Share This

Google+ Badge

Thursday, June 30, 2011

Rep.Allen West Live from Afghanistan

West should be in the White House, not that loser Obama

Obama Isn't Working: Allentown, PA

Another of Obama's not so ready shovel jobs.


Im from Pennsylvania, and I'm currently on a four day work week. Today I start a three week vacation, only one being paid. Work is slow so instead of closing for two weeks, this year the plant closes for three.

Wednesday, June 29, 2011

Europe: The Burka, Islam, and What Lies at the Heart of Jihadism


Europe, apparently concerned by the growth of radical Islam, is increasingly looking for ways to contain it.

In England, for example, Islamists were reported to be openly targeting women and homosexuals in London in an attempt to impose sharia law, and women were being threatened and intimidated into wearing the hijab.

As immigration Minister Damian Green said in a nuanced statement: “Telling people what they can and can’t wear, if they’re just walking down the street, is a rather un-British thing to do”: in a liberal democracy Muslim women have the right to wear the burka when “walking down the street,” but the state also has a duty to ensure that they have the right not to wear the burka if they so choose.

The problem is, in a family setting, how can this right possibly be enforced with even the slightest degree of fairness to the women?

On its website, the Muslim Council of Britain [MCB], which claims to represent half of Britain’s Muslims, states about the burka:

“We advise all Muslims to exercise extreme caution on this issue, since denying any part of Islam may lead to disbelief.”

“Not practicing something enjoined by Allah and his Messenger[…] is a shortcoming. Denying it is much more serious.”

The statement also includes the following quote from the Koran:

“It is not for a believer, man or woman, that they should have any option in their decision when Allah and his Messenger have decreed a matter.”

The MCB’s unsurprising position on the burka is hard-line, to say the least. As Andrew Gilligan noted in The Telegraph, since the French burka ban, the MCB issued a statement suggesting that Muslims who speak out against the burka or niqab are guilty of “disbelief” — and even apostasy, a much more serious charge, that in Islam requires the death penalty.

For years — and problematically – the MCB had an especially close and visible relationship with Labour Ministers. Communities Secretary Hazel Blears, for instance, broke off communications with the organization only when it refused to relieve deputy director-general Daud Abdullah of his position, after, according to the London Times, “he endorsed a pro-Hamas declaration that appeared to call for violence against Jews and Israel and condone attacks on British troops.”

The Secretary of State for Education, Michael Gove, has long been outspoken in his condemnation of anti-Semitism, and understands that this hatred lies at the heart of Jihadism. When it came to light recently that anti-Semitic material, from the Saudi-Arabian curriculum, were being used in Muslim schools in Britain, Govemade it clear that it was completely unacceptable. Ministers also need to take the lead in defending the rights of women and homosexuals.

Sufi and Shia Muslim groups, however, say that the MCB is unrepresentative of the majority of British Muslims, and have attacked the organization for its narrow view of Islam and what supposedly authentic Muslims ought to be.

British Muslims for Secular Democracy [BMSD] also issued a statement, “support[ing] the right of men and women to dress how they choose on civil libertarian grounds.” The organization also believes, however, that there should be “consistent identification procedures for people who cover their faces only in particular settings such as banks, airports and any place where child protection issues are invoked.” Such a measure would not need a special law singling out the burka or niqab, but would apply to any face covering.

Importantly, the BMSD also asserts that anyone “found guilty of coercing others into wearing niqab” should be punished.

The problem, again, is that it is not at all clear where coercion ends and peer pressure begins. If a woman is told that unless she is covered she could be regarded as a prostitute, is that coercion?

It should not be illegal for The Guardian to publish Daud Abdullah’s commentary on Israel, or for the BBC to promote Sharia Law and Islamist intolerance towards homosexuals, but Ministers can make clear that in providing anti-democratic political beliefs with a platform, they doing the majority of Muslims, and non-Muslims, a disservice that could easily result in extremely unpleasant consequences for society as a whole.

When the New Labour Government, was in power from 1997-2010, it openly cooperated with many of Britain’s most hard-line Islamists, sidelining the country’s pro-democratic Muslims. Consequently, not only did Islamism grow to become a considerable force both in the Government and the media, where its voice could always be heard, but also in a large section of the public. Apparently it caused enough trepidation and fear in the public fortwo thirds to support a ban on the burka.

