Archive for the ‘America’ Category

h1

May Day 2010 Lincoln Memorial

April 20, 2010

Dear friends,

Please make a point to be aware of: http://www.mayday2010.org/

A wonderful day of gathering in our nations capitol for prayer.

h1

Navy Seals trial moved to Iraq

January 14, 2010

Navy Seals trial moved to Iraq

source: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/01/navy_seals_trial_moved_to_iraq.html

Jane Jamison

The Newport News DailyPress.com reports :

Two of the three Navy elite commando SEALS who are facing military court martial for their arrest of an Islamic terrorist are going to have trials in Iraq so that they can exercise their right to  confront their accuser face-to-face.

Special Warfare Operater 2nd Class Jonathan Keefe, Special Warfare Operator 1st Class Julio Huertas and Special Warfare Operator 2nd Class Matthew McCabe are accused of mistreating Ahmed Hashim Abed after arresting him and denying wrongdoing in later statements to commanders.


Abed is the accused Islamo-terrorist mastermind of  the ambush, torture, murder, burning and hanging of 4 Blackwater contract personnel who were making a food delivery in Fallujah, Iraq in 2004.    The American men, most of them former U.S. military, were dragged behind vehicles, burned and hung from a Euphrates river bridge while town crowds cheered.

U.S. Military commanders, (who apparently suffer from the same “politically-correct”  illness as the President of the United States) allege that SWO2 McCabe may have punched Abed after his arrest.  The alleged “crime” of the other two SEALS is, apparently, that they didn’t rat out their fellow soldier.  Abed may have also suffered a cut lip in the incident.  Background on this story is here and here.

In the past few weeks, military prosecutors have sought to delay the trials of the SEALS and also tried to simply try the SEALS on the basis of a taped deposition of Abed.  Attorneys for the SEALS demanded the right to confront and question their Muslim terrorist accuser in person at trial.  The fact that the SEALS have to be flown to Iraq to protect their rights, their careers, their names and the SEALS’ reputation is a shameful waste of time, expense and effort.   The Christmas Day bombing attempt on an American jetliner shows the U.S. government has much more important business than prosecuting soldiers who were doing exemplary work tracking down a Muslim terrorist murder suspect.

The clock keeps ticking, the Obama administration has had plenty of time and still has more time to drop these charges and make this all go away.   American soldiers being treated like terrorists.   Terrorists being treated like soldiers.   The silence from this White House on this matter is shameful.

h1

Israelis Baffled by News of Defenseless US Soldiers

January 13, 2010

Israelis Baffled by News of Defenseless US Soldiers


Many Israelis want to know: why didn’t the soldiers attacked by a U.S. Army major-turned-terrorist return fire?

When a Muslim goes, well, Muslim in Israel he is typically shot to death by someone, like a reserve soldier, within seconds of screaming “Allah Akbar.”

In contrast with the Israeli experience, it took 10 minutes before a civilian police officer at  Fort Hood was able to shoot and stop Muslim fanatic Nidal Malik Hasan.

How could that happen?  How could so many people trained in the strategies and tactics of modern warfare be so defenseless?

The answer – and this may astonish many Americans – is that the victims were unarmed. U.S. soldiers are not allowed to carry guns for personal protection, even on a 340-acre base quartering more than 50,000 troops.

So it goes in brain-dead, liberal America .

Fort Hood is a “gun free” zone, thanks to regulations adopted in one of the very first acts signed into law by anti-gun President Bill Clinton in March, 1993. Click here for the file.

Contrary to President Obama’s crocodile tears, his administration is bent on further disarming the U.S. military, and all Americans. Obama and his people will not rest until every American is a sitting duck…

postscript: Israeli teachers, from kindergarten on up, are also armed; so, a Virginia Tech-type slaughter is highly unlikely at an Israeli university.

Israelis, who have had to combat terrorism all their lives, are not afraid of guns.  They are an armed people, ready, willing, and able to defend themselves and their country.

Unlike Liberally indoctrinated Americans, paralyzed by fear and political correctness, Israelis understand that people, not guns, kill people.

h1

Ann Coulter Backs up Brit Hume on Gospel of Jesus

January 7, 2010

Christianity: If you can find a better deal, take it!

Ann Coulter explain Gospel of Jesus
in backing up Brit Hume’s Tiger remark


Posted: January 06, 2010
6:11 pm Eastern

By Ann Coulter


Someone mentioned Christianity on television recently, and liberals reacted with their usual howls of rage and blinking incomprehension.

On a Fox News panel discussing Tiger Woods, Brit Hume said, perfectly accurately:

“The extent to which he can recover, it seems to me, depends on his faith. He is said to be a Buddhist. I don’t think that faith offers the kind of forgiveness and redemption that is offered by the Christian faith. So, my message to Tiger would be, ‘Tiger, turn to the Christian faith and you can make a total recovery and be a great example to the world.'”

Hume’s words, being 100 percent factually correct, sent liberals into a tizzy of sputtering rage, once again illustrating liberals’ copious ignorance of Christianity. (Also illustrating the words of the Bible: “How is it you do not understand me when I speak? It is because you cannot bear to listen to my words” [John 8:43].)

In the Washington Post, Tom Shales demanded that Hume apologize, saying he had “dissed about half a billion Buddhists on the planet.”

Is Buddhism about forgiveness? Because, if so, Buddhists had better start demanding corrections from every book, magazine article and blog posting ever written on the subject, which claims Buddhists don’t believe in God, but try to become their own gods.

I can’t imagine that anyone thinks Tiger’s problem was that he didn’t sufficiently think of himself as a god, especially after that final putt in the Arnold Palmer Invitational last year.

Are you a visual learner? Absorb the truths of God’s Word through the WatchWord Bible – the entire New Testament on DVD

In light of Shales’ warning Hume about “what people are saying” about him, I hope Hume’s a Christian, but that’s not apparent from his inarguable description of Christianity. Of course, given the reaction to his remarks, apparently one has to be a regular New Testament scholar to have so much as a passing familiarity with the basic concept of Christianity.

On MSNBC, David Shuster invoked the “separation of church and television” (a phrase that also doesn’t appear in the Constitution), bitterly complaining that Hume had brought up Christianity “out-of-the-blue” on “a political talk show.”

Why on earth would Hume mention religion while discussing a public figure who had fallen from grace and was in need of redemption and forgiveness? Boy, talk about coming out of left field!

What religion – what topic – induces this sort of babbling idiocy? (If liberals really want to keep people from hearing about God, they should give Him his own show on MSNBC.)

Most perplexing was columnist Dan Savage’s indignant accusation that Hume was claiming that Christianity “offers the best deal – it gives you the get-out-of-adultery-free card that other religions just can’t.”

In fact, that’s exactly what Christianity does. It’s the best deal in the universe. (I know it seems strange that a self-described atheist and “radical sex advice columnist faggot” like Savage would miss the central point of Christianity, but there it is.)

God sent his only son to get the crap beaten out of him, die for our sins and rise from the dead. If you believe that, you’re in. Your sins are washed away from you – sins even worse than adultery! – because of the cross.

“He canceled the record of the charges against us and took it away by nailing it to the cross” (Colossians 2:14).

Surely you remember the cross, liberals – the symbol banned by ACLU lawsuits from public property throughout the land?

Christianity is simultaneously the easiest religion in the world and the hardest religion in the world.

In the no-frills, economy-class version, you don’t need a church, a teacher, candles, incense, special food or clothing; you don’t need to pass a test or prove yourself in any way. All you’ll need is a Bible (in order to grasp the amazing deal you’re getting) and probably a water baptism, though even that’s disputed.

You can be washing the dishes or walking your dog or just sitting there minding your business hating Susan Sarandon and accept that God sent his only son to die for your sins and rise from the dead … and you’re in!

(Column continues below)

“Because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved” (Romans 10:9).

If you do that, every rotten, sinful thing you’ve ever done is gone from you. You’re every bit as much a Christian as the pope or Billy Graham.

No fine print, no “your mileage may vary,” no blackout dates. God ought to do a TV spot: “I’m God Almighty, and if you can find a better deal than the one I’m offering, take it.”

The Gospel makes this point approximately 1,000 times. Here are a few examples at random:

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16).

“For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God” (Ephesians 2:8).

“For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 6:23).

In a boiling rage, liberals constantly accuse Christians of being “judgmental.” No, we’re relieved.

Christianity is also the hardest religion in the world because, if you believe Christ died for your sins and rose from the dead, you have no choice but to give your life entirely over to Him. No more sexual promiscuity, no lying, no cheating, no stealing, no killing inconvenient old people or unborn babies – no doing what all the other kids do.

And no more caring what the world thinks of you – because, as Jesus warned in a prophecy constantly fulfilled by liberals: The world will hate you.

With Christianity, your sins are forgiven, the slate is wiped clean and your eternal life is guaranteed through nothing you did yourself, even though you don’t deserve it. It’s the best deal in the universe.

h1

VIDEO: One Nation Under God

January 6, 2010
h1

F-22 Raptor Fighter Jet Removed from Obama Speech

December 14, 2009

Last week Obama pulled this stunt:

Exclusive: Obama insisted F-22 be removed from his speech venue

When President Obama spoke to troops at Alaska’s Elmendorf Air Force Base last month, the unit there parked a shiny new F-22 fighter plane in the hangar. But according to multiple sources, White House aides demanded the plane be changed to an older F-15 fighter because they didn’t want Obama speaking in front of the F-22, a controversial program he fought hard to end.

