Saturday, April 16, 2011

Sedition Plot Thickens - Obama Officials Implicated

 
THREE OBAMA OFFICIALS IMPLICATED IN SEDITIOUS PLOT TO DISMANTLE US CONSTITUTION
URGENT UPDATE: NEW EVIDENCE COMES OUT OF OBAMA ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS' INVOLVEMENT IN PLAN TO EFFECTUALLY REWRITE THE U.S. CONSTITUTION AND BILL OF RIGHTS. SOROS-FUNDED EFFORT TO FORCE AMERICA INTO ACCEPTING A MARXIST MANIFESTO BY 2012 UNDERWAY IN OBAMA FACTION, LED BY KEY EXECUTIVE BRANCH APPOINTEES.
Just days after Marxist Free Market Saboteur Steve Lerner's plans for mass May Day national economic disruptions have become known via secretly caught exposure of a taped meeting with other extremists, now new evidence implicates the Obama White House in sedition. Regulatory Czar Cass Sunstein; his wife Samantha Power, Senior Director of the National Security Council; and Department of Justice Attorney General Eric Holder are key players in a related plot to dismantle and destroy America's Constitutional republic.
In April 2005, Sunstein opened a conference at Yale Law School sponsored by George Soros' Open Society Institute entitled, "The Constitution in 2020." The event was designed as a forum to craft the agenda and assign the tasks for changing the nature and interpretation of the Constitution into a fully "progressive" Marxist Manifesto by the year 2020. Sunstein was a natural fit for the conference, as his 2004 book, "The Second Bill of Rights: FDR'S Unfinished Revolution and Why We Need It More than Ever" proposed a radical new document to replace America's traditional Bill of Rights.
The conference was co-sponsored by the American Constitution Society, another hard Left Marxist organization which seeks to rewrite the Constitution. Attorney General Eric Holder not only previously served on the ACS Board of Directors, but is keynote speaker for their 2011 Convention.
The Obama faction onslaught against America is coming from all sides. A union thug with White House connections plots to crash the American economy while high ranking Obama officials seek to subvert the Constitution and Bill of Rights. We MUST compel Congress to open investigations and HALT the Obama wrecking crew that is daily dismantling America!
New audio has just been released which outlines a very real plan to collapse the American economy — including crashing the stock market and "bring down the banks" — in an effort to finally and irrevocably bring about the fundamental change, radical change, Obama promised. The sinister plan is set to take place the first week of May… and evidence suggests the plan may go all the way to the White House.
Steve LernerSteve Lerner is well known in union thug circles as the guy who uses intimidation to ensure success. March 19, 2011 Steve Lerner met with Abby Scher of Brooklyn College CUNY, Gerardo Dominguez of the Mexican Americans Workers Association, John Atols of ACORN and a number of other openly Marxist activists. Surrounded by fellow radicals , Mr. Lerner, unaware he was being recorded, felt comfortable enough to lay out his step by step plan to "put a boot in the wheel" of the American economy – crashing the stock market and orchestrating a complete banking collapse – in an effort to force Marxism upon the masses. Full audio with transcripts of Lerner's plot can be found on You Tube, at The Blaze website where this story broke, and all over the Internet.
Lerner identifies this as a union-driven plan, presumably crafted by his cronies at the SEIU, and he calls for the aid of community organizers. But evidence suggests Lerner may already have the assistance of the Community Organizer in Chief – Barack Hussein Obama.
Obama SEIU SpeechWhite House visitor logs show that Stephen Lerner has visited the White House repeatedly over the last two years. At least one of these visits was arranged by the office of then White House Political Director Patrick Gaspard – one of Lerner's previous SEIU colleagues and former leader of one of the most notoriously militant SEUI chapters. Gaspard, not coincidentally, is a close Obama advisor who is now the Executive Director of the Democratic National Party and a key player on Obama's 2012 election team.
Obama made clear in a now infamous 2008 campaign rally that SEIU's agenda is his agenda. Obama led a SEIU member chant after recalling how he started his early "organizing career" with SEIU troops on the ground, and went on to declare, "Just imagine what we can do together. Just imagine a President whose life's work is your (SEIU's) work"! It seems we no longer need to imagine. The present occupant of the Oval Office has brought sedition to the presidency — the highest office in the land. Barack Obama's own front group "Organizing for America" helped stage the recent Wisconsin "Days of Rage" protests that were notable for union-led violence, death threats and radical acts of intimidation, and now it appears he and his administration may be connected to a far-left coalition actively plotting to collapse the American economy.
My friends, Stephen Lerner's closed-attendance discussion at The Left Forum was not some simple academic and theoretical discussion of what revolutionary resistance might look like. It was a high-level presentation of a very real, well thought out plan that is underway for economic terrorism, and a recruitment call to leftwing radical leaders of other organizations to join in it. Stephen Lerner's terrorist plans, and actions of incitement and enlistment are outright sedition, all potentially prosecutable offenses.
In normal circumstances, we could count on the Department of Justice to investigate and uphold the rule of law. But alas, as we have seen with Eric Holder's refusal to prosecute colleagues, supporters and friends of Obama, including the election fraud and racist thuggery at the hands of the New Black Panthers, the once venerable DOJ is a rogue agency in a rogue administration, and can no longer be trusted to do its duty. Why have not the murky, possibly orchestrated causes behind the terrible economic crisis of the 2008 national fiscal collapse been investigated and disclosed to the nation? No, we must instead call upon this 112th Congress, and demand an immediate investigation of Stephen Lerner, and all of those who participated in his conspiratorial call to anarchy, sedition and economic terrorism on March 19. That investigation must include disclosure of all the participants and plotters lurking behind the scenes who are actively working to disrupt and destroy America — even if that road leads us directly to the White House.
Organizing for America WisconsinThis is no longer a matter of speculation. The Marxist plan to smash our commercial republic is alive and active within the corridors of power in America as never before. Their plans to launch their latest assault on these United States is scheduled for, of course, May Day — May 1, 2011 — and has been sounded to their foot soldiers as a very real and potentially calamitous call to harm our nation. We were warned when Obama first appeared on the national scene that he was at the least an academic Marxist surrounded by radicals, and a menace to the security, sovereignty and prosperity of the nation. Now there is evidence in abundance to confirm that judgment. We MUST force Congress to act NOW – before the evil forces that mean to destroy America are able to implement their plans. The very survival of our country is at stake if we do not take seriously the threat within. We implore you, fax Congress TODAY.
For America,
Patriot PAC – www.PatriotPAC.org

To send a check, please mail to:
PatriotPAC
PO Box 131728
Houston, TX 77219-1728

   

Thursday, April 14, 2011

British police go to great lengths to accommodate Islamic demands.

 
Many Americans fail to recognize the power of Islamic influence in our own country because they tend to treat all religions equally and they have been conditioned to accept political correct points of view. In spite of the vast wealth at the disposal of Middle East oil countries, money that can and does buy influence, America lacks the population percentages of Muslims that have exploded (no pun intended) in Great Britain and Europe. The wealth of influence buying that has impacted America has blinded the eyes of our news media and many of our politicians. It may just be a matter of time before we begin to see at home what is happening now on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean. Here is a preview to give some thought about. The first comes from the Australian web site Winds of Jihad.
Police banned from wearing the Union Jack flag on their uniform

    Metropolitan Police officials have now banned armed cops at Heathrow Airport from wearing the tiny Union Jack flag badge on their clothing.
Alternative symbol is needed for the Red Cross

    A Labour minister has sparked controversy by claiming that an alternative symbol is needed for the Red Cross because of the logo’s supposed links to the Crusades.  Foreign Office minister Chris Bryant  wants to replace it with a red “crystal”.
Police banned from wearing the Union Jack flag on their uniform
Metropolitan Police officials have now banned armed cops at Heathrow Airport from wearing the tiny Union Jack flag badge on their clothing.  These Union flag badges have been worn to show support for British military troops. Approximately 70% of these armed cops have served in the Forces and/or have children or other family members currently serving in Afghanistan. Now who might you imagine would find the British flag as "offensive"?  Who might be whining and complaining about it? Should we suspect muslims and their muslim wannabee sympathizers?
 Clearly muslims have made an issue - worldwide - of crosses - or any object bearing any form of a cross (including National flags) as being offensive to them and clearly many dhimmis are tripping over each other to pander to these muslims -- here are just a few instances:
A Labour minister has sparked controversy by claiming that an alternative symbol is needed for the Red Cross because of the logo's supposed links to the Crusades.  Foreign Office minister Chris Bryant  wants to replace it with a red "crystal".
The Police are not only submitting to outrageous demands, they had to suffer abuse when the Royal Anglian Regiment returned from active duty in Iraq and were insulted by howling Muslim protesters.
Police dogs are now being fitted with booties

