Clinton didn’t pay health insurance bills

Clinton didn’t pay health insurance bills By: Kenneth P. Vogel March 31, 2008 12:11 PM EST

Among the debts reported this month by Hillary Rodham Clinton’s struggling presidential campaign, the $292,000 in unpaid health insurance premiums for her campaign staff stands out. Clinton, who is being pressured to end her campaign against Barack Obama for the Democratic nomination, has made her plan for universal health care a centerpiece of her agenda. The campaign provides health insurance to all its employees, their spouses, partners and children — and that wasn’t interrupted by any lag in payments to insurance providers, said Jay Carson, a Clinton campaign spokesman. He said the campaign this month paid off all outstanding bills to Aetna Healthcare and CareFirst BlueCross BlueShield. Those payments will be reflected on a report the campaign will file this month with the Federal Election Commission, which Carson said will show “zero debt owed to both vendors.” “Sometimes invoices are not paid immediately because we need additional information for our records, or to verify expenses,” Carson said in a statement e-mailed to Politico. “Sometimes invoices arrive at the very end of the month at the cutoff of the reporting period, which means that we are required to report them as a debt on the current FEC report, even where they are paid in regular course during the next month.” See Also Cash-strapped Clinton fails to pay bills Superdelegates: A guide to the undecided Gore launches $300 million campaign But the unpaid bills to Aetna were at least two months old, according to FEC filings. They show the campaign ended last year owing Aetna more than $213,000 for “employee benefits.” During the first two months of the year, the campaign did not pay down any of that debt. In fact, it accrued another $16,000 in unpaid bills last month, and it finished the month owing Aetna $229,000. Though the campaign reported owing $63,000 to Carefirst at the end of February for employee benefits, it appears Clinton paid that company on a more frequent basis. The New York senator’s presidential campaign began the month owing $299,000 to Carefirst, but paid that amount in its entirety, and the $63,000 it owed at the end of the month appears to be from services rendered last month. Campaigns resemble businesses in many ways. Like businesses, one of their biggest costs is salaries, payroll taxes and the benefits of their employees. Also like businesses, they tend to carry unpaid bills as debt from week-to-week or even month-to-month. But Arizona Sen. John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, did not report any unpaid bills to insurance providers at the end of February. And the only insurance-related debt reported by Obama, an Illinois senator, was $908 to AIG American International Group for “insurance.” Their campaigns also reported substantially less debt overall than Clinton’s, which owed $8.7 million at the end of February. Obama owed $625,000 and McCain $4.3 million, though most of his debt was from a bank loan, and only $1.3 million was in the form of unpaid bills to a dozen vendors. Carson stressed that Clinton’s campaign pays all its bills “regularly and in the normal course of business.”

McCain’s Gauntlet Speech

By Lee Cary

McCain’s recent speech to the Los Angeles World Affairs Council delivered many important messages.  Some were aimed at the upcoming general election campaign. Others were international messages directed toward friends, foes and those in the middle.

Campaign Messages

McCain spent his first 300-plus words disclaiming an image that the MSM will eventually try to tag him with: an old, trigger-happy, fighter pilot.  Far from trigger-happy – he knows the horror of war.

Then he obliquely juxtaposed his self-descriptive label of realistic idealist with an implied one of naïve idealist to be applied later to whoever becomes his opponent. Why did he not apply the label to both Democrat candidates now? Because he’ll make the realistic versus naïve comparison directly if Obama is the nominee, and indirectly if it’s Clinton, for whom he has more respect. Premature to make it now.

Assume that Obama is the nominee, as is likely.  Merely labeling him a naïve idealist won’t be enough. McCain will have to do what President Bush has not done well.  He’ll need to make a more compelling case for not withdrawing from Iraq too soon. In this speech he took an articulate step in that direction by linking the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan with “the transcendent challenge of our time: the threat of radical Islamic terrorism.”

“In the troubled and often dangerous region they occupy, these two nations can either be sources of extremism and instability or they can in time become pillars of stability, tolerance, and democracy…And whether they eventually become stable democracies themselves, or are allowed to sink back into chaos and extremism, will determine not only the fate of that critical part of the world, but our fate as well.”

In the context of linking the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan with radical Islamic terrorism, McCain set a cornerstone for how he’ll differentiate himself from either Democrat opponent.

“Any president who does not regard this threat as transcending all others does not deserve to sit in the White House, for he or she does not take seriously enough the first and most basic duty a president has – to protect the lives of the American people.”  (emphasis added)

When Obama criticizes McCain for supporting Bush’s war in Iraq, McCain can say:

Maybe you didn’t notice that I repeatedly called for the removal of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and a new strategy in Iraq.  A strategy we eventually adopted, by the way, and is yielding success.

When Obama calls for a rapid withdrawal from Iraq, McCain will play the Irresponsible Statesmanship Card mentioned in his speech:

“It would be an unconscionable act of betrayal, a stain on our national character as a great nation, if we were to walk away from the Iraqi people and consign them to the horrendous violence, ethnic cleansing, and possibly genocide that would follow a reckless, irresponsible, and premature withdrawal.”

Obama will remind us again and often that he was against the war from the beginning. In response, McCain can say:

That’s the past, Senator Obama. Today we’re talking about the future, and a hope that the Iraqis can believe in. Because when it comes to our success in Iraq — Yes We Can, and Yes We Will.

His Los Angeles speech laid the groundwork for all these retorts and others.

