Chart of the morning: Guess who’s paying the Cover Tim Geithner’s A** “Bank Tax?” Y-o-u.

Chart of the morning: Guess who’s paying the Cover Tim Geithner’s A** “Bank Tax?” Y-o-u.

By Michelle Malkin  •  March 8, 2010 09:47 AM

In January, I deconstructed the White House “Financial Crisis Responsibility Fee” fakery for you:

1. The bank tax will inevitably be passed on to consumers and the White House has no way of stopping them from doing the dumping.

2. The tax won’t apply to non-banks, black holes Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, or the bailed-out auto companies.

3. This isn’t about getting “our money” back. It’s about redistributing it again under the guise of faux populism.

More to the point, this is what I call the Cover Tim Geithner’s A** Tax. Making banks the whipping boys takes the heat off Geithner for his incompetent, complicit, and transparency-subverting tenure as New York Federal Reserve chair.

Team Obama wants you to keep your eyes on its fatcat barbecue charade.

My friends at the Heritage Foundation compiled a handy graphic that underscores chicanery.

Heritage’s Mike Brownfield sums it up:

President Obama announced his bank tax during his State of the Union Address in January and claimed it would be a way to recoup money dished out to banks as part of the Troubled Asset Relief Program bailout. The truth, though, is that those banks already paid-back the bailouts, with interest; the real deadbeat offenders are Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, Chrysler and General Motors, who have yet to repay their debt. (Take a look at the above chart to see who has repaid – and who hasn’t.)

The President’s proposal was a not-so-thinly-veiled populist proposal, intended to play to an America disgruntled with government bailouts and those institutions that won government handouts.

He better brace himself for an America that finds itself even more disgruntled when they realize they’re getting hit with the very tax that was meant to appease them.

Stimulus funds pay for monkey research in N.C.

Stimulus funds pay for monkey research in N.C.

Benjamin Niolet | The (Raleigh) News & Observer

last updated: March 08, 2010 08:01:17 AM

Monkeys are getting high for science in North Carolina.

An analyst at the Civitas Institute seized on that image when selecting a cocaine addiction study at Wake Forest University Medical School as No. 1 on a list of the “10 worst federal stimulus projects in North Carolina.” Civitas’ Brian Balfour takes swipes at projects, writing that they “seem completely unrelated to avoiding an economic ‘catastrophe,’ but rather an ad hoc satisfaction of countless dubious wish lists.”

So, what is the $71,623 federal stimulus grant paying for?

Well, a job, said Mark Wright, a spokesman for the Wake Forest University School of Medicine.

“It’s actually the continuation of a job that might not still be there if it hadn’t been for the stimulus funding. And it’s a good job,” Wright said. “It’s also very worthwhile research.”

The study is examining the effects of cocaine on a particular neurotransmitter among monkeys who have had a long-term addiction to cocaine.

The medical school boasts a significant body of work studying addiction. Ultimately, the study could lead to better treatment for recovering cocaine addicts.

Balfour also cited another Wake Forest study. This one is studying whether yoga and other non-pharmaceutical therapies such as wellness classes can help alleviate hot flashes and other symptoms of menopause.

“How does this study help revive the economy?” Balfour asked.

Well, again, jobs, said Nancy Avis, a professor in the Department of Social Sciences and Health policy at the medical school. The funding, more than $147,000 over two years, will contribute to the salaries of six people.

To read the complete article, visit www.newsobserver.com.

New Poll: Most Americans Say Banning Handguns Is Unconstitutional

New Poll: Most Americans Say Banning Handguns Is Unconstitutional
Friday, March 05, 2010
By Karen Schuberg

(CNSNews.com) – While the U.S. Supreme Court considers whether Chicago’s handgun ban breaches the Second Amendment, 69 percent of Americans believe city governments have no right to legislate against citizens owning such guns, a new poll shows.
 
According to a Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey, only 25 percent of adults say city governments have the right to bar citizen handgun ownership.
 
The pollster asked: “Some people believe city governments have the right to ban ownership of handguns within their cities. Others say that’s a violation of the Second Amendment which guarantees citizens the right to bear arms. What do you think? Do city governments have the right to prevent citizens from owning handguns?
 
The findings echo those from June 2008 when the Supreme Court overturned a Washington, D.C., law which prohibited handguns in that city.
 
“Sizeable majorities of Americans across virtually all demographic lines, including age, income, gender, race and political affiliation, share the belief that cities do not have the right to ban handgun ownership,” the report said.
 
The pollster also found that 70 percent of all adults believe the right of the average citizen to own a gun is guaranteed by the Constitution. Fourteen (14) percent deny such a constitutional right exists and 16 percent are unsure.
 
How Americans feel about the need for more stringent gun-control laws is mixed: 42 percent want tougher anti-gun laws, but 49 percent think stricter gun laws are not needed.
 
Support for stronger gun control rose from 39 percent to 45 percent in April 2007, in the wake of the Virginia Tech massacre, when a student opened fire, killing 32 people and wounding many others before committing suicide.
 
Sixty-five (65) percent of Democrats want America to have stronger anti-gun laws, while 65 percent of Republicans and 52 percent of independents disagree.
 
Forty-four (44) percent of Americans now say there is a gun in their household, while 48 percent say no one in the house owns a gun.
 
Ironically, married adults — including those with children in the household — are “much more likely” to have a gun than single adults and those without children at home.
 
