Jihad in the UK…Could It Happen Here?

Yesterday, the British Empire was rocked by the news that one of their Brightest and Best, a British soldier, had been beheaded in the middle of London by two Muslim Terrorists.

They stabbed their victim several times, while asking unarmed witnesses to video them.

After their barbarism was complete, they shouted “Allahu Akbar” and one of them said,  while clutching his blood-soaked meat cleaver,

We swear by Almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you. The only reasons we have done this is because Muslims are dying every day.

You people will never be safe. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.

This British soldier is an eye for an eye a tooth for tooth. We apologize that women had to see this today but in our lands our women have to see the same.You people will never be safe. Remove your government. They don’t care about you.

You think David Cameron is going to get caught in the street when we start busting our guns? You think your politicians are going to die? No, it’s going to be the average guy like you – and your children.

So get rid of them – tell them to bring our troops back so we can … so you can all live in peace.

The murder happened 200 yards from The Royal Artillery Barracks in Woolwich and close to a primary school.

It took police 20 minutes to arrive…too late.

Of course, none of the witnesses were armed…thanks to the UK’s strict Gun Control Laws.

• In 1920, Britain passed a law requiring civilians to obtain a certificate from their district police chief in order to purchase or possess any firearm except a shotgun. To obtain this certificate, a British citizen  had to pay a fee, and the chief of police had to be “satisfied” that the applicant had “good reason for requiring such a certificate” and did not pose a “danger to the public safety or to the peace.” The certificate had to specify the types and quantities of firearms and ammunition that the applicant could purchase and keep.
• In 1968, Britain made the 1920 law stricter by requiring civilians to obtain a certificate from their district police chief in order to purchase or possess a shotgun. This law also required that firearm certificates specify the identification numbers (“if known”) of all firearms and shotguns owned by the applicant.
• In 1997, Britain passed a law requiring civilians to surrender almost all privately owned handguns to the police. More than 162,000 handguns and 1.5 million pounds of ammunition were “compulsorily surrendered” by February 1998. Using “records of firearms held on firearms certificates,” police accounted for all but fewer than eight of all legally owned handguns in England, Scotland, and Wales.

The homicide rate in England and Wales has averaged 52% higher since the outset of the 1968 gun control law and 15% higher since the outset of the 1997 handgun ban.

So, they have an unarmed, vulnerable citizenry.

And now, thanks to years of wide open borders, they have a Muslim Population Problem.

An article titled, Britain Vs. Muslim Immigration, posted on April 21, 2011, imparts some staggering information…

By any measure, the Muslim population in Britain has skyrocketed over the past ten years. Based on official estimates, Britain’s Muslim population has grown from 1.6 million in 2001 (when the British Census first began to measure religion) to 1,870,000 in 2004, to 2,422,000 in 2008, to 2,869,000 in 2010. That is an overall increase of more than 1.2 million, according to data compiled by the British government’s Labour Force Survey (LFS), which were first published by the Times of London newspaper in January 2009, later confirmed by Hansard, the official report of debates in the British Parliament, and then updated by the Pew Research Center in September 2010.

In just two decades, the percentage of the British population born abroad has doubled to over 11%, according to the Office for National Statistics. In real terms, that amounts to nearly seven million immigrants, equal to the population of the City of London, or the equivalent of one immigrant every two minutes. This rate of inflow is 25 times higher than any previous period of immigration since the Norman Conquest of England in September 1066. Demographers forecast that at current trends, Britain’s population will exceed 70 million in less than twenty years, with almost all of that increase being driven by immigration. This would turn Britain into the most crowded country in Europe. According to a recent “Citizenship Survey,” 77% of those polled said immigration should be cut, with slightly more than half saying it should be reduced “by a lot.”

The Cross Party Group for Balanced Migration, a bi-partisan group that is attempting to protect and re-establish a sense of British national identity, has called for all parties in Britain to commit to keeping the population below 70 million. In January 2010, Cameron told the Andrew Marr Show on BBC One (here, here and here) that the population of Britain should be kept below 70 million “to relieve pressure on public services.” He made those remarks after the former Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Carey of Clifton, called for immigration caps to protect Britain’s Christian ethos.

In other words, Britain’s Muslim population has multiplied 10 times faster than the rest of society over the past decade, while the number of Christians in the country has dropped by more than two million during the same period. Demographers expect that trend to continue. A new study titled “The Future of the Global Muslim Population” forecasts that Britain’s Muslim population will double to 5.5 million within the next 20 years.

As Britain’s Muslim population grows, British society is being transformed in ways unimaginable just a few years ago. For example, Mohammed is now the most popular name for baby boys in Britain. And the number of mosques in Britain (1,689) has grown to almost the number of Anglican churches (1,700) that have recently been closed.

That was two years ago…the Muslim Population in the UK has increased, since then.

Welcome to the United States of America…in the not too distant future.

With Obama and the rest of the Progressives pushing Gun Confiscation (Control) and “Immigration Reform” (thank you, Gang of Eight), we could very well be mired in the same “multi-cultural” situation that the Land of my Ancestors finds its stuffy liberal self in today.

The secret to America’s strength has always been our legendary status as a Melting Pot…immigrants yearning to actually become Americans, and assimilating into our culture and embracing our way of life, with a patriotic love for America rivaling those of us who are native-born.

However, in recent years, under Progressive rule, America has come to resemble the Tower of Babel, instead of The Shining City on a Hill.

We must not let our sacred land fall into the trap sprung on empires such as the Ancient Roman Empire and now, the United Kingdom.

Our foreign enemies can become our domestic enemies.

Simply by walking across a border.

Until He Comes,

KJ

The UK: A Harbinger of America’s Future?

As I sit here writing this post, up on the wall to my right, sits my family crest, bought at the York, England Insignia Shoppe, in July of 1978.

My ancestors, Lords of York and Oxford, (England, not Mississippi) would not recognize their country anymore. If fact, they would probably think that they had traveled back in time to when barbarians ruled the land.

…And, they would be exactly right.

Exhibit A, courtesy of Reuters.com…

A campaign by opponents of late Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher to get the song “Ding Dong! The Witch Is Dead” to the top of the British pop charts to celebrate her death failed on Sunday although it did manage to reach second place.

Thatcher, who died aged 87 on Monday, deeply divided Britons and while some have paid warm tributes to the achievements of her right-wing Conservative governments, others said her privatization of swathes of industry had destroyed communities.

That opposition was manifested in a Facebook campaign to propel the witch song, from the 1939 film “The Wizard of Oz”, to number one in the charts, provoking anger from politicians of all parties, right-leaning media, and members of the public.

The Official Charts Company said 52,605 copies of the song had been sold, but that was about 6,000 shy of the chart-topping track “Need U” by British DJ Duke Dumont and singer A*M*E.

The top 40 best-selling singles are played weekly on BBC Radio but the broadcaster said on Friday it would only pay a five-second clip of the song as part of a news item, leading to accusations it had caved into political pressure.

“I understand the concerns about this campaign. I personally believe it is distasteful and inappropriate,” BBC Director-General Tony Hall said in a statement.