“White House aides actually made them remove the F-22-said they would not allow POTUS to be pictured with the F-22 in any way, shape, or form,” one source close to the unit relayed.

Stephen Lee, a public affairs officer at Elmendorf, confirmed to The Cable that the F-22 was parked in the hangar and then was replaced by an F-15 at the White House’s behest.

Obama was key to having the F-22 program killed, so it is understandable why he would not want to be photographed in front of one. However, many in the Air Force family are very distressed by his position that was pushed by Gates, the traitor, because the F-22 is our only 5th generation aircraft. (Did you know that Gates required a signed loyalty oath from all who work for him? This is a first.) Our enemies are actively developing 5th generation aircraft, and we now have only about 187 of these planes.

the program started 20 years ago at 750 aircraft and was eventually whittled down to 187. An effort to preserve the production line with 7 more aircraft was rebuffed by Obama and Gates last summer, so there will never be any more F-22s, which was the top fighter jet in the world. So the irony of Obama’s game of hide and seek with the Airmen who fly these marvelous aircraft is tragic.

In a future conflict we will be at a severe disadvantage. The F-22 is criticized as costing too much per airplane. But this is a numbers game. The more aircraft you buy, as was planned, the cheaper the cost per aircraft. Because the program was cut back in numbers, the unit cost has increased. My point is that at every turn Obama is doing things that weaken our country, instead of strengthening it.

h1

New Rules of Engagement in Afghanistan

December 14, 2009

It’s not just the enemy killing U.S. soldiers …

You won’t believe new rules
of engagement in Afghanistan



WorldNetDaily  13 Dec. 09

WASHINGTON – New military rules of engagement ostensibly to protect Afghan civilians are putting the lives of U.S. forces in jeopardy, claim Army and Marine sources, as the Taliban learns the game plan based the rules’ imposed limits.

The rules of engagement, or ROEs, apply to all coalition forces of the United States and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Their enactment is in response to Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s complaints over mounting civilian deaths apparently occurring in firefights.

Despite the fact that the newly arrived U.S. commander in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, imposed the more restrictive ROEs to minimize the killing of innocent civilians, however, the Taliban is well aware of them and has its own forces acting in ways to counteract them.

The impact of new restrictions has created increasing frustration and concern among U.S. Army and Marine Corps troops who now are compelled to follow these rules despite the danger of letting the Taliban live to fight again another day.

Critics see the new ROEs being more oriented toward defensive rather than offensive operations, as evidenced by recent charges of murder against two U.S. Army snipers because they had targeted a Taliban commander who reportedly wasn’t holding a weapon.

The actual ROEs are said to be classified U.S. and NATO secrets, but based on individual soldier accounts, those restrictions include the following:

  • No night or surprise searches
  • Villagers are to be warned prior to searches
  • Afghan National Army, or ANA, or Afghan National Police, or ANP, must accompany U.S. units on searches
  • U.S. soldiers may not fire at insurgents unless they are preparing to fire first
  • U.S. forces cannot engage insurgents if civilians are present
  • Only women can search women
  • Troops can fire on insurgents if they catch them placing an IED but not if insurgents walk away from where the explosives are.

Often, rules of engagement require varying levels of approvals before action can be taken. In one case, villagers had tipped off U.S. forces of the presence of a Taliban commander who was threatening village elders.

To get permission to go after him, U.S. troops had to get 11 separate Afghan, U.S. and international forces’ approval to the plan. The approval, however, did not come until well into the next day. By then, the Taliban commander had moved on, to the consternation of the villagers who had provided the tip. Observers have claimed that it can take some 96 hours to acquire all the permissions to act.

In other cases, the use of force against insurgents may be blocked if they lower their guns, only to have those insurgents return later to attack.

Also, ISAF troops cannot engage insurgents if they are leaving an area where an IED has been planted. In one case, insurgents planting an IED had detected the presence of U.S. forces and immediately began leaving the area, tossing evidence of their preparations along the way. U.S. forces could not fire on them.

The ROEs in some cases have gone beyond limiting ISAF troops in their operations. In one case, ROE restrictions were in effect when four U.S. Marines twice pleaded by radio for artillery support in combat action in Kunar Province in Afghanistan – and twice they were refused, before they were killed.

F. Michael Maloof, a frequent G2B contributor, is a former senior security policy analyst in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. He can be contacted here.

h1

Photos: Remember Pearl Harbor

December 7, 2009

Remembering Pearl Harbor:

Pearl Harbor is an United States harbor, located on the island of O’ahu, Hawaii.  On December 7, 1941 Japan surprise attacked Pearl Harbor.  Japan used air craft and midget submarines for the attack.  The U.S. lost 2,350 soldiers, 68 civilians and there were 1,178 injured. Also the Japanese sank 4 U.S. Navy battle ships, 3 cruisers, 3 destroyers, 1 minelayer and 188 aircraft. This is one of the main reasons the United States joined WWII.

1pearl.jpg

1pearl002.jpg

1pearl003.jpg

h1

Cartoon: Obama’s 30,000 Troop Surge

December 7, 2009

h1

IPT: The Threat of Homegrown Terrorism

December 1, 2009

The Threat of Homegrown Terrorism

by Interview with Steven Emerson
C-SPAN
November 29, 2009

http://www.investigativeproject.org/1540/the-threat-of-homegrown-terrorism

Multimedia for this item

Washington Journal continues.

ROBB HARLESTON [HOST]: Steve Emerson is the Executive Director of the Investigative Project on Terrorism and author of Jihad Incorporated: A Guide to Militant Islam in the U.S. We’re going to talk about that a little bit more. We’ve got you in to talk about the threat of homegrown terrorism, so for the sake of this particular conversation, define homegrown terrorism for us.

STEVEN EMERSON: Well, interestingly enough, homegrown terrorism used to define right wing, neo-Nazi, KKK-type terrorism – indigenous terrorism. Now it is used as a euphemism for jihadist-type terrorism that grows up in the United States indigenously without external factors such as being directed by Al Qaeda or such as being imported from Al Qaeda, but rather American citizens who carry out attacks of terrorism here in the United States.

HARLESTON: And an example of that would be the case of the Somalis being written about in a lot of places as – and we’ve got the article here from the Wall Street Journal, the headline “Somali Case Highlights Specter of Radicalization” – tell us what they’re writing about.

EMERSON: They’re writing about a whole cluster of Somali-American kids whose parents had immigrated to the United States as refugees and who – the kids were born here. But unfortunately, because of radicalization, either through the mosque or through the internet or through videos or through CDs, they became radicalized to the point of joining the Al-Shabaab movement, which was an Al Qaeda subset in Somalia. And they were recruited to either carry out attacks in Somalia – one actually carried out a suicide bombing – or to carry out attacks in the United States. And they were all American-born.

HARLESTON: And how much of this threat – how big is this threat becoming? How is this growing here in the United States?

EMERSON: Well the Somali-American threat is growing. I can tell you there are at least six other American cities where they have young Somali-Americans who they believe belong to Al-Shabaab, and are deemed to be a national security threat. There is active recruitment in Kansas City, in Columbus, Ohio, in San Diego in California, and several other cities for Al-Shabaab. And that’s not the only group involved in terms of homegrown terrorism, but certainly one of the major groups.

HARLESTON: We’re talking with Steven Emerson about the threat of homegrown terrorism. If you want to get involved in the conversation, the number is (202) 737-0002 for Democrats. Republicans: (202) 737-0001. Independents: (202) 628-0205. So by this definition, would you categorize what happened at Fort Hood with Major Nidal Hasan as a case of homegrown terrorism?

EMERSON: Absolutely. I believe that was a case of homegrown jihadist terrorism. It wasn’t externally directed. It may have been influenced by a Yemeni cleric named Anwar al-Awlaki, who used to live in the United States, and with whom Major Hasan had had contact with. But he carried it out all by himself – he had procured the firearms, he let superiors know that infidels should have their throats slit, he became a full fledged jihadist here in the United States from seemingly not having a religious background.

HARLESTON: In this morning’s New York Post, their editorial “Fumbling Bureau of Incompetence,” they write, regarding the shooting at Fort Hood: “The gunman’s extremism was so obvious that the FBI had identified e-mails between Hasan and Anwar al-Awlaqi, a radical Muslim cleric with apparent ties to Osama bin Laden – yet decided against a full investigation. While Army intelligence also didn’t follow up, the FBI’s the one with the track record of missteps going back years.” How much responsibility do you feel falls on the FBI and American intelligence for the growth of this homegrown terrorism – particularly the case of the Somalis or the case of the shooting at Fort Hood?

