Posts Tagged ‘Muslims’

Goths to the East, VisiGoths to the South: Trump’s Immigration Proposals are Looking Better All the Time

April 25, 2016

untitled (56)While Americans are watching the Political Shenanigans, being practiced on full display, in both the Republican and Democrat Primaries, the current Administration continues their plan to “radically change” America…by any means necessary…including “importing their instruments of change”.

When the Roman Empire fell, they were under siege by invaders on several fronts.

So is America.

This summer, there will be another “Mexican Munchkin Migration”, harboring an invasion force of Mexican Gang Members.

Judicialwatch.org reports that

A government official warned employees deploying for the influx of illegal immigrant minors about health and safety risks because the new arrivals would have tuberculosis and some were young adults—not children—like the Obama administration proclaimed, according to records obtained by Judicial Watch. “We might as well plan on many of the kids having TB,” states a June 26, 2014 guidance e-mail from a Centers for Disease Control (CDC) environmental health scientist, Alaric C. Denton, as the agency prepared to handle the crisis. “Most of these kids are not immunized, so we need to make sure all our staff are immunized.” Denton, who is stationed at the CDC headquarters in Atlanta, Georgia, predicts in the directive that the agency will be overwhelmed pretty quickly and that screening requirements will be hard to keep up with.

Judicial Watch had to sue the CDC’s umbrella agency, the Department of Health and Human Services, (HHS) for the records. Though chunks have been redacted, the documents contradict the Obama administration’s public statements dismissing possible health and safety risks created by the tens of thousands of Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC) fleeing violence in Central America. The CDC official reveals in the documents obtained by JW as a result of the lawsuit that “some of these kids are not really kids they are young adults, and we should be wary of personal safety.” JW reported this early on, when the first group of UACs arrived through the Mexican border in the summer of 2014. Homeland Security sources directly involved with the mess told JW that holding centers were jam-packed, rampant with diseases and sexually active teenagers. A veteran Border Patrol officer who heads the agency’s Tucson sector quickly established that many of the UACs were not little kids but rather 17-year-olds with possible ties to gang members in the U.S.

Weeks later JW reported that the nation’s most violent street gangs—including Mara Salvatrucha or MS-13—were actively recruiting new members at U.S. shelters housing illegal immigrant minors. A high-level Homeland Security source told JW the gangs used Red Cross phones at the shelters to communicate with the new recruits. Last fall the Texas Department of Public Safety confirmed that the MS-13 has been fortified and able to remain a top tier gang thanks to the influx of illegal alien gang members that recently crossed into the state. The MS-13 is a feared street gang of mostly Central American illegal immigrants that’s spread throughout the U.S. and is renowned for drug distribution, murder, rape, robbery, home invasions, kidnappings, vandalism and other violent crimes. The Justice Department’s National Gang Intelligence Center (NGIC) says criminal street gangs like the MS-13 are responsible for the majority of violent crimes in the U.S. and are the primary distributors of most illicit drugs.

This new batch of government records, part of an ongoing JW investigation into the UAC disaster, indicate the administration was well aware of the danger in allowing hordes of illegal immigrant youths to enter and stay in the U.S. At the very least it flies in the face of the administration’s false narrative involving the key issues of health and safety surrounding the new arrivals which have been relocated throughout the nation. Denton, the CDC environmental health scientist who warned colleagues prior to deployment, works at the agency’s Environmental, Safety and Health Compliance Office (ESHCO). Officials from other federal agencies, including the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), were also involved in the exchanges. JW will continue receiving records from the government involving this issue as part of an agreement, supervised by a federal judge, stemming from our lawsuit.

Plus, thanks to the Obama Administration, Americans will be “welcoming” more “Visitors from the East”….

Something wicked this way comes…from Europe.

When the Syrian Refugee Invasion of Europe escalated, Ben Shapiro, writing for Breitbart News, asked and answered the following question…

Who Are These Refugees?

That competition to accept refugees would be fine if we knew that the refugees plan on assimilating into Western notions of civilized society, and if we knew that they were indeed victims of radical Muslim atrocities. Unfortunately, we know neither. It is deeply suspicious that major Muslim countries that do not border Syria refuse to take in large numbers of refugees, except for Algeria and Egypt.

Turkey has taken in nearly two million refugees, according to the United Nations, and keeps the vast majority in refugee camps — a typical practice in a region that has kept Arab refugees from the 1948 war of Israeli independence in Arab-run camps for seven decades. Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq have taken in hundreds of thousands of refugees as well, but all border the chaotic, collapsing Syria, and thus have limited choice in the matter. Iran has taken in no refugees. Neither have Pakistan, Indonesia, or any of the other dozens of member states of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation. Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait and Bahrain all refused to take any refugees, and explicitly cited the risk of terrorists among the refugees, according to The Guardian (UK).

These fears are not without merit, as even Obama administration officials have acknowledged: back in February, director of the National Counterterrorism Center Nicholas Rasmussen called Syrian refugees “clearly a population of concern.” FBI Assistant Director Michael Steinbach explained, “Databases don’t [have] the information on those individuals, and that’s the concern. On Tuesday, State Department spokesman John Kirby told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer that terrorist infiltration was “a possibility. I mean, you can’t, you can’t dismiss that out of hand.” He then added, “Obviously, if you look at those images though, it’s pretty clear that the great majority of these people are innocent families.”

Actually, images show a disproportionate number of young males in crowds of refugees. And those images reflect statistical reality: according to the United Nations Human Rights Commission, Mediterranean Sea refugees are overwhelmingly male: just 13 percent are women, and just 15 percent are children. The other 72 percent are men. Compare that population to the refugees in the Middle East from the same conflicts: 49.5 percent male, and 50.5 percent female, with 38.5 percent under the age of 12. Those are wildly different populations.

It is also being reported that these “refugees” are leaving a trail of waste, human and otherwise, in their wake.

In other words, these guys believe that hygiene is a girl that they used to “date” back home.

Classy, huh?

It appears that we have a lot to look forward to.

Here’s a Million Drachma Question for ya: Why are the other Middle Eastern Countries not taking them in?

What do they know that we and the Europeans don’t?

A famous quote by George Santayana states that

Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

As The History Channel notes

The Barbarian attacks on Rome partially stemmed from a mass migration caused by the Huns’ invasion of Europe in the late fourth century. When these Eurasian warriors rampaged through northern Europe, they drove many Germanic tribes to the borders of the Roman Empire. The Romans grudgingly allowed members of the Visigoth tribe to cross south of the Danube and into the safety of Roman territory, but they treated them with extreme cruelty. According to the historian Ammianus Marcellinus, Roman officials even forced the starving Goths to trade their children into slavery in exchange for dog meat. In brutalizing the Goths, the Romans created a dangerous enemy within their own borders. When the oppression became too much to bear, the Goths rose up in revolt and eventually routed a Roman army and killed the Eastern Emperor Valens during the Battle of Adrianople in A.D. 378. The shocked Romans negotiated a flimsy peace with the barbarians, but the truce unraveled in 410, when the Goth King Alaric moved west and sacked Rome. With the Western Empire weakened, Germanic tribes like the Vandals and the Saxons were able to surge across its borders and occupy Britain, Spain and North Africa.

American Billionaire. Business Entrepreneur, and Republican Presidential Candidate, Donald J. Trump has garnered a lot of attention and caught a lot of flack from Political Pundits and Media Hacks, alike, for his Immigration Platform, in which he outlines two basic solutions to the problems that I have written about in today’s blog.

Trump’s Immigration Platform calls for (And, I am paraphrasing)…

  1. Building a wall along America’s Southern Border and make Mexico pay for it.
  2. Suspending all Muslim Immigration, including that of the largely unvetted Syrian Refugees, until it can be determined exactly what the purpose of this mass migration is, in order to protect the sovereignty of America and the safety of its citizens.

If you were watching Saturday morning cartoons in 1977 on ABC, you would have seen this Schoolhouse Rock musical cartoon titled “The Great American Melting Pot”.  It extolled the unique greatness of  our American heritage.

For a while now, that heritage has been under attack.

The Immigration Act of 1924 was passed because America had experienced an overwhelming flood of immigrants, which strained the resources of our nation.

This act allowed all of these immigrants to be assimilated into American Society and to actually become Americans, in thought, word, deed, and LOYALTY.

Liberal President Jimmy Carter stopped Iranians from immigrating, because, just like the situation we faced today with Radical Islam, we were AT WAR.

In fact, Obama and his Administration are themselves being restrictive in whom they allow to immigrate to America, including restricting the immigration of persecuted Christians from the Middle East.

The only reason that all of the “perpetually concerned” Liberals are against Donald J. Trump’s proposals is that he is attempting to thwart their plans to rapidly import thousands of Muslims and Mexicans, whom the Powers That Be view as potential Democrat Voters, into our country.

Like all Liberals, they remain oblivious of their own hypocrisy.

…And, woefully, willfully, ignorant of history.

Until He Comes,
 
KJ

Iran’s Ayatollah Defends Continued Development of ICBMs. Did Obama’s “Brilliant” Nuke Deal Fund the Means to Our Destruction?

March 31, 2016

untitled (42)I think it’s brilliant! What an idea! And I was there! He took the idea! He saw it ripe on the tree, he plucked it, and he put it in his pocket. It’s, it’s, dare I say… genius? Ah, no, no! But maybe, ooh! ah! maybe it is! Maybe I’m in the presence of greatness, maybe I just don’t know it. But I saw it… – Fire Chief C.D. Bales (Steve Martin), “Roxanne”, 1987

Ah, you don’t believe we’re on the eve of destruction. – Barry McGuire, “Eve of Destruction” (1965)

Since the ouster of the Shah, Iran has been a thorn in the side of the Free World, and, especially, the United States of America. Are you old enough to remember the Hostage Crisis? If not, here is a summary, courtesy of u-s-history.com:

On November 4, 1979, an angry mob of some 300 to 500 “students” who called themselves “Imam’s Disciples,” laid siege to the American Embassy in Teheran, Iran, to capture and hold hostage 66 U.S. citizens and diplomats. Although women and African-Americans were released a short time later, 51 hostages remained imprisoned for 444 days with another individual released because of illness midway through the ordeal.

…Upon the death of the shah in July [1980] (which neutralized one demand) and the Iraqi invasion of Iran in September (necessitating weapons acquisition), Iran became more amenable to reopening negotiations for the hostages’ release.