Either Democrat nominee will equate a McCain victory with a Bush Third Term.  Countering that in advance, McCain reminded us that he’s not been a Bush sycophant.  He’s noted how he’s been against torture, inhuman treatment of prisoners, and wants to close Guantanamo. In that run of issues he included words some conservative critics may have glossed over: “…work with our allies to forge a new international understanding on the disposition of dangerous detainees under our control.”  Message:  Our allies will be responsible for helping us deal with these “dangerous” people because criticism from a distance without helping to solve the problem is counterproductive.

As soon as the MSM begins to support the Bush Third Term theme, McCain can say,

Look my friends, a little straight talk here: As early as 1999, the New York Times was referring to me as a “maverick.” In fact, they ran a story about me in July that year entitled ‘The Mantle of the Maverick Suits McCain.’  They’ve continued to apply that label to me ever since.  Just last January, the Times ran an article entitled “McCain, Long a G.O.P. Maverick, Is Gaining Mainstream Support.” So, if I’ve been such a maverick for so long, how can I now be a reincarnation of President Bush?   

Checkmate. 

International Messages

Now, to briefly review some of the international messages aimed at friends, foes and those in the middle.

TO All Nations:  We’ll continue to lead, but with a style that will not project what some of you have perceived as arrogance.

This message angered some conservatives, but it was necessary for our friends to hear it, regardless of whether we’ve accepted or rejected their criticism.

TO Hugo Chavez and Fidel’s little brother:  You have a choice to make. Isolate yourself further or embrace this future:

“Ours can be the first completely democratic hemisphere, where trade is free across borders, where the rule of law and the power of the free markets advance the security and prosperity of all.”

TO Russia:  Consult your English dictionary as I note the danger you pose by being “revanchist.” I think Brazil and India have more business being in the G-8 that you do.  And, I plan to grow NATO right up to your front door.  You feel me, Putin?

I had to look it up:  Revanchist: One who follows a policy seeking to retaliate, especially to recover lost territory.

TO China:  To really become a true friend of ours, you’ll need to be a more responsible world citizen, make your military intentions clearer, and stop trying to elbow us out of Asia. 

TO Africa:  It’s time some of you become more responsible nations. And, it’s time we help you eradicate malaria on the African continent.

TO Iran & N. Korea:  Be advised that we’re closely watching your efforts to attain nuclear weapons, and that I plan to further involve our friends in that watching.  No threats at this time.

TO Islamic Terrorists:  Don’t expect a McCain administration to be any less aggressive against you than was Bush’s. And maybe more so.

TO Selected Middle East Countries:  You know who you are.  We’re done relying on your out-dated autocracies as the safest path to the future of the Middle East.

TO Other Democracies:  Let’s form a “new global compact” – a League of Democracies. 

This message is a shot across the bow of the U.N.  Among all his international messages, this one is most noteworthy.

“We have to strengthen our global alliances as the core of a new global compact – a League of Democracies – that can harness the vast influence of the more than one hundred democratic nations around the world to advance our values and defend our shared interests.”

Finally,

TO the United Nations:  I am prepared to engage your bias, corruption and incompetence. You’re on notice.

That last message alone should atone for any perception on the part of some conservatives that John McCain is another John Kerry.

Lee Cary is a frequent contributor to American Thinker.

Obama’s Pastor and the Jewish “Ethnic Bomb”

•  http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2307

Longtime pastor and spiritual mentor of Barack Obama

• Considers the U.S. to be a nation rife with racism and disrimination
• Blames American racism for provoking the 9/11 attacks
• “Islam and Christianity are a whole lot closer than you may realize,” he has written. “Islam comes out of Christianity.”
• Embraces liberation theology and socialism
• Strong supporter of Louis Farrakhan
• Likens Israel’s treatment of Palestinians to South Africa’s treatment of blacks during the apartheid era

It has been learned that on the “Pastor’s Page” of a newsletter published by Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s Trinity United Church of Christ (TUCC), was an open letter from Palestinian activist Ali Baghdadi calling Israel an “apartheid” regime that was developing an “ethnic bomb” designed to kill “blacks and Arabs.”

Wrote Baghdadi: “I must tell you that Israel was the closest ally to the white supremacists of South Africa. In fact, South Africa allowed Israel to test its nuclear weapons in the ocean off South Africa. The Israelis were given a blank check: they could test whenever they desired and did not even have to ask permission. Both worked on an ethnic bomb that kills Blacks and Arabs.”

The letter appeared in the June 10, 2007 edition of the TUCC newsletter, which is still available at the church’s website. The publication described Baghdadi as someone who “acted as a Middle East advisor to the Honorable Elijah Muhammad, the founder of the Nation of Islam, as well as Minister Louis Farrakhan.”

The son of a Baptist minister, Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr. was born in Philadelphia on September 22, 1941. On March 1, 1972, he became the pastor of Chicago’s Trinity United Church of Christ (TUCC), a position he held until February 2008.

After a tour of duty in the U.S. Navy, Wright went on to earn a master’s degree in English from Howard University in 1969. Six years later he earned an additional master’s degree from the University of Chicago Divinity School, and in 1990 he received a Doctor of Ministry Degree from United Theological Seminary.

The writings, public statements, and sermons of Rev. Wright reflect his conviction that America is a nation infested with racism, prejudice, and injustices that make life very difficult for black people. As he declared in one of his sermons: “Racism is how this country was founded and how this country is still run!… We [Americans] believe in white supremacy and black inferiority and believe it more than we believe in God.”

