Sunday, 27 January 2008
Muslim welfare haven, Global banks & Islam, and more
COMMENT: You will want to read every word of each article. This is just one more way we are losing this nation.
The Great Divide: The Failure of Islam and the Triumph of the West
By Alvin J. Schmidt and Marvin Olasky
Unveiling Islam: An Insider's Look at Muslim Life and Beliefs
Ergun and Emir Canor
**These men are both former Muslims, raised in a Muslim home prior to becoming Christians and have been guest speakers at my church.
1. Salute the Danish Flag
2. Caughlin sacked
3. Global Banks Adopting Islam
4. Quantico mosque leader promoted
In Denmark, once-liberal immigration policies have forced huge governmental change and zero tolerance for Muslim immigrants intent on turning Denmark into an Islamic welfare haven. FSM Contributing Editor Susan MacAllen reveals a shocking reaction there and lessons America must learn.
Salute the Danish Flag! - It’s a Symbol of Western Freedom
By Susan MacAllen
In 1978-9 I was living and studying in Denmark. An elderly woman to whom I was close said something to me one day that puzzled me for many years after. I forget what the context of our conversation was, but she commented that I - as a young American in Denmark - should not let any Dane scold me about the way America had treated its black population, because the Danes in her view treated their immigrants at least as badly. I wasn’t sure which immigrants she meant, so I asked her. She answered that she meant those from the Middle East.
But in 1978 - even in Copenhagen, one didn’t see these Muslim immigrants. The Danish population embraced visitors, celebrated the exotic, went out of its way to protect each of its citizens. It was proud of its new brand of socialist liberalism - one in development since the conservatives had lost power in 1929 - a system where no worker had to struggle to survive, where one ultimately could count upon the state as in, perhaps, no other western nation at the time. The rest of Europe saw the Scandinavians as free-thinking, progressive and infinitely generous in their welfare policies. Denmark boasted low crime rates, devotion to the environment, a superior educational system and a history of humanitarianism.
Denmark was also most generous in its immigration policies - it offered the best welcome in Europe to the new immigrant: generous welfare payments from first arrival plus additional perks in transportation, housing and education. It was determined to set a world example for inclusiveness and multiculturalism. How could it have predicted that one day in 2005 a series of political cartoons in a newspaper would spark violence that would leave dozens dead in the streets - all because its commitment to multiculturalism would come back to bite?
By the 1990's the growing urban Muslim population was obvious - and its unwillingness to integrate into Danish society was obvious. Years of immigrants had settled into Muslim-exclusive enclaves. As the Muslim leadership became more vocal about what they considered the decadence of Denmark’s liberal way of life, the Danes - once so welcoming - began to feel slighted. Many Danes had begun to see Islam as incompatible with their long-standing values: belief in personal liberty and free speech, in equality for women, in tolerance for other ethnic groups, and a deep pride in Danish heritage and history.
The New York Post in 2002 ran an article by Daniel Pipes and Lars Hedegaard, in which they forecasted accurately that the growing immigrant problem in Denmark would explode. In the article they reported:
· "Muslim immigrants…constitute 5 percent of the population but consume upwards of 40 percent of the welfare spending."
· "Muslims are only 4 percent of Denmark's 5.4 million people but make up a majority of the country's convicted rapists, an especially combustible issue given that practically all the female victims are non-Muslim. Similar, if lesser, disproportions are found in other crimes."
· "Over time, as Muslim immigrants increase in numbers, they wish less to mix with the indigenous population. A recent survey finds that only 5 percent of young Muslim immigrants would readily marry a Dane."
· "Forced marriages - promising a newborn daughter in Denmark to a male cousin in the home country, then compelling her to marry him, sometimes on pain of death - are one problem..."
· "Muslim leaders openly declare their goal of introducing Islamic law once Denmark's Muslim population grows large enough - a not-that-remote prospect. If present trends persist, one sociologist estimates, every third inhabitant of Denmark in 40 years will be Muslim."
It is easy to understand why a growing number of Danes would feel that Muslim immigrants show little respect for Danish values and laws. An example is the phenomenon common to other European countries and the U.S.: some Muslims in Denmark who opted to leave the Muslim faith have been murdered in the name of Islam, while others hide in fear for their lives. Jews are also threatened and harassed openly by Muslim leaders in Denmark, a country where once Christian citizens worked to smuggle out nearly all of their 7,000 Jews by night to Sweden - before the Nazis could invade. I think of my Danish friend Elsa - who as a teenager had dreaded crossing the street to the bakery every morning under the eyes of occupying Nazi soldiers - and I wonder what she would say today.
***********for remainder, go here ***********
Inside the Ring
By Bill Gertz
January 4, 2008
2. Coughlin sacked
Stephen Coughlin, the Pentagon specialist on Islamic law and Islamist extremism, has been fired from his position on the military's Joint Staff. The action followed a report in this space last week revealing opposition to his work for the military by pro-Muslim officials within the office of Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England.
Mr. Coughlin was notified this week that his contract with the Joint Staff will end in March, effectively halting the career of one of the U.S. government's most important figures in analyzing the nature of extremism and ultimately preparing to wage ideological war against it.
He had run afoul of a key aide to Mr. England, Hasham Islam, who confronted Mr. Coughlin during a meeting several weeks ago when Mr. Islam sought to have Mr. Coughlin soften his views on Islamist extremism.
Mr. Coughlin was accused directly by Mr. Islam of being a Christian zealot or extremist "with a pen," according to defense officials. Mr. Coughlin appears to have become one of the first casualties in the war of ideas with Islamism.
The officials said Mr. Coughlin was let go because he had become "too hot" or controversial within the Pentagon.
Misguided Pentagon officials, including Mr. Islam and Mr. England, have initiated an aggressive "outreach" program to U.S. Muslim groups that critics say is lending credibility to what has been identified as a budding support network for Islamist extremists, including front groups for the radical Muslim Brotherhood.
Mr. Coughlin wrote a memorandum several months ago based on documents made public in a federal trial in Dallas that revealed a covert plan by the Muslim Brotherhood, an Egyptian-origin Islamist extremist group, to subvert the United States using front groups. Members of one of the identified front groups, the Islamic Society of North America, has been hosted by Mr. England at the Pentagon.
After word of the confrontation between Mr. Coughlin and Mr. Islam was made public, support for Mr. Coughlin skyrocketed among those in and out of government who feared the worst, namely that pro-Muslim officials in the Pentagon were after Mr. Coughlin's scalp, and that his departure would be a major setback for the Pentagon's struggling efforts to develop a war of ideas against extremism. Blogs lit up with hundreds of postings, some suggesting that Mr. England's office is "penetrated" by the enemy in the war on terrorism.
Kevin Wensing, a spokesman for Mr. England, said "no one in the deputy's office had any input into this decision" by the Joint Staff to end Mr. Coughlin's contract. A Joint Staff spokesman had no immediate comment.
*********for remainder, go here **********
3. GLOBAL BANKS ADOPTING ISLAM
December 14, 2007
The Bible warns that “… the love of money is the root of all sorts of evil” (1 Ti. 6:10) So, just when you think you have just about seen it all, something even more shocking turns up. Like this…
Either global bankers are seducing Islamic dictators, or vice versa. Even if they are seducing each other at the same time, the result will be the same: Islamic/Shari’a banking is coming to the United States and other western nations, thanks to global banks such as Citigroup, HSBC, Deutsche Bank, Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs.
With Great Britain now pledging to become the Islamic banking center of the world, the stampede by all global banks to enter the world of Islamic banking is well underway.
Western banking met Islam many decades ago, but only began to sleep with her a few years ago. Since then, it is has become a wanton and open affair.
The implications for the west, and especially for the United States, are staggering. Because all Islamic banking products must be created and offered according to strict Shari’a law, global banks are doing for Islam what it could never do on its own: give legitimacy to Shari’a and infiltrate it into the fabric of western society.
What is Islamic banking?
Simply put, “Islamic banking and finance” creates, sells and services products that are in strict accordance with Shari’a. In the Islamic culture, it is referred to as “Shari’a finance” and covers the practices of banking, investment, bonds, loans, brokerage, etc.
To insure Shari’a compliance, banks must hire Shari’a scholars to review and approve each product and practice as “halal”, the Muslim equivalent of kosher in Judaism. Because there is a shortage of such scholars, there is competition between banks to find the best expert to sit on their boards of directors. This provides the highest legitimacy to each ruling because it is made at the director rather management level.