“However, I do believe it would be wrong to ban the song outright as free speech is an important principle.”

Exhibit B, courtesy of dailymail.co.uk…

Britain’s Got Talent has been hit by a huge backlash from viewers after broadcasting a performance from an 11-year-old schoolgirl singing a song about a one night stand, and a highly sexualised lapdancing performance – all before the 9pm watershed.

The first episode of this year’s ITV talent contest, which was shown at 7pm on Saturday night and watched by more than 13 million people, was branded ‘totally unsuitable’ by outraged parents.

It has also emerged that contestant Keri Graham, whose provocative performance saw her stripping down to her underwear, writhing semi-naked on a chair and gyrating on Simon Cowell, is a professional stripper who has posted a series of raunchy pictures of herself on a ‘stripagram’ agency website.

Appearing on stage shortly after 7.30pm, the 43-year-old, who was joined at the audition by her husband and teenage son Callum, told the show’s judges and audience members that she teaches ‘chair fitness classes’, before launching into the routine and dancing to explicit song Freak Me, by Another Level.

A second act featured 11-year-old Arixsander Libantino performing a rendition of Jennifer Hudson song One Night Only, which features the lyrics: ‘You’ve got one night only, that’s all you have to spare, let’s not pretend to care, come on, big baby, come on, we only have ‘til dawn.’

Provocative: Keri Graham stripped down to her underwear and danced to explicit song Freak Me, by Another Level

Miss Libantino’s parents Aristotle and Elma, who are from the Philippines, and were watching off-stage, received a standing ovation from Simon Cowell and his fellow judges, but viewers immediately took to the internet to express their disgust that she was allowed to sing a song which featured such adult lyrics, with one member of the public condemning the show by branding it ‘Britain’s Got Sleaze’.

Helen Marianne from Eastbourne, wrote online: ‘The song this young girl sang was totally unsuitable for her age – She’s 11 for Heaven’s sake. However good her voice is, something much more appropriate should have been chosen for her. It gave me the creeps if I’m honest.’

Another wrote: ‘Marvellous isn’t it? Viewing images of children online is deemed wrong and rightly so, yet TV put up an 11-year-old girl who then sings a very adult-themed song. All very wrong. Her parents should not have condoned this.’

Controversial: Arixsandra Libantino, 11, sang a Jennifer Hudson song about a one-night stand

A further comment said: ‘The child was singing an adult song and should NOT have been allowed to sing it as it make her look like a Lolita.’

Viewers were equally appalled by Mrs Graham’s lapdance routine, with richbrownowl writing: ‘This show is pre-watershed, so the appropriateness of a half-naked woman doing a sexually provocative act needs to be called into question. This is a family entertainment show after all. No, I am not a prude.’

Family viewing?: Lyrics in the schoolgirl’s song included ‘let’s pretend not to care, come on big baby, come on, we only have til dawn’

Another post read: ‘Nice Saturday night family viewing as your child asks, “Mummy, why has that lady got hardly any clothes on, and what is she doing with those men?” So even a simple talent show has to have some sleaze.’

Jojo Moyes added on Twitter: ‘I hate that lapdancer moves are somehow considered family entertainment.’ Former X Factor winner Steve Brookstein also condemned the show, saying: ‘Family entertainment and BGT have a lap dancer. Stay classy ITV.’

Both acts were put through to the next round of the talent contest, with contestants competing for the £500,000 prize money and a place in the Royal Variety Show, which will be performed in front of the Queen.

Exhibit C, courtesy of cbn.com…

Stoning for adultery. Amputations for theft. Death for apostates. And second-class status for Christians and Jews. This is life under Sharia law, the Islamic system practiced in countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Great Britain.

Yes, Great Britain.

There are reportedly some 85 Sharia courts now operating there, with Islamic judges ruling on cases ranging from financial to marital disputes among British Muslims.

“We went into some proceedings and there were a couple of Islamic judges sitting up above the rest,” said Alan Craig, who recently stepped down as leader of the Christian Peoples Alliance party. “And there was one Muslim woman who was suing for divorce.”

Craig is a former city councilor in East London, home to several Sharia courts where women face open discrimination.

“A woman’s witness value is half that of a man,” Craig told CBN News. “So [the courts] will tend, therefore, to take the man’s position in a divorce.”

Craig is working with Baroness Caroline Cox to pass a bill in Britain’s House of Lords protecting women from this Sharia oppression.

Muslim women in Great Britain often face intimidation within their communities to settle things the Sharia way. According to Craig, some wrongly believe Islamic courts are their only option.

“What we’re trying to do is say, Muslim women, especially in this country, need to be informed,” he explained. “They actually have other rights and our view, better rights, under English law.”

Sharia courts operate outside of British common law. Their defenders say the courts are legal under a 1996 Arbitration Act that allows people to settle differences through methods of their own choosing.

The UK is an classic example of decades of Liberalism run amok.

What was a proud sovereign land, has seemingly degenerated into a shell of its former self, ripe pickings, as the Roman Empire was, for the barbaric horde.

Is it possible that what is happening in the UK, is a harbinger of America’s future?

The UK already allows homosexual marriage,has stringent gun control, and allows abortions, up to the 24 week s (6 months).

In fact, surveys show that Christians could be a minority in the UK by 2018.

The clash between the Muslim faithful and the unchurched of the UK should be horribly fascinating to watch.

Unfortunately, just like our blessed land…they have brought this upon themselves.

God save the UK…and America, too.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama Hypocricy: Abu Ghaith and Unmanned Drones

Have you ever thought about where our rights as Americans come from? Are they rights that are common and applicable to every individual born 0n this terrestrial ball? Or, are they unique to those of us, graced by God, with the gift of having been born in the greatest country on the face of His green Earth?

Evidently, President Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) and his Attorney General believe that the previously mentioned rights are universal.

The Obama Administration has captured Abu Ghaith, a Kuwaiti member of Al Qaeda,a member of Osama bin Laden’s family, believe it or not, and, instead of interring him in Gitmo, where he belongs, they have conferred upon this enemy combatant the same rights as you or I, American citizens, have. Obama and Holder have brought him to the United States for a civilian trial in a Manhattan courtroom, ironically, one mile from Ground Zero, where he’s already appeared in court to plead not guilty to charges of conspiracy to kill Americans.

According to Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), in an op ed he has written for foxnews.com,

Enemy combatants should be interrogated relentlessly, not given Miranda warnings.

Enemy combatants shouldn’t be tried in civilian courtrooms in the middle of a densely populated city – creating a much softer target for a spectacular and symbolic terrorist attack than a fortified military base like Guantanamo Bay.

Moreover, if we’re going to make the legal argument at home and abroad that we’re at war, why play right into our critics’ hands by suddenly and arbitrarily treating our war like an episode of “CSI: New York”?

Our enemies, working with their allies on the international left, want America’s hands to be tied, for us to use police methods and – more importantly – police weapons and tactics even while they arm themselves to the teeth and work tirelessly to kill as many Americans as they can.

