Home
News
Features
Community
Forums
Blogs
Businesses
Politico
The White House on Saturday struggled to tamp down the controversy over President Barack Obama’s statements about a mosque near ground zero — insisting Obama wasn’t backing off remarks Friday night when he offered support for a project that has infuriated some families whose loved ones died in the Sept. 11 attacks.
Obama’s comments placed him in the middle of the controversy over a Muslim group’s plans for a mosque near the site of the 2001 attack — and in turn, transformed an emotion-laden local dispute in New York into a nationwide debate overnight.
Republicans pounced, amid early signs that the issue would seep into some state and congressional contests. “It is divisive and disrespectful to build a mosque next to the site where 3,000 innocent people were murdered at the hands of Islamic extremism,” said Florida GOP Senate candidate Marco Rubio. His opponent, Gov. Charlie Crist, a Republican-turned-independent, came out in support of Obama’s comments.
And Democrats — at least those who were willing to comment — could barely contain their frustration over Obama’s remarks, saying he had potentially placed every one of their candidates in the middle of the debate by giving GOP candidates a chance to ask them point-blank: Do you agree with Obama on the mosque?
That could be particularly damaging to moderate Democrats in conservative-leaning districts, already 2010’s most vulnerable contenders.
“I would prefer the president be a little more of a politician and a little less of a college professor,” former Rep. Martin Frost (D-Texas), who once ran the House Democratic campaign arm, wrote in POLITICO’s Arena. “While a defensible position, it will not play well in the parts of the country where Democrats need the most help.”
Adding to the political problem for Democrats were the mixed messages out of the White House.
Obama’s comments Friday night — at an Iftar dinner at the White House marking the start of Ramadan — were widely reported as offering support for the specific mosque project in question near ground zero.
But on Saturday, Obama seemed to contradict himself, telling reporters at one point, “I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making the decision to put a mosque there. I was commenting very specifically on the right people have that dates back to our founding. That’s what our country is about. And I think it’s very important, as difficult as some of these issues are, that we stay focused on who we are as a people and what our values are all about.”
That impromptu answer to a TV reporter covering his trip to Florida prompted a second attempt to clarify his initial statement, this time from spokesman Bill Burton.
“Just to be clear, the president is not backing off in any way from the comments he made last night,” Burton said. “It is not his role as president to pass judgment on every local project. But it is his responsibility to stand up for the constitutional principle of religious freedom and equal treatment for all Americans. What he said last night, and reaffirmed today, is that if a church, a synagogue or a Hindu temple can be built on a site, you simply cannot deny that right to those who want to build a mosque.”
White House officials later said that Obama was simply saying that since there is no local ordinance that would prevent construction of the mosque, he believed local officials made the right decision to allow it to go forward.
At least one Republican, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, seized on the confusion. “Mr. President, should they or should they not build a mosque steps away from where radical Islamists killed 3,000 people? Please tell us your position. We all know that they have the right to do it, but should they? And, no, this is not above your pay grade,” Palin wrote on Facebook.
The Friday statement and Saturday clarification were consistent in a literal sense, but they sent sharply different signals that may have called into question how clearly the president thought through his intervention in the controversy or how his words would echo.
The legal right to build the mosque is one even many critics of the mosque have not contested — claiming mainly that the project was inappropriate on grounds of taste and local sensitivities and therefore should be strongly discouraged.
he two statements, rather than clarifying Obama’s views, may raise more questions: Had he unintentionally spoken too strongly the night before, or had he lost his nerve after the vehement early reactions? What is his real aim in wading into a controversy he had quite purposefully avoided for weeks?
For most Democrats, the muddled messaging wasn’t the problem as much as the substance of Obama’s remarks — putting himself on the record backing the construction of a mosque near the site where the Twin Towers fell, which Obama himself called “hallowed ground.”
Democratic aides say that, at the very least, the president has again knocked his party’s candidates off local messages and forced them to talk about a national issue that doesn’t appear likely to play well with important swing voters.
These officials planned to spend the weekend talking about Social Security’s 75th anniversary — the topic of Obama’s Saturday radio address — or the progress made in containing the Gulf oil spill. Instead, they played defense on an issue at the intersection of religion and terrorism — two hot buttons Obama won his 2008 election partly by downplaying.
“The main reaction is ‘Why? Why now?’” said one House Democratic leadership aide. “It’s just another day off message. There have been a lot of days off message.”
The chief of staff to one politically vulnerable House Democrat said it “probably alienates a lot of independent voters” and “it’s not a good issue to be talking about right now.”
He said he suspects “there are a lot of [Democrats] who are spooked in tough districts today” and “a lot of Republicans licking their chops right now.”
Prior to his speech, a few candidates tried with limited success to make the proposed mosque an issue outside of the tristate area around New York City — but Obama’s words may have served to do that for them. A recent CNN poll found two-thirds of Americans oppose building the mosque in the neighborhood around ground zero.
Few national Democrats rushed to embrace the president. Aides to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Chris Van Hollen and Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chairman Robert Menendez didn’t offer on-the-record comments Saturday.
Empire State Democrats, known for being outspoken, stayed notably mute in response to Obama’s comments at the Iftar dinner. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), who is expected to handily win reelection, has only said that he’s “not opposed” to the mosque despite weeks of prodding from reporters. There also was no statement from Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, who is running for governor.
The proposed mosque quickly became a flashpoint in Florida’s contentious Democratic primary for Senate. The issue has special resonance in the Sunshine State because so many New Yorkers retire there.
Democrat Jeff Greene released a deeply critical statement. “President Obama has this all wrong, and I strongly oppose his support for building a mosque near ground zero, especially since Islamic terrorists have bragged and celebrated destroying the Twin Towers and killing nearly 3,000 Americans,” he said.
Rep. Kendrick Meek, the establishment’s favorite in the Democratic primary, responded by staying noncommittal.
“Our nation was founded on the pillar of religious freedom, and construction of the mosque should not be denied on religious grounds, but this is ultimately a decision for the local community in New York City to make,” he said in a statement to POLITICO.
Rep. Peter King, a Republican who represents a swing district on Long Island and has been vocally opposed to the mosque, issued a statement Friday night criticizing Obama for bowing to “political correctness.”
“I can just sense that this is going to draw a lot of Democrats out. Most Democrats, as far as I know, have not taken a stand, certainly not taken a positive stand, they’ve taken a neutral stand or said they’re not opposed, but almost no one has said they support it,” King said. “It’s definitely going to create political problems for some Democrats, there’s no doubt about it, and probably more so around the country.”
House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) issued a statement, calling Obama’s Friday night comments “deeply troubling.”
Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol advised Republican candidates to frame Obama’s comments as elitist and out of touch.
He urged GOP candidates to react like this: “President Obama should stop condescending to his fellow citizens, and should start listening to us. He thinks we’re traumatized by 9/11. We’re not. But we do remember 9/11, and we don’t think it honors the memory of that day to acquiesce in — or worse, to embrace — this mosque with those sponsors at that place.”
Other Republicans privately acknowledge they are torn, recognizing the merits of the constitutional argument Obama made and remembering that former President George W. Bush preached tolerance for Muslims after Sept. 11.
Friday’s speech may very well be one of the most memorable — and debated — statements of the president’s first two years in office.
At best — depending how the issue echoes in coming days — it may remind people of some of Obama’s more transcendent moments on the campaign — a politician with a biracial background (whose estranged father was a Muslim), capable of both challenging Americans and uniting a majority of them on the most sensitive cultural questions.
At worst, it risks being lumped in with moments that have caused the public to reassess their image of him, such as when he weighed in on how “stupidly” the Cambridge, Mass., police acted in arresting Henry Louis Gates, or during the campaign, when he said rural voters cling to guns and religion.
The president’s base, recognizing how intense the political fire Obama has opened himself to may become, rushed to his defense. The Center for American Progress, one of Washington’s most muscular groups on the left, released a statement Saturday with a full-throated defense of the mosque.
W. Franklyn Richardson, the chairman of the Conference of National Black Churches, called it “encouraging to see a president who understands the importance of a diverse religious landscape.”
Former acting Solicitor General Walter Dellinger explained in POLITICO’s Arena that Obama deserved extra praise for his courage since he knew that because the group in question happened to be Muslim “he would pay a price for this defense of religious liberty that no other national figure would be required to pay” for endorsing religious freedom.
Those who need to face voters responded differently. Most Democratic members of the New York Delegation didn’t respond to requests for comment about the the Obama speech, seemingly concerned about being front and center in the same way as New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who got national press for supporting the mosque but who is not facing a reelection campaign.
If the issue impacts any election outcomes, it will most likely be in tight congressional races than in statewide contests. Bush’s numbers spiked in a collection of districts within 50 miles of ground zero between the 2000 and 2004 elections, motivated primarily by reactions to Sept. 11. Within that group, a few of those districts are in play to one degree or another in 2010.
One is NY-13, where Democratic Rep. Mike McMahon won his seat even as Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) carried it in 2008. Three aides to McMahon didn’t respond to repeated requests for comment.
To be sure, though, many local Republicans have not seen their standing improve in the polls even as they’ve tried to capitalize on the issue.
That might be partly why certain Republicans did not want to engage on the mosque issue Saturday, happy to watch from the sidelines as Democrats figured out their own messaging strategy. South Carolina Republican Nikki Haley’s campaign said they would not issue a statement. An aide to New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said that he was unlikely to weigh in.
Carol E. Lee, Jonathan Martin, Jonathan Allen, Jessica Taylor, Jake Sherman, Alexander Burns and Shira Toeplitz contributed to this report.
International Christian Union
Group Option
Admins
Members
Group Information
Category:
Name:
International Christian Union
Created:
Friday, 30 July 2010
Creator:
Description
World Christian solidarity and grass routsAnnouncements
No bulletin added yet
Discussions
No discussion added yet.
Photo Albums
No album created yet.
Videos
There are no videos added yet
Wall
This is not sent for discussion. If you agree, forward it.. If you don't, delete it.
I don't want to know one way or the other. By me forwarding it, you know how I feel.
I'll bet this was a surprise to NBC....
NBC POLL
Do you believe that the word God should stay in American culture?
NBC this morning had a poll on this question. They had the highest Number of responses that they have ever had for one of their polls, and the Percentage was the same as this:
86% to keep the words, In God We Trust and God in the Pledge of Allegiance
14% against.
That is a pretty 'commanding' public response.