Read the rest of this entry ?

h1

Navy SEALs Face Assault Charges

November 25, 2009

Navy SEALs Face Assault Charges for Capturing Most-Wanted Terrorist

Tuesday , November 24, 2009

By Rowan Scarborough

FC1

Navy SEALs have secretly captured one of the most wanted terrorists in Iraq — the alleged mastermind of the murder and mutilation of four Blackwater USA security guards in Fallujah in 2004. And three of the SEALs who captured him are now facing criminal charges, sources told FoxNews.com.

The three, all members of the Navy’s elite commando unit, have refused non-judicial punishment — called an admiral’s mast — and have requested a trial by court-martial.

Ahmed Hashim Abed, whom the military code-named “Objective Amber,” told investigators he was punched by his captors — and he had the bloody lip to prove it.

Now, instead of being lauded for bringing to justice a high-value target, three of the SEAL commandos, all enlisted, face assault charges and have retained lawyers.

Matthew McCabe, a Special Operations Petty Officer Second Class (SO-2), is facing three charges: dereliction of performance of duty for willfully failing to safeguard a detainee, making a false official statement, and assault.

Petty Officer Jonathan Keefe, SO-2, is facing charges of dereliction of performance of duty and making a false official statement.

Petty Officer Julio Huertas, SO-1, faces those same charges and an additional charge of impediment of an investigation.

The three SEALs will be arraigned separately on Dec. 7. Another three SEALs — two officers and an enlisted sailor — have been identified by investigators as witnesses but have not been charged.

FoxNews.com obtained the official handwritten statement from one of the three witnesses given on Sept. 3, hours after Abed was captured and still being held at the SEAL base at Camp Baharia. He was later taken to a cell in the U.S.-operated Green Zone in Baghdad.

The SEAL told investigators he had showered after the mission, gone to the kitchen and then decided to look in on the detainee.

“I gave the detainee a glance over and then left,” the SEAL wrote. “I did not notice anything wrong with the detainee and he appeared in good health.”

Lt. Col. Holly Silkman, spokeswoman for the special operations component of U.S. Central Command, confirmed Tuesday to FoxNews.com that three SEALs have been charged in connection with the capture of a detainee. She said their court martial is scheduled for January.

United States Central Command declined to discuss the detainee, but a legal source told FoxNews.com that the detainee was turned over to Iraqi authorities, to whom he made the abuse complaints. He was then returned to American custody. The SEAL leader reported the charge up the chain of command, and an investigation ensued.

The source said intelligence briefings provided to the SEALs stated that “Objective Amber” planned the 2004 Fallujah ambush, and “they had been tracking this guy for some time.”

The Fallujah atrocity came to symbolize the brutality of the enemy in Iraq and the degree to which a homegrown insurgency was extending its grip over Iraq.

The four Blackwater agents were transporting supplies for a catering company when they were ambushed and killed by gunfire and grenades. Insurgents burned the bodies and dragged them through the city. They hanged two of the bodies on a bridge over the Euphrates River for the world press to photograph.

Intelligence sources identified Abed as the ringleader, but he had evaded capture until September.

The military is sensitive to charges of detainee abuse highlighted in the Abu Ghraib prison scandal. The Navy charged four SEALs with abuse in 2004 in connection with detainee treatment.

h1

A Study in Muslim Doctrine: Nidal Hasan and Fort Hood

November 24, 2009

Nidal Hasan and Fort Hood: A Study in Muslim Doctrine

by Raymond Ibrahim
Pajamas Media
November 18, 2009

http://www.meforum.org/2512/nidal-hasan-fort-hood-muslim-doctrine

One of the difficulties in discussing Islam’s more troubling doctrines is that they have an anachronistic, even otherworldly, feel to them; that is, unless actively and openly upheld by Muslims, non-Muslims, particularly of the Western variety, tend to see them as abstract theory, not standard practice for today. In fact, some Westerners have difficulties acknowledging even those problematic doctrines that are openly upheld by Muslims — such as jihad. How much more when the doctrines in question are subtle, or stealthy, in nature?

Enter Nidal Malik Hasan, the psychiatrist, U.S. Army major, and “observant Muslim who prayed daily,” who recently went on a shooting rampage at Fort Hood, killing thirteen Americans (including a pregnant woman). While the media wonders in exasperation why he did it, offering the same old tired and trite reasons — he was “picked on,” he was “mentally unbalanced” — the fact is his behavior comports well with certain Islamic doctrines. As such, it behooves Americans to take a moment and familiarize themselves with the esotericisms of Islam.

Note: Any number of ulema (Muslim scholars) have expounded the following doctrines. However, since jihadi icon and theoretician Ayman Zawahiri, al-Qaeda’s number two, has also addressed many of these doctrines in his treatises, including by quoting several authoritative ulema, I will primarily rely on excerpts from The Al Qaeda Reader (AQR), for those readers who wish to source, and read in context, the following quotes in one volume.

Wala’ wa Bara’

Perhaps best translated as “loyalty and enmity,” this doctrine requires Muslims to maintain absolute loyalty to Islam and one another, while disavowing, even hating (e.g., Koran 60:4), all things un-Islamic — including persons (a.k.a. “infidels”). This theme has ample support in the Koran, hadith, and rulings of the ulema, that is, usul al-fiqh (roots of Muslim jurisprudence). In fact, Zawahiri has written a fifty-page treatise entitled “Loyalty and Enmity” (AQR, p. 63-115).

One of the many Koranic verses on which he relies warns Muslims against “taking the Jews and Christians as friends and allies … whoever among you takes them for friends and allies, he is surely one of them” (Koran 5:51), i.e., he becomes an infidel. The plain meaning of this verse alone — other verses, such as 3:28, 4:144, and 6:40 follow this theme — and its implications for today can hardly be clearer. According to one of the most authoritative Muslim exegetes, al-Tabari (838-923), Koran 5:51 means that the Muslim who “allies with them [non-Muslims] and enables them against the believers, that same one is a member of their faith and community” (AQR, p. 71).

Sheikh al-Islam, Ibn Taymiyya (1263-1328), takes the concept of loyalty one step further when he tells Muslims that they are “obligated to befriend a believer — even if he is oppressive and violent towards you and must be hostile to the infidel, even if he is liberal and kind to you” (AQR, p. 84).

In ways, Hasan’s life was a testimony to loyalty and enmity. According to his colleague, Dr. Finnell, Hasan “was very vocal about the war, very upfront about being a Muslim first and an American second.” If his being “vocal about the war” is not enough to demonstrate unwavering loyalty to Islam, his insistence that he is first and foremost a Muslim is. Other evidence indicates that the primary factor that threw him “over the edge” was that he was being deployed to a Muslim country (Afghanistan) — his “worst nightmare.”

According to a fellow Muslim convenience store owner who often spoke with Hasan, the thought that he might injure or kill Muslims “weighed heavily on him.” Hasan also counseled a fellow Muslim not to join the U.S. Army, since “Muslims shouldn’t kill Muslims,” again, showing where his loyalty lies. Tabari’s exegesis comes to mind: the Muslim who “allies with them [non-Muslims] and enables them against the believers, that same one is a member of their faith and community,” i.e., he too becomes an infidel (AQR, p. 71).

Another source who spoke with Hasan notes that “in the Koran, you’re not supposed to have alliances with Jews or Christian or others, and if you are killed in the military fighting against Muslims, you will go to hell.”

At any rate, surely none of this should come as a surprise. In April 2005, another Muslim serving in the U.S. Army, Hasan Akbar, was convicted of murder for killing two American soldiers and wounding fourteen in a grenade attack in Kuwait. According to the AP, “he launched the attack because he was concerned U.S. troops would kill fellow Muslims in Iraq.”

Taqiyya

This doctrine, which revolves around deceiving the infidel, is pivotal to upholding loyalty and enmity wherever and whenever Muslim minorities live among non-Muslim majorities. In fact, the Koran’s primary justification for deception is in the context of loyalty: “Let believers [Muslims] not take for friends and allies infidels [non-Muslims] instead of believers. Whoever does this shall have no relationship left with God — unless you but guard yourselves against them, taking precautions” (Koran 3:28). In other words, when necessary, Muslims are permitted to feign friendship and loyalty to non-Muslims, or, in the words of Abu Darda, a pious companion of Muhammad, “We grin to the faces of some peoples, while our hearts curse them” (AQR, p. 73). Taqiyya’s importance for upholding loyalty and enmity is evidenced by the fact that, just three pages into his treatise, Zawahiri has an entire section called “The Difference Between Befriending and Dissembling.” There he shows that, while sincere friendship with non-Muslims is forbidden, insincere friendship — whenever beneficial to Muslims — is not.

Again, Zawahiri quotes that standard reference, Tabari, who explains Koran 3:28 as follows: “Only when you are in their [non-Muslims’] power, fearing for yourselves, are you to demonstrate friendship for them with your tongues, while harboring hostility toward them. But do not join them in the particulars of their infidelities, and do not aid them through any action against a Muslim” (AQR, p. 74).

And therein lies the limit of taqiyya: when the deceit, the charade begins to endanger the lives of fellow Muslims — whom, as we have seen, deserve first loyalty — it is forbidden. As Zawahiri concludes, the Muslim may pretend, so long as he does “not undertake any initiative to support them [non-Muslims], commit sin, or enable [them] through any deed or killing or fighting against Muslims” (AQR, p. 75).

