Posted in Analysis, Speeches, Video, tagged Afghanistan, al Qaeda, al-Shabaab, Allen West, Center for Security Policy, China, drug cartels, Egypt, Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Libya, Mexico, National Security, Pakistan, Palestinians, Saudi Arabia, Somali pirates, Somalia, South America, Syria, Taliban, Turkey, Venezuela, Vietnam War, Yemen on June 29, 2011| Leave a Comment »
Rep. Allen West recently gave an awesome speech to the Center for Security Policy.
While it seems that our media can only focus on one “crisis” at a time, Allen West never takes his eye off of all the threats to U.S. national security.
No teleprompter, you’ll notice. The man is a walking encyclopedia, and he can communicate.
What Paul Ryan does for budget issues, Allen West does for national security.
Hat Tip: Big Peace
Posted in Analysis, tagged Army Corps of Engineers, Environmentalist wackos, Government malfeasance, Missouri River floods on June 27, 2011| Leave a Comment »
Yet one more reason in the ever-growing list of reasons why I’m not an “environmentalist” anymore…. Check out this eye-opening piece at the American Thinker:
Some sixty years ago, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) began the process of taming the Missouri by constructing a series of six dams. The idea was simple: massive dams at the top moderating flow to the smaller dams below, generating electricity while providing desperately needed control of the river’s devastating floods.
The stable flow of water allowed for the construction of the concrete and earthen levees that protect more than 10 million people who reside and work within the river’s reach. It allowed millions of acres of floodplain to become useful for farming and development. In fact, these uses were encouraged by our government, which took credit for the resulting economic boom. By nearly all measures, the project was a great success.
But after about thirty years of operation, as the environmentalist movement gained strength throughout the seventies and eighties, the Corps received a great deal of pressure to include some specific environmental concerns into their MWCM (Master Water Control Manual, the “bible” for the operation of the dam system). Preservation of habitat for at-risk bird and fish populations soon became a hot issue among the burgeoning environmental lobby. The pressure to satisfy the demands of these groups grew exponentially as politicians eagerly traded their common sense for “green” political support.
Things turned absurd from there….
The Corps began to utilize the dam system to mimic the previous flow cycles of the original river, holding back large amounts of water upstream during the winter and early spring in order to release them rapidly as a “spring pulse.” The water flows would then be restricted to facilitate a summer drawdown of stream levels. This new policy was highly disruptive to barge traffic and caused frequent localized flooding, but a multi-year drought masked the full impact of the dangerous risks the Corps was taking.
This year, despite more than double the usual amount of mountain and high plains snowpack (and the ever-present risk of strong spring storms), the true believers in the Corps have persisted in following the revised MWCM, recklessly endangering millions of residents downstream….
Perhaps the environmentalists of the Corps grew tired of waiting decades to realize their dream of a “restored Missouri River.” Perhaps these elements heard the warnings and saw in them an opportunity to force an immediate re-naturalization of the river via epic flood. At present, that is impossible to know, but to needlessly imperil the property, businesses, and lives of millions of people constitutes criminal negligence. Given the statements of Corps personnel, and the clear evidence of their mismanagement, the possibility that there is specific intent behind their failure to act must be investigated without delay.
In recent decades, many universities have steeped their Natural Sciences curriculum in the green tea of earth-activism, producing radically eco-centric graduates who naturally seek positions with the government agencies where they can best implement their theories. Today, many of these men and women have risen high in their fields, hiring fellow travelers to fill subordinate positions and creating a powerful echo chamber of radical environmentalist theory.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is a victim/tool of the above-described process. The horrifying consequence is water rushing from the dams on the Missouri twice as fast as the highest previous releases on record. Floodgates that have not been opened in more than fifty years are in full operation, discharging water at a rate of 150,000 cubic feet per second toward millions of Americans downstream.
This is a mind-boggling rate of release. Consider that 150,000 cubic feet of water would fill a football field instantly to a depth of four feet. This amount of water, being released every second, will continue unabated for the next several months. The levees that protect the cities and towns downstream were constructed to handle the flow rates promised at the time of the dam’s construction. None of these levees have ever been tested at these levels, yet they must hold back millions of acre-feet of floodwater for the entire summer without failing. In the flooding of 1993, more than a thousand levees failed. This year’s event will be many orders of magnitude greater.There are many well-publicized examples of absurd obeisance to the demands of radical environmentalists resulting in great economic harm. The Great Missouri River Flood of 2011 is shaping up to be another — only this time, the price will likely be paid in lives lost as well as treasure. Ayn Rand said, “You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality.”