Already our military is under extreme pressure, even from some of our allies, to adopt a law-enforcement approach even in the conduct of our military operations in Afghanistan.

Our rules of engagement are sometimes so restrictive that they can lead to loss of American life and grant actual battlefield advantages to the Taliban.

While we’re in the midst of an international argument over the law of armed conflict, we just handed our ideological opponents something more than a significant propaganda victory – we handed them a real-life example to use as the foundation for a new “customary international law” that is the form of binding international law created by nations’ actual policies and practices in fighting terror.

In addition, the Obama administration is demonstrating that it exists as an “imperial presidency.” One that is more arbitrary than the Bush administration it so self-righteously criticized. Under this Obama doctrine, the ultimate questions of war and peace, life and death, appear to follow no principle or pattern beyond the administration’s own whims.

This administration has failed to articulate a coherent approach to fighting deadly enemies. It brags about its “kill list” during a presidential campaign, yet after the campaign it doesn’t seem to mind when Egypt denies us access to the Benghazi suspects (by the way – where is the retaliation for that dreadful attack?).

Simply put, Bin Laden family members should not get their day in court in Manhattan.

The distinguished barrister is absolutely correct.

By conferring American rights on a barbaric, murderous, Islamic Terrorist, who would just as soon behead us Infidels as look at us, Obama has given our enemy the right to remain silent, which shuts down our intelligence agencies’ ability to get any information from him which may save American lives in the future.

Not to mention the fact that he is putting the people of New York City in danger from the very same Jihadists who killed over 3,000 in that very same city on that horrible day of September 11, 2001.

Furthermore, the Manchurian President has conferred upon this barbarian, rights and privileges bequeathed to us by our Founding Fathers, in the magnificent document they wrote for us to govern ourselves by, known as the United States Constitution.

In the section which contains the first Ten Amendments to this living and breathing document, known as the Bill of Rights, are the Fifth and Sixth Amendments, it states,

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

By bestowing upon this murderous Islamic Thug, and those like him, the rights and privileges of the very citizens they are trying to slaughter, Obama and Holder have proven themselves to be the world’s biggest hypocrites.

Because, at the same time they are wrapping these murderous Muslims in a Constitutional blanket of rights, woven by our Founding Fathers, specifically for American citizens, they have been intimating the fact that they plan to violate the Constitutional Rights of actual Americans, by using unmanned drones to hunt them down and kill them on American soil without due process.

Which begs the question: Why are they protecting the rights of our enemies and are so loathe to protect the rights of American citizens, whom they are sworn to protect “from enemies foreign and domestic”?

Anti-American, treasonous, or just plain Impeachable…or all of the above?

Until He Comes,

KJ

Atheists Complain About “Extensive Discrimination” to the UN. Christian Martyrs Unavailable for Comment.

An International Group representing atheists, humanists, and freethinkers told the United Nations yesterday that they face widespread discrimination around the world. In fact, according to them, when they express their views, they are treated as criminals in some countries, and even subject to to capital punishment.

The group presented a document to the UN’s human Rights Council that claims atheism has been banned by law in a number of countries where people were forced to officially adopt a faith.

According to Reuters News Service on Yahoo.com…

“Extensive discrimination by governments against atheists, humanists and the non-religious occurs worldwide,” declared the grouping, the International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU) which has some 120 member bodies in 45 countries.

In Afghanistan, Iran, Maldives, Mauritania, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Sudan “atheists can face the death penalty on the grounds of their belief” although this was in violation of U.N. human rights accords, the IHEU said.

Further, in several others legal measures “effectively criminalize atheism (and) the expression and manifestation of atheist beliefs” or lead to systematic discrimination against freethinkers, the document declared.

It was submitted to the rights council as it opened its annual Spring session against a background of new efforts in the U.N. by Muslim countries to obtain a world ban on denigration of religion, especially what they call “Islamophobia”.

Three of the states with legislation providing for death for blasphemy against Islam, a charge which can be applied to atheists who publicly reveal their ideas, are on the council – Pakistan, Mauritania and Maldives.

Turkey’s Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu told the council on Monday there was a “rising trend” of Islamophobia, adding: “We condemn all sorts of incitement to hatred and religious discrimination against Muslims and people of other faiths.”

And earlier this month a top official of the 57-nation Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) said the body would be focusing on getting agreement on criminalizing denigration of religion in coming talks with Western countries.

In November last year, the head of the 21-country Arab League told the U.N. Security Council in New York his organisation wanted a binding international framework to ensure “that religious faith and its symbols are respected”.

The IHEU, and other non-governmental rights groupings, argue that many Muslim governments use this terminology and the concept of “religious blasphemy” within their own countries to cow both atheists and followers of other religions.

A number of these governments “prosecute people who express their religious doubt or dissent, regardless of whether those dissenters identify as atheist”, the IHEU document submitted to the rights council said.

Islamic countries – including Bangladesh, Bahrain, Egypt, Indonesia, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia and Turkey – had also stepped up prosecution of “blasphemous” expression of criticism of religion in social media like Facebook and Twitter.

OIC countries have 15 seats on the council, all from Asia, Africa and the Middle East, and make up just less than one third of the rights body.

Notice that Christian countries are not mentioned by this group?

Per CatholicNews.org…

…there are currently 2.18 billion Christians in more than 200 countries around the world, representing nearly a third of the estimated 6.9 billion global population in 2010.

The study, conducted by the US-based Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life, found Christians to be so geographically widespread that no single continent or region can indisputably claim to be the centre of global Christianity.

The study, Global Christianity: A Report on the Size and Distribution of the World’s Christian Population, cites that 100 years ago, two-thirds of the world’s Christians lived in Europe but today only about a quarter of all Christians live there.

More than one-third of Christians live in the Americas; about a quarter live in sub-Saharan Africa and 13 percent live in Asia and the Pacific.

The data indicates that during the past 100 years, the number of Christians around the world has more than tripled from historical estimates of approximately 600 million in 1910 to more than 2 billion today.

But the world’s overall population has also risen rapidly, from an estimated 1.8 billion in 1910 to 6.9 billion in 2010. As a result, Christians make up about the same portion of the world’s population in 2010 (32 percent) as they did a century ago (35 percent).

The study also reveals that although Europe and the Americas are still home to a majority (63 percent) of the world’s Christians, that share is much lower than it was in 1910 when it was 93 percent. In the past 100 years, the number of Christians grew significantly in sub-Saharan Africa and the Asia-Pacific region.

In fact…

In 2012, Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary (GCTS) reported that globally every day there are 800 less atheists per day, 1,100 less non-religious (agnostic) people per day and 83,000 more people professing to be Christians per day.

In 2011, the American Spectator declared concerning research published in the International Bulletin of Missionary Research:

“The report estimates about 80,000 new Christians every day, 79,000 new Muslims every day, and 300 fewer atheists every day. These atheists are presumably disproportionately represented in the West, while religion is thriving in the Global South, where charismatic Christianity is exploding.”

An Observation….

Christians are being martyred for their faith every day.

According to deseretnews.com, in an article posted 9/2/11,,

On average, a Christian is martyred every five minutes — killed because of their faith.

