UPDATE – VIDEO of Sri Lanka Jihadists pledging allegiance to ISIS leader-The Religion of PEACE (update – NJT) ushers in EASTER 2019 with Bombings and Violence

April 21, 2019

VIDEO –

 

 

 

 

The Notre Dame – still an accident? No investigation?

Yes.  I blame Bush JR.  I blame him for decreeing to the WORLD that ISLAM meant PEACE.  It blinded all INTELLIGENCE agencies from seeking the TRUTH.

YET here we are today.  After addressing the media, President George Bush talks with his hosts during his visit to the Islamic Center of Washington, D.C. Sept. 17, 2001. "And it is my honor to be meeting with leaders who feel just the same way I do. They're outraged, they're sad," said the President during his remarks. "They love America just as much as I do.". White House photo by Eric Draper.Islam is as VIOLENT and more VIRULENT then it HAS EVER BEEN BEFORE.  AND POTUS today TRUMP has not decried the words and EDICT of George W. Bush —-https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010917-11.html

I am pleading with President Donald J. Trump – please, PLEASE decry and remove this edict from the White House website-the Intelligence agencies are hog tied with it!!!!!

NO more Notre Dames – no more silence about the Violent Islam!

 

Easter Sunday explosions at multiple churches and hotels rock Sri Lanka, death tolls rises past 200

A pair holding U.S. and British nationalities were among the 11 foreigners killed after a series of explosions struck three churches and three luxury hotels in and just outside of Sri Lanka’s capital Easter Sunday, leaving at least 207 people dead and 450 others injured, officials said.

Sri Lanka’s foreign ministry said the other foreigners whose nationalities have been verified included three Indians, one Portuguese national, two Turkish nationals, and three British nationals.

POPE CELEBRATES EASTER SUNDAY AMID BLOODSHED IN SRI LANKA

The six nearly simultaneous blasts—followed hours later by two more explosions—marked the bloodshed as among the worst since the South Asian country’s 26-year civil war ended a decade ago, a spokesperson for the Sri Lanka police said.

Defense Minister Ruwan Wijewardena described the attacks as a terrorist attack by religious extremists and said eight suspects have been arrested, though no one immediately claimed responsibility.

Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe said he feared the violence could trigger instability in the country and its economy.

The explosions collapsed ceilings and blew out windows, killing worshippers and hotel guests. People were seen carrying the wounded out of blood-spattered pews. Witnesses described powerful explosions, followed by scenes of smoke, blood, broken glass, alarms going off and victims screaming in terror.

“People were being dragged out,” Bhanuka Harischandra of Colombo, a 24-year-old founder of a tech marketing company who was going to the city’s Shangri-La Hotel for a meeting when it was bombed. “People didn’t know what was going on. It was panic mode.”

He added: “There was blood everywhere.”

The first explosion occurred around 8:45 a.m. local time, with the deadliest appearing to be at St. Sebastian’s Church in Negombo, a city about 20 miles north of Colombo. Other attacks occurred at St. Anthony’s Shrine in Colombo and Zion Church in the eastern city of Batticaloa. The three hotels – the Shangri La, Cinnamon Grand and Kingsbury Hotel – all in Colombo are frequented by foreign tourists.

Debris inside St. Sebastian's Church after a blast in Negombo, north of Colombo, Sri Lanka, Sunday. (Associated Press)

Debris inside St. Sebastian’s Church after a blast in Negombo, north of Colombo, Sri Lanka, Sunday. (Associated Press)

The other two blasts occurred in Dematagoda, where the occupants of a safehouse apparently detonated explosives to prevent arrest.

An official told the Associated Press that at least two of the church blasts were believed to have been coordinated attack carried out by suicide bombers.

Sri Lankan Army soldiers secure the area around St. Anthony's Shrine after a blast in Colombo, Sri Lanka, Sunday, April 21, 2019 (AP Photo/Eranga Jayawardena)

Sri Lankan Army soldiers secure the area around St. Anthony’s Shrine after a blast in Colombo, Sri Lanka, Sunday, April 21, 2019 (AP Photo/Eranga Jayawardena)

“The United States offers heartfelt condolences to the great people of Sri Lanka,” U.S. President Donald Trump tweeted in part early Sunday. “We stand ready to help!”

U.S. Ambassador to Sri Lanka Alaina Teplitz offered her condolences over Twitter early Sunday.

“Deeply saddened by the senseless attacks in Sri Lanka today. Our thoughts are with the victims and their families. We stand with Sri Lanka’s people at this terrible moment,” she tweeted.

Former President Barack Obama in a tweet called the Easter bloodshed an “attack on humanity.”

“The attacks on tourists and Easter worshippers in Sri Lanka are an attack on humanity,” Obama wrote. “On a day devoted to love, redemption, and renewal, we pray for the victims and stand with the people of Sri Lanka.”

Cardinal Daniel N. DiNardo, the president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, in a statement condemned the deadly blasts as a “great evil,” and said the attack cannot “overcome the hope” found in the Easter holiday.

SRI LANKA AVERTS RIFT SPILLING OVER TO UN RIGHTS SESSION

St. Sebastian’s pleaded for help on its Facebook page. The explosion ripped the roof off the building and knocked out doors and windows. Churches throughout the country have been placed on alert, with many canceling Easter services.

People gather outside St. Anthony's Shrine where a blast happened, in Colombo, Sri Lanka, Sunday, April 21, 2019. (Associated Press)

People gather outside St. Anthony’s Shrine where a blast happened, in Colombo, Sri Lanka, Sunday, April 21, 2019. (Associated Press)

Sri Lankan Member of Parliament Harsha de Silva tweeted Sunday of “many casualties including foreigners.”

“Sec Defence and I am at Kochchikade church. Also was at ShangriLa n Kingsbury. PM is on his way from Bentota. Emergency meeting called in a few minutes. Rescue operations underway. Please stay calm and indoors. Many casualties including foreigners,” he posted.