Wright laments “the social order under which we [blacks] live, under which we suffer, under which we are killed.”[1] Depicting blacks as a politically powerless demographic, he complains that “African Americans don’t run anything in the Capital except elevators.”[2] Similarly, on its website Wright’s church portrays black people as victims who are burdened by the legacy of their “pilgrimage through the days of slavery, the days of segregation, and the long night of racism,” and who must pray for “the strength and courage to continuously address injustice as a people.”

Wright attributes the high unemployment rate of African Americans to “the fact that they are black.”[3] Vis a vis the criminal justice system, he likewise explains that “the brothers are in prison” largely because of their skin color. “Consider the ‘three strikes law,'” he elaborates. “There is a higher jail sentencing for crack than for cocaine because more African Americans get crack than do cocaine.”[4]

In Wright’s calculus, white America’s bigotry is to blame not only for whatever ills continue to plague the black community, but also for anti-U.S. sentiment abroad. “In the 21st century, says Wright, “white America got a wake-up call after 9/11/01. White America and the western world came to realize that people of color had not gone away, faded into the woodwork or just ‘disappeared’ as the Great White West kept on its merry way of ignoring black concerns.”

Wright sees no reason to believe that Islam may be incompatible in any way with Western traditions. “Islam and Christianity are a whole lot closer than you may realize,” he has written. “Islam comes out of Christianity.”[5]

Wright detests America’s capitalist economic structure, viewing it as a breeding ground for all manner of injustice. “Capitalism as made manifest in the ‘New World,'” he says, “depended upon slave labor (by African slaves), and it is only maintained by keeping the ‘Two-Thirds World’ under oppression.”[6] Wright’s anti-capitalist perspective is reflected in TUCC’s “10-point vision,” whose ideals include the cultivation of “a congregation working towards ECONOMIC PARITY.” (Emphasis in original.) The TUCC mission statement plainly declares its goal of helping “the less fortunate to become agents of change for God who is not pleased with America’s economic mal-distribution!”

This view is entirely consistent with Rev. Wright’s devotion to the tenets of liberation theology, which is essentially Marxism dressed up as Christianity. Devised by Cold War-era theologians, it teaches that the New Testament gospels can be understood only as calls for social activism, class struggle, and revolution aimed at overturning the existing capitalist order and installing, in its stead, a socialist utopia where today’s poor will unseat their “oppressors” and become liberated from their material (and, consequently, their spiritual) deprivations. An extension of this paradigm is black liberation theology, which seeks to foment a similar Marxist revolutionary fervor founded on racial rather than class solidarity. Wright’s mentor in this discipline is James Cone, author of the landmark text Black Power and Black Theology. Arguing that Christianity has been used by white society as an opiate of the (black) masses, Cone asserts that the destitute “are made and kept poor by the rich and powerful few,” and that “[n]o one can be a follower of Jesus Christ without a political commitment that expresses one’s solidarity with victims.”

Wright commonly denounces the United States, which he views as a nation infested with racism and evil. In one noteworthy sermon, he paraphrased the assertions of another black preacher (with whose views he agreed entirely) as follows:

Fact #1: We’ve got more black men in prison than there are in college.

Fact #2: Racism is still alive and well. Racism is how this country was founded, and how this country is still run…. I don’t care how hard you run, Jesse, and no black woman can never be considered for anything outside of what she can give with her body.

Fact #3: America is the #1 killer in the world. We invaded Grenada for no other reason than to get Maurice Bishop. We invaded Panama because Noriega would not dance to our tune anymore. We are deeply involved in the importing of drugs, the exporting of guns and the training of professional killers. We bombed Cambodia, Iraq and Nicaragua, killing women and children while trying to get public opinion turned against Castro and Qadaffi.

Fact #4: We put Mandela in prison and supported apartheid the whole 27 years he was there. We believe in white supremacy and black inferiority, and believe it more than we believe in God.

Fact #5: We supported Zionism shamelessly while ignoring the Palestinians, and called anyone that spoke out against it as being Anti-Semitic.

Fact #6: We conducted radiation experiments on our own people. We’re just finding out about that. We care nothing about human life if the ends justify the means.

Fact #7: We do not care if poor black and brown children cannot read and kill each other senselessly. We abandoned the city back in the 60’s back when the riots started. And it really doesn’t matter what those “NNNNNNnnnnnnn…………… natives” do to each other, we gave up on them and public education of poor people who live in the projects…. We, with VCRs, TVs, CDs, and portable phones have more homeless than any nation in the world.

Fact #8: We started the AIDS virus. And now that it is out of control, we still put more money in the military than in medicine, more money in hate than in humanitar[ian] concerns. Everybody does not have access to health care, I don’t care what the rich white boys in the city say, brothers…. Listen up, if you are poor, black and elderly, forget it.

Fact #9: We are only able to maintain our level of living by making sure that Third World people live in grinding poverty.

Fact #10: We are selfish, self-centered egotists who are arrogant and ignorant and we prayer at church and do not try to make the kingdom that Jesus talks about a reality….

In light of these 10 facts, God has got to be SICK OF THIS SHIT! (emphasis in original) (Click here for video of this sermon.)

Many of Wright’s condemnations of America are echoed in his denunciations of Israel and Zionism, which he has blamed for imposing “injustice and … racism” on the Palestinians. According to Wright, Zionism contains an element of “white racism.”  Likening Israel’s treatment of Palestinians to South Africa’s treatment of blacks during the apartheid era, Wright advocates divestment campaigns targeting companies that conduct business in, or with, Israel.

