Video: mexican uses a car jack to breach the "border fence"

+ islamist lobby co-opts the FBI (essam abdallah/investigativeproject.org)

-

tried to run down a cop and pedestrians, ICE lets him go...

http://www.limitstogrowth.org/articles/2012/02/23/middle-eastern-airplane-disturber-update/

Middle Eastern Airplane Disturber Update

There is more information coming out about the Middle Eastern man who caused a
Continental flight to return to Portland on Tuesday because of his
disruption, violence and yells of “Allah is great” after being asked to
put out his electronic cigarette. Persons getting off the plane spoke in
terms of a terrorist attack and how it was thwarted by resistance from
passengers. See my blog Diversity in Travel which includes a video of passenger descriptions.
The man in question is a 19-year-old Saudi student, Yazeed
Mohammed Abunnayan (pictured). He was traveling with a friend to
Houston, but was arrested after the pilot thought his violent behavior
warranted a return to Portland.Saudi teen arrested again after disrupting flight, Ashland Daily Tidings, Feb 22 2012

A man who led Ashland police on a car-crashing chase through town
Sunday night has been arrested again, this time on a federal charge of
interfering with flight crew members on a plane out of Portland. [. . .]
He had refused to turn off an electronic cigarette “yelling
profanities and swinging his fist at the flight attendant, hitting or
attempting to hit several passengers, and speaking or singing about
Usama bin Laden and his hatred of women,” a federal indictment said. His
action caused the flight attendant to deviate from safety protocols by
unbuckling her restraints and leaving her seat during takeoff, thereby
forcing the flight to alter its route and return to Portland, the
indictment said. [. . .]

On Sunday, Abunayyan reportedly was spinning circles in a car on Siskiyou Boulevard, driving erratically, and trying to run over pedestrians.
He led police on a 20-minute chase back and forth through town, ramming
two police cars before high-centering his car on a dirt embankment at
the dead end of Clear Creek Drive. He was arrested on charges of driving
under the influence of intoxicants, reckless driving, eluding police,
two charges of first-degree criminal mischief, three charges of hit and
run, six charges of reckless endangerment, and two charges of assault on
an officer, but posted 10 percent on his $65,000 bail.
Another article noted that Yazeed was studying English prior to
enrolling as a college student at Sonoma State. Saudi students are known
for bad driving and co-ed harassment, not to mention the bent toward terrorism. Apparently the full tuition checks are a big enough enticement
for universities to overlook the extreme negatives of such dangerous
characters. However the universities’ irresponsibility endangers public
safety when they see only the dollars that foreigners bring.

-

http://www.oregonlive.com/gresham/index.ssf/2012/02/two_teens_accused_of_robbing_a.html

Two teenagers accused of robbing another at knifepoint at a Gresham
transit station Saturday night were arraigned in Multnomah County
Circuit Court today.

CesarVillano-Salazar, 19, and Pedro Gonzalez-Lopez, 18, each face
allegations of first-degree robbery, second-degree robbery and unlawful
use of a weapon.

-

http://www.kgw.com/news/local/Man-attacked-at-TriMet-bus-shelter-then-helper-attacked-too-140019353.html

2 arrested for attacks on MAX platform

Officers arrived and arrested Aklilu Beyene Girum and Conrad Milow,
both 25-years old. They were booked into the Multnomah County Jail on
robbery charges. Millow has a record of 19 arrests in Portland since
November 2010.
Just the day before, a Good Samaritan trying to help a woman who was
being mugged at a TriMet bus shelter was shot at, police said.

-

Another Anti-2A Obama Nominee Confirmed to the Bench

Last week, we alerted you to a radical anti-gun nominee President Obama named to the federal bench, Jesse Furman.

To no one’s surprise, Furman is cut from the same judicial cloth as
other Obama nominees such as Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.

For instance, in an article published a number of years ago—but
from which Furman has not distanced himself—he writes that: “Probably
the best explanation for the amount of violent crime in the United
States is its fascination with guns.”

GOA members flooded the Senate with emails, and many Senators voted
against Furman. But Majority Leader Harry Reid kept every single
Democrat in lock-step with the Obama agenda, and Furman was confirmed to
a lifetime appointment to the bench on a vote of 62-34.

Republicans Jon Kyl and John McCain (AZ), Bob Corker and Lamar
Alexander (TN), Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe (ME), Jeff Sessions
(AL), Lisa Murkowski (AK), Scott Brown (MA), and Lindsey Graham (SC)
joined all Democrats in voting for Furman.

This vote serves to highlight the difficulty in protecting the
courts from anti-Second Amendment nominees who come before the Congress.
Obama will continue to nominate far left gun grabbers, and Harry Reid
will be his go-to guy for confirmation votes.

And if Obama wins a second term, his agenda will become only more
brazen. That’s why a top goal of GOA in 2012 is to help elect as many
truly pro-gun friends as we can to the U.S. Senate.

It is crucial that Harry Reid does not retain the gavel next year.
But it is not enough to just elect members of the opposing party. We
need to elect strong candidates who understand the Constitution and who
will not bow to pressure from the White House—whoever the occupant may
be—or from the leadership of either party in the Congress.

-

http://jpfo.org/kirby/kirby-cw2.htm

Is Race War In America Inevitable?

"History is littered with wars which everybody knew would never happen."
Enoch Powell, ex-member of the British Parliament.

"Apparently, multi-cultural, multi-racial, and multi-ethnic democracies don't last very long, if they even get started in the first place. The minute a single race, religion or ethnic group loses a large majority in a nation, that nation begins to undergo internal fracture."
-
Thus opens Thomas Chittum's disturbing book Civil War II. With chilling precision, Chittum outlines the realization that America is headed the way of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia … Balkanization, or, as the subtitle to the book proclaims, The Coming Breakup of America. If our illustrious President wants us to "dialogue" about race, we'd better face the lessons of history that Chittum identifies in this book. You may not agree with Chittum's conclusions, but every American, of any race, should be familiar with the disturbing similarities between the bloody paths other nations have followed and the path America seems to be blundering along.

Chittum is a military analyst who has had hands-on experience with war, specifically civil wars. He fought for the U.S. Army in Vietnam in the '60s, the Rhodesian Territorials in the '70s, and with the Croatian Army in the '90s.

Apparently, multi-cultural, multi-racial, and multi-ethnic democracies don't last very long, if they even get started in the first place. The minute a single race, religion or ethnic group loses a large majority in a nation, that nation begins to undergo internal fracture. Chittum points out that the fall of the Soviet Union had as much to do with an incredible growth of Islamic forces in the various conglomerates of the Soviet Empire as did the arms race with the West. In the case of America, we shouldn't "celebrate diversity," we should fear it.

Civil War II will start in the American Southwest. Actually, it has already begun. It is called the "Reconquista," or in English, the Reconquest. An estimated two million illegal aliens, mostly Mexicans, have now infiltrated and occupied a huge swath of American soil that stretches from Los Angeles to New Orleans and up into New Mexico. Mexican and Latino radicals have already given this nation-to-be a name: "Aztlan." A beachhead has been established. Mexico will erupt into a revolution within the next 20 years. This revolution will either be brutally put down, as in the recent Chiapas uprising, or it will succeed and a new, likely Marxist, government will take over. In either case, further millions of Mexicans, attempting to escape the bloodshed and even more depressing poverty, will flee north across the American border and into the Southwest. The conflict between the whites and the Hispanics will be exacerbated by the fact that one group speaks English and the other Spanish. One group is brown and the other is white. The inevitable "them vs. us" division will occur because the opposing forces can be immediately identified by skin color and/or language.

So re-draw your map of 21st Century North America with "Aztlan" occupying the territory (plus a little extra) that was once Northern Mexico before the "Gringos" stole it. Toss in Southern Florida, because the Cubans are there to stay.