In the late stages of the presidential race with Ronald Reagan, Carter, given those new parameters, might have been able to bargain with the Iranians, which might have clinched the election for him. The 11th-hour heroics were dubbed an “October Surprise”* by the Reagan camp — something they did not want to see happen.

Allegations surfaced that William Casey, director of the Reagan campaign, and some CIA operatives, secretly met with Iranian officials in Europe to arrange for the hostages’ release, but not until after the election. If true, some observers aver, dealing with a hostile foreign government to achieve a domestic administration’s defeat would have been grounds for charges of treason.

Reagan won the election, partly because of the failure of the Carter Administration to bring the hostages home. Within minutes of Reagan’s inauguration, the hostages were released.

And, now, all these years later, the 44th President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama, has handed the Rogue State of Radical Muslim Barbarians the means of the destruction of both the United States of America and  our staunch ally, Israel, through a toothless, ineffectual “Nuclear Deal”, that supplied Iran with the money they needed to continue developing the means of America’s destruction.

Schmuck.

Don’t believe me?

CNSnews.com reports that

Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei declared Wednesday that Iran’s ballistic missile capabilities are crucial for the country’s defense, and – in an apparent swipe at an influential former president – added that those who argue that this is a time for talks rather than for missiles are either ignorant or traitors.

At a time when some U.N. Security Council members are mulling a response to Iran’s recent missile launches, Khamenei used an address to Iranians marking the birthday of Mohammed’s youngest daughter to laud the program.

He praised the recent demonstrations of missile prowess by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), saying – according to a statement on his website – they were “a source of happiness for those nations that have been wronged by the United States and the Zionist regime of Israel, and are at the same time unable to do anything about it.”

 In the “jungle-like circumstances” of today’s world, Khamenei argued, if Iran focuses on negotiations and economic and technological exchanges but neglects its defensive capacity, then it will find itself backing down in the face of threats by even “petty countries.”

Disputing those who say the times call for talks, not missiles, he said “[our] times are times for everything. Otherwise, the nation will see its rights trampled on, easily and overtly.”

“If this claim has been made due to lack of knowledge it is one thing,” he said. “But if it is said knowingly, it would amount to treason.”

Khamenei did not elaborate, but on March 24 former President Hashemi Rafsanjani, in a Twitter message illustrated with a photo of a magnolia blooming in spring, wrote that “the world of tomorrow is one of discourse, not missiles.”

Khamenei did not elaborate, but on March 24 former President Hashemi Rafsanjani, in a Twitter message illustrated with a photo of a magnolia blooming in spring, wrote that “the world of tomorrow is one of discourse, not missiles.”

He accused Iran’s foes – “the global arrogance” – of using all means at their disposal to undermine Iran – political, economic, cultural and military.

“They use dialog, economic relations, sanctions, military threat, and other means to realize their objectives,” he said. “Likewise, we should make optimum use of all these tools to fight back and defend.”

Khamenei said Iran’s foes should not claim that Iran is against dialogue.

However, “we say that we should negotiate in a powerful and vigilant manner in a bid to avoid being deceived.”

So, while the President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) and his Secretary of State John (I served in Vietnam) Kerry continue to praise their “wonderful, magnificent deal” with the Rogue Radical Islamic Nation of Iran, which they pushed down America’s throat, Iran continues their quest for World Domination, as if it never happened.

United States President Barack Hussein Obama has proven himself to be more concerned about America’s Enemies than our Allies….and the American Citizens he has sworn to protect.

So, why does the President of these United States, Barack Hussein Obama, continue to claim to trust Iran, an enemy of freedom, to stand by its “Agreement”, “ratified” with a wad of cash, to refrain from nuking the United States of America and Israel, seeming oblivious to Iran’s continued Arms Build-up?

Iran remains our mortal enemy, who wants every single American Infidel beheaded, and, who, to this day, refers to this sacred land as “The Great Satan”.

It is well known, that a young Obama, after his mother wed a quite well-off fellow from Indonesia, attended a Madrassa, or Muslim School, in Jakarta.

I believe that the time he spent among “the religion of peace” in his youth, and the 20 years he spent under the “Reformed Muslim” (Liberation Theology) teachings of “ex”-American Muslim, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, molded and cemented his attitude toward Muslims.

Obama innately trusts Muslims…even radical ones.

Obama, Kerry, and the rest of his Liberal Dhimmi Cabal has shown where their loyalties unequivocally lie, with their braggadocio over this Chamberlain-esque “deal” that is destined to not only blow up in their faces, but also “where alabaster cities gleam, undimmed by human tears” and in the heart of the Holy Land, itself.

Obama’s concern is not with our allies nor the safety of the citizens of the United States.

Obama, as he always has been, is concerned with himself and leaving a marvelous legacy as president.

Giving Iran the means to “kill the infidels” has definitely cemented Obama’s Legacy…if there will be anyone left to remember it.

Iran has always been, since the ouster of the Shah, a rogue nation. They are a threat to every nation who stands in the way of their crazed Political Ideology, disguised as a “religion”.

Either due to naiveté or a simple over-estimation of their own intelligence, on the part of Obama and his Administration, as regards their “superior intellect”, to quote Fred Thompson, as Admiral Josh Painter, in the great movie “The Hunt for Red October”…

This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we’ll be lucky to live through it.

Obama has screwed both God’s Chosen People (Israel) and the nation which he is sworn to protect…for the sake of his own ego’s contentment.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Donald J. Trump, White House Hypocrisy, and the Immigration Act of 1924

December 9, 2015

Rising-NRD-600The hang-wringing and blowback from the suggestion by Donald J. Trump to implement a pause in the immigration of Muslims to the United States of America, has been everything that the consummate showman now doubt hoped for…and more.

White House Spokesperson Josh Earnest was positively apoplectic at yesterday’s Daily Press Conference, as Breitbart.com reports…

President Barack Obama’s spokesman angrily lashed out at Donald Trump for proposing a ban on Muslim immigration to the United States, and accused him of “offensive bluster” and “grotesque and offensive” language.

“The fact is, that what Donald Trump said yesterday disqualifies him from serving as president,” spokesman Josh Earnest said, suggesting to reporters that his words were fundamentally anti-American.

Earnest denounced Trump’s “carnival barker routine” which included “outright lies” and mocked the Republican frontrunner for having “fake hair.” He said:

The Trump campaign, for months now, has had a dustbin of history-like quality to it, from the vacuous sloganeering to the outright lies to even the fake hair, the whole carnival barker routine that we’ve seen for some time now.
Earnest also denounced other Republicans for continuing to say that they would support the nominee of the Republican party even it was Donald Trump.

Earnest suggested the Republican Party is racist for failing to denounce Trump’s presidential campaign, and he reminded reporters that House Majority Whip Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA)
once called himself “David Duke without the baggage.” He said:

“Earlier this year, House Republicans elected to their leadership somebody who famously bragged to a reporter that he’s David Duke without the baggage.”

“They should say right now that they will not support him for president,” Earnest said, as he called Trump’s proposal “morally reprehensible.”

Earnest said Republicans leaders should:

“Say right now that they would not support Donald Trump for president. What he said is disqualifying and any Republican who’s too fearful of the Republican base to admit it has no business serving as president either. OK?”

When asked why the White House had decided to weigh in on Trump’s hair, Earnest defended the topic as an important part of the campaign.

“Well I guess I was describing why it would be easy for people to dismiss the Trump campaign as not particularly serious,” he said.

“Because of his hair?” one reporter asked in disbelief.

“Well because he’s got a rather outrageous appearance, that’s the hallmark of his campaign and his identity, though, that’s the point I’m trying to cite there,” he said.

“How do you know that it’s fake?” asked a second reporter.

“Well I guess I’m happy to be fact checked,” Earnest replied.

Suspending immigration is not a new concept.

It’s been done before…for over 40 years.

The following information is courtesy of u-s-history.com

During the Harding administration, a stop-gap immigration measure was passed by Congress in 1921 for the purpose of slowing the flood of immigrants entering the United States.

A more thorough law was signed by President Coolidge in May 1924. It provided for the following:

The quota for immigrants entering the U.S. was set at two percent of the total of any given nation`s residents in the U.S. as reported in the 1890 census;
after July 1, 1927, the two percent rule was to be replaced by an overall cap of 150,000 immigrants annually and quotas determined by “national origins” as revealed in the 1920 census.

College students, professors and ministers were exempted from the quotas. Initially immigration from the other Americas was allowed, but measures were quickly developed to deny legal entry to Mexican laborers.

The clear aim of this law was to restrict the entry of immigrants from Southern and Eastern Europe, while welcoming relatively large numbers of newcomers from Britain, Ireland, and Northern Europe.

The 1921 law had used the 1910 census to determine the base for the quotas; by changing to the 1890 census when fewer Italians or Bulgarians lived in the U.S., more of the “dangerous` and “different” elements were kept out. This legislation reflected discriminatory sentiments that had surfaced earlier during the Red Scare of 1919-20.

Total
Entering U.S.
Country of Origin
Great
Britain
Eastern
Europe*
Italy
1920
430,001
38,471
3,913
95,145
1921
805,228
51,142
32,793
222,260
1922
309,556
25,153
12,244
40,319
1923
522,919
45,759
16,082
46,674
1924
706,896
59,490
13,173
56,246
1925
294,314
27,172
1,566
6,203
1926
304,488
25,528
1,596
8,253
*Romania, Bulgaria and Turkey.
U.S. Bureau of the Census, Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1957 (Washington, D.C., 1960), p. 56.

A provision in the 1924 law barred entry to those ineligible for citizenship — effectively ending the immigration of all Asians into the United States and undermining the earlier “Gentlemen`s Agreement” with Japan. Efforts by Secretary of State Hughes to change this provision were not successful and actually inflamed the passions of the anti-Japanese press, which was especially strong on the West Coast.

Heated protests were issued by the Japanese government and a citizen committed seppuku outside the American embassy in Tokyo. May 26, the effective date of the legislation, was declared a day of national humiliation in Japan, adding another in a growing list of grievances against the U.S.

(The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 upheld the national origins quota system established by the Immigration Act of 1924, reinforcing these quotas.)

In 1965, the Hart-Cellar Act abolished the national origins quota system that had structured America`s immigration policy since the 1920`s, replacing it with a preference system that emphasized immigrants` skills and family relationships with citizens or residents of the United States.

Additionally, in April of 1980, during the Iranian Hostage Crisis, President Jimmy Carter cancelled all visas issued to Iranians for entry into the United States and warned that they would be revalidated only for “compelling and proven humanitarian reasons or where the national interest requires.”