Last June, 57 percent of Americans said gun sale increases were fueled by a “fear of increased government restriction” on owning guns. Twenty-three (23) percent attributed the rise in gun sales to a “fear of increased crime.”

Poll: By 2-to-1 Margin, Americans Say U.S. Debt Owed to China Now Greater Threat than Terrorism

Poll: By 2-to-1 Margin, Americans Say U.S. Debt Owed to China Now Greater Threat than Terrorism
Sunday, March 07, 2010
By Christopher Neefus

(CNSNews.com) – By a two-to-one margin, American adults believe the amount of money the U.S. owes China to cover the U.S. national debt is now a greater threat than radical Islam.
 
According to a Zogby International poll, 58 percent said the debt was a greater concern, versus just 27 percent who chose terrorism perpetrated by “radical Islamists.”
 
The polling firm asked respondents: “When you think about the long-term security and well-being of the U.S., which of these do you believe is a more serious threat?”
 
Political ideology did not change the results significantly, the pollster pointed out.
 
“Interestingly, there was little variation by party identification with a majority of Democrats, Republicans and independents all agreeing that the debt owed by the United States to China poses the greater threat,” the Zogby report said. “Opinion was consistent across all other major demographic and politics sub-groups.”
 
Democrats barely strayed from the overall 58 percent-27 percent spread, with 57 percent of Democrats choosing the debt owed to China and 24 percent more concerned with Islamic terrorism. Likewise, independents broke 59 percent for the debt and 28 percent for terrorist attacks. The GOP followed suit, at 61-32.
 
Unsurprisingly, Republicans were more apt to choose one or the other as a serious threat, with just 2 percent (within the margin of error) choosing “Neither.” Conversely, 12 percent of Democrats said neither.
 
The GOP has made the skyrocketing debt a prime issue of late. After President Obama introduced his record $3.8 trillion budget for fiscal year 2011, which carried a record trillion-plus-dollar deficit, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said the new debt incurred was “astonishing.”
 
“This budget provides a startling figure that should stop us all in our tracks,” he said on the floor of the Senate.
 
“In fact, in just four years the administration predicts the government will have to spend more just to pay interest on the federal debt than it spends on the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, HUD (Housing and Urban Development), Interior, Justice, Labor, State, Treasury, and the Corps of Engineers, Environment Protection Agency, GSA (General Services Administration), NASA, National Science Foundation, Small Business Administration and the Social Security Administration — combined.”
 
After Democrats voted to increase the debt ceiling to more than $14 trillion to accommodate new spending, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), the ranking Republican on the House Budget Committee said on the floor that the House had “bequeathed the next generation an inferior standard of living.”
 
“I didn’t come here to make sure that my three kids are going to have a life that’s worse off than ours.”
 
Democrats, on the other hand, often say that deficit spending is the best way to spur new economic growth, and that the red ink of okay for the short term.
 
Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner appeared before the Senate Finance Committee to defend the budget in the first week of February and told members there was a “very strong economic case” for elevated government spending.
 
“Our basic test should be what’s going to add jobs, what’s going to add spark to investment, what’s going to provide good leverage for the taxpayers’ money, and we need to make sure we’re doing that in a way that’s fiscally responsible over the medium term,” Geithner said. 

Set Free By Karzai As Peace Gesture: Afghanistan Insurgency Being Led By Ex-Gitmo Inmate

Set Free By Karzai As Peace Gesture: Afghanistan Insurgency Being Led By Ex-Gitmo Inmate

March 6th, 2010 Posted By Pat Dollard.

20091007t124802z_01_btre5960zk500_rtroptp_3_internationalusafghanistantalibananniversary

The southern Afghanistan insurgency IS the insurgency…

(Reuters) – Insurgency in the most violent part of Afghanistan is being led by a former Guantanamo Bay detainee, set free by the Afghan government in a botched attempt at reconciliation with tribes, a NATO official said on Saturday.

The man, known by the names Mullah Abdul Qayyum and Mullah Zakir, was arrested in 2001 and held in the U.S. prison camp in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, until 2007, when the administration of President George W. Bush turned him over to Afghan custody.

He is now the commander of Taliban forces in southern Afghanistan — including Helmand province, where U.S. and British forces launched the war’s biggest offensive last month — and a leading candidate to take over as Taliban number two and overall military commander, said the NATO official.

Qayyum was transferred to a prison in Kabul in 2007. Afghan Deputy Attorney General Fazel Ahmad Faqiryar confirmed that he was freed by the Afghan authorities in 2008 under a reconciliation programme.

The NATO official, asking not to be identified while discussing intelligence, said president Hamid Karzai appeared to have authorized the release in an effort to reconcile with Pashtun tribes involved in the insurgency.

“When we sort of started to clean out Cuba … it really was under the understanding he would stay locked up here,” the official said.

“He (Karzai) was the one who authorized the release, and I don’t think we were very pleased about it.”

The official said Qayyum took up his position as commander of the insurgency in the south shortly after his release.

Qayyum, believed to be in his early 30s, is now one of two top figures thought likely to replace Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, the Taliban number two leader whose arrest in Pakistan was announced last month, the NATO official said.

The other likely candidate would be the commander of the insurgency in the east of the country, Mullah Mansour, he said.

INTELLIGENCE COUP

The arrest of Baradar, one of the most senior Taliban figures ever brought into custody, was seen as a major coup for Pakistani and U.S. agents, but has raised questions about its impact on the insurgency at a time when Karzai is pushing for peace talks.