Malcom X, and now Louis Farrakan, have called for a "Black Homeland." Demographics are beginning to outline the shape of this second nation-to-be. Middle class and working class blacks are moving back to the Old South in increasing numbers. As the Reconquista progresses, blacks in Southern California will be stuck between a rock and a hard place; a growing resentment against the Hispanic tidal wave will be mixed with the age-old resentment against the white race. Patience and compassion go out the window when social misery meets ethnic and racial diversity. This is simply a pragmatic, coldly realistic lesson of history. All liberal, social engineering mumbo jumbo aside, when the fecal matter hits the fan, people prefer to be with their "own kind." So draw in "New Africa" on your map of 21st Century America. This will be most of the deep South.

North of New Africa and Aztlan will be an all-white nation stretching to the Canadian border or perhaps blended with several provinces of Canada. In 1992, the white race was 75% of the American population. If one were to travel through only the rural Northern U.S.A., one would likely assume that this is a nation of exclusively white people. Minorities have historically occupied enclaves in cities in the North. In 2050 the white race is expected to have been reduced to 52% of all Americans. Non-white immigration and the greater birth rate of blacks and Hispanics are fueling this trend.

There is a problem that prevents this demographic transition from remaining peaceful. The Mexicans want that land back. They will take it back, not simply ask. Black and white property owners in the fermenting nation of Aztlan will not likely relinquish their property without a fierce struggle. Likewise, southern whites, some of the most irascible critters on Earth, will not gently surrender their property to waves of black refugees. As the bloodshed against whites by blacks and against blacks by whites increases in the South, the black enclaves in Northern American cities (i.e., ghettos) will erupt into street warfare.

The armies are already in place. Our federal government estimates that 500,000 young men, predominantly black and Hispanic, are members of street gangs. These fellows have guns, money and a highly-organized hierarchy, because, as Chittum perceptively points out, the leadership of gangs is decided by cunning, street-smart business acumen (the drug trade), and a merciless willingness to eliminate rivals for power. The leadership of street gangs is Darwinian, while the leadership of our police and military agencies has to do more with whose ass you kiss than whose as you kick. Given equal armament, the street gangs are potentially better warriors.

Don't get mad at Thomas Chittum for his pragmatic insight. His book is controversial and opinionated, but it is not a racist screed. You just might as well get mad at the weatherman who tells you a hurricane is coming. Instead, read the book. Read it as soon as you can, and think long and hard about what is said. Civil War II is available from American Eagle Publications ($16.95, priority post and handling included), POB 1507, Show Low, Arizona 85901, 800-719-4957. Or order it from your local book store (ISBN#0-929408-17-9).
-

http://www.investigativeproject.org/3453/islamist-lobbies-washington-war-on-arab

Islamist Lobbies' Washington War on Arab and Muslim Liberals

by Essam Abdallah
The Cutting Edge News
February 16, 2012

A note from Investigative Project on Terrorism Executive Director Steven Emerson:

Please take the time to read this very important story written by a courageous Egyptian liberal intellectual about the Islamist and Muslim Brotherhood lobbies in Washington and the Obama Administration's secret collaboration with these pro-terrorist, anti-Western, anti-women, anti-American and anti-Semitic organizations. This is one of the most important articles I have read in years.

It was just revealed two days ago that FBI Director Mueller secretly met on February 8 at FBI headquarters with a coalition of groups including various Islamist and militant Arabic groups who in the past have defended Hamas and Hizballah and have also issued blatantly anti-Semitic statements. At this meeting, the FBI revealed that it had removed more than 1000 presentations and curricula on Islam from FBI offices around the country that was deemed "offensive." The FBI did not reveal what criteria was used to determine why material was considered "offensive" but knowledgeable law enforcement sources have told the IPT that it was these radical groups who made that determination. Moreover, numerous FBI agents have confirmed that from now on, FBI headquarters has banned all FBI offices from inviting any counter-terrorist specialists who are considered "anti-Islam" by Muslim Brotherhood front groups.

The February 8 FBI meeting was the culmination of a series of unpublicized directives issued in the last three months by top FBI officials to all its field offices to immediately recall and withdraw any presentation or curricula on Islam throughout the entire FBI. In fact, according to informed sources and undisclosed documents, the FBI directive was instigated by radical Muslim groups in the US who had repeatedly met with top officials of the Obama Administration to complain, among other things, that the mere usage of the term of "radical Islam" in FBI curricula was "offensive" and 'racist." And thus, directives went out by Attorney General Eric Holder and FBI Director Mueller to censor all such material. Included in the material destroyed or removed by the FBI and the DOJ were powerpoints and articles that defined jihad as "holy war" or presentations that portrayed the Muslim Brotherhood as an organization bent on taking over the world—a major tenet that the Muslim Brotherhood has publicly stated for decades.

During the next several months, the IPT will be releasing a series of major investigative reports revealing the secret infiltration by and collaboration with radical Islamic organizations by the Obama administration that has spread to the National Security Council, the Dept of Justice, the FBI, the Dept of Homeland Security, the CIA and the State Department as well as local law enforcement.

-------

The most dramatic oppression of the region's civil societies and the Arab Spring is not by means of weapons, or in the Middle East. It is not led by Gaddafi, Mubarak, Bin Ali, Saleh, or Assad. It is led by the powerful Islamist lobbies in Washington DC. People may find my words curious if not provocative. But my arguments are sharp and well understood by many Arab and middle eastern liberals and freedom fighters. Indeed, we in the region, who are struggling for real democracy, not for the one time election type of democracy have been asking ourselves since January 2011 as the winds of Arab spring started blowing, why isn't the West in general and the United States Administration in particular clearly and forcefully supporting our civil societies and particularly the secular democrats of the region? Why were the bureaucracies in Washington and in Brussels partnering with Islamists in the region and not with their natural allies the democracy promoting political forces?

Months into the Arab Spring, we realized that the Western powers, and the Obama Administration have put their support behind the new authoritarians, those who are claiming they will be brought to power via the votes of the people. Well, it is not quite so.

The Muslim Brotherhood, the Islamic Nahda of Tunisia, the Justice Party of Morocco and the Islamist militias in Libya's Transitional National Council have been systematically supported by Washington at the expense of real liberal and secular forces. We saw day by day how the White House guided carefully the statements and the actions of the US and the State Department followed through to give all the chances to the Islamists and almost no chances to the secular and revolutionary youth. We will come back to detail these diplomatic and financial maneuvers which are giving victory to the fundamentalists while the seculars and progressives are going to be smashed by the forthcoming regimes.

In the US, there are interests that determine foreign policy. And there are lobbies that put pressure to get their objectives met in foreign policy. One of the most powerful lobbies in America under the Obama Administration is the Muslim Brotherhood greater lobby, which has been in action for many years. This lobby has secured many operatives inside the Administration and has been successful in directing US policy towards the Arab world. Among leading advisors sympathetic to the Ikhwan is Daliah Mogahed (Mujahid) and her associate, Georgetown Professor John Esposito. Just as shocking, there is also a pro-Iranian lobby that has been influencing US policy towards Iran and Hezbollah in the region.

One of the most important activities of the Islamist lobby in the US is the waging of political and media wars on the liberal Arabs and Middle Eastern figures and groups in America. This battlefield is among the most important in influencing Washington's policies in the Arab world. If you strike at the liberal and democratic Middle Eastern groups in Washington who are trying to gain support for civil societies in the region, you actually win a major battle. You will be able to influence the resources of the US Government to support the Islamists in the Middle East and not the weak democrats. This huge war waged by the Islamist lobbies in America started at the end of the Cold war and continued all the way till the Arab spring. The two main forces of this lobby are the Muslim Brotherhood fronts and the Iranian fronts. According to research available in the US, the Ikhwan fronts such as CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations), led by Hamas supporter Nihad Awad, as well as the Muslim Public Affairs Council, the Islamic Society of North America, and others waged their political war to block the representatives of Arab liberals and Muslim moderates from making their case to the American public. The Iranian lobby, exemplified by the National Iranian American Committee (NIAC), led by Trita Parsi, has been hitting at Iranian exiles.