Wright is a great admirer of Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan. “When Minister Farrakhan speaks, Black America listens,” says Wright. “Everybody may not agree with him, but they listen … His depth on analysis when it comes to the racial ills of this nation is astounding and eye opening. He brings a perspective that is helpful and honest. Minister Farrakhan will be remembered as one of the 20th and 21st century giants of the African American religious experience. His integrity and honesty have secured him a place in history as one of the nation’s most powerful critics. His love for Africa and African American people has made him an unforgettable force, a catalyst for change and a religious leader who is sincere about his faith and his purpose.”

Wright’s praise for Farrakhan was echoed in the November/December issue of TUCC’s bimonthly magazine, the Trumpet, which featured an interview with the NOI “icon” who, according to the publication, “truly epitomized greatness.” “Because of the Minister’s influence in the African American community,” the Trumpet announced that it was honoring him with an “Empowerment Award” as a “fitting tribute for a storied life well lived.”

Wright accompanied Farrakhan on a 1984 trip to meet with Farrakhan’s friend, the Libyan dictator Muammar Qadhafi.

Farrakhan’s October 16, 1995 Million Man March ranks among the events about which Rev. Wright has written most extensively and passionately. Wright attended the rally with his son, and has described it as “a once in a lifetime, amazing experience.”[7] When a number of prominent African Americans counseled fellow blacks to boycott the demonstration because of Farrakhan’s history of hateful rhetoric, Wright derided those critics as “‘Negro’ leaders,”[8] “‘colored’ leaders,” “Oreos,” and “house niggras”[9] who were guilty of “Uncle Tomism.”[10] “There are a whole boat load of ‘darkies’ who think in white supremacist terms,” added Wright. “… Some ‘darkies’ think white women are superior to black women…. Some ‘darkies’ think white lawyers are superior to black lawyers. Some ‘darkies’ think white pastors are better than black pastors. There are a whole boatload of ‘darkies’ who think anything white and everyone white is better than whatever it is black people have.”[11]

On its website, Wright’s church describes itself in distinctly racial terms, as being an “Unashamedly Black” congregation of “African people” who are “true to our native land, the mother continent, the cradle of civilization,” and who participate in TUCC’s “Black worship service and ministries which address the Black Community.”

Some have suggested that such assertions, coupled with Wright’s own racially loaded statements and his close affiliation with Farrakhan, indicate that Wright is guilty of racism. But Wright dismisses this charge, stating: “I get tickled every time I hear a ‘Negro’ call me a racist. They don’t even understand how to define the word. Racism means controlling the means.”[12]

TUCC promotes a “Black Value System” that encourages African Americans to patronize black-only businesses, support black leaders, and avoid becoming “entrapped” by the pursuit of a “black middle-classness” whose ideals presumably would erode their sense of African identity and render them “captive” to white culture.

Wright and his congregants offered Kwanzaa programs for the TUCC community.[13]  Kwanzaa is the holiday founded by Maulana Karenga, a self-identified “African socialist” whose “Seven Principles of Blackness,” which are observed during Kwanzaa, include not only the Marxist precepts of parity and proletariat unity, but are identical to the principles of the 1970s domestic terrorist group, the Symbionese Liberation Army.

When Rev. Wright took over as TUCC pastor, the church’s membership totaled 87. By 2007 it had become the largest congregation in the United Church of Christ, with more than 8,000 members. TUCC’s most well-known congregant is Barack Obama, who sought Wright’s counsel before formally declaring his candidacy for U.S. President in 2007. Obama and his wife had previously selected Wright to perform their wedding ceremony and, later, to baptize their two daughters.

Rev. Wright retired as pastor of TUCC on February 10, 2008. 

Notes:

[1] When Black Men Stand up for God (Chicago: African American Images), 1996, p. 17.
[2] Ibid., p. 102.
[3] Ibid., p. 17.
[4] Ibid., p. 17. (Notwithstanding Wright’s implication that the harsh anti-crack penalties were instituted by racist legislators for the purpose of incarcerating as many blacks as possible, the Congressional Record shows that such was not at all the case. In 1986, when the strict, federal anti-crack legislation was being debated, the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC)—deeply concerned about the degree to which crack was decimating the black community—strongly supported the legislation and actually pressed for even harsher penalties. In fact, a few years earlier CBC members had pushed President Reagan to create the Office of National Drug Control Policy. See John DiIulio, Jr., “My Black Crime Problem, and Ours,” City Journal (Spring 1996), pp. 19-20.)
[5] When Black Men Stand up for God, p. 16.
[6] Blow the Trumpet in Zion (Minneapolis: Fortress Press), 2005, pp. 8-9.
[7] When Black Men Stand up for God, p. 10.
[8] Ibid., pp. 11, 37.
[9] Ibid., p. 80.
[10] Ibid., p. 11.
[11] Ibid., p. 81.
[12] Ibid., p. 102.
[13] Ibid., p. iv.

The Muslim Students Association and the Jihad Network Undermining the United States on college campuses.

