in the government’s bail out of Bear Stearns, its take over of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and its bailout of AIG that this was the Washington Post’s headline from September 19, 2008:
“In the Crucible of Crisis, Paulson, Bernanke and Geithner Forge a Committee of Three”
The first meeting of the first bailout -- of Bear Sterns -- was held in Geithner’s office. And the first meeting of what has become a $170 billion bailout of AIG was held -- where else? In Geithner’s New York Fed office.
Why Not Bankruptcy for AIG? Because Wall Street Wouldn’t Have Done As Well
From the outset, Geithner was central to the developing policy of having the taxpayers bail out ailing financial institutions like AIG rather then allow them to go bankrupt. And for months now, we’ve been told that these bailouts were necessary to avoid a wider, cataclysmic, financial meltdown.
But now it’s clear that other, less noble, considerations were at play.
As the Wall Street Journal editorialized yesterday, the real outrage over the AIG bailout isn’t executive bonuses, it’s that billions in taxpayer funds intended for AIG have been passed through to benefit foreign banks and Wall Street behemoths like Goldman Sachs.
And as former AIG CEO Hank Greenburg testified last October, these financial institutions wouldn’t have faired as well if AIG had filed for bankruptcy protection rather than do what it did, which was to negotiate a bailout with Timothy Geithner’s New York Federal Reserve.
Here’s how Greenburg put it:
“Although AIG stockholders could have fared better if the company had filed for bankruptcy protection, other stakeholders -- like AIG’s Wall Street counterparties in swaps and other transactions -- would have fared worse.”
For the Cost of Bailing Out AIG, Every American Household Could Have Free Electricity For a Year
So now everyone is outraged, and rightly so. But the lavish executive bonuses being paid with taxpayer funds are just the beginning of the story.
So far, the American taxpayers are on the hook for $170 billion to AIG -- that’s an astounding $1,224 per taxpayer.
What else could we have done with all this money?
$170 billion would pay for more than doubling the Navy’s fleet of aircraft carriers.
$170 billion would pay for a four-year education at a public university for more then two million Americans.
$170 billion would cover the electricity bill of every household in America for an entire year.
When You Reward Failure, All You Get is More Failure
What Washington should learn from all this outrage is to return to the common sense that should have guided it all along: When you reward failure, all you get it more failure.
A company that needs a $170 billion taxpayer bailout is a failed company. The executives that led that company are failed executives. But instead of having to face the consequences of their failure responsibly through bankruptcy or receivership, AIG and its Wall Street “counterparties” are being rewarded for their recklessness -- with our money.
Thanks to the Bush-Obama-Geithner policy of bailing out failing companies, we now have the worst of all possible scenarios:A taxpayer subsidized, government supervised private company; an unsustainable public/private hybrid that is too public to make its own decisions and too private to be responsible to the taxpayers that are keeping it alive.
Outrages like the fat cat bonuses currently dominating the headlines will only continue as long as the rule of politicians supplants the rule of law on Wall Street.
Congress should rethink this entire process. The dangers of a domino-like financial meltdown are real. But so, too, is the danger that the outrage of the American people will reach the point that we no longer trust the dire warnings -- or the righteous indignation -- coming from Washington.
Mexican drug cartels are now as heavily armed as America’s enemies during the Iraq war and are extending their bloody conflict into the United States, say security experts.
By Tom Leonard in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico
Law enforcement agencies in American cities close to the border with Mexico — including San Diego in California, and El Paso in Texas — are “gearing up” for street confrontations with the drug gangs, which are armed with rockets and grenades and have brought death and chaos south of the border.
The confidence of the cartel chiefs has increased so much that they are moving to affluent neighbourhoods in America to kidnap Mexican businessmen and smuggle them across the border to be ransomed, a private security consultant told The Daily Telegraph.
Van Bethea, the operations director for the Steele Foundation, an American private security company that has protected foreign businessmen in Mexico as well as Iraq, said the two countries were now comparable in terms of the potential danger.
“Quite frankly, in Mexico you can’t be armed enough,” said Mr Bethea. “The dynamic of this combat is approaching the early days of the Iraq war. The cartels’ men are well trained, disciplined and are armed with the latest weaponry, including armour-piercing bullets, rocket-launchers and grenades.”
His claims were backed by Congressmen in Washington, who have said money and guns smuggled from the US were fuelling violence that was now creeping over the border.
In Ciudad Juarez, a Mexican border city of 1.5 million people, five deaths a day in January and February were attributed to drug violence.
But the recent arrival of more than 10,000 troops and federal agents has succeeded in quelling much of the violence. Soldiers have disarmed and replaced a local police force, many of whose members were believed to have been working for the cartels.
But despite the success in Ciudad Juarez, officials estimate that the Mexican cartels are already established in 230 American cities. The gangs have been blamed for killings as far afield as Anchorate, Alaska, and Atlanta, Georgia, as well as 366 kidnappings in Phoenix, Arizona, last year alone.
Mr Medea said many Western businesses, including British companies, had invested heavily in the Mexican factories and were unable to give up doing business in the country easily.
The cartels’ ability to smuggle both guns and kidnap victims into Mexico has been facilitated by lax US border controls, although the Americans are starting to tighten up.
Janet Napolitano, the US homeland security secretary, has admitted that “carloads of cash and mega-weapons” were being transported out of America and into Mexico to fuel the fighting.
President Barack Obama will discuss the Mexican drug violence when he meets Felipe Calderón, the country’s president, in Mexico next month.
Her commentary included Taitz' recent interviews, on which WND has reported, with Justice Antonin Scalia and Chief Justice John Roberts.