Since the 1990s CAIR and its allies have attacked Copts, Southern Sudanese, Lebanese, Syrian reformers, Assyrians and Chaldeans, and Muslim dissidents in the United States. The Ikhwan of America demonized any publication, book, article, or interview in the national media or local press raising the issue of secular freedoms in the Middle East. The Islamists wanted to eliminate the liberal cause in the Arab world and replace it with the cause of the Islamists. What is also shocking is that CAIR and its allies stood by the oppressive regimes and visited them, claiming they speak on behalf of the peoples. CAIR and the Brotherhood fronts in America destroyed systematically every project that would have defended the seculars and liberals originating from the Middle East. The notorious and well-funded Islamists of the US allowed no book, documentary, or show on the liberals in Arab civil societies to see the light.

Thanks to this powerful lobbying campaign, the American public was not given a chance to learn about the deep feelings on the youth in the region. Americans were led to believe that all Muslims, all Arabs and all Middle Easterners were a strange species of humans who cannot appreciate freedom. Instead, the American Islamists, helped by apologists on the petrodollars payrolls, convinced the mainstream media that the Arab world has authoritarians and Islamists only.

Dr Shawki Karas, president of the American Coptic Association, told me in the late 1990s how he was harassed by Islamist activists for speaking up against the Mubarak regime and the Muslim Brotherhood in America. He was threatened with losing his job at the college where he taught. Reverend Keith Roderick, who has assembled a coalition of more than 50 group rights from the Muslim world, was severely attacked by the Islamists and was threatened to be removed from his church position. Muslim American leaders who are conservative and secular, such as Dr Zuhdi Jasser, were crucified by CAIR and the Brotherhood for daring to challenge the Party line of the Isl.amists in America and claiming that the Jihadists are the problem in the region. Muslim liberal dissidents such as Somali Ayan Hirsi Ali, Saudi Ali al Yammi, Syrian Farid Ghadri, Iranian Manda Ervin, and many others were trashed by the Islamist lobbies to block them from defending the causes of secular liberty in the US. Egyptian liberals as well as seculars and democracy activists from Iraq, Sudan, Syria, and other countries have been attacked by CAIR and allies. The pro-Iranian lobby targeted most Iranian-American groups and tried to discredit them, particularly with the rise of the Green Revolution in Iran. By smearing the Muslim liberal exiles, the Islamists were trying to destroy their causes in the mother countries. In the 1990s and the years that followed 9/11 the region's dictators supported the efforts by Islamist lobbies to crush the liberal exiles. The Mubarak, Bashir, Gaddafi, Assad, and Khomeinist regimes fully supported the so-called Islamophobia campaign waged by CAIR and its Iranian counterpart NIAC against dissidents for calling for secular democracy in the region. The dissidents were accused of being pro-Western by both the Islamists and the dictators.

The Islamist lobbies also severely attacked members of the US Congress such as Democrats Tom Lantos, who has since passed away, Eliot Engel, Howard Berman, Gary Ackerman, and Joe Lieberman as well as Republicans Frank Wolfe, Chris Smith, Trent Franks, John McCain, Rick Santorum, and Sam Brownback for their efforts in passing legislative acts in support for democracy and liberty in the Middle East. CAIR and NIAC heavily savaged President Bush's speeches on Freedom Forward in the Middle East, deploying all the resources they had to block US support to liberal democrats in the region. Islamist lobbies in Washington are directly responsible for killing any initiative in the US Government to support Darfur, southern Sudan, Lebanon, the Kurds, liberal women in the Muslim world, and true democrats in the Arab world and Muslim Africa.

In the think tank world, CAIR and its allies aggressively attacked scholars who raised the issue of persecution against seculars or minorities in the Arab world and Iran. Among those attacked were Nina Shea and Paul Marshal from the Hudson Institute and the founder of an anti-slavery group, Dr Charles Jacobs, who was exposing the Sudan regime for its atrocities. Last but not least is the Islamists' relentless campaign to stirke at top scholars who advise Government and appear in the media to push for democratic liberation in the region. The vast and vicious attacks leveled against Professor Walid Phares—initially by CAIR's Nihad Awad and then widened by pro-Hezbollah and Muslim Brotherhood operatives online—has revealed to Arab and Middle Eastern liberal and seculars how ferocious is the battle for the Middle East in the US. Phares's books, particularly the latest one, The Coming Revolution: Struggle for Freedom in the Middle East (2010), hit the Islamist agenda hard by predicting the civil society revolts in the Middle East and then predicting how the Islamists would try to control them. Phares was attacked by an army of Jihadist militia online like no author since Samuel Huntington in the 1990s. As a freedom activist from the Middle East, Mustafa Geha, wrote, Phares is a hero to Muslim liberals. Along with dissidents, lawmakers, experts, and human rights activists, Phares is a force driving for a strategic change in US foreign policy towards supporting secular democracies in the region. This explains why the Islamists of America are fighting the battle for the forthcoming regimes with all the means they have.

Dr. Essam Abdallah is an Egyptian liberal intellectual who teaches at Ain Shams University and writes for the leading Arab liberal publication Elaph.



Did you know that the military victims of Islamic jihad terrorism at Ft. Hood and the Little Rock Recruitment Center are not eligible for the Purple Heart?

The reason is that our Defense Department is defining these acts as “criminal” acts rather than as acts of “war.” In fact, the Ft. Hood massacre was classified as “workplace violence!”

This is in keeping with the Obama administration position that terrorists like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind of 9/11, are not “enemy combatants” but “alleged criminals.”

Not only do we strongly disagree with this designation, we find it outrageous and completely unacceptable that those in our armed forces killed by jihadists on our soil are not eligible for the Purple Heart.

Do you agree? Would you like to help us correct this injustice?

Then log on here and add your name to the Open Letter we will be sending to the chairmen of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees.

In the letter, we urge them to pass H.R. 1142, introduced by Rep. Allen West. Here’s an excerpt from this letter:

H.R. 1142, the Global Combat Zone Recognition Act, was introduced by Congressman Allen West and would assure that a member of the Armed Forces killed or wounded in a terrorist attack is afforded the same protections and treatments as one killed or wounded in a traditional active “combat zone.”

Help us pour tens of thousands of names behind this letter into the Armed Services Committees of both the House and Senate. Let them know the American people are outraged at this injustice and that we expect action!!

This is a chance for us to do more than “honor and support our troops” with our words.




The FBI has been co-opted‏


Why have we spent so much time ringing alarm bells about the Muslim Brotherhood? About its rise in the Middle East?

Why did we put together last fall a comprehensive resource package entitled “Unmasking the Enemy Among Us: Information Warfare and the Muslim Brotherhood” (available here)?

Because we have seen what’s coming, spelled out below in this must-read piece (highlights added) that recently appeared on the Investigative Project on Terrorism website. It begins with a note from Steven Emerson detailing how radical Muslim organizations have, for all practical purposes, successfully co-opted the FBI.


February 16, 2012
A note from Investigative Project on Terrorism Executive Director Steven Emerson:

Please take the time to read this very important story [below] written by a courageous Egyptian liberal intellectual about the Islamist and Muslim Brotherhood lobbies in Washington and the Obama Administration's secret collaboration with these pro-terrorist, anti-Western, anti-women, anti-American and anti-Semitic organizations. This is one of the most important articles I have read in years.