The Muslim Students Association and the Jihad Network

By FrontPage Magazine FrontPageMagazine.com | 3/31/2008

The following essay, adapted from the Introduction to this booklet, shows how, as early as the 1980s, operatives from the Muslim Brotherhood, parent group for al Qaeda and Hamas, formulated a blueprint for a “jihadist process” that would ultimately sabotage the “miserable house” of the United States. These Muslim Brotherhood operatives saw that the work of undermining the U.S. could be best accomplished by the use of front groups such as the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Muslim Students Association. But while CAIR was designed to work in the legal-cultural realm, posturing as another of the minority rights groups functioning in the public square, the MSA’s role was to be restricted to college campuses, where it would advance the cause of radical Islam and lead the effort to stigmatize Israel. Over the next several days, Front Page will publish profiles of individual chapters of the MSA on a variety of campuses around the country, showing how specifically they achieve the broad goals of the organization. – The Editors As revealed in documents seized by the FBI and entered as evidence in a Texas court, the Muslim Students Association is a legacy project of the Muslim Brotherhood.[1] The Brotherhood is an organization formed by a Hitler-admiring Muslim named Hasan al-Bannain Egypt in 1928.[2] It was designed to function as the spearpoint of the Islamo-fascist movement and its crusade against the West. The Brotherhood spawned al-Qaeda and Hamas.[3] Its doctrines make up the core of the terrorist jihad conducted by organizations such as Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, Hamas and the government of Iran.[4] Its agendas have been clear since its creation: infiltration, subversion and global terror with world conquest as the goal. …To establish one Islamic state of united Islamic countries, one nation under one leadership whose mission will be to reinforce adherence to the law of Allah…and the strengthening of the Islamic presence in the world arena….The goal…is the establishment of a world Islamic state.[5] The first target was the “near enemy” – the Arab states that al-Banna and his followers felt had betrayed Islam. The United States – the “far enemy” – would not become a specific focus of the Brotherhood until many years later. The organization’s aspirations for world dominion seemed like a fantasy until the Iranian revolution of 1979. But that event showed the jihadists that they could conquer and govern a state and use it as a base for Islamic revolution elsewhere. There was no doubt who the enemy was. The Iranian leader Ayatollah Khomeni coined the phrase “Great Satan” and “Little Satan” to demonize the United States and Israel and mark them for destruction. “Destroying Western Civilization From Within” A formal plan for targeting America was devised three years after the Iranian revolution, in 1982.[6]. The plan was summarized in a 1991 memorandum written by Mohamed Akram, an operative of the Muslim Brotherhood. “The process of settlement” of Muslims in America, Akram explained, “is a ‘Civilization-Jihadist Process.’” This means that members of the Brotherhood “must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”[7] This memo surfaced in a Texas courtroom in the fall of 2007 after prosecutors introduced it as evidence in the trial of the Holy Land Foundation, once the largest Islamic charity in the United States.[8] The HLF was charged with funneling charitable donations to the jihad terrorists of the Islamic Resistance Movement, or Hamas, a Brotherhood organization that now controls the Gaza Strip. But the implications of this document go far beyond the Holy Land Foundation. It is actually a blueprint for the subversion of American society, and the eventual imposition of Islamic law in the United States. This would mean an institutionalized oppression of women, homosexuals, and religious minorities; the end of freedom of speech and the freedom of conscience; and the replacement of democracy by theocracy. U.S. authorities had been keeping an eye on Brotherhood operatives even before the memo surfaced. In 2001, U.S. officials accused Youssef Nada, a member of the organization, of funding terrorism.[9] Two years later, American investigators described Soliman Biheiri, a businessman in Virginia, as the Brotherhood’s U.S. “financial toehold.” Surveying the Islamic organizations that existed in the U.S. in 1991, Mohamed Akram declared in his memo: “The big challenge that is ahead of us is how to turn these seeds or ‘scattered’ elements into comprehensive, stable, ‘settled’ organizations that are connected with our Movement and which fly in our orbit and take orders from our guidance.” At the end of the document, Akram provided “a list of our organizations and the organizations of our friends” – apparently, those whom he believed were likewise dedicated to this great project of sabotaging the “miserable house” of American society. Surveying all these groups filled him with enthusiasm: “Imagine if they all march according to one plan!!!”[10] Akram contemplated a network of many overlapping groups, with personnel that move from one to the other and hold positions in different organizations simultaneously—an arrangement that resembles the Communist Party’s creation of interlocking front groups during the Cold War and complicates the task of understanding and tracking the pattern of their activities. The organizations Akram saw as advancing the Islamo-Fascist movement in America included, among many others, the Islamic Society of North America, the North American Islamic Trust, the Islamic Circle of North America, the International Institute for Islamic Thought, and the Islamic Association for Palestine – from which came the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) three years later. But perhaps the most important of these groups in terms of the long term infiltration and conquest the Brotherhood envisioned was The Muslim Students Association (MSA). The Stealth Jihad of the MSA Established in January 1963 at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, the Muslim Students Association of the United States and Canada, or MSA (also known as MSA National) currently has chapters on nearly 600 college campuses across North America.)[11] The relationship between MSA National and the individual university chapters is not a fixed hierarchy, but rather a loose connection. Thus the policies and views of the national organization may differ from those of some of the local chapters.) Stating that its mission is “to serve the best interest of Islam and Muslims in the United States and Canada so as to enable them to practice Islam as a complete way of life,”MSA is by far the most influential Islamic student organization in North America.[12] Founded by members of the Muslim Brotherhood, MSA was named in Mohammed Akram’s 1991 memorandum as one of the Brotherhood’s likeminded “organizations of our friends” who shared the common goal of destroying America and turning it into a Muslim nation. These “friends” were described by the Brotherhood as groups that could help teach Muslims “that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands … so that … God’s religion Islam is made victorious over all other religions.”[13] From its inception, MSA had close links with the extremist Muslim World League, whose chapters’ websites have featured not only Osama bin Laden’s propaganda, but also publicity-recruiting campaigns for Wahhabi involvement with the Chechen insurgents in Russia. According to author and Islam expert Stephen Schwartz, MSA is a key lobbying organization for the Wahhabi sect of Islam.[14] MSA solicited donations for the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, whose assets the U.S. government seized in December 2001 because that organization was giving financial support to the terrorist group Hamas. MSA also has strong ties to the World Assembly of Muslim Youth.[15] Charging that U.S. foreign policy is driven by militaristic imperialism, MSA steadfastly opposes the American military incursions into both Afghanistan and Iraq.[16] The organization also follows the Arab propaganda line in the Middle East conflict and has condemned the anti-terrorist security fence that Israel has built in the West Bank as an illegal “apartheid wall” that violates the civil and human rights of Palestinians. An influential member of the International ANSWER steering committee, MSA maintains a large presence at ANSWER-sponsored anti-war demonstrations.[17] The pro-North Korea, pro-Saddam Hussein ANSWER is a front organization of the Marxist-Leninist Workers World Party.[18] Local chapters of MSA signed a February 20, 2002 document, composed by the radical group Refuse & Resist (a creation of the Revolutionary Communist Party’s) condemning military tribunals and the detention of immigrants apprehended in connection with post-9/11 terrorism investigations.[19] The document read, in part: “They the U.S. government are coming for the Arab, Muslim and South Asian immigrants. … The recent ‘disappearances,’ indefinite detention, the round-ups, the secret military tribunals, the denial of legal representation, evidence kept a secret from the accused, the denial of any due process for Arab, Muslim, South Asians and others, have chilling similarities to a police state.”[20] MSA has strongly opposed the Patriot Act, which it describes as an “infamous” piece of legislation. The organization’s chapters across the United States have similarly denounced virtually every other national security initiative implemented by the U.S. government since the 9/11 attacks. MSA chose not to endorse or participate in the May 14, 2005 “Free Muslims March Against Terror,” an event whose stated purpose was to “send a message to the terrorists and extremists that their days are numbered … and to send a message to the people of the Middle East, the Muslim world and all people who seek freedom, democracy and peaceful coexistence that we support them.”[21] But while it is possible to understand its political orientation from some of the positions it has taken on large national issues, the Muslim Students Association comes into sharper focus in the actions of the individual chapters that do its work every day on campuses across America. The following analysis of 18 separate campus chapters of MSA will make this clear.