It should be noted that most of these scholars are from the school of radical Wahhabi/Salafi Shari’a in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere, holding views diametrically opposed to the basic values of Western civilization.
Shari’a finance has many differences from orthodox banking: Notably, it cannot charge interest (usury) and it calls for alms giving (zakat). It also calls for avoidance of excessive risk and may not be associated in any way with gambling, drinking alcohol, eating pork, etc.
Zakat demands a tithe of 2.5 percent of revenue be donated to Islamic charity. If western banks follow this rule, their contributions will be staggering. It is certain that a portion of this money will end up in the hands of radical Muslims who are sworn to destroy the U.S. and replace its government with Shari’a law.
Shari’a finance is a recent phenomenon. There were very few Islamic banks prior to 1980. However, with the Khomeini revolution in Iran in 1979, Shari’a was summarily imposed throughout Iran and Shari’a finance took off.
The dark side of Shari’a
Shari’a is the legal and judicial system of Islam that is brutally imposed on many Islamic countries in the middle east. It is the specific embodiment of the totalitarian ideology practiced by the Taliban, Iranian Mullahs and Saudi Wahhabis.
Shari’a is perpetuated by claiming to have its roots in the Koran, but in fact it is mostly the product of rulings and dictates made by Islamic scholars and caliphs over several centuries.
For non-Muslims, Shari’a is best known for its medieval, harsh brutality. Many rulings handed down by Shari’a courts have shocked the western world, for instance:
The December, 2007 “teddy bear” case in Sudan, where a British teacher was sentenced to 40 lashes and a year in jail for allowing her students to name their teddy bear “Mohammad.” Islamic mobs demonstrated in the streets and called for her execution.
The November, 2007 case where a 19 year old gang-rape victim in Saudi Arabia received a sentence of 200 lashes for riding in the car with her rapists.
In 2006, a 34 year-old mother was forcibly raped and ultimately tried and convicted of adultery, and was ordered to be stoned to death.
Shari’a demands total and unquestioned submission. Its subjects are told that Shari’a is given by Allah and that whatever befalls them (good or bad) is Allah’s will. To question a judgment under Shari’a (right or wrong) is to question Shari’a itself and will only bring harsher punishment. If a person receives harsh punishment for something they didn’t do, the rationale is that Allah could and would have prevented it if that had been his will. This fatalistic and deterministic approach allows Shari’a rulers to get away with virtually any thing that enters their head.
To the average western mind, Shari’a is no more than a medieval, barbaric code that somehow survived to the 21st century. It flies in the face of western law, philosophy, liberty and freedom. Furthermore, it is the vehicle used to call for the complete destruction of the west and in particular the United States of America, which then will be replaced by Shari’a dictatorships.
How the banking rocket took off
At the behest of global trade moguls, numerous Free Trade Zones (FTZ’s) were created throughout the Islamic world that were full of windfall conditions.
For instance, the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC), is a 110 acre free trade zone that was founded in 2004 in Dubai, UAE. According to the DIFC website, participants will enjoy "zero tax rate on income and profits, 100 per cent foreign ownership, no restrictions on foreign exchange or capital/profit repatriation, operational support and business continuity facilities.”
Not surprisingly, Morgan Stanley’s application was one of the first approved by the Dubai Financial Services Authority to operate within the DIFC.
The director-general of the DIFC Authority, Dr. Omar Bin Sulaiman, welcomed Morgan Stanley by stating,
“This is a testimony to our status as an international financial centre of repute. Morgan Stanley is a highly reputed organisation and to have them here at the DIFC is a vindication of our strategy to create a world-class financial hub for the region. The opportunity available within the region, along with the state-of-the-art infrastructure and the international regulatory framework of the DIFC, provides the ideal platform for institutions such as Morgan Stanley to grow their business." [Emphasis added]
DIFC and similar Free Trade Zones are a banker’s nirvana into which global bankers have rushed headlong to establish regional financial centers.
And the payoff? A chance to enter and then dominate the Islamic banking industry. Such banking has over $1.5 trillion on the table today, and is growing at a steady and explosive rate of over 15% per year.
*************for remainder, go here ***********
4. Quantico mosque leader promoted
Pentagon honors Wahhabi-trained Muslim chaplain
Posted: December 14, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
In a special ceremony, the Pentagon recently promoted a Wahhabi-trained Muslim chaplain who catered to al-Qaida detainees at Guantanamo and fought to establish the first mosque in Marine Corps history.
Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England personally promoted Navy chaplain Abuhena Mohammed Saifulislam from lieutenant to lieutenant commander. Saifulislam also received a Joint Service Commendation Medal at the Pentagon ceremony held on the fifth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.
Pentagon officials say the ceremony was unprecedented.
"It's unusual for a deputy secretary to personally promote an officer of that rank," said one official who wished to go unnamed. "No one has known of such a high-level dignitary doing that."
England also earlier this year personally dedicated a new Islamic center at Marine headquarters in Quantico, Va., on the advice of Saifulislam, a Bangladesh immigrant who became a U.S. citizen in 1995.
The Muslim chaplain, who is stationed at Quantico, recited verses from the Quran in Arabic and English at the summer dedication ceremony, which included representatives from the Council on American-Islamic Relations, several leaders of which have been convicted on terrorism-related charges
Saifulislam, which is Arabic for "Sword of Islam," received his religious training at a radical Islamic school raided by federal agents after 9/11. The Graduate School of Islamic and Social Sciences, based in Leesburg, Va., is run by Taha Jaber Al-Alwani, an unindicted co-conspirator in the Sami al-Arian terror case. A federal affidavit used to obtain a warrant to search the school alleges Al-Alwani gave at least $50,000 in jihad money "to support suicide bombings."
Saifulislam insists he is moderate and condemns "terrorism," but critics say his Wahhabi background and associations should give the Pentagon pause.
"The Pentagon is giving him a permanent, taxpayer-supported platform from which to convert grunts to Islam," said terror expert Paul Sperry, a Hoover Institution media fellow and author of "Infiltration: How Muslim Spies and Subversives Have Penetrated Washington."
"With the Quantico mosque, the Pentagon is facilitating the study of the holy text the enemy uses, heretically or not, as their manual of warfare."
Saifulislam's promotion along with the dedication of his new Quantico mosque – the first of its kind in the 230-year history of the Corps – comes on the heels of a Muslim spy scandal at Gitmo involving another Muslim chaplain.
Army Capt. James "Yousef" Yee, who ministered to al-Qaida detainees, was charged with mishandling classified information. Yee, a convert to Islam, quit the Army and the charges were dropped. But two of his Muslim military friends at Gitmo were convicted of espionage-related crimes.
************for remainder, go here **********
Posted on 01/27/2008 3:42 PM by Bobbie Patray
Wednesday, 23 January 2008
Mature Human Embryos Created From Adult Skin Cells
COMMENT: Little human embryos being created and then destroyed for research. This man created his own clones and then destroyed them. Where in the world are we going???
Mature Human Embryos Created From Adult Skin Cells
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, January 18, 2008; Page A01
Scientists at a California company reported yesterday that they had created the first mature cloned human embryos from single skin cells taken from adults, a significant advance toward the goal of growing personalized stem cells for patients suffering from various diseases.
Creation of the embryos -- grown from cells taken from the company's chief executive and one of its investors -- also offered sobering evidence that few, if any, technical barriers may remain to the creation of cloned babies. That reality could prompt renewed controversy on Capitol Hill, where the debate over human cloning has died down of late.
Five of the new embryos grew in laboratory dishes to the stage that fertility doctors consider ready for transfer to a woman's womb: a degree of development that clones of adult humans have never achieved before.
No one knows whether those embryos were healthy enough to grow into babies. But the study leader, who is also the medical director of a fertility clinic, said they looked robust, even as he emphasized that he has no interest in cloning people.
"It's unethical and it's illegal, and we hope no one else does it either," said Samuel H. Wood, chief executive of Stemagen in La Jolla, whose skin cells were cloned and who led the study with Andrew J. French, the firm's chief scientific officer.
The closely held company hopes to make embryos that are clones, or genetic twins, of patients, then harvest stem cells from those embryos and grow them into replacement tissues. When transplanted into patients, the tissues would not be rejected because the immune system would see them as "self."
"All our efforts are being directed toward personalized medicine and diseases," said Wood, adding that the scientists did not try to extract stem cells from the first embryos they made because they were focused on proving they could make the clones.
Other stem cell scientists expressed optimism but said they want to see the work repeated and more details presented.