It was just revealed two days ago that FBI Director Mueller secretly met on February 8 at FBI headquarters with a coalition of groups including various Islamist and militant Arabic groups who in the past have defended Hamas and Hizballah and have also issued blatantly anti-Semitic statements. At this meeting, the FBI revealed that it had removed more than 1000 presentations and curricula on Islam from FBI offices around the country that was deemed "offensive." The FBI did not reveal what criteria was used to determine why material was considered "offensive" but knowledgeable law enforcement sources have told the IPT that it was these radical groups who made that determination. Moreover, numerous FBI agents have confirmed that from now on, FBI headquarters has banned all FBI offices from inviting any counter-terrorist specialists who are considered "anti-Islam" by Muslim Brotherhood front groups.

The February 8 FBI meeting was the culmination of a series of unpublicized directives issued in the last three months by top FBI officials to all its field offices to immediately recall and withdraw any presentation or curricula on Islam throughout the entire FBI. In fact, according to informed sources and undisclosed documents, the FBI directive was instigated by radical Muslim groups in the US who had repeatedly met with top officials of the Obama Administration to complain, among other things, that the mere usage of the term of "radical Islam" in FBI curricula was "offensive" and 'racist." And thus, directives went out by Attorney General Eric Holder and FBI Director Mueller to censor all such material. Included in the material destroyed or removed by the FBI and the DOJ were powerpoints and articles that defined jihad as "holy war" or presentations that portrayed the Muslim Brotherhood as an organization bent on taking over the world—a major tenant that the Muslim Brotherhood has publicly stated for decades.

During the next several months, the IPT will be releasing a series of major investigative reports revealing the secret infiltration by and collaboration with radical Islamic organizations by the Obama administration that has spread to the National Security Council, the Dept of Justice, the FBI, the Dept of Homeland Security, the CIA and the State Department as well as local law enforcement.

-------

Islamist Lobbies' Washington War on Arab and Muslim Liberals

by Essam Abdallah

http://www.investigativeproject.org/3453/islamist-lobbies-washington-war-on-arab

The most dramatic oppression of the region's civil societies and the Arab Spring is not by means of weapons, or in the Middle East. It is not led by Gaddafi, Mubarak, Bin Ali, Saleh, or Assad. It is led by the powerful Islamist lobbies in Washington DC. People may find my words curious if not provocative. But my arguments are sharp and well understood by many Arab and middle eastern liberals and freedom fighters. Indeed, we in the region, who are struggling for real democracy, not for the one time election type of democracy have been asking ourselves since January 2011 as the winds of Arab spring started blowing, why isn't the West in general and the United States Administration in particular clearly and forcefully supporting our civil societies and particularly the secular democrats of the region? Why were the bureaucracies in Washington and in Brussels partnering with Islamists in the region and not with their natural allies the democracy promoting political forces?

Months into the Arab Spring, we realized that the Western powers, and the Obama Administration have put their support behind the new authoritarians, those who are claiming they will be brought to power via the votes of the people. Well, it is not quite so.

The Muslim Brotherhood, the Islamic Nahda of Tunisia, the Justice Party of Morocco and the Islamist militias in Libya's Transitional National Council have been systematically supported by Washington at the expense of real liberal and secular forces. We saw day by day how the White House guided carefully the statements and the actions of the US and the State Department followed through to give all the chances to the Islamists and almost no chances to the secular and revolutionary youth. We will come back to detail these diplomatic and financial maneuvers which are giving victory to the fundamentalists while the seculars and progressives are going to be smashed by the forthcoming regimes.

In the US, there are interests that determine foreign policy. And there are lobbies that put pressure to get their objectives met in foreign policy. One of the most powerful lobbies in America under the Obama Administration is the Muslim Brotherhood greater lobby, which has been in action for many years. This lobby has secured many operatives inside the Administration and has been successful in directing US policy towards the Arab world. Among leading advisors sympathetic to the Ikhwan is Daliah Mogahed (Mujahid) and her associate, Georgetown Professor John Esposito. Just as shocking, there is also a pro-Iranian lobby that has been influencing US policy towards Iran and Hezbollah in the region.

One of the most important activities of the Islamist lobby in the US is the waging of political and media wars on the liberal Arabs and Middle Eastern figures and groups in America. This battlefield is among the most important in influencing Washington's policies in the Arab world. If you strike at the liberal and democratic Middle Eastern groups in Washington who are trying to gain support for civil societies in the region, you actually win a major battle. You will be able to influence the resources of the US Government to support the Islamists in the Middle East and not the weak democrats. This huge war waged by the Islamist lobbies in America started at the end of the Cold war and continued all the way till the Arab spring. The two main forces of this lobby are the Muslim Brotherhood fronts and the Iranian fronts. According to research available in the US, the Ikhwan fronts such as CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations), led by Hamas supporter Nihad Awad, as well as the Muslim Public Affairs Council, the Islamic Society of North America, and others waged their political war to block the representatives of Arab liberals and Muslim moderates from making their case to the American public. The Iranian lobby, exemplified by the National Iranian American Committee (NIAC), led by Trita Parsi, has been hitting at Iranian exiles.

Since the 1990s CAIR and its allies have attacked Copts, Southern Sudanese, Lebanese, Syrian reformers, Assyrians and Chaldeans, and Muslim dissidents in the United States. The Ikhwan of America demonized any publication, book, article, or interview in the national media or local press raising the issue of secular freedoms in the Middle East. The Islamists wanted to eliminate the liberal cause in the Arab world and replace it with the cause of the Islamists. What is also shocking is that CAIR and its allies stood by the oppressive regimes and visited them, claiming they speak on behalf of the peoples. CAIR and the Brotherhood fronts in America destroyed systematically every project that would have defended the seculars and liberals originating from the Middle East. The notorious and well-funded Islamists of the US allowed no book, documentary, or show on the liberals in Arab civil societies to see the light.

Thanks to this powerful lobbying campaign, the American public was not given a chance to learn about the deep feelings on the youth in the region. Americans were led to believe that all Muslims, all Arabs and all Middle Easterners were a strange species of humans who cannot appreciate freedom. Instead, the American Islamists, helped by apologists on the petrodollars payrolls, convinced the mainstream media that the Arab world has authoritarians and Islamists only.

Dr Shawki Karas, president of the American Coptic Association, told me in the late 1990s how he was harassed by Islamist activists for speaking up against the Mubarak regime and the Muslim Brotherhood in America. He was threatened with losing his job at the college where he taught. Reverend Keith Roderick, who has assembled a coalition of more than 50 group rights from the Muslim world, was severely attacked by the Islamists and was threatened to be removed from his church position. Muslim American leaders who are conservative and secular, such as Dr Zuhdi Jasser, were crucified by CAIR and the Brotherhood for daring to challenge the Party line of the Islamists in America and claiming that the Jihadists are the problem in the region. Muslim liberal dissidents such as Somali Ayan Hirsi Ali, Saudi Ali al Yammi, Syrian Farid Ghadri, Iranian Manda Ervin, and many others were trashed by the Islamist lobbies to block them from defending the causes of secular liberty in the US. Egyptian liberals as well as seculars and democracy activists from Iraq, Sudan, Syria, and other countries have been attacked by CAIR and allies. The pro-Iranian lobby targeted most Iranian-American groups and tried to discredit them, particularly with the rise of the Green Revolution in Iran. By smearing the Muslim liberal exiles, the Islamists were trying to destroy their causes in the mother countries. In the 1990s and the years that followed 9/11 the region's dictators supported the efforts by Islamist lobbies to crush the liberal exiles. The Mubarak, Bashir, Gaddafi, Assad, and Khomeinist regimes fully supported the so-called Islamophobia campaign waged by CAIR and its Iranian counterpart NIAC against dissidents for calling for secular democracy in the region. The dissidents were accused of being pro-Western by both the Islamists and the dictators.