The militants have so far not confirmed that Baradar was arrested and refuse to discuss his replacement. Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid said there could be no talk of any replacement for Baradar in the absence of any proof he was being held.

“They claim that they arrested Baradar, so why don’t they show him to the public?” he told Reuters by telephone from an undisclosed location.

However, a Taliban commander in the south, Mullah Hayat Khan, told Reuters Qayyum was likely to emerge as Baradar’s successor, and would be more aggressive than Baradar.

“The Taliban movement will be very strong with Mullah Qayyum in place of Mullah Baradar,” he said.

Afghanistan has asked Pakistan to turn Baradar over to its custody, but a Pakistani court has ruled he cannot be extradited.

Questions have been raised about exactly why Pakistan arrested Baradar now, after years of having little success in dismantling Afghan Taliban networks on its soil.

Some have suggested that the Taliban without Baradar could grow even more radical and hostile to negotiations.

Despite years leading the insurgency and ordering suicide and bomb attacks against the government, Baradar is from the same Pashtun tribe as Karzai and has been seen as someone that might eventually be willing to accept Karzai’s invitation to talks.

Qayyum, by contrast, is a tribal kinsman of the Taliban’s mercurial leader, Mullah Mohammad Omar.

The commander of U.S. and NATO forces, General Stanley McChrystal, said in an interview this week with Reuters and the New York Times that Baradar’s arrest may have been the result of an internal feud and purge within the Taliban leadership, although he stressed this was only one possible explanation.

The NATO official said there was no firm evidence to suggest that Qayyum had played a role in ousting Baradar.

Baradar, the official said, had been “extremely competent as a military leader,” and the insurgency would suffer without him. But Qayyum would also be a tough enemy if he emerges as Baradar’s replacement.

“This guy’s no angel and we’d certainly like him to come back and stay with us again,” he said.

4 Stages of Islamic Conquest:

4 Stages of Islamic Conquest:

STAGE 1: INFILTRATION

Muslims begin moving to non-Muslim countries in increasing numbers and the beginning of cultural conflicts are visible, though often subtle.

  • First migration wave to non-Muslim “host” country.
  • Appeal for humanitarian tolerance from the host society.
  • Attempts to portray Islam as a peaceful & Muslims as victims of misunderstanding and racism (even though Islam is not a ‘race’).
  • High Muslim birth rate in host country increase Muslim population.
  • Mosques used to spread Islam and dislike of host country & culture.
  • Calls to criminalize “Islamophobia” as a hate crime.
  • Threatened legal action for perceived discrimination.
  • Offers of “interfaith dialogue” to indoctrinate non-Muslims.

How many nations are suffering from Islamic infiltration? One? A handful? Nearly every nation? The Islamic ‘leadership” of the Muslim Brotherhood and others wish to dissolve each nation’s sovereignty and replace it with the global imposition of Islamic sharia law. Sharia law, based on the koran, sira and hadith, condemns liberty and forbids equality and is inconsistent with the laws of all Western nations. As the author and historian Serge Trifkovic states:

 ”The refusal of the Western elite class to protect their nations from jihadist infiltration is the biggest betrayal in history.”

STAGE 2:   CONSOLIDATION OF POWER

Muslim immigrants and host country converts continue demands for accommodation in employment, education, social services, financing and courts.

  • Proselytizing increases; Establishment and Recruitment of Jihadi cells.
  • Efforts to convert alienated segments of the population to Islam.
  • Revisionist efforts to Islamize history.
  • Efforts to destroy historic evidence that reveal true Islamism.
  • Increased anti-western propaganda and psychological warfare.
  • Efforts to recruit allies who share similar goals (communists, anarchists).
  • Attempts to indoctrinate children to Islamist viewpoint.
  • Increased efforts to intimidate, silence and eliminate non-Muslims.
  • Efforts to introduce blasphemy and hate laws in order to silence critics.
  • Continued focus on enlarging Muslim population by increasing Muslim births and immigration.
  • Use of charities to recruit supporters and fund jihad.
  • Covert efforts to bring about the destruction of host society from within.
  • Development of Muslim political base in non-Muslim host society.
  • Islamic Financial networks fund political growth, acquisition of land. 
  • Highly visible assassination of critics aimed to intimidate opposition.
  • Tolerance of non-Muslims diminishes.
  • Greater demands to adopt strict Islamic conduct.
  • Clandestine amassing of weapons and explosives in hidden locations.
  • Overt disregard/rejection of non-Muslim society’s legal system, culture.
  • Efforts to undermine and destroy power base of non-Muslim religions including and especially Jews and Christians.

Is there a pattern here? Theo van Gogh is murdered in the Netherlands for ‘insulting’ Islam; the Organization of the Islamic Conference demands ‘anti-blasphemy’ laws through the United Nations; France is set afire regularly by ‘youths’ (read Muslims); the rise of (dis-) honor killings…holocaust denial…anti-Semitism…deception re the tenets of Islam; hatred toward Christians and Jews and Hindus and Buddhists.  The pattern for all to see is the rise of Islamic intolerance and the covert/cultural jihad to remake host societies into sharia-compliant worlds – to remove host sovereignty and replace it with Islamic sharia law.  Sharia law that condemns earthly liberty and individual freedom, that forbids equality among faiths and between the sexes, that rejects the concept of nations outside the global house of Islam, that of dar al-Islam.