So, what Trump proposed has been done before

Evidently, no one ever told Obama and his Administration that when you point your finger at someone, there are 4 other fingers pointing back at you.

On January 7th of this year, Abraham H. Miller wrote the following blog, featured on thehill.com…

At the end of World War II, the Jewish survivors of Europe’s Holocaust found that nearly every door was closed to them. “Tell Me Where Can I Go?” was a popular Yiddish song at the time. Decades later, the Christians of the Middle East face the same problem, and the Obama administration is keeping the door shut.

America is about to accept 9000 Syrian Muslims, refugees of the brutal war between the Assad regime and its Sunni opposition, which includes ISIS, Al Qaeda, and various other militias. That number is predicted to increase each year.  There are no Christian refugees that will be admitted.

Why? Because the Department of State is adhering with all the rigidity of a Soviet era bureaucracy to the rule that only people at risk from massacres launched by the regime qualify for refugee status. The rapes of Christian women and the butchery of Christian children do not count. No matter how moved Americans were this Christmas season by the plight of their fellow Christ followers in Syria and Iraq, no matter how horrific the visuals of beheadings, enslavement, and mass murder, the Christians fleeing death do not engender the compassion of this president.

The Christians are being raped, tortured, and murdered by militias, not by the Syrian government. This technicality condemns them to continue to be victims without hope. And this technicality is being adhered to with all the tenacity with which President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s State Department manipulated quotas and created subterfuges  to keep out the Jews fleeing the oppression of Nazi Germany. Obama no more wants the Middle East’s Christian refugees than Roosevelt wanted Europe’s Jewish refugees.

We have seen in the last several weeks that President Obama has no difficulty using his “phone and his pen,” as he dramatically boasts, to circumvent the law. When it comes to immigration, he had no difficulty enacting an amnesty that a federal judge  subsequently ruled unconstitutional. He has had no problem circumventing Congress to change the relationship with Cuba. This president has shown that he will push back on the constraints of law when he wants to get something done.

But there are not even such constraints when it comes to the Middle East’s Christians fleeing the brutality of ISIS and Al Qaeda. The Department of State chooses to adhere to a definition of refugees as people persecuted by their own government. What difference does it make which army imperils the lives of innocent Christians?  Christians are still be slaughtered for being Christian, and their government is incapable of protecting them. Does some group have to come along—as Jewish groups did during the Holocaust—and sardonically guarantee that these are real human beings?

The Christians would barely have to be vetted for ties to terror organizations, which by their very nature do not take Christians. Meanwhile, there is the uncomfortable issue that among the Sunni refugees there are some in league with the Sunni terror militias. And beyond that there is the equally uncomfortable question of the acculturation of segments of the Muslim community.

That our Muslim neighbors are as worthy of being good Americans as anyone else is not an issue. That a highly active and prominent minority in the Muslim community seeks to transform America is an issue and one that cannot be overlooked, when taking in Muslim refugees.  Will they be vetted for seeking the transformation of America through jihad?

Whether the recent violence in Australia, the murder of two New York policemen, the Boston Marathon bombings, the growing list of victims of honor killings in Western societies, the forced closing of streets in Paris for Muslim prayers, the Muslim no-go and Sharia patrol areas of Britain, the rape of infidel women in Sweden, or the call by Council on Islamic American Relations that Islam is not in America to be another religion but to transform America, there is a Muslim problem. That it is not a problem precipitated by a majority of Muslims does not lessen its dangers.

No doubt the majority of the Muslim refugees will become good American citizens, but the real concern is that a significant minority will not. Yet, the Middle East Christians, even as a minority, do not pose remotely the same kind of threat.

With Christmas fresh in our minds, it is time for all people of good will to say to the Obama administration that telling Christians awaiting death that there is no room for them in the inn is not only unacceptable, it is also, to use President Obama’s own words, “not who we are.” This season, Christians  need to make their voice heard. They should not act as the Jews did, waiting for a president who had no intention of doing anything, to do something.

If you were watching Saturday morning cartoons in 1977 on ABC, you would have seen this Schoolhouse Rock musical cartoon titled The Great American Melting Pot.  It extolled the unique greatness of  our American heritage.
For a while now, that heritage has been under attack.
The Immigration Act of 1924 was passed because America had experienced an overwhelming flood of immigrants, which strained the resources of our nation.
This act allowed all of these immigrants to be assimilated into American Society and to actually become Americans, in thought, word, deed, and LOYALTY.
An Liberal President Jimmy Carter stopped Iranians from immigrating, because, just like the situation we faced today with Radical Islam, we were AT WAR.
As the article from thehill.com shows, Obama and his Administration are themselves being restrictive in whom they allow to immigrate to America.
The only reason that they are mad at Donald J. Trump is that he is attempting to thwart their plans to rapidly import thousands of Muslims, and potential Democrat Voters, into our country.
Like all Liberals, they remain oblivious of their own hypocrisy.
Until He Comes,
KJ

The San Bernadino Massacre, Sharia Law, and the U.S. Constitution (A KJ Sunday Morning Op Ed)

December 6, 2015

American Christianity 2

Tonight, the President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama, is going to deliver a speech from the Oval office, to address this past week’s massacre of innocent Americans in San Bernadino, California, as the result of a merciless attack by Radical Islamists.

As has been his pattern, I look for Obama to 1. Deny that Radical Islam is actually a part of Islam and 2. Draw a false equivalency between the Christians who founded our Sovereign Nation and the Syrian Muslim “Refugees”, whom he is forcing our states to take in.

This past year, Pope Francis paid a visit to the United States of America.

During his visit, while addressing the Congress of the United States of America, he basically said that we have an “obligation” to take in the Syrian Refugees, among them Radical Muslims, who are presently rioting in Europe.

Pope Francis, like President Obama and other Liberals, has been pushing a false equivalency, in equating Islam to Christianity, for a while now.

Back in June, The Washington Times reported that

On Monday, the Bishop Of Rome addressed Catholic followers regarding the dire importance of exhibiting religious tolerance. During his hour-long speech, a smiling Pope Francis was quoted telling the Vatican’s guests that the Koran, and the spiritual teachings contained therein, are just as valid as the Holy Bible.

“Jesus Christ, Mohammed, Jehovah, Allah. These are all names employed to describe an entity that is distinctly the same across the world. For centuries, blood has been needlessly shed because of the desire to segregate our faiths. This, however, should be the very concept which unites us as people, as nations, and as a world bound by faith. Together, we can bring about an unprecedented age of peace, all we need to achieve such a state is respect each others beliefs, for we are all children of God regardless of the name we choose to address him by. We can accomplish miraculous things in the world by merging our faiths, and the time for such a movement is now. No longer shall we slaughter our neighbors over differences in reference to their God.”

The pontiff drew harsh criticisms in December (2014) after photos of the 78-year-old Catholic leader was released depicting Pope Francis kissing a Koran. The Muslim Holy Book was given to Francis during a meeting with Muslim leaders after a lengthy Muslim prayer held at the Vatican.

Last February 5th, after President Barack Hussein Obama’s incendiary and decidedly anti-Christian remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast, Reverend Franklin Graham spoke truth to power:

Today at the National Prayer Breakfast, the President implied that what ISIS is doing is equivalent to what happened over 1000 years ago during the Crusades and the Inquisition. Mr. President–Many people in history have used the name of Jesus Christ to accomplish evil things for their own desires. But Jesus taught peace, love and forgiveness. He came to give His life for the sins of mankind, not to take life. Mohammad on the contrary was a warrior and killed many innocent people. True followers of Christ emulate Christ—true followers of Mohammed emulate Mohammed.

As Rev. Graham said so eloquently, Islam and Christianity present two very different Deities, who may share some similarities, but who have different identities and ultimately different standards. To pretend they are the same is not only to be clueless of the faith of 76% of the citizens of this nation, but, to be ignorant of an integral part of our American Heritage, the legacy of Christian Faith, which our Founding Fathers bequeathed us.

Not too long ago, Republican Presidential Candidate Hopeful, Dr. Ben Carson, got a lot of attention from hang-wringing Liberals in the Main Stream Media, the Democratic Party and among the Vichy Republicans, also, when he said that a Muslim should never be President of the United States of America., because Sharia Law in incompatible with The United States Constitution.

He was absolutely right.

The Center For Security Policy issued the following PDF, ” “Sharia Law Vs. The Constitution”,

Article VI: The Constitution is the supreme law of the land

  • Constitution: Article VI: “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby”
  • Shariah: “The source of legal rulings for all acts of those who are morally responsible is Allah.” (a1.1, Umdat al-salik or The Reliance of the Traveller, commonly accepted work of Shariah jurisprudence); “There is only one law which ought to be followed, and that is the Sharia.” (Seyed Qutb); “Islam wishes to destroy all states and governments anywhere on the face of the earth which are opposed to the ideology and program of Islam regardless of the country or the nation which rules it. The purpose of Islam is to set up a State on the basis of its own ideology and program.” (Seyed Abul A’ala Maududi)

First Amendment: Freedom of religion

  • Constitution: First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ”
  • Shariah: “Those who reject Islam must be killed. If they turn back (from Islam), take hold of them and kill them wherever you find them.” Quran 4:89 ; “Whoever changed his [Islamic] religion, then kill him” Sahih al-Bukhari, 9:84:57.  In historic and modern Shariah states, Shariah law enforces dhimmi status (second-class citizen, apartheid-type laws) on nonMuslims, prohibiting them from observing their religious practices publicly, building or repairing churches, raising their voices during prayer or ringing church bells; if dhimmi laws are violated in the Shariah State, penalties are those used for prisoners of war: death, slavery, release or ransom.(o9.14, o11.0-o11.11, Umdat al-salik).

First Amendment: Freedom of speech   

  • Constitution: First Amendment: Congress shall not abridge “the freedom of speech.”  
  • Shariah: Speech defaming Islam or Muhammad is considered “blasphemy” and is punishable by death or imprisonment.

First Amendment: Freedom to dissent

  • Constitution: First Amendment: “Congress cannot take away the right of the people “to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” 
  •  Shariah: Non-Muslims are not to harbor any hostility toward the Islamic state or give comfort to those who disagree with Islamic government.

Second Amendment: Right to self-defense

  • Constitution: Second Amendment: “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” 
  • Shariah: Under historic and modern dhimmi laws, non-Muslims cannot possess swords, firearms or weapons of any kind.

Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Amendments: Right to due process and fair trial

  • Constitution: Fifth Amendment: “no person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime… without due process of law.”  Sixth Amendment: guarantees a “public trial by an impartial jury.”  Seventh Amendment: “the right of trial by jury shall be preserved.”
  • Shariah: Hadith Sahih al-Bukhari: Muhammad said, “No Muslim should be killed for killing a Kafir (infidel).”  Non-Muslims are prohibited from testifying against Muslims.  A woman’s testimony is equal to half of a man’s.

Eighth Amendment: No cruel and unusual punishment 

  • Constitution: Eighth Amendment: “nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”
  • Shariah: Under Shariah punishments are barbaric: “Cut off the hands of thieves, whether they are male or female, as punishment for what they have done – a deterrent from Allah.” Quran 5:38; A raped woman is punished:”The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication – flog each of them with a hundred stripes” (Sura 24:2).

Fourteenth Amendment: Right to equal protection and due process 

  • Constitution:  Fourteenth Amendment: “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. “
  • Shariah: Under dhimmi laws enforced in modern Shariah states, Jews, Christians and other non-Muslims are not equal to Muslims before the law.  Under Shariah law, women, girls, apostates, homosexuals and “blasphemers” are all denied equality under the law. 

Given this incompatibility between Sharia Law and the Constitution of the United States of America, which our Freedom and our System of Laws are based upon, if given the choice, which would Muslims currently living in the Land of the Free and the home of the Brave choose to be faithful to?

Back on June 23, 2015, the Center for Security Policy released the following findings for a poll they took of 600 Muslims, who current live in America.

The numbers of potential jihadists among the majority of Muslims who appear not to be sympathetic to such notions raise a number of public policy choices that warrant careful consideration and urgent debate, including: the necessity for enhanced surveillance of Muslim communities; refugee resettlement, asylum and other immigration programs that are swelling their numbers and density; and the viability of so-called “countering violent extremism” initiatives that are supposed to stymie radicalization within those communities.

Overall, the survey, which was conducted by The Polling Company for the Center for Security Policy (CSP), suggests that a substantial number of Muslims living in the United States see the country very differently than does the population overall.  The sentiments of the latter were sampled in late May in another CSP-commissioned Polling Company nationwide survey.

According to the just-released survey of Muslims, a majority (51%) agreed that “Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to shariah.”  When that question was put to the broader U.S. population, the overwhelming majority held that shariah should not displace the U.S. Constitution (86% to 2%).

More than half (51%) of U.S. Muslims polled also believe either that they should have the choice of American or shariah courts, or that they should have their own tribunals to apply shariah. Only 39% of those polled said that Muslims in the U.S. should be subject to American courts.

These notions were powerfully rejected by the broader population according to the Center’s earlier national survey.  It found by a margin of 92%-2% that Muslims should be subject to the same courts as other citizens, rather than have their own courts and tribunals here in the U.S.

Even more troubling, is the fact that nearly a quarter of the Muslims polled believed that, “It is legitimate to use violence to punish those who give offense to Islam by, for example, portraying the prophet Mohammed.”

By contrast, the broader survey found that a 63% majority of those sampled said that “the freedom to engage in expression that offends Muslims or anybody else is guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and cannot be restricted.”

Nearly one-fifth of Muslim respondents said that the use of violence in the United States is justified in order to make shariah the law of the land in this country.

In conclusion, I am not saying that every Muslim is on a jihad against “the infidels”, and, wish to invade our Sovereign Nation and over-throw our Government.

However, there is a difference between being an average Christian American and a Muslim, living in America.

When Christians become “radicalized”, we want to share the testimony of what God has done for us through His love, with everyone we meet. We get involved in our local church and we become better fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers, and American Citizens.

When Muslims become “radicalized”, they want to “kill the Infidels” in the name of “Allah the Merciful”.

In the case of the Chechen Muslim brothers who bombed the Boston Marathon, their immersion into Radical Islam led them to “kill the infidels” that horrendous day.

In the case of the barbarians of ISIS, it has turned them into doppelgangers of the Nazi Butchers of Dachau.

For Liberals, including Pope Francis, to deny that, is disingenuous at best, and just plain dangerous at worst.

It becomes even more dangerous when that Liberal is the President of the United States of America.

Until He Comes,

KJ

UN Involved in “Vetting” of Syrian “Refugees”. Obama Tells States That They Cannot Block Them.

November 27, 2015

Syrian-Roulette-600-LAPresident Barack Hussein Obama loves false equivalencies.

Yesterday, thehill.com reported that

This Thanksgiving, President Obama is calling for Americans to lend a helping hand to another group of pilgrims fleeing persecution.

“Nearly four centuries after the Mayflower set sail, the world is still full of pilgrims – men and women who want nothing more than the chance for a safer, better future for themselves and their families,” Obama said in his weekly address Thursday. “What makes America is that we offer that chance.”

The president praised Americans who have offered to open their homes to refugees fleeing war-torn Syria. 
“One woman from Pennsylvania wrote to me to say, ‘Money is tight for us in my household. … But I have a guest room. I have a pantry full of food. We can do this,’ ” Obama said.
 
“Another woman from Florida told me her family’s history dates back to the Mayflower — and she said that welcoming others is part of ‘what it means to be an American,’ ” he added.
 
Obama called for citizens to put the “generosity” of America on full display by welcoming refugees into the country with arms wide open.

“I hope that you and your family have a wonderful Thanksgiving, surrounded by loved ones and full of joy and gratitude,” he said. “And together, may we all play our own small part in the American story, and write a next chapter that future generations can be thankful for.”
 
The House passed a measure earlier this month making it more difficult for Syrian refugees fleeing the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) to enter the country.
 
Republicans have cast doubt on whether refugees can be properly vetted to ensure that they are not terrorists.
 
At least one assailant in the Nov. 13 Paris terrorist attack, in which 130 people were killed, is suspected of entering France posed as a migrant.

Point of Order, Mr. President:

The Pilgrims were Christians, not Muslims.

BIG difference.

The Pilgrims did not include a population made up of 70% of ultra-fit Military-looking young men with cell phones.

And, they did not riot their way across Europe before the Government of this country brought them here.

A couple of months ago, Ben Shapiro, writing for Breitbart News, asked and answered the following question…

Who Are These Refugees? That competition to accept refugees would be fine if we knew that the refugees plan on assimilating into Western notions of civilized society, and if we knew that they were indeed victims of radical Muslim atrocities. Unfortunately, we know neither. It is deeply suspicious that major Muslim countries that do not border Syria refuse to take in large numbers of refugees, except for Algeria and Egypt.

Turkey has taken in nearly two million refugees, according to the United Nations, and keeps the vast majority in refugee camps — a typical practice in a region that has kept Arab refugees from the 1948 war of Israeli independence in Arab-run camps for seven decades. Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq have taken in hundreds of thousands of refugees as well, but all border the chaotic, collapsing Syria, and thus have limited choice in the matter. Iran has taken in no refugees. Neither have Pakistan, Indonesia, or any of the other dozens of member states of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation. Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait and Bahrain all refused to take any refugees, and explicitly cited the risk of terrorists among the refugees, according to The Guardian (UK).

These fears are not without merit, as even Obama administration officials have acknowledged: back in February, director of the National Counterterrorism Center Nicholas Rasmussen called Syrian refugees “clearly a population of concern.” FBI Assistant Director Michael Steinbach explained, “Databases don’t [have] the information on those individuals, and that’s the concern. On Tuesday, State Department spokesman John Kirby told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer that terrorist infiltration was “a possibility. I mean, you can’t, you can’t dismiss that out of hand.” He then added, “Obviously, if you look at those images though, it’s pretty clear that the great majority of these people are innocent families.”

Actually, images show a disproportionate number of young males in crowds of refugees. And those images reflect statistical reality: according to the United Nations Human Rights Commission, Mediterranean Sea refugees are overwhelmingly male: just 13 percent are women, and just 15 percent are children. The other 72 percent are men. Compare that population to the refugees in the Middle East from the same conflicts: 49.5 percent male, and 50.5 percent female, with 38.5 percent under the age of 12. Those are wildly different populations.

It is also being reported that these “refugees” are leaving a trail of waste, human and otherwise, in their wake.

In other words, these guys believe that hygiene is a girl that they used to “date” back home.

So, what is the actual vetting process for these Syrian “Refugees”?

Nine days ago, the Ultra-Liberal BBC.com reported on the process.

After intense criticism that the United States was not doing its part to help with the migrant crisis afflicting Europe, the Obama administration announced in September that it wanted to resettle about 10,000 Syrian refugees in the US by the same time next year.

The decision was met with some fear that militants could exploit the refugee programme to gain entry into the US to carry out attacks.

After the attacks in Paris, which left 129 dead, and the news that one of the attackers may have entered Europe as a refugee, those fears have become amplified and spread to governors’ mansions across the country as well as the corridors of Congress.

Newly elected Speaker of the US House of Representatives Paul Ryan has now called for a “pause” in the US refugee program. He tweeted, “Our nation has always been welcoming, but we can’t let terrorists take advantage of our compassion.”

The process for a Syrian refugee to resettle in the US is long and arduous, involving numerous federal agencies and intense background checks.

Compared to Europe, where fingerprints and simple information are taken and migrants can resettle with little difficulty, US processes look very different and are much stricter.

It is a long road for a Syrian refugee coming to the US – so where does it start?

Step 1: Leaving home & arrival at UNHCR refugee camp
As cities, town and villages have been overrun, millions of Syrian people have become displaced both internally and externally.

But to be eligible for permanent resettlement in another country, displaced persons have to leave Syria and find a camp run by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), in a neighbouring country.

Many of these camps offer only the most basic living conditions.

Upon arrival at the camp, the displaced person registers as a refugee and is given the option to apply for resettlement.

Nothing is guaranteed at this point. Not every refugee will be referred by the UNHCR for resettlement.

Refugees are allowed to express an interest in particular countries, but the decision on resettlement is ultimately at the UNHCR’s discretion.

Step 2: UNHCR referral for resettlement
The UNHCR then determines which refugees for whom resettlement makes sense, a senior administration official said.

Certain refugees get recommended to the programme in the US.

The State Department takes over after a referral is made from the UNHCR, and the Department of Homeland Security decides whether an individual application is approved.

Certain indicators for why a refugee may be recommended for the US programme include: if he or she has a relative in the US or whether it is likely he or she will be welcomed by a certain community.

“With Syrians, we’ve benefitted from years of experience in vetting Iraqi refugee applicants,” one senior Obama administration official said. The screening is “robust since large-scale Iraqi processing in 2007.”

