Category ArchiveCommon Defense
Common Defense Richard Falknor on 22 Dec 2016
Syrian Muslims to WV–Does Republican Senator Shelley Moore Capito Want To Be Seen As The “Frau Merkel” of West Virginia?
Today national refugee resettlement expert Ann Corcoran highlights in a post the fact that the Obama State Department approves 100 Syrian Muslims for West Virginia state capitol—
“Where were you WV Republican Senator Shelley Moore Capito and Republican Rep. Alex Mooney? Only two choices!—either asleep-at-the-switch or in support of this move by a local ‘interfaith’ group to be named a federal subcontracting agency for the purpose of beginning a new refugee resettlement site in the state. (Charleston previously received a few refugees through Catholic Charities, but no where near this scale).
If Capito and Mooney had put up significant opposition, we would have heard about it and this decision might have turned out differently. [Highlighting Forum’s throughout.]
Does Obama think he can stick it to West Virginia (Trump territory) voters in his final weeks in office? And, where is Joe [Manchin]? He must be all for it too!”
Both senators Capito and Manchin are either now, or in the case of centrist Manchin will be in the coming Congress, members of the powerful Appropriations Committee: they are hardly without influence in Washington, D.C.’s Deep State!
Frau Merkel and Berlin!
But Dutch patriot Geert Wilders this week declared about the Berlin terror attack of Monday evening–
“Let no-one tell you that only the perpetrators of these crimes are to blame. The politicians, who welcomed Islam into their country, are guilty as well. And it is not just Frau Merkel in Germany, it is the entire political elite in Western Europe. Out of political-correctness, they have deliberately turned a blind eye to Islam. They have refused to inform themselves about its true nature.”
Time for West Virginia Trumpers of both parties to have a heart-to-heart with their senators and Alex Mooney!
Common Defense Richard Falknor on 18 Nov 2016
Will West Virginia Voices In Congress Speak Out On Importing More Syrians? Part Of A National “Seeding” Program In Our Cities and Towns!
Yesterday national blogger Ann Corcoran in her Report: Charleston, WV pro-Syrian Muslim resettlement rally held reported–
“As I told you a few days ago a Charleston ‘Interfaith’ group was planning a rally to push for the resettlement of Syrian refugees to the state capitol. And, as I mentioned then, I am struck by the fact that the rally for refugees was so specific about Syrians when we bring refugees from all over the world (and resettlement contracting agencies don’t get to pick only those ethnic groups they prefer).
Why are they so concerned about Syrians? Why is the Charleston, West Virginia group so discriminatory against other ethnic groups?
And here are my bigger questions: Where is Alex? Where is Shelley? Where is Joe?
Considering that the controversy about the resettlement of Syrian refugees in American towns is one of the major issues that pushed Donald Trump over the finish line last week, shouldn’t we expect elected officials like Rep. Alex Mooney (R) in whose district this rally occurred and US Senators Shelley Moore Capito (R) and Joe Manchin (D) to have the guts to say where they stand on the issue!”(Highlighting Forum’s throughout.)
Asked author (Refugee Resettlement and the Hijra to America) Corcoran–
“Are they for or against this plan from Washington?
One story about the rally is here. There was a counter-rally, so no one can say any longer that there is no opposition to the plan to expand the resettlement of Syrian Muslims (99% of all Syrians entering the U.S. are Muslims) into West Virginia.”
Let’s take a look at the Liberty Scores (compiled by Conservative Review) of Representative Mooney and Senators Capito and Manchin: click here.
And their Immigration-Reduction Grades (compiled by NumbersUSA): click here.
Among the (thankfully outgoing) Obama Administration’s goals has been to transform America by changing its people.
The Refugee Admissions Program has been an important instrument to advance this.
And it is also supported by some major corporations seeking cheaper labor.
As the most conservative member of the West Virginia delegation as well as Charleston’s voice in the U.S. House, Representative Alex Mooney should be in the forefront of opposing the importation of Syrian Muslims into the Mountain State.
Common Defense Richard Falknor on 12 Nov 2016
Virginia Republicans Must Come To Grips With Sharia: Slogans From A State Chair & A Single Politician Won’t Do!
News4 Washington (NBC) reported yesterday evening in their Virginia Republicans Visit Mosque to Address Concerns:
“As Muslims worry about how the election of Donald Trump will affect them, Republican leaders visited a mosque on Friday in Sterling, Virginia.
The All Dulles Area Muslim Society, aka The Adams Center, invited Virginia state Republicans to join their afternoon prayer services.
