But the fact is, an ad run by Obama during the primaries featuring a supposed snippet of his anti-war speech in Chicago in 2002 is probably faked. That’s because no one can find any video of the speech anywhere. All that exists is a small snip of audio. This from none other than the liberal NPR:
The speech was given at an anti-war rally on Oct. 2, 2002…..Jessie Jackson was the main speaker. Obama’s speech went mainly unnoticed. He had not yet announced his run for the Senate, although now he claims he risked his political career. Of course we know that there was NO risk in running against Alan Keyes, all Obama had to do was breathe..
The speech was given at an anti-war rally on Oct. 2, 2002…..He had not yet announced his run for the Senate, although now he claims he risked his political career. Of course we know that there was NO risk in running against Alan Keyes, all Obama had to do was breathe..
Gonyea says…..”In an age of YouTube there is no video of the speech and only a snippet of audio. The Obama campaign has reenacted the speech in a campaign AD they are now running.“If there is no video available it would seem the entire Obama anti-war speech on which he is basing his Ad campaign may be faked. In fact the entire speech could be distorted.
Even in this era of YouTube and camera phones, a recording of Obama’s speech is all but impossible to find. The Obama campaign has gone so far as to re-create portions of the speech for a television ad, with the candidate re-reading the text, with audience sound effects.
Contemporary accounts don’t even mention Obama – an insignificant state senator at the time (so much for putting his political career on the line for opposing the Iraq war in a district so far to the left, Che would win in a landslide). But since this report is from last March – a report by a mainstream news outlet – why this is the first we’re hearing of Obama faking an anti-war ad.
Just more evidence that Obama is not what he appears to be and that the press will go a long way to cover that fact up.
Hat Tip: Ed Lasky
Corsi points out that there is no record of Obama’s anti-war speech-no video, no audio, no written record. Instead, his speech was simulated after the fact in a sound studio much later-complete with phony crowd sounds. He said during the primary campaign that he was in the midst of a US Senate campaign when he made the speech-making it seem as if it was a bold, risky move on his part- an act of courage. Not true-he gave the speech in Nov. 2002. He did not announce his run for the Senate until Jan. 2003
When Barack Obama gave a speech on patriotism, he equated patriotism with the abstract concepts of “sacrifice” and “service to a larger cause.” Senator Obama does not understand what patriotism is — or how it works.
“After a while, you start noticing people wearing a lapel pin, but not acting very patriotic. Not voting to provide veterans with resources that they need. Not voting to make sure that disability payments were coming out on time. My attitude is that I’m less concerned about what you’re wearing on your lapel than what’s in your heart.”
“Anytime that you pledge allegiance you put your hand over your heart and I always have and I always will. It’s simply not true.”
“And yet, at certain times over the last sixteen months, I have found, for the first time, my patriotism challenged — at times as a result of my own carelessness, more often as a result of the desire by some to score political points and raise fears about who I am and what I stand for.”
“I came to understand that our revolution was waged for the sake of that belief … that we could have the right to pursue our individual dreams but the obligation to help our fellow citizens pursue theirs.”
“I also believe that patriotism must, if it is to mean anything, involve the willingness to sacrifice – to give up something we value on behalf of a larger cause.”
“We must always express our profound gratitude for the service of our men and women in uniform … the sacrifice of our troops is always worthy of honor … [even for those not in the military] the call to sacrifice for the country’s greater good remains an imperative of citizenship.”
“I believe one of the tasks of the next Administration is to ensure that this movement towards service grows and sustains itself in the years to come. We should expand AmeriCorps and grow the Peace Corps. We should encourage national service by making it part of the requirement for a new college assistance program….” [My emphasis.]
“Just as patriotism involves each of us making a commitment to this nation that extends beyond our own immediate self-interest, so must that commitment extends beyond our own time here on earth.” [sic]
CAIR Assassination Plot?