Step 3: Vetting process with US begins
If a refugee is cleared to be considered by the US, the process for approval is lengthy – 18-24 months, said one senior administration official.

Refugees are admitted at about a 50% acceptance rate after being subjected to “the most rigorous screening of any traveller to the US,” an official told reporters in a conference call.

That involves extensive in-person interviews about their experiences with conflict, as well as the collection of both biometric and biographic information that is cross-checked with the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security and in some cases, the Department of Defense.

Step 4: Resettlement
Ten thousand people have been referred for resettlement in the US, but the US has not processed their applications yet.

After 18-24 months, a refugee may then be sent to his or her new community.

The BBC spoke with one young man who resettled with his family outside of Louisville, Kentucky in September.

A local church organisation funded by the US government helped him land a job at a car factory. He wants to attend university in the US someday.

Like the organisation that helped this man, there are nine organisations that work with the federal government to place refugees across the US.

Funny how Obama and his Administration left out the part that the United Nations is playing in this whole “vetting” process, huh?

Considering the track record of the Security Council, I trust their judgment about as much as I would that of Miley Cyrus.

And, if you think that Obama is going to allow a delay of 18-24 months before allowing these Muslim “Refugees” to be relocated among us, I have two bridges over the Mississippi River at Memphis to sell you.

In a related matter, foxnews.com reports that

The Obama administration warned states over the Syrian refugee crisis Wednesday, telling them in a letter they do not have legal authority to refuse the refugees, and states that do not comply may be subject to enforcement action.

The letter, from the Office of Refugee Resettlement (OCR), told state resettlement officials that they may not deny benefits and services to refugees based on their country of origin or religion.

“Accordingly, states may not categorically deny ORR-funded benefits and services to Syrian refugees,” the letter, dated Wednesday, says. “Any state with such a policy would not be in compliance with the State Plan requirements, applicable statutes, and their own assurances, and could be subject to enforcement action, including suspension and termination.”

The letter went on to say that the 1964 Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination based on race and national origin in all programs that receive federal financial assistance.

“Thus, it is not permissible to deny federally funded benefits such as Medicaid or TANF to refugees who otherwise meet the eligibility requirements,” the letter says.

The letter came after more than two dozen governors, mostly Republicans, announced they would resist efforts to resettle Syrian refugees in their states in light of the November 13 terrorist attacks in Paris, and fears that ISIS militants could use the controversial program to infiltrate the U.S.

As he did during the recent Iran Deal Fiasco, Obama has a nasty habit of going to the United Nations first and worrying about what THEY think, instead of doing his job as President of the United States of America, and, doing what is best for OUR COUNTRY.

Mr. President,

The United States of America is a Sovereign Nation, created by the blood, sweat, and tears of men and women, who rise above you in stature, honor, integrity, and courage to the point where you are not even fit enough to tie their boots.

To summarize, we are an “independent state”, completely independent and self-governing. We bow to no other country on God’s green Earth. We are beholden to no other nation. America stands on its own, with our own set of laws, The Constitution of the United States.

America is still the Greatest Nation on the Face of the Earth, despite all of your efforts to make us “just another country”.

Congress needs to tell Obama that the safety of our Sovereign Nation does not, and will never take second place to his Muslim Dhimmitude and purposeful naiveté.

Oh, and by the way, Mr. President, my family and I did not “discuss gun control”, yesterday. We played Yahtzee, instead.

Because thanking God for our Sovereign Nation, the greatest on the face of the Earth, and spending time with family and friends…not acquiescing to you and your failed political ideology, is what Thanksgiving Day is all about.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Pope Francis, Sharia Law, and the U.S. Constitution: Comparing Plowshares to Scimitars [A KJ Sunday Morning Op Ed]

September 27, 2015

American Christianity 2The past week, Pope Francis paid a visit to the United States of America.

During his visit, while addressing the Congress of the United States of America, he basically said that we have an “obligation” to take in the Syrian Refugees, among them Radical Muslims, who are presently rioting in Europe.

Pope Francis, like other Liberals, has been pushing a false equivalency, in equating Islam to Christianity, for a while now.

Back in June, The Washington Times reported that

On Monday, the Bishop Of Rome addressed Catholic followers regarding the dire importance of exhibiting religious tolerance. During his hour-long speech, a smiling Pope Francis was quoted telling the Vatican’s guests that the Koran, and the spiritual teachings contained therein, are just as valid as the Holy Bible.

“Jesus Christ, Mohammed, Jehovah, Allah. These are all names employed to describe an entity that is distinctly the same across the world. For centuries, blood has been needlessly shed because of the desire to segregate our faiths. This, however, should be the very concept which unites us as people, as nations, and as a world bound by faith. Together, we can bring about an unprecedented age of peace, all we need to achieve such a state is respect each others beliefs, for we are all children of God regardless of the name we choose to address him by. We can accomplish miraculous things in the world by merging our faiths, and the time for such a movement is now. No longer shall we slaughter our neighbors over differences in reference to their God.”

The pontiff drew harsh criticisms in December (2014) after photos of the 78-year-old Catholic leader was released depicting Pope Francis kissing a Koran. The Muslim Holy Book was given to Francis during a meeting with Muslim leaders after a lengthy Muslim prayer held at the Vatican.

Last February 5th, after President Barack Hussein Obama’s incendiary and decidedly anti-Christian remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast, Reverend Franklin Graham spoke truth to power:

Today at the National Prayer Breakfast, the President implied that what ISIS is doing is equivalent to what happened over 1000 years ago during the Crusades and the Inquisition. Mr. President–Many people in history have used the name of Jesus Christ to accomplish evil things for their own desires. But Jesus taught peace, love and forgiveness. He came to give His life for the sins of mankind, not to take life. Mohammad on the contrary was a warrior and killed many innocent people. True followers of Christ emulate Christ—true followers of Mohammed emulate Mohammed.

As Rev. Graham said so eloquently, Islam and Christianity present two very different Deities, who may share some similarities, but who have different identities and ultimately different standards. To pretend they are the same is not only to be clueless of the faith of 76% of the citizens of this nation, but, to be ignorant of an integral part of our American Heritage, the legacy of Christian Faith, which our Founding Fathers bequeathed us.

Recently, Republican Presidential Candidate Hopeful, Dr. Ben Carson, got a lot of attention from hang-wringing Liberals in the Main Stream Media, the Democratic Party and among the Vichy Republicans, also, when he said that a Muslim should never be President of the United States of America., because Sharia Law in incompatible with The United States Constitution.

He was absolutely right.

The Center For Security Policy issued the following PDF, ” “Sharia Law Vs. The Constitution”,

Article VI: The Constitution is the supreme law of the land

  • Constitution: Article VI: “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby”
  • Shariah: “The source of legal rulings for all acts of those who are morally responsible is Allah.” (a1.1, Umdat al-salik or The Reliance of the Traveller, commonly accepted work of Shariah jurisprudence); “There is only one law which ought to be followed, and that is the Sharia.” (Seyed Qutb); “Islam wishes to destroy all states and governments anywhere on the face of the earth which are opposed to the ideology and program of Islam regardless of the country or the nation which rules it. The purpose of Islam is to set up a State on the basis of its own ideology and program.” (Seyed Abul A’ala Maududi)

First Amendment: Freedom of religion

  • Constitution: First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ”
  • Shariah: “Those who reject Islam must be killed. If they turn back (from Islam), take hold of them and kill them wherever you find them.” Quran 4:89 ; “Whoever changed his [Islamic] religion, then kill him” Sahih al-Bukhari, 9:84:57.  In historic and modern Shariah states, Shariah law enforces dhimmi status (second-class citizen, apartheid-type laws) on nonMuslims, prohibiting them from observing their religious practices publicly, building or repairing churches, raising their voices during prayer or ringing church bells; if dhimmi laws are violated in the Shariah State, penalties are those used for prisoners of war: death, slavery, release or ransom.(o9.14, o11.0-o11.11, Umdat al-salik).

First Amendment: Freedom of speech   

  • Constitution: First Amendment: Congress shall not abridge “the freedom of speech.”  
  • Shariah: Speech defaming Islam or Muhammad is considered “blasphemy” and is punishable by death or imprisonment.

First Amendment: Freedom to dissent

  • Constitution: First Amendment: “Congress cannot take away the right of the people “to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” 
  •  Shariah: Non-Muslims are not to harbor any hostility toward the Islamic state or give comfort to those who disagree with Islamic government.

Second Amendment: Right to self-defense

  • Constitution: Second Amendment: “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” 
  • Shariah: Under historic and modern dhimmi laws, non-Muslims cannot possess swords, firearms or weapons of any kind.

Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Amendments: Right to due process and fair trial

  • Constitution: Fifth Amendment: “no person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime… without due process of law.”  Sixth Amendment: guarantees a “public trial by an impartial jury.”  Seventh Amendment: “the right of trial by jury shall be preserved.”
  • Shariah: Hadith Sahih al-Bukhari: Muhammad said, “No Muslim should be killed for killing a Kafir (infidel).”  Non-Muslims are prohibited from testifying against Muslims.  A woman’s testimony is equal to half of a man’s.

Eighth Amendment: No cruel and unusual punishment 

  • Constitution: Eighth Amendment: “nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”
  • Shariah: Under Shariah punishments are barbaric: “Cut off the hands of thieves, whether they are male or female, as punishment for what they have done – a deterrent from Allah.” Quran 5:38; A raped woman is punished:”The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication – flog each of them with a hundred stripes” (Sura 24:2).

Fourteenth Amendment: Right to equal protection and due process 

  • Constitution:  Fourteenth Amendment: “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. “
  • Shariah: Under dhimmi laws enforced in modern Shariah states, Jews, Christians and other non-Muslims are not equal to Muslims before the law.  Under Shariah law, women, girls, apostates, homosexuals and “blasphemers” are all denied equality under the law. 

Given this incompatibility between Sharia Law and the Constitution of the United States of America, which our Freedom and our System of Laws are based upon, if given the choice, which would Muslims currently living in the Land of the Free and the home of the Brave choose to be faithful to?

Back on June 23, 2015, the Center for Security Policy released the following findings for a poll they took of 600 Muslims, who current live in America.

The numbers of potential jihadists among the majority of Muslims who appear not to be sympathetic to such notions raise a number of public policy choices that warrant careful consideration and urgent debate, including: the necessity for enhanced surveillance of Muslim communities; refugee resettlement, asylum and other immigration programs that are swelling their numbers and density; and the viability of so-called “countering violent extremism” initiatives that are supposed to stymie radicalization within those communities.