I was asked to send this on if I agreed&nbs p;or delete if I didn't ..
Now it is your turn. It is said that 86% of Americans believe the word God should stay. . .
Therefore, I have a very hard time understanding why there is such a mess about having 'In God We Trust' on our money and having 'God' in the
Pledge of Allegiance.
Why is the world catering to this 14%?
If you agree, pass this on . If not, simply delete.
In God We Trust.
Sunday, 15 August 2010 19:07
IT IS EASY TO UNDERSTAND WHY WE ARE CONSTANTLY BEING SHOWN AND IMPOSED WITH THE WILL OF THIS SICKLY LITTLE GROUP IN WASHINGTON WHICH INCLUDES THE WHITE HOUSE -----YES THEY CONTROLL OUR FREE PRESS ---THEY HAVE PLACED THE MOST LIBERAL REPORTERS IN CHARGE OF ALL OUR ONCE OBJECTIVE FREE MEDIA AND THEY NOW MUST DO WHAT THEY ARE TOLD------- THE FEW OBJECTIVE REPORTERS WHO ARE ON THEIR STAFF ARE LIKE US ---TOO WEAK TO SAY ANYTHING ------- AND THEY WILL CONTINUE TO RUB IT IN OUR FACES WHILE THEY GLOAT WITH SATISFACTION KNOWING THAT THEY NOW HAVE A MAJORITY OF PEOPLE WHO DO NOTHING NO MATTER HOW THEY ARE TREATED ------ WE LET THEM CONTINUE TO DESECRATED OUR BELOVED FREEDOM AND OUR LOVE OF GOD------- THE LIBERALS FIND IT SO EASY TO DO THIS ----- EVEN OBAMA--- TOLD THE WORLD THAT WE ARE NOT A CHRISTIAN PRACTICING NATION---AND NO ONE DID ANYTHING ABOUT IT -----YET WE HAVE 87 PERCENT IN THE COUNTRY WHO ARE CHRISTIANS---
-TO FURTHER IMPRESS THE MUSLIMS ---- OBAMA ENTERTAINED A HUGE GROUP OF MUSLIM OFFICIALS TO CELEBRATE THE END OF THE RAMADAN SEASON --- AS SAID THIS WAS ONLY 2 DAYS AGO WHEN OBAMA ENTERTAINED THIS HUGE NUMBER OF PROMINENT MUSLIMS LEADERS AND IMAMS IN THE WHITE HOUSE FOR THE CELEBRATION OF THE END OF THE RAMADAN----- APPARENTLY THEY ALL MISSED THE ANTI AMERICAN IMAM RAUF WHICH OBAMA HAS SENT TO THE MUSLIM WORLD TO REPRESENT THIS CHRISTIAN COUNTRY---------
- WHAT ABOUT REPRESENTATIVES FOR OUR DEVOUT BAPTISTS---- MORMONS ---METHODIST AND OTHER DENOMINATIONS ------ WOULD HE AGREE TO SEND THEM---NO INDEED ------WHY WOULD A GOOD ANTI CHRISTIAN MUSLIM IN CHARGE---ONE WHO MEMORIZED THE KORAN IN A MADRESS SCHOOL----- DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT ---------INSTEAD----- HE MAKES YOU PAY TO ENTERTAIN DOZENS OF IMAMS WHO ARE BUILDING MOSQUES TO BE OCCUPIED LATER BY PROJECTED MUSLIMS IMMIGRANTS OF THE FUTURE---- PERHAPS -WHETHER LEGAL OR NOT ------- THIS IS BEING SEEN IN THE EMPTY MOSQUES IN NEW YORK CITY AREA----HOW IS THAT DONE??? ---------ASK OBAMA ----WHO HAS TAKEN OVER OUR CONSULAR ACTIVITIES WHICH IS REALLY NOW BEING CONTROLLED FROM THE WHITE HOUSE-----SOME SAY THAT FROM THE PARK ACROSS FROM THE WHITE HOUSE PEOPLE COULD HEAR THE APPLAUSE APPARENTLY AS OBAMA SAID THINGS WHICH THE MUSLIM IMAMS WERE SO HAPPY TO HEAR AT THE RAMADEN DINNER -AMONG OF THE MANY THINGS HE SAID TO PLEASE HIS LITTLE THAT NIGHT WAS THAT HE APPROVED THE BUILDING OF A MOSQUE AT GROUND ZERO---- AND THE CROWD WENT MAD-----WITH KISSES AND HUGS AND SCREAMING APPLAUSE---BUT WHEN HE FOUND OUT THAT 65 PERCENT OR MORE AMERICANS OPPOSED SUCH A THING THE NEXT DAY--- THEN OBAMA IN HIS LYING AND CUNNING WAY--- DENIED WHAT WE ALL READ IN THE NEWSPAPERS -- HE SAID WHAT HE MEANT WAS THAT "UNDER THE CONSTITUTION RELIGIOUS FREEDOM IS PROTECTED"--- READ IT YOURSELF IT IS IN THE AUG 16 ADVOCATE ----- HE ALWAYS LIES SO THEY PLAYED THE TAPE WHICH PROVED THAT HE HAD ONCE AGAIN EITHER EXAGGERATED THE TRUTH OR JUST PLAINED LIED -------WHAT A WAY TO CELEBRATE THE END OF HE RAMADAN---REMEMBER OBAMA WAS THE ONE WHO REFUSED TO RECONGNIZED THE NATIONS "PRAYER DAY" ----- WHY BECAUSE IT WOULD BE DONE WITH THE CHRISTIAN PARTICIPATION WHO HAD ORIGINALLY ESTABLISHED IT ----- ONCE AGAIN HE HIDES WITH THE LIBERALS USING THE CONSTITUTION-------WHY IS THE NATION PERMITTING THIS?--------------------
PELOIS SAID SHE WAS GOING TO CLEAN THE SWAMP IN WASHINGTON-------INSTEAD SHE ADDED A FEW MORE UNBELIEVABLE ANTI AMERICANS TO HER GROUP----BUT THEN THAT IS SO LIKE PELOSI--------HOWEVER PERHAPS HER WORD SHOULD BE USED BY ALL OF US WHO WANT TO CLEAN OUT WASHINGTON WHICH IS NOW A POLLUTED DISEASED POLITICAL SWAMP ----SOME ASK WHEN WILL IT BE DONE----- PELOSI -----OBAMA AND HIS ANTI AMERICA GROUP OF SUPPORTERS WHO REPRESENT ONLY 14 PERCENT OF THE POPULATION WILL CONTINUE TO MOCK THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS SINCE WE PERMIT IT ---- AND AS A RESULT THEY ARE CHANGING AMERICA FOR THE WORSE - ----THEY MUST ALL BE VOTED OUT OF OFFICE ---CAN YOU HEAR ME --THEY MUST ALL BE THROWN OUT BY VOTE FROM THESE OFFICES WHICH ONCE WERE THE MOST HONORABLE PLACES FOR AMERICANS TO SERVE--------THEY ALL NOW STINK SO MUCH WE CAN SMELL THEM EVEN IN BATON ROUGE------ AND AFTER THEY ARE VOTED OUT THEY MUST BE INVESTIGATED FOR THEIR TIME IN OFFICE MAY BE OBVIOUSLY FULL OF ACTS WHICH MAY BE TO SAY THE LEAST --- ILLEGAL AND EVEN ANTI AMERICAN -----
-TO FURTHER IMPRESS THE MUSLIMS ---- OBAMA ENTERTAINED A HUGE GROUP OF MUSLIM OFFICIALS TO CELEBRATE THE END OF THE RAMADAN SEASON --- AS SAID THIS WAS ONLY 2 DAYS AGO WHEN OBAMA ENTERTAINED THIS HUGE NUMBER OF PROMINENT MUSLIMS LEADERS AND IMAMS IN THE WHITE HOUSE FOR THE CELEBRATION OF THE END OF THE RAMADAN----- APPARENTLY THEY ALL MISSED THE ANTI AMERICAN IMAM RAUF WHICH OBAMA HAS SENT TO THE MUSLIM WORLD TO REPRESENT THIS CHRISTIAN COUNTRY---------
- WHAT ABOUT REPRESENTATIVES FOR OUR DEVOUT BAPTISTS---- MORMONS ---METHODIST AND OTHER DENOMINATIONS ------ WOULD HE AGREE TO SEND THEM---NO INDEED ------WHY WOULD A GOOD ANTI CHRISTIAN MUSLIM IN CHARGE---ONE WHO MEMORIZED THE KORAN IN A MADRESS SCHOOL----- DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT ---------INSTEAD----- HE MAKES YOU PAY TO ENTERTAIN DOZENS OF IMAMS WHO ARE BUILDING MOSQUES TO BE OCCUPIED LATER BY PROJECTED MUSLIMS IMMIGRANTS OF THE FUTURE---- PERHAPS -WHETHER LEGAL OR NOT ------- THIS IS BEING SEEN IN THE EMPTY MOSQUES IN NEW YORK CITY AREA----HOW IS THAT DONE??? ---------ASK OBAMA ----WHO HAS TAKEN OVER OUR CONSULAR ACTIVITIES WHICH IS REALLY NOW BEING CONTROLLED FROM THE WHITE HOUSE-----SOME SAY THAT FROM THE PARK ACROSS FROM THE WHITE HOUSE PEOPLE COULD HEAR THE APPLAUSE APPARENTLY AS OBAMA SAID THINGS WHICH THE MUSLIM IMAMS WERE SO HAPPY TO HEAR AT THE RAMADEN DINNER -AMONG OF THE MANY THINGS HE SAID TO PLEASE HIS LITTLE THAT NIGHT WAS THAT HE APPROVED THE BUILDING OF A MOSQUE AT GROUND ZERO---- AND THE CROWD WENT MAD-----WITH KISSES AND HUGS AND SCREAMING APPLAUSE---BUT WHEN HE FOUND OUT THAT 65 PERCENT OR MORE AMERICANS OPPOSED SUCH A THING THE NEXT DAY--- THEN OBAMA IN HIS LYING AND CUNNING WAY--- DENIED WHAT WE ALL READ IN THE NEWSPAPERS -- HE SAID WHAT HE MEANT WAS THAT "UNDER THE CONSTITUTION RELIGIOUS FREEDOM IS PROTECTED"--- READ IT YOURSELF IT IS IN THE AUG 16 ADVOCATE ----- HE ALWAYS LIES SO THEY PLAYED THE TAPE WHICH PROVED THAT HE HAD ONCE AGAIN EITHER EXAGGERATED THE TRUTH OR JUST PLAINED LIED -------WHAT A WAY TO CELEBRATE THE END OF HE RAMADAN---REMEMBER OBAMA WAS THE ONE WHO REFUSED TO RECONGNIZED THE NATIONS "PRAYER DAY" ----- WHY BECAUSE IT WOULD BE DONE WITH THE CHRISTIAN PARTICIPATION WHO HAD ORIGINALLY ESTABLISHED IT ----- ONCE AGAIN HE HIDES WITH THE LIBERALS USING THE CONSTITUTION-------WHY IS THE NATION PERMITTING THIS?--------------------
PELOIS SAID SHE WAS GOING TO CLEAN THE SWAMP IN WASHINGTON-------INSTEAD SHE ADDED A FEW MORE UNBELIEVABLE ANTI AMERICANS TO HER GROUP----BUT THEN THAT IS SO LIKE PELOSI--------HOWEVER PERHAPS HER WORD SHOULD BE USED BY ALL OF US WHO WANT TO CLEAN OUT WASHINGTON WHICH IS NOW A POLLUTED DISEASED POLITICAL SWAMP ----SOME ASK WHEN WILL IT BE DONE----- PELOSI -----OBAMA AND HIS ANTI AMERICA GROUP OF SUPPORTERS WHO REPRESENT ONLY 14 PERCENT OF THE POPULATION WILL CONTINUE TO MOCK THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS SINCE WE PERMIT IT ---- AND AS A RESULT THEY ARE CHANGING AMERICA FOR THE WORSE - ----THEY MUST ALL BE VOTED OUT OF OFFICE ---CAN YOU HEAR ME --THEY MUST ALL BE THROWN OUT BY VOTE FROM THESE OFFICES WHICH ONCE WERE THE MOST HONORABLE PLACES FOR AMERICANS TO SERVE--------THEY ALL NOW STINK SO MUCH WE CAN SMELL THEM EVEN IN BATON ROUGE------ AND AFTER THEY ARE VOTED OUT THEY MUST BE INVESTIGATED FOR THEIR TIME IN OFFICE MAY BE OBVIOUSLY FULL OF ACTS WHICH MAY BE TO SAY THE LEAST --- ILLEGAL AND EVEN ANTI AMERICAN -----
Sunday, 15 August 2010 19:06
Help FRC defeat the man who decides the value of life with a calculator
August 12, 2010 | | Share with Friends
Dear Joseph,
You were right.