By Joe Kaufman
FrontPageMagazine.com | 8/7/2008
“In death there is something to celebrate…”
– Affad Shaikh, ‘Celebrating Death,’ December 20, 2007
Last month, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents stationed at the U.S./Mexico border held the Civil Rights Coordinator of CAIR-California, Affad Shaikh, and others whom he was with for questioning. The agents suspected that the group had the intention of coming to the United States to assassinate President Bush. The following will provide a detailed context for why the CBP would believe such a thing and will make the case as to why the U.S. government should not drop the issue.
Affad Shaikh has spent the last 20 years of his life in the U.S. He was born in Karachi, Pakistan. Though he has been here for as long as he has, he has had mixed feelings about his status as an American.
In an article he wrote in September of 2006, entitled ‘Five Years Ago an American Muslim was born,’ Shaikh stated that, due to the events that took place on September 11, 2001, “America stopped being America” for him. He said that the “war on Terrorism” that the government waged following the attacks has been, in reality, a “war on Muslims and Islam.”
He wrote, “The fact is, there is a new generation of angry Americans who happen to be American, and who happen to not like what America is becoming. The more Islam is reviled and connected to terrorism, the more kids my age and younger will turn to Islam to define their perspective and their reality.”
Shaikh’s reaction to the attacks was not one of revilement for the attackers, but was instead an embrace of the ideology of the attackers. He became observant, when he had never been before; he grew a beard; and he joined the Muslim Students Association (MSA) and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), two groups closely aligned with the radical Muslim Brotherhood overseas, the latter being born out of Hamas. He stated that he wanted people to “stare” at him and think that “this guy might be a terrorist.”
Thus began Affad Shaikh’s indoctrination into the evil world of radical Islam. And now, nearly seven years later, he has discovered that there may very well be consequences for his actions.
On July 26, 2008, Shaikh posted to Muslamics, a blog which he is a contributing writer for, a piece about an incident he had with Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents stationed at the San Yasidero U.S./Mexico border check point. He titled it, ‘Europeans Need not Come to the US.’ Evidently, he and some others, including a Dutch “friend” of his, were attempting to make their way into the States via Mexico and were stopped.
According to Shaikh, the CBP, whom Shaikh described as “ignorant, incompetent and inhuman,” had reason to believe that Shaikh and his friends were plotting to assassinate President Bush. He stated, “[T]hey felt that we – the group of us – were coming to the US to ‘kill the President’ in one agents own words.” Shaikh said that he sat for “three hours” at the checkpoint.
The charge of plotting to kill the President is, of course, a serious one. In fact, it was less than three years ago that a 24-year-old U.S. citizen named Ahmed Omar Abu Ali was convicted of plotting just the same. Ali, born to a Jordanian father, was enrolled at a university in Saudi Arabia, when he joined up with Al-Qaeda and soon planned to create a terror cell in the U.S. and personally murder President Bush. Ali was sentenced, in March of 2006, to 30 years in prison, followed by 30 years of supervised release.
The border guard’s accusation against Shaikh was not an unfounded one. Indeed, Shaikh has exhibited a profound hostility towards President Bush and those close to the President, evidenced by the following quotes made by him:
Shaikh’s statements against President Bush are mostly recent, a telling sign that, over time, since 9/11, Shaikh’s behavior has gotten more radical.
Shortly after his indoctrination, Shaikh became a follower of Anwar Nasser Al-Awlaki, a.k.a. Abu Atiq, an imam who had previously led a mosque in San Diego, the same city where Shaikh had graduated college. According to witnesses, beginning in San Diego, Al-Awlaki came in contact with a number of 9/11 hijackers, including Khalid al-Mihdhar, Nawaf al-Hazmi and Hani Hanjour.
Al-Awlaki, himself, is suspected of having been involved in various Al-Qaeda attack plots against the United States and others. He also served as vice president of the now-defunct U.S. branch of the Charitable Society for Social Welfare (CSSW), which has been described as an al-Qaeda financing front. In August of 2006, at the behest of the U.S. government, Al-Awlaki was arrested in Yemen and spent the next year and a half in solitary confinement. Shaikh’s blog Muslamics presently contains a link to Al-Awlaki’s official website on all of its pages.