Overall, the survey, which was conducted by The Polling Company for the Center for Security Policy (CSP), suggests that a substantial number of Muslims living in the United States see the country very differently than does the population overall.  The sentiments of the latter were sampled in late May in another CSP-commissioned Polling Company nationwide survey.

According to the just-released survey of Muslims, a majority (51%) agreed that “Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to shariah.”  When that question was put to the broader U.S. population, the overwhelming majority held that shariah should not displace the U.S. Constitution (86% to 2%).

More than half (51%) of U.S. Muslims polled also believe either that they should have the choice of American or shariah courts, or that they should have their own tribunals to apply shariah. Only 39% of those polled said that Muslims in the U.S. should be subject to American courts.

These notions were powerfully rejected by the broader population according to the Center’s earlier national survey.  It found by a margin of 92%-2% that Muslims should be subject to the same courts as other citizens, rather than have their own courts and tribunals here in the U.S.

Even more troubling, is the fact that nearly a quarter of the Muslims polled believed that, “It is legitimate to use violence to punish those who give offense to Islam by, for example, portraying the prophet Mohammed.”

By contrast, the broader survey found that a 63% majority of those sampled said that “the freedom to engage in expression that offends Muslims or anybody else is guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and cannot be restricted.”

Nearly one-fifth of Muslim respondents said that the use of violence in the United States is justified in order to make shariah the law of the land in this country.

In conclusion, I am not saying that every Muslim is on a jihad against “the infidels”, and, wish to invade our Sovereign Nation and over-throw our Government.

However, there is a difference between being an average Christian American and a Muslim, living in America.

When Christians become “radicalized”, we want to share the testimony of what God has done for us through His love, with everyone we meet. We get involved in our local church and we become better fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers, and American Citizens.

When Muslims become “radicalized”, they want to “kill the Infidels” in the name of “Allah the Merciful”.

In the case of the Chechen Muslim brothers who bombed the Boston Marathon, their immersion into Radical Islam led them to “kill the infidels” that horrendous day.

In the case of the barbarians of ISIS, it has turned them into doppelgangers of the Nazi Butchers of Dachau.

For Liberals, including Pope Francis, to deny that, is disingenuous at best, and just plain dangerous at worst.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama to Israel About Iran: “Who Are You Going to Believe? Me or Your Lying Eyes?”

June 2, 2015

 

americanisraelilapelpinYou know, I think I am the closest thing to a Jew that has ever sat in this office. For people to say that I am anti-Israel, or, even worse, anti-Semitic, it hurts. – President Barack Hussein Obama, speaking to David Axelrod

And, I’m a 22 year old Dallas Cowboy Cheerleader named Buffy.

Obama is presently attempting to convince the Israelis that his attempts to reach an “agreement” with Iran, concerning their quest to achieve nuclear capability, do not pave the way for their country’s annihilation.

According to theblaze.com,

President Barack Obama told Israel’s Channel 2 television that while he understands the “concerns” and “fears” of Israelis, he believes the best path to preventing an Iranian nuclear weapon is through a “verifiable, tough agreement.”

“I can, I think, demonstrate, not based on any hope but on facts and evidence and analysis, that the best way to prevent Iran from having a nuclear weapon is a verifiable, tough agreement,” Obama said in an excerpt of the interview with Channel 2’s news magazine “Uvda” that was broadcast Monday night.

“A military solution will not fix it. Even if the United States participates, it would temporarily slow down an Iranian nuclear program but it will not eliminate it,” Obama said.

President Barack Obama said about the Iranian nuclear challenge: “A military solution will not fix it.” (Image source: Channel 2)

Amid tensions between Obama and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over the framework agreement between Iran, the U.S. and five world powers – which the Israeli leader has called a “bad deal” – Obama and other administration officials have found ways to address the Israeli public directly to try to allay concerns that a negotiated agreement will thwart the efforts of a country that has vowed to annihilate Israel from obtaining a doomsday weapon.

Asked if he could imagine a scenario in which Netanyahu, after the signing of a permanent agreement with Iran, were to launch a military strike on nuclear facilities without first alerting him as U.S. president, Obama said, “I won’t speculate on that. What I can say is, to the Israeli people: I understand your concerns and I understand your fears.”

Channel 2 will broadcast the entire 40-minute interview Tuesday night.

The interviewer, Ilana Dayan, a well-known television news personality in Israel, reported that during 40-minute interview Obama expressed his deep commitment to Israel’s security but said that without an Israeli-Palestinian peace process underway it would be difficult for the U.S. to defend Israel in international organizations.

The U.S., Iran and the five powers are working to meet a self-imposed June 30 deadline to reach a final agreement over Iran’s nuclear program.

Netanyahu on Sunday called Iran’s effort to develop nuclear weapons “the greatest threat to Israel’s security, to the stability of the region and to the peace of the world.

One of the perks of having written over 1,900 blogs, is that , sometime over the last 5 years, chances are I have gathered some pertinent background information on the subject I am writing today’s Blog on. Once again, I hit the jackpot.

Per wnd.com, posted 11/11/2008:

Hamas held a meeting in the Gaza Strip several months ago with aides to President-elect Barack Obama, but the terror group was asked to keep the contacts secret until after last week’s elections, according to a senior Hamas official.

Ahmed Yousef, Hamas’ chief political adviser in Gaza, told the leading Al-Hayat Arabic-language newspaper Hamas has maintained regular communication with Obama aides that even continued during the past week.

“We were in contact with a number of Obama’s aides through the Internet, and later met with some of them in Gaza, but they advised us not to come out with any statements, as they may have a negative effect on his election campaign and be used by Republican candidate John McCain (to attack Obama),” Yousuf told Al-Hayat.

Yousuf said Hamas’ contact with Obama’s advisers was ongoing, adding that relations were maintained after Obama’s electoral victory last Tuesday.

Then, on 6/25/10, ynet news.com reported:

A senior Hamas figure said Friday that official and unofficial US sources have asked the Islamist group to refrain from making any statements regarding contacts with Washington, this following reports that a senior American official is due to arrive in an Arab country in the coming days to relay a telegram from the Obama Administration.

The Hamas figure told the London-based Al-Quds Al-Arabi newspaper that the Americans fear discussing the talks publicly would “rouse the Jewish lobby and other pressure groups in the US and cause them to pressure the administration to suspend all talks with Hamas.”

The Hamas figure, who is close to Ismail Haniyeh, the prime minister of the government in Gaza, added, “This is a sensitive subject. The Americans don’t want anyone to comment on it because this would catch the attention of pressure groups (in the US) and cause problems.”

He said Hamas’ exiled leadership in Damascus is overseeing the contacts behind closed doors.

The point of re-posting the last two stories is very simple: Obama never has liked Israel, as it currently stands.

Remember the recent National Elections in Israel?

Now, I’m no Pollyanna.

(Although my bride does accuse me of always seeing the best in everyone. but, I digress…)

I know that America has influenced other nations’ elections for years, covertly, usually through the influence of backdoor diplomatic channels and the CIA.

However, Petulant President Pantywaist, who in the process of desperately sucking up to the Rogue, Muslim Terrorist Nation of Iran, who would rather kill us infidels than look at us, blatantly worked overtly to kick out of office, the Prime Minister of one of our closest allies.

Obama’s petulance knows no bounds.

Every time they have met, Netanyahu has schooled Obama, making him look like the petulant little lightweight that he is.

In order for Obama to succeed in his plan for a nuclear Iran, he decided before the election that he had to rid himself of Netanyahu’s strong and forthright leadership.

Obama believed, and rightfully so, that by replacing Netanyahu with a Liberal Politician in Israel, then the “Arab Spring”, which began under his presidency, would reach its apocalyptic zenith, with a nuclear Iran and an Israel cleaved in half, like Solomon almost did with that baby, in order to make room for the fictional “country of Palestine”.

For some clearly insane reason, Obama views this creation of a Caliphate as his Foreign Policy Legacy.

There is a reason that I will always refer to him as “our first anti-American President”.

Ever since he took office, whether through his ongoing embrace of Israel’s enemies, his support of giving away half of her land to the historically nomadic people, whom the British named, “Palestinians”, or his recent failed effort to have Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu thrown out of office, President Barack Hussein Obama has proven to be anything but “a friend of Israel”.

With friends like Barack Hussein Obama, Israel does not need enemies.

God Protect America and His Chosen People.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Ramadi: Obama’s War By Remote Control Has a “Minor Setback”

May 19, 2015

 

 

Knowing-NRD-600In a Sept. 13, 2007, Oval Office address, United Stated President George W. Bush warned that “Iran would benefit from the chaos” after U.S. withdrawal from Iraq.

Current United States President Barack Hussein Obama should have heeded that warning before he experienced his “premature evacuation”.

Fox News reports that

The fall of Ramadi to Islamic State forces — despite Obama administration efforts to downplay it as a short-term setback — has kicked up a sandstorm of problems for the White House: 

— The possibility that Iran-backed Shiite militias will take a lead role in the fight to retake the city; 

— Fresh political fallout over President Obama’s decision to withdraw virtually all troops in 2011 — against the advice of his top military commanders — only to watch hard-fought U.S. gains undone by ISIS; and, 

— Congressional pressure from both sides of the aisle to rethink the current anti-ISIS military strategy. 

Taken together, the problems pose a political and strategic migraine for an administration trying to manage the Iraq-Syria madness — while also forging a nuclear deal with Iran, seeking a resolution in war-torn Yemen and keeping tabs on the rest of the tumultuous post-Arab Spring nations, including Egypt and Libya. 

On Tuesday, congressional pressure mounted over the course of the U.S. military’s anti-ISIS strategy. 

House Speaker John Boehner said Obama should “start over” with his congressional request for use of military force against ISIS — a request that has stalled on Capitol Hill. Boehner said Obama needs to come up with a clear strategy, adding: “We know that hope is not a strategy. The president’s plan isn’t working.”

While skepticism from GOP leaders is hardly new, the criticism took on a bipartisan streak Tuesday as the top House intelligence committee Democrat piled on. 

“Alarm bells should be going off,” said Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., according to The Daily Beast. Schiff reportedly questioned the current strategy that relies largely on airstrikes, and also voiced concern that the on-the-ground approach relies too much on Iran-backed militias. (At the same time, Schiff said he was “deeply disappointed” by Boehner’s call to restart talks on the authorization for use of force.) 