‘We wanted to really address the anxiety that we know the Muslim community in our area has,’ newly reelected Rep. Barbara Comstock said.
John Whitbeck, chairman of the Republican Party of Virginia, said he wanted to share a message of freedom
‘One of the things they need to hear from me is that the Virginia Republican party values religious liberty and we stand with them, and they’re part of this community too,’ he said.
Many attendees of the mosque, which is one of the largest in the D.C. region, said they worry that Trump will ban Muslims from entering the country.
During the campaign, Trump said that if elected he would enact a ‘total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what the hell is going on.’
After facing backlash, he repackaged the proposal to describe a suspension of immigration ‘from terror-prone regions where vetting cannot safely occur.’
Comstock and Whitbeck said they believed that Trump had changed his position on a Muslim ban.
‘I think he himself has changed that,’ Comstock said. “What I am saying and what I have said is that that is not constitutional and it’s really un-American.’
Whitbeck also rejected any ban on Muslims entering the country.
“The Virginia Republican Party is the party of religious liberty. We don’t support banning Muslims in the United States of America,’ he said.” (Highlighting Forum’s throughout)
. . . . . . . . . .
“Northern Virginia resident Jafar Imam said he was particularly concerned about whether Trump would keep out Syrians, ‘those who are suffering enormously.’
‘He will not allow a single Syrian refugee coming to United States,’ Imam said.”
What Are Whitbeck & Comstock Thinking?
These Republican sachems don’t seem to realize what they are playing at.
As we explained three weeks ago in our Islam, The Adams Center, & Representative Barbara Comstock: Why Is She Trafficking With This Organization? —
‘Mohamed Magid is the Imam of the All Dulles Area Muslim Society (ADAMS).
DiscoverTheNetworks has an extensive biography of Magid.
Jihad Watch’s Robert Spencer declared in his 2015 article, Obama quietly reveals that he met with Muslim leaders with ties to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood–
“The guest list identified Imam Magid as a representative of the Adams Center, a large mosque in Sterling, Virginia. He has also served as president of the Islamic Society of North America, according to the group’s website.” [Mohamed Magid is now past president of ISNA but is on the ISNA Executive Council]
. . . . . . . . . .
”the Islamic Society of North America was named an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terror funding case, and has admitted ties to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood.”
With the defeat of Hillary Clinton, our country has escaped a major disaster.
Breitbart’s Julia Hahn explained earlier this month in her “Under Hillary Clinton Presidency, U.S. Muslim Population Would Exceed France’s by 2024”
“Many have warned if the U.S. continues at its current record pace of Muslim migration—or if pro-Islamic migration politicians, such as Ryan and Clinton, further increase Muslim migration—the U.S. risks following in Europe’s footsteps.
As Sen. Jeff Sessions has previously explained, ‘It’s an unpleasant, but unavoidable fact that bringing in large unassimilated flows of migrants from the Muslim world creates the conditions possible for radicalisation and extremism to take hold, just like they’re seeing in Europe.'”
Mark Steyn expands to Bill O’Reilly from Steyn’s recent first-hand knowledge–
“O’REILLY: Political commentator Mark Steyn recently returned from Europe where he attended the priest funeral and spoke with a number of people affected by the Jihad. Mr. Steyn joins us now from Colchester, VT. What did you learn there? What was the headline that you learned in Europe, Mr. Steyn?
STEYN: Well, you said at the top of the show that migrants aren’t the problem, jihadists are. And that’s true but there is a crude arithmetic here, Bill which is that the more Muslims you have, the more terrorism you have. So, that France, Belgium and Germany have very high Muslim populations, and they have a lot of terrorism. When you were in Poland and the Czech Republic, they have very few Muslims so they don’t have terrorism. And the question for Europe, and I think for the United States a few years down the line is whether you can contain this, just by the big security state. I was on the beach.
O’REILLY: Go ahead.
STEYN: Well, no, you can’t. I mean, there were soldiers everywhere in France now. Outside of schools, shopping centers, railway stations. I was on the beach at Saint-Tropez where the topless women have armed soldiers with automatic weapons patrolling between the topless women. It’s a sad sight and it’s an absurd sight. Ultimately it’s no solution.”
To add to these realities, Constitutional expert and former Federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy insists Of Course There Should Be an Ideological Test in Immigration:
“In the decades-long onslaught of radical Islam against the United States, honesty went out with the benighted notions that we should ‘know thine enemy’ and, God forbid, train our national-security agents in that enemy’s ideology, methods, and objectives.