    Because Muslims consider dogs “unclean”,   police dogs must not leave dog footprints and scent when used to check for bombs, etc in mosques and muslim homes.
Police dogs are under scrutiny
It was reported years ago that Muslims were offended by Police dogs when Police were undertaking routine duties like inspecting mosques for bombs or houses that might be hiding terror suspects. The British Police sprung immediately into “dhimmitude” mode and came up with a novel solution.
Police dogs are now being fitted with booties so those muslim perceived "unclean" police dogs will not leave dog footprints and scent when used to check for bombs, etc in mosques and muslim homes. 
So it comes as no surprise that there are two sets of rules for Police now. One set for how to arrest Muslims and one set for infidels. All symbols that were once respected are now reviled.
There also has been a message circulating the Internet about some new rules of procedure issued to the Bedfordshire Police Dept. in England on how they may conduct investigations in Muslim homes. The rules at first seemed a bit over the top so I attempted to verify them first. To my surprise this Internet rumor has a lot more truth to it than most so I am going to print the rumor first and the official response next.
THESE ARE INSTRUCTIONS HANDED OUT TO ALL OFFICERS AT C.I.D COURSES AND ANTI-TERRORISTS COURSES IN THE BEDFORDSHIRE FORCE/SERVICE

UK's Bedfordshire Police's rules regarding terrorists and dangerous criminals

If they're non-Muslim

* Consider the most opportune time of day to be able to arrest suspects with minimum resistance

* Apply all necessary force to enter the premises and arrest suspects accordingly.

If they're Muslim:

* Community leaders must be consulted before raids into Muslim houses.

* Officers must not search occupied bedrooms and bathrooms before dawn.

* Use of police dogs will be considered serious desecration of the premises.

* Cameras and camcorders should not be used in case of capturing women in inappropriate dress.

* If people are praying at home officers should stand aside and not disrupt the prayer. They should be allowed the opportunity to finish.

* Officers should take their shoes off before raiding a Muslim house.

* The reasons for pre-dawn raids on Muslim houses needs to be clear and transparent.

* Officers must not touch holy books or religious artefacts without permission.

* Muslim prisoners should be allowed to take additional clothing to the station.

With this continuing appeasement, no wonder it's now predicted that Britain will become an Islamic state by 2070. (Time to think about your children.)
The official response and Detailed Analysis from the web site Hoax Slayers adds more credibility to the rumor than it does to discredit it.
This message claims to contain a list of instructions given to police in Bedfordshire in the UK regarding police entry to Muslim households. The list provides information about how police should conduct themselves in Muslim households so that their activities do not offend the household's residents with regard to their religious beliefs and customs. The protest message decries what it considers to be a continued appeasement of Muslim citizens in the UK and asks recipients to pass on the information so that other British residents will be aware of the issue.

As detailed in the Bedfordshire Police statement quoted below, there are strong similarities between many of the points listed in the protest message and the actual set of guidelines provided to police. That said, however, the following information should be noted:

    * The advice given to police about entry to Muslim households consists of guidelines only, not concrete instructions or ironclad rules as suggested in the message. The information given to police makes it clear that the guidelines "should not impinge on, or supersede the objectives of the police action".

    * The guidelines used by Bedfordshire Police are derived from National Home Office / Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) guidelines. Thus, the guidelines were not created specifically by the Bedfordshire Police.

    * The Bedfordshire Police statement notes "that the same considerations and respect for faith and diversity are always applied no matter what the belief of the household, Muslim or otherwise."

In March 2010, the Bedfordshire Police published the following statement on its website in response to an enquiry about the protest email from a member of the public:

    Dear Member of the Public,

    REQUEST UNDER THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT Reference No F-2010-00207 With reference to your request for information received on 26th February 2010, I note you seek access to the following information:

    The following is an item circulating on the internet which is self explanatory.

    Will you please verify to the authenticity of it as true copy or otherwise, put out by the Bedfordshire Police for guidance of its officers.

    I am required by the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (The Act) to handle all requests in a manner that is blind to the identity of the requestor. Any information released in response to a request is regarded as being published, and therefore in the public domain without caveat.

    In response to your questions, I have today decided to release the information requested in full as I can see no harm to any individual, the community, the police service or other bodies. After considering whether releasing this information will affect the good order and functioning of community, government or other public service affairs, I believe it is in the public's interest the information be released. The information lies within the arena of public safety and may provide common benefit to members of the community. Releasing this information will not identify any individual or compromise any court case, law enforcement or investigation.

    With reference to your recent enquiry and in response to your question I can confirm the following: Response – The item you refer to is incorrect and is not ‘Bedfordshire Police’s rules regarding terrorists and dangerous criminals’ as the website claims.

    Bedfordshire Police does have guidance for entering households which was derived from National Home Office / Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) guidelines. While the information on the website is not the same, there are some similarities to our guidance for some basic considerations when entering Muslim households, especially for pre-planned operations, which is summarised below:

        * Innocent occupants of a household such as women and children may be present and Police should never under-estimate the impact of any loss of their personal dignity. Muslim women may be more flexible in their choice of dress at home amongst family members than outside and police entry could contribute to a loss of dignity. Opportunity should be afforded for occupants to cover themselves sufficiently to comply with the etiquettes of "Hijab" if a non-family member is present - and that includes the head for women.

        * The same level of etiquette and respect should be observed in Muslim households as in a Muslim place of worship, such as a Mosque.Female officers must be available wherever practicable to deal with females and there should not be any cross gender contact by the officers.

        * Muslim prisoners should be allowed to take additional clothing to the station. All clothing needs to remain pure for prayer and the denial of appropriate clothing will be a very serious issue for the individual.

        * If possible, officers should not take shoes into the houses, especially in areas that might be kept pure for prayer purposes - nor should they step on any prayer mats etc. This might be difficult in some cases but needs to be seriously considered - plastic overshoes may be an option in some cases if the cleanliness/ purity of the overshoes can be maintained.

        * Non-Muslims are not allowed to touch Holy Books, Qurans, or religious artefacts without permission. In the current climate the justification for pre-dawn raids on Muslim houses needs to be clear and transparent.

        * The aftercare of those not detained must be considered. Sufficient arrangements should be made to offer alternative accommodation to those who are removed from their homes whilst lengthy searches are carried out. If they are not removed from the house they should be allowed some flexibility and privacy.

        * Deployment of family liaison officers should be considered to minimise the impact on the families and the local community.

    This guidance is purely of an advisory manner and was written in 2005 at the time of the increased tensions following the 7/7 bombings and applies in the main to Counter Terrorism operations. It is made clear the advice should not impinge on, or supersede the objectives of the police action.

    The same considerations and respect for faith and diversity are always applied no matter what the belief of the household, Muslim or otherwise.
Back home in America, in the land of the free, we know that both the Dept. of Homeland Security and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) were created by Congress following the Muslim hijacked airliners were used to attack the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001. We know that the TSA, which is in charge of airport security screening of all passengers sees nothing wrong with body searches and pat-downs of 6-year old girls and Catholic nuns but they must treat Muslim women wearing burqas and nijabs with special respect and not do the same thing.
We know from reading news reports that male perverts wearing full body covering burqas have been caught in female public rest rooms. We know that bank robbers have walked into banks wearing the full body covering burqas for disguise. We know that at least one state, New Jersey, allows photos of Muslim women wearing full face covered burqas  to be on their driver's licenses and that those same driver's licenses are used for photo-identification at voting booths.
There have been numerous complaints filed by the Hamas terrorist-financing group CAIR, the Council on American Islamic Relations, to prevent Muslims from being singled out and stereotyped by law enforcement. Yet there has been no other religious or ethnic group responsible for terrorist attacks in America except Muslims. It is only a matter of time before we begin to see the same accommodations granted to Muslims in America that were reported above in England.

