As if you didn’t need another excuse to not vote for Barack Obama, here comes a wonderful one. According to the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), 68% of Muslims polled will vote for Obama. There are 25% still undecided, but it’s doubtful that particular group will end up swaying toward Romney.
Of course, this should come as no surprise to anyone. The rest of the numbers from CAIR’s poll are slightly interesting, but all in all, this poll is yet another indication of the disconnect between this administration, and reality. CAIR has been repeatedly mentioned in the context of assisting, or at the very least, sympathizing with radical Muslims worldwide. In spite of this poll claiming that 55% of their respondents consider themselves “moderate”, one must take that with a grain of salt. Is that a statement of political thinking, or religious belief, or both? And, as it’s been posited before, is there really any such thing as a moderate Muslim? Of course there are many individuals out there that follow the tenets of Islam, and claim to be opposed to radicals in their midst. However, organized groups of moderate Muslims speaking against violence in the name of their faith are few and far between.
Before any of the conservative fringe starts the whole “Obama is a Muslim” meme, it is wise to think twice. Bluntly, it’s old, crazy, and has done absolutely nothing for the conservative cause. However, pointing out that the necessarily small group that CAIR has polled overwhelmingly support Obama is just fine. And it is meaningful, especially given the events that have been unfolding in the Middle East and North Africa. It is appropriate to assume that Muslims in America relatively mirror their counterparts in that region when it comes to who they would like to see in the White House after this election. Liberals have been trying to play rhetorical games with the now infamous conservative refrain about the “Apology Tour” in 2009. For the record, it was never about the exact words Obama used, but the tone in every speech and meeting with world leaders. Muslims interpreted that as weakness, and there is no doubt that they would prefer to have a weak man in the White House, as opposed to a strong one. We should have learned by now that when offered an olive branch, Islamic radicals offer a sword in return. And moderate Muslims stand by in silence, not wanting to have that sword turned on them. As for CAIR, like the Muslim Brotherhood, they just stand by and watch as the Islamic terrorists attack.
Muslim groups are in a frenzy over the measure signed by Kansas Governor Sam Brownback which is meant to stop the state’s courts and government agencies from making decisions based on foreign legal codes. Even though Islamic Sharia Law would most likely fall under the definition of the measure, it is not specifically aimed at it. It instead states that no rulings from administrative agencies or state tribunals can be based on any legal system or foreign law that contradicts the rights of states and the U.S. Constitution.
“This bill should provide protection for Kansas citizens from the application of foreign laws,” said Stephen Gele, spokesman for the American Public Policy Alliance, a Michigan group promoting model legislation similar to the new Kansas law. “The bill does not read, in any way, to be discriminatory against any religion.” According to the Associated Press. However, the alliance website does state that it wants to protect Americans’ freedoms from foreign laws and legal doctrines, “especially Islamic Shariah Law.”
Muslims organizations including the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) claim they will most likely challenge the law in court because supporters of the law often speak concern about Sharia law specifically. They argue the law could cause discrimination. “If he claims it has nothing to do with Shariah or Islamic law or Muslims, then he wasn’t paying attention.” CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper said of Governor Brownback.
Although there are no known cases of Kansas courts deferring to Sharia law, it would appear they don’t want it to become an issue. There is a pending case were a man is attempting to divorce his wife and seeing the property be divided in accordance with Sharia law.
Much has already been said by conservatives about Obama’s apparent disdain for following the Constitution, let alone protecting it. So, it is not surprising to find out that there are no particularly vocal statements against the implementation of sharia law, in any form, in the United States coming from the White House. In fact, it is fair to say that Obama is far more concerned with extending an open hand to Islam, as opposed to lifting a finger to stop it.
Richard Loyal French (CC)
This administration’s foreign policy on Islam is virtually non-existent, in the sense that it is largely handled on a nation by nation basis, as opposed to viewing the Islamic world as a single ideological entity. That is probably part of the reason why one needs to stick with media sources outside the mainstream to find out about things like suicide bomber auctions in Saudi Arabia. But, perhaps the primary reason lies in the left-wing’s belief that Islam – the moderate variety – is not a threat to the U.S.