The blogger, Nancy Armstrong, had blogged:
"Dr. Orly Taitz, both a lawyer and naturalized citizen, has personally taken on the issue of Obama's eligibility. There is nothing wrong with her questioning this issue because Obama has literally hidden every evidence of his past. What has he hidden? All school records, passport records, employment records (forget his stupid story about ice cream and an ice cream shop….I believe it is another one of Obama's lies.) and his REAL birth certificate.
"Dr. Orly Taitz wouldn't even have to question anything if Obama was transparent about his life, something he continues to fight with law firms all over the country. Transparency would end all issues, but we will never see that from Obama…," the blogger continued.
"Dr. Taitz has been racing across the country, often times missing her three sons, to meet with Supremes….particularly Scalia and Roberts to further her 'quo warranto' case now at the door of the Supreme Court."
The screen view is posted here:
Screen shot of Kansas blog visitor, IP address 209.144.137.1, listed as the U.S. Supreme Court
Armstrong told WND she was writing about the issue because a friend asked her to do it.
"I just happened to go in and check. I brought my husband in right away. He was dumbfounded. There was the Supreme Court," she said. "It did surprise me.
"It may be that [Taitz] has checkmated the Supreme Court .... which means they are trying to dispense with her and her case," she said.
WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama's status as a "natural born citizen." The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."
Some of the lawsuits question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama's American mother, some suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.
Other challenges have focused on Obama's citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.
The only statement Obama officials have made to WND about the claims is that all such allegations are "garbage."
(Compiler's note: A must read - we will be hearing more about this in days to come. Even the main-stream media will eventually have to pick this up and report on it.)
By Bob Unruh
A Californiaattorney battling on a number of fronts to obtain documentation of Barack Obama's eligibility to be president is asking the FBI and U.S. Secret Service to investigate suspected "tampering" at the U.S. Supreme Court.
Orly Taitz, who is pursuing nearly half a dozen causes through her Defend Our Freedoms Foundation, says the issue of Obama's eligibility to meet the Constitution's demand for a "natural born" president has been before the Supreme Court at least four times.
But she wonders whether the justices actually were given the pleadings to review.
"I believe … that there was tampering with documents and records by employees of the Supreme Court and the justices never saw those briefs," she alleges in a letter to the FBI's Robert Mueller, the Secret Service's Mark Sullivan and Attorney General Eric Holder.
"Three hundred five million American citizens … need to know whether a foreign national is usurping the position of the president and the commander in chief," she wrote.
Taitz raises questions about "forgery of court records, tampering with court records, cyber crime, erasing of court records from the docket, fraud, mail fraud, wire fraud and other related crimes."
Specifically, she points to the handling of her own case, Lightfoot v. Bowen, which was submitted to the Supreme Court on an emergency basis. Although it was scheduled for a conference, no hearing ever was held.
Taitz notes that references to the case were erased from the docket of the Supreme Court on Jan. 21, shortly after Obama, the defendant, met with eight of the nine justices behind closed doors.
It happened just two days before her case was scheduled to be reviewed in conference.
Secondly, Taitz notes that in her conversation with Justice Antonin Scalia at a book-signing in Los Angeles several weeks ago, he appeared to have no knowledge of the cases that had been submitted.
She said she mentioned her case and those brought by Cort Wrotnowski, Philip Berg and Leo Donofrio.
"In the presence of several attorneys, law students and Secret Service agents Justice Scalia kept saying that he didn't know anything … even though all of the plaintiffs have received notification that all of those cases were reviewed by all nine justices," she said.
Taitz said she's also concerned that the Supreme Court docket was somehow modified.
"Did somebody from outside break and enter into the computer system of the Supreme Court or was it done by one of the overzealous employees who wanted to keep Obama in the White House?" she asked.
"I demand to see the printout of entries of both internal docket seen by justices and the external docket seen by the public to verify if those were identical at all times, particularly between January 20th and January 23rd," she said.
She also raised the possibility that justices' signatures may have been "stamped" on documentation.
"Due to the … great urgency of the matter in relation to the national security of the United States … I demand immediate investigation of this matter," Taitz wrote.
Taitz also is developing a Quo Warranto case that has been submitted to Holder.
Essentially, the case demands to know what authority Obama is using to act as president. An online constitutional resource says Quo Warranto "affords the only judicial remedy for violations of the Constitution by public officials and agents."
As WND reported, Taitz already has submitted a motion to the Supreme Court for re-hearing of Lightfoot v. Bowen, a case she is working on through Defend Our Freedoms alleging some of her documentation may have been withheld from the justices by a court clerk.
WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama's status as a "natural born citizen." The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."
Some of the lawsuits question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama's American mother, some suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.
Other challenges have focused on Obama's citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.
Although Obama officials have told WND all such allegations are "garbage," here is a partial listing and status update for some of the cases over Obama's eligibility:
New Jersey attorney Mario Apuzzo has filed a case on behalf of Charles Kerchner and others alleging Congress didn't properly ascertain that Obama is qualified to hold the office of president.
Pennsylvania Democrat Philip Berg has three cases pending, including Berg vs. Obama in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, a separate Berg vs. Obama which is under seal at the U.S. District Court level and Hollister vs. Soetoro a/k/a Obama, (now dismissed) brought on behalf of a retired military member who could be facing recall to active duty by Obama.
Leo Donofrio of New Jersey filed a lawsuit claiming Obama's dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court but denied a full hearing.
Cort Wrotnowski filed suit against Connecticut's secretary of state, making a similar argument to Donofrio. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court, but was denied a full hearing.
Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes headlines a list of people filing a suit in California, in a case handled by the United States Justice Foundation, that asks the secretary of state to refuse to allow the state's 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office. The case was dismissed by Judge Michael P. Kenny.
Chicago attorney Andy Martin sought legal action requiring Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle to release Obama's vital statistics record. The case was dismissed by Hawaii Circuit Court Judge Bert Ayabe.
Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan sought a temporary restraining order to stop the Electoral College vote in North Carolina until Barack Obama's eligibility could be confirmed, alleging doubt about Obama's citizenship. His case was denied.
In Ohio, David M. Neal sued to force the secretary of state to request documents from the Federal Elections Commission, the Democratic National Committee, the Ohio Democratic Party and Obama to show the presidential candidate was born in Hawaii. The case was denied.
Also in Ohio, there was the Greenberg v. Brunner case which ended when the judge threatened to assess all case costs against the plaintiff.
In Washington state, Steven Marquis sued the secretary of state seeking a determination on Obama's citizenship. The case was denied.
In Georgia, Rev. Tom Terry asked the state Supreme Court to authenticate Obama's birth certificate. His request for an injunction against Georgia's secretary of state was denied by Georgia Superior Court Judge Jerry W. Baxter.
California attorney Orly Taitz has brought a case, Lightfoot vs. Bowen, on behalf of Gail Lightfoot, the vice presidential candidate on the ballot with Ron Paul, four electors and two registered voters.
Today's news reports on Pres. Obama's visit to California include a touching interaction with an ex-convict who has lost his job. But his comments about making sure that illegal aliens keep THEIR jobs illustrates the common occurrence of really smart people at the top of our government who just don't get it. They don't understand that there are a limited number of U.S. jobs and that when you fill those jobs with foreign workers (including illegal ones) American workers lose out. Look at what happened . . .
This is from Scott Wilson's report on Mr. Obama's visit in southern California in the March 19 edition of the Washington Post:
In one exchange, a man who said he was a convicted felon, thanked Obama for listening to him, then told him he had recently been laid off from Toyota after 13 years on the job.
'What am I going to do?' he asked.
After a pause, Obama told him, 'You have made amends for your past mistakes, you are rehabilitated, and you have proven yourself in the job market. Based on what you are telling,' the President said, 'what you are facing has less to do with the fact that you are a felon, than that the job market is really tight right now.'
This is the point you want the President to say that he'll do everything he can to help people like the questioner to be able to find a job later this year.
But the very next paragraph in the Post said that Mr. Obama pledged the opposite:
Obama pledged to work for comprehensive immigration reform but said it 'would not be a free ride' for those here illegally. He said successful reform would entail better control of the border -- an issue he said he intends to work on with President Felipe Calderon of Mexico in a visit there next month -- and a process that would allow 'those who have been here for a long time to come out of the shadow' and become citizens.
Studies show that most ex-convicts who have been released from prison are less-educated, the very same characteristic shared by most illegal aliens. The estimated 7 million illegal aliens who are working are holding jobs that are best suited for the hundreds of thousands of Americans being released from prisons.
We went through this same intellectual disconnect with Pres. Bush. Remember his grandiose State of the Union address in which he announced a program to ensure that people being released from prisons would find jobs so they can turn their lives around?
The problem was that Mr. Bush insisted on importing around 140,000 foreign workers a month in addition to enticing other foreign workers to come here illegally to take the jobs that the ex-cons needed. Not surprisingly, Mr. Bush's program for ex-cons never really took hold.
Well, we have a new President with the same set of blinders. And we have a news media that don't notice the disconnect, either.
I don't see any evidence that anybody thought it was strange that Pres. Obama could show such concern and compassion for the recently unemployed ex-con and then say that he intends to keep as many jobs tied up with illegal foreign workers as possible.
And now this morning, Fox News is reporting from sources inside DHS that worksite raids have for all practical purposes been suspended.
Very strange. The raids have been opening up jobs for unemployed Americans, primarily those at the bottom of the economic ladder. A new report from the Center for Immigration Studies finds that every job opened by driving out an illegal alien was quickly filled by a legal worker and that wages went up for all workers at those worksites after the raids.
Why would Pres. Obama want to stop helping American workers like that?
The answer is that political pandering to the radical extreme of his ideological base blinds him to even considering that illegal immigration has anything to do with unemployed Americans.
Bankers on Wall Street and in Europe have struck back against moves by US lawmakers to slap punitive taxes on bonuses paid to high earners at bailed-out institutions.
Senior executives on both sides of the Atlantic on Friday warned of an exodus of talent from some of the biggest names in US finance, saying the “anti-American” measures smacked of “a McCarthy witch-hunt” that would send the country “back to the stone age”.
There were fears that the backlash triggered by AIG’s payment of $165m in bonuses to executives responsible for losses that forced a $170bn taxpayer-funded rescue would have devastating consequences for the largest banks.
“Finance is one of America’s great industries, and they’re destroying it,” said one banker at a firm that has accepted public money. “This happened out of haste and anger over AIG, but we’re not like AIG.” ....
Yesterday we emailed you the link to a video of an Islamist matter-of-factly discussing how easy it would be to smuggle anthrax across our border and kill over 300,000 people. Since then over 40,000 people viewed the video, demonstrating the reach ACT! for America currently has.
Juxtapose that video with the comments recently made by Homeland Security director Janet Napolitano. As the commentary below notes, Napolitano referred to Islamist terrorism as “man-caused disasters.”
As Diana West asks, “Is this a joke?” Unfortunately, no. Political correctness is running so rampant in Washington that the person charged with protecting our “homeland security” twists herself into an absurd rhetorical pretzel in order to avoid using the “I” word. Imagine the scorn that would have been heaped on Franklin D. Roosevelt if, after the attack on Pearl Harbor, he declared war on “man-caused disasters”! That tells how much things have changed in Washington.
We asked yesterday “Why is our shared ACT! for America mission so important? Why is the Islamist threat so dangerous? Why is it essential that we overcome political correctness in America and awaken citizens everywhere?”
You see, we are not only fighting the evil of radical Islamists who are intent on destroying our way of life and replacing our law with shariah law. We are also forced to contend with the willfully self-deceived in our government who are more concerned with appearing respectable than with protecting our safety and liberty.