We need to begin the investigations immediately. It seems that it is sanity, and not the river, that needs to be restored.
Posted in News, tagged Afghanistan, Human rights, Islam, Muslim women, Shariah, Taliban on June 27, 2011| Leave a Comment »
Afghan women are living in fear that they are about to be returned, once again, to the Dark Ages of misogynistic terror. The Asia Sentinel reports:
The report Wednesday from Washington, DC that US President Barack Obama has set in motion a substantial withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan is hardly good news for Afghanistan’s women. Withdrawal of 10,000 NATO troops is expected by the end of the year. Women in the country are hearing rumors that talks with the Taliban are already taking place in secret…. Women risk losing liberty, education and employment if the fundamentalist Taliban were to win a significant place in the Afghan government.
The presence of foreign troops has caused significant issues, too. For example, a recent errant NATO strike killed at least nine women and children. But women say this tragedy should not be used as a reason for a troop withdrawal. The Taliban are responsible for the majority of civilian deaths during the war and intolerable abuse of women.
In May, Safia Siddiqi, a women’s activist and former member of the Afghan National Economy Committee, said on a national radio broadcast that nothing had improved for women in rural areas and that women need each other and the international forces to attain peace and security.
Posted in Commentary, Opinion, tagged Agenda 21, Bill Ayers, Christian citizenship, Christianity, Cloward-Piven, Community organizing, Frances Fox Piven, Greece, Henry Kissinger, Hezbollah, Iran, Jihad, John Holdren, Libya, Manhattan Declaration, Marxism, Michael O'Brien, Michel Schooyans, Middle East unrest, New World Order, North Korea, Obama, Pope Benedict XVI, Population control, Rahm Emanuel, Ratzinger, Rules for Radicals, Saul Alinsky, Spain, Spiritual warfare, Syria, United Nations, Venezuela on June 2, 2011| 1 Comment »
Here is a chillingly prophetic piece dating from January 7, 2009. Think back, for a minute, to those days after Obama had been elected but before he’d been inaugurated… those days of “The Office of the President-Elect” and the cheap-imitation presidential seal… And then, only 25 days after this piece was written, Obama was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize — after being in office less than two weeks. I never saw this article at the time. As I read it today, I got goosebumps — and not the good kind — as I compared what we know now with what people such as Henry Kissinger were thinking 29 months ago as they looked forward to the age of “hope and change”….
WASHINGTON, DC, January 7, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – In an interview with CNBC Monday, former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger said that President-Elect Barack Obama’s most important, or defining task would be the creation of “a new world order.”
“The president-elect is coming into office at a moment when there is upheaval in many parts of the world simultaneously,” said Kissinger.
“Upheaval,” he says. Isn’t that cute? And that was before Greece went up in flames, Spain erupted in protests, Hezbollah dug in near Tijuana, Mexico descended into total chaos, North Korea sank a South Korean ship and attacked one of their islands, the Deepwater Horizon oil well blew out, China (or someone) test-fired a missile off the coast of Los Angeles, a Muslim U.S. Army doctor massacred soldiers at Ft. Hood, Iran started building missile bases in Venezuela, Iranian protesters got slaughtered in the streets, Syrian protesters got slaughtered in the streets, Libyan protesters got slaughtered in the streets, Bahraini protesters got slaughtered…. are we seeing a pattern here? Kissinger continues:
“You have India, Pakistan; you have the jihadist movement. So he [Obama] can’t really say there is one problem, that it’s the most important one. But he can give new impetus to American foreign policy partly because the reception of him is so extraordinary around the world. [Right, Henry. Especially from the queen of England. And the prime minister of Israel. And French president Sarkozy.] I think his task will be to develop an overall strategy for America in this period when, really, a new world order can be created.”
“It’s a great opportunity, it isn’t just a crisis.”
Henry is sounding nearly word-for-word like Rahm Emanuel here. And Frances Fox Piven. And Saul Alinsky. Ah, yes, Kissinger the “community organizer” — who knew?
Some commentators have suggested that the highly escalated conflicts in the Middle East and the world financial crisis have made the time ripe for a long-anticipated and foreshadowed “New World Order” to come to fruition. Celebrated Canadian author Michael O’Brien, who has written extensively on the ‘new world order,’ spoke with LifeSiteNews.com about Kissinger’s statement.
“Only in one sense is Kissinger’s analysis correct,” said O’Brien. “The current world situation is presently one of a multitude of crises and at the same time a moment of opportunity. However, positing a leap towards what he calls a ‘new world order’ is fraught with difficulties.
“What does the term mean? In all likelihood it can only mean an imposed top-down global social-political revolution. In other words, solutions would then come from a reigning authority over all nations putting aside individual conscience and principles of national self-determination.”
O’Brien added: “A true and healthy order in the human community can only arise from an internal revolution of the moral order. It cannot be imposed without imposing greater ills. In all likelihood, Kissinger and like-minded globalists, see the present world configuration as a creative disintegration which would usher in a new form of world government. In such a situation, management by crisis overrides authentic exercise of human freedom and responsibility.”
Because the real agenda of the one-world control freaks revolves around global population control, pro-lifers are ahead of the game in recognizing the core dynamic of the globalists.
For pro-life advocates, the proposal of a ‘new world order’ has been linked to the anti-life principles promoted at the United Nations. Pope Benedict, while still a Cardinal, expounded on this matter in the introduction to a book published in 1997. Then-Cardinal Ratzinger wrote the preface to a book by Michel Schooyans, entitled “The Gospel: Confronting World Disorder.
…Ratzinger first denounces the “new world order” describing it as more or less a culmination of Marxism. He goes on to say that a Christian is “obliged to protest” against it.
Christian protest, if it is truly Christian, will have a different character than Leftist/secular protests — both in what we advocate, and in how we advocate it. In my opinion, the starting point for every citizen who is a Christian should be signing the Manhattan Declaration of Christian Conscience. As we stand for our principles in the political sphere, we need to remember that the root problem is spiritual in nature, and that is where the real war must be fought, both within ourselves as individuals, and within the culture: “an internal revolution of the moral order,” in Michael O’Brien’s wise words.
The world-government control freaks and their initiatives, from the United Nations to the Bilderberg Group, from Agenda 21 to the Millennium Goals, represent a mind-set that, far from being limited to the Kissingers of the world conferring in dark-paneled rooms, is right out in the open and pervades our public life. That mind-set is materialism — the unspoken assumption that man is nothing more than an evolved combination of chemicals, therefore any individual life is worth little to nothing, and the great masses of human beings should be managed by their self-appointed “superiors.” If there is no soul, if all that exists is what we see with our eyes, why not have government-forced abortions in America, as Obama’s science czar, John Holdren, has advocated? If an individual life is worth nothing, why not impose social uniformity by “eliminating” 25 million Americans in “re-education camps,” as Obama’s friend Bill Ayers and his Weather Underground terror group once discussed?
It’s quite telling that Saul Alinsky, the father of “community organizing,” dedicated his book to Lucifer, a.k.a. Satan. You may recall that when Jesus was tempted in the desert, one of the temptations Satan proffered was global rule — worldly power — the only kind of power that an Alinsky, a Kissinger, or an Obama seems to recognize. But Jesus did not choose that kind of power. He chose — and enables every one of us to choose — the power of self-giving love. And that is the only power that can change the world for the better.