Again, we are reminded that the “moment of truth” for Hasan, who seems to have led something of a double life — American major and psychiatrist by day, financial supporter of jihadi groups and associate of terrorists by night — is the fact that he was being deployed to Afghanistan, i.e., he would have been aiding non-Muslim Americans against fellow Muslims (remember, he was “a Muslim first and an American second”). He tried to prevent this, getting a lawyer, to no avail. Thus, since he had taken deceit to its doctrinal limit and was now being placed in a position where he would have to actually demonstrate his loyalty to Americans against Muslims, it appears he decided to take it to the next level (see doctrine below).

Incidentally, we also find that “he [Hasan] was going to be kind of the caretaker for [American] Muslim soldiers. Sometimes Muslim soldiers have a rift between what they’re doing and their faith,” according to Major Khalid Shabazz, an Army Muslim chaplain. “That person who is a leader needs to quell some of those fears and help them through that process.”

This all sounds well and good, but what, precisely, does it mean? If, as we have seen, Islam clearly forbids Muslims from aiding infidels against fellow Muslims, and if being in the U.S. Army requires American Muslims to fight non-American Muslims now and again, how was Hasan — or any other observant Muslim — going to “quell some of those fears and help through that process”? How, if not by merely instructing them in the centuries-old arts of taqiyya?

Jihad

Amongst learned infidels, jihad is the most recognized and notorious of all Muslim doctrines. Literally meaning to “struggle” or “strive,” jihad can take on any form, though its most native and praiseworthy expression revolves around fighting, and killing, the infidel enemy — even if it costs the Muslim fighter (the mujahid) his life: “Let those who would exchange the life of this world for the Hereafter fight in the path of Allah; whoever fights in the path of Allah — whether he dies or triumphs — we shall richly reward him” (Koran 4:74). And “Allah has purchased from the faithful their lives and possessions, and in return has promised them the Garden. They will fight in the path of Allah, killing and being killed” (Koran 9:111).

The hadith also has its fair share of anecdotes advocating the “one-man jihad.” Zawahiri’s treatise, “Jihad, Martyrdom, and the Killing of Innocents,” (AQR p. 137-171), spends much time justifying the desperate solo jihad — otherwise known as the “martyrdom operation” — including by offering the following hadith: “A Muslim asked Muhammad, O Messenger of Allah! If I plunge myself into the ranks of the idolaters and fight till I am killed — what then, to heaven? He [Muhammad] said yes. So the man plunged himself into the ranks of the idolaters, fighting till he was slain” (AQR, p. 153).

The learned ulema agree. According to al-Qurtubi (d. 1273), “There is no wrong for a man to singlehandedly attack a mighty army — if he seeks martyrdom — provided he has the fortitude.” Others indicate that one of the reasons making the one-man jihad permissible is that it serves to “terrify the foe” (AQR, p. 155).

And there it is: When all else failed, when Hasan’s forthcoming deployment into Muslim land forced him to expose where his true loyalty (wala’) lies, pretense (taqiyya) gave way to full-blown struggle (jihad). Hasan, who sacrificed many years to become a psychiatrist and a U.S. Army major, in the clear words of the Koran “exchange[d] the life of this world for the Hereafter.” Evidence also indicates that he believed “martyrdom operations” were not only valid but laudable acts of courage, writing “YOUR INTENTION IS THE MAIN ISSUE” (capitals in original). Zawahiri puts it more articulately: “The deciding factor is … the intention.” Is the mujahid killing himself “to service Islam [laudable martyrdom], or is it out of depression and despair [forbidden suicide]?” (AQR, p. 157).

(Unfortunately and, no doubt, much to Hasan’s chagrin, infidel medics ensured his failure to achieve martyrdom.)

The greatest proof that, at least in his own mind, Hasan was waging a jihad is the fact that he utilized that immemorial jihadi war cry — Allahu Akbar! — which has served to terrify the infidel denizens of the world for centuries. Here’s an example from Muslim history (circa the early 8th century): “The [non-Muslim] inhabitants of eastern Anatolia were filled with terror the likes of which they had never experienced before. All they saw were Muslims in their midst screaming ‘Allahu Akbar!’ Allah planted terror in their hearts. … The [non-Muslim] men were crucified over the course of 24 km” (from Tarikh al-Rusul wa al-Muluk).

Indeed, while the takbir (the formal term for “Allahu Akbar”) can be used in various contexts, it is by far primarily used in a jihadi context, past and present. Nearly 1,400 years ago, Muhammad and the early Muslims cried “Allahu Akbar” immediately before attacking their infidel neighbors; eight years before the Fort Hood massacre, Mohamed Atta cried “Allahu Akbar” immediately before crashing a hijacked plane into one of the Twin Towers on 9/11. Even Bukhari, the most authoritative hadith compiler, has an entire chapter titled “The Recitation of Takbir [i.e., Allahu Akbar] in War.”

Yet confusion abides. An AP report writes: “As if going off to war, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan cleaned out his apartment, gave leftover frozen broccoli to one neighbor, and called another to thank him for his friendship — common courtesies and routines of the departing soldier. Instead, authorities say, he went on the killing spree that left thirteen people at Fort Hood, Texas, dead.” Contrary to the tone of this excerpt, Hasan’s actions were far from contradictory. After all, he was “going off to war.”

Wala’ wa bara, taqiyya, and jihad all help explain Hasan’s actions. Even so, other lesser-known aspects of Islam lend their support to the view that he was acting from an Islamist framework.

Sakina

Several people who encountered Hasan before, and even during, the time he went a-jihading note that he evinced an almost unnatural amount of calmness — certainly for one getting ready to go on a killing spree. No doubt, many will point to this as a sign that he was suffering from some sort of schizophrenic episode.

Yet the fact remains: according to jihadi lore, a feeling of tranquility and calmness is supposed to descend on the mujahid, especially during the most stressful moments of combat (see Koran 9:26 for confirmation). This is known as sakina (calmness, tranquility). Osama bin Laden himself often describes his experience of sakina during the Afghan-Soviet war: “Once I was only thirty meters away from the Russians and they were trying to capture me. I was under bombardment, but I was so peaceful in my heart that I fell asleep. Before a battle, Allah sends us sequina [sakina] — tranquility.” Of course, whether Hasan experienced “true” sakina, or whether he was merely affecting to himself, is irrelevant. Rather, the point here is that, once again, that which appears inexplicable or indicative of “mental instability” can be explained through an Islamic paradigm.

Da’wa

According to Sharia law, Muslims are not permitted to voluntarily reside in non-Muslim nations, such as America, except under certain circumstances. One of these is if the Muslim is actively engaged in da’wa, that is, proselytizing; another is if he fights in the path of Allah, jihad. Both serve the same purpose: empowering Islam by numbers and territory, respectively. Merely living in infidel territory out of choice, however, because it offers a “better life,” is forbidden. (To get an idea of how serious a matter it is for Muslims to reside in non-Muslims nations, see some online fatwas.)

Accordingly, we find that the observant Hasan, prior to his jihadi spree, was engaged in da’wa for years. In fact, he aggressively pursued it to the point that he was reprimanded by the authorities. Nor did he cease trying to proselytize — that is, trying to validate his living with infidels — until the day before he went on his rampage, when he gave his neighbor a copy of the Koran. Of course, many Westerners will project their notions of proselytism onto Hasan and see only a God-fearing man “altruistically” concerned for the souls of others. Unfortunately, even the business card he included with his Koran gifts is indicative of violence, as it stealthily introduces him as a “soldier of Allah.” Moreover, the “altruistic” interpretation fails to take into account the sort of legalism observant Muslims such as Hasan often adhere to: if he literally believed he was “exchanging this life for the Hereafter,” he most likely also believed that he had to justify his voluntary dwelling with infidels, hence the da’wa.

* * *

Soon following the Fort Hood massacre, FBI agent Brad Garrett explained Hasan’s behavior as follows: “It’s one of those things that he obviously went to kill a lot of people [jihad] and commit suicide [martyrdom]. Maybe in his own mind that he’s saving future lives [Muslim loyalty].” Read with the bracketed concepts I supplied, Hasan’s actions become logical and consistent — again, from an doctrinal point of view, that is, from a point of view the West, especially its leaders, are loath to explore and alacritous to ignore.

For example, “U.S. Rep. Andre Carson, an Indiana Democrat who is one of two Muslims serving in Congress, cautioned against focusing on the alleged shooter’s religion [and thus its doctrines] and instead said the discussion should be about mental health issues.”

Read:

U.S. Congressional Representative Andre Carson, Indiana Democrat – (one of the two Muslims in the U.S. Congress) – may have explained a lot more then he intended to when he said the discussion about Nidal Milak Hasan “should be about mental health issues” – Most of us already know that this is the only option.

Killing spree of 14 deaths and 30 wounded.

So, real Muslims are either crazy or they are just acting out their religious obligations.

Flagrant obfuscations aside, the facts remain: loyalty to Muslims and enmity for infidels (wala’ wa bara’), a secretive double life (taqiyya), violence in the name of Allah (jihad) — all these can easily explain Hasan’s violent rampage in Fort Hood.