While many on the right are harping on Obama’s publicity biography from the 1990’s, a little story probably slipped by unnoticed. Kansas is considering outlawing the recognition of sharia law, and CAIR is not happy about that. They have asked the governor of Kansas to not sign that law. It makes perfect sense that this organization should involve itself in this, because part of its mission is to protect the rights of Muslims to observe their faith. The left would be very happy if everyone would just sit back, and let CAIR do its job, too.
It is discrimination, according to the left and Obama, to prevent Muslims from freely observing their faith. Sharia law is part and parcel with that, so there should be no objections to it being legally recognized in this country. Of course the Thomas More Law Center would disagree with that. They have dedicated a great deal of time and effort to the task of protecting the rights of Americans, in particular, against the imposition of sharia law in this country. They have a problem with non-Muslim children being forced to learn the ways of Islam, and to accept those ideological tenets, for one example.
The leftist love affair with Islam, and in particular, CAIR, only serves to depict our nation as weak. In the name of being politically correct, the administration turns a blind eye to that organization, as it “demonizes” our country on Iranian television. It is no wonder that the Obama administration had to leave nuclear negotiations with Iran to Russia. The president has declared the end of the war on terror, and has heralded a new era of friendship with the Islamic world. Obama, yet again, fails to notice that the very people he is attempting to engage with peacefully are quietly getting what they wanted all along – they are engaged in stealth jihad, using our own courts against us when they can. And Obama is doing nothing to stop it.
President Barack Obama knows better than Congress what the U.S. needs to do. In spite of any objections from the Hill, our country is sending $1.5 billion in aid to Egypt. While there’s been many comments bandied about on the right about the dangers of the Muslim Brotherhood, Obama’s reply has been to deny any potential problems with the organization. Well, if he does have any doubts, sending billions of dollars to them was no way to show it.
Ben Hammersley (CC)
When considering the pros and cons of giving aid to any government that is controlled entirely or in part by Islamic organizations, it is best to consider the current and past situations that have been faced in these relationships. The U.S. has had a tumultuous history, at best, when it comes to dabbling in the Islamic world. Whether one considers our part in the creation of Israel, or the wars in Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan, since the end of World War II, we haven’t been very lucky in our involvements. We backed Saddam Hussein in his war against Iran, only to end up battling him later – twice. And there is a school of thought out there that we made Osama bin Laden what he was with our initial involvement in Afghanistan in the 1980’s.
Obama is not a Muslim, and it shows in how he approaches foreign policy. He suffers from the same mental disconnect that most Westerners have when it comes to dealing with followers of Islam. It is difficult for him to comprehend why the killing of 16 civilians by one soldier in Afghanistan is less offensive to Muslims than the accidental burning of copies of the Koran. It is the inverse of Christianity, that places such a great value on human life, and is extremely difficult for many Americans to comprehend fully. This disconnect is the reason why it is foolhardy to offer any degree of support to any organization that is even remotely associated with known Islamic terrorist organizations.
While it is tempting to give in to the demands of law-abiding citizens here in America that claim there is a problem here with Islamophobia, that is also a questionable choice, at best. Either the definition of “hate” is different for followers of Islam, or there is already a major problem with our institutions catering to the whims of Islamic organizations. The fact that faith is the most sacred part of life for a follower of Islam controls their world view. Even the most minor statement against their faith can be worse than anything Rush Limbaugh and Howard Stern together could manage against anyone else. CAIR-PA, the Pennsylvania affiliate of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, has been under scrutiny for having too close a relationship to an institution charged with giving reports of discrimination and bias in the Commonwealth. The research so far is indicating that CAIR-PA screams foul over citizens exercising their right to free speech, not discriminatory or biased behavior. There is no law stating that people must like everyone else. It is also not illegal to state those feelings. But, to CAIR-PA, saying anything against their faith is considered biased – Islamophobia or hate speech. When it comes to CAIR-PA members speaking about others, that’s another story.