Zenit.org and CatholicCulture.org reported on a presentation by Massimo Introvigne of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe that he gave in this summer at the “International Conference on Inter-religious dialogue between Christians, Jews and Muslims.”

Introvigne told the conference gathered near Budapest the number of Christians killed every year for their faith is about 105,000. And these are only those who were put to death because they were Christians. It does not include those killed as victims of war.

“If these numbers are not cried out to the world, if this slaughter is not stopped, if it is not acknowledged that the persecution of Christians is the first worldwide emergency in the matter of violence and religious discrimination, the dialogue between religions will only produce beautiful conferences but no concrete results,” Introvigne said according to Zenit.org.

Introvigne wrote an article for the Center for Studies on New Religions website that explained more behind the numbers. The statistics came from the late David B. Barrett and the Center for Study of Global Christianity.

Barrett and Todd M. Johnson said from AD 30 to 2000, 70 million Christians died as martyrs. The majority of those martyrs were not in ancient times. There were 45 million Christian martyrs in the 20th century. Introvigne emphasized these figures “exclude those killed for national, ethnic or political reasons who just happened to be Christian but were not killed because of their being Christian.”

Barrett and Johnson’s figures attribute 31.6 million of those 70 million Christian martyrs to atheist persecutors. Muslims killed another 9.1 million Christians.

When is the United Nations going to do something about the persecution of Christians throughout the world? 

History shows that believers faced death at the hands of both Muslims and atheists.

Unfortunately for the “free thinkers” living in Muslim-dominated countries, Islam does not teach forgiveness and compassion. Their faith teaches conversion and obedience…and death to the infidels.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama at the UN: It’s That Darned Video’s Fault!

Yesterday, the 44th President of these United States, Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm), gave a conciliatory speech at the United Nations General Assembly, not designed to show the courage and conviction of the country he is supposed to be protecting, but, instead, designed to kiss the Muslim anarchists’ …ummm…errr…well…you know.

Here are some excerpts of that speech from cnn.com:

…At times, the conflicts arise along the fault lines of race or tribe; and often they arise from the difficulties of reconciling tradition and faith with the diversity and interdependence of the modern world. In every country, there are those who find different religious beliefs threatening; in every culture, those who love freedom for themselves must ask themselves how much they are willing to tolerate freedom for others.

That is what we saw play out in the last two weeks, as a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world. Now, I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video, and I believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity. It is an insult not only to Muslims, but to America as well – for as the city outside these walls makes clear, we are a country that has welcomed people of every race and every faith. We are home to Muslims who worship across our country. We not only respect the freedom of religion – we have laws that protect individuals from being harmed because of how they look or what they believe. We understand why people take offense to this video because millions of our citizens are among them.

…The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. But to be credible, those who condemn that slander must also condemn the hate we see in the images of Jesus Christ that are desecrated, or churches that are destroyed, or the Holocaust that is denied. Let us condemn incitement against Sufi Muslims, and Shia pilgrims. It is time to heed the words of Gandhi: “Intolerance is itself a form of violence and an obstacle to the growth of a true democratic spirit.” Together, we must work towards a world where we are strengthened by our differences, and not defined by them. That is what America embodies. That’s the vision we will support.

Not exactly awe-inspiring.  More like Awww-inspiring.

Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan believe that Obama has not exactly been forthcoming on how the Libya situation, including the murder of Ambassador Chris Stevens, transpired.

 Fox News Reports:

Mitt Romney, in a joint Fox News interview with running mate Paul Ryan, accused the Obama administration of failing “to level with the American people” about how the U.S. Consulate in Libya was attacked, leaving the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans dead.

“Look, we expect candor from the president and transparency, and he continues to refuse what is said by the other members of his administration: This was a terrorist attack. We were attacked apparently by Al Qaeda and it is a very troubling development,” Romney said during a campaign stop in Ohio.

Romney’s comments underscored complaints made by Republican lawmakers, who question the administration’s shifting explanation, starting with claims that the Sept. 11 strike was “spontaneous” violence tied to protests over an anti-Islam film produced in the U.S. Obama officials gradually walked back that description, and Obama acknowledged Monday that it clearly “wasn’t just a mob action” — though he did not go as far as to call it a terrorist attack.

One of Obama’s advisers, National Counterterrorism Center Director Matt Olsen, was more direct last week, testifying to Congress that the four Americans “were killed in the course of a terrorist attack.”

“When the director of the Counterterrorism Center comes to Congress and testifies and says that this is a terrorist attack … I think you would want to ask that question of the president, why he is not on the same page with his own administration officials?” Ryan said.

Obama devoted much of his address Tuesday to the United Nations General Assembly to the attack in Libya and unrest in the Mideast. He paid tribute to Ambassador Chris Stevens, who died in the attack, recalling Stevens’ time serving in the Peace Corps as an English instructor in Morocco.

“Chris Stevens embodied the best of America,” Obama said.

The president went on to restate his administration’s support for the Arab Spring, calling it a “season of progress.” But he said the recent violence and unrest is indicative of the difficulties along the way. “True democracy — real freedom — is hard work,” he said.

The president, however, did not mention terrorism in his U.N. speech, and he has yet to elaborate on how extremists were able to launch what now appears to have been a coordinated attack on the consulate. Obama and others in his administration have been criticized by Republicans for not taking a more definitive stance on the attack.

Obama, in an interview taped Monday on ABC’s “The View,” condemned extremist elements in the Muslim world and vowed the U.S. is “not going to shrink back from the world because of this.”

“We are going to hunt down those who did this,” he said. “We will bring them to justice.”

He also said in the interview, which aired Tuesday, that there was “no doubt” that the assault “wasn’t just a mob action” but a sign of extremism in nations lacking stability. “What’s been interesting, just this past week, there were these massive protests against these extremists militias that are suspected, maybe, of having been involved in this attack.”

In interviews and at campaign events Monday, Romney assailed Obama’s leadership abroad, leading a chorus of Republicans in criticizing the president for what they said was minimizing the death of the Ambassador Stevens. Obama, in an interview with CBS’ “60 Minutes,” said recent violence in the Mideast was due to “bumps in the road” on the way to democracy. Romney on Monday also suggested Obama was leaving American foreign policy at the mercy of events instead of working to shape global politics in America’s interest.

In other words, Obama and the Mild Bunch (his administration) are not going out there and stopping things before they happen…they are waiting until horrible things, such as Ambassador Stevens’ murder, happen…and then apologizing to the murderers…as if America made them happen.

Because, Lord knows, it’s not the fault of those beheading Barbarians, known as the Muslim Brotherhood and/or al Qaeda…is it?

An unwatched video made them do it.

 

The Muslim Riots: Those Aren’t Videos They’re Burning…

Yesterday, in front of America’s Press Corps and the entire world, Obama’s Press Secretary, Jay Carney, lied his bespectacled backside off.

Here’s the exchange, courtesy of realclearpolitics.com:

JAKE TAPPER: Wouldn’t it seem logical that the anniversary of 9/11 would be a time that you would want to have extra security around diplomats and military posts?