STAGE 3: OPEN WAR w/ LEADERSHIP & CULTURE   

Open violence to impose Sharia law and associated cultural restrictions; rejection of host government, subjugation of other religions and customs. 

  • Intentional efforts to undermine the host government & culture.
  • Acts of barbarity to intimidate citizens and foster fear and submission.
  • Open and covert efforts to cause economic collapse of the society.
  • All opposition is challenged and either eradicated or silenced.
  • Mass execution of non-Muslims.
  • Widespread ethnic cleansing by Islamic militias.
  • Rejection and defiance of host society secular laws or culture.
  • Murder of “moderate” Muslim intellectuals who don’t support Islamization.
  • Destruction of churches, synagogues and other non-Muslim institutions.
  • Women are restricted further in accordance with Sharia law.
  • Large-scale destruction of population, assassinations, bombings.
  • Toppling of government and usurpation of political power.
  • Imposition of Sharia law

The website www.thereligionofpeace.com keeps track of the number of violent jihad attacks as best it can. The site lists more than 14,000 attacks since September 2001. It is worth a visit. What is occurring, however, that is likely inestimable are events where muslims are bullied by other muslims for not being “muslim enough,” where non-Muslims are intimidated into doing or not doing what they desire, where remnant populations are in a death spiral simply for being non-muslim in a predominantly muslim area. Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists Animists and Atheists meet with death, property destruction or confiscation, forced conversion, rape, excessive taxation (the jizya), enslavement, riotous mobs and various other forms of islam (in-) justice at the hands of muslims in Sudan, Philippines, Kenya, Malaysia, India, etc.  And let us not forget ‘death to Apostates’ the world over.

STAGE 4: Totalitarian ISLAMIC “THEOCRACY”

Islam becomes the only religious-political-judicial-cultural ideology.

  • Sharia becomes the “law of the land.
  •  All non-Islamic human rights cancelled.
  • Enslavement and genocide of non-Muslim population.
  • Freedom of speech and the press eradicated.
  • All religions other than Islam are forbidden and destroyed.
  • Destruction of all evidence of non-Muslim culture, populations and symbols in country (Buddhas, houses of worship, art, etc).

The House of Islam (“peace”), dar al-Islam, includes those nations that have submitted to Islamic rule, to the soul crushing, liberty-condemning, discriminatory law of Sharia. The rest of the world in in the House of War, dar al-harb, because it does not submit to Sharia, and exists in a state of rebellion or war with the will of ‘Allah.’ No non-Muslim state or its citizens are “innocent,” and remain viable targets of war for not believing in ‘Allah.’ The Christian, Jewish, Coptic, Hindu and Zoroastrian peoples of world have suffered under subjugation for centuries. The Dhimmi-esce are forbidden to construct houses of worship or repair existing ones, economically crippled by the heavy jizya (tax), socially humiliated, legally discriminated against, criminally targeted and generally kept in a permanent state of weakness, fear and vulnerability by Islamic governments.

It should be noted that forced conversions (Egypt) and slavery (Sudan) are still reported. Homosexuals have been hung in the public square in Iran. Young girls are married to old men. Apostates are threatened with death. “Honor” killings are routine. Women are legally second-class citizens, though Muslim males insist they are “treated better” than in the West. These more obvious manifestations may distract from some less obvious ones such as the lack of intellectual inquiry in science, narrow scope of writing, all but non-existent art and music, sexual use and abuse of youth and women, and the disregard for personal fulfillment, joy and wonder. Look into the eyes of a recently married 12 year old girl to see the consequence of the moral deprivation spawned by Islam.

For all four stages see “Liberty v Sharia” at http://shariafree.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/liberty-vs-sharia-1109.pdf

4 Stages of Islamic Conquest:

4 Stages of Islamic Conquest:

STAGE 1: INFILTRATION

Muslims begin moving to non-Muslim countries in increasing numbers and the beginning of cultural conflicts are visible, though often subtle.

  • First migration wave to non-Muslim “host” country.
  • Appeal for humanitarian tolerance from the host society.
  • Attempts to portray Islam as a peaceful & Muslims as victims of misunderstanding and racism (even though Islam is not a ‘race’).
  • High Muslim birth rate in host country increase Muslim population.
  • Mosques used to spread Islam and dislike of host country & culture.
  • Calls to criminalize “Islamophobia” as a hate crime.
  • Threatened legal action for perceived discrimination.
  • Offers of “interfaith dialogue” to indoctrinate non-Muslims.

How many nations are suffering from Islamic infiltration? One? A handful? Nearly every nation? The Islamic ‘leadership” of the Muslim Brotherhood and others wish to dissolve each nation’s sovereignty and replace it with the global imposition of Islamic sharia law. Sharia law, based on the koran, sira and hadith, condemns liberty and forbids equality and is inconsistent with the laws of all Western nations. As the author and historian Serge Trifkovic states:

 ”The refusal of the Western elite class to protect their nations from jihadist infiltration is the biggest betrayal in history.”

STAGE 2:   CONSOLIDATION OF POWER

Muslim immigrants and host country converts continue demands for accommodation in employment, education, social services, financing and courts.