Hillary’s list of lies

Hillary’s list of lies

By Dick MorrisThe USA Today/Gallup survey clearly explains why Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) is losing. Asked whether the candidates were “honest and trustworthy,” Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) won with 67 percent, with Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) right behind him at 63. Hillary scored only 44 percent, the lowest rating for any candidate for any attribute in the poll. Hillary simply cannot tell the truth. Here’s her scorecard: Admitted Lies o Chelsea was jogging around the Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001. (She was in bed watching it on TV.) o Hillary was named after Sir Edmund Hillary. (She admitted she was wrong. He climbed Mt. Everest five years after her birth.) o She was under sniper fire in Bosnia. (A girl presented her with flowers at the foot of the ramp.) o She learned in The Wall Street Journal how to make a killing in the futures market. (It didn’t cover the market back then.) Whoppers She Won’t Confess To o She didn’t know about the FALN pardons. o She didn’t know that her brothers were being paid to get pardons that Clinton granted. o Taking the White House gifts was a clerical error. o She didn’t know that her staff would fire the travel office staff after she told them to do so.

A Decades Deep Treasure Trove

Russ Vaughn
Barack Obama’s supporters are quick to level the cherry-picking charge in any discussion of Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s video vitriol, claiming that Obama’s critics are selectively condemning the pastor with but a few exceptional sermons out of twenty-plus years of weekly sermons.

The problem with that argument is that the church’s gift shop packaged and sold in DVD format the very sermons that are being used now with such devastating political effect, characterizing them as a “best of” series. One can only speculate as to whose characterization that is, but after seeing the Rev’s rather formidable ego demonstrated in the videos and in television interviews, I do not think he is one who would delegate the task of selecting his best sermons for resale purposes to any subordinate; which leaves us to conclude that Reverend Wright himself holds those cherry-picked videos in very high esteem.

Now, do any of us skeptics out here really believe that if those videos are the Rev’s choice for his “best of” series, that they are the only exceptional examples of thirty-six years of preaching from that pulpit? Are we to accept that after three and a half decades, the Rev can point only to that skimpy handful of videos and say, “There is the sum total of the very best of the fruits of my labors in service to the Lord?”

So what becomes most intriguing here is the question as to just how long the church has been recording and selling the Rev’s weekly exhortations to his flock and just how many of those tapes may be out there in circulation. Obviously, from what we’ve already seen, the church has been taping at least since the week after 9/11, which means there could be hundreds of tapes in just that time, perhaps multiple thousands if one considers that most likely every performance (three services every Sunday) is taped to provide the collection from which a “best of” series can be selected.

Obama’s supporters try to reassure themselves that this will blow over; but I wonder how many of them lay awake wondering just how many more of these tapes are out there and just when one of the Clintons’ opposition research operatives is going to pay some disgruntled, or just greedy, former parishioner a very hefty sum for his extensive collection of the “best of” series? That cannot be a sleep-inducing thought within the Obama campaign, especially if one of those videos should contain audience shots that include an enthusiastic, wildly cheering Barack and Michelle.

And just think there’s only twenty years of possibilities in this potential treasure trove. Once the Clintons get through digging, there may even be a jewel or two left for Republican oppo investigators should Obama win the nomination.

Posted at 02:28 PM | Email | Permalink

How would you like to see this couple as the Commander in Chief, and as the First Lady, in charge of the United States of America, next year?..

Talk about a need for America to pray and seek God!!!