The Islamist lobbies also severely attacked members of the US Congress such as Democrats Tom Lantos, who has since passed away, Eliot Engel, Howard Berman, Gary Ackerman, and Joe Lieberman as well as Republicans Frank Wolfe, Chris Smith, Trent Franks, John McCain, Rick Santorum, and Sam Brownback for their efforts in passing legislative acts in support for democracy and liberty in the Middle East. CAIR and NIAC heavily savaged President Bush's speeches on Freedom Forward in the Middle East, deploying all the resources they had to block US support to liberal democrats in the region. Islamist lobbies in Washington are directly responsible for killing any initiative in the US Government to support Darfur, southern Sudan, Lebanon, the Kurds, liberal women in the Muslim world, and true democrats in the Arab world and Muslim Africa.

In the think tank world, CAIR and its allies aggressively attacked scholars who raised the issue of persecution against seculars or minorities in the Arab world and Iran. Among those attacked were Nina Shea and Paul Marshal from the Hudson Institute and the founder of an anti-slavery group, Dr Charles Jacobs, who was exposing the Sudan regime for its atrocities. Last but not least is the Islamists' relentless campaign to stirke at top scholars who advise Government and appear in the media to push for democratic liberation in the region. The vast and vicious attacks leveled against Professor Walid Phares—initially by CAIR's Nihad Awad and then widened by pro-Hezbollah and Muslim Brotherhood operatives online—has revealed to Arab and Middle Eastern liberal and seculars how ferocious is the battle for the Middle East in the US. Phares's books, particularly the latest one, The Coming Revolution: Struggle for Freedom in the Middle East (2010), hit the Islamist agenda hard by predicting the civil society revolts in the Middle East and then predicting how the Islamists would try to control them. Phares was attacked by an army of Jihadist militia online like no author since Samuel Huntington in the 1990s. As a freedom activist from the Middle East, Mustafa Geha, wrote, Phares is a hero to Muslim liberals. Along with dissidents, lawmakers, experts, and human rights activists, Phares is a force driving for a strategic change in US foreign policy towards supporting secular democracies in the region. This explains why the Islamists of America are fighting the battle for the forthcoming regimes with all the means they have.

Dr. Essam Abdallah is an Egyptian liberal intellectual who teaches at Ain Shams University and writes for the leading Arab liberal publication Elaph.





Shocking Video Shows that Billion-Dollar Border Fence is about as Secure as a Garage Door

By Chris Chmielenski, Updated Friday, February 17, 2012, 12:00 PM EST - posted on NumbersUSA
DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano and the rest of the Obama Adminstration have been preaching the repetative Quixotic declaration that the Southwest border with Mexico is more secure now than it's ever been. Well, a shocking new video shows quite the contrary as drug smugglers use a simple car jack to lift the fence panels near Lukeville, Ariz. to open up an unobstructed gateway into the United States. Watch this eye-opening video now . . .

Read Full Blog Post
Attrition Through Enforcement trumps any open-border feelings at Conservative conference

By Chris Chmielenski, Updated Monday, February 13, 2012, 12:00 PM EST - posted on NumbersUSA
Last week, the American Conservative Union held its annual conference (CPAC) in Washington, D.C., offering three days of speeches from Conservative pundits, Members of Congress, and, of course, the GOP Presidential Hopefuls (minus Ron Paul). CPAC organizers are staunch supporters of free markets with leanings toward open-border policies and a more generous guest worker program. But the more than 10,000 attendees at this year's annual conference showed a preference for lower legal immigration levels and tough immigration enforcement.

Read Full Blog Post
Obama to Push for More Visas at Magic Kingdom -- Where the Entry/Exit System was Perfected

By Chris Chmielenski, Tuesday, January 17, 2012, 5:45 PM EST - posted on NumbersUSA
Disney World is dubbed one of the "Happiest Places on Earth", and Pres. Barack Obama will try to make it even happier by proposing to simplify the tourist visa process during a speech there on Thursday. The President will "unveil a strategy that will significantly help boost tourism and travel" said a White House aide. Trying to boost the top industry in a state with double-digit unemployment is a good idea. But making it easier for foreign visitors to come to the United States is a bad idea without a completed entry/exit system.

Read Full Blog Post
South Carolina Debate Provides Hopefuls with Some Chances to Discuss Immigration

By Chris Chmielenski, Monday, January 16, 2012, 11:05 PM EST - posted on NumbersUSA
It's been a while since the GOP Presidential Debates provided us with a lively discussion on the nation's immigration issues, and unfortunately Monday night's debate in South Carolina didn't do much to advance the discussion either. But, the debate hosted by Fox News Channel and the Wall Street Journal did provide some opportunities for the candidates to restate their positions along with some missed opportunities.

Read Full Blog Post
Gingrich's Amnesty Plan Receives Frosty Reception in New Hampshire and a Poor Primary Performance

By Chris Chmielenski, Wednesday, January 11, 2012, 9:16 AM EST - posted on NumbersUSA
On Saturday, GOP Presidential Hopeful Newt Gingrich held a two-hour town hall meeting with a group of veterans in Wolfeboro, N.H. A member of the crowd asked Gingrich, not about his position on immigration, but for the specific details of his policy should he be elected president. Typical of Gingrich, he laid out a 7-point policy plan for reforming immigration, earning enthusiastic applause on most of his points. But there was one of those 7 points that received more of a frosty reception from the few hundred in attendance.

Read Full Blog Post
LIVE BLOG: GOP Candidates Debate in Michigan

By Chris Chmielenski, Wednesday, November 9, 2011, 5:14 PM EST - posted on NumbersUSA
On Wednesday night, the GOP Presidential Hopefuls head to Michigan for the 10th debate of the primary season. It's been a while since we've seen the Hopefuls on the national stage, but tonight's debate is the first of three debates to be held before Thanksgiving. With tonight's debate hosted on CNBC, the main theme will be the economy. For the most part, the Hopefuls have left immigration out of their economic/jobs talking points.

Read Full Blog Post
Rep. Polis: Help Share Boulder's Happiness

By Chris Chmielenski, Wednesday, October 26, 2011, 5:00 PM EST - posted on NumbersUSA
Democratic Congressman Jared Polis sent out an interesting comment via Twitter on Wednesday afternoon. His Tweet simply said "Boulder residents r happiest ppl in the country :-)". And Boulder residents should be happy. While the U.S. population has increased at a rate close to 10% over the past 10 years, Boulder's population has grown by only 4.6% over the same period of time thanks to its strict population control policies.

Read Full Blog Post
Las Vegas GOP Debate: Can Gov. Perry Reverse the Damage of his Past Immigration Statements?

By Chris Chmielenski, Tuesday, October 18, 2011, 2:13 PM EST - posted on NumbersUSA
Tonight, the GOP Presidential Hopefuls get another chance to make an impression on voters in an early primary state during a debate in Las Vegas. The Perry campaign team is already trying to get a jump on the immigration issue; throughout the day, stories have popped up across the news wires quoting his political strategists who are saying Gov. Perry will try to reverse opinions about his position on immigration.

Read Full Blog Post
Facts Contradict Cantor's Concern That Few Foreign Students Remain in U.S. To Work

By Chris Chmielenski, Wednesday, October 12, 2011, 10:40 AM EST - posted on NumbersUSA
Bloomberg News hosted a round table last week of business leaders and academia to discuss, in addition to many other topics, how they could get more foreign workers to the United States. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor made an appearance at the panel and his statement to the group sounded off some alarms. Rep. Cantor said he sympathized with their concerns and, through his leadership position in Congress, would work to find ways to increase the number of available foreign workers.