  • Proselytizing increases; Establishment and Recruitment of Jihadi cells.
  • Efforts to convert alienated segments of the population to Islam.
  • Revisionist efforts to Islamize history.
  • Efforts to destroy historic evidence that reveal true Islamism.
  • Increased anti-western propaganda and psychological warfare.
  • Efforts to recruit allies who share similar goals (communists, anarchists).
  • Attempts to indoctrinate children to Islamist viewpoint.
  • Increased efforts to intimidate, silence and eliminate non-Muslims.
  • Efforts to introduce blasphemy and hate laws in order to silence critics.
  • Continued focus on enlarging Muslim population by increasing Muslim births and immigration.
  • Use of charities to recruit supporters and fund jihad.
  • Covert efforts to bring about the destruction of host society from within.
  • Development of Muslim political base in non-Muslim host society.
  • Islamic Financial networks fund political growth, acquisition of land. 
  • Highly visible assassination of critics aimed to intimidate opposition.
  • Tolerance of non-Muslims diminishes.
  • Greater demands to adopt strict Islamic conduct.
  • Clandestine amassing of weapons and explosives in hidden locations.
  • Overt disregard/rejection of non-Muslim society’s legal system, culture.
  • Efforts to undermine and destroy power base of non-Muslim religions including and especially Jews and Christians.

Is there a pattern here? Theo van Gogh is murdered in the Netherlands for ‘insulting’ Islam; the Organization of the Islamic Conference demands ‘anti-blasphemy’ laws through the United Nations; France is set afire regularly by ‘youths’ (read Muslims); the rise of (dis-) honor killings…holocaust denial…anti-Semitism…deception re the tenets of Islam; hatred toward Christians and Jews and Hindus and Buddhists.  The pattern for all to see is the rise of Islamic intolerance and the covert/cultural jihad to remake host societies into sharia-compliant worlds – to remove host sovereignty and replace it with Islamic sharia law.  Sharia law that condemns earthly liberty and individual freedom, that forbids equality among faiths and between the sexes, that rejects the concept of nations outside the global house of Islam, that of dar al-Islam.

STAGE 3: OPEN WAR w/ LEADERSHIP & CULTURE   

Open violence to impose Sharia law and associated cultural restrictions; rejection of host government, subjugation of other religions and customs. 

  • Intentional efforts to undermine the host government & culture.
  • Acts of barbarity to intimidate citizens and foster fear and submission.
  • Open and covert efforts to cause economic collapse of the society.
  • All opposition is challenged and either eradicated or silenced.
  • Mass execution of non-Muslims.
  • Widespread ethnic cleansing by Islamic militias.
  • Rejection and defiance of host society secular laws or culture.
  • Murder of “moderate” Muslim intellectuals who don’t support Islamization.
  • Destruction of churches, synagogues and other non-Muslim institutions.
  • Women are restricted further in accordance with Sharia law.
  • Large-scale destruction of population, assassinations, bombings.
  • Toppling of government and usurpation of political power.
  • Imposition of Sharia law

The website www.thereligionofpeace.com keeps track of the number of violent jihad attacks as best it can. The site lists more than 14,000 attacks since September 2001. It is worth a visit. What is occurring, however, that is likely inestimable are events where muslims are bullied by other muslims for not being “muslim enough,” where non-Muslims are intimidated into doing or not doing what they desire, where remnant populations are in a death spiral simply for being non-muslim in a predominantly muslim area. Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists Animists and Atheists meet with death, property destruction or confiscation, forced conversion, rape, excessive taxation (the jizya), enslavement, riotous mobs and various other forms of islam (in-) justice at the hands of muslims in Sudan, Philippines, Kenya, Malaysia, India, etc.  And let us not forget ‘death to Apostates’ the world over.

STAGE 4: Totalitarian ISLAMIC “THEOCRACY”

Islam becomes the only religious-political-judicial-cultural ideology.

  • Sharia becomes the “law of the land.
  •  All non-Islamic human rights cancelled.
  • Enslavement and genocide of non-Muslim population.
  • Freedom of speech and the press eradicated.
  • All religions other than Islam are forbidden and destroyed.
  • Destruction of all evidence of non-Muslim culture, populations and symbols in country (Buddhas, houses of worship, art, etc).

The House of Islam (“peace”), dar al-Islam, includes those nations that have submitted to Islamic rule, to the soul crushing, liberty-condemning, discriminatory law of Sharia. The rest of the world in in the House of War, dar al-harb, because it does not submit to Sharia, and exists in a state of rebellion or war with the will of ‘Allah.’ No non-Muslim state or its citizens are “innocent,” and remain viable targets of war for not believing in ‘Allah.’ The Christian, Jewish, Coptic, Hindu and Zoroastrian peoples of world have suffered under subjugation for centuries. The Dhimmi-esce are forbidden to construct houses of worship or repair existing ones, economically crippled by the heavy jizya (tax), socially humiliated, legally discriminated against, criminally targeted and generally kept in a permanent state of weakness, fear and vulnerability by Islamic governments.

It should be noted that forced conversions (Egypt) and slavery (Sudan) are still reported. Homosexuals have been hung in the public square in Iran. Young girls are married to old men. Apostates are threatened with death. “Honor” killings are routine. Women are legally second-class citizens, though Muslim males insist they are “treated better” than in the West. These more obvious manifestations may distract from some less obvious ones such as the lack of intellectual inquiry in science, narrow scope of writing, all but non-existent art and music, sexual use and abuse of youth and women, and the disregard for personal fulfillment, joy and wonder. Look into the eyes of a recently married 12 year old girl to see the consequence of the moral deprivation spawned by Islam.

For all four stages see “Liberty v Sharia” at http://shariafree.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/liberty-vs-sharia-1109.pdf

4 Stages of Islamic Conquest:

STAGE 1: INFILTRATION

Muslims begin moving to non-Muslim countries in increasing numbers and the beginning of cultural conflicts are visible, though often subtle.