"I'd really like to believe it, but I'm not sold yet," said Robert Lanza of Advanced Cell Technology (ACT) in Worcester, Mass. He said the report did not show the results of molecular tests that scientists typically do to prove that the cloning process was complete. He and George Daley, a stem cell scientist at Children's Hospital Boston, said the embryos look only marginally healthy in photos.
The work is the latest evidence, however, that the field is recovering from the scientific and public relations debacle of 2005, when similar claims by South Korean scientists proved to have been fabricated.
Nevertheless, opponents of research on human embryos lashed out at the approach.
"This study seems to confirm that human cloning . . . is technically possible," said Richard Doerflinger of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. "It does not show that a viable or normal embryonic stem cell line can be derived this way, or that any such cell has 'therapeutic' value. It does not answer the ethical or social questions about the mass-production of developing human lives in order to destroy them. . . . It only tells us that these questions are more urgent than ever."
Other critics noted that scientists in Japan and Wisconsin recently discovered a way to "reprogram" stem cells directly from skin cells, without having to make embryos as a middle step.
"In light of the recent cell reprogramming developments, cloning-based stem cell research is less justified than ever," said Marcy Darnovsky of the Center for Genetics and Society in Oakland, Calif.
Wood and others countered that, for now, those approaches require the use of gene-altered viruses, which can trigger tumor growth.
"It's hard to believe the FDA would approve the use of those cells," Wood said.
Criticism also arose on Capitol Hill, where enthusiasm has grown for the newer stem cell methods that do not involve embryos.
"Human cloning is now less about the science and more about the novelty, which makes it all the more nefarious," said Rep. Dave Weldon (R-Fla.), who has sought to ban all kinds of human cloning.
***********for remainder, go here **********
Posted on 01/23/2008 3:40 PM by Bobbie Patray
Tuesday, 22 January 2008
Immigration and Christian Duty
Immigration and Christian duty
Just last week a reporter covering the annual meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention asked me about the debate in the Christian community over the treatment of illegal immigrants: should we demonstrate Christian love and concern for their salvation or should we oppose amnesty legislation and enforce the immigration laws? The answer is yes – we can and should do both.
America is a nation of immigrants. >From the beginning, people have come here for freedom and prosperity. As early as 1783, George Washington wisely explained the privileges and duties of those seeking to become citizens of our Country:
The bosom of America is open to receive not only the Opulent and respectable Stranger, but the oppressed and persecuted of all Nations and Religions; whom we shall welcome to a participation of all our rights and privileges, if by decency and propriety of conduct they appear to merit the enjoyment. (Emphasis added.)
The Statue of Liberty still beckons from the New York Harbor, "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free." We should never turn our backs to those who show by their "decency and propriety of conduct" that they deserve to live here as an American citizen. But as Washington explained, citizenship entails not only the rights and privileges which flow from it, but also the duties and responsibilities which entitle an individual to its enjoyment.
Immigration is the legal means by which one becomes a citizen of the United States. It has historically required an application process for citizenship, including a test, an investigation, and an oath of allegiance to our Country and Constitution. To call those illegally residing here "immigrants" is an insult to those who have demonstrated the patience, responsibility, and fortitude to immigrate here legally.
When a person – from any country – enters our Country illegally, makes no application for citizenship, does not learn our language, does not care for our customs, and seeks only the benefits of living in America, they have not “immigrated” here at all. They are not "immigrants," but rather, "illegal aliens." Recent "May Day" demonstrations by illegal aliens that feature Mexican flags, anti-American slogans, and racist statements against "gringos" only confirm the intentions of many illegal aliens to not assimilate into our culture and way of life, but to displace it with their own. Their lack of "decency and propriety of conduct" show they neither desire nor deserve to be legal citizens.
Nevertheless, regardless of a person's status as immigrant or illegal alien, the Bible does say in Leviticus 19 that one should "love [the stranger] as thyself" and should not mistreat him. Leviticus 24:22 states that the same law shall apply "for the stranger, as for one of your own country." Deuteronomy 27:19 warns that "Cursed be he that perverteth the judgment of the stranger."
As Christians we are always to be concerned for the salvation and wellbeing of others, regardless of their citizenship. Justice requires that the laws be applied equally to citizens and aliens alike. Neither is to be treated unfairly or given special treatment. But because illegal aliens are not citizens, they do not enjoy the protection of regulations pertaining to such things as wage, labor, and housing. On the other hand, although they often pay little or no taxes, they receive the benefits of government welfare, health care, and education paid for by lawful taxpayers.
Nor are our immigration laws being applied equally. Illegal aliens from Central and South America are given special treatment when their presence here is excused, while those from other parts of the world suffer years of waiting and mountains of red tape to obtain American citizenship. Many legal immigrants are fleeing religious persecution, political oppression, or even civil war. Those who propose amnesty are actually rewarding and encouraging unlawful behavior by those who get here by simply crossing a river, a desert, or a dusty road just to seek a job.
************for remainder, go here *************
Posted on 01/22/2008 3:37 PM by Bobbie Patray
Monday, 21 January 2008
WHY CONSERVATIVES ARE LOSING
WHY CONSERVATIVES ARE LOSING
COMMENT: Following the thought provoking article by Cliff Kincaid is a brief article about an absurd claim from the Huckabee camp.
1. Why Conservatives are Losing
2. Huck Camp : Blame Fred
Why Conservatives Are Losing
AIM Column | By Cliff Kincaid | January 11, 2008
The ideas of small government, low taxes, low regulation, and minimal intrusion in the daily lives of people are losing ground.
You know the political world is in turmoil when the best conservative journalist on the scene, Robert Novak, blows two big predictions in a row. Novak said Mitt Romney would win the Iowa Caucuses (Romney lost by nine points to Mike Huckabee) and that Barack Obama would beat Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire in a "blow-out" (Hillary won by a couple points). All of this goes to show that both political parties are going through a revolution of "change" that the columnists and talking heads do not yet grasp.
From my vantage point, however, it looks like both major political parties are moving to the left.
Human Events, the national conservative weekly that used to be a favorite of Ronald Reagan, is trying to be a factor. It followed Fred Thompson's strong performance in Thursday night's South Carolina debate by endorsing the former Tennessee senator. Thompson had attacked Huckabee during the debate as too liberal. But Huckabee got more self-described "conservative" votes than any other Republican candidate in Iowa.
Is the Human Events endorsement too little too late for Thompson? Romney's endorsement by National Review (and his money) didn't help him win either Iowa or New Hampshire. As we contended in a recent column, it looks like the conservative media are losing their influence.
In fact, as demonstrated by the rise of Huckabee and especially John McCain in the Republican race, conservatives in and out of the media are looking rather desperate. About a year ago, the conservative group Citizens United released a report, "He's No Ronald Reagan: Why Conservatives Should Not Vote for John McCain." But McCain got the votes of 30 percent of self-described conservatives in New Hampshire.
My column about Rush Limbaugh losing influence, by virtue of the fact that Huckabee overcame Limbaugh's strident attacks and won Iowa anyway, generated some interesting comments. Here's one from an engineer in Cincinnati that drew my serious attention and I think has a lot of wisdom in it:
"I think that rather than draw the conclusion that Rush Limbaugh is losing his influence you have to question the current state of conservative politics in America. The ideas of conservatives are rarely promoted by anyone running or holding office. I heard a speech of Fred Thompson this week and he was speaking like a conservative but these speeches are few and far between these days. We lost out big when George Bush announced he was a compassionate conservative and then started writing bills with Ted Kennedy. There is not greater evidence than the spending spree him and the Republican Congress had for this first six years of this century.
"The ideas of small government, low taxes, low regulation, and minimal intrusion in the daily lives of people are losing ground. The people in Iowa are not rejecting Rush Limbaugh because he dares to suggest that Mike Huckabee is not Ronald Reagan. They are rejecting the concepts of Ronald Reagan himself.
"We have diluted the Republican concepts of being conservative with each election. Look at Arnold Schwarzenegger and Rudy Giuliani. These are your electable Republicans these days. And when we settle for them we commit ourselves to a worse one with the next election.
"I contend that Mr. Reagan himself would have a tough time getting elected these days. Likewise, John F. Kennedy would have the same problem in the Democrat party. He actually summed up the conservative central theme when he said 'And so, my fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country.' A guy talking like that is not going to pass the muster in the face of government giveaway, buy the votes Democrats, these days.
"Conservatism cannot win without people understanding the concept. And the word is not getting out there. If it weren't for the Internet this fight would already be lost.