JAY CARNEY: Well, as you know, we are very vigilant around anniversaries like 9/11. The president is always briefed and brought up to speed on all the precautions being taken. But, Jake, let’s be clear. These protests were in reaction to a video that had spread to the region.

TAPPER: At Benghazi?

CARNEY: We certainly don’t know. We don’t know otherwise. We have no information to suggest that it was a pre-planned attack. The unrest we’ve seen around the region has been in reaction to a video that Muslims, many Muslims, find offensive. And while the violence is reprehensible and unjustified, it is not a reaction to the 9/11 anniversary, that we know of, or to U.S. policy.

Mr. Carney…if movies caused people to riot, we Southerners would have burned Hollywood down to the ground because of that awful “Dukes of Hazzard” movie.

RadicalIslam.org very adroitly chronicles the real reason that the barbarians are rioting:

The apparent cause for this latest spasm of carefully-coordinated, anti-American violence in the lands of the so-called “Arab Spring,” where direct intervention by the U.S. was decisive in bringing to power the jihadist forces of the Muslim Brotherhood, was a film (soon to be released) deemed offensive to Islam and the Muslim prophet Muhammad that was made in the U.S.

The Salafist president of an Egyptian TV channel, Wesam Abdel-Wareth, deliberately whipped up Egyptian fury when he issued a call for a demonstration outside the U.S. Embassy over the film. Most Embassy personnel had left before the chaos began and no one appears to have been injured in the Cairo attack; ominously, though, the Egyptian security presence outside the facility was notably light even as the mob was gathering.

As Andrew McCarthy wrote at The National Review Online, these were acts of war. There can be no question but that they were coordinated acts of war, purposely timed to fall on America’s solemn day of commemoration of the worst jihadist attacks ever committed on the U.S. homeland (by Iran and al-Qa’eda, which sprang from the Muslim Brotherhood).

Diplomatic facilities are the sovereign territory of the country to which they belong. The host country is responsible for their security – and even though neither Egyptian nor Libyan uniformed government forces directly participated in the attacks, it is obvious that their Muslim Brotherhood supporters, the ones who elected them to office and who are now calling for jihad and sharia, were.

Moreover, it is also clear that the U.S. Department of State was aware of the impending threat to its facilities over the film because its Cairo Embassy issued a despicable statement of abject appeasement in advance of the attacks that offered up the treasured right of American free speech on the altar of Islamophobia.

U.S. Embassy Condemns Religious Incitement

September 11, 2012

The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims – as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions. Today, the 11th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, Americans are honoring our patriots and those who serve our nation as the fitting response to the enemies of democracy. Respect for religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy. We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others.

That statement came directly out of the talking points of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) on its Ten-Year Programme of Action and is intended by both the OIC and the U.S. Department of State to impose legal limits on Americans’ freedom of speech by criminalizing criticism of Islam. Recall that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton hosted OIC Secretary General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu in Washington, D.C. in mid-December 2011 to discuss implementation mechanisms for “Resolution 16/18,” a declaration adopted by the U.N. Human Rights Council in April 2011.

Resolution 16/18 calls on countries to combat “intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization” based on religion without criminalizing free speech – except in cases of “incitement to imminent violence.” If now the measure of “incitement to imminent violence” is a “test of consequences” that imposes prior restraint on freedom of expression because of the unpredictability of volatile Muslim populaces easily roused to murderous fury, as in Benghazi and Cairo, then Islamic law on slander will have been enforced.

This is the real meaning of these attacks, which were purposefully calculated precisely to elicit the craven press release quoted above from the U.S. State Department. This is how dhimmitude is implemented. Islamic Jihad and Gama’a al-Islamiyya demands for the release of Omar Abdul Rahman (the “Blind Sheikh”), now serving a life sentence in U.S. federal prison for his involvement in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, also have been issued, along with a threat to burn the U.S. Cairo Embassy to the ground if these demands are not met.

The sixth President of the United States of America, John Quincy Adams, wrote the following about the nature of Islam:

THE ESSENCE OF HIS [MUHAMMAD'S] DOCTRINE WAS VIOLENCE AND LUST: TO EXALT THE BRUTAL OVER THE SPIRITUAL PART OF HUMAN NATURE [Adams' capital letters]… Between these two religions, thus contrasted in their characters, a war of twelve hundred years has already raged. The war is yet flagrant… While the merciless and dissolute dogmas of the false prophet shall furnish motives to human action, there can never be peace upon earth, and goodwill towards men…The precept of the Koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God. The vanquished may purchase their lives, by the payment of tribute; the victorious may be appeased by a false and delusive promise of peace; and the faithful follower of the prophet, may submit to the imperious necessities of defeat: but the command to propagate the Moslem creed by the sword is always obligatory, when it can be made effective. The commands of the prophet may be performed alike, by fraud, or by force.

I’m sure that there are those among you saying, “Well, KJ, what about all the nice Muslims, who aren’t involved in this mess?”

I have met many nice Muslims in my life. My question, though, is, “Why aren’t those Muslims who have pledged allegiance to OUR flag speaking up against this wanton violence against their own countrymen?”

Hmmmmm?

Preparing for Remembrance: A 9/10 State of Mind

A Note From KJ: I wrote this article on September 10, of last year.  I share it on this 11th anniversary as a reminder. Never forget the fallen.

As our nation prepares for tomorrow’s day of remembrance, in commemoration of the largest Islamic Terrorist Attack ever on American soil, a realization struck me:

If it was up to this country’s Progressive Politicians, Americans would ignore the horrific events of that day, and forever be stuck in a 9/10 state of mind.

Let’s look at the words and actions of New York City’s own Mayor Michael Bloomberg, as an example:

From nydaily news.com:

Mayor Bloomberg touted New York as “the safest place to be” Friday morning, even as an unconfirmed terror threat loomed over the city.

On his weekly radio program, Bloomberg said the city was prepared to handle a sinister plot that surfaced days before the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

“I’m not at liberty to talk about the details of it,” he said. “Keep in mind we have threats all the time: on the Internet, every day, particularly around big sporting events, religious holiday and other commemorations of things like 9/11.

“And each time the NYPD with the FBI, we increase our security, and obviously we’ve done that for this.”

The mayor described the threat as “credible” but not “corroborated,” meaning it comes from a single source.

“‘Corroboration’ means multiple sources, which increases the likelihood that it’s real,” he said. “‘Credible’ means it’s possible.”

Security was ramped up around the city as federal officials reported Thursday night that New York and Washington, D.C., may be in the terrorists’ cross hairs, following a “credible” threat.

Bloomberg said he rode the subway to City Hall on Friday morning, and was planning to go to the U.S. Open tonight.

“It’s serious, but the right answer is go about your business. If you lock yourself in your house because you’re scared, they’re winning.”

In an appearance on the CBS “Early Show,” Bloomberg said the city’s 3,000 security cameras, radiation detectors and far-flung cops would keep New Yorkers safe.

“The level of security in this city probably makes New York the safest place to be,” he said.