Although banning the burka might also have been expected in the current coalition Government, Prime Minister David Cameron seems to have decided not to indulge in the sort of amateur theological meanderings that New Labour ministers appeared to love; instead, he is reemphasizing what he, and most British citizens understand: Britain’s commitment to liberal democracy. Britain’s Immigration Minister, Damian Green, had called banning the burka “un-British” in 2010, and, notably, recently reiterated his opposition to such a ban.

Britain’s publicity-seeking, and publicity-savvy, radical cleric, Anjem Choudary, attempted to join one of these. Although he was prevented from entering France, his name, once again, made it into the media.

Choudary knows a thing or two about government proscriptions, not least of all how ineffectual they tend to be. Choudary has been associated with various organizations, such as the now-banned Islam4UK organization — all of which appear to be reincarnations of the also-banned al-Muhajiroun. Since being prohibited from reestablishing its organization under any other name, a strangely similar group, called Muslims Against Crusades, has suddenly appeared on the streets of London. Choudary is careful, however, to play only cameo roles in its public demonstrations.

If the ban has made Choudary more cautious on the street level, it has also elevated him to the dizzy heights ofCNN and Channel 4, among others, who have talked him up from Street Preacher to Go-To Man for anyone wanting the – supposedly official – opinions of al-Qaeda and radical Islam.

Banning the burka seems to have about as much chance of effectively tackling Islamism as banning organizations such as Choudary’s: zero. Banning organizations, as well as symbols of them, such as the burka, just seems, as history shows, to lend them a seductive air of intrigue mixed with credibility.

In Germany, Christian Democrats-run, state of Hesse banned the wearing of the burka

in public in January; and in early April, two women were arrested in France, after its ban on the burka went into effect.

In France, its concept of laicite means that banning some religious symbols is not regarded as an affront to national identity. In 2003, a commission, praised by President Jacques Chirac, recommended banning the wearing of the Muslim headscarf, the yarmulke and “large crosses” in schools. Nevertheless, since the country’s ban on the burka went into effect in April 2011, Islamist demonstrations have been held in France.

Those arguing for the burka to be prohibited in public believe it would draw a clear line in the sand especially in regard to women’s rights. However, banning the burka would not only affect those women who — for whatever reason — have chosen to wear the covering, it would target merely one of the symbols of Islamism.

But the ideology behind it would remain unchallenged.

This seems to be something that the British government is beginning to understand. Notably, at the recent Munich Security Conference, Prime Minister David Cameron appeared to criticize the previous government’s policy of engaging with organizations known for their hard line interpretations of Islam, and acknowledged that, instead, the UK had to “engage groups that share our aspirations.”

In Europe, governments do need to draw a clear line in the sand, not by the empty gesture of banning organizations or symbols, but by taking on the ideas of Islamism, defeating them, and, consequently, pushing those who espouse them to the margins of society.

European Son http://europeson.wordpress.com/

Nonie Darwish & Carl Boyd - Sharia for Dummies 1:4.wmv

blogspotKitmanTV

One dog less - Muslim Youths Disrupt Christian Funerals in Holland

Imangine if that were to happen here in America. Well it can and will if we continue to give in to all of the demands of these sick bastards.

Monday, June 27, 2011

EDL Moves To Consolidate Its Influence With The English Working Class

International Civil Liberties Alliance


The EDL was founded by a group of working class lads from Luton and following their early efforts it has become a highly influential national organisation in England. The British establishment has been running around in circles trying to define it and worrying how it will affect its own plans for the country and the world. The main loser from the rise of the EDL will of course be the British labour movement that has already alienated its own working class support in favour of those that the Labour Government imported into Britain from the Third World as its new political support base. How loyal these new voters will be to the Labour Party cause remains to be seen. In any case, the English working class will be slow to forgive the Labour Party that tried to make it irrelevant.