What can YOU do TODAY that will help us take one more step forward in combating this lunacy?
First, forward this email to everyone you know, and urge them to log on to www.actforamerica.org and sign up for our daily email alerts.
And second, call the Department of Homeland Security “Comment Line,” 202/282-8495, and let them know, in a firm but respectful way, that you are outraged and deeply concerned by Napolitano’s characterization of terrorism.
The war on "man-caused disasters"
But what if the jihadist is a woman?
We're not fighting a War On Terror anymore. And we certainly aren't fighting a defensive action against the global jihad and/or Islamic supremacism. No, what we're doing is fighting a War on "man-caused disasters."
Feel better? Feel more politically correct? Less bigoted, racist, and Islamophobic? Good, because that's all you're going to get from this. You certainly aren't going to get any insight into who the enemy is, or why he (or she, Janet, you sexist) is doing what he is doing.
"'Away From the Politics of Fear,'" from Spiegel, March 16 (thanks to all who sent this in):
Janet Napolitano, 51, is President Obama's new Homeland Security Secretary. She spoke with SPIEGEL about immigration, the continued threat of terrorism and the changing tone in Washington.
SPIEGEL: Madame Secretary, in your first testimony to the US Congress as Homeland Security Secretary you never mentioned the word "terrorism." Does Islamist terrorism suddenly no longer pose a threat to your country?
Napolitano: Of course it does. I presume there is always a threat from terrorism. In my speech, although I did not use the word "terrorism," I referred to "man-caused" disasters. That is perhaps only a nuance, but it demonstrates that we want to move away from the politics of fear toward a policy of being prepared for all risks that can occur.
Is this a joke, a late-night skit's attempt to skewer PC lingo?
No, this is PC lingo. Having abandoned the idiotic but at least somewhat bellicose moniker "War on Terror," we are now into, what...the "Intervention into Man-Caused Disaster."
Of course, there are two PC problems with the "nuance" Mzzz Napolitano claims.
There is that pesky term "man"--sure to rile the feminists, let alone the female suicide bombers. Brace for the day when Secretary Janet discusses "Person-Caused Disasters."
But that leaves the fact that the kind of "persons" who cause the "disasters" in question believe that Allah, not man (and certainly not woman) causes everything. Remember Operation Infinite Justice? That was the name the US tagged onto the military campaign against the Taliban until Muslims complained (p. 166) on the grounds that they believe only Allah dispenses justice, infinite or otherwise. (And that was enough for Uncle Sam to changes names, natch.) This line of religious belief surely makes "Man/Person-Caused Disaster" practically a term of defamation. I'm thinking Madame Secretary will have to go with something else, maybe renaming the whole agency for further sensitivity's sake. Department for the Prevention of Allah-Caused Disasters, anyone?
Thefts increasingly disrupting many important infrastructure systems
When I recently told a friend of mine who is in the home remodeling and construction business that I was thinking of installing copper gutters to increase the value of my home in preparation to sell it next spring, his response was: “Yeah, and you’ll be awakened some night to the sound of your gutter and downspout being ripped down by copper thieves, too.”
Before my friend had even closed on the new home he recently bought, thieves had ripped out nearly all the copper wiring and had made off with the air conditioning unit and hot water heater.
It’d slipped my mind that copper theft is still a serious problem, even with the price of a pound of copper down to around a buck fifty from the $4 a pound it was selling for not long ago.
Ask anyone who has been in the building construction business and they’ll tell you copper theft has been a growing problem for at least the last half-decade.
But copper thievery is much more than a pricey nuisance to the construction industry. Today, organized copper theft is considered a homeland security problem, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).
In September, the Bureau’s Criminal Investigative Division’s Criminal Intelligence Section issued an unclassified Intelligence Assessment, “Copper Thefts Threaten US Critical Infrastructure,” that spells out the chronic problem copper theft poses to national security.
"The public safety impact could be significant," said the FBI analyst who prepared the report.
“Copper thieves are threatening US critical infrastructure by targeting electrical sub-stations, cellular towers, telephone land lines, railroads, water wells, construction sites, and vacant homes for lucrative profits,” the FBI’s intelligence assessment stated. “The theft of copper from these targets disrupts the flow of electricity, telecommunications, transportation, water supply, heating, and security and emergency services and presents a risk to both public safety and national security.”
Copper thefts increasingly are disrupting many important infrastructure systems like transportation, telecommunications, emergency services, airports, hospitals and agricultural systems.
The FBI intelligence analyst interviewed nearly 150 people from local and state law enforcement agencies and officials from a variety of private sector infrastructure companies. According to the analyst, while everyone had something to say about the problem of copper thefts, "nobody had the big picture."
"Until recently, the implications of these crimes fell below the radar of federal law enforcement," the analyst said, "but now, the serious issues surrounding copper theft are known and being addressed."
The intelligence advisory noted that in April, five tornado warning sirens in the Jackson, Mississippi area did not warn residents of an approaching tornado because copper thieves had stripped the sirens of copper wiring, rendering them inoperable.
The month before, in Polk County, Florida, nearly 4,000 residents were left without power after half-a-million in copper wire was stripped from an active transformer at a Tampa Electric Company power facility.
From 2006 to 2007, AT&T reported that thefts of copper bus bars, grounding wires or cable from cell sites in North Texas rose more than 200 percent. Nationwide, AT&T said copper theft had cost the company nearly $6.7 million in 2007.
“Every outage caused by copper theft has left customers and communities isolated and possibly vulnerable in an emergency,” spokesman Dave Pacholczyk said at the time.
From January 2007 through July 2007, an organized copper theft ring busted by the FBI made off with nearly $500,000 worth of copper grounding bars and wiring from more than 130 cell phone tower sites in 17 different jurisdictions in the Eastern District of Virginia and eastern North Carolina.