“Horrible scenes. I saw many body parts strewn all over. Emergency crews are at all locations in full force. We, at 1990 also have close to 20 units at the various locations. We took multiple casualties to hospital. Hopefully saved many lives,” he continued.

The Archbishop of Colombo, Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith, called on Sri Lanka’s government to launch a “very impartial strong inquiry” and to punish those found responsible “mercilessly because only animals can behave like that.”

Pope Francis denounced the “cruel violence” at the end of his traditional Easter Sunday blessing. 

Speaking from the loggia of St. Peter’s Basilica, Francis said: “I want to express my loving closeness to the Christian community, targeted while they were gathered in prayer, and all the victims of such cruel violence.”

He added: “I entrust to the Lord all those who were tragically killed and pray for the injured and all those who are suffering as a result of this dramatic event.”

British Prime Minister Teresa May tweeted “We must stand together to make sure that no one should ever have to (practice) their faith in fear.”

New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern condemned the “devastating” attacks, and referred to the March 15 shootings at two mosques in the New Zealand city of Christchurch in which 50 died.

“New Zealand condemns all acts of terrorism and our resolve has only been strengthened by the attack on our soil,” Ardern said. “New Zealand rejects all forms of extremism and stands for freedom of religion and the right to worship safely.”

Sri Lankan security forces in 2009 defeated Tamil Tiger rebels who had fought to create an independent homeland for the country’s ethnic minority Tamils. The U.N. initially estimated the death toll from 26 years of fighting to be about 100,000 but a U.N. experts’ panel later said some 45,000 ethnic Tamils may have been killed in the last months of the fighting alone.

Sri Lanka, a small island nation at the southern tip of India, has a long history with Christianity. Christian tradition holds that St. Thomas the Apostle visited Sri Lanka and southern India in the decades after the death of Christ. The majority of the island’s Christians are Roman Catholic.

The Associated Press contributed to this story.

https://www.foxnews.com/world/easter-sunday-explosions-at-multiple-churches-and-hotels-rock-sri-lanka-death-tolls-rises

 

Sri Lanka Bomber Stood at Hotel Buffet then Unleashed Terror

Sri Lankan security personnel and police investigators look through debris outside Zion Church following an explosion in Batticaloa in eastern Sri Lanka on April 21, 2019. - A series of eight devastating bomb blasts ripped through high-end hotels and churches holding Easter services in Sri Lanka on April 21, killing …
LAKRUWAN WANNIARACHCHI/AFP/Getty
BREITBART NEWS

1909

3:20

Colombo (AFP) — The suicide bomber waited patiently in a queue for the Easter Sunday breakfast buffet at Sri Lanka’s Cinnamon Grand hotel before setting off explosives strapped to his back.

Carrying a plate, the man, who had registered at the hotel the night before as Mohamed Azzam Mohamed, was just about to be served when he set off his devastating strike in the packed restaurant, a manager at the Sri Lankan hotel said.

“There was utter chaos,” said the manager, who spoke to AFP on condition of anonymity as he is not allowed to speak for the company.

The Taprobane restaurant at the hotel was having one of its busiest days of the year for the Easter holiday weekend.

“It was 8:30 am and it was busy. It was families,” the manager told AFP.

“He came up to the top of the queue and set off the blast,” he added.

“One of our managers who was welcoming guests was among those killed instantly.”

The bomber also died. Parts of his body were found intact by police and taken away.

 

Other hotel officials told how the bomber, a Sri Lankan, checked in giving an address that turned out to be false, saying he was in the city for business.

Two other hotels, the Shangri-La and the Kingsbury, were hit at about the same time, along with three churches packed with worshippers attending Easter Sunday services.

The blast at St Anthony’s Shrine, an historic Catholic Church, was so powerful that it blew out much of the roof, leaving roof tiles, glass and splintered wood littering the floor that was strewn with bodies.

Authorities have not said who staged the attacks. But all suffered major casualties and damage. Many of the 35 foreigners killed in the blasts were at the hotels, officials said.

– ‘Shock, grief and mourning’ –

“There was utter chaos, but we rushed all the injured to hospital in a very short time,” the Cinnamon Grand manager said.

“About 20 people were seriously wounded and we sent them to the National Hospital.”

The hotel is close to the Sri Lankan prime minister’s official residence and Special Task Force commandos were quickly at the scene.

At the Shangri-La, witnesses said they heard two loud blasts and that staff reported some people had been killed. But details of the toll were not immediately given.

An AFP photographer saw extensive damage in the second floor restaurant at the hotel, with windows blown out and electrical wires hanging from the ceiling.

The Shangri-La said in a statment that the bomb hit at approximately 9:00 am local time at its Table One restaurant.

“We are deeply saddened and shocked by the incident and our thoughts and prayers are with the families of the casualties and those who have been affected,” it said.

“Our immediate priority is to look after the safety and wellbeing of all involved. A Shangri-La crisis management team has been activated to provide all necessary support.”

The Kingsbury is also one of Colombo’s most expensive hotels, positioned near the city’s World Trade Center.

The toll there was not known.

In a statement on its Facebook page, the hotel said: “On behalf of the entire Kingsbury team we share in the shock, grief and mourning of our entire nation in the aftermath of the recent attack.”

“Medical evacuation and treatment of the injured guests and employees were handled immediately.” The hotel said it had been “isolated” for further safety checks.

 

Who was behind the Sri Lanka bomb attacks? Everything we know so far about Easter Sunday explosions

Easter Day bomb blasts at three Sri Lankan churches and four hotels killed more than 200 people and wounded more than 450, following a lull in major attacks since the end of the civil war 10 years ago.

The explosions, some of which officials said were suicide bomb attacks, led to an immediate clampdown, with the government declaring a curfew and blocking access to most major social media and messaging sites.