One of the main pillars of the Labour Movement, the unions, appears to have favoured mass immigration over the interest of the working class members who pay their subs and therefore the wages of the middle class elite that now run the unions. The mechanisms of the supply and demad for labour that has resulted have really dropped the working class in it! The union’s continued support for anti EDL counterdemonstrations illustrates this perfectly. It also shows how the unions support for unrestricted mass immigration is a deliberate effort on their part to abandon their own core support base. The causes that organisations like UAF represent are effectively the causes of the middle classes and those who have too much time on their hands. Many well off people like to experiment with communism, but in reality that is more about them then any real concern for working people or the poverty and lack of influence they have to endure. Perhaps union members would be better off making new arrangements rather than passing good money after bad to those who are undermining rather than representing their interests. Unions should be concerning themselves more with the needs of their members and less with the pet global projects of the international socialist movement that does not care one jot for the average English worker.

An article about the EDL and the working class has recently been published on the EDL website and this outlines how the EDL itself rather than the Labour Party or the labour movement and its unions is now the sole representative of true working class interests in England. It suggests that those who now run the labour movement are effectively members of the middle class who landed a cushy job after leaving university. The EDL, by contrast, is run by real working people, who love their country, and are willing to stand up for the interests of working people whatever the personal cost may be. How many politicians or union big-wigs are willing to accept the privations that Tommy Robinson has to put up with? To them it is just a job, to Tommy and people like him it is a calling. Who would you trust, someone who is paid to do a job or someone who does it because they believe in it?

Anyway, working people should treat the labour movement in Britain with suspicion and caution. Could it be that it has been subverted by the very forces that it was set up to counter. People will have to make up their own minds, but the elite are clever and are always on the lookout for ways to line their own pockets by getting people to work for less.

Update: A left wing response to the EDL’s article on the working class. It appears to be geared towards the intellectual purists on the left, but at least some on the left are starting to pay attention to their failure to support the working class.


Do you see any similarity to the Unions here in America? I sure as hell do. First off Unions are in favor of amnesty for Illegals vs what the population of America really wants. Unions want those Illegals for their votes and their union dues. Its the same shit whether here in US or in Europe. Its time the real working class in Europe and America understands that Unions are not in their best interest. Vote out all Democrats because they work for the Unions and not you the tax payer who continues to pay for those expensive health and pension plans that most of the Public Union members receive. Time to say no to Unions.

http://www.libertiesalliance.org/2011/06/23/edl-moves-to-consolidate-its-influence-with-the-english-working-class/

Muslims disrupt the funerals of Dutch infidels

Is there anything good about Muslims?

Sunday, June 26, 2011

Gay bar raided on gay pride day when New Yorkers got the ok for fag marriages.

Great timing on the NYPD parts.



An unannounced inspection that several agencies carried out at a gay bar in Manhattan on Friday night occurred at nearly the same time that patrons were celebrating the passage of legislation in Albany legalizing same-sex marriage.

Police officials said on Saturday that the inspection was part of a routine operation planned long ago. But Scott M. Stringer, the Manhattan borough president, said that he was troubled by descriptions of what took place at the Eagle bar, on West 28th Street off 11th Avenue, and that the actions amounted to a raid.

“I am going to ask the police commissioner to conduct a formal investigation concerning the circumstances around this raid,” he added.

The inspection occurred late at night, Mr. Stringer said, and while it was “true that there are these multiagency inspections, I think this one was ill-conceived and ill-timed given the circumstances surrounding the marriage equality celebration, on Pride week.”

According to those present, about 100 people were mingling at the Eagle, when representatives from the New York Police Department and three other city agencies, as well as from the State Liquor Authority, showed up, at nearly the same time as a vote by the State Senate to legalize same-sex marriage and as the thrill of victory was swirling through the place.

“I was on the roof deck, smoking a cigar and having drinks with friends, and all of a sudden, the police showed up and started shining flashlights in everyone’s face and offending everyone,” said Thomas J. Shevlin, a financial markets researcher and the treasurer of the Stonewall Democratic Club.

“Basically, it is offensive,” Mr. Shevlin, 40, said. “It is real serious harassment that they come out on pride weekend.”
Life is so unfair!
Posted by Donald Douglas at 12:30 PM

http://americanpowerblog.blogspot.com

Tom Friedman's love song Lampoon Video

Muqata

Thursday, June 23, 2011

Monday, June 20, 2011

CAIR & Sharia Law; The Center For Security Policy Gets It Right

In Defense Of The Constitution

News & Analysis
June 20, 2011


CAIR & Sharia Law; The Center For Security Policy Gets It Right

In the last few months much has been said about the rise of such new (for Americans) ideas as: “Sharia-compliant finance” and “Sharia Law for Muslims”. The mainstream press has either failed to report accurately on Sharia Law, or purposely ignores its impact on America .

Many Americans are thus confused. Is Sharia Law a threat or not? Who is hurt if Muslims decide their disputes in a Sharia Court? What about contract law between Muslims and non-Muslims? Can, and should, the United States of America have a parallel legal system dominated by Islam? If so, how will it work? Will Muslims and non-Muslims be treated equally? What are the rights of Muslim minorities?

The Center for Security Policy (CSP) has produced a stunning report on Sharia Law. The CSP report is important for several reasons:

- It reveals how Sharia Law has been used to settle cases in American courts in the past.
- It reveals how Sharia Law is being implemented through a well thought out program of “death by a thousand cuts”.
- It reveals the impact of Sharia Law on the every day functioning of our court system and why this cannot be allowed to continue.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is strongly in support of Sharia Law, deceptively broad brushing Sharia Law as just another benign legal system for the adherents of Islam. But is it?

Consider that under Islam, Muslim women have half the word as a Muslim man; i.e., it takes two Muslim women’s testimony to equal that of one Muslim man. This is bad enough, yet how many female or male Christians, Jews, Buddhists, or Sikhs would have to testify in a Sharia court to equal the word of one Muslim male? Can non-Muslims even testify in a Sharia court? One growing Sharia compliant phenomenon in Muslim countries is for a Muslim husband to declare he is divorced from his wife by sending a text message through a cell phone, yet a woman cannot do the same. How long will it be before this technique for divorce is attempted in America? How does this square with our Constitutional right of equal protection under the law? Do the Islamic-Supremacists of CAIR condone this unfair practice?

There are many other issues that come up as a result of Sharia Law but the main issue that the CSP report conveys is that those who support Sharia Law are not acting in the best interests of anyone, not least of all Muslims. Many Muslims came to the United States to get away from this misogynistic, barbaric, and unequal legal system that serves no other purpose than to elevate Muslim men to a position they couldn’t possibly attain by peaceful means. To paint Sharia Law as “religious law” is to ignore reality. It is a legal system using the cover of religion to impose restrictions on people that are laughable at best and deadly serious to those who adhere to it.

There is no healthy median or redeeming qualities to Sharia Law. It must be kept out of our legal system and public life as there is no room for both the Constitution and Sharia Law.

We ignore the threat at our peril.



Andrew Whitehead
Director
Anti-CAIR

ajwhitehead@anti-cair-net.org
www.anti-cair-net.org

Story Links:
http://www.shariahfinancewatch.org/blog/
http://www.aifdemocracy.org/news.php?id=6302
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/shariah-law-on-americas-shores-townhall-magazine-examines-terrors-secret-weapon/
http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/index.xml
http://shariahthethreat.org/
http://www.anti-cair-net.org/HooperStarTrib
http://hussamayloush.blogspot.com/2011/04/khutbahsermon-understanding-and.html
http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/06/16/2270624/sharia-law-is-not-a-threat.html
http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/20051
http://www.gazette.com/opinion/sharia-119978-islam-bar.html
http://www.international-divorce.com/uae_divorce.htm
http://www.gazettenet.com/2011/04/28/tajik-divorce-when-u-c-it039s-over
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_Islam#Divorce
http://www.mzuhdijasser.com/7943/8-questions-with-dr-zuhdi-jasser


Follow Anti-CAIR on twitter
Get private updates on your cell phone by texting
follow AntiCAIR to 40404 in the United States

http://twitter.com/AntiCAIR

REGGIE BROWN: Best Obama Impersonator you’ve ever seen- Video

This guy is good.

Sunday, June 19, 2011

Unhinged Leftist Radio Host Ambushes James O’Keefe at Right Online – FAILS (Video)

Now doesn't this leftist Media Bitch sound like her panties are on too tight?

Culturally Enriched Food Stamp Fraud

Gates of vienna

The following culturally enriched scamsters are all Somalis. There are three of them, but even so their scam has a Mohammed Coefficient of 100%.

Notice that their ingenious rackets managed to ring just about every bell in the welfare state carillon: food stamps, the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program, WIC, federal welfare, rent subsidies, Medicaid, heating assistance, and even Pell Grants.