A few weeks ago, about 3,000 Windstream Communications phone and broadband customers in Washington County, Pennsylvania were left without service for a day after thieves cut lines and fiber optic cables to steal copper wiring.
Earlier in November in Goshen and Montgomery, New York, power was cut off to hundreds after thieves stole copper wire from electric utility poles.
In Rancho San Diego, an area of unincorporated San Diego County, California, electricity recently was knocked out when thieves cut down and made off with copper power lines.
Between October 2007 and March 2008, $90,000 worth of copper was stolen from 11 power substations in northwestern Montana belonging to the Bonneville Power Administration and Flathead Electric Cooperative.
In Greenville, South Carolina in July 2006, a man was electrocuted trying to steal copper from a Duke Energy substation.
More disturbingly, late last year thieves cut out a 300 foot section of copper wire from a Federal Aviation Administration air traffic control tower in Ohio, threatening communications between pilots and air traffic controllers.
Copper theft increased more than 1,000 percent from 2005 to 2006. A study by the Department of Energy found that in 2007, copper theft cost the electric power industry about $1 billion – and is growing. From January 2006 to March 2007, electric utility companies in 42 states reported 270 copper thefts.
The problem isn’t likely to abate anytime soon, especially with some analysts predicting that the price of copper will hover around $3 a pound through 2012.
According to the FBI’s intelligence assessment of the problem, “the global demand for copper, combined with the economic and home foreclosure crisis, is creating numerous opportunities for copper-theft perpetrators to exploit copper-rich targets. Organized copper theft rings may increasingly target vacant or foreclosed homes as they are a lucrative source of unattended copper inventory.”
The FBI stated that “current economic conditions, such as the rising cost of gasoline, food, and consumer goods, the declining housing market, the ease through which copper is exchanged for cash, and the lack of a significant deterrent effect, make it likely that copper thefts will remain a lucrative financial resource for criminals.”
Continuing, the FBI pointed out that “China , India and other developing nations are driving the demand for raw materials such as copper and creating a robust international trade. Copper thieves are receiving cash from recyclers who often fill orders for commercial scrap dealers. Recycled copper flows from these dealers to smelters, mills, foundries, ingot makers, powder plants and other industries to be re-used in the United States or for supplying the international raw materials demand.”
And “as the global supply of copper continues to tighten, the market for illicit copper will likely increase,” the FBI warned.
Maricopa County, Arizona Farm Bureau President Steven Bales, Jr. told a state committee during hearings on the matter that copper theft “has rapidly escalated into an epidemic.”
The Copper Theft Prevention Act of 2008 was introduced in the House just prior to the August congressional recess, but so far no action has been taken on it since it was sent to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
The legislation is aimed at protecting the nation’s critical infrastructure that relies on copper. The bill would “require certain metal recyclers to keep records of their transactions in order to deter individuals and enterprises engaged in theft and interstate fencing of stolen copper.
Meanwhile, the FBI said, “industry officials have taken some countermeasures to address the copper theft problem” which “include the installment of physical and technological security measures, increased collaboration among the various industry sectors, and the development of law enforcement partnerships.”
And in lieu of congressional action, “many states are also taking countermeasures by enacting or enhancing legislation regulating the scrap industry––to include increased recordkeeping and penalties for copper theft and noncompliant scrap dealers.”
Tim Neal of Miller County was shocked recently when he heard a radio program about a strategic report compiled by state and federal law enforcement agencies to combat terrorism.
Titled “The Modern Militia Movement,” the report is dated Feb. 20 and designed to help police identify militia members or domestic terrorists. Red flags outlined in the document include political bumper stickers such as those for U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, talk of conspiracy theories such as the plan for a mega-highway from Canada to Mexico and possession of subversive literature.
But when Neal read the report, he couldn’t help but think it described him. A military veteran and a delegate to the 2008 Missouri Republican state convention, he didn’t appreciate being lumped in with groups like the Neo-Nazis.
“I was going down the list and thinking, ‘Check, that’s me,’ ” he said. “I’m a Ron Paul supporter, check. I talk about the North American union, check. I’ve got the ‘America: Freedom to Fascism’ video loaned out to somebody right now. So that means I’m a domestic terrorist? Because I’ve got a video about the Federal Reserve?”
Blogs and Web sites frequented by people interested in civil liberties issues have been overloaded in recent days with comments from angry readers who view the document as a precursor to an American KGB spying on U.S. citizens.
“The government is out of control, we are just trying to survive,” wrote one poster who identified himself as John Adams.
But state law enforcement officials said the report is being misinterpreted. Lt. John Hotz of the Missouri State Highway Patrol said the report was compiled by the Missouri Information Analysis Center based in Jefferson City and comes purely from publically available, trend data on militias.
Hotz said MIAC, which opened in 2005, is a “fusion center” that combines resources from the federal Department of Homeland Security and other agencies. It was set up to collect local intelligence to better combat terrorism and other criminal activity, he said.
“All this is an educational thing,” Hotz said of the report. “Troopers have been shot by members of groups, so it’s our job to let law enforcement officers know what the trends are in the modern militia movement.”
The report’s most controversial passage states that militia “most commonly associate with third-party political groups” and support presidential candidates such as Ron Paul, former Constitutional Party candidate Chuck Baldwin and Bob Barr, the Libertarian candidate last year.
Hotz said using those or similar factors to determine whether someone could be a terrorist is not profiling. He said people who display signs or bumper stickers from such groups are not in danger of harassment from police.
“It’s giving the makeup of militia members and their political beliefs,” Hotz said of the report. “It’s not saying that everybody who supports these candidates is involved in a militia. It’s not even saying that all militias are bad.”