  • First migration wave to non-Muslim “host” country.
  • Appeal for humanitarian tolerance from the host society.
  • Attempts to portray Islam as a peaceful & Muslims as victims of misunderstanding and racism (even though Islam is not a ‘race’).
  • High Muslim birth rate in host country increase Muslim population.
  • Mosques used to spread Islam and dislike of host country & culture.
  • Calls to criminalize “Islamophobia” as a hate crime.
  • Threatened legal action for perceived discrimination.
  • Offers of “interfaith dialogue” to indoctrinate non-Muslims.

How many nations are suffering from Islamic infiltration? One? A handful? Nearly every nation? The Islamic ‘leadership” of the Muslim Brotherhood and others wish to dissolve each nation’s sovereignty and replace it with the global imposition of Islamic sharia law. Sharia law, based on the koran, sira and hadith, condemns liberty and forbids equality and is inconsistent with the laws of all Western nations. As the author and historian Serge Trifkovic states:

 ”The refusal of the Western elite class to protect their nations from jihadist infiltration is the biggest betrayal in history.”

STAGE 2:   CONSOLIDATION OF POWER

Muslim immigrants and host country converts continue demands for accommodation in employment, education, social services, financing and courts.

  • Proselytizing increases; Establishment and Recruitment of Jihadi cells.
  • Efforts to convert alienated segments of the population to Islam.
  • Revisionist efforts to Islamize history.
  • Efforts to destroy historic evidence that reveal true Islamism.
  • Increased anti-western propaganda and psychological warfare.
  • Efforts to recruit allies who share similar goals (communists, anarchists).
  • Attempts to indoctrinate children to Islamist viewpoint.
  • Increased efforts to intimidate, silence and eliminate non-Muslims.
  • Efforts to introduce blasphemy and hate laws in order to silence critics.
  • Continued focus on enlarging Muslim population by increasing Muslim births and immigration.
  • Use of charities to recruit supporters and fund jihad.
  • Covert efforts to bring about the destruction of host society from within.
  • Development of Muslim political base in non-Muslim host society.
  • Islamic Financial networks fund political growth, acquisition of land. 
  • Highly visible assassination of critics aimed to intimidate opposition.
  • Tolerance of non-Muslims diminishes.
  • Greater demands to adopt strict Islamic conduct.
  • Clandestine amassing of weapons and explosives in hidden locations.
  • Overt disregard/rejection of non-Muslim society’s legal system, culture.
  • Efforts to undermine and destroy power base of non-Muslim religions including and especially Jews and Christians.

Is there a pattern here? Theo van Gogh is murdered in the Netherlands for ‘insulting’ Islam; the Organization of the Islamic Conference demands ‘anti-blasphemy’ laws through the United Nations; France is set afire regularly by ‘youths’ (read Muslims); the rise of (dis-) honor killings…holocaust denial…anti-Semitism…deception re the tenets of Islam; hatred toward Christians and Jews and Hindus and Buddhists.  The pattern for all to see is the rise of Islamic intolerance and the covert/cultural jihad to remake host societies into sharia-compliant worlds – to remove host sovereignty and replace it with Islamic sharia law.  Sharia law that condemns earthly liberty and individual freedom, that forbids equality among faiths and between the sexes, that rejects the concept of nations outside the global house of Islam, that of dar al-Islam.

STAGE 3: OPEN WAR w/ LEADERSHIP & CULTURE   

Open violence to impose Sharia law and associated cultural restrictions; rejection of host government, subjugation of other religions and customs. 

  • Intentional efforts to undermine the host government & culture.
  • Acts of barbarity to intimidate citizens and foster fear and submission.
  • Open and covert efforts to cause economic collapse of the society.
  • All opposition is challenged and either eradicated or silenced.
  • Mass execution of non-Muslims.
  • Widespread ethnic cleansing by Islamic militias.
  • Rejection and defiance of host society secular laws or culture.
  • Murder of “moderate” Muslim intellectuals who don’t support Islamization.
  • Destruction of churches, synagogues and other non-Muslim institutions.
  • Women are restricted further in accordance with Sharia law.
  • Large-scale destruction of population, assassinations, bombings.
  • Toppling of government and usurpation of political power.
  • Imposition of Sharia law

The website www.thereligionofpeace.com keeps track of the number of violent jihad attacks as best it can. The site lists more than 14,000 attacks since September 2001. It is worth a visit. What is occurring, however, that is likely inestimable are events where muslims are bullied by other muslims for not being “muslim enough,” where non-Muslims are intimidated into doing or not doing what they desire, where remnant populations are in a death spiral simply for being non-muslim in a predominantly muslim area. Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists Animists and Atheists meet with death, property destruction or confiscation, forced conversion, rape, excessive taxation (the jizya), enslavement, riotous mobs and various other forms of islam (in-) justice at the hands of muslims in Sudan, Philippines, Kenya, Malaysia, India, etc.  And let us not forget ‘death to Apostates’ the world over.

STAGE 4: Totalitarian ISLAMIC “THEOCRACY”

Islam becomes the only religious-political-judicial-cultural ideology.

  • Sharia becomes the “law of the land.
  •  All non-Islamic human rights cancelled.
  • Enslavement and genocide of non-Muslim population.
  • Freedom of speech and the press eradicated.
  • All religions other than Islam are forbidden and destroyed.
  • Destruction of all evidence of non-Muslim culture, populations and symbols in country (Buddhas, houses of worship, art, etc).