 

Wednesday, April 13, 2011

Who the Hell writes these rules and procedures, anyway?

It has become all too common to read in our newspapers that some outrageous act committed by someone in law enforcement is defended by higher officials because, "They were following procedures." Why is it that none of the equally outraged responses ever ask, "Who the hell writes these rules and procedures, anyway?"

The threat of being a victim of police violence has become so real there is even a group called Oath Keepers who try to get police officers to swear they will not follow any order that violates the Constitution. Of course, the Oath Keepers, for all their good intentions, are having pipe-dreams if they think a police officer is given enough information to help him/her decide that an order is valid. All the cop hears is the briefing about the drug dealer being inside the house or the bank robber or whatever and they must bust down the door and "use appropriate procedures" to protect themselves and secure the premises. I'm not picking on the Oath Keepers, just pointing out the weak link in their purpose. But what about other agencies of the government who also "follow proper procedures" and in doing so, violate the rights of innocent citizens?

Here are a few examples from the news today and a few old ones to think about.

Six year old child patted down by TSA agents.

Selena Drexel is the mother of 6-year old Anna Drexel. Mrs. Drexel appeared on ABC's "Good Morning America" and told them that her family was returning home from a vacation earlier this month when their 6-year  daughter Anna was selected for a pat-down by Homeland Security TSA agents when they passed through the airport in New Orleans, Louisiana.

Quoting from an AP story, “In a statement, the Transportation Security Administration says the officer followed proper procedure but that the agency is reviewing its screening policies.”

Proper procedures, my ass! Watch the video and decide for yourself. After the pedophiles were outed by the Catholic Church how do we know they didn't get jobs working for the Transportation Security Administration?


There is another video on YouTube posted by an eyewitness to another pat-down of a child last November 19th at Salt Lake City that has an interesting written commentary by the person who posted it. Click the link to see the video and make sure you read the commentary. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSQTz1bccL4&feature=related

I cannot forget the first time I became enraged over police using excessive force. A trained officer carrying a firearm coming up against a person who has no gun or knife, has a distinct advantage. Multiply that by 15 police officers surrounding a man holding a brick and the situation is even more outrageous when the order the person to "drop the brick" and 60-seconds later, open fire and kill him. Here is how it was described in the Cincinnati Enquirer on June 1, 1997.

Cincinnati police shoot and kill a man holding a brick.

Some facts about this as written by Peter Bronson in the Cincinnati Enquirer. "Lorenzo Collins was a very large, violent psychotic, with a history of crime, assault and drug abuse. Lorenzo Collins walked off AWOL from the lockdown psychiatric unit at University Hospital three times. On February 23, 1997, Lorenzo Collins was surrounded by 15 police officers on a vacant lot. Collins was holding a brick. The cops ordered him to drop the brick and 60 seconds later they opened fire and killed him after he refused to comply with the order."

Hamilton County Prosecutor Joseph Deters, who has ruled that the Collins shooting was not criminal, partially blamed the hospital for not keeping him locked up. Yeah, sure, blame someone else.

So in my opinion, 15 trained police officers in excellent condition decided they could not subdue one large mentally deranged man holding a brick? And the county prosecutor defended the cops because they followed proper procedures.
Another Cincinnati cop a few years ago responded to a call in a public place where an old man was acting strangely. The old man was suffering from dementia and was confused but the cop didn't know that so when he arrived he simply floored the old man and hurt him badly. Why cops don't ask questions first before resorting to violence is beyond me.
County SWAT team shoots mayor's dog in botched police raid.

Prince George's County SWAT team raids mayors house and shoots both of his dogs. This happened on July 29, 2008 in Maryland. A drug dealer devised a plan to ship a box of drugs across country to a randomly chosen name and address and have an accomplice retrieve the drugs after they were delivered. The Feds got wind of the plan and tracked the shipment right up to the delivery. The randomly chosen name, Trinity Tomsic was the wife of Cheye Calvo, the mayor of a small town of Berwyn Heights, Maryland, but the County SWAT team wasn't familiar with it and the local cops were not involved. CNN reported this on their web site on Aug. 8, 2008.
Mayor wants federal probe after SWAT raids house, kills dogs
Calvo said he had just returned home from walking his two Labrador retrievers, Chase and Payton, when his mother-in-law told him a package had arrived for his wife, Trinity Tomsic.

Moments later, Calvo was in his room changing for a meeting when he heard commotion downstairs.

"The door flew open," he said. "I heard gunfire shoot off. There was a brief pause and more gunfire."

Calvo said he was brought downstairs at gunpoint in his boxer shorts, handcuffed and forced onto the floor with his mother-in-law near the carcass of one of dead dogs.
The brave SWAT officers, all wearing body armor, shot one of the dogs when it was running away. The Prince George's County Sheriff defended the action saying the officers were protecting themselves and they all followed procedure.

One more example of outrageous procedures involved another Cincinnati cop some years ago. One cop puts a handcuffed defendant in the back seat of a police car and puts him in a strangle hold which resulted in his death. Another cop witnessed this and there is a big trial when the killer cop stands accused of manslaughter. The witness cop lies under oath and the killer cop is exonerated. Then the witness cop goes and confesses to his superior that he lied under oath but according to Rule 213 of the Police Department, if a cop does something wrong and reports it to a superior, he cannot be charged with a crime.   

In all of these examples the common thread is the existence of some rules and procedures that some unknown group of people write that have tremendous impact on our lives. Who are these people and why doesn't any of our government officials admit these rules and procedures are wrong and have them corrected?
There is one reason that could explain why these procedures are allowed to exist, that is they are used as a test to identify which police officers will go to extreme ends to blindly follow orders without question. Shoot the dog, shoot the child, makes little difference if the cop is more violence prone than the suspect. It helps to lower the entry qualifications for cops, too. New York City did that many years ago and let ex-gang members become cops, then they saw a dramatic increase in the use of excessive police force. If you want to create a GESTAPO style police state you need people you can depend on. Those who want to protect the innocent have no useful place there.


 



Tuesday, April 12, 2011

An analytical look at Islamic origins, myths and hypocricy.

   
CULT or RELIGION?
It has been said by many Muslims that Islam celebrates death just as everyone else celebrates life. That is why so many Muslims believe in suicide bombers. Islam has a morbid fascination with death, blood, amputations and beheadings and other barbaric acts. Other practices of this group support the contention that Islam is more of a cult than a religion and in no way fits its own description as a "Religion of Peace".  Source: Wikipedia, Definition of a Cult: "In traditional usage, the cult of a religion, quite apart from its sacred writings ("scriptures"), its theology or myths, or the personal faith of its believers, is the totality of external religious practice and observance, the neglect of which is the definition of impiety. The word cult pejoratively refers to a group whose beliefs or practices are considered abnormal or bizarre. The word originally denoted a system of ritual practices."

Above: Islamic celebration: Day of Ashura.
Definition of Bizarre and Abnormal practices: Islamic Sharia Law, which is derived from Mohammad’s commands in Sera 005.038 in the Qur’an that order the cutting off the hand of a thief or chopping off their fingers, a 7th Century practice still followed today in Muslim countries. Three translations from USC Center for Muslim-Jewish Engagement.
YUSUFALI: As to the thief, Male or female, cut off his or her hands: a punishment by way of example, from Allah, for their crime: and Allah is Exalted in power.
PICKTHAL: As for the thief, both male and female, cut off their hands. It is the reward of their own deeds, an exemplary punishment from Allah. Allah is Mighty, Wise.
SHAKIR: And (as for) the man who steals and the woman who steals, cut off their hands as a punishment for what they have earned, an exemplary punishment from Allah; and Allah is Mighty, Wise.
The religious cult called Islam was invented by Muhammad some 20 years before his death in the year 632 A.D. History notes that Muhammad was mobilizing an army to attack the cities of Medina and Mecca when he invented Islam and his preachings to his followers, that became the substance of the Qur'an, were more like a code of conduct for warfare than a celebration of spiritual uplifting. Claiming his words came from the god Allah, Muhammad united the conflicting tribes in Medina, and after eight years of fighting with the Meccan tribes, his followers, who by then had grown to 10,000, conquered Mecca.
Hardly the typical words from a spiritual leader, the following passages from the Qur'an show the war time orders issued by Muhammad. As a whole, the Qur'an could be interpreted as a Field Manual for warfare. USC Center for Muslim-Jewish Engagement provides these translations: 
008.067
YUSUFALI: It is not fitting for a prophet that he should have prisoners of war until he hath thoroughly subdued the land. Ye look for the temporal goods of this world; but Allah looketh to the Hereafter: And Allah is Exalted in might, Wise.
PICKTHAL: It is not for any prophet to have captives until he hath made slaughter in the land. Ye desire the lure of this world and Allah desireth (for you) the Hereafter, and Allah is Mighty, Wise.
SHAKIR: It is not fit for a prophet that he should take captives unless he has fought and triumphed in the land; you desire the frail goods of this world, while Allah desires (for you) the hereafter; and Allah is Mighty, Wise.