What happened?

The powerful blasts – six in quick succession and then two more hours later – wrought devastation, including at the capital’s well-known St Anthony’s Shrine, a historic Catholic Church.

The three hotels hit in the initial attacks were the Shangri-La Colombo, Kingsbury Hotel in Colombo and the Cinnamon Grand Colombo.

The first six explosions were all reported within a short period in the morning just as church services were starting. Hours later there were two further attacks in the outskirts of Colombo.

Police said at least three of the attacks were carried out by suicide bombers.

Who were the victims?

The death toll rose rapidly to more than 200 and was expected to rise further still. There were hundreds of people injured in hospitals.

There were five British citizens killed in the attack, Sri Lanka’s ministry of foreign affairs stated.

One Dutch person was among those killed, Dutch foreign minister Stef Blok said in a statement.

The Foreign Office said it was “urgently seeking” information from authorities in Sri Lanka.

A spokesman said: “We are aware of reports of a number of explosions in Sri Lanka, including Colombo, and we are urgently seeking information from the local authorities.

“British nationals in Sri Lanka should follow the instructions of the local authorities and check FCO travel advice for updates.”

Who was behind the attacks?

Seven suspects were arrested on Sunday afternoon, Sri Lanka’s defense minister said.

The nature of the blasts was not immediately clear and there were no immediate claims of responsibility.

But documents seen by AFP show that Sri Lanka’s police chief Pujuth Jayasundara issued an intelligence alert to top officers 10 days ago, warning that suicide bombers planned to hit “prominent churches”.

“A foreign intelligence agency has reported that the NTJ (National Thowheeth Jama’ath) is planning to carry out suicide attacks targeting prominent churches as well as the Indian high commission in Colombo,” the alert said.

The NTJ is a radical Muslim group in Sri Lanka that was linked last year to the vandalism of Buddhist statues.

How did Sri Lanka react?

The government beefed up security and imposed an immediate and indefinite curfew across the country. It also put in place a “temporary” ban on social media platforms “in order to prevent incorrect and wrong information being spread”.

Security at Colombo’s airport was also enhanced, according to Sri Lankan Airlines, which advised its passengers to arrive four hours before their flights. It added that passengers with passports and tickets will be able to reach the airport during the curfew.

Embassies in Sri Lanka have warned their citizens to shelter in place.

 


Islam party in Sweden – When have you hear of Jewish party or Christian party? Islam is a body POLITIC

April 19, 2019

Islam as it is today is not a FAITH alone.  Islam REQUIRES Sharia supremacy.  The Jihad is what moves Sharia into physical geographical areas.

 

Ex-Muslim warns Sweden that their country will be Islamic in 50 years, due to their catastrophic immigration policies

Mona Walter is a Somali woman who came to Sweden in the 90’s. In Somalia, she had never been religious, but in Sweden she was more or less forced to go to the mosque and wear a hijab.

After a couple of years she rebelled, left Islam and became an atheist. Eventually she came to believe in Jesus and converted to Christianity.

“For many years I have tried to get the Swedes to understand what the Muslim goal is – to take over your country. The first thing they will do is demand sharia courts, just like in the UK”, she says.

But the mainstream media does not want to listen to Mona Walter. They call her controversial and most Swedes turn away from her message, which they perceive as too frightening, according to the news blog Ingrid and Maria.

“Swedes are so convinced that Swedish laws will always apply in their country. But ask any Englishman if he 30 years ago would have believed that Britain would have legal sharia courts in 2019. No one would have thought it possible.”

“If Sweden recognises Sharia courts the Muslims will have new demands, like permission to rule their own enclaves without interference from the Swedish society. The end goal is for Sharia to rule all of Sweden.”

“If there, perchance, are any blond and blue-eyed Swedes left at that point it doesn’t matter – they will all be behind niqabs and burkas by that time”, Mona states.

 

“What Muslim politicians want is to change the laws so that Muslims in Sweden get permission to live under Sharia law. They want to rule their own areas without having to obey the secular laws of Sweden.”

“That is the long-term goal and Islam has lots of patience. As they say: “You have the watches, but we have the time””, she continues.

Before the election on September 9 last year most Swedish journalists were hysterical about the Nazi party Nordic Resistance Movement. They got 2 106 votes, clearly showing that Swedes are not interested in National socialism.

But no one seems scared by the fact that Sweden now have approximately one million Muslims in the country, of which many have infiltrated the political parties to promote their own interests. The question is when Muslims will form their own party in Sweden.

In Belgium the Islam Party has been very successful over the last few years, with political goals like making the country a “100 percent Islamic state” and introducing Sharia law. They say Belgium will have a Muslim majority in only 12 years.

https://trump-train.com/2019/04/13/ex-muslim-warns-sweden-that-their-country-will-be-islamic-in-50-years-due-to-their-catastrophic-immigration-policies/

 

 


Hilton and the Democrats (Ilan Omar) are hosting Islamic Terrorist CAIR

April 7, 2019

 

 

#Hilton Hotel Hosts A #Terrorist Fundraiser! SERIOUSLY!! https://youtu.be/xQvdqyLOcTM via @YouTube


Obama’s misstep – Israel’s ’67 borders would cripple defense and peace – Why suggest it then?

May 24, 2011

I believe that Obama’s goal is the Muslim goal primarily.  He is a Communist secondarily.  He’s an anti Colonialist, as defined by the African definition.  If one is anti – colonialist, then one is against the West and ALL that the WEST represents. This, indeed, means anti – Jewish and Christian, anti- Capitalist and anti – Socialist, this further means anti – Capitalist.  This leave Theocracy and nothing else.  THIS is OBAMA.

This also means that a Caliphate across the ME, would not be objectionable to him.  He is after all a TRUE son to Africa, not America.  Regardless of his birth place, he is African.  He’s SAID so.