The House of Islam (“peace”), dar al-Islam, includes those nations that have submitted to Islamic rule, to the soul crushing, liberty-condemning, discriminatory law of Sharia. The rest of the world in in the House of War, dar al-harb, because it does not submit to Sharia, and exists in a state of rebellion or war with the will of ‘Allah.’ No non-Muslim state or its citizens are “innocent,” and remain viable targets of war for not believing in ‘Allah.’ The Christian, Jewish, Coptic, Hindu and Zoroastrian peoples of world have suffered under subjugation for centuries. The Dhimmi-esce are forbidden to construct houses of worship or repair existing ones, economically crippled by the heavy jizya (tax), socially humiliated, legally discriminated against, criminally targeted and generally kept in a permanent state of weakness, fear and vulnerability by Islamic governments.

It should be noted that forced conversions (Egypt) and slavery (Sudan) are still reported. Homosexuals have been hung in the public square in Iran. Young girls are married to old men. Apostates are threatened with death. “Honor” killings are routine. Women are legally second-class citizens, though Muslim males insist they are “treated better” than in the West. These more obvious manifestations may distract from some less obvious ones such as the lack of intellectual inquiry in science, narrow scope of writing, all but non-existent art and music, sexual use and abuse of youth and women, and the disregard for personal fulfillment, joy and wonder. Look into the eyes of a recently married 12 year old girl to see the consequence of the moral deprivation spawned by Islam.

For all four stages see “Liberty v Sharia” at http://shariafree.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/liberty-vs-sharia-1109.pdf

Obamacare Is a Budgetary Disaster

Obamacare Is a Budgetary Disaster   [James C. Capretta]

Congressman Paul Ryan’s systematic dismantling of the argument that Obamacare would cut the budget deficit, delivered at the Blair House “summit” meeting, has gotten a lot of attention in recent days, and deservedly so. The Wall Street Journal ran the full text of his presentation on its opinion page yesterday and amplified his arguments in an editorial of its own. At Blair House, neither the president nor any other Democrat present offered a direct rebuttal to Ryan’s critique. The president chose to change the subject instead.

This week, however, top administration officials have come forward with a belated defense — of sorts.

First, OMB director Peter Orszag penned a blog post taking issue with one of Ryan’s points, namely that the plan relies on ten years of offsets to pay for only six years of spending. And today, Orszag and White House health-reform czar Nancy-Ann DeParle have an op-ed in the Washington Post that expands upon Orszag’s post.

Orszag and DeParle start by agreeing with Ryan that delaying the start date of an entitlement expansion is a tried-and-true budget gimmick, designed to push the full cost of the additional spending outside of the “budget window” covered by a cost estimate.

But, not to worry, they say. In this instance, it’s not a gimmick because the deficit reduction from their plan just keeps growing over time. They claim the president’s health plan would produce deficit reduction of $100 billion over ten years and $1 trillion in the second decade.

Of course, there’s another reason besides balancing revenue and spending to push the start of an entitlement back, and that’s to make the ten-year cost look much smaller than it really is. Recall that the president promised in his address to Congress last September to deliver a bill that costs only “$900 billion” over a decade. The new entitlements the Democrats want to create would cost much, much more than $90 billion per year. In fact, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) says they will cost about $200 billion per year by 2019. And so, to get the media to now say his plan costs only “$1 trillion” (what’s $100 billion among friends!), the administration delays the coverage expansion provisions until 2014. Never mind that the president also says the uninsured can’t wait a day longer for the legislation. Once enacted, he would make them wait — for four years.

As Ryan noted, however, once the program did get up and running, costs would soar. The Senate Budget Committee Republican staff estimates the Senate bill’s cost at $2.3 trillion over ten years when fully implemented.

In their Post op-ed, Orszag and DeParle do not even attempt to address the many other points Ryan made which expose the dubious assumptions and sleight of hand behind their deficit-cutting claims.

For instance, the health-reform bill is filled to the brim with Medicare changes, but the one Medicare provision the president and the Democrats want to pass separately from the health bill is the so-called “doc fix,” which would repeal a cut in Medicare physician fees at a cost of $371 billion over ten years. Of course, splitting their agenda into two or three bills doesn’t change the total cost. When the “doc fix” is properly included in a tally of what the president is pushing, all of the supposed deficit reduction vanishes.

Then there’s the double-counting that Ryan exposed. The president’s plan starts up yet another entitlement program, providing long-term care insurance. Enrollees have to pay premiums for a number of years before they qualify for any benefits. Consequently, at startup, there’s a surplus of premium collections — $73 billion over ten years, according to CBO — because no one qualifies for the benefits yet. The president and his team count these savings against the cost of health reform — even though the money will be needed later to pay out long-term-care insurance claims. When this gimmick is taken out of the accounting, the president’s health proposal goes even deeper into the red.

Over the long-run, the administration’s claim of large-scale deficit reduction hinges on the dubious assumption that future elected officials will demonstrate more political courage than those in office today.

For most of last year, the president said that he would “bend the cost-curve” in large part by imposing a new tax on “high-cost” insurance plans. The tax would hit more and more middle-class beneficiaries each year because the threshold for determining what constitutes a “high-cost” plan would grow much more slowly than medical costs. In fact, after a number of years, virtually all Americans would be in plans at or above the “high-cost” threshold.