The FBI and the Department of Homeland Security warned of a potential plot to “avenge Osama Bin Laden’s death” a decade after the attacks that claimed nearly 3,000 lives.

Bloomberg said New York always hikes up security around 9/11, but said the city is well-protected at all times. This time around, he said on his radio show, security is “a little more.”

“Everyone should feel just as comfortable,” he said.

“The message is, over the 10 years: New York is back, and the terrorists haven’t won.”

This from the same guy, who in 2010, backed to the hilt the building of the Ground Zero Mosque.

And, is excluding New York’s heroic first responders from the official ceremony, per newser.com:

They risked their health and safety in the aftermath of the 9/11 terror attacks, but now officials say some 3,000 first responders will not receive invites to the 10th anniversary ceremony at Ground Zero due to space constraints, reports CNN. The city maintains that the ceremony, which will be attended by two presidents, is for victims’ families. “We’re working to find ways to recognize and honor first responders, and other groups, at different places and times,” says a rep for the mayor’s office.

“The best of the best that this country offered 10 years ago are being neglected and denied their rightful place,” complains the founder of an advocacy group for emergency crews who worked at Ground Zero. “I’m crying because it’s really a big betrayal on the part of the city, to rob me from my way to pay homage and to find that comfort and healing,” says one first responder. Other first responders say they believe they are being excluded from the ceremony to keep those suffering from untreated illnesses related to 9/11 out of the spotlight.

Those brave first responders were family men,  Christian Americans, many just good ol’ Catholic boys (as we say in Dixie).

However, that aspect of their lives, their Christianity, will not be allowed to be spoken of in the New York City official remembrance:

Here is what attorney and Catholic Deacon Keith Fournier  wrote in his op ed, Oppose Mayor Bloomberg’s Exclusion of Clergy and Prayer from 9/11 Memorial, posted at catholic.org:

Like all Americans, 9/11/2011 forever changed my life. I have my “Ground Zero Heroes”  and, I will write about one in particular on that day. I remember the outcry of goodness which followed the evil act; the heroism, the virtue, the demonstration of authentic charity and true solidarity. I remember the spontaneous outpouring of religious expression manifested in our national response. I will never forget the emergence of the Ground Zero Cross and all the memorials which were built everywhere as that crater became a shrine.

However, the Mayor of New York will exclude clergy and will censor religious expression at our National Memorial. His actions are not only insensitive, they are unjust. There has been an outcry from Religious leaders and from most Americans. However, Mayor Bloomberg has unilaterally decided to disregard our history, misinterpret our Constitution and dishonor many who lost their lives on that day which will forever define America. He should be ashamed.

 Here is the tragic toll  of 9/11/01, broken down by the numbers.  Courtesy of nymag.com:

The initial numbers are indelible: 8:46 a.m. and 9:02 a.m. Time the burning towers stood: 56 minutes and 102 minutes. Time they took to fall: 12 seconds. From there, they ripple out.

• Total number killed in attacks (official figure as of 9/5/02): 2,819
• Number of firefighters and paramedics killed: 343
• Number of NYPD officers: 23
• Number of Port Authority police officers: 37
• Number of WTC companies that lost people: 60
• Number of employees who died in Tower One: 1,402
• Number of employees who died in Tower Two: 614
• Number of employees lost at Cantor Fitzgerald: 658
• Number of U.S. troops killed in Operation Enduring Freedom: 22
• Number of nations whose citizens were killed in attacks: 115
• Ratio of men to women who died: 3:1
• Age of the greatest number who died: between 35 and 39
• Bodies found “intact”: 289
• Body parts found: 19,858
• Number of families who got no remains: 1,717
• Estimated units of blood donated to the New York Blood Center: 36,000
• Total units of donated blood actually used: 258
• Number of people who lost a spouse or partner in the attacks: 1,609
• Estimated number of children who lost a parent: 3,051
• Percentage of Americans who knew someone hurt or killed in the attacks: 20
• FDNY retirements, January–July 2001: 274
• FDNY retirements, January–July 2002: 661
• Number of firefighters on leave for respiratory problems by January 2002: 300
• Number of funerals attended by Rudy Giuliani in 2001: 200
• Number of FDNY vehicles destroyed: 98
• Tons of debris removed from site: 1,506,124
• Days fires continued to burn after the attack: 99
• Jobs lost in New York owing to the attacks: 146,100
• Days the New York Stock Exchange was closed: 6
• Point drop in the Dow Jones industrial average when the NYSE reopened: 684.81
• Days after 9/11 that the U.S. began bombing Afghanistan: 26
• Total number of hate crimes reported to the Council on American-Islamic Relations nationwide since 9/11: 1,714
• Economic loss to New York in month following the attacks: $105 billion
• Estimated cost of cleanup: $600 million
• Total FEMA money spent on the emergency: $970 million
• Estimated amount donated to 9/11 charities: $1.4 billion
• Estimated amount of insurance paid worldwide related to 9/11: $40.2 billion
• Estimated amount of money needed to overhaul lower-Manhattan subways: $7.5 billion
• Amount of money recently granted by U.S. government to overhaul lower-Manhattan subways: $4.55 billion
• Estimated amount of money raised for funds dedicated to NYPD and FDNY families: $500 million
• Percentage of total charity money raised going to FDNY and NYPD families: 25
• Average benefit already received by each FDNY and NYPD widow: $1 million
• Percentage increase in law-school applications from 2001 to 2002: 17.9
• Percentage increase in Peace Corps applications from 2001 to 2002: 40
• Percentage increase in CIA applications from 2001 to 2002: 50
• Number of songs Clear Channel Radio considered “inappropriate” to play after 9/11: 150
• Number of mentions of 9/11 at the Oscars: 26
• Apartments in lower Manhattan eligible for asbestos cleanup: 30,000
• Number of apartments whose residents have requested cleanup and testing: 4,110
• Number of Americans who changed their 2001 holiday-travel plans from plane to train or car: 1.4 million
• Estimated number of New Yorkers suffering from post-traumatic-stress disorder as a result of 9/11: 422,000

9/11 was indelibly seared into the collective memories of Americans on that fateful day, regardless of the present-day wishes of a minority percentage of our population.

As we prepare to remember our fallen, I have but one question for the milk-soppish, near-treasonous, Blame America First crowd:

Have You Forgotten?

 

Jumah at the DNC: No Pork Ribs Allowed.

Guess what religious group is being featured at Obama’s Democratic National Convention? I give you a clue: it ain’t Christians.

Breitbart.com reports:

The first Muslim to deliver the daily prayer to the U.S. House of Representatives was black convert Siraj Wahaj in 1991. It was an artful prayer, though he would deliver a very different message elsewhere just one year later. His ideas of what he really wanted as regards our federal government were fairly clear, “If we were united and strong, we’d elect our own emir [leader] and give allegiance to him. . . . [T]ake my word, if 6-8 million Muslims unite in America, the country will come to us.”