Obama’s diversionary tactics

By Caroline B. Glick

What did the president wish to accomplish by purposely starting an ugly fight with the prime minister this past weekend? 

http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | As the Washington Post pointed out on Friday, US President Barack Obama purposely provoked the current fight with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. He knew full well that Netanyahu does not back the Palestinian formulation that negotiations with Israel must be based on the indefensible 1949 armistice lines, or what are wrongly referred to as the 1967 lines. In the days leading up to Obama’s speech last Thursday, Israel registered explicit, repeated requests that he not adopt the Palestinian position that negotiations should be based on those lines.

And so it was a stinging rebuke when Obama declared Thursday: “The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps.” According to the Washington Post, Obama wrote these lines of his speech himself and Netanyahu was informed of them just as he was scheduled to fly to the US on Thursday evening. Obama gave the speech while Netanyahu was in the air on his way to Washington to meet Obama the next morning. It is hard to think of a more stunning insult or a greater display of contempt for the leader of a US ally and fellow democracy than Obama’s actions last week. And it is obvious that Netanyahu had no choice but to react forcefully to Obama’s provocation.

The question is why would Obama act as he did? What did he wish to accomplish by purposely starting such an ugly fight with Netanyahu?

Probably the best way to figure out what Obama wished to accomplish is to consider what he did accomplish, because the two are undoubtedly related.

ON MAY 4, two weeks before Obama gave his speech, Fatah and Hamas signed a unity agreement. Hamas is the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. Like its fellow Brotherhood satellite al-Qaida, Hamas shares the Brotherhood’s ideology of global jihad, the destruction of Western civilization and the establishment of a global caliphate. Also like al-Qaida, it is a terrorist organization which, since its establishment in 1987 has murdered more than a thousand Israelis.

In 2005, Hamas subcontracted itself out to the Iranian regime. Since then, its men have been trained by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps and by Hezbollah. Hamas maintains operational ties with both outfits and receives most of its weapons and significant funding from Iran.

The agreement between Fatah and Hamas makes Hamas a partner in the leadership of the Palestinian Authority. It also paves the way for Hamas to win the planned Palestinian legislative and presidential elections that are scheduled for September just after the UN General Assembly is scheduled to endorse Palestinian statehood. It also sets the conditions for Hamas to integrate its forces and eventually take over the UStrained Palestinian army in Judea and Samaria and to join the PLO.

The Hamas-Fatah unity deal constitutes a complete repudiation of the assumptions informing Obama’s policies towards the Palestinians and Israel. Obama perceives the conflict as a direct consequence of two things: prior US administrations’ refusal to “put light” between the US and Israel, and Israel’s unwillingness to surrender all of the territory it took during the course of the 1967 Six Day War.

The Hamas-Fatah unity deal is indisputable proof that contrary to what Obama believes, the conflict has nothing to do with previous administrations’ support for Israel or with Israel’s size. It is instead entirely the consequence of the Palestinians’ rejection of Israel’s right to exist and their commitment to bringing about Israel’s destruction.

Forcing Israel into indefensible boundaries, (which as Netanyahu explained to Obama at the White House on Friday, “were not the boundaries of peace, they were the boundaries of repeated wars because the attack on Israel was so attractive for them,”), will not advance the cause of peace. It will advance the Palestinians’ goal of destroying Israel.

Obama had two options for contending with the Palestinian unity deal. He could pay attention to it or he could create a distraction in order to ignore it. If he paid attention to it, he would have been forced to disavow his policy of blaming his predecessors in the White House and Israel for the absence of peace. By creating a distraction he would be able to change the subject in a manner that would enable him to maintain those policies.

And so he picked a fight with Netanyahu. And by picking the fight, he created a distraction that has, in fact, changed the subject and enabled Obama to maintain his policies that have been wholly repudiated by the reality of the Palestinian unity deal.

By inserting the citation of the 1949 armistice lines into his speech, Obama made Israel’s size again the issue.

Political map of Israel with Westbank and Gaza, Golan Heights, and southern Lebanon

Political map of Israel with Westbank and Gaza, Golan Heights, and southern Lebanon

The Hamas-Fatah unity deal actually demonstrates that not only is Israel’s size not the cause of the conflict, it is the main reason that Israelis and Palestinians live in relative peace.

Israel’s control over Judea and Samaria and east Jerusalem, and with them, its ability to ward off invasion and attacks on its major cities is what has prevented wars. If Israel were more vulnerable, the de facto Palestinian terror state would not be weighing whether or not to begin a new terror war as its leaders from Fatah and Hamas are doing today. It would be waging a continuous campaign of terror whose clear aim is Israel’s destruction for again, as Netanyahu said the 1949 armistice lines make war an attractive option for Israel’s enemies.

BY PICKING a fight with Netanyahu, since Thursday, no one could have possibly noted this basic truth because the false issue of Israel’s control over these areas — that is, Israel’s size — has dominated the global discourse on the Middle East.

Obama would never have been able to create his diversion from the unwelcome fact of Palestinian duplicity and rejectionism, to imaginary problem with the size of Israel without the enthusiastic support given to him by the Israeli Left.

Led by opposition leader Tzipi Livni, the Israeli Left responded to Obama’s full-scale assault on Israel’s legitimacy by launching a full-scale partisan assault on Netanyahu. Rather than back Netanyahu as he fights for the country’s future, Livni called for him to resign and said that he was wrecking Israel’s ties with the US. In so doing, the Left provided crucial support for Obama’s move to maintain his phony anti- Israel paradigm for Middle East policymaking in the face of the Palestinian unity deal’s repudiation of that model.

The Left’s assault on Netanyahu is not the only way it has enabled Obama to maintain his pro-Palestinian policies in the face of the Palestinians’ embrace of terror and war. In his speech to AIPAC, Obama argued that Israel needs to surrender its defensible boundaries because the Palestinians are about to demographically challenge Israel’s Jewish majority.