Not everybody agrees. At a “Tea Party” to protest wasteful government spending Thursday in Flat Branch Park, several people displaying the Revolutionary War-replica “Don’t Tread On Me” flag were upset to learn the MIAC report lists the banner as a “militia symbol.”
“That’s insane,” said Doug Wendt looking at the MIAC document. “That is not a militia symbol. That is American history. This is historic. The only animosity” American colonists “ever directed with this was towards England.”
Roger Webb, president of the University of Missouri campus Libertarians, also took offense. “It’s absolutely obscene,” he said of the report. “It seems like they want to stifle political thought. There are a lot of third parties out there, and none of them express any violence. In fact, if you join the Libertarian Party, one of the things you sign in your membership application is that you don’t support violence as a means to any ends.”
Neal, who has a Ron Paul bumper sticker on his car, said the next time he is pulled over by a police officer, he won’t know whether it’s because he was speeding or because of his political views.
“If a police officer is pulling me over with my family in the car and he sees a bumper sticker on my vehicle that has been specifically identified as one that an extremist would have in their vehicle, the guy is probably going to be pretty apprehensive and not thinking in a rational manner,” Neal said. “And this guy’s walking up to my vehicle with a gun.”
(Compiler's note: Sometimes it takes someone from 'The Outside' to look in and see what idiots we Americans can be!)
Source: A friend
Now let me get this straight: You hired a man with virtually no experience, and mysterious past who might not even be a natural born citizen to be your president... and who derives all his experience from the seat of all corruption... Chicago. His first act was try to give a trillion of your dollars to Wall Street crooks with absolutely no accountability and he is still trying mightily..
The people who already got your money were caught trying to buy a jet plane bought outside your country. The parties who have received your money and spent it are already legend. We think that within six months the next monies will be partied out and they will be back for more!
His nominee for Sec of the Treasury is a tax evader. He was confirmed nevertheless. The next three whom he nominated were all tax evaders. Two of them had to withdraw on the same day.
Your President promised that absolutely no lobbyists would be part of his administration. Already three of the biggest lobbyists in the country are on his team. Who fed you Americans a whopping dose of stupid?
We grieve for the loss of your Constitution, common sense, and morality. I doubt if the Crown would take you back.
(Compiler's note: This is one change you must read to believe.)
Also requires new evaluation of 'mandatory' service for all
By Bob Unruh
The U.S. House of Representatives has approved a plan to set up a new "volunteer corps" and consider whether "a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people" should be developed.
The legislation also refers to "uniforms" that would be worn by the "volunteers" and the "need" for a "public service academy, a 4-year institution" to "focus on training" future "public sector leaders." The training, apparently, would occur at "campuses."
Act of 1973, acts that originally, among other programs, funded the AmeriCorps and the National Senior Service Corps.
It not only reauthorizes the programs, butalso includes "new programs and studies" and is expected to be funded with an allocation of $6 billion over the next five years, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
Many, however, are raising concerns that the program, which is intended to include 250,000 "volunteers," is the beginning of what President Obama called his "National Civilian Security Force" in a a speech last year in which he urged creating an organization as big and well-funded as the U.S. military. He has declined since then to elaborate.
WND reported when a copy of the speech provided online apparently was edited to exclude Obama's specific references to the new force.
The new bill specifically references the possibilities "if all individuals in the United States were expected to perform national service or were required to perform a certain amount of national service."
Such new requirements perhaps, the legislation notes, "would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds."
No one, apparently with the exception of infants, would be excluded:
"The means to develop awareness of national service and volunteer opportunities at a young age by creating, expanding, and promoting service options for elementary and secondary school students, through service learning or other means, and by raising awareness of existing incentives."
"It becomes forced labor and like the practice of another era, presses American citizens of all ages and creeds, unknowingly into military service," the commentary said.
"On paper, H.R. 1388 is the 'Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act'; the more innocuous sounding 'The Give Act,' for short.
"The Give Act puts the finishing touches to Public Allies New Leadership for New Times, modeled after Saul Alinsky's 'Peoples Organizations' and operating under Michelle Obama," the commentary said.
"Michelle was also a pioneer in the social entrepreneur movement – leaders who create new approaches and organize to provide new solutions to social problems. Like most things Saul Alinsky, H.R. 1388 sounds noble in stating why wide-sweeping change is necessary," the commentary said.
"H.R. 1388 goes straight to the heart of volunteerism in America, impacting everything from the lemonade stands of neighborhood children, to the residents of senior citizens homes. … The Give Act puts tow-headed school children and silver-haired seniors in the official uniform of the new State, and encompasses every walk of life in main-street America," the commentary said. "Whether you are young or old, or firmly believe that volunteering means you are offering your time to the good of community work, you will be pressed into Obama's National Civilian Community Corps."
Groups of such "volunteers," would, under the legislation, be "grouped together as appropriate in campuses for operational, support, and boarding purposes. The Corps campus for a unit shall be in a facility or central location established as the operational headquarters and boarding place for the unit. … There shall be a superintendent for each camp."
The plan generated this concern from Resistnet.com: "This is the equivalent of brown shirts."
Another portion of the bill talks about a "service learning" plan that will be "a mandatory part of the curriculum in all of the secondary schools served by the local educational agency."
A forum participant noted, "I wonder what's going to happen to those who refused to 'volunteer.' Maybe they will be put into a different 'campus.' I guess we will soon find out."
Formal announcements about the plan suggested something far different, picking a provision far down in the 200 pages of legislation to highlight.
According to a Business Wire statement released by Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., the bill "would formally authorize federal support for establishing the anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks on America as a National Day of Service and Remembrance."
That provision is tucked into the far reaches of the legislation, but Schumer discussed it as if it were the primary point.
"I could not be more proud to work to pass this important provision," said Schumer. "September 11 should not only be a day for mourning – it should be a day to think about our neighbors, our community, and our country. We can take a tragic day in our nation's history and turn it into a force for good."