008.069
YUSUFALI: But (now) enjoy what ye took in war, lawful and good: but fear Allah: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.
PICKTHAL: Now enjoy what ye have won, as lawful and good, and keep your duty to Allah. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
SHAKIR: Eat then of the lawful and good (things) which you have acquired in war, and be careful of (your duty to) Allah; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
Wikipedia notes that: “The Qur'an was reportedly written down by Muhammad's companions (sahabah) while he was alive. The numerous quotes herein come from different articles in Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia as well as recognized authoritative sources.
TIMELINE
In other words, like the religious concept of Islam itself, the Qur’an did not exist prior to 610 A.D. but Muhammad attempted to add relevance to his quasi-religious preachings by referring to the past biblical prophets Abraham, Moses and Jesus as part of his religion and added his own name as the latest prophet. Wikipedia also notes that: “Muslim historical traditions first began developing from the earlier 7th century with the reconstruction of Muhammad's life following his death. (Muhammad died in the year 670 A.D.)” As a point of interest in analyzing this timeline, the abbreviation A.D. that follows the dates above stands for Anno Domini, a Latin expression that means “In the year of our Lord”. Wikipedia clarifies this: “The term Anno Domini is Medieval Latin, translated as In the year of (the/Our) Lord. It is sometimes specified more fully as Anno Domini Nostri Iesu (Jesu) Christi ("In the Year of Our Lord Jesus Christ"), although Islam uses a different calendar as noted in the referenced article at the end.
PAGANS
In the concept of “worship” pagans were people who worshiped idols and assigned to them different aspects of some form of deity, such as a “sun god” or “moon god”. These deities were then associated with symbols and the “moon god” was depicted as a crescent moon. Coincidentally, the crescent moon is a symbol often associated with Islam and, in fact, is a fixture that sits atop every mosque. One of the pagan gods in pre-Islamic Arabia was named Hubal and in Wikipedia it says, “One notable center of Hubal-worship is said to have been at the Kaaba at Mecca, prior to the religious reforms instituted by Muhammad in AD 630.” And later it says: “Some scholars have suggested that the Islamic god Allah is a version of Hubal, a link which would also explain Islam's use of the crescent moon as its symbol and the presence of many Arabic, pre-Islamic rituals.”

Allah is the Arabic word that means "god" and the name that Muslims call their god but they only did so after Muhammad invented the religious cult of Islam. Back to Wikipedia again and it says this about Allah: “The name was previously used by pagan Meccans as a reference to the creator deity, possibly the supreme deity in pre-Islamic Arabia. The concepts associated with the term Allah (as a deity) differ among religious traditions. In pre-Islamic Arabia amongst pagan Arabs, Allah was not considered the sole divinity, having associates and companions, sons and daughters–a concept which Islam thoroughly and resolutely did away with.” The word “Islam” means “submission” in Arabic and since Muhammad was the only “messenger of Allah” it basically translated to submitting to Muhammad. Since Muhammad was a brutally barbaric leader, the act of submission was the only practical way of staying alive. As noted elsewhere in the revealing study, Statistical Islam written by the Center For The Study Of Political Islam, the Qur'an contains more references to hate and killing and barbarism than spiritual uplifting as Christians think of religion.
HYPOCRISY
The article following this is the complete text from an Islamic web site instructing Muslims on how to deal with the Christian celebration of Christmas, which was the birth of Jesus Christ. It has been taken from an Islamic web site concerned with educating Muslims in proper conduct per the Qur'an and Islamic Sharia Law. Note how this Muslim scholar has proclaimed that Jesus was created by the Islamic god Allah in spite of the historical fact that Jesus was born over 600 years before Islam came to exist. This scholarly opinion should be kept in mind when you read about Muslims pretending to participate in multi-cultural diversities with other religions. Their true intentions are made very clear in the final paragraph from the pro-Muslim web site quoted below that reads:


“Consequently, celebrating with Christians and congratulating them on Christmas is prohibited, regardless of the intention. If one does so while approving of their religion, he is an apostate. Allaah The Exalted Says (what means): {And whoever desires other than Islam as religion -- never will it be accepted from him, and he, in the Hereafter, will be among the losers.} [Quran 3: 58]”
DECEPTION
To understand Islam is to know about Muhammad and his teachings that "war is deceit". It is written in
Bukhari (52:269) - "The Prophet said, 'War is deceit.'"  For this is known as the practice of Taqiyya – the command to all Muslims to lie to non-Muslims to advance and defend the cause of Islam. A very informative video called “3 Things you didn’t know about Islam” contains the following passage describing Taqiyya.

Muslims are allowed to deceive non-Muslims if it helps Islam. For non-Muslims this principle, called Taqiyya is another surprising concept of Islam. While most other religions speak highly of truthfulness the Qur’an instructs Muslims to lie to non-Muslims about their beliefs and their political ambitions to protect and spread Islam. There are many examples of today’s Islamic leaders saying one thing in English for the Western press and then saying something entirely different to their own followers in Arabic a few days later. Deceiving the enemy is always useful in war and Islam is at war with the non-Islamic world until the whole world follows Shari’a Law. All non-Muslims living in non-Islamic states are therefore enemies. So deceiving Westerners is totally acceptable – even encouraged – if it can forward the goals of the spread of Islam.

Similarly, Qur’an 3:28 enjoins believers not to take the company of doubters unless as a means of safeguarding themselves. “Let not the believers take those who deny the truth for their allies in preference to the believers – since he who does this cuts himself off from God in everything – unless it be to protect yourself against them in this way…” Regarding 3:28, Ibn Kathir, a prominent authority writes, "Whoever at any time or place fears their [infidels'] evil may protect himself through outward show." As proof of this, he quotes Muhammad's companion, al-Hassan, who said, “taqiyya is acceptable till the Day of Judgment [i.e., in perpetuity].”
Another excellent example of Taqiyya, or “religious deception” in action is depicted on the web site An Inquiry into Islam, which bills itself as "A non-racist, unbigoted inquiry into the core teachings of Islam and what it all means (if anything) for non-Muslims" in a story "What is Taqiyya?" Compare this information with the official Islamic instruction to Muslims on why it is against Islam to acknowledge Christmas. Then consider Muslims who attend diversity meetings with religious leaders of other faiths. Can they in all honesty do so in view of this command from Mohammed in Sera 005.051 in the Qur'an?
005.051
YUSUFALI: O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.
PICKTHAL: O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for friends. They are friends one to another. He among you who taketh them for friends is (one) of them. Lo! Allah guideth not wrongdoing folk.
SHAKIR: O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people. 
This is the true face of Islam as instructed by Islamic scholars, not the face that terrorist supporter groups like CAIR, the Council on American Islamic Relations, propagandize in the sympathetic leftist American news media.
Participating in Christmas and other Christian festivals - I
Monday, April 11, 2011
Jumaadaa Al-Oula 8, 1432
It is an indisputable fact that ‘Eesa (Jesus) may Allaah exalt his mention was sent by Allaah The Almighty. He was one of the Prophets of Allaah The Almighty whom He sent to the Children of Israel to call them to worship Allaah The Almighty alone with no partners beside Him.