***********for remainder, go here ************
HUCK CAMP: BLAME FRED
COLUMBIA, S.C. -- It’s clear who Huckabee camp is blaming for its squeaker of a loss in South Carolina: Fred Thompson.
After Huckabee’s gracious concession speech -- in which he had nothing but kind words for John McCain who he said showed great “civility” -- former SC Gov. David Beasley, a Huckabee surrogate, railed against Thompson.
“Fred hurt us in South Carolina,” Beasley began. “He had one goal and one goal only -- to distort Mike Huckabee’s record so John McCain could pull it out. No ifs, ands or buts about it….
“Thompson came here and just went to the areas where he could gut Huckabee. I have no doubt in my mind, it was Washington politics at its worst.
“One thing about Fred; I love Fred, but Fred’s not stupid….I don’t think he had any intention in South Carolina but to hurt Mike Huckabee…. Had Fred Thompson not been in the race, this would have been an overwhelming, dynamic victory for Mike Huckabee.”
************for remainder, go here **********
Posted on 01/21/2008 3:35 PM by Bobbie Patray
Friday, 18 January 2008
As we head into another legislative Session and Presidential election year, many are concerned about our elected officials proposing evermore socialist policies and programs. Our nation seems to be split - some want to stop this advance, and clearly others want it to progress.
The late, great economist Milton Friedman often reminded us that throughout history there have been oppressive governments that impose totalitarian socialism on the people – causing untold tyranny, servitude, and misery. As Americans, we reject such oppression.
Yet, many of the very same Americans who regard totalitarian socialism as something evil do not seem to see a problem with democratic socialism.
If it is agreed that socialism takes away our freedom, imposes heavy taxes, and creates heaps of inefficient government bureaucracy, why then is socialism any more palatable just because a legislator votes for it through the democratic process than if a dictator imposes it?
Is it really possible to take freedom away in a kinder gentler manner? As government programs become ever more elaborate and expensive just how much will it ultimately cost to buy the compliance of America?
Today, there seems to be societal confusion over just what constitutes a "right." A constituent asked me, “Do you believe healthcare is a right?” “No, I don’t” was my reply and I went on to explain that if a so called “right” takes something from another person to provide that right to you it is not a right.
My right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness costs others nothing and yet I delight in each of those rights everyday. My right to freedom of speech, religion and my property costs others nothing as well. The government doesn’t provide rights to me – they are mine, given to me by God. The government protects my rights for me.
Socialized healthcare is not a right but a government program. All socialism, democratic or totalitarian, is born of a “Plan” by politicians that think they know better how to spend your money and pretend to care more about your children than you do.
How is it accomplished? It is a gradual process to pass laws that destroy the free market and bring us to our knees begging for government intervention.
However, such programs are destined to be laced with coercion, power struggles, turf wars and pressure from special interests that are assured to grant you less power, choice and money. Ask yourself, do you really want to pathetically beg some politician for something that you should decide for yourself?
Our free enterprise system has produced the greatest nation the world has ever known. Experience shows us that government programs don’t perform market activities as well as the free market. it is time to remind ourselves of the distinction between a "right" and a "program"; "protection" and "provision."
Socialism fosters rationing, inferior quality, poor service, stunted innovation and undermines motivation. Some politicians may have some very smooth words that tempt your better judgment and buy your compliance but beware their rhetoric costs more than we can afford.
By State Representative Susan Lynn
R - Mt. Juliet
District 57 - Part of Sumner and Wilson counties
- Nashville Address
- 215 War Memorial Building
- Nashville, TN 37243-0157
- Phone (615) 741-7462
- Fax (615) 253-0353
- Staff Contact: Cyndie Todd
Posted on 01/18/2008 6:54 AM by Bobbie Patray
Thursday, 17 January 2008
Former Republican Congressman Mark Deli Siljander Indicted for Terrorism
Former Republican Congressman Mark Deli Siljander Indicted For Terrorism
WASHINGTON — Former Republican congressman and delegate to the United Nations Mark Deli Siljander was indicted Wednesday as a member of a terrorist fundraising ring. The ring is alleged to have sent more than $130,000 to al-Qaida and Taliban supporter Culbudden Hekmaytar. A terrorist who has threatened both U.S. and international troops in Afghanistan.
The former Michigan congressman, Stands accused of money laundering, conspiracy and obstructing justice for lying to senators about an Islamic charity that authorities claim was in fact secretly funding terrorists.
The entire 42-count indictment, was unsealed in U.S. District Court in Kansas City, Mo., And accuses the Islamic American Relief Agency of paying Siljander $50,000 for his lobbying efforts. Money that it turns out, was stolen from the Agency for International Development.
Siljander served two terms in the House and was later appointed by then President Reagan to serve as a delegate to the United Nations in 1987. Mr. Siljander could not reached for comment and his attorney in Kansas City, JR Hobbs, had no immediate comment for the media.
The charges reflect a long-running investigation into the charity’s activities, originally based in Columbia, Mo., It was designated by the Treasury Department as a fundraising shill for terrorists in 2004. The government claims I.A.R.A employed a man who served as a fundraising aide to no less then Osama bin Laden.
The formal charges allege the I.A.R.A sent approximately $130,000 to Gulbuddin Hekmaytar, a man designated as a global terrorist. Records show cash was deposited to bank accounts in Peshawar, Pakistan between 2003 and 2004, and listed as funds for an orphanage located in buildings that turned out to be owned by Hekmaytar.
***********for remainder, go here *******
Islamic Charity Charged with Terrorist Financing; Former U.S. Congressman Indicted for Money Laundering
Posted on 01/17/2008 6:57 AM by Bobbie Patray
Wednesday, 16 January 2008
Questions Republican Candidates Should Answer
Questions Republican Candidates Should Answer
by Phyllis Schlafly, December 19, 2007
Why are questions about Communist China asked only in the Democratic presidential debates? We want to know what the Republican candidates plan to do about China sending us poisoned foods and toys.
All presidential candidates should be asked what they plan to do about the fact that free trade with China means acquiescing in gross discrimination against U.S. products and jobs. The Chinese avoid a level trading field by artificially undervaluing their currency up to 40 percent, subsidizing their products, and imposing import duties against U.S. products that are ten times higher than tariffs on their products in U.S. stores.
Our free-trade negotiators routinely accept trade agreements that give other countries the right to charge higher tariffs than we charge for similar products. For example, the Chinese Chery car will face a 2.5 percent tariff when sold in the U.S., but U.S. autos entering China will be taxed at 25 percent.
Foreign countries get by with this discrimination by calling it a Value Added Tax (VAT) instead of a tariff, but it amounts to just as high a barrier against free trade. The result is that millions of American jobs have moved overseas.
All presidential candidates ought to be asked what they plan to do about China's organized theft of our intellectual property and counterfeiting of our products. Communist China is the world's top producer of illegal copies of music, movies, software, designer clothes, and medicines.
All candidates should be asked what they plan to do about China putting its billion dollars of profits from U.S. trade into military weaponry to threaten, not only Taiwan, but the United States, especially our communication satellites.
The toy advertised by Wal-Mart as the top toy of the season had to be recalled after it was discovered that children in Texas, Delaware, New Hampshire, Illinois and Utah fell sick and were hospitalized because of swallowing the toy's bead-like parts. After 4.2 million were recalled, China finally admitted that the beads in this toy, called Aqua Dots, contained a substance that can turn into the "date-rape" drug after children swallow them.
That drug, gamma-hydroxy butyrate, causes breathing problems, loss of consciousness, seizures, drowsiness, coma, and death. Aqua Dots were supposed to have been coated with a nontoxic chemical, but that chemical costs three or four times the price of the poisonous compound, so the Chinese manufacturer couldn't resist using the cheaper product.
According to the Consumer Product Safety Commission's website, 26 million toys and other products made in China have been recalled by U.S. companies since August. Even the Boy Scouts of America had to recall a million Chinese-made plastic badges that contained unsafe amounts of lead.
Chinese products for children found to contain unacceptable levels of lead include vinyl baby bibs, Thomas the Tank Engine sets, Baby Einstein Discover & Play Color Blocks, Pirates of the Caribbean medallion squeeze lights, Totally Me! Funky Room Decor Sets, Hannah Montana handbags, and Barbie doll accessories.
Australia recalled hundreds of blankets imported from China in October because they contained formaldehyde up to ten times the level permissible under international standards. The World Heath Organization has classified formaldehyde as a known human carcinogen.