During Anwar Al-Awlaki’s imprisonment, he was visited by agents from the FBI for interrogation. According to him, they put pressure on him, which “led to a conflict.” It may be pure coincidence, but in November of 2006, while Al-Awlaki was being held, Shaikh issued the following warning: “[H]ere is my advice to fellow American Muslims: NEVER GO INTO AN INTERVIEW WITH THE FBI, WITH OUT COVERING YOURSELF.”
Like most Islamists, Shaikh spends much of his time denouncing Israel and America’s relationship to her. In May of 2007, he foretold of a future catastrophic event that will arise, due to this relationship. He wrote, “I can not even begin to explain why we in the United States continue to support a country that has broken more UN resolutions then Saddam… For those of you who do not know, Israel is a Jewish state, and any who are not Jewish are second class citizens. If we in the West continue to feed into the this idea and support a state that is not truly in line with Democratic principles then we are fooling ourselves and setting up for a catastrophe of great magnitude.”
Shaikh has verbally attacked various government officials for having what he perceives to be a pro-Israel bias, including Senator Barbara Boxer and Congresswoman Jane Harman, who he has labeled “a pocket protector for [the Israel lobby group] AIPAC.”
He has even targeted Muslim leaders. In February of 2008, he posted to his blog a video derogatorily depicting the heads of Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the Palestinian Authority wearing outfits with big Jewish stars on them, dancing hand-in-hand with Israel’s Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert. He titled the post, ‘Imagine a World Where Zionism Won.’
Shaikh’s animosity for Israel makes sense, given the fact that the group he works for, CAIR, was a creation of the Hamas movement. Sheikh has also admitted to financially supporting Islamic Relief, a “charity” the Israeli government has labeled a front for Hamas.
And while his preoccupation with Israel borders on obsession, his vitriol for America is not far behind. In May of 2000, Shaikh said, “The United States is among the least peaceful nations in the world.” As well, he has borrowed vernacular from Al-Qaeda, referring to Americans in Iraq as “Crusaders.”
Any one of his statements left on its own would suggest little more than the fact that Affad Shaikh is a disgruntled Islamist. However, taken as a whole, Shaikh’s activity translates to a potential danger – to the President and others.
One year ago, in August of 2007, the Executive Director of CAIR-California, Hussam Ayloush, posted a threat against President Bush on his personal website. It had been written by an enemy combatant held in Guantanamo Bay, who Ayloush was advocating for the release of. It read, “America, you ride on the backs of orphans, and terrorize them daily. Bush, beware.”
If the U.S./Mexico border agents were correct, Affad Shaikh, Hussam Ayloush’s colleague in CAIR, might very well have been the answer to this unheeded warning.
In May of 2007, Shaikh penned an article, which he ominously ended with the statement, “Get rid of the Pharaoh in Egypt along with the Prince of Israel.” The quote was in the context of U.S. support for the Jewish state. Question: Was President Bush supposed to be the “Pharoah” or the “Prince”?
Islamobil: Mosque on Wheels
August 6, 2008
In one of my articles, Terrorists’ Bill of Rights, I described how America will be taken over by the Muslims. I warned that Muslims do it first by establishing Mosques in every town and city. These mosques range from the ostentatious, such as the one in Washington D.C., to the academically-cloaked university Islamic centers, to the innocuous storefront types and even prison chapels. One and all have the same aims: Hold the faithful in line, recruit as many new adherents by any and all means, and indoctrinate one and all in the imperative of Islamic conquest.
It is in these Islamic places that the impressionable young and the fanatical adults are drilled with the duty to carry out Jihad against the Dar ul Harb (“land of war”—anyplace not completely under the rule of Islam.)
Operating this vast network of Islamism requires significant financing. Saudi Arabia has spent over $80 billion for these operations since 1970. The other Gulf States, with their treasuries flush with oil money, have done and continue to do their share of financing.