The Heartlander 
The REAL problem for us with Anthony Weiner should be his WIFE — and her family’s ties to militant Islam
Posted in Analysis, Commentary, tagged al Qaeda, Al-Azhar University, Alwaleed bin Talal, Anthony Weiner, Fethullah Gulen, Hassan Abedin, Hillary Clinton, Honor killings, Huma Abedin, Islam, Muslim Brotherhood, Muslim Sisterhood, OCIS, Omar Naseef, Oxford Center for Islamic Studies, Oxford University, Saleha Abedin, Shariah, Shariah Compliant Finance, Taqiyya, Tariq Ramadan, Walid Shoebat, Yusuf Qaradawi on June 20, 2011| 2 Comments »
While the nation was busy obsessing over Anthony Weiner’s private parts, we missed what should have been by far the more important story: his wife, Huma Abedin. As deputy chief of staff to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton — and by many accounts, her closest aide — Huma Abedin is privy to many state secrets. This is disturbing because Abedin’s immediate family members are more than tangentially involved in the Islamist cause. Not just Muslim. Islamist. As in: militant Islam. The enemy. In plain English: Someone with close ties to our enemies has an extremely high-level position in our State Department. Hello? Anyone awake?
According to Walid Shoebat and Ben Barrack writing at Pajamas Media, Huma Abedin’s mother, Saleha Abedin, who lives in Saudi Arabia, is a member of the Muslim Sisterhood (also known as the International Women’s Organization), the women’s arm of the radical, terrorist-spawning Muslim Brotherhood. In addition, Huma’s brother, Hassan Abedin, has worked to promote the Islamic agenda from his base at Oxford University.
A report from 2007 identifies Naseef as the likely force behind the Abedin family’s abrupt departure from Kalamazoo, Michigan, to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, circa 1977 – the same year that the Muslim Sisterhood was established.
Huma’s brother, Hassan, has also worked on projects with Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, whose goal is “spreading Islam to the west.” Alwaleed bin Talal is one of those Saudi princes who has credibility with many in America because of his personal connections, philanthropic donations, and investments (notably, he owns seven percent of NewsCorp, the parent of FOX News, making him the second-largest individual shareholder). But meanwhile, the prince gives huge financial support to radical Islamist groups masquerading as “moderate” — including the Cordoba Initiative (Ground Zero mosque), CAIR, and the Islamic Development Bank (promoting shariah-compliant finance, which inherently and by design promotes the spread of shariah).
I got so confused while trying to make my way through the tangled web of connections that I had to make a diagram — somewhat simplified — to keep it all straight. (In case you’re wondering, the dotted line from Weiner to Hillary is there because of Hillary’s support — at least, until recently! — of Weiner’s political ambitions. Bill Clinton was even the officiator at Weiner’s and Abedin’s wedding.)
Besides the Abedin family’s numerous Islamist connections, another thing that raises red flags is the lack of Muslim outrage over Huma’s marriage to a Jewish man. Given how well-known the Abedins are in the Islamic world (and in the Islamist world), how is it that Huma was able to marry a non-Muslim, which is absolutely prohibited in Muslim law? Even in the West, there have been “honor killings” of girls from Muslim families for dating a non-Muslim, much less marrying one. (Note: A non-Muslim woman is allowed to marry a Muslim man — because the man is dominant in Islam. However, the reverse — a Muslim woman, such as Huma Abedin, marrying a non-Muslim man, such as Anthony Weiner, is absolutely forbidden by shariah because such an arrangement puts a non-Muslim in a position of dominance over a Muslim — which, in Islam, is intolerable.)
Since the penalty for such apostasy is death, why has Huma not been the victim of an “honor killing”? Ex-Muslim Walid Shoebat offers two possible explanations. One is that Huma and her family are using taqiyya — the obligation of a devout Muslim to lie and dissemble when dealing with non-Muslims in order to advance the greater cause of Islam. That would mean that Huma has been given a “pass” in service of the greater Islamist/Muslim Brotherhood goal: to infiltrate the highest levels of our government.
A second possible explanation is that Anthony Weiner might have converted to Islam. This is not as unlikely as it sounds at first blush, especially given that Weiner was raised as a secular Jew. New York imam Omar Abu-Namous, a close associate of Ground Zero mosque imam Faisal Abdul Rauf, encouraged Huma, in the wake of the recent scandals, to stand by her husband — but such advice would not be expected from an imam if Huma were in fact married to a non-Muslim.
As corruptive of our culture — and fraught with the potential for political blackmail — as Anthony Weiner’s peccadilloes have been, they pale in comparison to the potential dangers created by his wife, Huma Abedin, being a top, trusted aide to the Secretary of State of the United States. Can you say “Alger Hiss“?
Cross-posted at Unified Patriots and RedState
Share this:
Read Full Post »