How would you like to see this couple as the Commander in Chief, and as the First Lady, in charge of the United States of America, next year?.. If you think we have problems now…   With them in office..  “You ain’t seen nothin’ yet!”…  

MICHELLE OBAMA’S MILITANT RACISM REVEALED

In her senior thesis at Princeton, Michelle Obama, the wife of Barack Obama stated that America was a nation founded on “crime and hatred”. Moreover, she stated that whites in America were “ineradicably racist”.   The 1985 thesis, titled “Princeton-Educated Blacks and the Black Community” was written under her maiden name, Michelle LaVaughn Robinson. 

Michelle Obama stated in her thesis that to “Whites at Princeton, it often seems as if, to them, she will always be Black first…” However, it was reported by a fellow black classmate, “If those “Whites at Princeton” really saw Michelle as one who always would “be Black first,” it seems that she gave them that impres sion”.

Most alarming is Michelle Obama’s use of the terms “separationist” and “integrationist” when describing the views of black people.

Mrs. Obama clearly identifies herself with a “separationist” view of race.

“By actually working with the Black lower class or within their communities as a result of their ideologies, a separationist may

 better understand

 the desperation of their situation and feel more hopeless about a resolution 

as opposed to anintegrationist who is ignorant to their plight.”

Obama writes that the path she chose by attending Princeton would likely lead to her “further integration and/or assimilation into a white cultural and social structure that will only allow me to remain on the periphery of society; never becoming a full participant.”

Michelle Obama clearly has a chip on her shoulder. 

Not only does she see separate black and white societies in America, but she elevates black over white in her world.

                                  

Here is another passage that is uncomfortable and ominous in meaning:

“There was no doubt in my mind that as a member of the black community, I am obligated to this community and will utilize all of my present and future resources to benefit the black community first and foremost. “

What is Michelle Obama planning to do with her future resources if she’s first lady that will elevate black over white in America?

The following passage appears to be a call to arms for affirmative action policies that could be the hallmark of an Obama administration.

“Predominately white universities like Princeton are socially and academically designed to cater to the needs of the white students comprising the bulk of their enrollments.”

The conclusion of her thesis is alarming.

Michelle Obama’s poll of black alumni concludes that other black students at Princeton do not share her obsession with blackness. But rather than celebrate, she is horrified that black alumni identify with our common American culture more than they value the color of their skin. “I hoped that these findings would help me conclude that despite the high degree of identification with whites as a result of the educational and occupational path that black Princeton alumni follow, the alumni would still maintain a certain level of identification with the black community. However, these findings do not support this possibility.”

Is it no wonder that most black alumni ignored her racist questionnaire? Only 89 students responded out of 400 who were asked for input.

Michelle Obama does not look into a crowd of Obama supporters and see Americans. She sees black people and white people eternally conflicted with one another.

                                                                                             

The thesis provides a trove of Mrs. Obama’s thoughts and world view seen through a race-based prism. This is a very divisive view for a potential first lady that would do untold damage to race relations in this country in a Barack Obama administration.

Michelle Obama’s intellectually refined racism should give all Americans pause for deep concern.

                                                         

Now maybe she’s changed, but she sure sounds like someone with an axe to grind with America. Will the press let Michelle get a free pass over her obviously racist comment about American whites?  I am sure that it will.  But it shouldn’t.