Seafood from China is a potentially more dangerous import. About 80 percent of seafood consumed by Americans is imported, and the Food and Drug Administration inspects and tests only one percent.
Lab tests show that China uses antibiotics to treat fish raised in filthy waters where bacteria, viruses and parasites breed. Lab testers say that when seafood is rejected for an illegal chemical, the Chinese simply switch to another harmful chemical.
Often found in imported fish is a fungicide called malachite green, which is illegal to use in food in the U.S. because studies show it can cause cancer and birth defects.
Alabama has its own tests and rejects 50 to 60 percent of all fish imports. Alabama Commissioner of Agriculture Ron Sparks personally visited Asia to witness seafood farmed in sewage.
Chinese products are so cheap because the workers in Guangdong, where most of the Chinese toys are made, are primarily females age 17 to 25 who work an average of 16 hours a day, 6 or 7 days a week, for about $50 per month. They live in unhealthy, overcrowded dormitories, where a bed is all they have of their own.
With the 2008 Olympic games coming soon, Communist China is stepping up its censorship under the official slogan "constructing a harmonious society." Visitors who click on China's largest Internet site, called Sina.com, are greeted by two cute cartoon police figures, one male and one female, who pop up on their screens every 30 minutes.
These images link to the Communist internet police in order to report any information the government might deem illegal. It's important for Americans to realize that China is still a very Communist and anti-American country.
Posted on 01/16/2008 3:16 PM by Bobbie Patray
Tuesday, 15 January 2008
Adult Stem Cell Success Stories-2007 Update
Thanks to Family Research Council for providing this most encouraging, informative and timely report:
Adult Stem Cell Success Stories-2007 Update
by David Prentice, William L. Saunders, and Michael Fragoso
As the reader will see from our prior publication, "Adult Stem Cell Success Stories - 2006,"  adult stem cell research had an impressive track record as of 2006-over 1100 FDA approved clinical trials in the United States for 72 different illnesses and disabilities. 2007 has seen further advances in adult stem cell research and therapy. Currently, peer-reviewed studies have documented over 1400 FDA approved trials for 73 different conditions in humans where patient health has been improved through adult stem cell therapy.
Adult stem cells are found throughout the human body from birth onward, in placentas, and in umbilical cord blood. Unlike embryonic stem cell research, no embryos are destroyed in retrieving them.
Treatments with adult stem cells continue to be so impressive and continually increasing that we have decided to publish a yearly update each fall/winter. (Note: There have been no successful treatment trials in human beings using embryonic stem cells.)
Unlike embryonic stem cells and the recently discovered (and ethical) "induced pluripotent stem cells" ("iPS cells"), adult stem cells do not create tumors.
Below we summarize some of the developments in adult stem cell research and treatments since our 2006 paper.
Heart Tissue Regeneration
Doug Rice of Otis Orchards, Washington, was diagnosed with congestive heart failure eight years ago. Diabetes prevented him from receiving a heart transplant.
Facing the possibility that he would suffer fatal heart failure, Rice flew to Thailand to receive an experimental adult stem cell therapy through the company TheraVitae. Stem cells were isolated from Rice's blood in a lab in Israel and differentiated into angiogenic cell precursors, and transferred back into Rice's heart.
So far, TheraVitae has treated over 100 patients, 80 of whom have seen improvement, with the remainder holding steady. In Rice's case, the results were immediate, with his heart increasing to 41 percent efficiency from 11 percent before the procedure. According to Rice, "I've been around a lot of people with bad hearts. I know if they looked at [adult stem cell therapy], it might save their lives. I firmly believe it saved mine."
Osiris Therapeutics is another company that has begun using adult stem cells to treat heart patients. Their "easy to administer" adult stem cell treatments have been given to recent heart attack victims, who have seen their hearts pump blood 25 percent more efficiently on average, when tested at both three and six months intervals following the procedure.
The procedure is done intravenously, thus raising the possibility it could be widely and easily used at local hospitals. Marc Penn, director of the Bakken Heart Brain Institute at the Cleveland Clinic, says of the new therapy, "It's very exciting, perhaps a sea-changing trial for the field ... offering the chance of an off-the-shelf-product."
Bodo-Eckehard Strauer is the director of the cardiology department at D|sseldorf University Hospital, and has used bone marrow stem cells to treat over 300 heart patients. In September, 2007, Dr. Strauer used adult stem cells on a patient "on the verge of dying" following a severe heart attack. Following seven weeks in intensive care, he received a transplant of his own bone marrow adult stem cells from Dr. Strauer, and his condition improved. This seems to be the first time that cardiogenic shock has been treated by adult stem cells. Dr. Strauer calls it a "global innovation."
To continue reading go to http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=IS07L01
Posted on 01/15/2008 3:11 PM by Bobbie Patray
Friday, 11 January 2008
Bredesen Bunker goes forward
Bredesen Bunker goes forward
The meeting room was packed well before the eleven o'clock starting time. The entire Capitol Hill Press Corp was in attendance as well as representatives for each of the television networks. By the time the State Planning Commission members arrived people were standing around the wall and gathered around the TV monitor in the hall.
Budget outlook bleak
"While last year the state was flush with cash, having a surplus of over a billion dollars, the early estimates for next year’s budget situation appear to be significantly lower. With a slowing economy and other factors such as the subprime mortgage crisis, the state is estimating a current revenue shortfall of almost $150 million.
In a presentation to the House Finance, Ways and Means Committee, Commissioner of Finance Dave Goetz made clear that in addition to the legislature reining in spending, departmental cuts to the tune of $40 million may need to be made as well."
Well in the face of declining revenue and the admission by the First Lady that the escalating cost of the renovation project had surprised even her, yesterday the State Planning Commission voted 5-1 to approve the underground Conservation Hall, better known as 'the bunker'. In Governor Bredesen's absence, House Speaker Jimmy Naifeh chaired the meeting where the lone 'no' vote was cast by Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey. You can thank him at
615.741.4524 or Email: email@example.com
The State Architect, Mike Fitz, made a presentation (not using a mike which made hearing him very difficult), then commission members made statements and asked questions. Lt. Gov. Ramsey asked some pertinent questions and expressed his concerns about the funding for the project, the moving of the private funds, the potential for increased costs, etc. Fitz and the other members of the Commission endeavored to explain away the concerns expressed by the public and raised by the Oak Hill Planning Commission who unanimously opposed the project.
See articles for more details.
Following the articles is contact information for the commission.
1. Mansion's banquet hall will go forward
2. Bredesen Criticizes Speaker for Mansion Vote
1. Mansion's banquet hall will go forward
Critics seek new ways to halt project
Opponents to an underground expansion at the Executive Mansion said they are not giving up the fight, even though a vote by a key state commission on Thursday rejected their objections.
Blasting could start later this month on the subterranean banquet hall that has become the center of a controversy over its necessity and the growing costs at the Executive Mansion, which was recently renovated.
The city manager of Oak Hill and members of a grassroots group called Tennesseans for Accountability in Government, who have dubbed the facility "Bredesen's Bunker," said they will regroup.
"We are not surprised," said Bill Kraus, city manager of Oak Hill, after the State Building Commission rebuffed the Oak Hill Planning Commission's opposition to the project.
"We will now determine what the next step may be," Kraus said. "At this point, we're not prepared to say."
Legislation or a lawsuit to halt the project has been contemplated by some.
Kraus and representatives of the grass-roots group pinned some hope on the state Fiscal Review Committee, a panel of House and Senate members, which will take up the project's budget on Monday.
But state Finance Commissioner Dave Goetz, a voting member of the State Building Commission, said the Fiscal Review Committee has no authority to overturn Thursday's action.
"We are ecstatic," said Barry Yoakum, an architect with Archimania, the Memphis firm that designed the innovative skylit underground banquet facility called Conservation Hall.
"This will be one of the greenest buildings in the country and will use less energy because it is not above ground," Yoakum said.
The restoration and preservation of the Executive Mansion, a three-story, 16-room home on Curtiswood Lane, has been led by first lady Andrea Conte, who had lead paint stripped away, hazardous electrical wiring replaced and a new roof put on.
Because Gov. Phil Bredesen, a Democrat, and Conte have continued to live in their own Forest Hills home, a window was open for a major renovation and construction project.
Hall would hold 499
Once completed, Conservation Hall will have a maximum capacity of 499 people, state architect Mike Fitts said.