The liberals scoffed when you worried that ObamaCare would result in rationing panels with the power to decide who gets care and who doesn't. Some even call them "death panels."
As a reader of our emails, you know President Obama has stealthily appointed Dr. Donald Berwick to run the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS)--the bloated $800 billion per year federal agency that controls government health insurance programs for more than 100 million elderly and lower-income men, women, and children.
Family Research Council (FRC) needs your immediate support to help educate Americans and lawmakers about Dr. Berwick's radical views and unethical plans.
Dr. Berwick is the man who will ration health care under ObamaCare. This is the man on whose desk those life-and-death decisions will stop.
This is the man whose views are so outrageous that President Obama unscrupulously used a "recess appointment" to seat him while the Senate was on a short break in July.
When I tell you what Dr. Berwick believes, you'll see why President Obama and liberals in Congress wanted to avoid an official confirmation hearing now. He clearly wants to implement health care rationing immediately and not risk Dr. Berwick's rejection by the Senate.
But the fight is not over. Dr. Berwick's shady appointment expires in January, and the President will have to expose his "death panel czar" to public hearings in the Senate then.
Your donation today will help FRC educate allies in Congress and the public over the next few months by revealing Dr. Berwick's background, previous statements, and actions that clearly show he's outside the mainstream and will do nothing to help make America healthier.
I'm not guessing about that, either. Dr. Berwick's own words indict him. Two years ago, he gave a lecture in England celebrating the 60th anniversary of Britain 's notoriously inhumane National Health Service. Here are a few excerpts:
"You cap your health care budget, and you make the political and economic choices. . . . You plan the supply; you aim a bit low; you prefer slightly too little of a technology or a service to too much. . . ." (In other words, bureaucrats deny care and stifle innovation.)
". . . any health care funding plan that is just must redistribute wealth."
"I am romantic about the National Health Service; I love it."
He loves a socialized health care agency that decides whose life is worth saving . . . and whose isn't . . . based strictly on the cost of service.
The federal government isn't thinking about compassionate care. Bureaucrats like Donald Berwick are thinking about accounting.
As a Family Research Council supporter, please do your part to help us prepare your senators and the public for Dr. Berwick's confirmation hearings in January.
Those hearings will largely decide if the power of life and death will rest in the hands of a man who apparently plans to deny care rather than provide it . . . limit services rather than expand them . . . count dollars rather than save lives . . . and control your health care.
We do need to cut the fraud, waste, and abuse in government programs. But we must rely on market-based solutions . . . not have bureaucrats cut costs by denying care.
Until ObamaCare can be repealed, Dr. Berwick must not be allowed to control who gets health care and who doesn't--and for reasons beyond what I've already mentioned.
Please let me hear from you today. Thank you.
Standing (Ephesians 6:13),
Tony Perkins
President
P.S. Summer is historically a slow time for FRC's contributions, but a demanding time as we voice your values on so many issues affecting health care, marriage, the family, human life and religious liberty . . . and prepare for the critical fall season. Your gift today would be a tremendous help! After making a secure online donation, please forward this to a friend to build a tidal wave of opposition to Dr. Berwick and ObamaCare.
Saturday, 14 August 2010 21:52
By Scott Stewart
When we discuss threats along the U.S./Mexico border with sources and customers, or when we write an analysis on topics such as violence and improvised explosive devices along the border, a certain topic inevitably pops up: Hezbollah.
We frequently hear concerns from U.S. and Mexican government sources about the Iranian and Hezbollah network in Latin America. They fear that Iran would use Hezbollah to strike targets in the Western Hemisphere and even inside the United States if the United States or Israel were to conduct a military strike against Tehran’s nuclear program. Such concerns are expressed not only by our sources and are relayed not only to us. Nearly every time tensions increase between the United States and Iran, the media report that the Hezbollah threat to the United States is growing. Iran also has a vested interest in playing up the danger posed by Hezbollah and its other militant proxies as it tries to dissuade the United States and Israel from attacking its nuclear facilities.
A close look at Hezbollah reveals a potent capacity to conduct terrorist attacks. The group is certainly more capable and could be far more dangerous than al Qaeda. An examination also reveals that Hezbollah has a robust presence in Latin America and that it uses its network there to smuggle people into the United States, where it has long maintained a presence. A balanced look at Hezbollah, however, shows that, while the threat it poses is real — and serious — that threat is not new and it is not likely to be exercised. There are a number of factors that have limited Hezbollah’s use of its international network for terrorist purposes in recent years. A decision to return to such activity would not be made lightly, or without carefully calculating the cost.
Military Capability
When examining Hezbollah, it is important to recognize that it is not just a terrorist group. Certainly, during the 1980s, Hezbollah did gain international recognition from its spectacular and effective attacks using large suicide truck bombs, high-profile airline hijackings and snatching scores of Western hostages (who were sometimes held for years) in Lebanon, but today it is far more than a mere terrorist group. Hezbollah is an influential political party with a strong, well-equipped militia that is more powerful than the army in Lebanon. The organization also operates an extensive network of social service providers in Lebanon and an international finance and logistics network that supports the organization through a global array of legitimate and illicit enterprises.
Militarily, Hezbollah is a force to be reckoned with in Lebanon, as demonstrated by the manner in which it acquitted itself during its last confrontation with Israel, in August 2006. While Hezbollah did not defeat Israel, it did manage to make a defensive stand and not be defeated itself. It may have been bloodied and battered by the Israeli onslaught, but at the end of the fight Hezbollah stood unbowed — which signified a major victory for the organization and won it much acclaim in the Muslim world.
The tenacity and training of Hezbollah’s soldiers was readily apparent during the 2006 confrontation. These traits, along with some of the guerrilla warfare skills they demonstrated, such as planning and executing complex ambushes and employing improvised explosive devices against armored vehicles, are things that can be directly applied to terrorist attacks. This was demonstrated in the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik al-Hariri in February 2005.
Hezbollah maintains training facilities in places like Nabi Sheet in eastern Lebanon, where its militants are trained by Hezbollah instructors, members of the Syrian army and trainers from Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and its Quds Force (IRGC-QF) as well as Iran’s Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS). In addition, Hezbollah militants are sent outside Lebanon to Syria and Iran for training on advanced weapons and advanced guerrilla/terrorist tactics. Such advanced training has provided Hezbollah with a large cadre of operatives who are well-schooled in the tradecraft required to operate in a hostile environment and conduct successful terrorist attacks. Their links to Iranian diplomatic facilities guarantee them access to modern weaponry and military-grade explosives that can be brought in via the diplomatic pouch, which is inviolable under international treaty.
Latin American Network
Hezbollah and its Iranian patrons have a presence in Latin America that goes back decades. Iran has sought to establish close relationships with countries such as Cuba, Nicaragua, Bolivia and Venezuela that have opposed the United States and its foreign policy. STRATFOR sources have confirmed allegations by the U.S. government that the IRGC-QF has a presence in Venezuela and is providing training in irregular warfare to Venezuelan troops as well as militants belonging to the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia.
The Iranians are also known to station IRGC-QF operatives in their embassies under diplomatic cover alongside MOIS intelligence officers. IRGC-QF and MOIS officers also work under non-official cover in businesses, cultural centers and charities and have been known to work closely with Hezbollah operatives. This coordination occurs not only in Lebanon but also in places like Argentina. On March 17, 1992, Hezbollah operatives supported by the Iranian Embassy in Buenos Aires attacked the Israeli Embassy in that city with a vehicle-borne improvised explosive device, killing 29 people and injuring hundreds more. On July 18, 1994, 85 people were killed and hundreds injured when Hezbollah operatives supported by the Iranian Embassy attacked the Argentine Israelite Mutual Association building in Buenos Aires. Iran also maintains diplomatic relations with Mexico and uses its official diplomatic presence there to engage Mexico on a range of topics, including commercial relations and international energy matters. (Both countries are major energy producers.)