Another established fact is that the children of Israel afflicted him with harm and intended to crucify him. Nevertheless, Allaah The Almighty raised him. Then they distorted the message with which he had been sent. The Jew, Saul – later known as Paul – embraced Christianity after ‘Eesa may Allaah exalt his mention had been raised. Although he had been one of his most bitter enemies and had tortured his followers, he claimed belief in ‘Eesa may Allaah exalt his mention.
Subsequently, he attained a lofty position in Christianity and this enabled him to distort and change the divine law that had been brought by ‘Eesa may Allaah exalt his mention. In this way Christianity became the Doctrine of Trinity and polytheism after it had once been a monotheistic religion. Paul decided what is lawful and unlawful in the name of God, the Father, and Jesus, the Son. Thus, true Christianity disappeared and was replaced by a distorted creed. Roman emperors such as the Emperor Constantine established this distortion for worldly interests.

A variety of reasons led to the distortion of Christianity and the Sacred book (the Bible). The Bible was not written at the time of ‘Eesa may Allaah exalt his mention. The Gospels are attributed to the disciples. However, the authenticity of its authorship is doubted because there is no authentic evidence to prove this. Indeed, proof indicates the opposite, and Christian scholars gave testimony to this.

It has been historically established that the Christian clergy added some things and omitted other things in the Bible. Hence, there are different versions of the Bible and there is clear inconsistency and discrepancies among them, which they acknowledge and cannot deny. They still commit innovations in a religion which has been distorted since the first century of its inception, and was changed from the right path to accommodate personal interests and whims.

Consequently, today we face a false religion whose fallacy is established by all criteria whether they are based on text, transmission, history or reason.
In the Quran, Allaah The Almighty stated that the People of the Book had distorted their religion and changed it. He Says (what means): {And from those who say, "We are Christians" We took their covenant; but they forgot a portion of that of which they were reminded.} [Quran 5: 14]

Historically, there is no consistent chain of transmission for the Gospels. The Christians themselves are aware of this.

Unreasonably, they insist that there are three gods in one, which is completely illogical.  

Consequently, since the religion is distorted, therefore, its acts of worship and rituals are also distorted and false. In this case, is it justifiable and acceptable that the Muslim participates in the rituals of a distorted religion or congratulates its followers on these occasions? What is the meaning of participation and congratulation?

It indicates approving their distorted religion, accepting it and being satisfied with it. All this implies belief in the soundness of this religion. When one realizes this, and despite this, insists on participating and congratulating them on their festivals, this shows disbelief because this is a state of satisfaction with disbelief and belying Allaah The Almighty .

If the participation or congratulation has another motive, like complimenting them or flattery, then the following are the reasons behind this:  
- When one is forced to do so, as in the case of coercion or fear of unbearable harm if one declines to do that. In such a case, one is forced to do so, and he is considered blameless on account of his helplessness and weakness. Such a person is even permitted to outwardly declare disbelief in this case, and he is consequently blameless for deeds lesser than this.
-
- When one aims at bringing himself closer to them with this action while he believes that their religion is false. This involves taking a risk because he is encouraging them to remain steadfast on their religion and think that they are rightly guided. These are natural feelings when they see the one who normally objects to their religion and tries to unveil their deviation, agreeing with and taking part in their religious ceremonies. Actually, the greatest temptation occurs when those who follow the true religion participate with those who are not on the right path in their falsehood and even declare their approval and consent. .Does this not imply deception and distraction from seeking guidance and following it?
-
- If one participates and congratulates them out of showing love and affection so that he will be able to call them to Islam, this is actually a good intention, but this manner of Islamic propagation is invalid. How will they respond to him when he voluntarily participates in their falsehood and neither calls them nor offers them advice to abandon it?
-
Consequently, celebrating with Christians and congratulating them on Christmas is prohibited, regardless of the intention. If one does so while approving of their religion, he is an apostate. Allaah The Exalted Says (what means): {And whoever desires other than Islam as religion -- never will it be accepted from him, and he, in the Hereafter, will be among the losers.} [Quran 3: 58]
WHAT IS ISLAM, TODAY?
The goal of Islam is to dominate the world and eradicate all other religions. Islam is far more than anything perceived to be just a religion. Islam is a total cultural, political, militaristic, controlling order that regulates every aspect of the Muslim life and family. It permits the practice of "honor killings" of family members who feel insulted by simple acts not deemed acceptable in Islam such as a female member who uses a cell phone or dresses in Western fashion. Islam is readily financed in America by the vast wealth produced by oil-rich Arab nations. The government of Saudi Arabia has financed the construction of almost all the mosques built in America in the past few decades and along with that financial support came the importation of the radical anti-American Wahabbi sect. A study conducted by the NGO Freedom House found Wahhabi publications in mosques in the United States. These publications included statements that Muslims should not only "always oppose" infidels "in every way", but "hate them for their religion ... for Allah's sake", that democracy "is responsible for all the horrible wars of the 20th century", and that Shia and certain Sunni Muslims were infidels. We now know that 14 of the 19 Muslim terrorists who attacked America on Sept. 11th 2001 came from Saudi Arabia. The U.S. Justice Dept. identified hundreds of Muslim groups working in America that it classified as unindicted co-conspirators to the Holy Land Foundation terrorist funding trials in Dallas, Texas. We know that dozens of attempted plots to kill thousands of Americans since 2001 have been planned and attempted by Muslim fanatics who were encourage by the preachings they heard in dozens of mosques. We know that Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hassan, a Muslim who killed 14 unarmed soldiers in Ft. Hood, Texas declared himself to be a "Soldier of Allah" on his business card and shouted "Allahu Akbar", Allah is Great, while shooting his victims. Maj. Hassan was also influenced by radical Muslim cleric in a Virginia mosque. The authoritative group The Investigative Project on Terrorism has identified these mosques on an interactive map on their web site. Click the map to jump to the IPT web site and you can click on each place holder for details on the terrorist activity.
And we know that Islamic Sharia Law strongly opposes all Freedom of Speech that our U.S. Constitution gives us. The riots in Afghanistan that killed 20 UN staff workers was a result of a Florida pastor who burned a Qur'an. It is perfectly acceptable for Muslims to burn Christian bibles, Christian churches and slaughter Christian worshipers but to burn their holy book is considered the worst offense against Islam. In America we tolerate all forms of freedom of expression and Muslims who choose to live here must accept this. Instead, many Muslims hold the belief that they should not acknowledge any form of government or laws made by man and only abide by their Sharia Laws. That makes them the worst of all hypocrites.
Interested readers can find more information of the following web sites:


   




Sunday, April 10, 2011

Bill Maher: "There is one religion in the world that kills you when you disagree with them.."

I do not agree with all of the people all of the time but I do agree with some of the people some of the time. That is the extent of my conditional remarks that I must state when the subject of Bill Maher comes up. Maher has made some very outrageous comments in the past that I have truly taken issue with but when he speaks about the barbaric nature of the so-called religion of Islam I must agree with his sentiments. This latest commentary from Bill Maher comes from two sources, Jihad Watch and Real Clear Politics. Click the title link to watch the video clip.

Maher: Islam Only Religion That "Kills You When You Disagree With Them"

"All this talk of people who burn the Koran and nothing about the people who reacted in such a stupid way. We are always blaming the victim and not holding them -- not most Muslims, but at least a large part of Muslim culture that doesn't condemn their people," Bill Maher said on his show "Real Time" Friday night.

"There is one religion in the world that kills you when you disagree with them and they say 'look, we are a religion of peace and if you disagree we'll fucking cut your head off,'" Maher said. "And nobody calls them on it -- there are very few people that will call them on it."

"It's like if Dad is a violent drunk and beats his kids, you don't blame the kid because he set Dad off. You blame Dad because he's a violent drunk," Maher concluded.

Maher also give his reaction to Sen. Lindsey Graham saying "free speech is great, but we're at war." Maher said that comment made him "nervous."