Here’s the story from Grand Rapids :http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2011/06/prosecutor_government_helped_g.html


Prosecutor: Store Owner Accused of Massive Food-Stamp Fraud Also Had Government Assistance for His Family



GRAND RAPIDS – After reporting low income and virtually no assets, the government says, Ahmed Sheikh Mohamed got help for food, housing, heating, medical treatment and college costs for his family.

He didn’t disclose that his small Grand Rapids grocery store deposited $800,000 from 2006 to 2009. Or, that he made $60,000 annually in food-stamp fraud. Or, that he routinely moved cash in a business account to an account for personal spending, which included a $15,000 family vacation in Mecca, the government said.

“The principal goal of the conspiracy was to obtain money by defrauding federal programs intended to provide food, housing, medical care and underprivileged,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Nils Kessler wrote recently in a court document.

The investigation, which led to charges against Mohamed and two others, was one of at least five in the last year in the Grand Rapids area targeting stores that trade electronic food stamps for cash and ineligible items. Enforcement action last year in Michigan convinced the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which oversees the benefit program, to provide a $3.3 million grant to fight fraud and abuse in the food-assistance program.

[…]

In the latest Grand Rapids case, the government alleged that Mohamed, his son, Mohamed Isse, and his nephew, Abdulrahman Hassan Mohamed, owned or operated Rayan Phone Cards and Grocery, a small store that catered to the Somali immigrant community, and conspired to defraud the government's food-stamp program. [emphasis added]


The defendants have all pleaded not guilty.

Kessler, the federal prosecutor, said the nephew became an authorized redeemer for the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program, or SNAP. The father, in applying for assistance, said he worked as a $7.50-an-hour meat cutter at the store, the government in court documents.

“This allowed Ahmed to conceal the substantial income he derived from the store, so he could fraudulently apply for and receive federal welfare, housing, medical and educational benefits for himself and various members of his family,” Kessler wrote, in an indictment.

The government alleged $474,000 in food-stamp fraud.

It also said Mohamed and his family wrong received $46,605 in SNAP benefits; $4,313 in Women, Infant and Children benefits; $44,873 in rent subsidies; $57,963 in Medicaid benefits; $300 in emergency heating assistance; and $24,678 in Pell Grants.


On a further note, don't forget that our Muslim in Chief wants to bring thousands more of these same Somali deadbeats to America. All of whom will of course be added to the welfare system. You and I taxpayers will be paying for these Illiterates for many years as well as their children. Isn't it time we put an end to such immigration scams.

Tuesday, June 14, 2011

Barnhardt-HealthCareSolutionPart1 & 2

Love this women. A true patriot.



Somalians In Sweden: There is a First time for Everything

Just imagine Muslim Obama is bringing in thousands of these uneducation brain dead Muslims to US.


First place they go when they get here? You guessed it. The welfare department for all the freebies that you and I, the taxpayer will pay for.

Sunday, June 12, 2011

How Hockey Commentator Don Cherry Feels about Torture

Those gentle, always polite Canadians. Maybe being a hockey commentator makes a difference.


You Gotta love this Guy!!

DON CHERRY, Canadian Hockey Commentator for CBC Television, was asked on a local live radio talk show, what he thought about the allegations of torture of suspected terrorists. His reply prompted his ejection from the studio, but to thunderous applause from the audience.

HIS STATEMENT:

"If hooking up one raghead terrorist prisoner's testicles to a car battery to get the truth out of the lying little camel shagger will save just one Canadian life, then I have only three things to say:

'Red is positive, black is negative, and make sure his nuts are wet."

Take the Obama Racist Test


Do you like him any better now?
No?
Me neither.........
Congratulations, you're not a racist

Wednesday, June 1, 2011

Geert Wilders Final Words at The Amsterdam Trial - English Subtitles

blogspotKitmanTV

Michael Savage - Sick of Islam

Wow, love this guy. Finally someone speaking out against Islam. I agree Deportation not Reeducation. Send the bastards back to the rat hole they came from.

The Black Plague Hits Germany

Oh its really the attack of the Bagheads.



Do what you do with your garbage bags. Put the bagheads out in the trash.

Thanks to BNI for this video.