Read Full Blog Post
TONIGHT: GOP Hopefuls Debate in New Hampshire; Follow Our Live Blog for Updates

By Chris Chmielenski, Tuesday, October 11, 2011, 3:53 PM EST - posted on NumbersUSA
It's been three weeks since the GOP Presidential Hopefuls last debated in Orlando, Fla. After three debates in states with high illegal-alien populations, the Hopefuls square off tonight in New Hampshire, which will play a major role in determining who will be the GOP nominee.

Read Full Blog Post


-

from the American Petroleum Institute:

CRUDE OIL IS 80% of the cost of Gasoline.

The import/export market has nothing to do with it, you must control the base product to get the price under control. DRILL HERE DRILL NOW.




"THE OPEN FUEL STANDARD ACT:

"If you’ve been tracking recent news from Iran, you know that their state media recently reported that the country plans to cut oil exports to six European countries as a retaliatory measure for new sanctions. Though the U.S. does not purchase Iranian oil, the threat alone has an impact on the price we pay for gasoline. Why? Because Iran is a member of OPEC and the cartel largely sets the worldwide price of oil.

Frankly, the trending price of gasoline even before Iran announced its recent threat should certainly cause you much concern. Today it is higher than it ever has been before at this time of year and the expectation is that it will continue to increase as summer approaches. But this is nothing new—this up and down trend is a pattern we’ve been seeing since the early 1970’s!

But there’s a solution—and you can play a role in achieving it.

The Open Fuel Standard Act, legislation that will finally free us from OPEC’s stranglehold, continues to gain bi-partisan support from Members of the U.S. Congress. Why is this issue different? As one such federal legislator recently told me, “Because when it comes to national security, we need to look at things differently.”

The beauty of legislation like the Open Fuel Standard Act (H.R.1687 in the U.S. House and S.1603 in the Senate) is that the only thing it mandates is competition—something we don’t currently enjoy when it comes to transportation fuel. The legislation doesn’t stipulate WHAT kind of alternative fuel must be used in gasoline powered vehicles produced or sold in America, just that it must be something in addition to gasoline.

As Brigitte Gabriel points out to our elected officials when she travels with me to the Hill, one of the great things about the United States is that we have the option of choice for goods and services—our preferred cereal, our preferred hammer, our preferred pet food. But why not our preferred form of liquid fuel?

The Open Fuel Standard Act can change all that…at absolutely no cost to the Federal government and less than $100 per vehicle to the consumer.

Would you pay $100 to stop funding terrorism, kick OPEC in the teeth, have a choice about what fuel you purchase (resulting in saving you $1,000 per year per car under today’s price levels), and spur job creation in America—all at the same time?

The article below describes how one man brought competition to a once closed system of producers. This man, Marc Goldman, now works closely with us as part of the Open Fuel Standard coalition.

But it’s critical that your elected officials don’t just hear from Marc, Brigitte and me. They need to hear from the folks back home, or this bill won’t ever see the light of day. You have the power to make a difference!

Have you written a letter to your Representative and Senator encouraging their support of the Open Fuel Standard Act? If not, please do so today by selecting the two Open Fuel Standard links on our Contact Congress page (one for the House bill and one for the Senate).


Newsmax

The Milk Man’s Lesson: Car Choice Can Work
Friday, February 3, 2012 11:46 AM

By: Christopher Ruddy

Christopher Ruddy's Perspective: Can the United States create jobs, lower the price of fuel, reduce emissions, and become energy-independent all at the same time?

The answer is, “Yes — and rather quickly.”

The simple answer correlates with a rather simple solution being evangelized by Marc Goldman, a former milk company executive from New Jersey.

Marc is not a household name, but he once made big headlines in New York for taking on the state’s powerful dairy interests and a system that kept milk prices artificially high by limiting competition among dairies.

Marc spent a small fortune and considerable time in court challenging that system, and in January 1987, won the right for his Farmland Dairies to sell milk in all of New York City and its suburbs — a victory that led to a sharp drop in milk prices for many New Yorkers.

The milk story really has nothing to say directly about energy, but it does have something to say about Marc, who has sold his milk company and now lives in Boca Raton, Fla.

Today, Marc spends his time on another worthy crusade — promoting the Open Fuel Standard Act of 2011, known in the House as H.R. 1687 and in the Senate as S. 1603.

The proposed bills create a “free market for fuel,” just as his victory in New York created a free market for milk, by requiring car manufacturers to give owners a choice in the fuel they use in their vehicles.

The bills call for “fuel competition” to reduce the nation’s dependence on foreign imports through greater use of domestic energy sources, and for an annually increasing percentage of automobiles sold in the UnitedStates to be flex-fuel capable.

This new law would require vehicles to be manufactured flex-fuel ready, adding less than $100 to the cost of each car, which would allow drivers to easily change the type of fuel their engine uses — from gasoline to other types of fuels, such as methanol or ethanol.

Such an option is available today in most cars in Brazil, where massive production of sugarcane ethanol has made Brazil the world’s first sustainable bio-fuel economy. It’s no accident that Brazil’s economy has been booming in recent years as the United States’ sags under high petroleum costs.

Rightfully, critics have complained that if the United States sharply increased the production of ethanol, made from corn or sugar, food prices would skyrocket globally.

This would be bad for everyone, and especially harm the poor.

But Marc points out that the United States has huge reserves of natural gas — by some estimates over 2,500 trillion cubic feet of recoverable reserves. He notes that natural gas is easily converted into methanol, and methanol use could save drivers at least 80 cents per gallon for the same energy a gallon of gasoline today provides.

Marc’s point here is that once the fuel option opens up in Americans’ cars, the free market will work to meet the demand. Natural gas will boost demand and spur other forms of biomass fuel to be mass produced. And, as demand for oil drops, the fall-off in petroleum prices will be catastrophic for suppliers.

Today, the lion’s share of global oil reserves is under the control of OPEC, a cartel with many member states that are openly hostile to American interests.

As for environmental concerns, experiments show that methanol and ethanol fuels yield fewer hydrocarbon and nitrogen oxide emissions than gasoline.

It’s a win-win for consumers, the environment, and the country.

To the bills’ opponents, perhaps energy expert Dr. Robert Zubrin, an aerospace engineer and author, puts it best in a National Review article:

“In whose interest is it that Americans should continue to be denied fuel choice, that America’s vast natural gas, coal, and biomass remain unusable as a source of liquid fuel, that America continues to give hundreds of billions of dollars each year to foreign potentates bent upon our destruction, instead of paying our own people to make fuel out of our own resources, that a foreign cartel retains unlimited power to raise the cost of our fuel?

“We can set ourselves free, but action is required.”

-
Obama Voter Fraud: How Much Does He Need?‏
House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Ranking Member Darrell Issa (R-CA) continues to ask questions about ACORN's illegal activities and federal funding grants to this supposedly-defunded political organization...and its affiliates.

The Oversight and Government Reform Committee Republican investigation, "found ACORN conspired to defraud the United States by using taxpayer funds for partisan political activities," wrote Rep. Issa. He requested that officials at various government agencies answer critical questions pertaining to ACORN's political work, tax filings, and taxpayer money it receives from the Federal Government.

"It is outrageous that ACORN's partisan political work has earned it access to more Federal taxpayer dollars instead of closer scrutiny into its illegal activities," said Rep. Issa. "As part of our oversight responsibilities, Republicans on the Oversight Committee intend to ensure that Federal authorities aren't having the wool pulled over their eyes by ACORN."

It has been revealed that the supposedly now-defunct ACORN is working with the Eric Holder Department of Justice. Documents prove that the Obama Department of Justice has coordinated various voter projects with an ACORN-connected entity. Rep. Darrell Issa is calling for an congressional investigation!

PROJECT VOTE/Voting for America is ACORN's voter registration branch and Barack Obama's former employer, abbreviated its name to Project Vote, Inc. on July 19, 2010. The same incorporator was also the incorporator of ACORN Community Land Association. Please fax Congress NOW to salvage this election from fraud!

FrontPageMag reported: "At an emergency meeting New York Communities for Change (NYCC) organizing director Jonathan Westin played semantic games: "It was pretty funny. Jonathan told staff they don't pay for protesters, but the people in the meeting who work there objected and said, 'Wait, you pay us to go to the protests every day?' Then Jonathan said, 'No, but that's your job,' and staffers were like, 'Yeah, our job is to protest,' and Westin said, 'No your job is to fight for economic and social justice. We just send you to protest.' Staff said, 'Yes, you pay us to carry signs.' Then Jonathan says, 'That's your job.' It went on like that back and forth for a while."

It was Fox News that exposed the fact initially that ACORN supported the Occupy Wall Street protests. They immediately began to shred some of their documents. The New York State Attorney still refuses to comment about the ONGOING investigation of the ACORN branch - the NYCC!

Estelle Rogers, a former attorney for ACORN, is a primary contact person on policy matters for PROJECT VOTE (a "shadow" of ACORN). Her title is Director of Advocacy for Project Vote. Her expertise is voter registration issues on both the state and federal levels. Revealing emails show that she was in contact many times with the DOJ in relationship to the hiring of certain personnel.

The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) recently provided detailed email communications between Rogers and top Obama White House officials and the Department of Justice.

New, damaging evidence of coordination of events continue between Project Vote and the DOJ. THIS MUST BE INVESTIGATED NOW!!

No matter what name ACORN uses, they stand ready to re-elect Barack Obama as the President, no matter how many illegitimate voters they need to use---dead or alive! Defunded and deemed "illegal," ACORN derivatives have been resurrected in various names and organizations. The bottom line: massive voter fraud and voter registration fraud! According to a July 2009 report by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, over 430,000 voter registrations submitted by Project Vote or ACORN in the 2008 election, was INVALID! Fraudulent!!

They are ready to help steal the 2012 election through fraudulent votes!!

And now we know that the Obama Administration has been involved. Documents prove that there has been widespread coordination between the Department of Justice Voting Section (under the "watchful" eye of Attorney General Eric Holder who is already facing possible perjury before Congress!) and PROJECT VOTE!

The upcoming elections could be STOLEN by Project Vote!

And that is why we must support U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa and his call for a Congressional investigation!

-
Lawyer forces Kagan to reconsider recusal from Obamacare‏

Lawyer forces Supreme Court to reconsider Kagan recusal from Obamacare

Our lawyer friend Larry Klayman [pictured right-->] with Freedom Watch has filed a formal "motion to reconsider" with the U.S. Supreme Court, demanding Justice Elena Kagan recuse herself from hearing the Obamacare case NFIB v. Sebelius in June.

Worldnet Daily reports: "In a motion to reconsider filed [1 Feb], Klayman said the issue of judicial integrity is even more important that the substance of the Obamacare dispute itself.

"The ‘greater' issue is the integrity of the Supreme Court itself and whether or not it will adhere to and respect centuries old rules of judicial ethics, which require a judge to recuse herself when she has a conflict of interest and when to continue on the case would create even the appearance of partiality," Klayman said in the motion.

"He wrote that in addition to Kagan's 'conflict of interest' because of her work in the White House, allegedly on behalf of Obamacare, she also reportedly advocated for Obamacare in another case.

"This act constitutes not only a conflict of interest, but creates more than the appearance of partiality, for which she must recuse herself or be disqualified by the court," he wrote.

"If the Supreme Court does not adhere to accepted rules of judicial ethics in this case, and others, it will lose credibility as the 'People's Supreme Court,' and indeed its ultimate decision herein will be forever held illegitimate and tainted by judicial misconduct. This is why the issue of Justice Kagan's recusal or disqualification is even more important than the underlying issues of this Obamacare case itself. It will have a lasting effect on the integrity of the Supreme Court and how Americans view their court," he said.

"He noted that already in the United States, 'with the rise of citizens' movements like Occupy Wall Street and the Tea Party, Americans are already feeling disenfranchised from judicial and other government institutions, such that they are resorting to civil disobedience and if that does not work perhaps even revolution if things do not change.'"

[Chaps comment: Klayman is right on. Justice Kagan will disparage the entire court and ruin the reputation of the institution itself, destroying not just her own integrity but the integrity of the Supreme Court and the American Justice System itself. We must demand she recuse herself, for the sake of defending the integrity of the Constitution itself.]
-
Supreme Court rejects demand for Kagan to recuse Obamacare

CNN reports "The Supreme Court has turned aside a motion from a political advocacy group that sought to argue that Justice Elena Kagan should not participate in the upcoming blockbuster appeals over the constitutionality of health care reform [aka Obamacare.]

"The justices denied the request from Freedom Watch without comment [last month]. Kagan herself did not get involved in this particular motion.

"The court's brief order all but assures that the newest justice will participate in the late March arguments and eventually rule on the cases' merits. Similar calls for recusal from other groups have been directed at Justice Clarence Thomas.

"Larry Klayman, head of Freedom Watch, wanted to argue the recusal issue himself as part of the three days of public oral arguments scheduled for March 26-28. There, lawyers for the Obama administration and a coalition of 26 states and private groups will separately plead their case on the health care law's legal limits.

"Klayman said that while the argument request was denied, he still thinks Kagan should pull out of the debate. 'The justices work for us, and the Supreme Court is the people's court, not the justices' court,' he said. 'I hope that they will sober up and do the right thing and disqualify Justice Kagan from sitting on the Obamacare case, as she has a textbook conflict of interest given her involvement in the drafting of, and supporting, the legislation, while she was an official of the Obama administration at the Department of Justice.'"

[Chaps comment: Today's ruling is yet another example of Washington corruption at the highest levels of the U.S. Supreme Court, as Justice Kagan [pictured right-->] flagrantly thumbs her nose at the law she swore to uphold. Four U.S. Senators agree with me, saying: "Federal law requires recusal from a case if a judicial officer of the United States 'has served in governmental employment and in such capacity participated as counsel, adviser or material witness concerning the proceeding or expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case or controversy.' 28 U.S.C. § 455(b)(3). In addition, a federal judge must disqualify herself from participating in a matter if her 'impartiality might reasonably be questioned.' Id. at § 455(a). It appears that former Solicitor General Kagan's participation in the Obama Administration's defense of the PPACA may satisfy both requirements for recusal," the Senators' letter said.]

We must continue to demand Kagan's impeachment, and full hearings on her corruption.
-
over 83,000 petitions to Congress (with copies directly to the Supreme Court) demanding Justice Elena Kagan recuse herself from hearing the Obamacare case, Chief Justice Roberts came to Kagan's aid by writing a letter defending the Court's integrity.

Roberts wrote in his "end of year" report that we shouldn't worry about Kagan's bias, despite the fact she helped write, defend, and lobbied to pass Obamacare:

"I have complete confidence in the capability of my colleagues to determine when recusal is warranted," Roberts wrote. "They are [Kagan is] jurists of exceptional integrity and experience whose character and fitness have been examined through a rigorous appointment and confirmation process."

"The Supreme Court does not sit in judgment of one of its own members' decision whether to recuse in the course of deciding a case. [Roberts won't rebuke Kagan.] Indeed, if the Supreme Court reviewed those decisions, it would create an undesirable situation in which the court could affect the outcome of a case by selecting who among its members may participate."