Later, in 1995, he was a character witness for Omar Abdel Rahman, or blind sheikh, who was found guilty of conspiracy to overthrow the American government. The U.S. attorney for New York even listed Wahaj as an “unindicted persons who may be alleged as co-conspirators” in that case.

Yet, none of that seems to matter to Democrats intent on focusing on Islam as part of their party’s upcoming national convention with an event, “Jumah at the 2012 DNC.”

The Democratic National Convention will open with a focus on Islam. 20,000 Muslims are expected to attend according to the Bureau of Indigenous Muslim Affairs (BIMA), the national Muslim American non-profit coordinating the two days of events they claim are non-political.

As noted by M. Zuhdi Jasser here, the leaders of Jumah at the 2012 DNC are Jibril Hough and the same Siraj Wahhaj. “They are radicals,” writes Jasser. “These individuals embrace Islamist supremacy and have demonstrated support for radical ideologies.”

As for Jibril Hough, when not putting on events for the Democrat Party, he’s busy trying to undermine America’s war on terror.

‘Myrick’s latest attempt at fighting terrorism is nothing more than a fear campaign,’ said Jibril Hough, a spokesman for the Islamic Center of Charlotte. ‘It is nothing more than a new McCarthyism, or Myrickism. As Muslims, we have become expendable as politicians like Myrick seek political gain.’

Is it fair to say Democrats are embracing radicals at their upcoming national convention? It seems more than fair to say it, based upon the evidence.

But wait…there’s more! As frontpagemag.com reports:

But the most disturbing aspect of the entire “Jumah at the DNC” is not the obvious victimhood-mongering of its agenda, but the people involved. The Democrats are playing host to an unsavory gang of Islamic supremacists with numerous ties to jihad groups. Even this is not surprising, but it should be a matter of concern to any Americans who are more aware of the jihad threat than the average politically correct Democrat pol.

Take, for example, BIMA spokesman Jibril Hough. Hough’s mosque, the Islamic Center of Charlotte, is owned by a Muslim Brotherhood group, the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT), which was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation Hamas terror funding case. When confronted about this on a radio show, Hough first professed not to be aware of the charges against NAIT, and then refused to disavow the organization, saying only that he himself was “not necessarily” a member of NAIT and: “I was not involved in the decision to allow NAIT to be the [title] holder.”

Meanwhile, the “Grand Imam” for Jumah at the DNC is none other than Siraj Wahhaj. Wahhaj is one of the most sought-after speakers on the Muslim circuit, and has addressed audiences all over the country; in 1991, he even became the first Muslim to give an invocation to the U.S. Congress. After 9/11, his renown as a moderate Muslim grew when he declared: “I now feel responsible to preach, actually to go on a jihad against extremism.” But as with so many other Muslim leaders in the U.S., Siraj Wahhaj is not as moderate as he may appear at first glance.

Wahhaj was several years ago designated a “potential unindicted co-conspirator” in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. He himself has denounced this designation as essentially meaningless, but he didn’t earn it by doing nothing. In the early 1990s he squired the Blind Sheikh, Omar Abdel Rahman, all around New York City and New Jersey, sponsoring talks by him in area mosques. The Blind Sheikh, of course, is now serving a life sentence for his role in the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993, as well as in jihad plots to blow up the Lincoln and Holland Tunnels.

Hold on…there’s even more! Per militantislammonitor.org:

In September 1991, Wahhaj stated the following:

“…And he [Allah] declared ‘Whoever is at war with my friends, I declare war on them.’ Who is a friend of Allah? [He chants a passage in Arabic] Allah. Your true friend is Allah, the messenger, and those who believe. Americans and Canadians. Hear it well. Hear what I’m telling you well. The Americans are not your friends, hear what I’m telling you, hear it well. The Canadians are not your friends, hear what I’m telling you, hear it well. The Europeans are not your friends. Your friend is Allah, the Messenger and those who believe. These people will never be satisfied with you until you follow their religion. They will never be satisfied with you…”

And boy, was he excited when Barack Hussein Obama (peace be upon him) got himself elected. In fact, the Blind Sheikh’s former associate wrote this  prayer, praising Allah:

MIM: A message from Siraj Wahhaj the Amir of MANA.

MANA Congratulates President-elect Barack Hussein Obama

The Muslim Alliance in North America congratulates President-elect Barack Hussein Obama on winning his bid for President of the United States of America. This election was historic in many ways and we know Muslims became actively involved.

We pray that Allah, Most High, will purify Obama’s heart, guide his actions and policies, and protect him and his family as he leads this nation. Furthermore, we encourage American Muslims to engage in forging an agenda and shaping the future of our society.

Let us all strive to be at the forefront of change in America–fighting for truth, justice and peace, and advocating for issues and policies that impact American Muslims and Muslims around the world, insha’Allah. I’m thankful to Allah that this striving is truly what drives the goals and initiatives at MANA.

May Allah, Most High, keep all of us rightly guided and obedient to His will.

Lovely.

So, this is how the 44th President’s Political Party rewards those who hate the fact that Americans are still living ?

 Are there fireworks planned?

God save the Union.

The Obama Administration and Terrorism: Don’t Say the “I” Word.

The War on Terror is still being fought by those who are sworn to protect us everyday…even if they are forbidden from publicly identifying or profiling the enemy.

Reuters News has the story:

Law enforcement and homeland security personnel face an average of 55 daily encounters with “known or suspected terrorists” named on government watchlists, officials told Reuters.

The figure – which equals more than 20,000 contacts per year – underscores the growing sweep of the watchlists, which have expanded significantly since a failed Christmas Day 2009 bombing attempt of a U.S. airliner. But officials note that very few of those daily contacts lead to arrests.

Civil liberties groups question the use of watchlists, and they have been ridiculed for ensnaring innocent citizens.

U.S. officials said the encounters, which involve airport and border security personnel as well as federal and local law enforcement officers, are reported to the Terrorist Screening Center (TSC), an interagency unit led by an FBI official based in a tightly guarded building in northern Virginia.

At its headquarters, the TSC operates a 24-hour command center, resembling something from a Hollywood thriller, complete with giant wall-screen projections and signs flashing “SECRET.”

Officials said that when a law enforcement or homeland security officer in the field stops a person whose name matches a name in the TSC’s databases, the officer is supposed to phone the TSC command center for instructions. Based on information in the databases, the TSC then will advise the officer in the field how to proceed, which could range from releasing the suspect to calling in federal officers as backup.

The command center gets between 100 and 150 inquiries a day, of which an average of 55 involve individuals who turn out to be listed on one of the federal watch lists, officials said. Of those calls, about 60 percent come from federal officers at border or airport security posts; the rest come from local police.

“There are incidents every single day,” said TSC director Timothy Healy.

The watchlists include the best known “no fly list” as well as a “selectee list” of people who the government thinks should get extra screening or questioning before being allowed to board an airplane.

…A suspect’s name is put on the “no fly” list if they are deemed by government experts to be a threat to aviation, to be planning an attack or if they are “operationally capable” and are known to be planning to attend, or to have already attended, a militant training camp.

Fewer than 500 of the individuals on the no-fly list are U.S. citizens, officials said.