Islam & the Iranian Dilemma

Islam & the Iranian Dilemma

Friday, 28 March 2008

Since its inception fourteen hundred years ago, Islam has been at war with the people of this planet. Millions of people have been literally butchered with the sword of Islam. Some may argue that all religions at one point in time have committed crimes against humanity. That may be so, but none of the existing world religions’ foundation has been based upon shedding the blood of its innocent victims. Islam lives, breaths and grows on blood. Once we take away this red element from Islam, Islam will vanish completely. Islam cannot possibly live in the hearts and minds of its believers. Islam needs to shed the blood of the infidels, meaning all non-Muslims. Islam is about world domination. It is utterly part of being Muslims. Muslims are radical even in their intrafaith dealings. Various sects and sub-sects pronounce other sects and sub-sects as heretics worthy of death; women are treated as chattel, deprived of many rights; hands are chopped for stealing even a loaf of bread; sexual violation is punished by stoning, and much much more. These are standard day-to-day ways of the mainstream “moderate” Muslims living under the stone-age laws of Sharia. The “moderate” mainstream of Islam has been outright genocidal from inception. Their own historians record that Ali, the first imam of the Shiite and the son-in-law of Muhammad, with the help of another man, beheaded 700 Jewish men in the presence of the Prophet himself. The Prophet of Allah and his disciples took the murdered men’s women and children in slavery. “Ali, who is the successor of God on the earth, and known to fight with a double edged sword, ordered the warriors to cut off the heads of the nonbelievers. Zobair assisted him in finishing this job. Ali also ordered the distribution of the captives and their property [i.e. the ‘booty’] among the Muslims, in accord with Sa’ad’s (b. Mu’adh) decision regarding the fate of the defeated Jews [i.e., the Qurayzah]. After the battle [and executions], Ali ordered everyone [of the Muslims] to return home. Sa’ad (b. Mu’adh) who had been very anxious during the battle, was now happy and praised God upon completion of his task. Then [later] they [i.e., the Muslims] celebrated and enjoyed beautiful women.” Muslims are taught deception and lying in the Quran itself—something that Muhammad practiced during his life whenever he found it expedient. Successive Islamic rulers and leaders have done the same. Khomeini, the founder of the 1979 Iranian Revolution, for instance, rallied the people under the banner of democracy. All along his support for democracy was not a commitment of an honest man, but a ruse. As soon as he gathered the reins of power, Khomeini went after the Useful Idiots of his time with vengeance. These best children of Iran, having been thoroughly deceived and used by the crafty phony populist-religionist, had to flee the country to avoid the fate of tens of thousands who were imprisoned or executed by the double-crossing imam. “Throughout centuries, Iranians continued to prevent Islam from making inroads into their cultural identity and divesting them of their heritage. Knowing their culture well, they influenced events and paved the way for posterity to turn the tide. From the beginning, three lines of resistance are distinct: administrative manipulation, political resistance, and intellectual nonconformity.” Almost three decades after the tragic Islamic Revolution of 1979, the suffocating rule of Islam casts its death-bearing pall over Iranians. A proud people with enviable heritage is being systematically purged of its sense of identity and forced to think and behave like the barbaric and intolerant Muslims. Iranians who had always treated women with equality, for instance, have seen them reduced by the stone-age clergy to sub-human status of Islamic teaching. Any attempt by the women of Iran to counter the misogynist rule of Muhammad’s mullahs is mercilessly suppressed. Women are beaten, imprisoned, raped and killed just as men are slaughtered without due process or mercy. One must pay attention to how Islamists engage others in discussion. When they don’t like what they hear, they resort to ridicule, accusations and name-calling. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if these people would, for once, were to abandon their primitive mindset and use a civilized method of dialogue? What are the facts the Islamists dispute? Is it the truth that they don’t like? Well, that’s tough. Truth is often unwelcome. Yet, it is light to our feet. We really must be truthful even if it hurts and often it does. Are there any questions about the facts? 1. Muhammad died and did not leave a written will (he was illiterate, that’s understandable). So, his high-ranking disciples began scheming for leadership. The Shias claim that Muhammad verbally indicated that Ali was to lead his Ummah. Well, 90% of the Muslims say, no he did not and the Caliphate system was the way to go. 2. Shortly after Muhammad’s death, Ali was killed by some disgruntled Muslim, for whatever reason. Violence was part and parcel of Islam from the very outset. 3. Then there was a battle between Yazid’s forces and Hussein. Wasn’t there? Hussein and his band of relatives-followers got butchered. Well, friends, that’s the nature of the beast called war. 4. To this day, Shias bloody themselves, their children, even their babies with self-flagellation in a most horrid way in aza dari (morning) for what happened to Hussein. What good does this do, other than perpetuate a sense of defeatism and fanaticism that mitigates against Iranians freeing themselves from the yoke of the conniving mullahs? The long-suffering Iranian people must put the past behind them and use their excellent talents to not only join the advanced world, but lead it. What a shame to remain stuck in this horrid mentality of victimization. Iranians deserve better than being manipulated by a bunch of mullahs who have been having a great ride on the back of the ignorant poor. They have been deceiving deceiving the poor and the ignorant with empty promises all the goodies that they are promised in the afterlife. Forget the afterlife and pay attention to the plight of the suffering masses. Stop playing politics with the life of the people. Those responsible for this sham have no heart and no shame. Let the bad bygones be bygones and use the marvelous human potential of Iranians to provide them with the opportunities to better themselves and their families. The most important step in the direction of emancipation of our people is the establishment of the rule of law — not the barbaric Sharia — to grant all Iranians, male and female, young and old, of any and all beliefs equal rights. We Iranians don’t have a dog in this fight. In fact we should rid ourselves of all Islamic stains, Shia, Sunni, or whatever, and with it stop playing victims of one power or another. Playing victim may give psychological relief but doesn’t solve any problems on the ground. And problems on the ground we have aplenty. Let’s look forward and do something about the sorry plight of Iranian people today so that future generation recall this generation of Iranians as trailblazers who had the courage to break from the bleak past and launch a bright future.

Obama’s Wright fantasy

Clarice Feldman
Undoubtedly hoping to tie Hillary in the fabulist category, Obama tells a whopper of his own and Tom Maguire captures it in amber (well online, anyway):

Can someone help me with what looks like the latest fantasy from Obama as he explains his Reverend Wright (emphasis added):

WASHINGTON – White House hopeful Barack Obama suggests he would have left his Chicago church had his longtime pastor, whose fiery anti-American comments about U.S. foreign policy and race relations threatened Obama’s campaign, not stepped down.

“Had the reverend not retired, and had he not acknowledged that what he had said had deeply offended people and were inappropriate and mischaracterized what I believe is the greatness of this country, for all its flaws, then I wouldn’t have felt comfortable staying at the church,” Obama said Thursday during a taping of the ABC talk show, “The View.” The interview will be broadcast Friday.

Let’s make the working assumption that this excerpt is accurate and in context – time will tell, since the show airs tomorrow.

So, when did Wright acknowledge that what he had said was deeply offensive and inappropriate?  The AP story recounts some of Wright’s controversial comments but oddly omits to mention his apology, as does all other news coverage with which I am familiar.  And I am strangely certain that a Wright apology would have made the news – unless he never made it publicly.

So what are we supposed to believe – that Wright apologized to Obama, who is now apologizing to the rest of us on Wright’s behalf?  For heaven’s sake, this really does show that Obama is made of Presidential stuff – maybe he can do an Apology Tour, just as Bill Clinton did.

Posted at 12:39 PM | Email | Permalink

How The Global Jihad Really Works

http://patdollard.com/2008/03/the-deadly-beasts-of-jihad-are-gearing-up-for-major-confrontations/