The ultimate lesson? So long as Muslim doctrines are downplayed in the West, so long will warning signs, even concrete intelligence, be ignored, so long will such seemingly inexplicable incidents occur, so long will the media continue grasping for straws and Americans be “completely blindsided,” so long will “Muslim grievance” be the default answer, so long will appeasement and concessions (domestically and internationally) be the only solution, so long will jihadis and Islamists grow emboldened and contemptuous, expecting more. Ad infinitum.

Conversely, if the Fort Hood massacre causes Americans to begin taking Islam’s doctrines more seriously, the thirteen slain, while dying tragically, will not have died in vain.

Originally published at: http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/nidal-hasan-and-fort-hood-a-study-in-muslim-doctrine-part-1/ and http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/nidal-hasan-and-fort-hood-a-study-in-muslim-doctrine-part-2/

Raymond Ibrahim is the associate director of the Middle East Forum and the author of The Al Qaeda Reader, translations of religious texts and propaganda

Related Topics: Muslims in the United States, Radical Islam, TerrorismRaymond Ibrahim receive the latest by email: subscribe to the free mef mailing list This text may be reposted or forwarded so long as it is presented as an integral whole with complete information provided about its author, date, place of publication, and original URL.

h1

The War On Terror On Trial

November 23, 2009

Article: The War on Terror on Trial | IBD: 19 November 2009

23 November 2009

The Democrat party is a party of destruction.  Going after President Bush for doing all that he could do to protect America is a clear sign of the sickness of this party of misfits – who hate liberty, who have no understanding of Islam’s danger to our security.

What has Obama done to lend us any trust?

We don’t believe that Obama is smart enough to deal with this trial in “New York, New York” – like his buddy Eric – we don’t trust him either.

All these clowns want to do is embarrass George Bush – prove to the world that the Democrat Party’s ‘values’ are different.

The tragic issue for America is that they have no inkling and certainly no knowledge of radical Islam’s plans for America.

————————

A jury of his peers? – one Islamist on the jury (which Obama will encourage) and the jury system will collapse.

And imagine tens of thousands of Islamists in the streets of “New York, New York” – a subject already being discussed in the media and already being discussed in conversations right here in Ann Arbor.

Don

The War On Terror On Trial

19 Nov. 2009

Justice: Attorney General Holder’s testimony on Wednesday provided no credible rationale for sending the 9/11 conspirators into the civilian federal court system. This is 100% politics.

Steam was pouring out of Eric Holder’s ears after Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., quoted from former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy’s National Review article this week. McCarthy described Holder as “a lawyer whose firm is among those responsible for the litigation-driven delay that became a lawfare triumph for al-Qaida.”

And he pointed out that once the administration Holder serves took over, “Obama shut down the (military) commission despite the jihadists’ efforts to conclude it by pleading guiltyso that we can instead endure an incredibly expensive and burdensome civilian trial that will take years to complete.”

Read the rest of this entry ?

h1

Gitmo North

November 19, 2009

Gitmo North

IBD: 19 Nov. 2009

War On Terror: Sen. Dick Durbin calls a plan to transfer 100 Guantanamo detainees to northwest Illinois “a dream come true.” It would paint a bull’s-eye on America’s heartland in time for the 2012 Iowa caucuses.

It seems the question of where to put the Guantanamo detainees is being settled as we speak, with liberal Democrats in the very blue state of Illinois welcoming them with open arms and outstretched hands for the federal dollars that will come with them.

Federal officials last Friday inspected the Thomson Correctional Center in Thomson, Ill., a town of 500 on the Iowa border, with the thought of transferring as many as 100 Gitmo inmates there. The prison, built to house 1,600 prisoners, now holds around 200, and has fallen victim to state budget problems.

At press conferences held in Chicago, Moline and Rockford, Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn, who took over from the disgraced Rod Blagojevich, and Illinois’ senior U.S. senator, Dick Durbin, stumped for the plan, calling it “a dream come true.” We call it a nightmare on Main Street.

Read the rest of this entry ?

h1

THANKSGIVING: What happened to Thanksgiving?!?

November 18, 2009

It’s a shame more isn’t made of Thanksgiving

I think it’s too bad that we no longer celebrate Thanksgiving with the true meaning for which it was intended. We seem to have forgotten that the Pilgrims came to America.  We cannot find any decorations like little Pilgrims which we could years ago.  We go all out for Halloween and go right to Christmas. There just isn’t much made of Thanksgiving, which we should be so thankful for.  Irma Weidmayer, Manchester (Ann Arbor News – 25 Nov. 2008)

h1

THANKSGIVING: The Meaning of Thanksgiving

November 18, 2009

The Meaning Of Thanksgiving

Thanksgiving is a delightful day. We watch parades and football games and feast on turkey and other delicious foods with family and friends. But it’s important to remember what this oldest of American holidays is really all about. “The Pilgrims left England on September 6, 1620, and for two months braved the harsh elements of a storm-tossed sea. After disembarking at Plymouth Rock, they had a prayer service and began building hasty shelters, but unprepared for a harsh New England winter, nearly half died before spring. Yet persevering in prayer and assisted by helpful Indians, they reaped a bountiful harvest the following summer. The grateful Pilgrims then declared a three-day feast in December, 1621, to thank God and to celebrate with their Indian friends – America’s first Thanksgiving Festival. This began an annual tradition in the New England colonies that slowly spread into other colonies” (from Thanksgiving in America by David Barton).

Some Great Thanksgiving Proclamations

“Congress recommends a day of… thanksgiving and praise so that the people may express their grateful feelings of their hearts… and join… their prayers that it may please God, through the merits of Jesus Christ, to forgive ours sins and … to enlarge His kingdom which consists in righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Ghost” (Continental Congress, 1777).

“It is in an especial manner our duty as a people, with devout reverence and affectionate gratitude, to acknowledge our many and great obligations to Almighty God, and to implore Him to continue and confirm the blessings we experienced. Deeply penetrated with this sentiment, I, George Washington, President of the United States, do recommend to all religious societies and denominations, and to all persons whomsoever, within the United States, to set apart and observe Thursday, the 19th day of February next, as a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, and on that day to meet together and render sincere and hearty thanks to the great Ruler of nations for the manifold and signal mercies which distinguish our lot as a nation… to preserve us from the arrogance of prosperity, and from hazarding the advantages we enjoy by delusive pursuits, to dispose us to merit the continuance of His favors by not abusing them, by our gratitude for them…(George Washington, 1795).

“I appoint… a day of public Thanksgiving to Almighty God… to ask Him that He would… pour out His Holy Spirit on all ministers of the Gospel; that He would… spread the light of Christian knowledge through the remotest corners of the earth… and that He would establish these United States upon the basis of religion and virtue” (Thomas Jefferson).

“I… appoint… a day of public thanksgiving and praise… to render to God the tribute of praise for His unmerited goodness toward us… by giving to us… the Holy Scriptures which are able to enlighten and make us wise to eternal salvation… And to pray that He would forgive our sins and… cause the religion of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ to be known, understood and practiced among all the people of the earth” (John Hancock).

“It is the duty of nations as well as of men to own their dependence upon the overruling power of God; to confess their sins and transgressions in humble sorrow, yet with assured hope that genuine repentance will lead to mercy and pardon; and to recognize the sublime truth, announced in the Holy Scriptures and proven by all history, that those nations are blessed whose God is the Lord. We know that by His divine law, nations, like individuals, are subjected to punishments and chastisements in this world. May we not justly fear that the awful calamity of civil war which now desolates the land may be a punishment inflicted upon us for our presumptuous sins, to the needful end of our national reformation as a whole people? We have been the recipients of the choicest bounties of heaven; we have been preserved these many years in peace and prosperity; we have grown in numbers, wealth and power as no other nation has ever grown. But we have forgotten God. We have forgotten the gracious hand which preserved us in peace and multiplied and enriched and strengthened us, and we have vainly imagined, in the deceitfulness of our hearts, that all these blessings were produced by some superior wisdom and virtue of our own. Intoxicated with unbroken success, we have become too self-sufficient to feel the necessity of redeeming and preserving grace, too proud to pray to the God that made us. It has seemed to me fit and proper that God should be solemnly, reverently and gratefully acknowledged, as with one heart and one voice, by the whole American people. I do therefore invite my fellow citizens in every part of the United States, and also those who are at sea and those who are sojourning in foreign lands, to set apart and observe the last Thursday of November as a day of Thanksgiving and praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the heavens(Abraham Lincoln, during the Civil War, in 1863).

Being Thankful To The Supreme Person

God is a Person – the Supreme Person. He has mind, intelligence, emotion and will. He is good and always does what is right. He is also infinitely pure so that not even the slightest hint of anything bad can remain in His presence. And the truth is that there is bad in each one of us. Mankind has been corrupted and we are estranged from our Creator. The purpose of your life is to be reconciled to God and live with Him forever. The Lord created us, loves us and longs to have a close, personal and eternal relationship with us; but that relationship must be on His terms – not ours.