As Obama put it, “The number of Palestinians living west of the Jordan River is growing rapidly and fundamentally reshaping the demographic realities of both Israel and the Palestinian territories. This will make it harder and harder — without a peace deal — to maintain Israel as both a Jewish state and a democratic state.”

The demographic time bomb story is a Palestinian fabrication. In 1997, the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics published a falsified Palestinian census that inflated Palestinian population data by 50 percent. The Israeli Left adopted this fake report as its own when Palestinian terrorism and political warfare convinced the majority of Israelis that it was unwise to give them any more land and that the peace process was a lie.

Since 2004, repeated, in-depth studies of Jewish and Arab birthrates and immigration/ emigration statistics west of the Jordan River undertaken by independent researchers have shown that the demographic time bomb is a dud. In January, the respected demographer Yaakov Faitelson published a study for the Institute of Zionist Strategies in which he definitively put to rest the tale of pending Jewish demographic doom.

As Faitelson demonstrated, Jewish and Arab birthrates are already converging west of the Jordan River at around three children per woman. And whereas the fertility rates of Israeli Arabs, Gazans and residents of Judea and Samaria are all trending downward, Jewish fertility is consistently rising. Moreover, whereas the Arabs are experiencing consistently negative net immigration rates, Jewish net immigration rates are positive and high.

Faitelson based his multiyear projections on current population numbers in which Jews comprise 58.6 percent of the population west of the Jordan River and Muslims constitute 38.7% of the overall population. Non-Jewish, non-Muslim minorities comprise the other 2.7%. Using assessment baselines for Jewish net immigration well below current averages, Faitelson showed that in the years to come, not only will Jews not lose our demographic majority. We will increase it.

Faitelson’s study, like the studies published since 2004 by the American-Israeli Demographic Research Group show that from a demographic perspective, Israel is in the same situation as many Western states today. Namely, it has to develop policies for dealing with an irredentist minority population.

There are many reasonable, liberal policies that Israel can adopt. These include applying the liberal Israeli legal code to Judea and Samaria and enforcing the laws of treason. It is hard to see why the best policy for Israel is to take some of that irredentist population off its books by establishing a terror state ruled by what Netanyahu rightly referred to as “the Israeli equivalent of al-Qaida” on its border.

ALL OF this brings us back to Hamas, terrorism, the Palestinian rejection of Israel’s right to exist, and Obama’s diversionary moves to facilitate his preservation of a Middle East policy based on a wholly false and discredited assessment of reality and the Israeli Left’s facilitation of Obama’s efforts.

When we realize what Obama is up to, we recognize as well what Netanyahu must do in response.

In his address before Congress on today and in all of his appearances in the coming weeks and months, Netanyahu should have one goal: to bring the focus of debate back where it belongs — on the Palestinians.

At every opportunity, Netanyahu needs to pound the message that the Palestinians’ commitment to Israel’s destruction is the sole reason that there is no peace.

As for the Israeli Left, it is high time that Netanyahu place the likes of Livni on the defensive. This involves two things. First, Netanyahu must attack the Left’s doomsday demographic projections that are without factual basis and are indeed antithetical to reality. As long as the demographic lie goes unchallenged by Netanyahu, the Left will continue to argue that by refusing to build a terror state on the outskirts of Tel Aviv, Netanyahu is endangering Israel.

Netanyahu deserves a lot of credit for standing up to Obama on Friday. He showed enormous courage in doing so. It was his finest hour to date and polls over the weekend show that the public appreciates and supports him for it. He must build on that success by putting the focus on the truth.

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0511/glick052411.php3

Egyptian spring – What it means to the Christians over there

May 22, 2011

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Egyptian spring – What it means to the Christia…, posted with vodpod

Obama should not be president – Israel is thrown under the bus by POTUS, AND the US is also case asunder by proxy

May 21, 2011
Vodpod videos no longer available.
Jonathan Schanzer: Hamas & Fatah, posted with vodpod

Jonathan Schanzer of the Jewish Policy Institute addressed the Center for Security Policy’s National Security Group on Capitol Hill. He is the author of Hamas vs. Fatah.

Obama’s Abandonment of America

Posted by Caroline Glick on May 20th, 2011 and filed under Daily MailerFrontPage.

Reprinted from carolineglick.com.

I was out sick yesterday so I was unable to write today’s column for theJerusalem Post. I did manage to watch President Obama’s speech on the Middle East yesterday evening. And I didn’t want to wait until next week to discuss it. After all, who knows what he’ll do by Tuesday?

Before we get into what the speech means for Israel, it is important to consider what it means for America.

Quite simply, Obama’s speech represents the effective renunciation of the US’s right to have and to pursue national interests. Consequently, his speech imperils the real interests that the US has in the region – first and foremost, the US’s interest in securing its national security.

Obama’s renunciation of the US national interests unfolded as follows:

First, Obama mentioned a number of core US interests in the region. In his view these are: “Countering terrorism and stopping the spread of nuclear weapons; securing the free flow of commerce, and safe-guarding the security of the region; standing up for Israel’s security and pursuing Arab-Israeli peace.”

Then he said, “Yet we must acknowledge that a strategy based solely upon the narrow pursuit of these interests will not fill an empty stomach or allow someone to speak their mind.”

While this is true enough, Obama went on to say that the Arabs have good reason to hate the US and that it is up to the US to put its national interests aside in the interest of making them like America. As he put it, “a failure to change our approach threatens a deepening spiral of division between the United States and Muslim communities.”

And you know what that means. If the US doesn’t end the “spiral of division,” (sounds sort of like “spiral of violence” doesn’t it?), then the Muslims will come after America. So the US better straighten up and fly right.

And how does it do that? Well, by courting the Muslim Brotherhood which spawned Al Qaeda, Hamas, Jamma Islamiya and a number of other terror groups and is allies with Hezbollah.