He’s not alone in his concerns over strategy and Iran’s role. On Sunday, House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Michael McCaul, R-Texas, told Fox News the Shiite militias will only inflame the Sunni tribes in Iraq. As they did in the battle for Tikrit, the Shiite militias once again are being looked to by the Iraqi government to help in Ramadi.  

“I think this is a prescription for disaster,” McCaul said. 

Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and John McCain, R-Ariz., voiced similar concerns. 

“I think they may be able to take Ramadi back, but you know who they’re going to take it with? The Shia militias, which are Iranian-run, sponsored, trained and equipped,” McCain told Fox News. “And they are going to go into a Sunni area and they’re not going liberate, my friend. The Sunnis will never reconcile with the Shia militias, which are sponsored by the Iranians. 

“… And that, of course, will mean a lot more bloodletting.” 

Aside from concerns about Iran taking a lead role in the battle to retake Ramadi, the weekend’s defeat of Iraqi security forces marks a troubling reversal of U.S. gains in the region — Ramadi is part of the so-called Sunni Triangle, which saw heavy fighting in the intermediate years of the Iraq war. 

McCain noted that hundreds of Americans died trying to wrest Ramadi from Al Qaeda in Iraq, out of which spawned ISIS. 

“I can’t imagine what some of the troops are thinking as they see where they had such terrible sacrifices,” former Defense Secretary Robert Gates told Fox News. 

He said, at this point, sending in a “huge new U.S. force” would be a mistake, but said the U.S. could “more effectively” use the assets it has in the region. 

“Getting [ISIS] out of these cities is going to be incredibly tough,” Gates acknowledged. But he said if ISIS is allowed to keep the territory permanently, “What you have is a cancer in the middle of the Middle East.” 

With the Obama administration again facing criticism for not keeping a residual force on the ground after 2011, Gates said the reason the country was better off in 2010 and 2011 was “we had a presence on the ground.” 

A Pentagon spokesman vowed Monday that “we will retake Ramadi.” 

A senior defense official also denied there were plans to change the approach to fighting ISIS in light of the weekend’s takeover. 

“There are no plans to change our strategy,” he said. 

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said Tuesday that “overall,” the U.S. strategy to fight ISIS has been a success. 

In a glimmer of good news, Iraqi forces reportedly were able to repel an ISIS attack overnight in a location west of Baghdad. 

For President Barack Hussein Obama to continue to attempt to prosecute the war against ISIS by remote control, and by not even calling it “Radical Islam’, with apparently no military strategic input in place at all, is one of the silliest, and most dangerous,things I’ve ever seen in my life.

And, to compound their incompetency, they referred to this major victory, the taking of Ramadi by ISIS, as a “minor setback”.

As has been noted by several military analysts, eventually, Obama is going to have to put troops on the ground. That is, additional troops to the troops which he already has on the ground in the role of “military advisors”.

Meanwhile, Obama’s bombing runs are doing minimal damage, at best.

The fact of the matter is, you cannot bomb buildings and expect to kill your enemy, when the enemy is a guerrilla force, which does not stay in any building for any period of time. Just like their Nomadic Barbaric Ancestors, these guerrillas keep moving, regrouping, and attacking.

Obama truly believed that he could count on “our Muslim Allies” in the Middle East to be our “boots on the ground”.

President Pantywaist chose to ignore the fact that they hate “The Great Satan” (us) more than they do their fellow Muslims from ISIS.

As I wrote, back when all of this started,

Welcome to Iraqi-Nam.

Where’s King Richard the Lion-Hearted when we need him.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Garland, Texas Jihadists Connected to ISIS. Are They At Our Border?

May 5, 2015

muslimsignBy now, you have probably heard about “the incident”(as my Local Newscast described it), at a “Draw Mohammed” Contest featuring Pamela Geller, Sunday night in Garland, Texas.

The London Daily Mail reports that

A former terror suspect has been named as one of the gunmen shot dead by police after the two attackers blasted an unarmed security guard in the ankle during an anti-Islam art contest in Texas on Sunday night.

Elton Simpson, 30, who was previously the subject of a terror investigation, and his roommate Nadir Soofi, 34, were armed with assault rifles when they were killed by a quick-thinking traffic officer after opening fire outside the Curtis Culwell Center in Garland, Dallas, at around 7pm.

The shooting unfolded as the American Freedom Defense Initiative held an event inside the building where caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad were being displayed. Followers of Islam deem that any physical depiction of the prophet – even a positive one – is blasphemous. 

Simpson, identified in court papers as an American Muslim, had been convicted of lying to federal agents about his plans to travel to Somalia five years ago, but a judge ultimately ruled it could not be proved that he was heading there to join a terror group. He was placed on probation.

Soofi, named as the second gunman by the Washington Post, shared an apartment with Simpson at the Autumn Ridge complex in Phoenix.

On Monday morning, FBI agents and investigators could be seen cordoning off and searching the apartment, as well as a white van believed to belong to Simpson. Investigators are also reviewing computer records from materials found at the home. 

Investigators also searched the car that the two gunmen drove to the scene and found luggage and further ammunition inside. Some of the belongings were destroyed as a precaution but no explosives were found inside the vehicle, Garland Police Officer Joe Harn said on Monday.

On Monday, Simpson’s father said that he believes his son, who had worked in a dentist’s office, ‘made a bad choice’.

‘We are Americans and we believe in America,’ Dunston Simpson told ABC News. ‘What my son did reflects very badly on my family.’ 

Ahead of the attack on Sunday evening, several Twitter messages were sent out, and authorities believe Simpson was behind them. The last one was shared just half an hour before the shooting.

Followers of ISIS had been calling for an attack online for more than a week after learning that the competition in Garland would feature a ‘draw Muhammad’ art contest, with a prize of $10,000 for the best caricature.

After the attack, the SITE Intelligence Group reported that an Islamic State fighter claimed on Twitter that the shooting was carried out by two pro-Isis individuals. 

In a series of tweets and links, a jihadist named as Abu Hussain AlBritani, which SITE said was British IS fighter Junaid Hussain, claimed that ‘2 of our brothers just opened fire’ at the Prophet Muhammad exhibition in Texas.  

‘They Thought They Was Safe In Texas From The Soldiers of The Islamic State,’ added the tweet.  

Other ISIS supporters claimed on Twitter that one of the gunmen was a man calling himself Shariah Is Light on the social media site, using the now-suspended account name @atawaakul, according to New York Times reporter Rukmini Callimachi.

He had posted a message earlier that said ‘the bro with me and myself have given bay’ah [oath] to Amirul Mu’mineen [ISIS leader Al Baghdadi]. May Allah accept us as mujahideen #texasattack’. 

The contest was just minutes from finishing when multiple gunshots were heard.

The two suspects had pulled up in a vehicle before getting out and firing at a security officer, 57-year-old Bruce Joiner, who was employed by the independent school district. He was later taken to hospital in a stable condition and was released on Sunday evening. 

Less than a month ago, on April 14th, I asked and answered the following question:

Could it be possible that a Radical Islamic Organization, which has promised to plant its flag on top of the White House, is presently camped along our Southern Border?

You betchum, Red Ryder.

Judicial Watch has posted the following troubling  report…

ISIS is operating a camp just a few miles from El Paso, Texas, according to Judicial Watch sources that include a Mexican Army field grade officer and a Mexican Federal Police Inspector.

The exact location where the terrorist group has established its base is around eight miles from the U.S. border in an area known as “Anapra” situated just west of Ciudad Juárez in the Mexican state of Chihuahua. Another ISIS cell to the west of Ciudad Juárez, in Puerto Palomas, targets the New Mexico towns of Columbus and Deming for easy access to the United States, the same knowledgeable sources confirm.

During the course of a joint operation last week, Mexican Army and federal law enforcement officials discovered documents in Arabic and Urdu, as well as “plans” of Fort Bliss – the sprawling military installation that houses the US Army’s 1st Armored Division. Muslim prayer rugs were recovered with the documents during the operation.

Law enforcement and intelligence sources report the area around Anapra is dominated by the Vicente Carrillo Fuentes Cartel (“Juárez Cartel”), La Línea (the enforcement arm of the cartel) and the Barrio Azteca (a gang originally formed in the jails of El Paso). Cartel control of the Anapra area make it an extremely dangerous and hostile operating environment for Mexican Army and Federal Police operations.

According to these same sources, “coyotes” engaged in human smuggling – and working for Juárez Cartel – help move ISIS terrorists through the desert and across the border between Santa Teresa and Sunland Park, New Mexico. To the east of El Paso and Ciudad Juárez, cartel-backed “coyotes” are also smuggling ISIS terrorists through the porous border between Acala and Fort Hancock, Texas. These specific areas were targeted for exploitation by ISIS because of their understaffed municipal and county police forces, and the relative safe-havens the areas provide for the unchecked large-scale drug smuggling that was already ongoing.

Mexican intelligence sources report that ISIS intends to exploit the railways and airport facilities in the vicinity of Santa Teresa, NM (a US port-of-entry). The sources also say that ISIS has “spotters” located in the East Potrillo Mountains of New Mexico (largely managed by the Bureau of Land Management) to assist with terrorist border crossing operations. ISIS is conducting reconnaissance of regional universities; the White Sands Missile Range; government facilities in Alamogordo, NM; Ft. Bliss; and the electrical power facilities near Anapra and Chaparral, NM.

Is President Barack Hussein Obama blissfully unaware of this contingency?

Probably not.

Perhaps ol’ Scooter needs it spelled out for him.

I have updated some information I first shared back on September 14, 2014.

Sign, sign, everywhere a sign…

According to Breitbart.com,

On September 11, 2014, individuals or a group in Mexico hung a message to America over the U.S.-Mexico border wall condemning American support for Israel and declaring support for Palestine. U.S. federal agents discovered the banner draped over the primary border fence in Arizona’s Yuma Sector in a restricted area that could only have been reached from Mexico. The message also contained an image described by authorities as an anarchist symbol. The incident was kept secret from the American public by federal authorities. Breitbart Texas exclusively obtained the leaked incident report from federal agents on the condition their identities remain private.

The leaked incident report reveals that U.S. Border Patrol agents discovered the banner in the early hours of September 12, 2014, indicating that the banner had been draped over the border wall late in the night on September 11th. 

Obama and the rest of “the Smartest People in the Room” have never taken into consideration that Muslim Terrorists could be among the Illegal Aliens whom his quest for Blanket Amnesty will cover.