On the Albany Insanity blog, this concern was raised: "What gives the government the right to require individuals to give three years service under the guise of 'volunteer' service? It is not explicit exactly who is required but I think they get the bill passed and then iron out the details. It talks about uniforms and 'camps.' They revise the word 'camps' and call it 'campus.' There is language about Seniors and Community organizations."
The blog noted, such work forces would be used for "pressing national and local challenges" that apparently could range from weather disasters to economic uncertainty.
At a Republican website, officials noted it authorizes funding for an Education Corps, Healthy Futures Corps, Clean Energy Corps, Veterans' Corps and Opportunity Corps.
The bill was sponsored by Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, a Democrat from New York. It was approved in the House 321-105, with mostly GOP opposition. It now goes to the Senate.
WND reported earlieron Obama's Colorado Springs campaign speech when he sought a civilian security force as big and well-funded as the military – with a budget of hundreds of billions of dollars.
WND later reported when the official website for Obama, Change.gov, announced he would "require" all middle school through college students to participate in community service programs.
However, after a flurry of blogs protested children being drafted into Obama's proposed youth corps, officials softened the website's wording.
Originally, under the tab "America Serves," Change.gov read, "President-Elect Obama will expand national service programs like AmeriCorps and Peace Corps and will create a new Classroom Corps to help teachers in under served schools, as well as a new Health Corps, Clean Energy Corps, and Veterans Corps.
"Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by developing a plan to require 50 hours of community service in middle school and high school and 100 hours of community service in college every year," the site announced.
Joseph Farah, founder and editor of WND, used his daily column first to raise the issue and then to elevate it with a call to all reporters to start asking questions.
"If we're going to create some kind of national police force as big, powerful and well-funded as our combined U.S. military forces, isn't this rather a big deal?" Farah wrote. "I thought Democrats generally believed the U.S. spent too much on the military. How is it possible their candidate is seeking to create some kind of massive but secret national police force that will be even bigger than the Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force put together?
"Is Obama serious about creating some kind of domestic security force bigger and more expensive than that? If not, why did he say it? What did he mean?" Farah wrote.
The Obama administration dropped a proposal to require some disabled veterans to pay for medical treatments through their private insurance companies, heeding a chorus of outrage from veterans groups and Capitol Hill lawmakers who said the idea was immoral, unconscionable and un-American.....
OSLO (Reuters) - Investments of $750 billion could create a "Green New Deal" to revive the world economy and protect the environment, perhaps aided by a tax on oil, the head of the U.N. environment agency said on Thursday.
Achim Steiner said spending should focus on five environmental sectors including improved energy efficiency for buildings and solar or wind power to create jobs, curb poverty and fight climate change.
"The opportunity must not be lost," Steiner, head of the U.N. Environment Program (UNEP), told Reuters of a UNEP study that will be put to world leaders meeting in London on April 2 to work out how to spur the ailing economy.
The UNEP report said investments of one percent of global gross domestic product, or about $750 billion, could bankroll a "Global Green New Deal" inspired by the "New Deal" of U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt that helped end the depression of the 1930s.
Investments should be split between more energy efficient buildings, renewable energies, better transport, improved agriculture and measures to safeguard nature -- such as fresh water, forests or coral reefs, it said.
Thursday's study adds details of spending after UNEP called for a Green New Deal late last year.
Steiner also said that the world urgently needed funds to jump start a U.N. deal to fight global warming, due to be agreed in Copenhagen in December to succeed the U.N.'s Kyoto Protocol beyond 2012.
He floated the possibility of taxing oil in rich nations of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) to help a new pact become the cornerstone of a greener economy.
"If, for argument's sake, you were to put a five-year levy in OECD countries of $5 a barrel, you would generate $100 billion per annum. It translates into roughly 3 cents per liter," he said.
UNNOTICED
"It would be almost, if not totally, unnoticed by the consumer," he said, especially since oil prices have fallen from more than $140 a barrel at mid-2008 peaks to about $40.
A barrel of oil contains 158 liters and OECD consumption is about 20 billion barrels a year, he said. "This is just one example, there may be many others," of funding, he said.
"I am concerned about the prospect of a meaningful deal in Copenhagen if there is not a significant financial package on the table," he said. Cash would encourage poor nations to step up actions to curb rising greenhouse gas emissions.
"The argument that we cannot afford this does not, on any serious analysis, hold much water -- especially given the cost to the global economy of failure to act on climate change," he said.
Carbon markets, which could also be a source of funds to help fight climate change, were unlikely to contribute enough cash in early years of a new climate deal, he said.
Steiner said there were promising signs that economic stimulus packages by many nations, ranging from the United States to China, were being tailored to help a shift toward greener growth and away from dependence on fossil fuels.
The U.N. Climate Panel says that greenhouse gases from burning fossil fuels are a prime cause of warming that will cause more heatwaves, droughts, rising sea levels and more powerful storms.
WASHINGTON -- Attorney General Eric Holder said some detainees being held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, may end up being released in the U.S. as the Obama administration works with foreign allies to resettle some of the prisoners.
Eric Holder
Mr. Holder, in a briefing with reporters, said administration officials are still reviewing individual cases of the approximately 250 detainees to determine which will be put on trial and which may be released to comply with plans to close the detention facility by next year.
Six weeks into his tenure, Mr. Holder is still trying to assemble much of the Justice senior leadership, with several nominees awaiting Senate confirmation. He said he has reviewed the department's handling of white-collar criminal cases in response to the financial crisis and is considering ways to increase coordination on financial fraud among federal prosecutors and state officials. He said he is trying to increase the budget dedicated to white-collar crime, while maintaining funding for national security.