"If an appeals court or district court judge withdraws from a case, there is another federal judge who can serve in that recused judge's place. But the Supreme Court consists of nine members who always sit together, and if a justice withdraws from a case, the court must sit without its full membership."

"A justice accordingly cannot withdraw from a case as a matter of convenience or simply to avoid controversy. Rather, each justice has an obligation to the Court to be sure of the need to recuse before deciding to withdraw from a case."

So Roberts won't step in to tell Kagan to recuse herself. What do you think? I think we're getting their attention. If Roberts won't oversee Kagan, the U.S. Congress must.

Should Justice Kagan be trusted to "not recuse" herself, or impeached by Congress?


our top-ranking Republican Senators agreed with us and demanded Justice Kagan recuse herself from the Obamacare case. In a letter signed by Majority Leader McConnell (R-KY), Whip John Kyl (R-AZ), Ranking Judiciary Grassley (R-IA), and Senator Mike Lee (R-UT), all four rebuked President Obama's Attorney General Eric Holder, who has obstructed justice and blocked Congressional investigation of Kagan's bias in the Obamacare case.

"Federal law requires recusal from a case if a judicial officer of the United States 'has served in governmental employment and in such capacity participated as counsel, adviser or material witness concerning the proceeding or expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case or controversy.' 28 U.S.C. § 455(b)(3). In addition, a federal judge must disqualify herself from participating in a matter if her 'impartiality might reasonably be questioned.' Id. at § 455(a). It appears that former Solicitor General Kagan's participation in the Obama Administration's defense of the PPACA may satisfy both requirements for recusal," the letter said. You can read the Senators' full letter here.

Sadly A.G. Holder continues to stonewall Congressional investigations. "Unfortunately, your Department has rejected all Congressional oversight requests for information about her role in the Obama Administration's defense of this law [Obamacare]." While Holder blocks any justice to help Obama, Kagan scored the touchdown by defending Obamacare, and now she acts as the "instant replay referee" to find no flags on her own play.

Her "impartiality" is obviously flawed, as the Senators point to a March 2009 email Kagan sent to DOJ Legal Adviser Larry Tribe concerning Obamacare: Entitled, "Fingers and toes crossed today!" Kagan emails, "I hear they have the votes, Larry!! Simply amazing." [How impartial can she be when ruling on this law?]

Political analyist Dick Morris agrees: "As Solicitor-General, Kagan was the point person for defending the constitutionality of federal law before the Supreme Court. She was, in effect, the lawyer supporting the Health Care law. How can she now sit in judgment on it?" Morris has also delivered 19,000+ petitions to Congress, along with our 63,000+.

--------------
NoInternetTax.org:

BUREAUCRATS ARE PUSHING FOR AN INTERNET TAX!

The U.N. believes it has the right to IMPOSE TAXES on people, businesses and industry - and they are coming for your American tax dollars.

The easiest way for them to do that is through the internet, the world's most GLOBAL forum.

Neil Snyder at American Thinker warns,

I used to tell my strategy students at the University of Virginia to keep their eyes on the internet. At the time, our elected officials had decided not to tax purchases made over the internet to permit it to grow unhindered by cumbersome government restrictions, specifically taxes.

I told my students that one day, governments around the world would demand the creation of an internet tax to fund various things such as a global welfare system like the one that we have in the United States and a global police force/army with enforcement powers. The internet is the perfect vehicle to fund such programs because it's global in nature and it's easily accessible to anyone with a computer or a smartphone no matter where he or she lives.

...We are moving toward a global government with teeth. By that I mean a global political body with taxing and enforcement powers.

...Our elected officials left the door open for some group (i.e., the U.N. or some other global organization) to claim the authority to use its tax revenue-generation potential. That day has arrived. When our elected officials decide that it's time to give the U.N. or any other global group taxing authority, said group will go after the internet with reckless abandon, and the world as we know it will change forever.

But be aware, it's not just the United Nations looking at internet taxes. Our economy is faltering, and government at the local, state and federal levels need revenue. The World Wide Web is an obvious solution.

It's also wide open to taxation because of the way Bill Clinton's 1998 Internet Tax Freedom Act is written. The Act prevents governments from taxing internet-only activities such as bandwidth, email, or putting multiple taxes on any kind of electronic commerce.

But, it was not made permanent, which means Congress has to periodically extend it. The current moratorium on taxes is set to expire on November 1, 2014.

That is only two years from now. But, the economy is bad. So as you read this, more than 30,000 state and local governments, 7,600 taxing authorities AND THE UNITED NATIONS are chomping at the bit, searching for loopholes that will enable them to open up the Internet to oppressive taxation and regulation before that November 1st, 2014 date.

Don't think for a minute that because the moratorium is in effect that this issue is going away. It isn't.

Work has already begun to find new ways to tax your online activity:

AT THE STATE LEVEL - The National Governor's Association has introduced a "Streamlined Sales Tax Project" (SSTP). Under this proposal, a "national collection center" would be established to monitor and audit your internet purchases. Your personal information and Internet shopping habits will be stored by a "trusted third party" or government body. Or, states can subscribe to a national "cartel" tax collection system - which in essence, will mean a NATIONAL SALES TAX!

AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL - Senator Dick Durbin introduced the "Main Street Fairness Act" earlier this year ... Obama's overreaching FCC is working on all kinds of internet regulations ... Hollywood is pushing its Stop Online Piracy bill ... and we can expect more activity of this kind in 2012.

AT THE GLOBAL LEVEL – On February 1st, the U.N. Commission on Social Development introduced the idea of taxation to support a "social protection floor." Ambassador Jorge Valero, the current Chairman, said capitalism was the source of the world's financial problems, and called for "progressive policies of taxation" that would require "those who earn more to pay more taxes."

Barack Obama and his liberal friends want to continue their spending free-for-all, and they don't want to have to buckle down and control expenses. And,the United States already provides the U.N. with 22% of their budget - why not send MORE?


This debate is not about tax or no-tax, because YOU ALREADY PAY TAXES ON THE INTERNET. It is taxed in the same way that catalogues, mail order and TV sales are. Every time you access the internet you are paying telecommunication taxes. But, a significant number of online purchases, such as travel and financial services, are services not subject to sales tax in any form - electronic or otherwise.

This debate is about the collection of usage and sales taxes. It's about more, more and MORE.

More Big Brother. More government. More regulation. More control.

And now, we are facing a one-world government as the United Nations seeks to destroy the sovereignty of the United States.

NoInternetTax.org believes:

The moratorium on Internet access and discretionary taxes should be made permanent.
Taxes on Internet access are regressive by nature and only serve to widen the Digital Divide.
The United Nations, World Trade Organization and European Union have no right to try to impose or collect taxes on U.S. citizens.
The Streamlined Sales Tax Proposal, supported by the National Governor's Association, is unconstitutional and violates consumer privacy through its "national collection center" which stores personal information and Internet shopping habits.

EVERYTHING is on the table. Think about all the ways YOU can be TAXED for your online activities: things like downloads, email, e-Commerce purchases, financial transactions, MP3 files, broadband access, ISP access are all up for grabs ... every aspect of the internet is going to be fair game.

Don't let them open the door. If you don't raise your voice in opposition today, who knows what they will tax tomorrow.
-------
=====
-------
http://dailycaller.com/2012/02/23/irans-grand-ayatollahs-earth-belongs-to-muslims-end-is-near/

Iran's grand ayatollahs: Earth belongs to Muslims, end is near
-

http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=259057&;R=R3

'Highest level of Syrian gov't ordering atrocities'
-
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/?refresh=true



Sarah Palin Demands Afghanistan Apologize for Slaughter of 2 US Soldiers

-


rooters.com


Iraq attacks kill 60, raise sectarian fears