Posts Tagged ‘Barack Obama’

(Roosevelt-ism /) Reagan-ism VS (Carter-ism/) Obama-ism

February 6, 2011


As I see MSM admitting Reagan’s heroism and ‘American legacy,’ they link his legacy to his own hero: Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Now, let’s examine historical perspective, how is (Roosevelt-ism /) Reagan-ism VS (Carter-ism/) Obama-ism, in:

Pride VS shame

Pro-American, Pro-freedom, pro-Israel, anti-Islamism.

Or, What would Reagan do/say today?

FDRReaganCarterObama

F.D.R.


F.D.R. Pro Israel, pro Zionism, protesting British bias for allowing Arab immigration (the main origin of “Palestinians”) exceeding Jewish immigration that was blocked by the infamous British ‘White paper.’

Rights of the Jewish People to a Sovereign State in their Historic …Nov 16, 2003 … Indeed, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt concluded in 1939 that “Arab immigration into Palestine since 1921 has vastly exceeded the total Jewish immigration during the whole period.” …
http://www.jcpa.org/jl/vp507.htm


The memoirs of Cordell Hull: Volume 2, Part 2 Andrew Henry Thomas Berding, Macmillan Co., 1948, (1804 pages) , p. 1530
…and a good deal of dismay the decisions of the British Government regarding its Palestine policy.” He continued: “Frankly, I do not believe that the British are wholly correct in saying that the framers of the Palestine Mandate ‘could not have intended that Palestine should be converted into a Jewish state against the will of the Arab population of the country.’ […] I believe that the Arabs could be brought to accept this because it seems clear that 75000 additional immigrants can be successfully settled on the land and because also the Arab immigration into Palestine since 1921 has vastly exceeded the total Jewish immigration during this whole period.
http://books.google.com/books?id=dAh3AAAAMAAJ&dq=vastly
F.D.R.: 1928-1945
Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Elliott Roosevelt, Duell, Sloan and Pearce, p. 886

http://books.google.com/books?id=gPh2AAAAMAAJ&dq=
Arab+immigration+into+Palestine+since+1921+has+vastly+exceeded+the+total+Jewish+immigration+during+this+whole+period


“A history of the Middle East”, Saul S. Friedman, 2006, p. 244

The Arabs Declare War upon the Axis
In February 1945, King Ibn Saud met with Franklin Roosevelt aboard the cruiser Quincy, anchored at the Bitter Lake of Suez. The American president, returning from his meeting with Stalin at Yalta, was exhausted, but he later informed Congress:
“I learned more about the whole problem, the Moslem problem, the Jewish problem, by talking with Ibn Saud for five minutes than I could have learned in the exchange of two or three dozen letters.”

http://books.google.com/books?id=LCNpmgDOYTwC&pg=PA244

“Is Islam Compatible with the Constitution?”, Steve Klein, p. 172

From what we have discovered, it appears that Mohammed and his brand of Islam, Saudi Wahhabism, is not favorable toward the four freedoms of Franklin D. Roosevelt: Freedom of speech and religion, freedom from fear and want.

http://books.google.com/books?id=3YGTM-KHYQcC&pg=PA172

December 7, 1950 – Jihad Watch

Dec 7, 2010

Nine years after Pearl Harbor, World War II had been over for five years. The nation was strong and confident in the face of the Cold War threat from the Soviets, and was in the process of magnanimously helping Germany and Japan rebuild.

Nine years after 9/11, and we are barely even at square one. Consider, by way of comparison, Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s speech to Congress the day after the Pearl Harbor attacks and the U.S. in the age of Barack Hussein Obama. The similarities — and the differences — are striking.

Franklin D. Roosevelt’s Speech to the U.S. Congress on December 8th, 1941 (as delivered)

Mr. Vice President, Mr. Speaker, Members of the Senate, of the House of Representatives:

Yesterday, December 7, 1941 – a date which will live in infamy – the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan.

And on September 11, 2001 — a date which will likewise live in infamy — the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by the forces of the global Islamic jihad.

The United States was at peace with that nation, and, at the solicitation of Japan, was still in conversation with its government and its Emperor looking toward the maintenance of peace in the Pacific. […]

The United States was at peace with the warriors of Islam, and considers itself to be at peace with them still, and has undertaken numerous efforts to mollify Muslims and convince them that it has no quarrel with Islam or with Muslims at all.

It will be recorded that the distance of Hawaii from Japan makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks ago. During the intervening time, the Japanese government has deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace. […]

It will be recorded that the doctrines of jihad in Islam and the statements of jihad terrorists worldwide make it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned as a jihad attack. During the ensuing nine years, Islamic spokesmen have deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.

Yesterday, the Japanese government also launched an attack against Malaya.

Last night, Japanese forces attacked Hong Kong.

Last night, Japanese forces attacked Guam.

Last night, Japanese forces attacked the Philippine Islands.

Last night, the Japanese attacked Wake Island.

This morning, the Japanese attacked Midway Island.

Japan has, therefore, undertaken a surprise offensive extending throughout the Pacific area. The facts of yesterday and today speak for themselves. The People of the United States have already formed their opinions and well understand the implications to the very life and safety of our nation.

Islamic jihad forces are currently operating in Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand, India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel, Nigeria, Chechnya, and elsewhere. The jihadists have, therefore, undertaken an offensive extending throughout the world. The facts of 9/11 and today speak for themselves. Yet the People of the United States largely remain unequipped to form their opinions and understand the implications to the very life and safety of our nation, for neither government nor media is telling them the truth about the nature of the threat.

As Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy, I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense.

But always will our whole nation remember the character of the onslaught against us. […]

Today the Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy involves people who hold exactly the same belief-system as that held by those who attacked us on 9/11 in vital measures taken for our defense.

And not even nine years after 9/11 does our nation as a whole fully understand the character of the onslaught against us.

Hostilities exist. There is no blinking at the fact that our people, our territory, and our interests are in grave danger.

With confidence in our armed forces – with the unbounding determination of our People – we will gain the inevitable triumph – so help us God.

I ask that the Congress declare that since the unprovoked and dastardly attack by Japan on Sunday, December 7, 1941 a state of War has existed between the United States and the Japanese empire.

Hostilities exist. There is no blinking at the fact that our people, our territory, and our interests are in grave danger.

With confidence in our armed forces – with the unbounding determination of our People – we will gain the inevitable triumph – so help us God.

But Congress has declared no state of War, and nine years after the unprovoked and dastardly attack by Islamic jihadists on Tuesday, September 11, 2001, no one is even sure who or what we are fighting.

Except, that is, our jihadist enemies themselves. They know full well who they are and what they are about. And the fog of deception is one of their foremost and most effective weapons in this country.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/12/december-7-1950.html

______________________

REAGAN

“The Reagan presidency: an oral history of the era”, Deborah Hart Strober, Gerald S. Strober, p. 189, 2003 (631 pages)
President Reagan and Israel Shimon Peres Israel was one of those issues about which he had a very clear opinion; he was unshakable — he was a staunch supporter. From that point of view, he belonged to the good people of this world.

http://books.google.com/books?id=3FcLzstBMOwC&pg=PA189

The Prince: The Secret Story of the World’s Most Intriguing Royal, Prince Bandar Bin Sultan – Page 68
William Simpson, HarperCollins, 2008 (496 pages)

As Reagan had entered office with the reputation of being very pro- Israeli and cynical about the Arab nations, his staunch support for the AWACS sale was surprising.

http://books.google.com/books?id=at9z3p2c-MEC&pg=PA68


Reagan: A Staunch Friend of Israel

Jon E. Dougherty, NewsMax.com
Wednesday, June 9, 2004

While most American leaders over the past several decades have been supporters of Israel, the lone democracy in the Middle East, few were better friends of the Jewish state than Ronald Reagan.

The late president opened communications, security and economic links to Israel – many of which still exist today – that resulted in the close, symbiotic relationship between Washington and Jerusalem, according to U.S. and Israel political analysts and experts.

Also, Reagan shared a spiritual bond with Israel that has been compared with President Bush’s understanding of the strategic, historic and biblical role of Israel, say experts.

“It seems that presidents like Reagan and Bush who have a foundation in the Bible have a better understanding of what Israel’s role is in the world,” said Helen Freedman, the executive director of American For a Safe Israel [AFSI], based in New York City.

“Israel is not meant to be a nation like all the other nations,” she told NewsMax. “It’s not meant to be absorbed into the Middle East or the Commonwealth of Nations. It is a nation that represents the biblical promise – the Promised Land, the chosen people, and its obligation to be a light unto the nations.”

Reagan, Freedman said, was a president “we had heard woke up every morning and asked to do God’s will – not his will, but God’s will. We believe President Bush is somewhat on that track also.”



Israel Legacy



In many respects, experts said Reagan was the best U.S. friend Israel has had since its founding in 1948.

Among his many accomplishments was his successful efforts to get the Soviet Union to allow persecuted Russian Jews to emigrate to the Jewish state. Reagan’s policies eventually led to a tidal wave of immigrants for Israel.



“There are a number of things President Reagan did that are monumental in their importance to U.S.-Israel relationship,” said Josh Block, a spokesman for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee [AIPAC] in Washington, D.C.

Among them:

  • Reagan was instrumental in the enhancement of the U.S.-Israel Strategic Cooperation Agreement, which resulted in the establishment of the Joint Political-Military Group [JPMG], a Pentagon program which oversees joint intelligence and military ventures between both nations.