Posted on April 8, 2011

 

An investigative report detailing the Obama eligibility controversy

  
America today is on the brink of an economic disaster that could very well dissolve our Constitutional Republic. This disaster appears to have been part of a plan to eliminate the only bastion of freedom remaining in the world and allow our country to be taken over by a cadre of global elitists led by billionaire George Soros whose record of anti-American efforts has been well documented. The following is probably the most important article written in recent memory. It appears on the web site Canada Free Press and elevates with facts the substance of the "birther" movement from conspiracy theory to reality. The article references two investigative reports posted on the Internet in Adobe Acrobat PDF format. These reports can be downloaded and saved from the following two locations. Click the hyper-linked titles:

An investigative report detailing the Obama eligibility controversy [Part 1]

An investigative report detailing the Obama eligibility controversy [Part II]
Trumping up the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama
The unraveling of Barry Soetoro, a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama II
 By Doug Hagmann & Joseph Hagmann   Friday, April 8, 2011 
To those who are now speaking out about the Obama eligibility matter, I can think of no better statement than the one uttered by a very frustrated Officer John McClane, played by Bruce Willis in the movie“Die Hard.” In order to get the attention of a police officer oblivious to the carnage taking place inside of the Nakatomi Plaza building after making a very cursory inspection and finding nothing amiss,McClane tosses the body of a terrorist from an office window window onto the windshield of the police cruiser and fires at the police car, yelling “welcome to the party, pal.”

I suspect that this statement accurately  reflects the sentiment of numerous individuals and groups who have been fighting in the real world trenches for full disclosure of all of Barack Hussein Obama’s records, including his birth certificate, for the last three years. People such as Commander Charles Kerchner (retired) and Attorney Mario Apuzzo, Pennsylvania Attorney Philip Berg,  Reverend David Manning of Atlah Ministries,  and numerous others who have spoken out and taken their valiant fight for full disclosure of Obama’s records to the nation’s courts, only to be struck down for lack of standing or other arbitrary judicial opinions.

Due to the recent public statements by billionaire businessman turned reality television star about the birth certificate issue, the eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama has gained equal amounts of renewed interest and contempt by the American media and a vocal segment of the American public. The latter display of contempt is nicely displayed by some recent interview clips, including the priceless Meredith Viera interview of Donald Trump where she can hardly hold back her disdain of Mr. Trump and the entire eligibility matter, and Donald Trump’s appearance on “The View” last month.

On “The View,” Mr. Trump wreaked havoc among the cadre of women co-hosts when he merely mentioned the lack of a legitimate birth certificate provided by Obama. Lacking any coherent or intellectual rebuttals to Trump’s claims, a not-so veiled accusation of racism was leveled against Trump by “The View” co-host Whoppi Goldberg, while Barbara Walters expressed discomfort with the matter by simply wanting to change the topic.

“Welcome to the party, pal”

During the last three years, there have been numerous individuals, authors, investigative journalists, and others (and I consider myself among them) who have been mocked, ridiculed, belittled or ignored by Obama supporters, the liberal media, and the political left for even suggesting that this issue has any merit whatsoever.

Perhaps even worse, conservatives on the right, including some high profile media personalities, have joined with the left in the same vitriolic ridicule of us so-called “Birthers,” a pejorative term ascribed to those who are merely asking for yet-unfurnished proof that Barack Hussein Obama is constitutionally eligible to occupy the office of the President of the United States.

It has been only after Donald Trump began to ask the same questions others have been asking for the last three years that the matter appears to have morphed from a fringe topic into legitimacy. For example, Rush Limbaugh, who has kept this topic at arm’s length, has taken delight of the Viera interview, although it’s difficult to discern whether Mr. Limbaugh is more delighted at Mr. Trump’s steam roller approach and Viera’s reaction, or that the issue is being finally exposed in such an unlikely venue. Because Mr. Limbaugh has the ear of millions every day, I tend to gravitate to the former.

To those who are now beginning to pick up the topic because of the exposure by Donald Trump, I can only say “welcome to the party, pal.”
With all due respect to Donald Trump, he has not “legitimized” the eligibility issue, as the matter far exceeds the existence of the birth certificate and has adversely affected the lives of many patriotic Americans who have long fought for full disclosure of all of Obama’s records. Promising to be the “most transparent” president in history,  Barack Hussein Obama is the most deliberately opaque president who has withheld many more records than his birth certificate. Not only has he withheld his records, he has fought to keep them hidden from public view, amassing legal fees that some claim to exceed a million dollars of his own money, and perhaps twice that amount if pro-bono and other legal work is counted.

Also as a result of his refusal to disclose his records, a respected military physician is presently serving time in Leavenworth for refusing to obey deployment orders until he was satisfied that the orders he was given were constitutionally legal. LTC. Terry Lakin, an honored veteran with 18 unblemished and distinguished years of service, lost his legal battle and remains behind bars as Obama’s first political prisoner in the war for truth. While many may question the methods and venue in which LTC Lakin chose to take up his battle, no one can question his motives.

“The biggest scam ever

Both Messrs Trump and Limbaugh have stated that if Obama is determined to be ineligible to hold office, it is the “biggest scam ever” perpetrated. Indeed, and that statement itself might be an understatement.

I urge those reading this and those who are pursuing the truth to avoid “battlefield myopia” and not merely cling to the existence or lack thereof of the long form, authenticated birth certificate. The issue is much greater than the birth certificate or where Obama was physically born, as he could have been born in the Lincoln bedroom during the Kennedy administration and still be ineligible to hold the office of president under Article II, Section I, Clause 5 of the United States Constitution. Our founders determined that future presidents must be born to two parents who are both U.S. citizens. Clearly then, the place of Obama’s birth is merely one concern, while the citizen aspect of his parents remains another.

But the scam goes much deeper. Reviewing only the admissions of Barack Obama, we are told that Obama was born to U.S. citizen Stanley Ann Dunham, legally adopted by a foreign national named Lolo Soetoro, had taken the name Barry SOETORO, and was given Indonesian citizenship. He was raised as a Muslim in Indonesia, and attended a school there that accepted all faiths. At one point, Barry SOETORO moved to Hawaii to reside with his grandparents after Lolo SOETORO and Stanley Ann DUNHAM divorced. Obama completed high school as Barry SOETORO Much is missing from his early years, including a legal name change from Barry SOETORO to Barack Hussein Obama II. Absent of any document to show the legal process of a name change within the U.S., it is likely that the man sitting in the Oval Office is, in fact, Barry SOETORO.

The above would also serve to explain the discrepancies with his social security number and region of issuance, a matter we are very familiar with in our capacity as licensed investigators. The reasons we have seen published concerning the allegations of the association of multiple social security numbers with Barry SOETORO and Barack Hussein OBAMA has always bothered us, but not necessarily for the reasons often published. After careful and extensive analysis, it appears that many of the numbers and name variations associated with Obama are what we would describe as “database chaff.” It is not uncommon for database repositories to erroneously associate different numbers, addresses and sometimes names to an individual. The reasons for this are many and beyond the scope of this article, but it happens.

Accordingly, an investigator is well advised not to take the information obtained from a proprietary database at face value without first analyzing the information, tossing out the chaff and concentrating on the rest, which we have done. Additionally, we have found and concur with others on this matter that the social security number associated with Obama that was issued from the SSA region in Connecticut is troublesome, but again, not necessarily for the reasons as publicly stated by others.

As we have been investigating this matter for some time (see our investigative report 1 and report 2 in PDF format for important background information), it has become apparent that at some point, the individual known as Barry SOETORO began using the name Barack Hussein Obama II. Based on our investigative findings, it was at about this same time period that the Connecticut issuance of the social security number appeared and became “attached” to the name Barack Hussein Obama. It can then be reasonably reconciled that Barry SOETORO became Barack Hussein Obama while he was a young man in New York following his mysterious trip to Pakistan on a passport that was likely not issued by the U.S.

Trump’s curious statements

As long-time investigators dealing with large corporations, we have the distinct advantage of knowing other professionals in the industry. Although we have had no contact with Mr. Trump’s investigators nor are we connected in any manner to Mr. Trump’s organization, team or efforts, we are aware of the identity of at least one who is actively working on the Obama birth certificate mystery. We are also familiar with that investigator’s associates and their areas of inquiry, so we have a fairly good understanding of what is taking place behind the scenes - and there is plenty taking place behind the scenes.

NOTE: We will be talking about this in depth on the upcoming episode of CFP Radio’s “The Hagmann & Hagmann Report” on 8-10pm EST, Saturday, 9 April 2011. Program details follow this report.

In advance of that show, however, we should address two rather curious statements made by Mr. Trump during one recent interview. When talking about his investigators in Hawaii who are looking into Obama’s birth certificate issue, he stated that “you wouldn’t believe what they’re finding.” Mr. Trump also stated that in his experience on Wall Street, he is familiar with frauds of all types, and has seen some very sophisticated frauds over the years. Well, we do have a very good idea of what is being found or verified as having been scrubbed from the records.