While Hezbollah has received hundreds of millions of dollars in financial support and military equipment from Iran and Syria, it also has created a global finance and logistics network of its own. The Lebanese people have an entrepreneurial and trading culture that has spread around the world, and Hezbollah has exploited this far-flung Lebanese diaspora (both Christian and Muslim) for fundraising and operational purposes. To assist in this effort, Hezbollah also has partnered with non-Lebanese Arabs and Muslims, both Shia and Sunni, many of whom work with Hezbollah’s network for financial gain and not out of ideological affinity with the group.
Hezbollah’s global commercial network transports and sells counterfeit consumer goods and electronics and pirated movies, music and software. In West Africa, the network also deals in “blood diamonds” from places like Sierra Leone and the Democratic Republic of the Congo and fences illegally bunkered oil from the Niger Delta. Cells in Asia procure and ship much of the counterfeit material sold elsewhere; nodes in North America deal in smuggled cigarettes, baby formula and counterfeit designer goods, among other things. In the United States, Hezbollah also has been involved in smuggling pseudoephedrine and selling counterfeit Viagra, and it has had a significant role in the production and worldwide propagation of counterfeit currencies. Hezbollah also has a long-standing and well-known presence in the tri-border region of Paraguay, Argentina and Brazil, where it earns tens of millions of dollars annually from legal and illegal commercial activities, according to U.S. government estimates.
The Hezbollah business empire also extends into the drug trade. The Bekaa Valley, Lebanon’s central agricultural heartland, is controlled by Hezbollah and serves as a major center for growing poppies and cannabis and for producing heroin from raw materials arriving from places like Afghanistan and the Golden Triangle of Southeast Asia. Indeed, Hezbollah controls a commanding percentage of the estimated $1 billion drug trade flowing out of the Bekaa. Much of the hashish and heroin emanating from there eventually arrives in Europe, where Hezbollah members also are involved in smuggling, car theft and the distribution of counterfeit goods and currency. Hezbollah operatives in the Western Hemisphere work with Latin American drug cartels to traffic cocaine into the lucrative markets of Europe, and there have been reports of Hezbollah members dealing drugs in the United States.
In recent years, Hezbollah also has become active in Central America and Mexico, the latter being an ideal place for the Iranians and Hezbollah to operate. Mexico has long been a favorite haunt for foreign intelligence officers from countries hostile to the United States, ranging from Nazi Germany to the Soviet Union, due to its close proximity to the United States and its very poor counterintelligence capability. Mexican government sources have told STRATFOR that the ability of the Mexican government to monitor an organization like Hezbollah is very limited. While Mexico has a domestic intelligence capability, it has historically oriented its efforts toward political opponents of the government and not toward foreign intelligence operatives operating on its soil. This is understandable, considering that the foreign intelligence officers are in Mexico because of its proximity to the United States and not necessarily to spy on Mexico. The Mexican government’s limited counterintelligence capacity has been further reduced by corruption and by the substantial amount of resources the Mexican government has been forced to dedicate to the cartel wars currently ravaging the country.
It is also convenient for Hezbollah that there is some degree of physical resemblance between some Lebanese and Mexican people. Mexicans citizens of Lebanese heritage (like Mexico’s richest man, Carlos Slim) do not look out of place when they are on the street. STRATFOR sources say that Hezbollah members have married Mexican women in order to stay in Mexico, and some have reportedly even adopted Spanish names. A Hezbollah operative with a Spanish name who learns to speak Spanish well can be difficult for a U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent to spot. American officials often lack the Spanish skills required to differentiate between Spanish speakers with Mexican accents and those with foreign accents.
Most of the Lebanese residing in Mexico are Maronite Christians who fled Lebanon and who are now well assimilated and prosperous in Mexico. Many of the Lebanese Muslims living in Mexico are relatively recent immigrants, and only about half of them are Shia, so the community in Mexico is smaller than it is in other places. Still, Hezbollah will use it to hide operatives. Sources tell STRATFOR that Hezbollah and the Iranians are involved in several small Islamic centers in Mexican cities such as Torreon, Chihuahua City and Monterrey. They also have an active presence in Shiite Islamic centers in border towns on both sides of the border and use these centers to coordinate cross-border smuggling of contraband and operatives.
Arrestors
Hezbollah has a group of operatives capable of undertaking terrorist missions that is larger and better-trained than any group al Qaeda has ever had. Hezbollah (and its Iranian patrons) have also established a solid foothold in the Americas, and they have demonstrated a capability to use their global logistics network to move operatives and conduct attacks should they so choose. This is what U.S. government officials fear, and what the Iranians want them to fear. The threat posed by Hezbollah’s militant apparatus has always been a serious one, and Hezbollah has long had a significant presence inside the United States. The threat it poses today is not some new, growing phenomenon, as some reports in the press would suggest.
But despite Hezbollah’s transnational terrorism capabilities, it has not chosen to exercise them outside of its home region for many years now. This is due in large part to the way Hezbollah has matured as an organization. It is no longer the new, shadowy organization it was in 1983 but a large global organization with an address. Its assets and personnel can be identified and seized or attacked. Hezbollah understands that a serious terrorist attack or series of attacks on U.S. soil could result in the type of American reaction that followed the 9/11 attack and that the organization would likely end up on the receiving end of the type of campaign that the United States launched against al Qaeda (and Lebanon is far easier to strike than Afghanistan). In the past, Hezbollah (and its Iranian patrons) have worked hard to sow ambiguity and hide responsibility for terrorist attacks, but as Hezbollah matured as an organization, such subterfuge became more difficult.
There is also international public opinion to consider. Hezbollah is a political organization seeking political legitimacy, and it is one thing for it to be seen as a victim of Israeli aggression when standing up to Israeli forces in southern Lebanon and quite another to be seen killing innocent civilians on the other side of the globe.
Hezbollah also sees the United States (and the rest of the Western Hemisphere) as a wonderful place to make money through its array of legal and illegal enterprises. If it angered the United States, its business interests in Western Hemisphere would be severely impacted. Hezbollah could conduct attacks in the United States, but it would pay a terrible price for doing so, and it does not appear that it is willing to pay that price. The Hezbollah leadership may be radical, but it is not irrational. Many of the senior Hezbollah leaders have matured since the group was founded and have become influential politicians and wealthy businessmen. This older cadre tends to be more moderate than some of the younger firebrands in the organization.
So, while Hezbollah has the capability to attack U.S. interests, it does not currently possess the intent to do so. Its terrorist attacks in Lebanon in the 1980s, like the bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks and the two attacks against the U.S. Embassy, were intended to drive U.S. influence out of Lebanon, and the attacks largely succeeded. An attack by Hezbollah inside the United States today would result in the return of U.S. attention to, and perhaps even a presence in, Lebanon, something that is clearly not in Hezbollah’s interests.
Then why the recurring rumors of impending Hezbollah terrorist attacks? For several years now, every time there has been talk of a possible attack on Iran there has been a corresponding threat by Iran that it will use its proxy groups in response to such an attack. Iran has also been busy pushing intelligence reports to anybody who will listen (including STRATFOR) that it will activate its militant proxy groups if attacked and, to back up that threat, will periodically send IRGC-QF, MOIS or Hezbollah operatives out to conduct not-so-subtle surveillance of potential targets. (They clearly want to be seen undertaking such activity.)
In many ways, the Hezbollah threat is being played up in order to provide the type of deterrent that mutually assured destruction did during the Cold War. The threats of unleashing Hezbollah terrorist attacks and closing the Strait of Hormuz are the most potent deterrents Iran has to being attacked. Since Iran does not yet possess a nuclear arsenal, these threats are the closest thing it has to a “real nuclear option.” As such, they are threats that Iran will make good on only as a last resort.
Read more: Hezbollah, Radical but Rational | STRATFOR
When we discuss threats along the U.S./Mexico border with sources and customers, or when we write an analysis on topics such as violence and improvised explosive devices along the border, a certain topic inevitably pops up: Hezbollah.
We frequently hear concerns from U.S. and Mexican government sources about the Iranian and Hezbollah network in Latin America. They fear that Iran would use Hezbollah to strike targets in the Western Hemisphere and even inside the United States if the United States or Israel were to conduct a military strike against Tehran’s nuclear program. Such concerns are expressed not only by our sources and are relayed not only to us. Nearly every time tensions increase between the United States and Iran, the media report that the Hezbollah threat to the United States is growing. Iran also has a vested interest in playing up the danger posed by Hezbollah and its other militant proxies as it tries to dissuade the United States and Israel from attacking its nuclear facilities.
A close look at Hezbollah reveals a potent capacity to conduct terrorist attacks. The group is certainly more capable and could be far more dangerous than al Qaeda. An examination also reveals that Hezbollah has a robust presence in Latin America and that it uses its network there to smuggle people into the United States, where it has long maintained a presence. A balanced look at Hezbollah, however, shows that, while the threat it poses is real — and serious — that threat is not new and it is not likely to be exercised. There are a number of factors that have limited Hezbollah’s use of its international network for terrorist purposes in recent years. A decision to return to such activity would not be made lightly, or without carefully calculating the cost.
Military Capability
When examining Hezbollah, it is important to recognize that it is not just a terrorist group. Certainly, during the 1980s, Hezbollah did gain international recognition from its spectacular and effective attacks using large suicide truck bombs, high-profile airline hijackings and snatching scores of Western hostages (who were sometimes held for years) in Lebanon, but today it is far more than a mere terrorist group. Hezbollah is an influential political party with a strong, well-equipped militia that is more powerful than the army in Lebanon. The organization also operates an extensive network of social service providers in Lebanon and an international finance and logistics network that supports the organization through a global array of legitimate and illicit enterprises.
Militarily, Hezbollah is a force to be reckoned with in Lebanon, as demonstrated by the manner in which it acquitted itself during its last confrontation with Israel, in August 2006. While Hezbollah did not defeat Israel, it did manage to make a defensive stand and not be defeated itself. It may have been bloodied and battered by the Israeli onslaught, but at the end of the fight Hezbollah stood unbowed — which signified a major victory for the organization and won it much acclaim in the Muslim world.
The tenacity and training of Hezbollah’s soldiers was readily apparent during the 2006 confrontation. These traits, along with some of the guerrilla warfare skills they demonstrated, such as planning and executing complex ambushes and employing improvised explosive devices against armored vehicles, are things that can be directly applied to terrorist attacks. This was demonstrated in the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik al-Hariri in February 2005.
Hezbollah maintains training facilities in places like Nabi Sheet in eastern Lebanon, where its militants are trained by Hezbollah instructors, members of the Syrian army and trainers from Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and its Quds Force (IRGC-QF) as well as Iran’s Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS). In addition, Hezbollah militants are sent outside Lebanon to Syria and Iran for training on advanced weapons and advanced guerrilla/terrorist tactics. Such advanced training has provided Hezbollah with a large cadre of operatives who are well-schooled in the tradecraft required to operate in a hostile environment and conduct successful terrorist attacks. Their links to Iranian diplomatic facilities guarantee them access to modern weaponry and military-grade explosives that can be brought in via the diplomatic pouch, which is inviolable under international treaty.
Latin American Network
Hezbollah and its Iranian patrons have a presence in Latin America that goes back decades. Iran has sought to establish close relationships with countries such as Cuba, Nicaragua, Bolivia and Venezuela that have opposed the United States and its foreign policy. STRATFOR sources have confirmed allegations by the U.S. government that the IRGC-QF has a presence in Venezuela and is providing training in irregular warfare to Venezuelan troops as well as militants belonging to the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia.
The Iranians are also known to station IRGC-QF operatives in their embassies under diplomatic cover alongside MOIS intelligence officers. IRGC-QF and MOIS officers also work under non-official cover in businesses, cultural centers and charities and have been known to work closely with Hezbollah operatives. This coordination occurs not only in Lebanon but also in places like Argentina. On March 17, 1992, Hezbollah operatives supported by the Iranian Embassy in Buenos Aires attacked the Israeli Embassy in that city with a vehicle-borne improvised explosive device, killing 29 people and injuring hundreds more. On July 18, 1994, 85 people were killed and hundreds injured when Hezbollah operatives supported by the Iranian Embassy attacked the Argentine Israelite Mutual Association building in Buenos Aires. Iran also maintains diplomatic relations with Mexico and uses its official diplomatic presence there to engage Mexico on a range of topics, including commercial relations and international energy matters. (Both countries are major energy producers.)
While Hezbollah has received hundreds of millions of dollars in financial support and military equipment from Iran and Syria, it also has created a global finance and logistics network of its own. The Lebanese people have an entrepreneurial and trading culture that has spread around the world, and Hezbollah has exploited this far-flung Lebanese diaspora (both Christian and Muslim) for fundraising and operational purposes. To assist in this effort, Hezbollah also has partnered with non-Lebanese Arabs and Muslims, both Shia and Sunni, many of whom work with Hezbollah’s network for financial gain and not out of ideological affinity with the group.
Hezbollah’s global commercial network transports and sells counterfeit consumer goods and electronics and pirated movies, music and software. In West Africa, the network also deals in “blood diamonds” from places like Sierra Leone and the Democratic Republic of the Congo and fences illegally bunkered oil from the Niger Delta. Cells in Asia procure and ship much of the counterfeit material sold elsewhere; nodes in North America deal in smuggled cigarettes, baby formula and counterfeit designer goods, among other things. In the United States, Hezbollah also has been involved in smuggling pseudoephedrine and selling counterfeit Viagra, and it has had a significant role in the production and worldwide propagation of counterfeit currencies. Hezbollah also has a long-standing and well-known presence in the tri-border region of Paraguay, Argentina and Brazil, where it earns tens of millions of dollars annually from legal and illegal commercial activities, according to U.S. government estimates.
The Hezbollah business empire also extends into the drug trade. The Bekaa Valley, Lebanon’s central agricultural heartland, is controlled by Hezbollah and serves as a major center for growing poppies and cannabis and for producing heroin from raw materials arriving from places like Afghanistan and the Golden Triangle of Southeast Asia. Indeed, Hezbollah controls a commanding percentage of the estimated $1 billion drug trade flowing out of the Bekaa. Much of the hashish and heroin emanating from there eventually arrives in Europe, where Hezbollah members also are involved in smuggling, car theft and the distribution of counterfeit goods and currency. Hezbollah operatives in the Western Hemisphere work with Latin American drug cartels to traffic cocaine into the lucrative markets of Europe, and there have been reports of Hezbollah members dealing drugs in the United States.
In recent years, Hezbollah also has become active in Central America and Mexico, the latter being an ideal place for the Iranians and Hezbollah to operate. Mexico has long been a favorite haunt for foreign intelligence officers from countries hostile to the United States, ranging from Nazi Germany to the Soviet Union, due to its close proximity to the United States and its very poor counterintelligence capability. Mexican government sources have told STRATFOR that the ability of the Mexican government to monitor an organization like Hezbollah is very limited. While Mexico has a domestic intelligence capability, it has historically oriented its efforts toward political opponents of the government and not toward foreign intelligence operatives operating on its soil. This is understandable, considering that the foreign intelligence officers are in Mexico because of its proximity to the United States and not necessarily to spy on Mexico. The Mexican government’s limited counterintelligence capacity has been further reduced by corruption and by the substantial amount of resources the Mexican government has been forced to dedicate to the cartel wars currently ravaging the country.
It is also convenient for Hezbollah that there is some degree of physical resemblance between some Lebanese and Mexican people. Mexicans citizens of Lebanese heritage (like Mexico’s richest man, Carlos Slim) do not look out of place when they are on the street. STRATFOR sources say that Hezbollah members have married Mexican women in order to stay in Mexico, and some have reportedly even adopted Spanish names. A Hezbollah operative with a Spanish name who learns to speak Spanish well can be difficult for a U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent to spot. American officials often lack the Spanish skills required to differentiate between Spanish speakers with Mexican accents and those with foreign accents.
Most of the Lebanese residing in Mexico are Maronite Christians who fled Lebanon and who are now well assimilated and prosperous in Mexico. Many of the Lebanese Muslims living in Mexico are relatively recent immigrants, and only about half of them are Shia, so the community in Mexico is smaller than it is in other places. Still, Hezbollah will use it to hide operatives. Sources tell STRATFOR that Hezbollah and the Iranians are involved in several small Islamic centers in Mexican cities such as Torreon, Chihuahua City and Monterrey. They also have an active presence in Shiite Islamic centers in border towns on both sides of the border and use these centers to coordinate cross-border smuggling of contraband and operatives.
Arrestors
Hezbollah has a group of operatives capable of undertaking terrorist missions that is larger and better-trained than any group al Qaeda has ever had. Hezbollah (and its Iranian patrons) have also established a solid foothold in the Americas, and they have demonstrated a capability to use their global logistics network to move operatives and conduct attacks should they so choose. This is what U.S. government officials fear, and what the Iranians want them to fear. The threat posed by Hezbollah’s militant apparatus has always been a serious one, and Hezbollah has long had a significant presence inside the United States. The threat it poses today is not some new, growing phenomenon, as some reports in the press would suggest.
But despite Hezbollah’s transnational terrorism capabilities, it has not chosen to exercise them outside of its home region for many years now. This is due in large part to the way Hezbollah has matured as an organization. It is no longer the new, shadowy organization it was in 1983 but a large global organization with an address. Its assets and personnel can be identified and seized or attacked. Hezbollah understands that a serious terrorist attack or series of attacks on U.S. soil could result in the type of American reaction that followed the 9/11 attack and that the organization would likely end up on the receiving end of the type of campaign that the United States launched against al Qaeda (and Lebanon is far easier to strike than Afghanistan). In the past, Hezbollah (and its Iranian patrons) have worked hard to sow ambiguity and hide responsibility for terrorist attacks, but as Hezbollah matured as an organization, such subterfuge became more difficult.
There is also international public opinion to consider. Hezbollah is a political organization seeking political legitimacy, and it is one thing for it to be seen as a victim of Israeli aggression when standing up to Israeli forces in southern Lebanon and quite another to be seen killing innocent civilians on the other side of the globe.
Hezbollah also sees the United States (and the rest of the Western Hemisphere) as a wonderful place to make money through its array of legal and illegal enterprises. If it angered the United States, its business interests in Western Hemisphere would be severely impacted. Hezbollah could conduct attacks in the United States, but it would pay a terrible price for doing so, and it does not appear that it is willing to pay that price. The Hezbollah leadership may be radical, but it is not irrational. Many of the senior Hezbollah leaders have matured since the group was founded and have become influential politicians and wealthy businessmen. This older cadre tends to be more moderate than some of the younger firebrands in the organization.
So, while Hezbollah has the capability to attack U.S. interests, it does not currently possess the intent to do so. Its terrorist attacks in Lebanon in the 1980s, like the bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks and the two attacks against the U.S. Embassy, were intended to drive U.S. influence out of Lebanon, and the attacks largely succeeded. An attack by Hezbollah inside the United States today would result in the return of U.S. attention to, and perhaps even a presence in, Lebanon, something that is clearly not in Hezbollah’s interests.
Then why the recurring rumors of impending Hezbollah terrorist attacks? For several years now, every time there has been talk of a possible attack on Iran there has been a corresponding threat by Iran that it will use its proxy groups in response to such an attack. Iran has also been busy pushing intelligence reports to anybody who will listen (including STRATFOR) that it will activate its militant proxy groups if attacked and, to back up that threat, will periodically send IRGC-QF, MOIS or Hezbollah operatives out to conduct not-so-subtle surveillance of potential targets. (They clearly want to be seen undertaking such activity.)
In many ways, the Hezbollah threat is being played up in order to provide the type of deterrent that mutually assured destruction did during the Cold War. The threats of unleashing Hezbollah terrorist attacks and closing the Strait of Hormuz are the most potent deterrents Iran has to being attacked. Since Iran does not yet possess a nuclear arsenal, these threats are the closest thing it has to a “real nuclear option.” As such, they are threats that Iran will make good on only as a last resort.
Read more: Hezbollah, Radical but Rational | STRATFOR
Saturday, 14 August 2010 21:50
The Ground Zero Mosque controversy continues to stir up new revelations.
Now we learn that tax dollars have been used to build mosques around the world (see column below).
And yesterday, Fox News reported that the Ground Zero Mosque imam has rejected an offer by New York Governor David Paterson to help move the mosque to another location. What does this tell us about the imam’s alleged commitment to interfaith bridge building? About his “sensitivity”?
A CNN poll this week revealed that 68% of American voters now oppose the Ground Zero Mosque! Driven by new revelations and increasing media coverage, this is an increase of nearly 10 points in the past 30 days. For example, since April Brigitte Gabriel has conducted nearly 200 radio and TV interviews about the Ground Zero Mosque! The rising opposition of public opinion certainly contributed to Paterson’s decision to try to mediate a solution and get the mosque moved.
You can help fuel this rising opposition by signing our petition if you haven’t yet done so AND forwarding this email to everyone you know!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/aug/10/tax-dollars-to-build-mosques/
Tax dollars to build mosques
U.S. underwrites fundraising tour for Islamic shrine at Ground Zero
By THE WASHINGTON TIMES
-
The Washington Times
7:46 p.m., Tuesday, August 10, 2010
Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, executive director of the Cordoba Initiative, addresses a gathering as groups planning a proposed mosque and cultural center near Ground Zero in Lower Manhattan to be named Cordoba House showed and spoke about their plans for the center at a community board meeting in New York Tuesday, May 25, 2010. Community members both for and against the plan spoke during the meeting. (AP Photo/Craig Ruttle)
The State Department is sending Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf - the mastermind of the Ground Zero Mosque - on a trip through the Middle East to foster "greater understanding" about Islam and Muslim communities in the United States. However, important questions are being raised about whether this is simply a taxpayer-funded fundraising jaunt to underwrite his reviled project, which is moving ahead in Lower Manhattan.
Mr. Rauf is scheduled to go to Saudi Arabia, Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Bahrain and Qatar, the usual stops for Gulf-based fundraising. The State Department defends the five-country tour saying that Mr. Rauf is "a distinguished Muslim cleric," but surely the government could find another such figure in the United States who is not seeking millions of dollars to fund a construction project that has so strongly divided America.
By funding the trip so soon after New York City's Landmarks Preservation Commission gave the go-ahead to demolish the building on the proposed mosque site, the State Department is creating the appearance that the U.S. government is facilitating the construction of this shameful structure. It gives Mr. Rauf not only access but imprimatur to gather up foreign cash. And because Mr. Rauf has refused to reveal how he plans to finance his costly venture, the American public is left with the impression it will be a wholly foreign enterprise. This contradicts the argument that a mosque is needed in that part of New York City to provide services for a burgeoning Muslim population. If so many people need the mosque so badly, presumably they could figure out a way to pay for it themselves.
Americans also may be surprised to learn that the United States has been an active participant in mosque construction projects overseas. In April, U.S. Ambassador to Tanzania Alfonso E. Lenhardt helped cut the ribbon at the 12th-century Kizimkazi Mosque, which was refurbished with assistance from the United States under a program to preserve culturally significant buildings. The U.S. government also helped save the Amr Ebn El Aas Mosque in Cairo, which dates back to 642. The mosque's namesake was the Muslim conqueror of Christian Egypt, who built the structure on the site where he had pitched his tent before doing battle with the country's Byzantine rulers. For those who think the Ground Zero Mosque is an example of "Muslim triumphalism" glorifying conquest, the Amr Ebn El Aas Mosque is an example of such a monument - and one paid for with U.S. taxpayer funds.
The mosques being rebuilt by the United States are used for religious worship, which raises important First Amendment questions. U.S. taxpayer money should not be used to preserve and promote Islam, even abroad. In July 2009, the Office of the Inspector General published an audit of U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) faith-based and community initiatives that examined whether government funds were being used for religious activities. The auditors found that while USAID was funding some religious activities, officials were "uncertain of whether such uses of Agency funding violate Agency regulations or the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution" when balanced against foreign-policy objectives.
For example, our government rebuilt the Al Shuhada Mosque in Fallujah, Iraq, expecting such benefits as "stimulating the economy, enhancing a sense of pride in the community, reducing opposition to international relief organizations operating in Fallujah, and reducing incentives among young men to participate in violence or insurgent groups." But Section 205.1(d) of title 22 of the Code of Federal Regulations prohibits USAID funds from being used for the rehabilitation of structures to the extent that those structures are used for "inherently religious activities." It is impossible to separate religion from a mosque; any such projects will necessarily support Islam.
The State Department is either wittingly or unwittingly using tax money to support Mr. Rauf's efforts to realize his dream of a supersized mosque blocks away from the sacred ground of the former World Trade Center, which was destroyed by Islamic fanaticism. This ill-considered decision will raise the ire of millions of Americans and illustrates the limits of what the denizens of Foggy Bottom know about diplomacy.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Make sure you receive all of your messages from ACT for America. Add actforamerica@donationnet.net to your address book as an approved email sender. If you found this message in your "Bulk" or "Spam" folder, please click the "Not Spam" button to notify your provider that these are emails you want to receive.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACT for America
P.O. Box 12765
Pensacola, FL 32591
www.actforamerica.org
Now we learn that tax dollars have been used to build mosques around the world (see column below).
And yesterday, Fox News reported that the Ground Zero Mosque imam has rejected an offer by New York Governor David Paterson to help move the mosque to another location. What does this tell us about the imam’s alleged commitment to interfaith bridge building? About his “sensitivity”?
A CNN poll this week revealed that 68% of American voters now oppose the Ground Zero Mosque! Driven by new revelations and increasing media coverage, this is an increase of nearly 10 points in the past 30 days. For example, since April Brigitte Gabriel has conducted nearly 200 radio and TV interviews about the Ground Zero Mosque! The rising opposition of public opinion certainly contributed to Paterson’s decision to try to mediate a solution and get the mosque moved.
You can help fuel this rising opposition by signing our petition if you haven’t yet done so AND forwarding this email to everyone you know!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/aug/10/tax-dollars-to-build-mosques/
Tax dollars to build mosques
U.S. underwrites fundraising tour for Islamic shrine at Ground Zero
By THE WASHINGTON TIMES
-
The Washington Times
7:46 p.m., Tuesday, August 10, 2010
Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, executive director of the Cordoba Initiative, addresses a gathering as groups planning a proposed mosque and cultural center near Ground Zero in Lower Manhattan to be named Cordoba House showed and spoke about their plans for the center at a community board meeting in New York Tuesday, May 25, 2010. Community members both for and against the plan spoke during the meeting. (AP Photo/Craig Ruttle)
The State Department is sending Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf - the mastermind of the Ground Zero Mosque - on a trip through the Middle East to foster "greater understanding" about Islam and Muslim communities in the United States. However, important questions are being raised about whether this is simply a taxpayer-funded fundraising jaunt to underwrite his reviled project, which is moving ahead in Lower Manhattan.
Mr. Rauf is scheduled to go to Saudi Arabia, Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Bahrain and Qatar, the usual stops for Gulf-based fundraising. The State Department defends the five-country tour saying that Mr. Rauf is "a distinguished Muslim cleric," but surely the government could find another such figure in the United States who is not seeking millions of dollars to fund a construction project that has so strongly divided America.
By funding the trip so soon after New York City's Landmarks Preservation Commission gave the go-ahead to demolish the building on the proposed mosque site, the State Department is creating the appearance that the U.S. government is facilitating the construction of this shameful structure. It gives Mr. Rauf not only access but imprimatur to gather up foreign cash. And because Mr. Rauf has refused to reveal how he plans to finance his costly venture, the American public is left with the impression it will be a wholly foreign enterprise. This contradicts the argument that a mosque is needed in that part of New York City to provide services for a burgeoning Muslim population. If so many people need the mosque so badly, presumably they could figure out a way to pay for it themselves.
Americans also may be surprised to learn that the United States has been an active participant in mosque construction projects overseas. In April, U.S. Ambassador to Tanzania Alfonso E. Lenhardt helped cut the ribbon at the 12th-century Kizimkazi Mosque, which was refurbished with assistance from the United States under a program to preserve culturally significant buildings. The U.S. government also helped save the Amr Ebn El Aas Mosque in Cairo, which dates back to 642. The mosque's namesake was the Muslim conqueror of Christian Egypt, who built the structure on the site where he had pitched his tent before doing battle with the country's Byzantine rulers. For those who think the Ground Zero Mosque is an example of "Muslim triumphalism" glorifying conquest, the Amr Ebn El Aas Mosque is an example of such a monument - and one paid for with U.S. taxpayer funds.
The mosques being rebuilt by the United States are used for religious worship, which raises important First Amendment questions. U.S. taxpayer money should not be used to preserve and promote Islam, even abroad. In July 2009, the Office of the Inspector General published an audit of U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) faith-based and community initiatives that examined whether government funds were being used for religious activities. The auditors found that while USAID was funding some religious activities, officials were "uncertain of whether such uses of Agency funding violate Agency regulations or the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution" when balanced against foreign-policy objectives.
For example, our government rebuilt the Al Shuhada Mosque in Fallujah, Iraq, expecting such benefits as "stimulating the economy, enhancing a sense of pride in the community, reducing opposition to international relief organizations operating in Fallujah, and reducing incentives among young men to participate in violence or insurgent groups." But Section 205.1(d) of title 22 of the Code of Federal Regulations prohibits USAID funds from being used for the rehabilitation of structures to the extent that those structures are used for "inherently religious activities." It is impossible to separate religion from a mosque; any such projects will necessarily support Islam.
The State Department is either wittingly or unwittingly using tax money to support Mr. Rauf's efforts to realize his dream of a supersized mosque blocks away from the sacred ground of the former World Trade Center, which was destroyed by Islamic fanaticism. This ill-considered decision will raise the ire of millions of Americans and illustrates the limits of what the denizens of Foggy Bottom know about diplomacy.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Make sure you receive all of your messages from ACT for America. Add actforamerica@donationnet.net to your address book as an approved email sender. If you found this message in your "Bulk" or "Spam" folder, please click the "Not Spam" button to notify your provider that these are emails you want to receive.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACT for America
P.O. Box 12765
Pensacola, FL 32591
www.actforamerica.org
Saturday, 14 August 2010 21:44
8/9/2010 Indonesia (JakartaPost) Muslim Extremists Attack Church Members in Bekasi
On Sunday, August 8, 2010, hundreds of police officers secured the perimeters of the HKBP church's service in West Java. Unfortunately, there were not enough policemen to stop the Islamic Defenders Front (FPI) from bursting through the manmade barricade and entering the church service area. Once inside, the FPI began to attack and beat dozens of HKBP’s church members—including women. According to some, the FPI and West Java’s police force planned the attack. Full Story
Pray for the members of HKBP as they heal both mentally and physically.
Pray that West Java’s police force will do everything they can to protect their Christian citizens.
Pray that members of the FPI will stop tormenting and persecuting Indonesian Christians.
8/9/2010 Uzkekistan (Worthy News) Uzbekistan Jails Baptists, Threatens Church
Baptists from an “unregistered” church in Uzbekistan were celebrating the spiritual birth of a fellow believer by singing songs and drinking tea. However, their celebration came to an abrupt end when Uzbekistan officers barged into the house church and began forcing the believers into police cars. According to sources, one four-year-old boy was terrified by the way the Uzbek officers were treating his mother. Besides detaining 23 Christians, policemen confiscated two Bibles, four songbooks, and a violin textbook. Thus far, at least ten people have been released. Full Story
Pray that all 23 members of the Uzbekistan house church are released.
Pray for the mental health of the four-year-old boy who saw his mother get attacked by Uzbek police.
Pray that the Uzbekistan government will allow the church members to register their church.
8/10/2010 Somalia (CBNNews.com) Somalia Militants Ban Christian Aid Groups
Recently, al-Shabaab, a radical Muslim group, has been accusing Christian aid organizations of spreading Christianity in Somalia. Although the Christian organizations say the accusations are false, al-Shabaab has begun threatening to enact “disciplinary measures” on anyone who helps Somalia’s Christians. Thus, organizations such as World Vision and ADRA have been forced to cease operations in this spiritually needy country. Full Story
Pray that World Vision and ADRA will be able to continue their work in Somalia.
Pray that al-Shabaab will stop threatening those who try to help Somalia’s Christians.
Pray that the Holy Spirit will blanket Somalia.
8/11/2010 China (WorthyNews) Chinese Government Destroys Christian-Owned Factory
At 3 am on a Sunday morning, employees of China’s Gospel Shoe Factory were mercilessly attacked and beaten by a mob of 200 men—men that were being led by a Chinese Communist official. The Gospel Shoe Factory also served as a house church. In China, all house churches must be registered and overseen by a government-appointed body. And although the Gospel Shoe Factory had a building permit and a business license, the Chinese government still decided to demolish the factory. Full Story
Pray that the owners of the Gospel Shoe Factory will be reimbursed for their loss.
Pray that the owners of the Gospel Shoe Factory will be able to rebuild their business.
Pray that Chinese Christians will be able to worship together without having to be “registered” or “overseen.”
8/11/2010 India (Christianity Today) Witness Testifies in Kandhamal Nun Rape Case
In 2008, Debadutta Naik, an Indian farmer, testified that he “did not” see anyone attack and manhandle a priest and nun at the Baliguda Catholic Church. Fortunately, Naik has decided to change his statement and tell the truth. Debadutta Naik is now testifying that he witnessed a mob of 50 Hindu youths attack Baliguda Catholic Church, manhandle a priest and rape a nun, and then force the nun to parade naked through the streets of India. Hopefully, with Naik’s statement, justice will be served. Full Story
Pray for the safety of Debadutta Naik when his testimony becomes public.
Pray that justice will be served and that the 50 Hindu youths will be arrested and imprisoned.
Pray that the priest and nun who were attacked recover both mentally and physically.
8/9/2010 Afghanistan (AP) Afghan Medical Mission Ends in Death for Ten
Ten members of a Christian medical team hiked for over ten hours to bring aid and medical supplies to needy Afghan citizens. After serving for two weeks in the remote Parun Valley, the doctors and nurses began the long trek back to Kabul. Unfortunately, their trek ended early when members of the Taliban attacked and killed the Christian medical team. According to sources, the Taliban murdered the Christian medical team because they heard that they were “spying” and “preaching Christianity.” Full Story
Pray for the friends and families of these faithful Christians as they mourn the loss of their loved ones.
Pray that this recent slaughter does not deter other Christian medical teams from working in Afghanistan.
Pray that the Lord will place a hedge of protection over all Christian workers in Afghanistan.
8/6/2010 Tanzania (CDN) Zanzibar Muslims, Officials Stop Church Building, Erect Mosque
In April 2007, Pastor Paulo Masegi of the Evangelistic Assemblies of God purchased land to build a church in Mwanyanya-Mtoni. By November of 2007, Pastor Paulo had erected a house on his land to serve as a temporary place of worship. Yet, soon after Pastor Paulo’s house was built, local Muslims began saying that they didn’t like having a church in the area. In 2009, these same Muslims began to erect a mosque a mere three feet away from Pastor Paulo’s property line. When Pastor Paulo began constructing his permanent church building, these Muslims trespassed onto his property and destroyed the church’s foundation. As of now, Pastor Paulo’s church has yet to be built, but the adjacent mosque has been open since December of 2009. Full Story
Pray that Pastor Paulo Masegi will be able to finish building his church.
Pray that local Muslims will stop objecting to the construction of a church in Mwanyanya-Mtoni.
Pray that Pastor Paulo’s congregation will find a place to worship as they wait for their church to be built.
Giving Made Easier!
ICC Offers the Ability to Automate Your Monthly Gift!
You can sign up to be a monthly supporter of the persecuted through a monthly credit card (or bank account) transfer via our website. Your automated recurring gift will help us plan, build, and serve the persecuted with greater confidence. Thank you for your ongoing commitment to serve our persecuted brothers and sisters.
You can sign up for recurring gifts or make a secure online donation by clicking here.
Thank you for caring and praying for the persecuted.
2020 Pennsylvania Ave. NW #941
Washington, D.C. 20006-1846
Web: www.persecution.org
Phone: USA 1-800-422-5441
Email: icc@persecution.org
Saturday, 14 August 2010 21:42
Visit our News page
“Ground Zero Mosque” imam & taqiyya
Petition opposing the mosque now has over 76,400 names
Dear Joseph,
Andrew McCarthy, who headed up the prosecution in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, was a featured speaker at the recent ACT! for America 2010 National Conference and Legislative Briefing.
McCarthy, author of the excellent book The Grand Jihad, recently weighed in on the controversy surrounding the “Ground Zero Mosque” and its imam—notably, a book written by the imam that has a very different name for Arabic-speaking audiences than for English-speaking audiences. (See commentary below, highlights added.)
A common tactic of “taqiyya” (sharia-sanctioned deception) employed by Islamists is to say one thing to English-speaking audiences and something quite different to Arabic-speaking audiences.
Opposition to the mosque continues to grow—as do the number of people who have signed our petition. If you haven’t yet done so, please click here to add your name today!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://article.nationalreview.com/print/?q=MmNhNTg0ZmY1NzA4NWJmMjM0YjI1MzAwNzljYjFiNDM
NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE www.nationalreview.com
Andrew C. McCarthy
July 24, 2010 4:00 A.M.
Rauf’s Dawa from the World Trade Center Rubble
Meet the Ground Zero Mosque imam’s Muslim Brotherhood friends.
Feisal Abdul Rauf is the imam behind the “Cordoba Initiative” that is spearheading plans to build a $100 million Islamic center at Ground Zero, the site where nearly 3,000 Americans were killed by jihadists on 9/11. He is also the author of a book called What’s Right with Islam Is What’s Right with America. But the book hasn’t always been called that. It was called quite something else for non-English-speaking audiences. In Malaysia, it was published as A Call to Prayer from the World Trade Center Rubble: Islamic Dawa in the Heart of America Post-9/11.
Now it emerges that a “special, non-commercial edition” of this book was later produced, with Feisal’s cooperation, by two American tentacles of the Muslim Brotherhood: the Islamic Society of North America and the International Institute of Islamic Thought. The book’s copyright page tells the tale:
Both ISNA and IIIT have been up to their necks in the promotion of Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood’s ruthless Palestinian branch, which is pledged by charter to the destruction of Israel. In fact, both ISNA and IIIT were cited by the Justice Department as unindicted co-conspirators in a crucial terrorism-financing case involving the channeling of tens of millions of dollars to Hamas through an outfit called the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development. For the last 15 years, Hamas has been a designated terrorist organization under U.S. law.
Dawa, whether done from the rubble of the World Trade Center or elsewhere, is the missionary work by which Islam is spread. As explained in my recent book, The Grand Jihad, dawa is proselytism, but not involving only spiritual elements — for Islam is not merely a religion, and spiritual elements are just a small part of its doctrine. In truth, Islam is a comprehensive political, social, and economic system with its own authoritarian legal framework, sharia, which aspires to govern all aspects of life.
This framework rejects core tenets of American constitutional republicanism: for example, individual liberty, freedom of conscience, freedom to govern ourselves irrespective of any theocratic code, equality of men and women, equality of Muslims and non-Muslims, and economic liberty, including the uses of private property (in Islam, owners hold property only as a custodians for the umma, the universal Muslim nation, and are beholden to the Islamic state regarding its use). Sharia prohibits the preaching of creeds other than Islam, the renunciation of Islam, any actions that divide the umma, and homosexuality. Its penalties are draconian, including savagely executed death sentences for apostates, homosexuals, and adulterers.
The purpose of dawa, like the purpose of jihad, is to implement, spread, and defend sharia. Scholar Robert Spencer incisively refers to dawa practices as “stealth jihad,” the advancement of the sharia agenda through means other than violence and agents other than terrorists. These include extortion, cultivation of sympathizers in the media and the universities, exploitation of our legal system and tradition of religious liberty, infiltration of our political system, and fundraising. This is why Yusuf Qaradawi, the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood and the world’s most influential Islamic cleric, boldly promises that Islam will “conquer America” and “conquer Europe” through dawa.
In considering Imam Rauf and his Ground Zero project, Qaradawi and the Muslim Brotherhood are extremely important. Like most Muslims, Rauf regards Qaradawi as a guide, and referred to him in 2001 as “the most well-known legal authority in the whole Muslim world today.” And indeed he is: a prominent, Qatar-based scholar whose weekly Al Jazeera program on the subject of sharia is viewed by millions and whose cyber-venture, Islam Online, is accessed by millions more, including Muslims in the United States. Not surprisingly, his rabble-rousing was a prime cause of the deadly global rioting by Muslims when an obscure Danish newspaper published cartoon depictions of Mohammed.
Qaradawi regards the United States as the enemy of Islam. He has urged that Muslims “fight the American military if we can, and if we cannot, we should fight the U.S. economically and politically.” In 2004, he issued a fatwa (an edict based on sharia) calling for Muslims to kill Americans in Iraq. A leading champion of Hamas, he has issued similar approvals of suicide bombings in Israel. Moreover, as recounted in Matthew Levitt’s history of Hamas, Qaradawi has decreed that Muslims must donate money to “support Palestinians fighting occupation. . . . If we can’t carry out acts of jihad ourselves, we at least should support and prop up the mujahideen [i.e., Islamic raiders or warriors] financially and morally.”