Thank God that He sent Yeshua (Jesus), who is the Messiah of Israel and the Savior of the world, to make atonement for us so that we can be reconciled to God and live forever! When we commit our lives to follow the Messiah, God sends His Spirit to live in us and begin transforming us from within. From our inner being we start doing the things that God wants us to do. Are you thankful for who the Lord is and what He has done for you – meeting your physical and spiritual needs? Do you have a close, personal relationship with the Living God? Have you come to Him on His terms? Are you living the way He wants you to live? Are you a committed follower of Yeshua?

Being Thankful In Spite Of Difficulties

The Plymouth colony lost half its population its first year. Can you imagine losing half your population and still being thankful to God for the good things He does for you ? Are you genuinely grateful to your Creator for all the good things you have, in spite of the difficult circumstances you may have experienced? As you celebrate Thanksgiving this year, talk to your Creator and express your gratitude that has always been the spirit of this oldest of American holidays. Here is a prayer you might want to pray: Dear God, thank You for Your existence, power, wisdom and goodness. All good things ultimately come from You. I am sorry that I have not been thankful enough for the material and spiritual blessings You have provided for me. Help me to be more appreciative of You, and from that thankfulness be willing to serve You on your terms!

Congregation Shema Yisrael is a community made up of Jews and Gentiles who have come to know God and the Messiah that He sent to help us. We would love to help you grow in your knowledge of God and His ways. You are welcome to join us! You can contact us at:

Congregation Shema Yisrael

source: http://www.shema.com/thanksgiving.php

h1

THANKSGIVING: Thanking God

November 18, 2009

source: Christian Law Association http://www.christianlaw.org

Thanksgiving is the oldest American holiday.  Although we generally attribute the First Thanksgiving to the Pilgrims in 1621, several other special times of thanksgiving preceded it on land that would eventually become part of America.

In 1541 at Palo Duro Canyon, Texas, Coronado and 1,500 of his men celebrated a time of thanksgiving to God for His blessings.

In 1564 at St. Augustine, Florida, French colonists also engaged in a special time of thanksgiving to God.

In 1598 in El Paso, Texas, Juan de Oriate and his expedition held a similar celebration to God.

In 1619 in Virginia, the Jamestown settlers held an official Thanksgiving celebration.

The Pilgrims

The first Pilgrim Thanksgiving in 1621 with Samoset, Squanto, and their other Indian friends and benefactors, was not the most dramatic Pilgrim Thanksgiving.  The most dramatic Thanksgiving occured two years later.

During that summer, the Pilgrims suffered a severe and extended time of drought.  They knew that without a change in the weather, there would be no fall harvest.  The winter would surely bring severe starvation and death to their community.  Therefore, Gov. William Bradford gathered the Pilgrims together for a time of prayer and fasting.

Shortly thereafter, a gentle rain began to fall.  Governor Bradford explained in his History of Plymouth Plantation:

[The rain] came without either wind or thunder or any violence, and by degrees in abundance, as that ye earth was thoroughly wet and soaked therewith, which did so apparently revive and quicken ye decayed corn and other fruits as was wonderful to see, and made ye Indians astonished to behold; and afterwards the Lord sent them such seasonable showers, with interchange of fair warm weather as, through His blessing, caused a fruitful and liberal harvest, to their no small comfort and rejoicing.

The rain saved the corn.  One of the Indians who observed this miracle remarked:

Now I see that the Englishman’s God is a good God; for he hath heard you, and sent you rain, and that without such tempest and thunder as we used to have with our rain; which after our Powawing for it, breaks down the corn; whereas your corn stands whole and good still; surely, your God is a good God.

The drought had been broken; there was an abundant harvest—-cause for yet another Thanksgiving. The Pilgrim practice of designating an official time of Thanksgiving quickly spread throughout the other New England colonies as annual traditions were established of prayer and fasting in the spring, followed by prayer and thanksgiving in the fall.

The First National Thanksgiving

America’s first national Day of Thanksgiving occurred on September 25, 1789.  It was the nation’s first official act set by Congress after that body completed the Constitution and Bill of Rights.  According to the early equivalent of the Congressional Record:

Mr. [Elias] Boudinot said he could not think of letting the session pass without offering an opportunity to all the citizens of the United States of joining with one voice in returning to Almighty God their sincere thanks for the many blessings He had poured down upon them. With this view, therefore, he would move the following resolution:

Resolved, That a joint committee of both Houses be directed to wait upon the President of the United States to request that he would recommend to the people of the United States a Day of Public Thanksgiving and Prayer. . .

Mr. Roger Sherman justified the practice of thanksgiving on any single event not only as a laudable one in itself but also as warranted by a number of precedents in Holy Writ. . . . This example he thought worthy of a Christian imitation on the present occasion.

President George Washington heartily concurred with this request to thank Almighty God at the birth of the new Constitution.  He issued the first federal Thanksgiving proclamation, declaring in part:

Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor. . . . Now, therefore, I do appoint Thursday, the 26th day of November 1789 . . . that we may all unite to render unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection.

So much for any hint of the desire for a “separation of church and state” to be found in the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment in the Bill of Rights!  While our Founders wanted to prohibit the establishment of an official national church, they quite obviously had absolutely no intention of separating God from the American government.

Following President Washington’s initial proclamation, days of Thanksgiving were sporadically proclaimed.

Another by President Washington in 1795;

One by John Adams in 1799;

Others by James Madison in 1814 and 1815.

But most official Thanksgivings in early America were observed at the state level.  By 1815, the various state governments had issued at least 1,400 official calls for prayer and thanksgiving or for prayer and fasting.

President Lincoln’s Proclamation

While our Founders wanted to thank God for the new nation they had just established, Thanksgiving did not become an annual event in America until the time of President Abraham Lincoln.  After being importuned by Sarah Josepha Hale, a popular women’s magazine editor, President Lincoln proclaimed the last Thursday in November, 1863, as a day “of Thanksgiving and Praise to our benevolent Father.”  He proclaimed this national Day of Thanksgiving in the midst of the darkest days of the Civil War, noting:

The year that is drawing towards its close, has been filled with the blessings of fruitful fields and healthful skies. To these bounties, which are so constantly enjoyed that we are prone to forget the source from which they come, others have been added, which are of so extraordinary a nature, that they cannot fail to penetrate and soften even the heart which is habitually insensible to the ever watchful providence of Almighty God.

The President continued,

No human counsel hath devised nor hath any mortal hand worked out these great things. They are the gracious gifts of the Most High God, who, while dealing with us in anger for our sins, hath nevertheless remembered mercy. It has seemed to me fit and proper that they should be solemnly, reverently, and gratefully acknowledged as with one heart and one voice by the whole American People.

The 1863 Day of Thanksgiving was remarkable because it was held during a time in which the Union Army had been losing battle after battle for three extremely brutal and bloody war years.

That time was also a pivotal point in Lincoln’s own personal spiritual life. Just several months earlier, the Battle of Gettysburg had resulted in the loss of more than 60,000 American lives—-in a single battle.  President Lincoln would later explain to an Illinois clergyman that it was while walking among the thousands of graves at Gettysburg that he first committed his life to Christ. He confessed:

When I left Springfield [Illinois, to assume the Presidency], I asked the people to pray for me. I was not a Christian. When I buried my son, the severest trial of my life, I was not a Christian. But when I went to Gettysburg and saw the graves of thousands of our soldiers, I then and there consecrated myself to Christ.

That tragedy of 60,000 dead affected Abraham Lincoln’s eternal destiny as well as the rest of his brief remaining earthly life.  His dedication to Christ was visible in his public pronouncements for the remainder of his presidency.

A Continuing Tradition

Since President Lincoln’s 1863 proclamation, each President has issued an annual proclamation declaring a National Day of Thanksgiving to God, although the actual dates varied widely.  It was in 1933 that President Franklin D. Roosevelt, another president destined to witness the brutality of war, as well as the chaos of economic collapse, called for an annual national Day of Thanksgiving every fourth Thursday of November.  Finally, in 1941, ironically just a few weeks before the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, Congress permanently established the fourth Thursday of November as an official national Thanksgiving holiday.

Thanksgiving 2009

As we thank God for His blessings this year, we should particularly remember the words of Boston’s Lady Magazine editor, Sarah Josepha Hale, when she urged President Lincoln to proclaim a national Day of Thanksgiving during the midst of the Civil War.  She wrote:

Let us consecrate the day to benevolence of action, by sending good gifts to the poor, and doing those deeds of charity that will, for one day, make every American home the place of plenty and of rejoicing. Let the people of all the States and Territories sit down together to the “feast of fat things,” and drink, in the sweet draught of joy and gratitude to the Divine giver of all our blessings, the pledge of renewed love to the Union, and to each other; and of peace and good-will to all men.

This year, as America faces dark days and severe challenges, Mrs. Hale’s words seem particularly appropriate.  Wars, rumors of war, and economic distress have overtaken us yet again.  Nevertheless, Almighty God has continued to bless America.  It is appropriate that we continue to express our national gratitude and thankfulness to Him for His blessings.

Thankfulness, no matter what the external circumstances, has for nearly 500 years expressed the true spirit of America.  It is no accident that Thanksgiving is the oldest of all American holidays.