House Democrats and their union allies despise this tax. Last week, the president caved in to their pressure and pushed the start date of the tax back to 2018, well past the point when he will have left office. Even so, Orszag and DeParle still claim credit for the massive revenue hike that would occur in a second decade of implementation. They want us to believe we can finance a permanent, expensive, and rapidly growing new entitlement program with a tax the president himself was never willing to collect.

In Medicare, Orszag and DeParle like to highlight so-called “delivery system reforms” the administration has touted. In the main, these are extremely small-scale initiatives and pilot programs. CBO says they will amount to virtually no savings. The big Medicare cuts in the president’s plan come from across-the-board payment-rate reductions. In particular, the president wants to cut the inflation update for hospitals, nursing homes, and others by half a percentage point every year, in perpetuity. On paper, this change produces huge long-run savings. But it does nothing to control the underlying cost of treating patients. It just pays everyone less, without regard to patient need or quality of care. The chief actuary of the program has said repeatedly that these cuts are completely unrealistic for these very reasons. If implemented, he expects they would drive one in five facilities into serious financial distress. And yet Orszag and DeParle want us to believe these savings can be counted to finance the president’s massive entitlement promises.

And massive they are. CBO says the coverage expansion provisions in the Senate-passed bill would cost about $200 billion by 2019, and that cost would rise 8 percent every year thereafter.

But even these estimates understate the true cost of Obamacare. The president’s plan, like the House and Senate bills, would extend generous new insurance subsidies to low- and moderate-wage workers getting insurance through the new “exchanges.” Workers in job-based plans would get no additional help. That means two workers with identical incomes would be treated very differently. Gene Steuerle of the Urban Institute has estimated that, in 2016, a worker with job-based coverage and a $60,000 income would get $4,500 less than someone with the same income but health insurance through the exchange. This kind of inequitable treatment would never last: one way or another, the entitlement would get extended to everyone in the targeted income range, sending the overall costs of the program soaring.

The president started off last year by saying he wanted to “bend the cost-curve” even as he broadened coverage. But after a year of partisan political and legislative maneuvering, all that’s left is a massive entitlement expansion. The new costs would get piled on top of the unreformed and unaffordable entitlements already on the books. It’s a budgetary disaster in the making.

Who Poses the Greater Threat?

Who Poses the Greater Threat?

Posted By Walter Williams On March 8, 2010 @ 12:01 am In FrontPage | 2 Comments

Bill Gates is the world’s richest person, but what kind of power does he have over you? Can he force your kid to go to a school you do not want him to attend? Can he deny you the right to braid hair in your home for a living? It turns out that a local politician, who might deny us the right to earn a living and dictates which school our kid attends, has far greater power over our lives than any rich person. Rich people can gain power over us, but to do so, they must get permission from our elected representatives at the federal, state or local levels. For example, I might wish to purchase sugar from a Caribbean producer, but America’s sugar lobby pays congressmen hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions to impose sugar import tariffs and quotas, forcing me and every other American to purchase their more expensive sugar.

Politicians love pitting us against the rich. All by themselves, the rich have absolutely no power over us. To rip us off, they need the might of Congress to rig the economic game. It’s a slick political sleight-of-hand where politicians and their allies amongst the intellectuals, talking heads and the news media get us caught up in the politics of envy as part of their agenda for greater control over our lives.

The sugar lobby is just one example among thousands. Just ask yourself: Who were the major recipients of the billions of taxpayer bailout dollars, the so-called Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP)? The top recipients of TARP handouts included companies such as Citibank, AIG, Goldman Sachs and General Motors. Their top management are paid tens of millions dollars to run companies that were on the verge of bankruptcy, were it not for billions of dollars in taxpayer money. Politicians preach the politics of envy whilst reaching into the ordinary man’s pockets, through the IRS, and handing it over to their favorite rich people and others who make large contributions to their election efforts.

The bottom line is that it is politicians first and their supporters amongst intellectuals who pose the greatest threat to liberty.

Dr. Thomas Sowell amply demonstrates this in his brand-new book, “Intellectuals and Society,” in which he points out that: “Scarcely a mass-murdering dictator of the twentieth century was without his intellectual supporters, not simply in his own country, but also in foreign democracies … Lenin, Stalin, Mao and Hitler all had their admirers, defenders and apologists among the intelligentsia in Western democratic nations, despite the fact that these dictators each ended up killing people of their own country on a scale unprecedented even by despotic regimes that preceded them.”

While American politicians and intellectuals have not reached the depths of tyrants such as Lenin, Stalin, Mao and Hitler, they share a common vision. Tyrants denounce free markets and voluntary exchange. They are the chief supporters of reduced private property rights, reduced rights to profits, and they are anti-competition and pro-monopoly. They are pro-control and coercion, by the state. These Americans who run Washington, and their intellectual supporters, believe they have superior wisdom and greater intelligence than the masses. They believe they have been ordained to forcibly impose that wisdom on the rest of us. Like any other tyrant, they have what they consider good reasons for restricting the freedom of others. A tyrant’s primary agenda calls for the elimination or attenuation of the market. Why? Markets imply voluntary exchange and tyrants do not trust that people behaving voluntarily will do what the tyrant thinks they should do. Therefore, they seek to replace the market with economic planning and regulation, which is little more than the forcible superseding of other people’s plans by the powerful elite.

We Americans have forgotten founder Thomas Paine’s warning that “Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.”

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 55 other followers