European justice ministers met with Mr. Holder earlier this week and pressed for details on how many Guantanamo prisoners the U.S. planned to release domestically, as part of any agreement for allies to accept detainees. Mr. Holder said U.S. officials would work to respond to the questions European officials have over U.S. Guantanamo plans.
For "people who can be released there are a variety of options that we have and among them is the possibility is that we would release them into this country," Mr. Holder said. "That process is ongoing and we've not made any determinations or made any requests of anybody at this point."
Among the detainees whose fate remains undetermined are 17 ethnic Uighurs, from the Central Asian region of China, who have been ordered released by a judge. The U.S. has refused to turn the men over to China, which considers them part of an separatist group.
Mr. Holder is planning to visit Mexico next month to meet with his counterparts and discuss efforts to fight the trafficking of guns from the U.S. into Mexico and the drug trade from Mexico into the U.S.
"The Mexican government has been courageous in the way it has confronted the problems that now challenge it," Mr. Holder said, noting the violence that has resulted from battles against the drug cartels in Mexico.
(Compiler's note: Your must read and understand this teaching by our enemy.)
from Jihad Watch
Yemen Times columnist Mofeed Al-Gaad insists that jihad is not terrorism, that America and Israel are the real terrorists, and that jihad warfare is a religious duty for Muslims. If by "terrorism" is meant a strike on innocent civilians in order to demoralize an enemy, then the application of the word does indeed rest on one's conception of who is innocent and who is the enemy. But note that al-Gaad is subscribing to a doctrine that mandates the subjugation of non-Muslims under Islamic rule, by violent means if necessary, and their forced acceptance of second-class status. That makes it incumbent upon all free people, and all people who value the concepts of human rights that have evolved out of the Judeo-Christian tradition and become universal (except where Sharia norms prevail), to resist this man's religious obligation.
"Jihad is a duty, not terrorism," by Mofeed Al-Gaad in the Yemen Times, March 19 (thanks to James):
Massacres are being committed in different parts of Arab world amidst the complete silence and quiet absence of the brotherly soul of the Arab people. In the past, the enemies of Islam realized that their aims could not be fulfilled via military force because the Arab people have a strong faith in their religion that makes them sacrifice themselves for its defense. That is to say, events and life experiences made the enemies of Muslims realize that it is impossible to defeat those Muslims who have strong faith in the idea of the jihad.
Hence, the enemies of Islam sent missionaries to Arab world in order to kill the idea of the jihad inside every Muslim mind. Those missionaries had already tried to use their various weapons to change the beliefs of Muslims and kill the soul of jihad. In the past they failed to affect the conception of jihad among Muslims or force them to forget their duties toward their brothers. These days however, it seems that the enemy achieves whatever he failed to do in the past.
Under the umbrella of terrorism, the enemy succeeded to erase the very word of jihad from the Islamic dictionary, burying its corpse in a deep grave. If any Muslim who possesses the soul of jihad tries to take revenge on those who kill innocent children and elderly people, he will be accused of being a terrorist who disturbs the safety and stability of the world. Consequently, America and Israel are seizing this opportunity to accomplish their colonial aims by destroying the Islamic cities and by killing Muslims in different parts of the Arab world.
To prove this point, let us look at what is happening in Iraq and Palestine. Under the umbrella of emancipating the Iraqi people from Saddam’s dictatorial regime, the United States of America destroyed the great country of Iraq, killing its heroes, raping its virgin girls, absorbing its valuable wealth, and slaughtering its faithful leaders in the process. Likewise, Israel accused the poor people of Gaza of being terrorists who disturb the stability of both Israelis and Palestinians, ignoring the fact that it is the Israelis who are the savage criminals who spread corruption in Arabic Palestine. The Israelis killed innocent children and elderly people, burned the beautiful plants, and destroyed the sacred places in the virgin land of Palestine.
Perhaps most importantly, the Arab leaders who claim that they represent their people accused those mujahedeen fighters who defend their people and their land as aggressive jihadists. Thus they are participating with the enemies of Islam in changing the concept of jihad into another concept called ‘terrorism.’ This is why the Arab leaders looked silently at the savage massacres committed by Israel against our brothers in the Gaza strip.
Moreover, America and its daughter Israel describe the fighters of the Hamas movement who resist the invaders as being a terrorist group. Here is a question that poses itself to these aggressive countries: is the one who defends his homeland, fights the invaders, and protects his people a terrorist? That most certainly is not true. All the cultures of the world see that defending one’s homeland and fiercely fighting invaders is a duty on the shoulders of all people residing in the invaded land.
America and Israel claim that Hamas fighters are the real terrorists who are disturbing the stability of Israel, neglecting the fact that Israelis, represented by their cruel officials, are the real terrorists. They are the ones who killed the innocent children and slaughtered the elderly people, throwing all Security Council and United Nations resolutions to the wind. The real picture of Israel must be shown in an obvious fashion to all people all over the world. Israelis are the real terrorists who assault humanity and violate international laws. The unjust Israeli war against Gaza is a clear example of this cruel and savage country that disturbed the international stability and aroused chaos and horror in the world.
Dear readers, we ought to pay attention to the devilish aims of our enemy who desires to delete the duty of jihad from the Islamic dictionary. In this situation in which the enemy of Islam makes a lot of Muslims unable to distinguish between jihad and terrorism, we should consult our holy book, the Quran. God in the Holy Quran makes jihad a duty on the shoulders of every Muslim who is able to fight. Therefore, we should be rational and support the flag of jihad wherever we find it.
Posts
![[Eric Holder]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_viy1F8I7odRnYYRqeYDTKBVtPchFqV6LWUcb0EZ8oaa5zvrx380tGuNIUzY2vXI7a7SZL2EvJvkBBPYY-wkmV7GhTprTlxg-cqxuikdmbHPdGnTXxJnNtr1vvN2kFpQA67VE3NxvRI8h3cCuZRCzSvYQ=s0-d)