Not to be out-done by the virulent Wahhabism of the Saudis and their co-sectist Sunnis, the Islamic Republic of Iran has been bank-rolling its own array of clientele in the Middle East, much of Africa, and as far away as Southeast Asia and Latin America in a push for Shiism. The-non-Muslim world is literally caught in a pincer of the two rabid Islamic forces.
There are those who still delude themselves by preferring to believe that Islam has not made as many inroads into the United States as it has in other parts of the world, such as Europe. Facts prove otherwise.
According to a National Portrait, a survey released in April 2001, there were at least 1,209 mosques in the US. According to the latest report, this number has sky-rocketed to as many as 6,000 mosques in 2008
Two years ago, the Islamobil debuted in Germany to teach the German people what a peaceful religion Islam really is. The concept of Islamobil appears to be the brainchild of the Islamic Republic of Iran. It is a way of taking the mosque to the people who lack a Takeyeh (mosque) in their own neighborhood.
In addition to all the stationary and mobile mosques, Islam is advanced by a large cadre of auxiliaries. Dr. Paul Williams (former FBI consultant, best-selling author and investigative journalist) reports that many Muslim businesses around the country conduct their regular businesses during the day and in the evening they turn their stores into Islamic gathering places. There are several thousands of these make-shift “Takeyehs”.
Disguised as religion, Islam has penetrated the democracies with the aim of replacing civility and liberty with the barbarism of theocracy and Sharia. Islam’s multi-pronged attack aims to destroy all that liberty offers.
America, with a long tradition of protecting religious freedom, still clings to the “hands off” practice of leaving alone any doctrine or practice billed as religion. A thorny problem is in deciding what constitutes a religion and who is to make that call. We must keep in mind that to be a loyal and faithful Muslim, a Muslim must adhere to and perform many obligatory acts, as specified in the Quran by Allah and the Hadith/Sunna, during his entire life.
“Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home: an evil fate.” Quran 9:73
Irrespective of what the term Islam may mean, the facts on the ground conclusively demonstrate Islam’s violent nature from its very inception. No need to go back to the time of Muhammad and examine the historical records. Just a few contemporary events should make the point.
Here is a partial list: the savage Shiite-Sunni bloodletting in Iraq; the barbarism of the resurgent Taliban in Afghanistan; the genocide in Sudan’s Darfur region; the Somali killings; the Iranian mullahs’ murder of their own people and support of mischief abroad; the cross-border attack on Israel by Lebanese Hizbollah; the incessant terrorist acts of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, and the Fatwas of the Palestinians against Israel.
As a group, Islamists are paranoid and suffer chronically from the disease of victimization. That is, they either victimize the helpless whenever and wherever they can, or scream murder against the strong. This mentality is one of the many bequests that Muhammad left for his Ummah. And it is well-known that paranoia is a powerful impeller to acts of violence. The Quran commands the faithful to make war against the non-Muslims and the deeply paranoia-inflicted Muslims are just too happy to comply.
Recall that Muhammad himself bemoaned his victim plight in Mecca, packed his bags and fled to Medina where the Jews were not as vicious as his own Quraish tribe who ran the lucrative tourist business of the idolaters.
Once in Medina with a band of booty-hungry followers, Muhammad was metamorphosed to a cruel victimizer, with the Jews as handy and tempting easy prey.
The handwriting is on the wall. The wall is presently covered with bold letters on the other side of the Atlantic: Islam is taking over with much of the Sharia law in effect in many parts of Europe, including the source of our Common Law, Great Britain.
Before long, we can expect the arrival of the Islamobil in this land to join forces with the already-in-place Islamic digs called mosques to help replace our free and secular society with the barbaric Islamic rule and its Sharia.
With the average citizen, and not the devious and for-purchase-politicians, rests the solemn obligation to act, and act now, to compel our government to stem the tide of Islamism before it is too late.
I am not an alarmist. Please take time and read the reports of what is happening in Europe. Also, investigate how the petrodollar-intoxicated Islamists are buying people and services they need to further their aim. Freedom is priceless. We should accept no price for it nor should we allow anyone to tender freedom to the invaders on our behalf