In our investigation, we found that the scrubbing and altering of records pertaining to Obama began well before he became an Illinois state senator in the 1996 election cycle. The “scrubbing” or alteration of records did not begin or end with Obama, but also extended to his mother and other associates as well. In fact, a very large and extremely relevant part of the investigation of Barry SOETORO, or Barack Hussein Obama II as he is known, revolves around his parents, step father, and grandparents. and extends from the U.S. mainland to Hawaii and other points across the globe.

Meteoric rise to power was well planned

To understand how a virtually unknown politician from Illinois could rise to occupy the most powerful position in the free world in less than a decade after he became a state senator, one must take a few steps backward to understand the complete picture, and that Obama was selected long before he was elected to become president. Problems with his background were numerous, however, including but not limited to his parental lineage and place of birth. These problems became apparent through a private vetting process by his own handlers, or those who are known as the “power elite” in the latter half of the last century. His handlers were and are globalists of the highest order, extending from George Soros to those above him on the proverbial pyramid capstone of globalists.

The globalists had direct and indirect ties to the Dunham family and in particular, Obama’s mother. Consider, for example, that Peter F. Geithner (father of Obama’s Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner), worked for the Ford Foundation and oversaw the work of Obama‚Äôs mother, Ann Dunham, while she was developing “microfinance programs” in Indonesia. In brief, Obama’s mother set up a large loan system in Indonesia akin to the savings and loan structure of the 1970s and 1980s. To gain a better understanding of her activities in finance, despite her background in anthropology, recall the BCCI scandal of the late 1970s. In fact, some of the same “players” who existed then continue to exist in Obama’s circles.
Our investigation into her activities and those close to Obama are continuing and will be the subject of a separate article, including how Obama as president fits into the communist China agenda in terms of global finance. Meanwhile, it’s important to take a few more steps backward in history to understand that the scrubbing of inconvenient records is not new.

Fast Rewind: Senator Joe McCarthy & the relevance to today

The majority of Americans alive today do not recall the WW II postwar era beyond the revised history contained in textbooks that rarely reflect the truth of that time. Today’s well-coiffed but intellectually deficient anchors who deliver the news to ordinary Americans know little to nothing of the gritty reality of the origins of the “cold war” between the U.S. and the former Soviet Union, and the infiltration of communist agents into American government. It is that very infiltration that has paved the way for Obama.

Mention, however, the name of former Senator Joe McCarthy and watch as they recoil in disgust, having been taught that the inquiries of Senator Joe McCarthy is a black chapter in the history books of America. Since the 9/11 attacks, some of these news anchors and pundits have actually described the vetting of Muslims for sensitive positions in the U.S. as a throwback to “McCarthyism,” while few actually using that term know the true history of communist infiltration in key government positions in the postwar era.

The truth is that communist infiltration of and through the U.S. government, particularly the State Department, was and remains a legitimate threat to America. A 106-page confidential memo dated 3 August 1946, written by State Department official Samuel Klaus, detailed the alarming levels of communist infiltration into American government. It was that memo that served as the basis of Senator Joe McCarthy launching an investigation into the threat to America from within. It was through the efforts of McCarthy that a Senate subcommittee chaired by Senator Millard Tydings requested and eventually received a copy of that memo.

As noted by M. Stanton Evans, author of Blacklisted by History, that memo would mysteriously vanish from our nation’s records. Mr. Evans notes that this historic memo is not in the legislative panel file of the Tydings panel, located in the National Archives of the U.S., and was also removed from the files of Samuel Klaus, the author of the memo, from the National Archives in March of 1993, nearly a half century after it was issued.

As painstakingly revealed by M. Stanton Evans in his extensive work Blacklisted by History, important documentation well beyond the Klaus memo relevant to exposing the level of communist infiltration into the U.S. government is not limited to government sources such as the National Archive, but also to private data sources and repositories. He lists a number of instances where records were scrubbed and consequently, created a much different and much less accurate picture of that era of U.S. history.

This topic is as relevant today as it was during the time of Senator Joe McCarty, if not even more relevant. One only has to look at the reported communist, Marxist and socialist ties in Obama’s lineage and inner circle to understand the impact of missing records.

One would do well to use the voluminous work of M. Stanton Evans as a template to understand how Americans have been deliberately misled by the media and some members of our own government into believing that the communist and socialist objectives, launched in the postwar era, have led to where we find ourselves today.

The removal of the Klaus memo from his file in March of 1993 was as deliberate as the refusal of government officials, complicit with the media moguls of today to address the lack of bona fides of Barack Hussein Obama. In fact, one could consider them an extension of the same.

What it all means

Based on investigative findings that are not discussed in the media, it would appear that the selection and election of Barack Hussein Obama was indeed the greatest scam ever pulled off against the American people. The above provides just a small portion of the critical issues surrounding Obama’s eligibility, identity and his place in U.S. and world history. The story is much larger than a single piece of paper, but that paper, if properly authenticated, will serve as the thread that will unravel the larger tangled web of the Obama legend.

To those who have just awakened to the constitutional crisis we are facing at the hands of this president, we’d like to say once again, “welcome to the party, pal.”

Douglas J. Hagmann & his son, Joseph Hagmann, both investigators, researchers and contributors to Canada Free Press, host a weekly radio program on CFP Radio called The Hagmann & Hagmann Report, broadcast live every Saturday from 8:00-10:00 p.m. ET. In it’s fifth week, the program has gained in popularity, and has become one of the ten most popular radio shows on the BlogTalk Radio platform. This week’s program will be providing additional details about the problems with Obama’s eligibility to occupy the White House.
Author
Doug Hagmann & Joseph Hagmann  Bio

Doug Hagmann & Joseph Hagmann Most recent columns Copyright © Douglas Hagmann

Douglas Hagmann, founder & director of the Northeast Intelligence Network, and a multi-state licensed private investigative agency. Doug began using his investigative skills and training to fight terrorism and increase public awareness through his website.
Doug can be reached at: director@homelandsecurityus.com

Joseph Hagmann earned a degree in business administration, marketing and management and holds several law enforcement related certifications. He has completed over 6,000 hours of field investigation and covert surveillance operations, specializing in surveillance and counter-surveillance operations.He is presently the Director of Field Operations (DFO) for the Northeast Intelligence Network.
Joseph can be reached at: joehagmann24@aol.com

Friday, April 8, 2011

A few more words on that extraordinary woman, Ann Barnhardt.