At the same time, CAIR-PA is guilty of the unreflective prejudice it condemns, yet it remains a member of the Inter-Agency Task Force. Referring to a 2010 profanity-filled letter sent to the imam of the Muslim Association of Lehigh Valley (BI #24788), CAIR-PA’s Khawaja wrote: “If [the purported sender’s] name is actually Joe Martin, the offender is most likely white.” When discussing the World of Islam book series previously mentioned, CAIR described the publishing partner, the Foreign Policy Research Institute, as “a right-wing, pro-war think tank.” Referring to the Peter King congressional hearings, Khawaja tweeted: “If ur minority and havent figured that GOP is bastion of racism and bigotry, get ur head out of ur ass.” Apparently, malicious characterizations give offense only when the receiving end is an Islamist organization.
And CAIR and CAIR-PA are off-shoots of the Muslim Brotherhood – the organization that will arguably benefit the most from the aid Obama is sending to Egypt. No doubt they will happily spend that money. But if Obama expects anything in return for it diplomatically, he more than likely will be very disappointed – if CAIR-PA’s behavior is any indicator.
NEW YORK, Feb. 21, 2012 /PRNewswire/ — The producers of the critically-acclaimed documentary, The Third Jihad: Radical Islam’s Vision for America, have produced a new short video exposing the recent New York Times and Council of American Islamic Relations (CAIR) campaign to smear The Third Jihad.
The Third Jihad was recently the subject of debate when the New York Times rehashed a year-old story that the New York Police Department (NYPD) was using the film in its counter-terrorism training program.
Anatomy of a Smear documents the blatant inaccuracies, misquotes, omissions and innuendos of New York Times articles and editorials aimed at discrediting The Third Jihad as “hateful” and Islamophobic.
“Claims that The Third Jihad is an anti-Islam film are ignorant and misinformed,” says Raphael Shore, Producer of The Third Jihad. “Those that have blasted the film are attempting to stifle an important debate about the internal state of the Muslim community in America, and whether politicized Islam and indoctrination pose tangible security threats,” Shore said.
The Third Jihad, narrated by devout Muslim and US Navy veteran Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, opens with the following frame in bold letters for all viewers to read: “This is not a film about Islam. It is about the threat of radical Islam. Only a small percentage of the world’s 1.3 billion Muslims are radical.”
The new video, Anatomy of a Smear demonstrates how the New York Times and CAIR campaign is a real-time example of cultural jihad, a strategy to use the banner of political correctness to manipulate American institutions and culture, the very subject of The Third Jihad.
As part of the campaign, CAIR called for the resignation of NYPD commissioner Raymond Kelly, one of many high-level interviewees featured in the film. The Brennan Center for Justice, who is cited as a source by the Times then published its own opinion piece calling for an independent inspector general to “police the NYPD.”
CAIR itself has established terror ties, as documented in The Third Jihad, and was designated by the U.S. Justice Department as an unindicted co-conspirator/joint-venturer in the Holy Land Foundation Trial, the largest terror-funding trial in America’s history.
The Third Jihad has received significant praise outside of the New York Times articles, including by American Muslim leaders.
A recent statement by the American Islamic Leadership Council reads, “We have viewed The Third Jihad, and regard the information presented therein to be both factually accurate, and important for our fellow Muslim and non-Muslim citizens to understand, debate and address. The Third Jihad explicitly distinguishes between the religion of Islam, and the highly politicized ideology of religious hatred, supremacy and violence characteristic of political Islam, often referred to as ‘Islamism.'”
Rudy Giuliani called the film, “a wake up call for America.”
“It is imperative that The Third Jihad reaches a mass audience in the U.S. so that the urgency of this threat becomes clear to the American public,” said US Rep. Ros-Lehtinen (FL), Chairwoman of the House Foreign Relations Committee.
Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl (AZ) said, “The Third Jihad alerts Americans to the dangers of Islamic radicalization in our own communities. Zuhdi Jasser is sounding the alarm before it is too late.”
“We hope that the general public will consider the sensitive content in the film, and will not simply accept the baseless innuendos being made in the media. We invite the general public to watch and judge the documentary for themselves,” Shore said.
The U S 10th Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld a ruling by U S District Court Judge Vicki Miles-LeGrange that Oklahoma State Question 755, passed on November 2, 2010, is unconstitutional. The State Question was passed by 70% of the voters of the State of Oklahoma to ban the use of Shari Law, International Law, or the laws of any foreign country in the state.
The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) filed a lawsuit saying the question discriminated against Muslims in Oklahoma. In the original filing, CAIR’s Oklahoma director called the bill a case of “anti-Muslim bigotry”.
“This is an important reminder that the Constitution is the last line of defense against a rising tide of anti-Muslim bigotry in our society, and we are pleased that the appeals court recognized that fact,” said Muneer Awad. “We are also hopeful that this decision serves as a reminder to politicians wishing to score political points through fear-mongering and bigotry.”
The 10th Circuit agreed with Judge Miles-LeGrange and upheld her ruling in an opinion released on January 10, 2012.
Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt said that states have the right to establish their own court systems and have a say in which sets of laws are followed.
“With the decision by the U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals to uphold a temporary stay of State Question 755, the case will return to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma to determine its constitutionality,” Attorney General Scott Pruitt said. “My office will continue to defend the state in this matter and proceed with the merits of the case.”
I received an e-mail a few days ago with a story about a lady who owns a bakery in Des Moines, Iowa. She declined to bake a wedding cake for two lesbians, which has resulted in calls for a boycott, and the usual name calling, from homosexual groups. Victoria Childress, owner of Victoria’s Cake Cottage told the couple that she is a Christian and would not violate her Christian beliefs to provide them with a cake. When interviewed about the incident, Ms. Childress said:
“I was straight-forward with them and explained that I’m a Christian and that I have very strong convictions. I chose to be honest about it. They said they appreciated it and left. That was all that was said.”
Childress said her decision had nothing to do with discrimination or the lesbian couple, and stressed this fact by saying:
“It doesn’t have anything to do with them – it was about my convictions. They can get their cake anywhere.”
Childress said money is not the issue, adding:
“I’m being attacked because of my beliefs – my convictions to their lifestyle. I was not rude. I was not condescending. It was matter-of-fact. I told them, ‘I’m sorry, I just can’t do that.’”
The lesbian pair released a statement calling the Christian cake baker a “bigot” and are contemplating filing a discrimination lawsuit against Ms. Childress. More on the discrimination issue later in this piece. The couple ran to the media and started calling a citizen, who I thought had freedom of choice also, a bigot. They threaten legal action, and make a big scene because someone doesn’t want to bake them a wedding cake. How thin skinned can anyone get? They are offended? I am offended that they think they have a right to demand service from any business owner. I am offended that they think a Christian doesn’t have a right to decide who to do business with. If someone doesn’t want my business I just take it elsewhere.
Unfortunately, this reaction is typical of special interest groups, any special interest group. It seems everyone has a “right” to their views, and to be pandered to, except Christians. I wonder what would happen if these same women walked into a bakery owned by a Muslim. Would the owner bake them a cake or chase them out of the shop with a barrage of rocks, or simply hang them for their blasphemy? Stoning, in case you aren’t aware, is one of the penalties for homosexuality in the Muslim world. Hanging also seems to be a popular punishment.
Would these women go screeching to the media about Muslim bias against their “lifestyle”? If they did complain, would anyone make a big fuss or would they just keep out of it for fear of “offending” a Muslim business owner? I hope their next stop is at a bakery owned by a Muslim. I would really like to see the result of that visit. That situation would put the media and all of the “minority” groups in a tizzy. Who would they side with?