DOWNLOAD THE .PDF FILE

h1

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed: Justice Denied

November 16, 2009

Justice Denied

IBD: 16 Nov. 2009

In this March 1, 2003 file picture, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is seen shortly after his capture during a raid in Pakistan. Attorney General Eric Holder...In this March 1, 2003 file picture, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is seen shortly after his capture during a raid in Pakistan. Attorney General Eric Holder.

War On Terror: Eric Holder’s move to try the 9/11 masterminds in Manhattan makes it official: This administration has reverted to pre-9/11 “crime” fighting.

Amid all the talk during the attorney general’s surreal press conference of the “crime” committed eight years ago, the 9/11 attack on the Pentagon wasn’t even mentioned.

Lest anyone forget, the military headquarters of the United States was attacked that day along with the Twin Towers.

An entire wedge of the Ring was gutted when the Saudi hijackers slammed American Airlines Flight 77 into it. Nearly 200 military personnel were killed, along with the passengers and crew of the hijacked jet.

The jet was a weapon used to attack the very center of our military. That was not a “crime,” as some say. It was an act of war.

And 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, along with the four other al-Qaida terrorist co-conspirators Holder wants to try, are no mere criminals. They are enemy combatants — and should be treated as such.

Yet this administration has adopted the same crime-centered mentality as the last Democratic administration. The one that treated al-Qaida’s first World Trade Center bombing as a “crime.” And al-Qaida’s attack on the U.S. embassies in Africa as a “crime.” And even al-Qaida’s attack on the USS Cole as a “crime.”

All were prosecuted in U.S. courts. A lot of good that did.

While President Bill Clinton was busy preparing indictments against the terrorists, al-Qaida was already plotting its next move. It hit the Pentagon just nine months after Clinton and his crime-fighters left office.

Maddeningly, this administration is repeating the Clinton administration’s mistake.

KSM and the other terrorists, er, “defendants” aren’t even U.S. citizens. They don’t deserve all the rights afforded citizens in our civilian court system. They shouldn’t be allowed to use our courts as a platform to promulgate their ideology of hate. Which they will, sure as Osama bin Laden is smiling right now.

This will only serve to inspire more homegrown terrorists — and stab at the hearts of the relatives of 9/11 victims.

Holder clucked that the “trials will be open to the public and the world.” And they will turn into circuses, playing right into the hands of the enemy.

These trials will drag on for years, perhaps even decades, as defense lawyers file endless motions and appeals. Meanwhile, valuable intelligence about interrogation techniques and other methods we’ve used against al-Qaida will be revealed to the enemy during trial discovery.

This move to a civilian court makes no sense at all, except viewed through a political prism. Maybe the White House wants to make its Jan. 22 deadline to close Gitmo. Or maybe it’s keen to publicly differentiate itself from the previous administration, which was considerably tougher on terrorists.

Either way, it’s an unwise move. It will only remind people how much America has shrunk in the last nine months.

h1

Cartoon: Red Flags

November 16, 2009

h1

Cartoon: Hasan – Political Correctness

November 12, 2009

h1

Another Radical Judge

November 12, 2009

If you love liberty, help stop this ill-equipped “judge” from going any further.

He is ANTI-CHRISTIAN – PRO-ISLAMIST!

Another Radical Judge

IBD: 11 Nov. 2009

11 11 09

Federal Bench: Yet another judicial nominee seeks to impose the “empathy” standard on the courts. He thinks judges should base rulings on a plaintiff’s status, legislate from the bench and amend the Constitution.

Indiana federal judge David Hamilton stands poised to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate to assume a seat on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals serving Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin. He’s a former fundraiser for Acorn and a former leader of the Indiana chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union.

He is also another in a series of activist judges who believe the U.S. Constitution is not etched in stone but made of clay, ready to be molded into anything they want. He shares the beliefs of Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor and Edward Chen, nominee for the Northern District of California, that laws can be made from the bench and that empathy, not original intent, should be a judge’s guide.

“Part of our job here as judges is to write a series of footnotes to the Constitution,” Hamilton says. “We all do that every year in cases large and small.”  [He doesn’t know the Constitution]

And that’s precisely the problem. The law should be applied equally and evenly irrespective of who the plaintiffs or defendants might be. Otherwise, equal protection under the law goes out the window.

In testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Hamilton said that “empathy” was “important” in fulfilling a judge’s role. “Empathy is the ability to understand the world from another person’s point of view,” he said.

But the only “point of view” a federal judge needs to understand is that of the Founding Fathers.

According to Hamilton, “A judge needs to empathize with all parties in the case — plaintiff and defendant, crime victim and accused defendant — so that the judge can better understand how the parties came to be before the court and how legal rules affect those parties and others in similar situations.”

And here we thought justice should be blind and not wear its heart on its judicial robes.

Hamilton, who was nominated to the district court bench by President Clinton even though he had no judicial experience and was rated as “not qualified” by the ABA, has a history of overturned rulings and admonishments by colleagues and superiors about exceeding his authority.

After Hamilton blocked the enforcement of Indiana’s informed consent abortion law, the Seventh Circuit disagreed, saying: “No court anywhere in the country … has held any similar law invalid in the years since (the Supreme Court ruled in Planned Parenthood vs.) Casey. Indiana is entitled to put the law into effect and have that law judged by its own consequences.”

Judge Frank Easterbrook of the Seventh Circuit scolded Hamilton, noting he was the only judge in the country who had blocked enforcement of a law “materially identical” to laws that the Supreme Court, the Seventh Circuit and the Fifth Circuit had held constitutional. Under Hamilton’s version of the “living Constitution,” even Supreme Court precedent is irrelevant.

As Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., has pointed out in a letter to colleagues, Hamilton also has a problem with any expression of religion in the public square — however innocuous — but not with all religion.

Hamilton’s ruling in the 2005 case, Hinrichs v. Bosma, “prohibited prayers in the Indiana House of Representatives that expressly mentioned Jesus Christ … yet he allowed prayers which mentioned Allah,” Sessions also noted. We wonder if Hamilton has a problem with “God save the United States and this Honorable Court,” being uttered as the U.S. Supreme Court enters the courtroom to hear arguments.

Judges such as Hamilton, Chen and Sotomayor believe the courts should be used as instruments of social justice and not to discern the intent of those who wrote the U.S. Constitution. They believe their “life experience” should be the final arbiter of justice.

We don’t believe Hamilton deserves a promotion any more than Chen does or Sotomayor did.

h1

PHOTOS: Fort Hood: Profiles of those who were slain

November 10, 2009
Isaiah 40:28-31
28 Do you not know?
Have you not heard?
The LORD is the everlasting God,
the Creator of the ends of the earth.
He will not grow tired or weary,
and his understanding no one can fathom.

29 He gives strength to the weary
and increases the power of the weak.

30 Even youths grow tired and weary,
and young men stumble and fall;

31 but those who hope in the LORD
will renew their strength.
They will soar on wings like eagles;
they will run and not grow weary,
they will walk and not be faint.

Some joined the military after 9/11. Some wanted to help troubled troops. One just wanted to see the world. The 13 victims of the Fort Hood shootings came from different paths, but all shared a sense of patriotism that led them to their tragic deaths at the hands of a comrade.

USA TODAY: 9 Nov. 2009

Michael Cahill, 62, was a physician assistant who was married 37 years and had three children. He was so dedicated to his troops that he took only one week to recover from a recent heart attack, his daughter Keely Vanacker said. She remembered his long talks after Thanksgiving dinners: “Now, who am I going to talk to?”

Maj. Libardo Eduardo Caraveo, 52, immigrated from Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, as a teen knowing very little English, said his son, also named Eduardo Caraveo. The father went on to earn a doctorate in psychology and work with bilingual special-needs students in Arizona schools. He was set to deploy to Afghanistan.

Staff. Sgt. Justin DeCrow, 32, married his high school sweetheart, and they had a 13-year-old daughter, his wife Marikay DeCrow said. His father, Daniel DeCrow, of Fulton, Ind., spoke with his son last week. “As usual, the last words out of my mouth to him were that I was proud of him,” Daniel DeCrow said.

Capt. John Gaffaney, 56, served in the Navy and California National Guard as a younger man, but rejoined the military after 9/11. “He wanted to help the boys in Iraq and Afghanistan,” his friend Stephanie Powell said. He was a married father of one who liked to read military novels and ride his Harley-Davidson motorcycle.

Spc. Frederick Greene, 29, worked for several years at A.C. Lumber and Truss in Mountain City, Tenn., before joining the military, former coworker Glenn Arney said.Greene was also active at Baker’s Gap Baptist Church. “He was one of the finest boys you ever saw,” said Arney, the church’s former superintendent.

Spc. Jason Dean Hunt, 22, went by “J.D.” and was married just two months ago, said his mother, Gale Hunt. The Oklahoma native had rejoined the Army after a two-year stint that included a tour in Iraq. He was “just kind of a quiet boy and a good kid, very kind,” said Kathy Gray, an administrative assistant at his high school.