Waitasec.  You mean we can start calling these jerks “terrorists” again?  I thought they were “misguided youths” creating “man-caused disasters”?  At least, that’s what we were told by newsbusters.org, back in March of 2009:

Even as President Obama compares bankers to suicide bombers, his Homeland Security Secretary is suggesting the T-word, terrorism, is too inflammatory and representative of old-fashioned “politics of fear.” She’s announced a new term: “man-caused disaster.” From an interview with the German magazine Der Spiegel:

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.

But what if the suicide bomber is a female? Isn’t it sexist to use “man-caused disaster”?

Why did the Obama Administration forbid the use of the term Islamic Terroist” in the first place?

Perhaps a clue to the answer to that may be found in the new book written by Ed Klein, “The Amateur:  Barack Obama in the White House”.  In the book, Klein says that Rev. Wright, a former American Muslim, took Obama under his wing, becoming a father figure to him.

“Obama was steeped in Islam but knew nothing about Christianity,” Klein says.

Klein asked Wright if he converted Obama from being a Muslim into a Christian.

“He said, I don’t know about that. but I can tell you that I made it easy for him to come to an understanding of who Jesus Christ is and not feel that he was turning his back on his Islamic friends and his Islamic traditions and his understanding of Islam,” Klein says.

In an article posted at The Daily Caller on October 21, 2011…

Deputy U.S. Attorney General James Cole confirmed on Wednesday that the Obama administration was pulling back all training materials used for the law enforcement and national security communities, in order to eliminate all references to Islam that some Muslim groups have claimed are offensive.

“I recently directed all components of the Department of Justice to re-evaluate their training efforts in a range of areas, from community outreach to national security,” Cole told a panel at the George Washington University law school.

The move comes after complaints from advocacy organizations including the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and others identified as Muslim Brotherhood front groups in the 2004 Holy Land Foundation terror fundraising trial.

In a Wednesday Los Angeles Times op-ed, Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) president Salam al-Marayati threatened the FBI with a total cutoff of cooperation between American Muslims and law enforcement if the agency failed to revise its law enforcement training materials.

Maintaining the training materials in their current state “will undermine the relationship between law enforcement and the Muslim American community,” al-Marayati wrote.

Multiple online sources detail MPAC’s close alignment with CAIR.

So, to recap, our Law Enforcement officials and Homeland Security Agents handle an average of 55 “terrorist” encounters per day, consisting of people who are recorded on a government watchlist, which includes a no-fly list, which has less than 500 U.S. Citizens listed on it.

Therefore, one must conclude that the majority of these terrorists are not U.S. Citizens.   

Hmmm.  I wonder who they are and where they hail from. Mongolia?

Come, Mr. Taliban…

When is a conspiracy theory, not a conspiracy theory?  When evidence is found to prove it as a fact.

Guardian.co.uk has the story:

Documents found in the house where Osama bin Laden was killed a year ago show a close working relationship between top al-Qaida leaders and Mullah Omar, the overall commander of the Taliban, including frequent discussions of joint operations against Nato forces in Afghanistan, the Afghan government and targets in Pakistan.

The communications show a three-way conversation between Bin Laden, his then deputy Ayman Zawahiri and Omar, who is believed to have been in Pakistan since fleeing Afghanistan after the collapse of his regime in 2001.

They indicate a “very considerable degree of ideological convergence”, a Washington-based source familiar with the documents told the Guardian.

The news will undermine hopes of a negotiated peace in Afghanistan, where the key debate among analysts and policymakers is whether the Taliban – seen by many as following an Afghan nationalist agenda – might once again offer a safe haven to al-Qaida or like-minded militants, or whether they can be persuaded to renounce terrorism.

One possibility, experts say, is that although Omar built a strong relationship with Bin Laden and Zawahiri, other senior Taliban commanders see close alliance or co-operation with al-Qaida as deeply problematic.

Western intelligence officials estimate that there are less than 100 al-Qaida-linked fighters in Afghanistan, and last year the United Nations split its sanctions list to separate the Taliban and al-Qaida.

Both David Cameron and US secretary of state Hillary Clinton have said that some kind of political settlement involving the Taliban is key to the stability of Afghanistan once most western troops have withdrawn by 2014.

Some communications in the documents date back several years but others are said to be from only weeks before the raid on 2 May last year in which Bin Laden died.

The Obama Administration has been reaching out to negotiate with the Taliban within the last year, in the misguided notion that you can negotiate with barbarians who want your whole nation to be wiped off the face of the earth.

Last week, thehill.com explained why this was a very stupid strategy:

The Taliban’s recent multi-pronged attacks, coming just a month after suspending talks with the U.S. is a stark reminder that peace negotiations remain a long shot at best, escalating an increasingly contentious debate over whether the insurgent group has any serious intentions of reaching a political settlement. Given the unpredictable nature of the enemy, adopting either policy — cease to participate, or stubbornly pursue peace talks — is irresponsible and extremely risky. Before making any decision, we must first understand why the Taliban might not be vested in reaching a compromise at this point in time. Only then the Afghan government could craft strategies that would strengthen its leverage in any serious peace talks and maintain security in case the enemy abandons negotiations all together.

For starters, the Taliban, who have waged a war of attrition against the Afghan government and its allies for more than ten years now, have seemed more interested in waiting out the international forces that are scheduled to leave the country by the end of 2014. Why? There are three plausible reasons.

First, President Obama’s premature declaration of a withdrawal date and the expected “race to the exits” by other countries have only reassured the Taliban that their plan to exhaust America’s commitment is working — and that sooner rather than later the early 90s scenario would repeat itself. The recent transfer to Afghan security forces of authority over detainees and the conduct of night raids, and Australia’s panicky announcement to pull out its troops nearly a year earlier than planned (although they took a “U-turn to fine-tune the coalition’s plan”) are affirmations of that realization.

Secondly, Taliban’s belief that their worst days are soon to end and that the fight will only get easier have boosted its morale. It should not come as a surprise from an insurgent group that lost thousands of fighters—yet remained steadfast against mighty forces in the decade-long war—that they would give themselves an extra five-year window to test out its ability to take over Kabul after foreign troops withdraw. In fact, it would be a quite rational step forward, especially when the Taliban’s leaders expect the tide to turn in their favor post-2014.

Third, this ideology-driven terrorist group believes that God and time are on its side, resulting in an unwavering commitment to stay the course to oust what they consider the soon-to-be-vulnerable puppet Afghan government militarily.

In the face of a foe like the Taliban, it is clear that hinging all hopes for a sovereign and peaceful Afghanistan on a political settlement would be foolhardy. Yet it does not mean that Afghans should refuse to welcome talks. Either way is an extreme position that will only limit the government’s options. Instead, a middle ground strategy is needed to limit the enemy’s options and possibly its ambitions before any serious negotiations are possible and fruitful.

So, now it turns out that Obama and his minions have been attempting to negotiate with people who were close confidants with those instrumental in the largest Terrorist attack ever on U.S. soil on September 11, 2001.

Smart Power?  Nope.  More like Chamberlain-esque.