How do we know this is Obama’s plan? Because right after he said that the US needs to end the “spiral of division,” he recalled his speech in Egypt in June 2009 when he spoke at the Brotherhood controlled Al Azhar University and made sure that Brotherhood members were in the audience in a direct diplomatic assault on US ally Hosni Mubarak.

And of course, intimations of Obama’s plan to woo and appease the jihadists appear throughout the speech. For instance:

“There will be times when our short term interests do not align perfectly with our long term vision of the region.”

So US short term interests, like for instance preventing terrorist attacks against itself or its interests, will have to be sacrificed for the greater good of bringing the Muslim Brotherhood to power in democratic elections.

And he also said that the US will “support the governments that will be elected later this year” in Egypt and Tunisia. But why would the US support governments controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood? They are poised to control the elected government in Egypt and are the ticket to beat in Tunisia as well.

Then there is the way Obama abandoned US allies Yemen and Bahrain in order to show the US’s lack of hypocrisy. As he presented it, the US will not demand from its enemies Syria and Iran that which it doesn’t demand from its friends.

While this sounds fair, it is anything but fair. The fact is that if you don’t distinguish between your allies and your enemies then you betray your allies and side with your enemies. Bahrain and Yemen need US support to survive. Iran and Syria do not. So when he removes US support from the former, his action redounds to the direct benefit of the latter.

P Photo/US Navy, Kurt Eischen The USS New Orleans makes its way down the Mississippi River on March 5, 2007. The U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet says two of its vessels -- a submarine, the USS Hartford and an amphibious ship, the USS New Orleans -- collided in the Strait of Hormuz between Iran and the Arabian peninsula early Friday.

Beyond his abandonment of Bahrain and Yemen, in claiming that the US mustn’t distinguish between its allies and its foes, Obama made clear that he has renounced the US’s right to have and pursue national interests. If you can’t favor your allies against your enemies then you cannot defend your national interests. And if you cannot defend your national interests then you renounce your right to have them.

As for Iran, in his speech, Obama effectively abandoned the pursuit of the US’s core interest of preventing nuclear proliferation. All he had to say about Iran’s openly genocidal nuclear program is, “Our opposition to Iran’s intolerance – as well as its illicit nuclear program, and its sponsorship of terror – is well known.”

Well so is my opposition to all of that, and so is yours. But unlike us, Obama is supposed to do something about it. And by putting the gravest threat the US presently faces from the Middle East in the passive voice, he made clear that actually, the US isn’t going to do anything about it.

May 11, 2011

Palestinian State in September? Hamas Says No Way

http://www.viciousbabushka.com/2011/05/palestinian-state-in-september-hamas-says-no-way.html

Al-zahar

Palestinian Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar walks on an Israeli flag while taking part in a rally to mark the upcoming 23rd anniversary since the group's foundation, in Gaza city, Thursday, Dec. 9, 2010. The arabic text reads: "For sure will be destroyed. Israel". AP Photo.

Gaza rulers say September most likely too soon to declare Palestinian independence, as too many questions pertaining to state’s viability remain unanswered

Senior Hamas official Mahmoud al-Zahar said Wednesday that the Islamist movement was somewhat skeptical as to the viability of Fatah’s September-bound bid for statehood.

Speaking with the Palestinian Ma’an News Agency, al-Zahar said that “all the talk of a Palestinian state is… an attempt to pacify us.”

He further wondered as to the nature of the Palestinian state, should it be declared in several months’ time: “Where is the land for this state? Are those living in the West Bank and Gaza to be its citizens? What will be the fate of the five million Palestinians in the diaspora? Are we to give up the right of return?”

He also said that anyone who thinks that a Palestinian state would be accepted by the international community without it recognizing Israel first, “does not understand the (political) landscape.”

Hamas, he said, is willing to accept a Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders, but will maintain its refusal to recognize Israel, since a formal recognition of Israel would “cancel the right of the next generations to liberate the lands.”

Read more at YNet.

Palestinians never miss an opportunity.

In short, every American who is concerned about the security of the United States should be livid. The US President just abandoned his responsibility to defend the country and its interests in the interest of coddling the US’s worst enemies.

AS FOR ISRAEL, in a way, Obama did Israel a favor by giving this speech. By abandoning even a semblance of friendliness, he has told us that we have nothing whatsoever to gain by trying to make him like us. Obama didn’t even say that he would oppose the Palestinians’ plan to get the UN Security Council to pass a resolution in support for Palestinian independence. All he said was that it is a dumb idea.

Obama sided with Hamas against Israel by acting as though its partnership with Fatah is just a little problem that has to be sorted out to reassure the paranoid Jews. Or as he put it, “the recent announcement of an agreement between Fatah and Hamas raises profound and legitimate questions for Israel.”

Hamas is a jihadist movement dedicated to the annihilation of the Jewish people, and the establishment of a global caliphate. It’s in their charter. And all Obama said of the movement that has now taken over the Palestinian Authority was, “Palestinian leaders will not achieve peace or prosperity if Hamas insists on a path of terror and rejection.”

Irrelevant and untrue.

It is irrelevant because obviously the Palestinians don’t want peace. That’s why they just formed a government dedicated to Israel’s destruction.

As for being untrue, Obama’s speech makes clear that they have no reason to fear a loss of prosperity. After all, by failing to mention that US law bars the US government from funding an entity which includes Hamas, he made clear that the US will continue to bankroll the Hamas-controlled Palestinian Authority. So too, the EU will continue to join the US in giving them billions for bombs and patronage jobs. The Palestinians have nothing to worry about. They will continue to be rewarded regardless of what they do.