Qaradawi’s support for Hamas is only natural. Since that organization’s 1987 founding, it has been the top Muslim Brotherhood priority to underwrite Hamas’s jihadist onslaught against the Jewish state. Toward that end, the Muslim Brotherhood mobilized the Islamist infrastructure in the United States.
The original building block of that infrastructure was the Muslim Students Association (MSA), established in the early Sixties to groom young Muslims in the Brotherhood’s ideology — promoting sharia, Islamic supremacism, and a worldwide caliphate. As Andrew Bostom elaborated in a New York Post op-ed on Friday, Imam Rauf, too, is steeped in this ideology.
In 1981, after two decades of churning out activists from its North American chapters (which now number over 600), the Brotherhood merged the MSA into ISNA. In its own words, ISNA was conceived as an umbrella organization “to advance the cause of Islam and service Muslims in North America so as to enable them to adopt Islam as a complete way of life.” That same year, the Brotherhood created IIIT as a Washington-area Islamic think tank dedicated to what it describes as “the Islamicization of knowledge.”
After Hamas was created, the top Brotherhood operative in the United States, Mousa Abu Marzook — who actually ran Hamas from his Virginia home for several years in the early Nineties — founded the Islamic Association for Palestine to boost Hamas’s support. One of his co-founders was Sami al-Arian, then a student and Muslim Brotherhood member, later a top U.S. operative of the terrorist organization Palestinian Islamic Jihad, which he helped guide from his perch as a professor at the University of South Florida. In 2006, al-Arian was convicted on terrorism charges.
Marzook and other Brotherhood figures established the Occupied Land Fund, eventually renamed the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), to be Hamas’s American fundraising arm. The HLF was headquartered in ISNA’s Indiana office. As the Justice Department explained in a memorandum submitted in the HLF case:
During the early years of HLF’s operation, HLF raised money and supported Hamas through a bank account it held with ISNA. . . . Indeed, HLF (under its former name, OLF) operated from within ISNA, in Plainfield, Illinois. . . . ISNA checks deposited into the ISNA/[North American Islamic Trust] account for the HLF were often made payable to “the Palestinian Mujahideen,” the original name for the Hamas military wing. . . . From the ISNA/NAIT account, the HLF sent hundreds of thousands of dollars to Hamas leader Mousa Abu Marzook . . . and a number of other individuals associated with Hamas.
Ultimately, the HLF raised over $36 million for Hamas. At the height of the intifada, this was not about the social-welfare activities Hamas touts to camouflage its barbarism. As the journalist Stephen Schwartz of the Center for Islamic Pluralism has observed, “Ordinary Americans should be shocked and outraged to learn that Hamas was running its terror campaign from a sanctuary in the U.S.” In addition, prosecutors showed that ISNA was central to a 1993 meeting of top Brotherhood operatives, who were wiretapped “discussing using ISNA as an official cover for their activities.”
Meantime, in 1992, the IIIT contributed $50,000 to underwrite an al-Arian venture, the World & Islam Studies Enterprise (WISE), a front for Palestinian Islamic Jihad that ostensibly employed several members of the PIJ governing board. IIIT has been under federal investigation since 2002 — and after his terrorism conviction, al-Arian went into contempt of court rather than honor a grand-jury subpoena in the probe.
In 1991, the Muslim Brotherhood’s American leadership prepared an internal memorandum for the organization’s global leadership in Egypt. It was written principally by Mohamed Akram, a close associate of Sheikh Qaradawi. As Akram put it, 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.
The memorandum included a list described by Akram as “our organizations and the organizations of our friends,” working together to implement this sabotage strategy. Prominently included in that list were ISNA and IIIT.
The Ground Zero project to erect a monument to sharia overlooking the crater where the World Trade Center once stood, and where thousands were slaughtered, is not a test of America’s commitment to religious liberty. America already has thousands of mosques and Islamic centers, including scores in the New York area — though Islam does not allow non-Muslims even to enter its crown-jewel cities of Mecca and Medina, much less to build churches or synagogues.
The Ground Zero project is a test of America’s resolve to face down a civilizational jihad that aims, in the words of its leaders, to destroy us from within.
— Andrew C. McCarthy, a senior fellow at the National Review Institute, is the author, most recently, of The Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotage America.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Make sure you receive all of your messages from ACT for America. Add actforamerica@donationnet.net to your address book as an approved email sender. If you found this message in your "Bulk" or "Spam" folder, please click the "Not Spam" button to notify your provider that these are emails you want to receive.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACT for America
P.O. Box 12765
Pensacola, FL 32591
www.actforamerica.org
ACT for America is an issues advocacy organization dedicated to effectively organizing and mobilizing the most powerful grassroots citizen action network in America, a grassroots network committed to informed and coordinated civic action that will lead to public policies that promote America’s national security and the defense of American democratic values against the assault of radical Islam. We are only as strong as our supporters, and your volunteer and financial support is essential to our success. Thank you for helping us make America safer and more secure.
Monday, 02 August 2010 20:23
Looming threat from illegals: terror
By BRIGITTE GABRIEL
Last Updated: 10:01 AM, July 30, 2010
Posted: 12:01 AM, July 30, 2010
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/looming_threat_from_illegals_terror
_fxLo773X6OkZJXUCLXVIXJ
Arizonans will be grateful for some extra help from the National Guard, starting Sunday, in protecting the border and fighting drug violence -- especially now that a federal judge has blocked key parts of their recent illegal-immigration law. But there's a more pressing border issue that goes beyond Arizona: the alliance between drug cartels and groups that aim to smuggle terrorists into our country through the Mexican border.
Last week's detonation along the Texas-Mexico border of an Improvised Explosive Device similar to those used in Iraq and Afghanistan strongly suggests that Hezbollah is working with the drug cartels -- and that America is unsafe. Law-enforcement officials and intelligence analysts believe that terrorist groups like al Qaeda have been working with such gangs as the ruthless MS-13 to smuggle terrorists into America.
Intel briefings and other sources suggest that al Qaeda spends as much as $50,000 to smuggle in a single terrorist, while Hezbollah, funded by Iran, pays as much as $10,000.
Indeed, some analysts estimate that thousands of terrorists have already been smuggled into the United States through the Mexican border since 9/11. Last year, a worker at the Mexican embassy in Beirut was caught selling visas to enter Mexico for $3,000 apiece. Hezbollah terrorists know that once they get to Mexico they can make their way here through our southern border.
A congressional report on homeland security acknowledges this threat. The report, "A Line in the Sand: Confronting the Threat at the Southwest Border," addresses the alarming rate at which the number of aliens referred to as "other than Mexican," or OTMs, are crossing the border. Many OTMs are nationals and terrorists from countries such as Iran, Syria, Pakistan, Chechnya, Afghanistan and Iraq.
Our biggest threat is that a nuclear, dirty or biological bomb could be smuggled by OTMs into America soon.
Hezbollah, the most sophisticated terrorist organization today, trains al Qaeda members in centers in Lebanon's Bekaa Valley before they leave for terror destinations via Syria, my sources there report. The organization manufactures IEDs in Lebanon and has perfected their use since the 1980s.
An alliance between the drug cartels and Hezbollah is a symbiotic, win-win situation for both parties. Hezbollah can share its expertise in tunnel-engineering and bomb-making with the drug cartels. The cartels can then smuggle dealers and drugs through these tunnels, several of which have been discovered in recent years, while Hezbollah smuggles terrorists and munitions to be used in terror missions in America.
Hezbollah is Iran's proxy army and is trained by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards. As Iran and America head into a confrontation over Iran's nuclear program, Iran must ensure it has sufficient operatives in America to retaliate when the time comes, and this alliance provides the means to get them here. That time is coming faster than we think.
Intelligence analysts think Hezbollah has at least 11 cells in America, including one in New York City. If provoked, perhaps via an Israeli strike, it is likely Iran will retaliate not only against Israel but against its strongest ally.
Our border-security crisis extends beyond illegal workers and employers looking for cheap labor. A suitcase bomb or biological bomb detonated in any major city in America would kill untold numbers of civilians and wreak havoc on our economy. Health care, prison housing and other costs for illegal immigrants would ultimately pale in comparison to such devastation.
Terrorists now have operational centers all over South America. They're learning Spanish and obtaining fake Spanish papers in case they're caught crossing over the Mexican border. The Tri-Border region of Argentina, Brazil and Paraguay in South America has become a haven for international Islamic extremists. A State Department report notes that Hezbollah and other terrorist groups were using bases in Latin America to "raise millions of dollars annually via criminal enterprises."
Americans must put politics aside and act now to secure the Mexican border. Arizona families are in need of protection from the drug violence, but we must protect the millions of Americans living in major cities who are threatened by a suitcase bomb or the like smuggled through the Mexican border.
The time for bickering is over.
Terrorism analyst Brigitte Gabriel, author of "Because They Hate," is president of ACTforAmerica.org.
Friday, 30 July 2010 22:16
FEATURED LOCAL BUSINESSES
FEATURED BERGEN COUNTY REAL ESTATE
LATEST MEMBERS
TOP MEMBERS
-
Points: 412 -
Points: 332 -
Points: 245 -
Points: 223 -
Points: 189
UPCOMING EVENTS
- 06-03-12 - 06-03-12 | 9:30 AM Step Up For The Arc Walk 2012
BERGEN COUNTY CALENDAR OF EVENTS
YOUR LATEST DISCUSSIONS:
| • Leonia Arts Launches New Web Site &... Luhrs and Associates 07-05-12 07:04 |
| • FREE NY WATER WAY SHUTTLE NeighborhoodActivist 09-03-12 23:32 |
| • Edgewater noise pollution? qman 08-03-12 22:16 |
| • Councilman Richard Carbonaro mrhatfield 06-07-11 11:14 |
| • Deleted monarchrh 25-05-11 10:48 |
PHOTO COMMENTS
VIDEO COMMENTS
-
1956 Safety Patrol Film St.Mary's Rutherford NJ Classic Rutherford! -
-
SEX~FOOD~ROCK&ROLL Pretty HOT Boom Boom! -
New Jersey Cliffs I just noticed this video - there are a lot of hidden areas in Bergen County that we just take for granted.
-
Bergen County Zoo, Van Saun Park, Paramus, New Jersey I'm excited to go to Van Saun Park again.Its been many years,last time I was there.Thank you,for the video Lou Ryder.shace58