Where does this nonsense stop? Why is it that everyone has to bow down to the homosexual lifestyle, or Islam, or the NAACP, or any other “minority” group? Does freedom only apply to those with “issues”? I always thought freedom applies to all of us. Does “diversity” of thought include the thoughts of Christians? Does “diversity” of expression include Christians? Does “freedom of speech” include Christians? Apparently not!!!!!
I am also a Christian who believes homosexuality or heterosexual relations outside of marriage to be wrong. Does being against heterosexual couples living together and engaging in sexual activity outside of marriage make me a bigot also? What does one call that bigotry, heterophobia? Do Christians not have a right to live according to their firmly held religious beliefs? We are certainly expected, by Muslims and many judges and politicians, to allow Muslims to practice their religious beliefs and customs, even the parts that call for stoning of adulterers or honor killings.
Like most other Christians, including Victoria Childress, I don’t condemn others for their lifestyles, I simply disagree with them. Ms. Childress didn’t say anything tawdry about the couple, according to the article. Ms. Childress just expressed her views politely and let it go at that. Also mentioned in the article was a comment from another bakery owner who would be more than happy to bake the cake. Why is this a problem? It isn’t like these two can’t get a cake anywhere, others are happy to have their business.
Read the next couple of paragraphs very carefully and think about the point they make. Find the irrationality of those calling for a boycott of Victoria’s Cake Cottage. As far as a boycott, what will that accomplish? Ms. Childress seems to be boycotting homosexuals, yet that is unlawful according to homosexual activists. Homosexuals are going to boycott a business that doesn’t want their business. Does anyone besides me see the irony in this? I really can’t help but chuckle at this point.
If it is permissible for homosexuals to boycott Victoria’s Cake Cottage why isn’t it permissible for her to boycott homosexuals? Isn’t a boycott a boycott? Shouldn’t this cut both ways? Aren’t these homosexual groups practicing discrimination against Victoria’s Cake Cottage? They claim she is discriminating against them so they turn around and call for a boycott. If they don’t boycott every bakery equally isn’t that the definition of discrimination?
One of the biggest problems faced by this nation today is this very attitude of “tolerance”. We are told we must accept illegal aliens, who have a “right” to be here. We are told we must accept Islam and Sharia Law, because Muslims have “rights”. Christians are told we must accept a lifestyle that goes against our beliefs because these people have “rights”. I find it problematic that the “tolerance boat”, built by Christians who came here looking for freedom of religion, no longer has room for the Christians who built it. What about the rights of Christians to live our lives according to our beliefs? What about our “rights”?
If we are to be a truly tolerant society the tolerance has to go both ways, and it currently does not. If true tolerance were to be enforced, illegal aliens would be required to understand and “tolerate” my views about immigration. In a truly tolerant society homosexuals would be required to “tolerate” the fact that Ms. Childress and I disagree with their lifestyle and would rather they take their business elsewhere. A truly “tolerant” society would say the Congressional Black Caucus is required to admit white members of Congress. Muslims, in a truly “tolerant” society, would be required to accept that America has a Constitution and that Sharia law is unacceptable as it violates nearly every tenet of that Constitution. Muslims would have to “tolerate” our Constitution, and its Judeo-Christian basis, in a truly tolerant society.
If tolerance is not a two way street then it isn’t tolerance it is bullying. Whites are bullied by Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson on a regular basis. Christians are bullied by CAIR and homosexuals, among other special interest groups. American citizens are bullied by the ACLU, LaRaza and like organizations. Proponents of Right to Work are bullied by unions every day. Tolerance must be equal or it isn’t tolerance. If Victoria Childress and others like her are not allowed to live their lives according to their beliefs then tolerance isn’t anything other than brute force being used against someone these groups disagree with. Isn’t that the definition of bullying? Isn’t that the very thing they are fighting against? Can you spell HYPOCRISY?
I salute Ms. Childress for the way she handled this situation. She was forthright about her stand and refrained from making a big deal out of the situation. She did not “chastise” the couple; she merely chose not to participate in something she finds objectionable. From what I know of this situation she handled herself in a Christian manner with courage and firmness, yet with “tolerance”. She didn’t run to the media, she merely responded with the truth of her beliefs.
I hope that everyone reading this piece will show Ms. Childress their support. If you live in Des Moines or nearby, visit her shop. If not, go to her website and give her words of support. If possible, order something from her bakery and reward her for this stand for freedom of religion. If you live outside of Des Moines order some cookies or something that can be shipped. Let her know you appreciate her courage and her willingness to stand by her values and not be intimidated into surrendering her values or her freedom to live by those values.
I submit this in the name of the Most Holy Trinity, in faith, with the responsibility given to me by Almighty God to honor His work and not let it die from neglect.
November 26, 2011
The first thing the lesbian couple did was run to the news media, where they knew they and their whining and crying, “woe is me”, “I’ve been victimized” story would be coddled.
A recent report by FrontPageMag, reveals CAIR’s latest attempts to stifle opposition of Islam and hide attempts at Jihad in the United States. The Muslim Brotherhood front group continues to pressure federal and local officials, as well as law enforcement agencies, into removing any traces of radical Islam and it’s agenda for America from their literature and training manuals.
A recent article on CAIR’s website stated: “The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) announced today that 15 of its chapters nationwide have filed 87 separate public records requests about possible Islamophobic training of local, state and national law enforcement personnel. CAIR is seeking information about state-level trainings that may have used federal taxpayer dollars to fund anti-Muslim trainers, a phenomenon highlighted in recent research and media reports.”
Director of Communications for CAIR Los Angeles, Munira Syeda, recently defended the actions of of group of Muslims students associated with the radical Muslim Student Union. Apparently, unable to wait till the end for the Q & A session, the students were found guilt of disrupting a speech which was being presented by Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren on US-Israeli relations. Repeatedly, the students were asked to stand down as they shouted numerous epitaphs and went as far as to ask “How many Palestinians did you kill?” While the students and Syeda viewed this as an exercise in 1st Amendments rights, Judge Peter J. Wilson did not, and sentenced the students to 56 hours of community service and three years of informal probation.
Syeda also condemned a rally protesting Siraj Wahhaj (an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center attack) who was speaker at a Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) fundraiser held at a community center in Orange County, California last February. While the protestors were adamant in their cause, they did so peacefully and 50 yards away from the community center entrance. Councilwoman and Republican Party Vice Chair Deborah Pauly who also was upset with the pro-Jihadi guest list was quoted saying to the protestors “Let me tell you what’s going on over there right now – make no bones about it – that is pure, unadulterated evil. … I know quite a few Marines who would be very happy to help these terrorists to an early meeting in paradise.” Strong words, yes, but not illegal and was spoken outside without heckling the event.
It possibly could be ascertained that CAIR is a proponent of free speech, for CAIR, and just as long as is does not paint the wrong image of Islam and expose Jihad.
We are just days away from the 10th anniversary of the day that changed America.
September 11, 2001, started off bright and beautiful for America, just as any other day. However, before the day really got started good, that bright and beautiful day turned into a very dark day.
Two thousand, eight hundred and nineteen people lost their lives that day. (The official figure as of 9/5/02): 2,819)
As each year passes, as a nation, we risk the very distinct possibility of losing the significance this day had on our nation. If you were not old enough to realize what was happening on that day, and the months that followed, you have a very different understanding of how it changed this nation.
For those who were old enough to realize the reality of what we saw on our televisions, there is no way time can erase the emotions that were experienced when those planes flew into the World Trade Center, Pentagon, and crashed in the Shanksville, Pennsylvania field.
We’ve all heard the quote by poet and philosopher George Santayana:
“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
For those who do remember the past, the importance of educating those who do not remember the past is vital! Though they cannot remember, if we do not teach them what happened, we have no hope for the future.
Wayne Bell is someone who understands the importance of educating our children about the reality of what happened that fateful September morning almost ten years ago.
Mr. Bell is the publisher of Really Big Coloring Books, Inc., in St. Louis, Missouri. He has created a unique way to teach older children about the terrorist attacks on our nation with a coloring novel. It’s not just a coloring book, and it is not meant for younger children. Mr. Bell says the coloring novel is for children about the age of 9 to 11-years-old.
“We Shall Never Forget 9/11: The Kids’ Book of Freedom,” is a memorial tribute. Mr. Bell says:
“It is an informational piece to help educate children on events on 9/11. [It is] a simplistic, honest tool.”
Mr. Bell goes on to say that the novel is a “12-hour narrative of the events that happened on the day that forever changed America.” Kids can color pictures of the twin towers, President George W. Bush, Americans mourning the attacks, and other significant images depicting that day.
It’s hard to believe that an educational book could cause so much controversy, especially when it is something so important, but that is indeed what Mr. Bell is facing with his coloring novel.
It should not come as a surprise to anyone that in our day and age where political correctness outweighs the facts so often, there are many people who do not want reality to be presented.
In fact, Dawud Walid, the Michigan representative for CAIR (the Council on American Islamic Relations), calls the novel “disgusting.”
“We Shall Never Forget 9/11: The Kids’ Book of Freedom,” refers to the jihadists as “freedom-hating radical Islamic Muslim extremists.” Mr. Walid is not happy with the fact that almost all of the mentions of Muslims also have the words “terrorist” or “extremist.” He feels that by only portraying the extremist side of the Muslim religion, a disservice is being done to all Muslim Americans who were impacted by 9-11. Mr. Walid says:
“Little kids who pick up this book can have their perceptions colored by those images … it instills bias in young minds. Muslim mothers lost sons too.”
Mr. Walid also argues that the information and pictures in the novel are incorrect. One instance he says is incorrect is that Osama Bin Laden “wasn’t hiding behind a wife when he was shot.”
However, Mr. Bell disagrees, saying the book is an “honest depiction.” He went on to say:
“The truth is the truth. It’s unfortunate that they were all Muslim and that’s the part people want to erase … I don’t know what else you can call them.”
Mr. Bell appeared on Fox & Friends this morning. The full interview can be seen here:
Rep. Allen West held a town-hall meeting last night in Florida, and once again a representative from CAIR showed up with their standard leftist talking points disguised as questions. If you missed the beginning of this ideological battle between LCT West and CAIR you can see it here. In keeping with CAIR’s leftist tactics of trying to discredit/ marginalise a true American Patriot such as 22-year military vet Rep. Allen West, we see that West does not back down an inch from the truth being told. This man has been there and done that, he has seen firsthand the dangers and oppression inherent in the Radical Ideology and no one is going to *blow smoke up his butt* and tell him otherwise.
Recently, a bus in Israel was blown up, one woman killed and many more injured by the so-called religion of peace. The Fogel family was murdered and a 3-year old baby had his throat slit by these same fanatics operating under the guidelines of Jihadist war against non-Muslims that is outlined in the Koran. CAIR can send every leftist-talking-point propagandist they have in their arsenal at West, but this true Patriot Warrior will never back down. Hold your ground Colonel, we have your back. In the meantime, tighten up your security, and keep your M1911 .45 handy, as these people do not like being exposed by infidels who will not bend to their will. America needs true leadership, so watch your back please.
After being made complete fools of in their first encounter with Col. West, one would think CAIR would have learned from that tactical mistake, but no, in keeping with the leftist tactics of trying to discredit anyone with an opposite view, they sentanother misguided puppet of Islam to do try to engage in a battle of will against Col. West once again last night. The results were quite the same, as we saw in round one of this battle of attrition, in the above linked video. Here is the West vs CAIR puppets round 2 video:
With true Patriotic Americans such as Rep. Allen West fighting for America, it certainly does look like we are Winning the Future for all Americans.
Florida State Senator Alan Hays and Rep. Larry Metz recently announced legislation that will protect all Floridians’ Constitutional rights against the infiltration or injection of any foreign laws or legal doctrines from other countries. While there are already many visible examples of this happening in America today, some choose to deny this reality, and the need to prevent the laws of other countries from being injected into America any further.
CAIR, or Council on American-Islamic Relations, denounces anyone who stands up for the right of Americans to live by our own laws and Constitution.
Senator Hays explains his stance and reason for proposing this legislation as this:
“I filed a bill that says in the courts of Florida the laws of no other country can be used to influence the decisions of Florida,” Hays said. “If it’s Sharia law or any other law – I don’t care what law it is – if it’s not a Florida law and if it’s some foreign law, it doesn’t belong in our courts.” (emphasis mine)
Right away, some people try to paint this as an attack on one group or another to denounce it, such as one Mr. Nezar Hamze of South Florida chapter of CAIR, saying it is some kind of stealth attack on Muslims. CAIR is using Alisnkey-ish tactics to bully and denounce anyone standing up for American laws and culture today. An attack on Senator Hays was aided by the liberal Miami Herald in a post titled: Lawmakers target Islamic Sharia law*. In the post, misinformation and lack of journalistic integrity are displayed throughout – a disservice to the whole State of Florida and America. Marc Caputo was busy putting the Muslim-oriented, leftist anti-American spin into the article demonstrating the true story behind it, perhaps in a way he never intended us to see:
” One reason Sharia isn’t mentioned in the bill is due to the U.S. Constitution’s ban on religious discrimination or favoritism. Citing the First Amendment, a federal judge recently blocked a voter-approved Oklahoma law targeting Sharia.” (emphasis mine)
A Federal Judge going against the wishes of the people who voted for this law is somehow being spun into a good thing there. Thus the danger of self-righteous appointed federal Judges sticking their noses into State law-making decisions. This new legislation will take those types of decisions out of play down here in Florida. Sen. Hays and Rep. Metz are to be commended, no matter what Mr. Hamze or the Miami Herald say about it. This is America, and if you refuse to live by American law, dont let the door hit you in the backside on the way back to your third world countries and their oppression- laden cultures.
Also found in the Herald article is Mr. Hamze looking like a foolish hypocrite when he stated the following:
“It’s absurd. I’ve never even heard of a court using Sharia law in making a ruling in a case,” Hamze said. “If it is intended to combat people’s fear of Islamic law, it does a poor job … because it does not mention Islam or Sharia but it does mention foreign law, which affects all religions, not just Islam, because you have Jewish, Muslim, Christian, Hindu laws.”
Actually, Mr. Hamze, is the fact thatyou conviently choose to ignore several problems that have already occurred in Florida courts, due precisely to attempts of Sharia law trying to be injected into Florida. It took all of two minutes to find an example from USATODAY.com**
A Florida judge ruled Friday that a Muslim woman cannot wear a veil in her driver’s license photo, agreeing with state authorities that the practice could help terrorists conceal their identities.
Sultaana Freeman arrives at the Orange County courthouse in Orlando
By Peter Cosgrove, AP
Attempts to inject forms of Sharia law and culture into Florida laws are obvious. There is a pressing need for Senator Hays’ leglislation to stop it from infecting Florida any further. Call up Senator Hays and the rest of your Florida representatives today and tell them you support this leglislation. It is for the good of all Floridians, and Americans across the country who tire of American culture and laws being changed to suit assorted radicals like Mr. Hamze. We are no longer going to stand by and watch our country be degraded and destroyed by these types of people. Thank you again Senator Hays and Rep. Metz.
Florida Judge Orders Use of Islamic Law in Mosque Case