Then of course there are all the hostile, hateful details of the speech:

He said Israel has to concede its right to defensible borders as a precondition for negotiations;

He didn’t say he opposes the Palestinian demand for open immigration of millions of foreign Arabs into Israel;

He again ignored Bush’s 2004 letter to Sharon opposing a return to the 1949 armistice lines, supporting the large settlements, defensible borders and opposing mass Arab immigration into Israel;

He said he was leaving Jerusalem out but actually brought it in by calling for an Israeli retreat to the 1949 lines;

He called for Israel to be cut in two when he called for the Palestinians state to be contiguous;

He called for Israel to withdraw from the Jordan Valley – without which it is powerless against invasion – by saying that the Palestinian State will have an international border with Jordan.

Conceptually and substantively, Obama abandoned the US alliance with Israel. The rest of his words – security arrangements, demilitarized Palestinian state and the rest of it – were nothing more than filler to please empty-headed liberal Jews in America so they can feel comfortable signing checks for him again.

Indeed, even his seemingly pro-Israel call for security arrangements in a final peace deal involved sticking it to Israel. Obama said, “The full and phased withdrawal of Israeli military forces should be coordinated with the assumption of Palestinian security responsibility in a sovereign, non-militarized state.”

What does that mean “with the assumption of Palestinian security responsibility?”

It means we have to assume everything will be terrific.

All of this means is that if Prime Minister Netanyahu was planning to be nice to Obama, and pretend that everything is terrific with the administration, he should just forget about it. He needn’t attack Obama. Let the Republicans do that.

But both in his speech to AIPAC and his address to Congress, he should very forthrightly tell the truth about the nature of the populist movements in the Middle East, the danger of a nuclear Iran, the Palestinians’ commitment to Israel’s destruction; the lie of the so-called peace process; the importance of standing by allies; and the critical importance of a strong Israel to US national security.

He has nothing to gain and everything to lose by playing by the rules that Obama is trying to set for him.

http://frontpagemag.com/2011/05/20/obamas-abandonment-of-america/


Obama should not be President – Obama is setting Israel up for a WAR and the same logic would lead to a WAR in the US – He is setting a DANGEROUS precedent

May 21, 2011

This President is dangerous to the US.  The logic that started the war in Libya has nothing to do with Gadhafi, per se.  It has to do with setting the stage.  This president is not a leader.  He IS an actor.  The stage is being prepared by others.  He is only the lead role at the moment.  And this is WHY he is dangerous.  Nothing is REAL.  It’s all staged.  No one that is a REAL player gets hurt, according to the globalists.

I’m convinced that there is a fracturing in the Globalists clique.  Some of them are Global Capitalists and others are Global Communists.  There is an ideological strife a foot. The reason I believe that is because there are leaks of information surfacing that would otherwise NOT be there.

Be that as it may, the other agents in play are the Muslims.  They are outmaneuvering the Globalists on some fronts and the Globalists are making hasty errors in judgement.  They are forced to move more quickly, but some have already made deals with the other side.  Those, I believe, are the Capitalists, because they have only one goal, money, but not money in that they have paper or stuff like that, but money in terms of true wealth and that is Control driven.  They have to get CONTROL of the commonly accepted currency, because in the end, that is their only truest commodity.

So, how does that correlate to Gadhafi and how does that set the stage for a war that the US be subjected to?

It’s the Logic.  The UN is the Global GUN.  The reason that Gadhafi was attacked is to begin to set the precedent and NO other reason.  The next casualty will be potentially Syria, in my opinion.  The following, and this may not occur until AFTER the election, is Israel.  And the reasoning is nice outlined below, in Gaffeney’s article.  However, I would take it a step farther.  The same situation is setting itself up here too, in the US.  The next casualty, may indeed be, the US.  Hezbollah and Hamas have set up shop in South America and Mexico.  They are taking over the cartels.  They got their FEET in the door by selling weapons and training the Cartels.  Now, they are tenured within those “armies.”  The same situation is setting itself up.  What difference is there in logic?  It is the same.  The Palestinian’s cry that they were removed from their land.  The Mexicans cry the same.  US children are being taught toward sedition and outright treason of their own country by “teachers” whose agenda is to overthrow the state that they teach.  Even the methods are the same between the Palestinians and what they are doing to Israel and what the “Mexican’s”  are doing to the US.   The similarities should not go unnoticed.  The fish ALWAYS stinks from the HEAD.

<thanks to Mandy for the Gaffney article.>

I would also like to mention that Obama sitting as the head of the UN security council is a direct violation of the nobility clause in Article 9 of the US CONSTITUTION.

The Senate Armed Services Committee should convene immediately to prevent Obama from using our people in his and the NWO’s war. The military should stand down.

The ATF who’s under the Homeland security, which the CIA is also under, is headed by a CZAR.  This agency is NOT steered by an elected official.  This is an appointment by the PRESIDENT.  These CZAR headed agencies have taken control of legitimate agencies and are run by executive fiat.  This is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.  How is it that they have been allowed these POWERS?  These agencies have seized control of America.  They overrule the Constitutional limitations of power.

Communist China may be bad, but America is going to be much worse, if this continues unchecked.

The Gadhafi precedent: Could attack on Libya set the stage for action against Israel?

By Frank J. Gaffney, Jr.

http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | There are many reasons to be worried about the bridge-leap the Obama administration has just undertaken in its war with Col. Moammar Gadhafi. How it will all end is just one of them.

Particularly concerning is the prospect that what we might call the Gadhafi precedent will be used in the not-too-distant future to justify and threaten the use of U.S. military forces against an American ally: Israel.

Here’s how such a seemingly impossible scenario might eventuate:

It begins with the Palestinian Authority seeking a United Nations Security Council resolution that would recognize its unilateral declaration of statehood. Three top female officials in the Obama administration reprise roles they played in the council’s recent action on Libya: U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice, a vehement critic of Israel, urges that the United States support (or at least not veto) the Palestinians’ gambit. She is supported by the senior director for multilateral affairs at the National Security Council, Samantha Power, who in the past argued for landing a “mammoth force” of American troops to protect the Palestinians from Israel. Ditto Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, whose unalloyed sympathy for the Palestinian cause dates back at least to her days as first lady.