Their ignorance and naivete, born out of their zeal for political expediency, could be the instruments of our nation’s demise.

The addition of Home-grown Muslim Terrorists with connections to ISIS, who themselves may be coming across our wide-open Southern Border, is a doubly-dangerous situation, which has happened because of President Barack Hussein Obama’s arrogance and ineptitude, which has led to failed Foreign and Domestic Policies.

A wide-open Southern Border is as big a threat to the sovereignty of the United States as anything that our enemies can throw at us right now.  Mr. President, quit playing political games.  The safety of America is at stake .  SECURE THE BORDER NOW.

Thank the Good Lord that Americans are Still Individualists and not the Socialist Collective that Obama and his Progressive Minions want us to be.

Thanks to one well-trained Garland, Texas Traffic Cop, two Wannabe Jihadists are now in the company of their 72 virgins…who all look like Rosie O’Donnell.

I hope ISIS is paying attention.

We’re not just another country, boys.

WE’RE AMERICA.

WE FIGHT BACK.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama Defended Iran By Threatening to Shoot Down Israel Air Force

March 2, 2015

AFBrancoObamaElevator9142014

Over the weekend, a startling new report has surfaced, concerning America’s Dhimmi-in-Chief, Barack Hussein Obama.

Israelnationalnews.com reports that

The Bethlehem-based news agency Ma’an has cited a Kuwaiti newspaper report Saturday, that US President Barack Obama thwarted an Israeli military attack against Iran’s nuclear facilities in 2014 by threatening to shoot down Israeli jets before they could reach their targets in Iran.

Following Obama’s threat, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu was reportedly forced to abort the planned Iran attack.

According to Al-Jarida, the Netanyahu government took the decision to strike Iran some time in 2014 soon after Israel had discovered the United States and Iran had been involved in secret talks over Iran’s nuclear program and were about to sign an agreement in that regard behind Israel’s back.

The report claimed that an unnamed Israeli minister who has good ties with the US administration revealed the attack plan to Secretary of State John Kerry, and that Obama then threatened to shoot down the Israeli jets before they could reach their targets in Iran.

Al-Jarida quoted “well-placed” sources as saying that Netanyahu, along with Minister of Defense Moshe Yaalon, and then-Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman, had decided to carry out airstrikes against Iran’s nuclear program after consultations with top security commanders.

According to the report, “Netanyahu and his commanders agreed after four nights of deliberations to task the Israeli army’s chief of staff, Benny Gantz, to prepare a qualitative operation against Iran’s nuclear program. In addition, Netanyahu and his ministers decided to do whatever they could do to thwart a possible agreement between Iran and the White House because such an agreement is, allegedly, a threat to Israel’s security.”

The sources added that Gantz and his commanders prepared the requested plan and that Israeli fighter jets trained for several weeks in order to make sure the plans would work successfully. Israeli fighter jets reportedly even carried out experimental flights in Iran’s airspace after they managed to break through radars.

Brzezinski’s idea

Former US diplomat Zbigniew Brzezinski, who enthusiastically campaigned for Obama in 2008, called on him to shoot down Israeli planes if they attack Iran. “They have to fly over our airspace in Iraq. Are we just going to sit there and watch?” said the former national security advisor to former President Jimmy Carter in an interview with the Daily Beast

“We have to be serious about denying them that right,” he said. “If they fly over, you go up and confront them. They have the choice of turning back or not. No one wishes for this but it could be a ‘Liberty’ in reverse.’”

Israel mistakenly attacked the American Liberty ship during the Six-Day War in 1967.

Brzezinski was a top candidate to become an official advisor to President Obama, but he was downgraded after Republican and pro-Israel Democratic charges during the campaign that Brzezinski’s anti-Israel attitude would damage Obama at the polls.

A lot has been made lately about the chumminess between Obama and our country’s sworn enemy, the Rogue Islamic Nation of Iran and the obsessive hatred which the President of the United States of America seems to hold toward Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu, and God’s Chosen People, the nation of Israel.

Even though this situation has been allowed to become overt, only within the last few months, it has definitely been an ongoing covert situation, since the beginning of Obama’s Presidency.

One of the perks of having written over 1,800 blogs, is that, sometime over the last, almost 5 years, chances are that I have gathered some pertinent background information on the subject I am writing today’s blog on. This time, I hit the jackpot.

Per wnd.com, posted 11/11/2008:

Hamas held a meeting in the Gaza Strip several months ago with aides to President-elect Barack Obama, but the terror group was asked to keep the contacts secret until after last week’s elections, according to a senior Hamas official.

Ahmed Yousef, Hamas’ chief political adviser in Gaza, told the leading Al-Hayat Arabic-language newspaper Hamas has maintained regular communication with Obama aides that even continued during the past week.

“We were in contact with a number of Obama’s aides through the Internet, and later met with some of them in Gaza, but they advised us not to come out with any statements, as they may have a negative effect on his election campaign and be used by Republican candidate John McCain (to attack Obama),” Yousuf told Al-Hayat.

Yousuf said Hamas’ contact with Obama’s advisers was ongoing, adding that relations were maintained after Obama’s electoral victory last Tuesday.

Then, on 6/25/10, ynet news.com reported:

A senior Hamas figure said Friday that official and unofficial US sources have asked the Islamist group to refrain from making any statements regarding contacts with Washington, this following reports that a senior American official is due to arrive in an Arab country in the coming days to relay a telegram from the Obama Administration.

The Hamas figure told the London-based Al-Quds Al-Arabi newspaper that the Americans fear discussing the talks publicly would “rouse the Jewish lobby and other pressure groups in the US and cause them to pressure the administration to suspend all talks with Hamas.”

The Hamas figure, who is close to Ismail Haniyeh, the prime minister of the government in Gaza, added, “This is a sensitive subject. The Americans don’t want anyone to comment on it because this would catch the attention of pressure groups (in the US) and cause problems.”

He said Hamas’ exiled leadership in Damascus is overseeing the contacts behind closed doors.

And, as far as Iran is concerned, on November 7th, I posted that,

WSJ.com reports that

WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama secretly wrote to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in the middle of last month and described a shared interest in fighting Islamic State militants in Iraq and Syria, according to people briefed on the correspondence.

The letter appeared aimed both at buttressing the campaign against Islamic State and nudging Iran’s religious leader closer to a nuclear deal.

Mr. Obama stressed to Mr. Khamenei that any cooperation on Islamic State was largely contingent on Iran reaching a comprehensive agreement with global powers on the future of Tehran’s nuclear program by a Nov. 24 diplomatic deadline, the same people say.

The October letter marked at least the fourth time Mr. Obama has written Iran’s most powerful political and religious leader since taking office in 2009 and pledging to engage with Tehran’s Islamist government.

The correspondence underscores that Mr. Obama views Iran as important—whether in a potentially constructive or negative role—to his emerging military and diplomatic campaign to push Islamic State from the territories it has gained over the past six months.

Mr. Obama and senior administration officials in recent days have placed the chances for a deal with Iran at only 50-50. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry is set to begin intensive direct negotiations on the nuclear issue with his Iranian counterpart, Javad Zarif, on Sunday in the Persian Gulf country of Oman.

“There’s a sizable portion of the political elite that cut their teeth on anti-Americanism,” Mr. Obama said at a White House news conference on Wednesday about Iran’s leadership, without commenting on his personal overture. “Whether they can manage to say ‘Yes’…is an open question.”

For the first time this week, a senior administration official said negotiations could be extended beyond the Nov. 24 deadline.

The White House will know after Mr. Kerry’s trip to Oman whether a deal with Iran is possible by late November, the senior official said.

“We’ll know a lot more after that meeting as to whether or not we have a shot at an agreement by the deadline,” the official said. “If there’s an extension, there’re questions like: What are the terms?”

Mr. Obama’s push for a deal faces renewed resistance after Tuesday’s elections gave Republicans control of the Senate and added power both to block an agreement and to impose new sanctions on Iran. Sens. Mark Kirk (R., Ill.) and Robert Menendez (D., N.J.) have introduced legislation to intensify sanctions.

‘There’s a sizable portion of the [Iranian] political elite that cut their teeth on anti-Americanism. Whether they can manage to say ‘Yes’…is an open question.’ —Barack Obama

“The best way to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon is to quickly pass the bipartisan Menendez-Kirk legislation—not to give the Iranians more time to build a bomb,” Mr. Kirk said Wednesday.

House Speaker John Boehner (R., Ohio) expressed concern when asked about the letter sent by Mr. Obama.

“I don’t trust the Iranians, I don’t think we need to bring them into this,” Mr. Boehner said. Referring to the continuing nuclear talks between Iran and world powers, Mr. Boehner said he “would hope that the negotiations that are under way are serious negotiations, but I have my doubts.”

In a sign of the sensitivity of the Iran diplomacy, the White House didn’t tell its Middle East allies—including Israel, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates—about Mr. Obama’s October letter to Mr. Khamenei, according to the people briefed on the correspondence.

Leaders from these countries have voiced growing concern in recent weeks that the U.S. is preparing to significantly soften its demands in the nuclear talks with Tehran. They said they worry the deal could allow Iran to gain the capacity to produce nuclear weapons in the future.

Arab leaders also fear Washington’s emerging rapprochement with Tehran could come at the expense of their security and economic interests across the Middle East. These leaders have accused the U.S. of keeping them in the dark about its diplomatic engagements with Tehran.

So, let me get this straight: Petulant President Pantywaist, dhimmi that he is, has been secretly writing love letters to our sworn enemy, Iran, a Radical Muslim Rogue State, who is building a nuclear bomb, in order to wipe us off the face of the Earth, in a failed effort to recruit them to join us in our fight against ISIS, an Organization of Radical Muslims, who stated that they were going to plant their flag on top of the White House.

And, before that, he met with the Muslim Terrorist Organization, and sworn enemy of Israel and the US, Hamas, before he was elected President in 2008.

Additionally, this past year, he almost shot out of the sky the Air Force of Israel, one of our closest allies.

My Dear Lord.

If there was ever any doubt in anyone’s mind, to whom Obama’s true allegiance lies, politically, spiritually, and personally, this incident, along with the news that he is going to allow Iran to build a nuclear bomb, should wipe away all doubt.

Obama stands with the enemies of our Sovereign Nation and has no qualms about attacking our friends.

And, if this treatment of God’s Chosen People continues, I am afraid we are going to find out why America is not mentioned in The Book of Revelation.

Until He Comes,

KJ


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,735 other followers