**********for remainder, go here *********
2. Bredesen Criticizes Speaker For Mansion Vote
Bredesens Say Addition Needed To Better Entertain
NASHVILLE, Tenn. -- Gov. Phil Bredesen criticized Republican Senate Speaker Ron Ramsey on Thursday for being the lone holdout in the Tennessee Building Commission's vote to clear the way for construction of an underground hall at the governor's mansion. The hall is part of a $19 million project to renovate the mansion that has drawn objections from neighbors. Of that amount, about $13 million has been provided by the state. About $9 million has been raised from private donations, but only $6.4 million has been allocated. "I was disappointed at Sen. Ramsey's remarks at the meeting today," Bredesen said in an interview with The Associated Press. "I thought they were unnecessary and inaccurate, and I think very partisan." "I thought he was more of a standup guy than that," Bredesen said.
Bredesen, a Democrat, attributed what he called partisan attacks on the project to the political climate of an election year. "In a presidential year, everyone's radar and attention to more classical political differences gets up there," he said. When contacted on his cell phone about Bredesen's comments, Ramsey said, "I'm sorry he feels it's political. I'm just trying to be fiscally responsible. During the commission meeting, Ramsey had said his intentions were not political, but rather an attempt to make sure any additional money needed for the project comes from more donations and not state funds. "I believe everybody agrees that the residency needs to be remodeled," said Ramsey, the only Republican on the six-member commission. "But I was led to believe in the very beginning that all the money going to renovate or remodel the residence was coming from private funds. But as we've gone along, the private money seems to be less and less." State architect Mike Fitts assured Ramsey and the other commission members that no additional state dollars should be needed. "I feel extremely confident that we are within the funds we have been allocated," Fitts said. The governor and first lady Andrea Conte have said the hall is needed so the mansion will have sufficient space for meetings and entertainment. Without the underground space, the governor would have to continue to entertain in temporary tents on the property, which don't protect well against noise or weather, state officials said.
********for the remainder, go to **********
Governor Phil Bredesen, Chairman
First Floor, State Capitol,
Nashville, TN 37243
Speaker Jimmy Naifeh, Vice Chairman
House of Representatives
Suite 19, Legislative Plaza
Nashville, TN 37243
John G. Morgan
Comptroller of the Treasury
First Floor, State Capitol
Nashville, TN 37243
First Floor, State Capitol,
Nashville, TN 37243
Secretary of State
First Floor, State Capitol
Nashville, TN 37243
Dave Goetz, Commissioner
Dept. of Finance & Administration
First Floor, State Capitol,
Nashville, TN 37243
Posted on 01/11/2008 6:53 PM by Bobbie Patray
Thursday, 10 January 2008
Infused LGBTQ curriculum
Infused LGBTQ curriculum
COMMENT: This is not happening only in California. What are your children and grandchildren being taught here in Tennessee?
Stripped bare: 'Gay' school plot unveiled
'Infuse LGBTQ curriculum into history, social science, and literature classes'
Posted: December 11, 2007
9:05 p.m. Eastern
By Bob Unruh
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
On the heels of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's signature on S.B. 777, which opponents describe as a homosexual indoctrination plan for education districts, a pro-homosexual lobbying organization in California has launched its campaign to infuse a "gay" influence into public school curricula.
The Gay Straight Alliance recently forwarded an e-mail to its California chapters with information on how to make sure homosexuality is taught in the state's schools and warned that having students and parents simply "tolerate" homosexuality is not enough.
"In many schools, learning about LGBTQ issues takes the form of very necessary tolerance education where students are educated about the importance of not discriminating against each other," according to GSA documents. "Tolerance education is an important first step, but we need to push further.
Infuse LGBTQ curriculum into history, social science, and literature classes," is the organization's plan.
Karen England, a spokeswoman for Capital Resource Institute who publicized the GSA campaign and is a primary organizer behind the Save Our Kids plan to put the issue before voters and ask them to reject it, said this is exactly what she expected of those who wish to promote the homosexual lifestyle.
"The homosexual lobby is active and ambitious. They already have GSA units in many California schools that will oversee the implementation of SB 777," England said. "As evidenced in the GSA e-mail, their agenda is inclusion in school instruction and activities, regardless of their public assertions of 'streamlining' anti-discrimination policies in the law."
She said the GSA "guide" to be used tells students "that insisting on LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer) history in school instruction 'helps to create schools where students feel safer and more supported.'"
"Utilizing the slogan 'Let's Set the Record Straight: History Isn't', students are given several action steps to take in accomplishing their 'curriculum campaign' goal. These include monitoring classroom instruction to see if LGBTQ individuals are discussed or 'made invisible'; taking over class to present LGBTQ history lessons and contacting textbook companies to change curriculum," England noted.
She said no child should be subjected to discrimination, "but incorporating discussions of an instruction about controversial lifestyles in the classroom does not accomplish this goal. Instead, it undermines parental authority over children's moral upbringing."
The documentation promotes a classroom discussion of Sylvia Rivera, a "Latina transwoman," and suggests, "It's time to take action!"
"Are your teachers teaching about the historical achievements of LGBTQ individuals? Are these issues included in your textbooks?..." the organization wrote. "Take over class! … Lead a discussion about LGBTQ history or present a lesson of your own."
England said with the pending implementation of S.B. 777, soon such messages will come not from independent advocacy groups such as GSA, but from the state's superintendent of Public Instruction, Jack O'Connell.
"That will be the mandate if our referendum isn't successful," she told WND. "It won't be just some San Francisco school. It will be the San Francisco curriculum and values forced on school districts in California."
She called the agenda "highly offensive" to most Californians, in fact, "most Americans."
"Religious background or not, you don't want these controversial issues discussed in a classroom," she said.
She said the Save Our Kids campaign is on track, with more than enough petitions in circulation to collect the signatures needed to present the plan to voters.
But she said petition signature collectors now need to be getting the pages of signatures back to the campaign office to be processed and submitted to the state.
She described the citizen response so far as incredible.
"We have people who are saying, 'Not with my kids, not with my grandkids,'" she said. "Citizens who have never done anything [politically] are setting up tables outside of grocery stores."
**********for remainder, go here ************
Posted on 01/10/2008 6:44 PM by Bobbie Patray
Tuesday, 8 January 2008
Pledge Common Cause with Islam
Pledge Common Cause with Islam
COMMENT: Those coming illegally across our southern borders are not the only threat this nation is facing. We had better take the time educate ourselves and understand other things that can have a long-term effect on our country. Let me recommend What Every American Needs to Know About the Qur'an, by William Federer [http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0977808556]
To be forewarned is to be forearmed.
1. Evangelical Leaders Pledge Common Cause with Islam
2. Epistle to the Muslims
3. Islam vs. Free Speech
4. Segregation Muslim Style
1. Evangelical Leaders Pledge Common Cause with Islam
by Stephen Adams, associate editor
They apologize for the 'sins of Christians,' leave the deity of Christ open for discussion.
An attempt by leaders of the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) to win friends and influence Muslims is alienating another group — evangelical Christians.
Reactions have been negative and strong. Islam expert Dr. Patrick Sookhdeo has called it a “betrayal” and a “sellout.” Dr. Albert Mohler, president of Southern Seminary (Southern Baptist), termed it “naiveté that borders on dishonesty.”
Others are just beginning to hear of it. In November, NAE President Leith Anderson and NAE Vice President Richard Cizik signed onto a Christian response to an invitation to dialogue from 138 Muslim leaders around the world.
Their response — initiated by Yale Divinity School and endorsed by other liberal Christian leaders — apologized for the sins of Christians during the Crusades and for “excesses” of the global war on terror, without mentioning Muslim atrocities. It appeared to leave the fundamentals of Christianity — especially the deity of Christ — open for discussion.
It even seemed to acknowledge Allah as the God of the Bible. “Before we ‘shake your hand’ in responding to your letter,” it stated, “we ask forgiveness of the All-Merciful One and of the Muslim community around the world.”
The very name of the Muslim communiqué — A Common Word between Us and You — is from a verse in the Quran that condemns “people of the Scripture” (Christians) for alleged polytheism (the doctrine of the Trinity).
Mohler said the agreement “sends the wrong signal” and contains basic theological problems, especially in “marginalizing” Jesus Christ. He also condemned the apology for the Crusades.
“I just have to wonder how intellectually honest this is,” he said. “Are these people suggesting that they wish the military conflict with Islam had ended differently — that Islam had conquered Europe?”
Neither Anderson nor Cizik could be reached for comment. On the NAE Web site, Anderson asserts he signed the letter as a private individual, although he is identified as NAE president. He also seems to acknowledge problems with the statement.