This resolution enjoys the support of the other four veto-wielding Security Council members – Russia, China, Britain and France – as well as all of the other nonpermanent members except India, which joins the United States in abstaining. As a result, it is adopted with overwhelming support from what is known as the “international community.”

With a stroke of the U.N.’s collective pen, substantial numbers of Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and Israeli citizens find themselves on the wrong side of internationally recognized borders. The Palestinian Authority (PA) insists on its long-standing position: The sovereign territory of Palestine must be rid of all Jews.

The Israeli government refuses to evacuate the oft-condemned “settlements” now on Palestinian land or to remove the IDF personnel, checkpoints and facilities rightly seen as vital to protecting their inhabitants and, for that matter, the Jewish state itself.

Hamas and Fatah bury the hatchet (temporarily), forging a united front and promising democratic elections in the new Palestine. There, as in Gaza – and probably elsewhere in the wake of the so-called “Arab awakening” – the winner likely will be the Muslim Brotherhood, whose Palestinian franchise is Hamas.


The unified Palestinian proto-government then seeks international help to “liberate” its land. As with the Gadhafi precedent, the first to act is the Arab League. Its members unanimously endorse the use of force to protect the “Palestinian people” and end the occupation of the West Bank by the Israelis.

Turkey, which is still a NATO ally despite its ever-more-aggressive embrace of Islamism, is joined by Britain and France – two European nations increasingly hostile to Israel – in applauding this initiative in the interest of promoting “peace.” They call on the U.N. Security Council to authorize such steps as might be necessary to enforce the Arab League’s bidding.

Once again, Team Obama’s leading ladies – Mrs. Clinton, Ms. Power and Ms. Rice – align to support the “will of the international community.” They exemplify and are prepared to enforce the president’s willingness to subordinate U.S. sovereignty to the dictates of transnationalism and his personal hostility toward Israel. The concerns of Mr. Obama’s political advisers about alienating Jewish voters on the eve of the 2012 election are trumped by presidential sympathy for the Palestinian right to a homeland.

Accordingly, hard as it may be to believe given the United States’ long-standing role as Israel’s principal ally and protector, Mr. Obama acts in accordance with the Gadhafi precedent. He warns Israel that it must take steps immediately to dismantle its unwanted presence inside the internationally recognized state of Palestine lest it face the sort of U.S.- enabled “coalition” military measures now under way in Libya. In this case, they would be aimed at neutralizing IDF forces on the West Bank – and beyond, if necessary – in order to fulfill the “will of the international community.”

Of course, such steps would not result in the ostensibly desired endgame, namely “two states living side by side in peace and security.” If the current attack on Libya entails the distinct possibility of unintended (or at least unforeseen) consequences, application of the Gadhafi precedent to Israel seems certain to produce a very different outcome from the two-state “solution”: Under present and foreseeable circumstances, it will unleash a new regional war, with possible worldwide repercussions.

At the moment, it seems unlikely that the first application in Libya of the Gadhafi precedent will have results consistent with U.S. interests. Even if a positive outcome somehow is forthcoming there, should Mr. Obama and his anti-Israel troika of female advisers be allowed, based on that precedent, to realize the foregoing hypothetical scenario, they surely would precipitate a new international conflagration, one fraught with truly horrific repercussions – for Israel, the United States and freedom-loving people elsewhere.

A Congress that was effectively sidelined by Team Obama in the current crisis had better engage fully, decisively and quickly if it is to head off such a disastrous reprise.

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/gaffney032211.php3

– Here’s another article as food for thought –

WHY THE FRAMERS INCLUDED THE “NATURAL BORN CITIZEN” CLAUSE

by Tom Deacon


The greatest defeat of the American Revolution was the fall of Charleston, SC to the British in 1780

(May 16, 2010) — Section 1 ofArticle II of the United States Constitution sets forth the eligibility requirements for serving as President of the United States:

No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

Try to understand this: At the time of the adoption of the Constitution there were no “natural born Citizens” (no country yet = no citizens, period?), so yes, the Founders wrote in a “grandfather” clause to allow those present (already born) at the time the Constitution was signed to qualify to be president.  However, if you weren’t born yet when the Constitution was adopted (that includes Obama), then you had to be a “natural born Citizen,” meaning both parents must be U.S. citizens. It is amazing how tough this is for some people to understand. The reason Congress “investigated” McCain was because he was not born in the USA. They concluded in their report that that was OK, because his “parents” (notice the plural form of “parents”) were both U.S. Citizens.  This is not true for Obama, and he clearly was not held to the same standard.

The Constitution says you must be a natural born Citizen, or a citizen at the time the Constitution was adopted. The Founders wanted the president to be a natural born Citizen, but they recognized that there were NO natural born Citizens until after the Constitution was adopted. They didn’t know that 200+ years from the signing, the education system would have dumbed down the USA’s population to the point that understanding it was an endangered ability.

Some may believe the natural born Citizen clause isn’t fair. The Founders of our nation believed it was the right thing to do because they had just fought a war with those who had allegiance to a country other than the one they were fighting to create….that country was the one they left to come to America, namely, England.  The Founders did not want to elect a newborn to the office of the president, nor did they want to wait 35 years for a natural born Citizen to meet the age requirement to be president. So they grandfathered themselves in with the statement “or a Citizen at the time of the adoption of the Constitution.” No doubt they trusted themselves and their children who were born prior to the signing of the Constitution to be loyal only to the USA, fighting a war with England would have had that effect on them.

Obama is the “poster child’ who proves once again that the wisdom of America’s Founders was impeccable.

You can make up excuses till the earth fries from global warming, but you can’t change the truth.

http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/05/16/note-to-obama-supporters-even-a-birth-in-hawaii-is-not-enough/


%d bloggers like this: