Obama must learn it’s not about him

American Thinker

January 05, 2010

Lloyd Marcus
My wife Mary’s eyes glaze over whenever I mention football. “But honey this is about life not football” I promise her. She graciously listens. Three years ago with only a few minutes left in the game, all Tony Romo, quarterback of the Dallas Cowboys had to do was hold the football so his kicker could kick a game tying field goal. Romo fumbled the ball.

After his horrible unbelievable mistake, the young quarterback sat on the bench dejected with his head hung low. John Madden, former pro football coach was one of the announcers on the TV broadcast team. Madden said, “Somebody needs to tell Romo to get his head up. This game is not over and he still has to lead his team”. Wow, I don’t know why, but I found the wise old coach instructing (mentoring) the young man quite moving.

Madden was saying leadership is understanding it is not about you. As the Bible says, “To whom much is given, much is required”. Madden is also saying, OK, Tony Romo, you said you wanted to be the leader of this team; you must do just that, Lead! You do not have the luxury of sulking over your mistakes. True leadership is putting the needs of your team before your needs.

The Obama administration and the media puts his needs before the best interest of the American people. They believe since Obama is the first black president, he is simply too big to fail. Consequently, every event, policy and etc is judged from a “how will this affect Obama’s presidency” point of view rather than what is best for America.

They protect him at all cost against all offenders. Remember how Rush Limbaugh was verbally gang flogged for daring to say he hoped Obama’s wacko agenda failed?

Mr. Obama is the man who occupies the Oval office, but he is not our leader. He has yet to grasp the concept that it is not about him.

By the way, Tony Romo did get his head up. He has lead his team to numerous victories. Today, Tony Romo is a pro football superstar.

Lloyd Marcus (black) Unhyphenated American, Singer/Songwriter, Entertainer, Author, Artist & Tea Party Patriot

A Sham Of A Process For A Sham Of A Bill

The Heritage Foundation

Speaking at a town hall meeting on August 21, 2008, in Chester, Virginia, then-candidate Barack Obama promised the American people: “I’m going to have all the negotiations around a big table. We’ll have doctors and nurses and hospital administrators. Insurance companies, drug companies … what we will do is, we’ll have the negotiations televised on C-SPAN, so that people can see who is making arguments on behalf of their constituents … And so, that approach, I think is what is going to allow people to stay involved in this process.” The participants around Obama’s fictional big table may have changed depending on where he was speaking, but throughout his campaign the essential promise was always there: “negotiations televised on C-SPAN.”

Of course, Obama already broke this promise to the American people months ago. According to PoliFact, the backroom deals Obama cut with drug companies and hospitals last July already violated this pledge. But those were just preliminary negotiations. Surely when it came time for the final health care bill passage in Congress, Obama and his allies would welcome some transparency into the process? No such luck.

Politico is reporting that President Obama and Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) will meet at the White House today (joined by Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) via conference call) to set the parameters for reconciling the House and Senate versions of health care legislation. However, instead of proceeding with the usual public and open conference committee process, the White House is going to take a very active role in secret behind-closed-door meetings between the House and Senate. The Sunlight Foundation explains the implications for the American people: “Both House and Senate rules require that all conference committee meetings be open to the public unless a majority of conferees votes in open session to close the meetings. Senate rules require all conference committee reports be publicly available for at least 48 hours prior to a final vote. Without conference, there is no mechanism to provide for openness in the final discussions regarding the health care bill.”

And there is plenty of reason the American people should demand transparency in the final stages of the legislative process. We previously identified Six Key Differences between the House and Senate bills, all of which deserve their own public debate. But one issue in particular is in desperate need of the disinfectant powers of sunlight: Sen. Ben Nelson’s (D-NE) deal exempting Nebraska from the costs of Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion.

Last week, after a group of 13 state attorneys general promised to file suit against Obamacare should the Nelson deal become law, Nelson called South Carolina Attorney General Henry McMaster to “call off the dogs.” According to McMaster’s office, Nelson said the deal was not his idea, was simply a “marker” placed in the bill, and that the issue would be fixed by extending the same Medicaid exemption to all states. Will the budget-busting Medicaid problem get “fixed” for all states? If so, how? The American people deserve to know.

There is more than one reason the American people have turned solidly against President Obama’s health plan. Americans believe Obama’s plan will increase their health care costs, decrease the quality of their health care, raise their taxes, and increase the deficit. And as former Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean has admitted, Obamacare is not real health care reform. No wonder President Obama wants as little public input as possible.

Quick Hits:

  • CSPAN has sent a letter to the House and Senate asking that they “open all important negotiations” to electronic media coverage.
  • Democrats in favor of amnesty have agreed to vote for President Barack Obama’s health care legislation in exchange for an Obama promise for amnesty legislation later this year.
  • California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is going to seek a federal bailout to help close the $21 billion deficit his state faces over the next 18 months.
  • The number of Americans filing for personal bankruptcy rose by nearly a third in 2009.
  • According to the British government, MI5 told American intelligence agents more than a year ago that the Detroit bomber had links to extremists.

Photo challenges Obama nativity story

Suggests father had relationship with grandfather before meeting mother


Posted: January 05, 2010
1:00 am Eastern

By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

A photograph circulating on the Internet has raised new questions about the officially accepted account of President Obama’s birth and early childhood.

The photo shows Barack Obama Sr. at a dock, apparently arriving in Hawaii in 1959, welcomed by Stanley Dunham without his daughter, Ann Dunham.

The photo raises the question whether Barack Obama Sr. had a connection to Stanley Dunham before Ann Dunham supposedly met him in a Russian language class at the University of Hawaii.


Undated photo shows Barack Obama Sr., with leis, and Stanley Dunham, immediate right, President Obama’s grandfather

Barack Obama Jr. admitted in his autobiography “Dreams from My Father” that his grandfather, Stanley Dunham, introduced him to Frank Marshall Davis, the well-known communist author and journalist from Chicago. The introduction suggested Stanley Dunham was comfortable with close ties to well-known leftists in Hawaii.

On pages 76-77 of “Dreams from My Father,” Barack Obama Jr. said Davis “would read us his poetry whenever we stopped by his house, sharing whiskey with Gramps out of an emptied jelly jar.”

(Story continues below)

// // // //

In the photograph, Barack Obama Sr. is seen surrounded by well wishers, wearing an ample supply of traditional Hawaiian leis.

Stanley Dunham is seen in the photograph standing casually to the immediate left of Barack Obama Sr. with his hands in his pants pockets.

In the photograph are what appear to be two seamen in naval uniforms, one of whom is wearing an officer’s cap.

The occasion of the photograph and the others in the photograph are so far unidentified.

Stanley Ann Dunham, the mother of the future president, is not in the group photograph.

The occasion could be the departure of Barack Obama Sr. from Harvard to the mainland where in 1962 he travelled to Cambridge, Mass., to begin graduate studies at Harvard.

But Stanley Dunham’s presence at the departure of Barack Obama, Sr. would not likely be such a cordial event, given that even the official Obama narrative maintains that by leaving Hawaii for Cambridge, Mass., Barack Obama Sr. was leaving behind his wife, Ann Dunham, and his son.

WND has reported that contrary to President Obama’s statement, his father did not abandon the family in Hawaii when he accepted an invitation to study at Harvard in 1962.

Instead, his mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, abandoned Barack Obama Sr., when she moved from Hawaii to Seattle where she was enrolled in extension courses beginning Aug. 19, 1961, only 15 days after Barack Obama Jr. was born, according to Dunham’s grade transcript that WND obtained from the University of Washington.

The Polk city street directory for Seattle in 1961-1962 has Obama’s mother listed as a student living at 516 13th Ave. E., apartment 2, in Seattle’s Capitol Hill area, where babysitter Mary Toutonghi reported Obama’s mother attended night classes at the university that began at 4:30 p.m., as part of her extension school curriculum.

Documents uncovered by WND have raised questions whether President Obama’s parents ever lived together as husband and wife, despite Obama’s repeated assertions his parents lived together in Hawaii during the first two years of his life.

WND further reported the Polk city street directory for Honolulu for 1961-1962 indicates Obama’s grandparents, Madelyn and Stanley Dunham, lived at 6085 Kalanianaole Highway, the address listed for Obama’s birth in the announcement published in the Hawaiian newspaper at the time. Barack Obama Sr., meanwhile, maintained a separate bachelor pad at an 11th Avenue address, closer to the University of Hawaii.

Still, the nativity birth myth that Barack Obama, Sr. abandoned Ann Dunham when he left for Hawaii matches the nativity story he told on page 126 of Dreams from My Father.

There, Obama related a story his mother allegedly told him, writing: “When your father graduated from UH (University of Hawaii), he received two scholarship offers. One was to the New School, here in New York. The other one was to Harvard. The New School agreed to pay for everything – room and board, a job on campus, enough to support all three of us. Harvard just agreed to pay tuition. But Barack was such a stubborn bastard, he had to go to Harvard. How could I refuse the best education? he told me. That’s all he could think about, proving that he was the best. …”

WND can find no indication if Ann Dunham worked while she continued attending the University of Washington, where she was enrolled in the Spring 1962 term as a full-time student taking courses at the campus.

WND can find no documentary evidence indicating how Ann Dunham paid her tuition at the University of Washington or where she got sufficient funds to pay rent and living expenses for herself and her infant son while she was living in Seattle from Aug. 1961 until she returned to Hawaii, after Barack Obama Sr. had left for Harvard.

WND also can find no documentary evidence that Ann Dunham ever returned to Hawaii to visit Barack Obama Sr. while he continued his studies at the University of Hawaii in her absence; nor can WND find any evidence Barack Obama Sr. ever traveled from Hawaii to visit Ann Dunham while she lived in Seattle.

The newly discovered photograph of Barack Obama Sr. at the dock without Ann Dunham joins a group of photos of Obama’s father at the University of Hawaii, where WND reported Barack Obama Sr. was photographed again without Ann Dunham.

WND has previously reported three photos of Barack Obama Sr. attending a University of Hawaii party in the early 1960s surfaced on the Internet, showing the president’s father enjoying the company of his fellow university students without the presence of Ann Dunham.

Barack Obama Sr.’s evident demeanor from the three photographs suggests a familiarity with women and an ease as a single man that would give no indication he was regarded as engaged to be married or already wed to Ann Dunham.

While the possibility remains the photographs were taken prior to the time Obama Sr. met Ann Dunham, the testimony from Obama’s fellow students at the University of Hawaii that accompany the photographs makes no mention whatsoever that Barack Obama Sr. was ever associated with Ann Dunham, at the time the photographs were taken, or later.

A reasonable interpretation of the photographs and accompanying testimony would be that at the time of the party in Hawaii, Barack Obama Sr. was a bachelor enjoying the free and easy company of his peers, unencumbered by a fiancée or a wife.

WND has previously reported Michelle Obama stated at a public event that her husband’s mother, Ann Dunham, was “very young and very single” when she gave birth to the future U.S. president.

WND has reported the only documentation for Ann Dunham’s marriage to Barack Obama Sr. comes from their divorce documents that list the marriage date as Feb. 2, 1961.

In actuality, it isn’t clear Obama’s parents were married, since official records have never been produced showing a legal ceremony took place. No wedding certificate or photograph of a ceremony for Dunham and Obama Sr. has ever been found or published.

In his book “Barack and Michelle: Portrait of an American Marriage,” former Time magazine contributing editor Christopher Anderson elaborates: “There were certainly no witnesses (to the alleged civil marriage ceremony on Maui in 1961 between Obama’s parents) – no family members were present, and none of their friends at the university had the slightest inkling that they were even engaged.”

Anderson further quoted Rep. Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawaii, a self-described friend of Barack Obama Sr. and Ann Dunham in 1961, as saying that “nobody” was invited to the wedding ceremony.

Obama himself, on page 22 of his autobiography, wrote of his parents wedding: “In fact, how and when the marriage occurred remains a bit murky, a bill of particulars that I’ve never quite had the courage to explore. There’s no record of a real wedding, a cake, a ring, a giving away of the bride. No families were in attendance; it’s not even clear that people back in Kansas were fully informed. Just a small civil ceremony, a justice of the peace. The whole thing seems so fragile in retrospect, so haphazard.”

WND’s search for documentary evidence has established the following timeline for his mother:


Timeline

The timeline indicates, contrary to President Obama’s contentions that his parents lived together in Hawaii for two years after he was born and that the father abandoned the family when he went to Harvard toward the end of 1962, that his mother, Ann Dunham, abandoned the family in the month of Obama’s birth, with the parents never again living together in Hawaii or anywhere else.

Did Obama Politicize the Terror Database?

American Thinker

By James Lewis

In his usual heroic fashion, Obama tossed that hot Christmas Bomber potato to Janet Napolitano, and when she dropped the potato, it got cannoned over to the CIA with a quick fake to Dick Cheney, who didn’t even bother to answer. Obama kept his head buried deep in the sand at Oahu for almost four days while all this was going on. But this was Obama’s personal hot potato, and I believe he may personally be at fault for placing almost three hundred passengers in deadly peril on NW Flight 253 on Christmas Day.
How? By putting a politically correct twist on the existing terrorist database.
If you think about this as a Google search, pinpointing Omar the Bomber before he got on the plane wasn’t hard. Google could have done it in a flash as soon as Omar tried to board a plane in Africa. All they had to do was Google “Christmas flights to U.S., departing Muslim-majority country, cash paid, one-way, no check-in luggage.” Then they could have spotted him in Amsterdam before boarding there. Even after he was on NW 253, a simple search of the terrorist database would have brought up this wannabe mass killer.
Every time you use Google, you’re searching a giant database running on a swarm of servers. Today, this guy has 2.35 million web citations on Google. Just type in “Abdulmutallab,” and in a third of a second it comes up with those 2,350,000 sources. The reason why Google has become fabulously rich is that it does the best job of cutting down millions of hits to a few useful ones. That’s exactly the job we have in stopping the next airplane bomber. If the FBI and U.S. intel can’t do it, then they should just turn it over to Google…or put out a big FBI Most Wanted poster on the next bomber and let millions of people on the web search for the him. It’s not that hard, and the logic is exactly the same as those Wanted: Dead or Alive posters they used in the Old West. They turned every citizen into a crime-spotter.
The big TIDE list of terror suspects has 500,000 names. That’s too many to be practical, but only 4,000 of them have been put on the U.S. “No Fly” list. It should be five or ten times as many — say, 20,000 No Fly suspects. Flying on a passenger plane is not a human right. We can just say “no” to 20,000 people and be a lot safer.
Regardless of the number, the question is always how to get from those half million suspects to a small enough number to knock out an attack. Fortunately, these terror goons are highly predictable. Bush-Cheney did a good job in stopping them once they started to collect a mass of intelligence on al-Qaeda.
First you assign tags to all the suspects, like little red danger flags. Omar the Christmas Bomber was so bad he was practically bleeding little red flags. This guy was obvious, as the world found out twenty-four hours after he almost killed 280 people. Google would have popped him out in a few seconds.
Now everybody in the intelligence world understands that. That’s their job. This is not hard, folks. Don’t let the Obumblers pretend it was hard. It was just like the Fort Hood shooter — who had Soldier of Allah” printed on his business card. The weirdest psychiatrist at Fort Hood was practically putting up a flashing billboard to advertise his murderous plans. Everybody who knew him heard about it, but they weren’t allowed to say it out loud, which is suicidal Army policy. The Fort Hood killer was a massive command failure, but as far as we know, nobody got fired. The fact that the brass hasn’t been fired yet is a signal that they are not supposed to change. FDR fired people wholesale after Pearl Harbor. They got the idea fast.
For Omar the Christmas bomber, here are just some red flags we know.
Red Flag 1. Omar was reported by his father directly to the U.S. embassy in Nigeria. His father is the best source you can get: He is a former government minister in Nigeria, a devout (but not terrorist) Muslim, and a prominent banker. He probably knows what his son is thinking better than anybody in the world, and he obviously doesn’t want to taint his son as a dangerous extremist unless he has a very good reason to do so. His son recently broke off all contact with the family. That’s a whole field of red flags waving frantically in our faces right there.
Red Flag 2. Omar was head of the Muslim Student Organization at University College London, a well-known center of Islamist radical agitation and recruitment. Note: Nobody gets to head that Muslim Student Organization without being a target for terrorist recruitment. They keep inviting Islamofascist rabble-rousers to give public speeches over there, and the university keeps letting them do it. The London Daily Mail has been yelling about that over and over for a decade. The socialist ruling Labour Party have turned a deaf ear because they are importing Pakistani crazies from the badlands who make easy-to-buy Labour votes. Everybody over there should be on the short list.
Red Flag 3. Omar the Bomber paid cash for his trip to Detroit, and he didn’t check in a single piece of luggage. He might just as well have painted “Suicide Bomber” on his t-shirt. Red flags, anybody?
Red Flag 4. He’s 23 years old, a kid from a wealthy family who is both spoiled and lost in the big world — exactly the kind of comfortable, alienated, and confused character who gets targeted by the bomber imams to go and blow himself up. He’s got the perfect psychological profile, similar to the Fort Hood shooter. That also happens to be the profile of the kids who become Communist radicals and the ones who became Nazis in the 1930s.
The psychology is always the same. It keeps repeating over and over, and only the media can pretend to be surprised. Bill Ayers was a rich kid. Bernardine Dohrn was a rich kid. Barack Hussein Obama’s family was not rich, but middle class — Barack himself was very spoiled, very indulged, and went to all the rich-kid schools. He never had to pay for anything; everything in life was free for BHO. Karl Marx was a rich kid who went bad. So was Pol Pot. The biggest ideological extremists are always the same. They are almost never poor and desperate kids, because poor families raise their kids differently. They have to work and learn about reality, fast. It’s always the middle class — “idealistic,” overeducated, confused, culturally estranged, depressed, grandiose, narcissistic, personally troubled kids who become Adolf Hitler.
Red Flag 4. Omar is known to have traveled to Yemen twice. Yemen has been heating up with many AQ threats to bomb American targets. Even the news media have noticed it.
Red Flag 5. Who is trying to get on a plane right now? Remember, this Google search can be done in a fraction of a second. Don’t think the airlines haven’t hit on the idea of running their passengers through the terror database. Out of the 500,000 suspects on the big list, you can ignore all but a few thousand at any moment because they’re not waiting at an airport. Plus, this is a religious terror gang, remember? They nearly always use Muslim names, even if they were born John Smith. They always try to kill people on significant days: This was Christmas Day, 2009. Al-Qaeda is still fighting the Crusades, which stopped in the 13th century for the West, way before Christopher Columbus discovered America. You might not remember the Crusades, but bin Laden thinks they are still going on. (Bin Laden is another billionaire kid who became a terrorist.)
So we could easily single out Omar the Bomber from half a million terror suspects using a Google-type database. His picture pops up, and then you look at the passengers waiting in line for the plane in Lagos or Amsterdam. Do you see somebody who looks like him? If you do, pull him out for the sniffer machine. It’s happened to a lot of us. Omar the Bomber was using the same chemical the Shoe Bomber used in 2001. It’s an ingredient of Semtex, the favorite terrorist bomb mixture worldwide. This is not hard, kids.
Spotting this guy was dead easy. But they missed him.
So what went wrong?
I can see only one possibility: The Obombers have screwed up the database. Remember that the Obama administration is a little nuts. They’re not stupid, but they are very, very deeply stuck in a false and perverse ideology. They don’t get reality. They automatically flip it upside-down. They are rich kids who have been treated as the best and the brightest all their lives, but they have never been exposed to reality. So they’ve gotten very clever at getting everything wrong about the real world. That’s why they’re so amazingly weird.
Did you see Obama bowing to the emperor of Japan? It upset the Chinese to no end. It was just his own brainstorm. Why? In Obama’s lush and self-centered fantasy life, bowing to the Shinto Emperor of Japan is a smart thing to do. Nobody else in the world thinks so — in fact, everyone else in the world thinks it’s weird — but that doesn’t matter. Obama’s made up his mind.
We’ve seen a lot of these PC-crazed characters in the Age of Political Correctness. The Ninth Circuit is full of them. So is the New York Times editorial board. They are the Democrat politicians, the judges, the media talkers, and the law school professors who tell street cops that they are not allowed to stop and question ex-cons driving in luxury cars they can’t possibly pay for, wearing gangsta attire, looking stoned out of their minds, and racing away from the most recent gang shooting — because they are the wrong race or color to be questioned. PC is reverse racism, and we now have racial, ethnic, and religious quotas for gangbangers. That is completely insane, and it’s the poor and the blacks who suffer the most. It’s the inner-city schools that are in chaos because middle-class parents make sure they get their kids out of there.
But you can bet that Obama and his Brain Trust believe in this PC insanity.
The only explanation for the Christmas Bomber fiasco is the most obvious one: This administration has just applied quotas to the terrorist database. Who knows? Maybe they are demanding that the database can only come up with ten percent Muslims. Or equal numbers of all colors of the rainbow. Or not too many people named Muhammed, because that would be profiling. We know that’s how they run their affirmative action programs. Obama is our first affirmative-action president — that’s how he got elected. Lots of people voted for him because he’s black, regardless of his nutty associations and his total lack of qualifications.
A.J. Strata discovered that the Deputy National Security Advisor (who disgraced himself on the Sunday talk shows evading important questions) “hinted in an interview during the presidential campaign that if Obama was elected, he planned to dial back the trip wire sensitivity on our national security.”
We also know that political correctness protected the Fort Hood killer, and that was on a U.S. Army Base, where the killer was personally known to hundreds of trained and alert military personnel. General Casey defended his own miserable failure to get rid of the Fort Hood killer because it was PC to keep this maniac. (Fire that general right now).
This is not sane. But can you think of any other explanation that fits what we know about these characters?
I can’t.

Treating terrorism as an ordinary crime

The Washington Examiner

January 5, 2010

Two men have been charged by law enforcement authorities with committing criminal acts on Christmas Day 2009. The first, Joseph T. Knox, 43, of 6092 North Main St. in Sandy Creek, N.Y., was charged with attempted first-degree felony robbery of the China One restaurant, located next door to his residence. New York State Police said Knox brandished a knife during the bungled robbery. Bail was set at $10,000, and, if convicted, Knox could face up to 25 years in prison.

The second, Nigerian national Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, 23, of no known permanent address, was charged with attempting to blow up Northwest Airlines Flight 253 bound for Detroit from Amsterdam. If convicted, Abdulmutallab could face up to 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

In other words, in President Obama’s America, a man charged with brandishing a knife during a failed attempt to rob a local eatery could get more prison time than an aspiring suicide bomber who tried unsuccessfully to ignite explosives that would have incinerated him and nearly 300 other passengers and crew members on board Flight 253. This disparity unmasks the illogic of dealing with Islamic terrorists as if they are mere criminal defendants deserving of the same constitutional rights as common thieves.

Like Knox, Abdulmutallab was told he had a right to remain silent, and he took full advantage of it. Then, as if to turn terrorism into the moral equivalent of shoplifting, prosecutors offered Abdulmutallab a plea bargaining deal in return for his cooperation. This was done, according to White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan, so that Abdulmutallab would know “there are certain things that are on the table, and if he wants to engage with us in a productive manner, there are ways that he can do that.”

If Obama is serious about “doing everything in our power” to stop terrorism, he will instead treat Abdulmutallab, along with all other terrorists attempting in the name of Islamic extremism to destroy America, as enemy combatants on a par with irregular guerrillas. Such fighters use civilian clothes to disguise their murderous intentions and are thereby not covered by the Geneva Convention for prisoners of war.

The appropriate response to such individuals is interrogation using accepted techniques for extracting militarily useful information, followed by a military tribunal to establish the facts in all cases and execution for those justly convicted. Anything less makes the protection and preservation of our nation no more important than punishing an inept restaurant robber in a small town in upstate New York.

Islam Explained in Layman’s Terms

This was sent to me in an e-mail. Instead of trying to forward it to everyone, i thought I would post it. 1Dragon

Adapted from Dr. Peter Hammond’s book: Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat

� Islam is not a religion, nor is it a cult. In its fullest form, it is a complete, total, 100% system of life.

�Islam has religious, legal, political, economic, social, and military components. The religious component is a beard for all of the other components.

� Islamization begins when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their religious privileges.

When politically correct, tolerant, and culturally diverse societies agree to Muslim demands for their religious privileges, some of the other components tend to creep in as well.

Here’s how it works:

As long as the Muslim population remains around or under 2% in any given country, they will be for the most part be regarded as a peace-loving minority, and not as a threat to other citizens. This is the case in:
United States — Muslim 0..6%

Australia — Muslim 1.5%

Canada — Muslim 1.9%

China — Muslim 1.8%

Italy — Muslim 1.5%

Norway — Muslim 1.8%

At 2% to 5%, they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups, often with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs.

This is happening in:

Denmark — Muslim 2%

Germany — Muslim 3.7%

United Kingdom — Muslim 2.7%

Spain — Muslim 4%

Thailand — Muslim 4.6%

From 5% on, they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population. For example, they will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature halal on their shelves — along with threats for failure to comply.

This is occurring in:

France — Muslim 8%

Philippines — 5%

Sweden — Muslim 5%

Switzerland — Muslim 4.3%

� The Netherlands — Muslim 5.5%

� Trinidad & Tobago — Muslim 5.8%

At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves (within their ghettos) under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islamists is to establish Sharia law over the entire world.

When Muslims approach 10% of the population, they tend to increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions. In Paris, we are already seeing car-burnings. Any non-Muslim action offends Islam, and results in uprisings and threats, such as in Amsterdam, with opposition to Mohammed cartoons and films about Islam. Such tensions are seen daily, particularly in Muslim sections, in:

Guyana — Muslim 10%

India — Muslim 13.4%

� Israel — Muslim 16%

Kenya — Muslim 10%

Russia — Muslim 15%

After reaching 20%, nations can expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings, and the burnings of Christian churches and Jewish synagogues, such as in:

Ethiopia — Muslim 32.8%

At 40%, nations experience widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks, and ongoing militia warfare, such as in:

Bosnia — Muslim 40% �

Chad — Muslim 53.1%

Lebanon — Muslim 59.7%

From 60%, nations experience unfettered persecution of non-believers of all other religions (including non-conforming Muslims), sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon, and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels, such as in:

Albania — Muslim 70%

Malaysia — Muslim 60.4%

Qatar — Muslim 77.5%

Sudan — Muslim 70%

After 80%, expect daily intimidation and violent jihad, some State-run ethnic cleansing, and even some genocide, as these nations drive out the infidels, and move toward 100% Muslim, such as has been experienced and in some ways is on-going in:

Bangladesh — Muslim 83%

Egypt — Muslim 90%

Gaza — Muslim 98.7%

Indonesia — Muslim 86.1%

Iran — Muslim 98% �

Iraq — Muslim 97%

Jordan — Muslim 92%

Morocco — Muslim 98.7%

Pakistan — Muslim 97%

Palestine — Muslim 99%

Syria — Muslim 90%

Tajikistan — Muslim 90%

Turkey — Muslim 99.8%

United Arab Emirates — Muslim 96%

100% will usher in the peace of ‘Dar-es-Salaam’ — the Islamic House of Peace. Here there’s supposed to be peace, because everybody is a Muslim, the Madrasses are the only schools, and the Koran is the only word, such as in:

Afghanistan — Muslim 100%

Saudi Arabia — Muslim 100%

Somalia — Muslim 100%

Yemen — Muslim 100%

� Unfortunately, peace is never achieved, as in these 100% states the most radical Muslims intimidate and spew hatred, and satisfy their blood lust by killing less radical Muslims, for a variety of reasons.

� ‘Before I was nine I had learned the basic canon of Arab life. It was me against my brother; me and my brother against our father; my family against my cousins and the clan; the clan against the tribe; the tribe against the world, and all of us against the infidel. — Leon Uris, ‘The Haj’

� It is important to understand that in some countries, with well under 100% Muslim populations, such as France, the minority Muslim populations live in ghettos, within which they are 100% Muslim, and within which they live by Sharia Law. The national police do not even enter these ghettos. There are no national courts, nor schools, nor non-Muslim religious facilities. In such situations, Muslims do not integrate into the community at large. The children attend madrasses. They learn only the Koran. To even associate with an infidel is a crime punishable with death. Therefore, in some areas of certain nations, Muslim Imams and extremists exercise more power than the national average would indicate.

� Today’s 1.5 billion Muslims make up 22% of the world’s population. But their birth rates dwarf the birth rates of Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, and all other believers. Muslims will exceed 50% of the world’s population by the end of this century.

� Adapted from Dr. Peter Hammond’s book: Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat

Well, boys and girls, today we are letting the fox guard the henhouse.

The wolves will be herding the sheep!

Obama has Appoints two devout Muslims to homeland security posts.
Doesn’t this make you feel safer already?

Obama and Janet Napolitano Appoint: Arif Alikhan, a devout Muslim as Assistant Secretary for Policy Development.

�DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano swore-in Kareem Shora, a devout Muslim, who was born in Damascus, Syria as ADC National Executive Director as a member of the Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC).

NOTE: Has anyone ever heard a new government official being identified as a devout Catholic, a devout Jew or a devout Protestant…?  Just  wondering.

Devout Muslims being appointed to critical Homeland Security positions? Doesn’t this make you feel safer already??

That should make our homeland much safer, huh!!

Was it not “Devout Muslim men” that flew planes into U.S. buildings 8 years ago?
Was it not a Devout Muslim who killed 13 at Fort Hood?

Freed Guantánamo inmates are heading for Yemen to join al-Qaeda fight

Said Ali al-Shihri, Ibrahim Suleiman al Rubaish (ID not confirmed); Abdullah Saleh Ali al Ajmi; and Abdullah Mahsud

Said Ali al-Shihri, Ibrahim Suleiman al Rubaish (ID not confirmed); Abdullah Saleh Ali al Ajmi; and Abdullah Mahsud

Tom Coghlan
Times Online
Jan. 5, 2010

At least a dozen former Guantánamo Bay inmates have rejoined al-Qaeda to fight in Yemen, The Times has learnt, amid growing concern over the ability of the country’s Government to accept almost 100 more former inmates from the detention centre.

The Obama Administration promised to close the Guantánamo facility by January 22, a deadline that it will be unable to meet. The 91 Yemeni prisoners in Guantánamo make up the largest national contingent among the 198 being held.

Six prisoners were returned to Yemen last month. After the Christmas Day bomb plot in Detroit, US officials are increasingly concerned that the country is becoming a hot-bed of terrorism. Eleven of the former inmates known to have rejoined al-Qaeda in Yemen were born in Saudi Arabia. The organisation merged its Saudi and Yemeni offshoots last year.

The country’s mountainous terrain, poverty and lawless tribal society make it, in the opinion of many analysts, a close match for Afghanistan as a new terrorist haven.

Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, voiced concern about the growing strength of al-Qaeda in Yemen. “Obviously, we see global implications from the war in Yemen and the ongoing efforts by al-Qaeda in Yemen to use it as a base for terrorist attacks far beyond the region,” she said.

A Yemeni, Hani Abdo Shaalan, who was released from Guantánamo in 2007, was killed in an airstrike on December 17, the Yemeni Government reported last week. The deputy head of al-Qaeda in the country is Said Ali al-Shihri, 36, who was released in 2007. Ibrahim Suleiman al-Rubaish, who was released in 2006, is a prominent ideologue featured on Yemeni al-Qaeda websites.

Geoff Morrell, the spokesman for the Pentagon, said: “This is a large question that goes beyond the issue of transferring detainees. The bulk of the remaining detainees are from Yemen and that has been the case for a long time. We are trying to work with the Yemeni Government on this.”

The US Government issued figures in May showing that 74 of the 530 detainees in Guantánamo were suspected or known to have returned to terrorist activity since their release. They included the commander of the Taleban in Helmand province, Mullah Zakir, whom the British Chief of the Defence Staff, Sir Jock Stirrup, called “a key and seemingly effective tactical leader”. Among others who returned to terrorism was Abdullah Saleh al-Ajmi, a Kuwaiti who killed six Iraqis in Mosul in 2008.

The number believed to have “returned to the fight” in the May 2009 estimate was double that of a US estimate from June 2008. US officials acknowledged that more detainees were known to have reoffended since, but the number has been classified.

“There is a historic trend and it continues. I will only say that we have said there is a trend, we are aware of it, there is no denying the trend and we are doing our best to deal with this reality,” Mr Morrell said.

Officials said that a higher proportion of those still being held were likely to return to terrorism because they were considered more of a security threat than those selected in the early stages of the release programme.

Chris Boucek, an expert on the region for the Carnegie Endowment think-tank, said that up-to-date figures for Saudi Arabia showed that 26 of the 120 Saudis released from Guantánamo were either in jail, wanted by the authorities or dead.

Gregory Johnsen, a Yemen expert at Princeton University, said evidence showed that al-Qaeda was seeking to use Yemen to mount a renewed campaign into Saudi Arabia. He cited a recent incident in which two Saudi militants, one the brother-in-law of alShihri, were killed while trying to cross the border in women’s clothing. Martyrdom videos were subsequently posted on militant websites.

The Saudi Government had boasted previously of a zero reoffence rate for Guantánamo detainees who were put through its widely praised rehabilitation programme for al-Qaeda members.

Robert Lacey, who writes about Saudi Arabia, made numerous visits to the Prince Mohammad bin Naif rehabilitation facility north of Riyadh.

“I know a number of young men from Guantánamo who were successfully reintegrated,” he told The Times. “The programme involves the whole family with a mixture of religious re-education, patriotism, guilt and co-opting in terms of being given a car, job and a nice wife.”

However, other analysts suggested that the claims for the Saudi programme were exaggerated. Mr Johnsen pointed out that an attack that nearly killed Prince Mohammad bin Naif, the Saudi head of counterterrorism, in August was mounted by a Yemen-based al-Qaeda terrorist who had offered to join the reintegration programme to get near his target.

“The Saudi programme is nothing but bureaucratised bribery. The ideologically committed terrorists simply won’t listen,” Mr Johnsen said.

The Yemen reintegration programme for terrorists was abandoned on December 10, 2005