“Sometimes we all sign onto things that are not all that we would like them to be,” Anderson wrote. “Even after we write and say our own words, we discover that we wish we had done better.”
Gary Bauer, president of the Campaign for Working Families, told CitizenLink the NAE leaders “have left the (card) table without their pants — that is, they’ve been taken and may not even realize they’ve been taken.”
Bauer said he already was dismayed by the NAE’s recent controversial excursions into questionable areas such as global warming.
***********for remainder, go here
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Read the Yale document and the list of signers. You also can read the original Muslim statement.
Bruce S. Thornton
2. Epistle to the Muslims
Christian leaders abase themselves before Islam.
27 November 2007
On November 18, the New York Times ran a full-page ad entitled “A Christian Response to A Common Word Between Us and You.” A Common Word is an October letter from 138 Muslim scholars and clerics “to leaders of Christian churches, everywhere.” It reads like an invitation to ecumenical tolerance and “peace and understanding” based on “the very foundational principles of both faiths”: “The Unity of God, the necessity of love for Him, and the necessity of love of the neighbour is thus the common ground between Islam and Christianity.” Over 300 Christian theologians and church leaders signed the “Christian Response,” including the heads of some of the nation’s most prestigious seminaries and theological schools. But if it accurately represents the thinking of mainstream Christian leadership, then Christianity in America is in deep trouble.
The response opens on a familiar self-loathing note, in the therapeutic style that has convinced jihadists that Christianity in the West is an empty shell, a mere lifestyle choice. Noting that Muslim and Christian “relations have sometimes been tense, even characterized by outright hostility,” the letter professes “that in the past (e.g. in the Crusades) and in the present (e.g. in excesses of the ‘war on terror’) many Christians have been guilty of sinning against our Muslim neighbors,” and so “we ask forgiveness of the All-Merciful One and of the Muslim community around the world.”
The groveling self-abasement of this language, particularly its begging forgiveness of Allah, is matched only by its remarkable historical ignorance. “Outright hostility” has indeed existed between Muslims and Christians, for the simple reason that for 13 centuries Islam grew and spread by war, plunder, rapine, and enslavement throughout the Christian Middle East. Allah’s armies destroyed regions that were culturally Christian for centuries, variously slaughtering, enslaving, and converting their inhabitants, or allowing them to live as oppressed dhimmi, their lives and property dependent on a temporary “truce” that Muslim overlords could abrogate at any time.
And let’s not forget the seven-century-long Islamic occupation of Spain, the centuries of raids into southern Italy and southern France, the near-sack of Rome in 846, the occupation of Sicily and Greece, the four-century-long occupation of the Balkans, the destruction of Constantinople, the two sieges of Vienna, the kidnapping of Christian youths to serve as janissaries from the fourteenth to the nineteenth centuries, the continual raiding of the northern Mediterranean littoral for slaves from 1500 to 1800, and the current jihadist terrorist attacks against the West.
**************for remainder, go here *********
3. Islam vs. Free Speech
Under assault by Muslims and multiculturalists, free speech and freedom of the press are dead in Britain. The same sorts of people who killed them in Britain are killing them in Canada. They and their allies are using the British and Canadian courts and tribunals to bury our First Amendment rights in America.
Muslims -- individually and in pressure groups -- are using British libel laws and Canadian “human rights” laws to limit what is said about Islam, terrorists and the people in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere who are funding groups such as al-Queda. The cases of Rachel Ehrenfeld and Mark Steyn prove the point.
Dr. Ehrenfeld is a scholar and author of the book, “Funding Evil: How Terrorism is Financed, and How to Stop it.” In that book, Khalid Salim bin Mahfouz -- a Saudi who is former head of the Saudi National Commercial Bank -- and some of his family are described as having funded terrorism directly and indirectly.
Ehrenfeld is American, her book was written and published in America and she has no business or other ties to Britain. Under American law, the Brit courts would have no jurisdiction over her. But about two-dozen copies of her book were sold there through the internet. Bin Mahfouz sued her for libel in the Brit courts where the burden of proof is the opposite of what it is in US courts: the author has to prove that what is written is true, rather than the supposedly defamed person proving it is false.
Think about that for a moment. Under the US Constitution political writing -- free speech -- is almost unlimited. To gain a libel judgment a politician -- or someone suspected of terrorist ties -- would have to prove that the story or book was false. If that person were a public figure such as Mahfouz, in order to get a libel judgment he’d not only have to prove that what was written was false, he’d also have to prove it was published maliciously.
Those American laws and standards of proof protect political speech. The First Amendment is intended to protect political speech that people find objectionable. In the landmark 1969 case of Brandenburg v. Ohio, the Supreme Court overturned an Ohio statute which would have outlawed hate speech by the Ku Klux Klan. That’s why Mahfouz sued in Britain, not here.
Ehrenfeld refused to fight the case, saying the Brit courts have no jurisdiction over her. Mahfouz got a default judgment against her for ?10,000 (for himself, and in equal amounts for his sons). The judgment also requires that there be no further “defamatory” statements published in England and Wales.
In a letter published in the Spectator on November 21, bin Mahfouz’s lawyers gloated over their victory against Ehrenfeld: “Rather than check her facts, defend her statements in open court, or acknowledge her mistakes, Ehrenfeld hides behind a claim to free speech. Thank goodness, the legal lights remain on in Britain to expose such harmful journalism.”
“Harmful journalism” is what tyrants and despots call free speech, especially political speech that condemns their affronts to freedom. The “legal lights” Mahfouz’s lawyers see is the bonfire they made of the Magna Carta. Thanks to Mahfouz and his ilk, the light of free speech is extinguished in Britain. Consider the fate of the book, “Alms for Jihad.”
********for remainder, go here ********
4. Segregation: Muslim Style
BELFAST, Northern Ireland —Where there are large concentrations of Muslims in England, “no-go” zones are being established and, according to the Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali, the Church of England’s Bishop of Rochester, non-Muslims who “trespass” in such neighborhoods risk attack.
Nazir-Ali, a native of Pakistan and convert to Christianity, writes in The Sunday Telegraph that a spiritual vacuum in Britain, along with its indifference to the rise of Islamic extremism and a growing “multi-faith” society, is robbing the nation of its Christian identity and putting its future in jeopardy. He is not alone. A poll of the General Synod — the Church’s parliament — shows that its senior leaders also believe that Britain is being damaged by uncontrolled immigration.
Bishop Nazir-Ali warns of attempts to give Britain an increasingly Islamic character by introducing the call to prayer and wider use of Sharia law, a legal system based on the Koran. He is critical of the government’s response to immigration and the influx of “people of other faiths to these shores,” blaming the government’s “novel philosophy of multiculturalism” for allowing society to become deeply divided and accusing ministers of lacking a “moral and spiritual vision.” He says that multiculturalism has led to deep divisions in British society.
Trevor Phillips, the chairman of the Commission for Equalities and Human Rights, believes the country is “sleepwalking into segregation.” David Davis, the shadow home secretary, goes further, accusing Muslims of promoting “voluntary apartheid” by shutting themselves off from surrounding culture and demanding immunity from criticism.
Anyone who has studied Islamic societies (as Bishop Nazir-Ali has, having been part of one) knows segregation and subjugation of non-Muslims is the norm, not the behavior of an “extremist fringe.” Former Muslims and others have issued dire warnings about the intentions of these immigrant invaders and their objectives to subordinate Western countries to their view of God’s will. Segregation and intolerance are the first fruits of what they intend to impose on everyone. Political leadership in Britain and increasingly in the United States turns a blind eye to such things because they are prospecting for votes, including from those who would end democracy.
No wonder Britons are growing increasingly uneasy, even despondent, about life in their country. A poll conducted by the respected YouGov organization and published in the Dec. 30 London Times found that more than half of all men and four in 10 women said they would rather live abroad if given the choice. The main reasons are antisocial behavior among a growing underclass and immigration. The “state of the nation” poll of more than 1,500 people found that concerns about immigration topped the list of issues of six out of 10 of those questioned. Among self-identified Conservative voters, three-quarters consider immigration among their top concerns.
**********for remainder, go here
Posted on 01/08/2008 6:37 PM by Bobbie Patray
Monday, 7 January 2008
I Don't Feel 'Called' Either
COMMENT: As the legislative session begins and we face the desperate need for citizen involvement there as well as in our local communities, let this article be a challenge to each of us to be FAITHFUL.