  • The nation’s 40th president oversaw the creation of the Joint Security Assistance Planning Group [JSAP] in April 1988, a mechanism by which both countries review Israel’s security needs in light of current threat assessments and U.S. budgetary demands. This forum is enormously important for deciding a wide array of bilateral strategic interests, said AIPAC.

  • A strategic relationship that has led to advances for both countries in their battles against terrorism.

  • The signing of an American-Israel free trade agreement, which allowed Israeli companies to compete equally with European companies. Since 1985, trade between the two countries has increased 400 percent and topped $20 billion last year (Israel is the United States’ 21st largest trading partner). This agreement served as a model for other, similar agreements, including the North America Free Trade Agreement between the U.S., Canada and Mexico.

    When he signed the agreement, Reagan said, “I believe this new economic relationship with our friends in Israel will further our historic friendship, strengthen both our economies, and provide for new opportunities between our peoples for communication and commerce.”

    Block said in 1985 and 1986, when the Israeli economy was experiencing inflation rates as high as 445 percent, Reagan approved $1.5 billion in Israeli assistance, which was paid in two installments — one each year.

    “It was an extraordinarily important effort to help Israel make it through their economic crisis,” he said.



    Bolstering Aid Packages



    Prior to the Reagan presidency, the U.S. provided financial backing and assistance to Israel via a collection of loans and grants.

    But after he took office, the loans and grants evolved into the “very important economic and military aid” the U.S. currently and regularly provides Jerusalem, America’s only democratic ally in the Middle East.

    “Israel has received more direct aid from the United States since World War II than any other country,” but the amounts during the first half of that time period “were relatively small,” writes Mitchell Bard, for the American-Israeli Cooperative Enterprise.

    “Starting with fiscal year 1987, Israel annually received $1.2 billion in all grant economic aid and $1.8 billion in all grant military assistance,” Bard wrote. But, he added, “In 1998, Israel offered to voluntarily reduce its dependence on U.S. economic aid. According to an agreement reached with the Clinton Administration and Congress, the $1.2 billion economic aid package will be reduced by $120 million each year so that it will be phased out in ten years.”

    Still, half those savings ($60 million) will be added to Israel’s military aid package.



    Commonsense Friend



    Reagan seemed to be at ease in his dealings with Israel, partly because experts believe he knew and understood the importance of a strong Jewish state in the region.

    “He had some real good commonsense approaches” to U.S. relations with Israel, said Freedman, of AFSI. “He understood Jerusalem could not be divided, and that there cannot be a Palestinian state” because the latter “would spell the end of Israel,” she said.

    Block said Reagan signed a strategic letter of understanding in 1982 with the Israeli administration of Prime Minister Menachem Begin, which is still used by both governments today.

    Rabbi Dr. Morton H. Pomerantz, a leading New York rabbi, told NewsMax that Reagan “was a friend of Israel from the time the country was founded, and he was very consistent.”

    Pomerantz said while Bush understands that Israel “lives under the kind of terrorism that struck the U.S. on September 11, 2001,” he also agreed that Reagan saw early the terror threat to both countries as well, especially after Iranian-backed terrorists bombed a U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, in 1983, killing 241 Marines.

    “Reagan recognized Israel as an actual ally during the Cold War,” he said, “which he was most responsible for winning.”

    Reagan may have used Israel to help him defeat the Evil Empire. But he had a deep affinity for the only other nation to claim a Providential founding.

    “In Israel, free men and women are every day demonstrating the power of courage and faith,” Reagan once remarked. “Back in 1948 when Israel was founded, pundits claimed the new country could never survive. Today, no one questions that. Israel is a land of stability and democracy in a region of tyranny and unrest.”
    http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/6/8/172342.shtml

    ______________________

    CARTER

    While Jimmy Carter, called the worst president in 20th century, simply lost it, lost the America’s trust in him, from the New York Times of Jan. 21, 981: Reagan Takes Oath as 40th President; Promises an ’Era of National Renewal’–Minutes Later, 52 U.S. Hostages In Iran Fly to Freedom After 444-Day Ordeal
    .

    Infamous Carter, as in causing [indirectly] the fascist ‘Islamic revolution’ that endangers the world today with Hezbollah Mahdi thugs (not only reacking havoc in Lebanon and Israel but) in major (Islamic) hot spots, including in: Somalia, Iraq (more ), Afghanistan, and playing a a dangerous game in Latin America. Arming itself with nuclear arms capabale of reaching Europe and calling genocide on the Jews in Israel.
    the Ex-President For Sale, who -with Arab oil lobby’s money- published his venemous anti-Israel hate book, this, despite his own admission on CNN: “I recognize that Israel is a wonderful democracy with freedom of speech and equality of treatment under the law between Arab Israelis and Jewish Israelis.”

    ______________________

    OBAMA?

    So far, Obama has cowed to Islamic leaders, bowed to Arab Muslim tyrants, “apologized” for America’s mistakes, toured the world, often as an embarrased American… worst, (unlike the crystal clarity that of Reagan’s) he can’t even seem to define the Islamic militant threat upon the world.

    Conclusion

    To Prez. Obama, your actions will determine if you will become a ‘Reagan’ or a ‘Carter’ in America’s hearts, empty spinning “words” alone simply won’t do it.


  • 10 Highlighted problems with mainstream Islam

    September 20, 2010

    10 Highlighted problems with mainstream Islam

    [clarity and concerns are not “bigotry”]

    1) DEHUMANIZATION

    Apes and pigs, the dehumanization of non-Muslims, Christians as pigs and Jews as apes.[1][2][3][4][5] (Or as some Islamic cleric of the ‘Bali bombing’ called non-Muslims: “worms, snakes and maggots.”[6][7]

    2) TERRORISM

    Had the mainstream Islam really eject its radicals, the Jihadists wouldn’t have the motivation to go on, Why else is there Islamic terrorism still active in so many parts of the world? The half-way condemnation, and almost always accompanied by a “but”, but the west does this or that argument is still on – after 9 Years from the 9/11 Islamic massacre in 2001.[8][9]

    3) SHARIA: OPPRESSION AND ANNIHILATING THE INFIDEL

    The campaign, hidden or open for implementation for Sharia law. In Sharia, besides the legal basis for the war against the infidel,[10] women are subjucated, which explaines how top Islamic cleric of Australia called non-Muslim women plain “meat.”[11]

    4) HONOR KILLING

    One of the great imports from the Islamic culture.[12][13]5) JIHAD & INTIMIDATIONS BY “MODERATES”The so called moderate Muslim leaders that the best they can do is intimidate the west to give in to their Islamic expansion, or else… the radicals will be unleashed.[14][15] The hidden Jihad.

    6) SELF-MADE VICTIMHODD

    The wide sympathy and support in mainstream Islam to the Palestinian,[16][17][18][19][20] Hezbollah,[21] Taliban,[22] Al Qeada in Iraq tactics of using civilians (indirect murder of their own people) so that the west looks bad. (All of the above causalties are seen by mainstream Islam as nothing else but the ‘victims of the west’).

    7) ISLAMIC APARTHEID / BIGOTRY

    With all the ‘criticism” of the west, the Islamic world is still practicing Apartheid (in the real sense), religious and gender wise.[23][24][25][26] In the intolerant Muslim world all non-Muslims are either at an inferior status or worse. The Christian minority has dwindeled in Lebanon[27] and among the Jordanian / Palestinian Arabs[28][29][30][31][32] while Muslim population have increased, persection. Islamic bigotry’s also at the roots of conflicts, including in the Sudan[33][34] and in Israel/Palestine[35] (in the intolerant Arab – Islamic world[36][37] against the “other”[38]).

    8)}WORLD DOMINATION – GOAL

    The open or silent goal by Jihadists, yet backed by so many in mainstream Islam, towards a Caliphate – a theocratic Islamic dictatorship based on the Sharia (religious Islamic law).[39][40][41][42][43][44]

    9) A TOTALITARIAN WORLD

    The Arab-Islamic world is totalitarian[45][46][47][48] – oppressive, even Lebanon that is supposedly the real democracy in that world, the terror Islamic group Hezbollah has immense power. (Iraq is yet to bee seen). Minorities are in even worse shape.

    10) MOST CONFLICTS ALL OVER THE GLOBE ARE BY MUSLIMS

    Draw a map and point to the conflicts,[49] then try to detach most of it from Muslims. Here’s a partial list: Russia. Somalia. Sudan. Nigeria. Lebanon. Israel. Iraq. Afghanistan. Pakistan. India. Kashmir. Thailand. Philippines. China.

     

    1. ^ Jews of Islam, p. 33, by Bernard Lewis – 2002 [1]
    2. ^ http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/02/pupils_aged_five_poisoned_at_i.php
    3. ^ http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2007060106,00.html
    4. ^ Arab dress: a short history : from the dawn of Islam to modern times – Page 105, Yedida Kalfon Stillman, Norman A. Stillman (BRILL, 2003 ISBN 9004135936, 9789004135932) The patch for Jews had the image of an ape and the patch for Christians the image of pig…
    5. ^ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/06/25/wsaudi25.xml
    6. ^ http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/03/24/2197660.htm
    7. ^ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-543509/Holiday-Britons-threatened-Bali-Muslim-extremist-labels-tourists-maggots.html
    8. ^ http://www.actforamerica.org/index.php/learn/email-archives/2063-our-moderate-muslim-problem
    9. ^ http://www.hudson-ny.org/1471/moderate-muslims
    10. ^ Foreign Follies: America’s New Global Empire, Doug Bandow, 2006, p. 313
    11. ^ http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2423758,00.html
    12. ^ Encyclopedia of Women & Islamic Cultures: Family, law, and politics, p. 365, Suad Joseph, Afsaneh Najmabadi, 2005
    13. ^ http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/05/13/phyllis-chesler-palestinian-husband-wife-ultrasound-girl-honor-killing/
    14. ^ http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/rauf_move_would_spur_muslim_backlash_vHnEtuAvT4ZAatCuzXDuGM
    15. ^ http://www.breitbart.tv/ground-zero-mosque-imam-threatens-america-with-attack-if-mosque-not-built/
    16. ^ http://washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20061107-083640-3568r.htm
    17. ^ http://www.iris.org.il/blog/archives/2102-Palestinians-Brag-About-Using-Human-Shields-for-Terrorists.html
    18. ^ http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28404637
    19. ^ http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=58118
    20. ^ http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/gazahumanshields.html
    21. ^ http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2006/jul/30/20060730-093558-9976r/
    22. ^ http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/feb/17/taliban-human-shields
    23. ^ http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article1480090.ece
    24. ^ http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewForiegnBureaus.asp?Page=\ForiegnBureaus\archive\200603\FOR20060314a.html
    25. ^ http://education.independent.co.uk/news/article237199.ece
    26. ^ http://www.acage.org/print/?day=03192007&id=0200&what=articles
    27. ^ http://www.lebaneseforces.com/blastfromthepast006.asp
    28. ^ http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=2&x_outlet=35&x_article=1672
    29. ^ http://www.acpr.org.il/cloakrm/clk117.html
    30. ^ http://www.science.co.il/arab-israeli-conflict/articles/Imra-1997-10-30.asp
    31. ^ http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/talking/59_ChristiansPA.html
    32. ^ http://www.christiannewstoday.com/CWN_855.html
    33. ^ http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article21799
    34. ^ http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,420182,00.html
    35. ^ http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203440104574400532495168894.html
    36. ^ http://www.adl.org/main_as_arab.asp
    37. ^ http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=168176
    38. ^ http://frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=688A19CA-9922-45EB-A57D-B6E67266E79A
    39. ^ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/FC31Ag01.html
    40. ^ http://www.barackobama.com/2007/08/01/the_war_we_need_to_win.php
    41. ^ http://www.ict.org.il/apage/5204.php
    42. ^ http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/ladin.htm
    43. ^ http://www.heritage.org/Research/RussiaandEurasia/BG1656.cfm
    44. ^ http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/08/11/africa/ME-GEN-Palestinians-Islamic-Movement.php
    45. ^ http://www.middle-east-info.org/mission/index.htm
    46. ^ http://www.jfednepa.org/mark%20silverberg/democratizing.html
    47. ^ http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778
    48. ^ http://www.worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/Reading/Total/islamfascist.htm
    49. ^ http://www.globalpolitician.com/22907-war

    Obama to the Arabs: You are my MASTER, I am your slave!

    April 9, 2010

    Obama to the Arabs: You are my MASTER, I am your slave!

    When we were all humiliated by Obama’s dreadful bow to the Saudi Arabian “royal” leader, what went through your mind?

    Here’s my understanding of the psychology of Barack Oabma. The mentality of SUBMISSION to the ARAB MASTER is very deep in the psyche of non-Arab Muslims. Which is why he’d rather risk some critics from the left in raising the bar of the attacks in Afghanistan instead. His panic from the ‘Arab street’ [within the context of greater Muslim street] is far greater than of that from the “average” Muslim world.

    Don’t get me wrong, don’t under estimate the power of the Arab lobby in particular as a opposed to the greater Islamic lobby in the world and even in Washington.

    Of course the lobbyists together with the Gulf Arab filthy-rich tycoons’ grip is great, but his “bow” is in his “system,”, in his mental background. A Muslim who is Asian or African, etc., concedes to Arab superiority, whether it’s because of Muhammad being an Arab, his glorification of Arabic over others, some of Islamic phrases seeing as degrading Turks and Blacks or because of Arab slavery and Arab racism (the latter, still practiced today), the fact remains that it’s entrenched into the non-Arab Muslims, from which not too many manage to “break up free”.

    Growing up as a Muslim boy in Indonesia, he “learned” among other (Islamic) things, directly or indirectly about the ‘Arab master–hood.’ So, when he was bowing to the Arab king, he was essentially telling us and to the world, what a Salafi Imam says: “Salafi Imam: We Must BELIEVE Arabs are “Master Race” Salafi Movement (cult), Imam Abu Usamah Ath-Thahabi (a Blackamerican), that the Arabs are superior to the non-Arabs (or in other words: the Arabs are the “Master Race”) “.

    Point is, if he has issues from his childhood, he should keep them to himself, don’t drag us all into this garbage ideology.

    Here’s a tip of the iceberg.

    The troubling question is, How can we trust him on the ‘war on terror, on the middle east “peace” process, or on any security issue?

    The US/Britain 200 Years war against Islamic pirates – terrorists

    April 9, 2009

    The US/Britain 200 Years war against Islamic pirates – terrorists

    For young Somalis, piracy offers power, prosperity
    The Associated Press
    There are several known pirate groups in Somalia. One is based in the southern port town of Kismayo, which is controlled by Islamic insurgents. …
    http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iR9XICoYi0CQt77GJUw5lNAPpG_AD97EGS200

     

    Hot Air » Blog Archive » Somali pirates seize American ship, crew … by Ed Morrissey Jefferson Versus the Muslim Pirates …one cannot get around what Jefferson heard when he went with John Adams to wait upon Tripoli’s ambassador to London in March 1785. When they inquired by what right the Barbary states preyed upon American shipping … So here was an early instance of the “heads I win, tails you lose” dilemma, in which the United States is faced with corrupt regimes, on the one hand, and Islamic militants, on the other—or indeed a collusion between them. …
    http://hotair.com/archives/2009/04/08/somali-pirates-seize-american-ship-crew/

    A look back at history

    Britain’s 200-year jihad (and US facing them)

    Britain’s 200-year jihad There are many similarities between the stateless jihad of the 1700’s and ….. The pirate ships set sail for Algeria later that day, with the captives on …
    http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/008320.php

    America’s Earliest Terrorists

    Lessons from America’s first war against Islamic terror.

    December 16, 2005, 9:55 a.m.
    By Joshua E. London
    At the dawn of a new century, a newly elected United States president was forced to confront a grave threat to the nation — an escalating series of unprovoked attacks on Americans by Muslim terrorists. Worse still, these Islamic partisans operated under the protection and sponsorship of rogue Arab states ruled by ruthless and cunning dictators.
    Sluggish in recognizing the full nature of the threat, America entered the war well after the enemy’s call to arms. Poorly planned and feebly executed, the American effort proceeded badly and at great expense — resulting in a hastily negotiated peace and an equally hasty declaration of victory.
    As timely and familiar as these events may seem, they occurred more than two centuries ago. The president was Thomas Jefferson, and the terrorists were the Barbary pirates. Unfortunately, many of the easy lessons to be plucked from this experience have yet to be fully learned.
    The Barbary states, modern-day Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, and Libya, are collectively known to the Arab world as the Maghrib (“Land of Sunset”), denoting Islam’s territorial holdings west of Egypt. With the advance of Mohammed’s armies into the Christian Levant in the seventh century, the Mediterranean was slowly transformed into the backwater frontier of the battles between crescent and cross. Battles raged on both land and sea, and religious piracy flourished.
    The Maghrib served as a staging ground for Muslim piracy throughout the Mediterranean, and even parts of the Atlantic. America’s struggle with the terror of Muslim piracy from the Barbary states began soon after the 13 colonies declared their independence from Britain in 1776, and continued for roughly four decades, finally ending in 1815.
    Although there is much in the history of America’s wars with the Barbary pirates that is of direct relevance to the current “war on terror,” one aspect seems particularly instructive to informing our understanding of contemporary Islamic terrorists. Very simply put, the Barbary pirates were committed, militant Muslims who meant to do exactly what they said.
    Take, for example, the 1786 meeting in London of Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja, the Tripolitan ambassador to Britain. As American ambassadors to France and Britain respectively, Jefferson and Adams met with Ambassador Adja to negotiate a peace treaty and protect the United States from the threat of Barbary piracy.
    These future United States presidents questioned the ambassador as to why his government was so hostile to the new American republic even though America had done nothing to provoke any such animosity. Ambassador Adja answered them, as they reported to the Continental Congress, “that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise.”

    Sound familiar?
    The candor of that Tripolitan ambassador is admirable in its way, but it certainly foreshadows the equally forthright declarations of, say, the Shiite Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the 1980s and the Sunni Osama bin Laden in the 1990s, not to mention the many pronouncements of their various minions, admirers, and followers. Note that America’s Barbary experience took place well before colonialism entered the lands of Islam, before there were any oil interests dragging the U.S. into the fray, and long before the founding of the state of Israel.
    America became entangled in the Islamic world and was dragged into a war with the Barbary states simply because of the religious obligation within Islam to bring belief to those who do not share it. This is not something limited to “radical” or “fundamentalist” Muslims.
    Which is not to say that such obligations lead inevitably to physical conflict, at least not in principle. After all peaceful proselytizing among various religious groups continues apace throughout the world, but within the teachings of Islam, and the history of Muslims, this is a well-established militant thread.
    The Islamic basis for piracy in the Mediterranean was an old doctrine relating to the physical or armed jihad, or struggle.
    To Muslims in the heyday of Barbary piracy, there were, at least in principle, only two forces at play in the world: the Dar al-Islam, or House of Islam, and the Dar al-Harb, or House of War. The House of Islam meant Muslim governance and the unrivaled authority of the sharia, Islam’s complex system of holy law. The House of War was simply everything that fell outside of the House of Islam — that area of the globe not under Muslim authority, where the infidel ruled. For Muslims, these two houses were perpetually at war — at least until mankind should finally embrace Allah and his teachings as revealed through his prophet, Mohammed.
    The point of jihad is not to convert by force, but to remove the obstacles to the infidels’ conversion so that they shall either convert or become a dhimmi (a non-Muslim who accepts Islamic dominion) and pay the jizya, or poll tax. The goal is to bring all of the Dar al-Harb into the peace of the Dar al-Islam, and to eradicate unbelief. The Koran also promises rewards to those who fight in the jihad, plunder and glory in this world and the delights of paradise in the next.
    Although the piratical activities of Barbary genuinely degenerated over the centuries from pure considerations of the glory of jihad to less grandiose visions of booty and state revenues, it is important to remember that the religious foundations of the institution of piracy remained central.
    Even after it became commonplace for the pirate captains or their crew to be renegade Europeans, it was essential that these former Christians “turn Turk” and convert to Islam before they could be accorded the honor of engagement in al-jihad fil-bahr, the holy war at sea.
    In fact, the peoples of Barbary continued to consider the pirates as holy warriors even after the Barbary rulers began to allow non-religious commitments to command their strategic use of piracy. The changes that the religious institution of piracy underwent were natural, if pathological. Just as the concept of jihad is invoked by Muslim terrorists today to legitimize suicide bombings of noncombatants for political gain, so too al-jihad fil-bahr, the holy war at sea, served as the cornerstone of the Barbary states’ interaction with Christendom.

    In times of conflict, America tends to focus on personalities over ideas or movements, trying to play the man, not the board — as if capturing or killing Osama bin Laden, for example, would instantly end the present conflict. But such thinking loses sight of the fact that ideas have consequences. If one believes that God commands something, this belief is not likely to dissipate just because the person who elucidated it has been silenced. Islam, as a faith, is as essential a feature of the terrorist threat today as it was of the Barbary piracy over two centuries ago.
    The Barbary pirates were not a “radical” or “fundamentalist” sect that had twisted religious doctrine for power and politics, or that came to recast aspects of their faith out of some form of insanity. They were simply a North African warrior caste involved in an armed jihad — a mainstream Muslim doctrine. This is how the Muslims understood Barbary piracy and armed jihad at the time, and, indeed, how the physical jihad has been understood since Mohammed revealed it as the prophecy of Allah.
    Obviously, and thankfully, not every Muslim is obligated, or even really inclined, to take up this jihad. Indeed, many Muslims are loath to personally embrace this physical struggle. But that does not mean they are all opposed to such a struggle any more than the choice of many Westerners not to join the police force or the armed services means they do not support those institutions.
    Whether “insurgents” are fighting in Iraq or “rebels” and “militants” are skirmishing in Chechnya or Hamas “activists” are detonating themselves in Israel, Westerners seem unwilling to bring attention to the most salient feature of all these groups: They claim to be acting in the name of Islam.
    It is very easy to chalk it all up to regional squabbles, economic depression, racism, or post-colonial nationalistic self-determinism. Such explanations undoubtedly enter into part of the equation — they are already part of the propaganda that clouds contemporary analysis. But as Thomas Jefferson and John Adams came to learn back in 1786, the situation becomes a lot clearer when you listen to the stated intentions and motivations of the terrorists and take them at face value.
    — Joshua E. London is the author of Victory in Tripoli: How America’s War with the Barbary Pirates Established the U.S. Navy and Shaped a Nation (John Wiley & Sons, September 2005); for more about the book visit http://www.victoryintripoli.com.
    http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/london200512160955.asp

     

    Jihad in the Days of Jefferson
    http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1145961230585&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull

     

    When the Founding Fathers Faced Islamists May 27, 2008 … birth of US Naval power and the campaign against the Barbary pirates: …. that United States did not start the war with the Jihadists. …
    http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/when-the-founding-fathers-faced-islamists/

    Sally Rovers incident, at the height of North African Arab Muslim pirates’ crimes against Christians, mainly British

     

    Britain’s 200-year jihad

    On my travels for the past few days, I have been reading a book which tells the story of a quite astonishing part of British history of which I was previously unaware. In ‘White Gold’, Giles Milton records the appalling details — gleaned,it appears, from a wealth of historical documents including diaries and letters — of a seaborne Islamic jihad against Britain which lasted for no less than two centuries.

    From the early seventeenth to nineteenth centuries, thousands of British men women and children were kidnapped by Arab corsairs and sold into slavery in Morocco where they were kept in conditions of unspeakable barbarism. The astounding thing is that these British victims were not merely seized at sea where they ran the gauntlet of such pirates in places such as the Straits of Gibraltar. They were actually abducted from Britain itself.

    Corsairs from a place in Morocco called Sale — who became known in Britain as the ‘Sally Rovers’ — sailed up the Cornish coast in July 1625, for example, came ashore dressed in djellabas and wielding damascene scimitars, burst into the parish church at Mount’s Bay and dragged out 60 men women and children whom they shipped off to Morocco. Thousands more Britons were seized from their villages or their ships and dispatched to the hell-holes of the Moroccan slave pens, from where they were forced to work all hours in appalling conditions building the vast palace of the monstrous and psychopathic Sultan, Moulay Ismail, who tortured and butchered them at whim. Most of them perished, but the book records the survival of a tenacious Cornish boy Thomas Pellow, who survived 23 years of this ordeal and whose descendant, Lord Exmouth, finally ended the white slave trade when he destroyed Algiers in 1816.

    The book makes clear that this assault upon the British people (and upon Europeans and Americans who were similarly seized) was a jihad. The Sally Rovers, writes Milton, were called ‘al-ghuzat’– the term once used for the soldiers who fought with the Prophet — and were hailed as religious warriors engaged in a holy war against the infidel Christians who were pressurised to convert to Islam under threat of hideous punishment. What is even more striking was the response of the British crown. For almost two centuries, it made only the most ineffectual attempts to rescue its enslaved subjects. Those who had succumbed to the torture and inhumanity of the Sultan and converted to Islam were deemed to be no longer British and therefore outside the scope of any rescue. The pleas of Pellow’s parents were simply brushed aside. Popular outrage forced successive Kings to dispatch a series of feeble emissaries to try to get the Sultan to end this vile traffic and release the slaves, all to no avail.

    But this went on for virtually two centuries. For almost 200 years the British state either sat on its hands or wrung them impotently while the Islamic jihad seized, enslaved and butchered its people. And then it appears, this staggering onslaught was all but airbrushed out of our history.

    Food for disquieting thought.
    http://www.melaniephillips.com/diary/archives/001423.html

     

    ‘Pirates of Penzance’ redo? James Zumwalt
    Thursday, October 2, 2008
    Soon after winning independence from England, the United States faced another war. Muslim pirates operating off North Africa’s Barbary Coast were seizing U.S., as well as European, ships sailing in international waters, holding them for tribute payment or plunder.
    In 1786, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, meeting in London with Tripoli’s Muslim ambassador to Britain, inquired as to the reason for such Arab hostility. Acknowledging their attacks were unprovoked, the Tripoli ambassador explained it was their right and duty under the Koran as faithful Muslim followers to plunder and enslave the unfaithful – with those Muslims dying in the process going to paradise. To stop the attacks, the United States initially agreed to pay the Barbary pirates tribute, equal to about 20 percent of government revenues. Only later did an indignant United States launch two wars against them, ending in victory in 1815 and no further payments. European nations, acting individually and collectively, suppressed pirate activity as well, with the French conquest of Algiers in 1830 providing the last nail in the Barbary Pirates’ coffin.
    Today, Muslim pirates again sail the seas off Africa’s coast. Mostly Somalis, these pirates have already attacked more than 60 ships this year in the vicinity of the Gulf of Aden – almost 5 times more than occurred all last year. Pirates gain confidence as owners prove willing to pay ransoms for the safe return of ships and crews, much like the United States first did with the Barbary Pirates.
    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oct/02/pirates-of-penzance-redo/

    (Arab racism by Islamic) Al Qaeda’s No. 2 leader – uses racial epithet against Barack Obama latimes ^ | Nov 20, 2008 Al Qaeda’s No. 2 leader uses racial epithet against Barack Obama

    November 20, 2008

    (Arab racism by Islamic) Al Qaeda’s No. 2 leader – uses racial epithet against Barack Obama
    latimes ^ | Nov 20, 2008

    Al Qaeda’s No. 2 leader uses racial epithet against Barack Obama Los Angeles Times – Nov. 20, 2008 In a video, Ayman Zawahiri says the president-elect is ‘the direct opposite of honorable black Americans’ and says Obama, Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice are ‘house Negroes.

    http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-house-slave20-2008nov20,0,1727083.story

    Tags: , , , ,, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,