Sgt. Amy Krueger, 29, joined the Army after 9/11 and vowed to take on Osama bin Laden, her mother, Jeri Krueger, told the Herald Times Reporter in Manitowoc, Wis. Jeri Krueger recalled telling her daughter she couldn’t take on the al-Qaeda leader herself. “Watch me,” her daughter replied.

Pfc. Aaron Nemelka, 19, chose to join the Army instead of going on a mission for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. “What I loved about the kid was his independence of thought,” his uncle Christopher Nemelka said. He was set to deploy to Afghanistan in January, his family said.

Pfc. Michael Pearson, 22, quit a job at a furniture company in a Chicago suburb to join the military. “He wanted to travel, see the world,” his mother, Sheryll Pearson, told the Chicago Tribune. She spoke to her son two days before his death to work out how he would get home for Christmas.

Capt. Russell Seager, 51, a married father of one, was a psychiatrist who joined the Army to help veterans struggling to return to civilian life, his uncle, Larry Seager, said. He was preparing for a deployment to Afghanistan in December. The Wisconsin man also taught classes at a Milwaukee college.

Pvt. Francheska Velez, 21, was pregnant and preparing to return home to Chicago. She wrote poetry, loved dancing and was seeking a lifelong career in the military. She had just returned from a tour in Iraq, according to her father, Juan Guillermo Velez. “She had the spirit of a child,” he said.

Lt. Col. Juanita Warman, 55, was a military physician assistant with two daughters and six grandchildren. After putting herself through the University of Pittsburgh, Warman spent most of her career in the military, her sister, Margaret Yaggie told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

Pfc. Kham Xiong, 23, was a father of three whose father and grandfather fought the Viet Cong alongside the CIA. His brother is a Marine serving in Afghanistan. Xiong was set to deploy to Afghanistan. “He didn’t get to go overseas and do what he’s supposed to do,” said his sister, Mee Xiong.

3 of the victims were women

May God Bless the family members of the fallen soldiers





h1

CRITICAL: Suicide By PC

November 10, 2009

Suicide By PC

IBD: 10 Nov 2009

For Gen. Casey, loss of diversity would be an
For Gen. Casey, loss of diversity would be an “even greater tragedy.” AP (????????)

 

War On Terror: The No. 1 lesson of the Fort Hood massacre is that political correctness kills. But instead of learning this lesson, the Pentagon is repeating the mistake, putting more soldiers at risk.

Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey warns that making the connection between Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan’s terrorist act and his Islamic faith could “cause a backlash against some of our Muslim soldiers.”

Yet ignoring that connection, despite one red flag after another, is what allowed Hasan allegedly to carry out his own violent backlash against non-Muslim soldiers.

Just a few months ago, Hasan was promoted to major. He passed a security clearance despite evidence he openly engaged in anti-American rants, and even discussed cutting the throats of infidels during a PowerPoint presentation. Now there are reports that U.S. intelligence intercepted contacts between Hasan and al-Qaida.

But shhh! This isn’t about Islam. Close your eyes. Look the other way. Do not make the connection.

“It would be an even greater tragedy if our diversity becomes a casualty here,” Casey said on Sunday’s morning shows. Really? Tell that to the victims of the Muslim terrorist who shouted “Allahu Akbar!” before pumping fellow soldiers full of bullets at close range. Tell it to their grieving families.

Diversity is a good thing only if Muslims embrace the military’s mission. Of course many do, but a growing number object to fighting Muslims abroad. By our count, at least a dozen Muslims in uniform have been charged or convicted of terror or spying since 9/11, including Hasan. That’s a sectarian pattern, not a random act by a lone gunman, as the media have portrayed it.

The prize for digging up the most imaginative excuse for Hasan’s actions goes to ABC News. The network speculated he may have suffered from “second-hand trauma” — “like second-hand smoke” — from counseling soldiers with post traumatic stress disorder.

You see, Hasan had never actually been deployed, never seen combat, as first assumed. So the initial spin that he suffered PTSD no longer worked. Unless he suffered combat stress by proxy. So now it’s “second-hand trauma.” Anything but jihad.

But let’s be fair. At least ABC reported that Hasan was Muslim. Over at Fox News, host Shephard Smith refused to even mention Hasan’s name. And he’s still waiting on a motive. “As journalists,” the anchor said Monday, “we can’t report what the motive was, because at this point, we don’t know what his motive was.”

Seems Fox has caught the PC virus.

Meanwhile, our commander in chief refuses to call the attack terrorism. And he seemed to take news of the military massacre glibly. Briefed on the shooting before an appearance at a Democrat event, he walked up to the podium grinning. Then, in a bizarre non-sequitur, he gave a “shout out” to a Democrat supporter, infuriating soldiers across the country, and rightfully so.

Surely the Homeland Security secretary would tell it like it is. No such luck. Janet Napolitano issued a warning to Americans from the UAE against any anti-Muslim backlash. She said she’d work with Muslim groups, such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations, to deflect any bigotry. To hear her, Islam was the real victim of the Islam-inspired terrorism.

Democrats aren’t the only ones in denial. “It’s certainly not about his religion,” intoned GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham.

Passing out Qurans the morning of the shooting. Nope, no religion here! Proselytizing fellow soldiers to Islam. Not religion.

Close your eyes. Look the other way.

This PC insanity is literally killing us now. We are committing politically correct suicide. If the military is now too PC to protect its own troops from Islamic fanatics on its own soil, how can we be sure it can protect the rest of us?

h1

Ann Arbor Connection to Nadal Malik Hasan

November 10, 2009

We have just learned from a creditable source that Nadal  Malik Hasan, the gunman at Ft. Hood, has ties to our local Islamic Center (Plymouth Rd.) in Ann Arbor Michigan.

Check back for further updates.

h1

Fort Hood: Jihad’s 5th Column

November 9, 2009

Jihad’s 5th Column

IBD: 9 Nov. 09

Hasan: Invisible with PC blinders on? APHasan: Invisible with PC blinders on? AP

 

War On Terror: The Fort Hood terrorist is being portrayed as an “anomaly,” an “aberration,” a “lone wolf.” Sadly, he’s just one of many examples of jihadist traitors in the ranks of the military.

Together they form a dangerous Fifth Column, and the Pentagon — thanks to institutionalized political correctness — is doing next to nothing to root them out .

Instead, brass are actively recruiting Muslim soldiers — whose ranks have swelled to more than 15,000 — and catering to their faith by erecting mosques even at Marine headquarters in Quantico, Va. More, they’re hiring Muslim chaplains endorsed by radical Islamic front groups, who convert and radicalize soldiers.

In the wake of the worst domestic military-base massacre in U.S. history, this is an outrage to say the least. And the PC blinders explain how Fort Hood commanders could have failed so horrifically in protecting their force from the internal threat there.

The terrorist suspect, an Islamic fanatic, penetrated deep into the Army’s officer corps before gunning down, execution-style, more than 40 of his fellow soldiers. Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan allegedly killed 13 at the Texas post, which boasts some 40 Muslims.

Witnesses say he shouted “Allahu Akbar” — Allah is great! — before opening fire in a crowded building where troops were sitting ducks, waiting to deploy to Iraq and Afghanistan, both wars that Hasan angrily opposed. “Muslims should stand up and fight the aggressor,” he reportedly said earlier this year, referring to the U.S. — the country he swore to protect.

During the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, another devout Muslim in the Army had a similar conflict. Sgt. Hasan Akbar also resorted to violence, fragging 17 fellow soldiers, killing two. Why? He opposed the killing of fellow Muslims. “You guys are coming into our countries, and you’re going to rape our women and kill our children,” he was overheard by soldiers who survived the grenade attack as saying.

Clearly, his loyalties lay elsewhere. And he’s hardly alone:

Navy Signalman Hassan Abujihaad last year was convicted of tipping off al-Qaida to battle group movements in the Persian Gulf, including disclosing classified documents detailing the group’s vulnerability to terror attack.

• Army reservist Jeffrey Battle in 2003 pleaded guilty to conspiring to wage war against the U.S., confessing he enlisted “to receive military training to use against America.”

• Army reservist Semi Osman in 2002 was arrested for providing material support to al-Qaida and pleaded guilty to weapons charges after agreeing to testify against other terror suspects.

• Marine Abdul Raheem al-Arshad Ali trained at a suspected al-Qaida camp and was charged with selling a semi-automatic handgun to Osman.

• Army Sgt. Ali Mohamed trained Green Berets at Fort Bragg’s elite special warfare school before stealing military secrets for al-Qaida and helping plan bombings at three U.S. embassies in 1998.

• Army Spec. Ryan Anderson in 2004 was convicted of leaking military intelligence to al-Qaida terrorists, including sensitive information about the vulnerabilities of armored Humvees.

• Army sniper John Muhammad was put on death row after fatally shooting 10 in the nation’s capital a year after 9/11.

While good and decent Muslim soldiers have served admirably, the list of those who have put their allegiance to Islam above country is long, and this is by no means an exhaustive accounting.

The Pentagon must do a better job of vetting such recruits. And it must do a better job of force protection — starting with beefing up its counterspying operations — before more intelligence is compromised and more soldiers are lost.