I Don't Feel 'Called,' Either
by Sonja Dalton
See if you notice a pattern here:
- When a courageous Christian school board member questioned the profane, sexually explicit, and violent content of books on her district’s required reading lists, a handful of her supporters contacted about sixty churches in the district asking for their support — but not one pastor or minister “felt called” to show up at the school board meeting and publicly oppose such morally corrupt material.
- When a Christian mother noticed that her son’s reading list included a blatantly anti-Christian and factually false assignment, she spoke with other Christian parents, but they just “didn’t feel called” to speak to the teacher or principal. Likewise, her church’s coordinator for high school Bible study “didn’t feel called” to alert other parents in the congregation or to counter the propaganda in group discussions with students.
- When I speak with mature fellow Christians about evangelizing in homosexual neighborhoods, somehow they, too, “don’t feel called” to that particular ministry.
After hearing this pious response over and over, I began to wonder if I’d missed something, so I consulted my favorite online concordance in a quest for Bible authority, hoping to learn that I, too, could wait to “feel called” to cook a dish for the next potluck. You can imagine my disappointment when I discovered...um...nothing.
You see, the Bible doesn’t say a thing about “feeling” called. It says that Christians are called, period.
- We are called to be saints, set apart, to belong to Jesus Christ. (Romans 1:6, I Corinthians 1:2)
- We are called to be sanctified by the Spirit and by belief in Truth, to be conformed to the image of Jesus, to serve His purposes. (Romans 8:26-30, II Thessalonians 2:13-15)
- We are called to live in manner worthy of the calling — to walk in holiness. (Galatians 5:24, Ephesians 4:1, I Thessalonians 4:7, II Timothy 1:9)
- We are called into fellowship with and service to other believers. (I Corinthians 1:2,9, Galatians 5:13-14)
- We are called to preach the gospel, to proclaim His excellencies. (Acts 16:10, I Peter 2:9)
- We are called to suffer for doing good. (I Peter 2:21)
- We are called to stand firm. (II Thessalonians 2:15)
- We are called to eternal life. (I Timothy 6:12, I Peter 5:10)
Sometimes I don’t “feel” like abstaining from temptation or selflessly serving others — and I never “feel” like suffering, especially not unjustly. But nonetheless I am called — and so are you.
Let me remind you: Moses didn’t “feel” sufficiently articulate to speak before Pharaoh, but God called him to do it. Jonah didn’t “feel” like preaching to those ungodly residents of Ninevah, but he was called just the same. Jeremiah, merely a youth, didn’t “feel” qualified, but God called him anyway. I bet that Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah didn’t “feel” any special passion to be tied up and thrown into the fiery furnace, but God called them to stand firm.
I submit to you that you are called by God to follow in their steps and to engage in the culture war of the 21st Century, whether you “feel” like it or not. Let me explain why...
#1 — You are called as a parent to raise your own children “in the discipline and instruction of the LORD” (Ephesians 6:25).
And these words that I command you today shall be on your heart. You shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise. You shall bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes. You shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates. — Deuteronomy 6:6-9
Despite this Divine charge, most Christian parents in the US still send their children to public schools, where they are indoctrinated in secular humanism for at least six hours each day. Science curricula insist there is no Creator. Reading assignments expose kids to profane language, sexual immorality, and gratuitous violence. English and social studies teachers promote “tolerance” and “diversity” and “social justice”; they normalize (even celebrate) homosexuality, bisexuality, and trans-sexuality. After twelve years in public school, most children of Christian parents are not Christians themselves, and many of those who profess faith in Jesus Christ remain morally confused.
Are you called to know what’s on your child’s reading list? In his sex ed curricula? What films his teachers show in class? Yes, you are — and where your public school contradicts Biblical teaching, you are called to oppose them, whether you “feel like it” or not.
#2 — You are called to exercise your privileges and responsibilities as a citizen.
The Apostle Paul serves as a great model of citizenship for us. When he was unjustly beaten and jailed, he refused to be released without an apology from the rulers (Acts 16). When Paul was assaulted and arrested in the temple (Acts 22), he asked the tribune for permission to speak publicly to the people. and boldly shared his testimony. He was bound and taken to the soldiers’ barracks for examination by flogging, but he again invoked his rights as a citizen: “Is it lawful for you to flog a man who is a Roman citizen and uncondemned?" Paul testified before the chief priests and council, Felix (the governor), Festus (the governor elect), King Agrippa, the Jewish leaders and crowds in Rome, and, after more than four years of incarceration, to Caesar. In the words of King Agrippa, "This man could have been set free if he had not appealed to Caesar." Paul used his Roman citizenship strategically, not to secure his own comfort, but to defend Christ before the Roman rulers.
Friends, we must draw a direct correlation to our own citizenship. We are instructed to pray for and submit to our rulers, to pay our taxes, but their authority ends where their decrees contradict Christ:
- When the military orders chaplains not to pray in the name of Jesus Christ, is a Christian chaplain called to refuse? Yes, he is.
- When judges order justices of the peace to issue marriage licenses to homosexual pairs, is a Christian justice called to disobey? Yes, he is.
- When legislators order teachers to present evolution as truth and perversion as normative, are Christian teachers called to stand firm, even at the expense of their jobs? Yes, they are.
Are you prepared to courageously appeal to Caesar, to stand before powerful men, not in a fine wool suit, but in chains, like Paul?
Pastors, are you equipping your flock to stand? If a pharmacist in your congregation loses his job because refuses to dispense abortifacients, or if a social worker gets fired because she can’t approve a homosexual adoption, will your congregation offer spiritual and financial support? (Or will most say “Why didn’t you just keep quiet?”)
#3 — You are called to hate and to be hated.
O you who love the LORD, hate evil! — Psalm 97:10
You probably won’t hear it from the pulpit at Willow Creek or Saddleback, but you can read it in your trusty Bible: “The fear of the LORD is hatred of evil” (Proverbs 8:13). The Bible teaches that righteous men abhor evil (Romans 12), a vile person (Psalm 15), evildoers (Psalm 26), wickedness (Psalm 45), deceit (Psalm 5), idol worshippers (Psalm 31), those who fall away (Psalm 101), and every false way (Psalm 119).
“Do I not hate those who hate you, O LORD? And do I not loathe those who rise up against you?
I hate them with complete hatred; I count them my enemies.” — Psalm 139:21-22
Hostility to evil is still mandated under the covenant of grace: Paul reprimanded the church in Corinth for tolerating sexual immorality (I Corinthians 5). Conversely, Jesus Himself commended the church at Ephesus for hating the works of the Nicolaitans, which Christ also hated (Revelation 2:1-7).
How would you react to the Planned Parenthood abortion center in your neighborhood or the homosexual bathhouse in your city if you actually hated what goes on there? Do you have a deep spiritual aversion to the unrepentant abortionist or the proud homosexual activist? If not, why not? Because according to scripture, you are called to hate.
And you are called to be hated, too. Jesus told his disciples “you will be hated by all nations for my name’s sake” (Matthew 24:9). However, in order to be hated for Christ’s name’s sake, you must give offense in His name. Jim Elliot wrote in his diary: “The world cannot hate us, we are too much like its own. Oh that God would make us dangerous!”
Will his prayer be answered in your counter-culture life? Or are you “too much like its own”? Which master do you serve (Matthew 6:24)?
#4 — You are called to love your neighbors, and even your enemies.
Christian leaders remind us often to love our neighbors, teaching kindness and compassion. But Biblical “agape” love is far more — it is a willful decision to seek God’s best for the other person. It is sacrificial love, grounded in justice as well as mercy, a love that cannot rejoice at wrongdoing (I Corinthians 13:6) — a tough, heart-broken love willing to deliver an unrepentant brother to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, but his conscience might be provoked to sorrow and his spirit saved.
Jesus commanded to love not only our neighbor, but to “love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you...” (Matthew 5:44). Is it possible to hate evil, yet simultaneously love evil men? Yes, because the hatred to which Christians are called is not a destructive, vicious, violent emotion, but rather it is a spiritual aversion to wickedness, a righteous indignation. We are to arm ourselves and fight secular humanism and abortion mills and homosexual activism — not with guns or pipe bombs, but with the sword of the Spirit, the Word of God, and with prayer. “For though we walk in the flesh, we are not waging war according to the flesh. For the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh but have divine power to destroy strongholds. We destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ...” (II Corinthians 10:3-5).
************for remainder, go here *********
Posted on 01/07/2008 3:05 PM by Bobbie Patray