Ann Barnhardt is an attractive 34-year old commodities broker in Lone Tree, Colorado who owns Capital Management, Inc. On April 3rd, Ann posted two videos on YouTube in response to Liberal RINO Senator Lindsey Graham's critical comments about the Florida preacher who burned a Qur'an. I reposted those videos on my blog a few days ago. Ann Barnhardt gave the most eloquent assessment about free speech that I have ever heard and how a jackass RINO politician has misunderstood the origin, meaning and purpose of those rights. Here is a commentary on those videos posted on another web site, Pajamas Media followed by an updated comment by Ann Barnhardt from her own web site.
Ann Barnhardt, Culture Hero
April 6, 2011 - 6:51 am - by Roger Kimball
Even if you don’t do anything else today, please take a moment to look at the two videos that Ann Barnhardt, an intrepid Colorado resident, made a couple of days ago responding to Senator Lindsey Graham’s spineless attack on Terry Jones, the Florida minister who presided over a “trial” and burning of a Koran late last month. I link to them at the end of this post.
A recap: When publicized and condemned by Afghan President Hamid Karzai and officials in Pakistan last week, Jones’s bonfire provided the occasion for the deadly riots in Afghanistan that (so far) have left a dozen people dead, including UN and NATO personnel. The instant response from the liberal establishment was condemnation — not of the rioters who were, as is their wont, murdering for Allah, but of Terry Jones. As I noted in this space Monday, Islamophiliacs from Time’s Joe Klein to Senators Harry Reid and Lindsey Graham blamed Jones for the rampage. Even General David Petraeus condemned the Koran burning as “hateful, intolerant, extremely disrespectful.” On Face the Nation, Lindsey Graham said:
I wish we could find some way to hold people accountable. Free speech is a great idea, but we’re in a war. During World War II you had limits on what you could do if it inspired the enemy. Any time we can push back  here in American against actions like this that put our troops at risk, we ought to do it.
Sobering, isn’t it, to realize how quickly folks entrusted with upholding the Constitution are willing to dispense with its protections? I was moderately tart about these latest exhibitions of what I called “preemptive capitulation.” But my response was a veritable valentine compared with Ms. Barnhardt’s eloquent demolition. There are some theatrics in her presentation. She repeatedly calls Graham a “jackass” — a “stupid, stupid jackass” on one occasion.  In part two, she reads various passages from the Koran — those memorable bijoux that advocate the murder of Jews, infidels, and apostates, the rape of women prisoners, pedophilia, and beating of insufficiently  submissive wives, etc.  — and then rips out the offending pages and burns them in a glass fire-bowl. Crowning detail: she has bookmarked the passages with rashers of uncooked bacon. (“Raw bacon,” she explains, “makes the best Koranic bookmark.”)
Ms. Barnhardt describes the reading and burning of the Koran as “the main event.” It is a riveting performance, her declamation and analysis of all those goads to violence and mayhem, followed by the incineration, one leaf after the next, of the dozen or so pages she chose: “Evil, evil garbage, in it goes and up in flames!”
But perhaps even more impressive is Ms. Barnhardt’s  excoriation of Lindsey Graham and his contemptible suggestion that the free speech of American citizens should be curtailed in the face of Islamic intimidation.
Read it again: “I wish we could find some way to hold people accountable,” said this U.S. senator. “Free speech is a great idea, but we’re in a war. During World War II you had limits on what you could do if it inspired the enemy. Any time we can push back here in American against actions like this that put our troops at risk, we ought to do it.”
Ms. Barnhardt picks this apart phrase by disgraceful phrase.  “Hold people accountable”? Accountable for what? she asks.
For exercising their Constitutionally protected and divinely ordained right to freedom of thought, freedom of speech, freedom of expression, and freedom of religion? Hey Jackass, have you not read the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States?
What Lindsey Graham wants to do, she continues, is to “elevate the totalitarian political system masquerading as a religion called Islam to a status which
supersedes and overrides the First Amendment to the Constitution  and thus places it in a position of specially protected   legal superiority wherein criticism of Islam or failure to show proper and sufficient deference and honor for Islamic texts is a crime.  Hey Lindsey, you Jackass, you know what that’s called? It’s called Sharia. What the hell is wrong with you?”
Delicious, no? Ms. Barnhardt then announces that she will burn a Koran in a few minutes and invites Little Lindsey  to have her arrested and dragged before before Congress and held to account. “Do it. Nothing would make me happier. I would relish the opportunity to explain to you how exactly it is that we do things in the United States of America. If you want to pick a fight, Sir, you go right ahead, but understand that if you pick a fight with me the only way it ends is with you sobbing in the men’s room.”
Why can’t we have senators like this?
Ms. Barnhardt then moves on to Little Lindsey’s declaration that “Free speech is a great idea but we’re in a war.”
Point One: free speech is not just a great idea, it is “bedrock principle of Western civilization and the United States.”
Point Two: “Individuals are free sovereign agents. Individuals are not property or drones of the state. The government doesn’t tell the people what to think and say. The people tell the government what to think and say through the mechanisms” of  representative government.
Point three: Intellectual snobbery. Ms. Barnhardt discerns it in Little Lindsey’s remarks. Terry Jones is a redneck Southern preacher with a drawl and a handlebar mustache to match. No fancy Ivy league education. Ergo, he’s not eligible for the same sort of Constitutional  protection that, for example, Little Lindsey and his peers enjoy. “Listen, Jackass, it doesn’t work that way.  The First Amendment applies to all American citizens equally. It does not operate on a sliding scale based upon how expensive an education one received, what one’s income is, or whether or not one is invited to tony soirées in Georgetown.”
Ms. Barnhardt then takes up and demolishes Little Lindsey’s invocation of World War II as a precedent for clamping down on free speech. “Lindsey, you Jackass, the only prohibitions on speech during World War II and all other wars pertained to speech which would give aid and comfort to the enemy, not speech which demoralized, discouraged, or degraded the enemy.” She then enumerates various examples from those World War II posters depicting the Nazis and Japanese as deranged animals to cartoons that “ruthlessly mocked and degraded”  Germans, Italians, and the Japanese. “The informal prohibition during the war was on speech that was defeatist or conciliatory towards  the enemy, which is exactly what you are engaging in, you stupid, stupid, Jackass.”
And so it goes. Little Lindsey wants to “push back” against people like Terry Jones who burn the Koran or otherwise criticize Islam because, he says, it  “puts the troops at risk.” “Push back?” Ms. Barnhardt asks. “Since the free speech in question is by a loyal, law-abiding American citizen  against the sworn enemy of the United States and its Constitution — which is Islam — and you Senator Graham are talking about ‘pushing back’ using the force of the government of the United States, it sure sounds to me like you have decided that the United States  government is allied with Islam against the people of the Untied States who do not show sufficient deference and respect for Islam.”
Oh, and as for putting our troops at risk, “the only thing that is putting our troops at risk at are the suicidal, defeatist rules of engagement which prevent our brave soldiers from actually fighting and defeating the enemy. You hang our boys out on the lines of battle and then refuse to give them ammunition, refuse to allow  to engage the enemy without permission from a flipping attorney, and refuse to allow them to engage ‘civilians’ while fighting a force that is 100 percent comprised of civilians. How dare you accuse us of putting our troops at risk.”
There’s more. Watch both videos.  They are inspirational. Ann Barnhardt opens with the observation that she is “apparently one of the very, very last people left in Western Civilization who possesses any quantity of brains and balls simultaneously.” She is probably right. Thank God for her.
The fact that YouTube has become increasingly conscious of political correctness, Ann Barnhardt's videos might not remain visible for very long so I thought it best to pass along these comments from Pajamas Media because it contains a pretty fair depiction of her sentiments. Ann Barnhart's own web site has been inundated with favorable commentary and I am also passing along her latest post on this subject. It should also be noted that Ann is well aware of the consequences of her act and she has informed the world of her means and ability to protect herself.
Posted by Ann Barnhardt - April 7, AD 2011 1:17 PM MST 
Upon further reflection, I realized that Lindsey That Jackass Graham managed in less than 100 words to eviscerate three of the ten amendments in the Bill of Rights plus the 14th Amendment. Six more, and you'll pick up the spare, Player. 
First Amendment: Lindsey wants to limit freedom of speech. We've already covered this in depth.
Fifth and Sixth Amendments: Lindsey repeatedly said that while he had no desire to either amend the Constitution OR pass a law limiting free speech, he still strongly and repeatedly advocated "holding people accountable" and "pushing back" against speech offensive to islam. What he is wanting to do is completely shred the Constitutional right to DUE PROCESS OF LAW. Read both the Fifth and Sixth Amendments, and then tell me that Jackass isn't advocating for a means by which the government can punish people without actually having a law to back it up. If this doesn't terrify you, then you aren't sentient.
Fourteenth Amendment: Section 1 in full:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Lindsey advocates a legal caste system whereby muslims are held to a different legal standard than non-muslims, or "the sane", as I like to refer to them.
Lindsey Jackass Graham MUST MUST MUST be hounded from office. The people of South Carolina MUST peaceably but resolutely demand his resignation immediately. Any person who has such a superficial knowledge and understanding of the Constitution which he SWORE AN OATH to defend is not qualified to hold congressional office. Period. And I don't give a damn if he holds a Juris Doctor degree or not. The man is either a slack-jawed, mouth-breathing imbecile, or he is a conscious and willful traitor to the Constitution of the United States. Either way, he must be dismissed post haste.
-----------------------
"I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue."
--Extracted from Barry Goldwater's Speech Accepting the Republican Presidential Nomination delivered 16 July 1964, in San Francisco
Hat tip: thale_taxurfeet at BigPeace.com 
And, Yes, this gutsy lady knows how to defend herself. She mentioned that it was very unwise for anyone to drop by and pay her a visit without first calling ahead. She even posted her street address and phone number.

That is her hand, her Rosary beads and her pink gun. God Bless her and keep her safe.