In our alternative universe, you are not supposed to remember that there is an American constitutional framework of liberty, popular sovereignty, and equality before the law.
You are not supposed to realize that aliens are expected to exhibit fidelity to this constitutional framework as a precondition to joining our society.
You are not supposed to know that there is an Islamic law, sharia, that has far more to do with governance, economics, warfare, civil rights, domestic relations, criminal prosecution, and fashion than it does with spiritual life.
And you are absolutely not supposed to grasp that sharia is antithetical to the Constitution, to the very foundational American principle that the people may make law for themselves, live as they see fit, and chart their own destiny.
You are not supposed to connect the dots and ask, ‘Well, how is it conceivable that any sharia-adherent alien could faithfully pledge allegiance to our Constitution?’
So, instead, we shrug our shoulders, mumble something about ‘freedom of religion,’ and bury our heads back in the sand — as if the structure of government and the decision of which limb to smite for which larceny had anything to do with religion in a free society that rejects the establishment of any state religion and separates spiritual from political life.
Sharia is not religion. Sharia is a totalitarian societal structure and legal corpus that anti-American radicals seek to impose. Yes, their motivation for doing so is their interpretation of their religion — the fundamentalist, literalist construction of Islam. But that does not make sharia itself a matter of ‘religion’ in the Western sense, even if vast numbers of Arab Muslims — for whom there is no cognizable separation of mosque and state — say otherwise. If Karl Marx had said, ‘The workers must control the means of production because God says so,’ that would not have transmogrified the tyranny of Communism into the ‘freedom of religion.'”
McCarthy, author of The Grand Jihad, continues–
“There are no constitutional constraints against excluding aliens on grounds of anti-American political ideology. Excluding anti-Americans from America is common sense and was regarded as such for much of our history. In a time of radical Islamic threat to our national security, Donald Trump is right to propose that aliens from sharia-supremacist areas be carefully vetted for adherence to anti-constitutional principles.
Leftists — those notorious disciples of the Framers — claim this is unconstitutional. When shown it is not, they claim that it is against our ‘tradition’ — being, you know, big fans of American tradition. When shown that this is not the case either, when shown that our history supports ideological exclusion of anti-Americans, leftists are down to claiming, ‘It is not who we are’ — by which they always mean it is not who they are, and who they would force the rest of us to be.”
In Virginia as elsewhere, bringing in sharia-supremacists to our country is too large a threat to our national security and national values to be left to willfully-blind deals between individual politicians and local mosques.
The Republican Party of Virginia needs to spell out its position on importing people whose values are antithetical to our Constitution and who are unlikely to assimilate into American society.
Common Defense Richard Falknor on 16 Jul 2016
A good start to grasping this danger is Mark Tapson’s short interview here with Heather Mac Donald about her new book The War on Cops: How the New Attack on Law and Order Makes Everyone Less Safe !
Some excerpts from the interview—
“MT: What were your thoughts upon hearing of last week’s Dallas shooting in progress, when police were dying and being wounded even as they tried to protect the demonstrators who had gathered there to protest their supposed racial bias?
HM: I was overcome by acute fear for this country. The elite establishment has been playing with fire in stoking the Black Lives Matter hatred of the police, and that fire may now be raging out of control.”
* * * * *
“MT: This is a little off-topic from your book, but you’ve written about anti-terrorism before – in light of the proliferating Islamic attacks on American soil, are our counterterrorism efforts being hindered in much the same way as our law enforcement is with crime?
HM: Our unwillingness to speak the truth about Islamic terrorism is if anything more perverse than our unwillingness to recognize the reality of black crime. The elites mostly just ignore black crime. In the case of Islamic terrorism, however, they affirmatively rebrand it as, for example, an eruption of Republican homophobia or opposition to transgender bathroom use, as we saw in the recent Orlando attacks.” (Highlighting Forum’s throughout.)
Few GOP politicians are likely to read Mac Donald’s War on Cops on their own — so patriots should get their own copy and start schooling their elected officials about this grave peril! Their local central committees might be a good place to begin this discussion.
(Slightly revised after press time.)
Common Defense Richard Falknor on 15 Jun 2016
UPDATE JUNE 17! Washington Post’s “What Trump delegates in Md. think of Hogan’s decision not to back the presumptive nominee”that “Regardless of Hogan’s effect on the presidential race, multiple delegates said it could cost him votes in a 2018 reelection bid.”
* * * * * * * * *
Ovetta Wiggins of the Washington Post reported this afternoon–
“Gov. Larry Hogan (R) said emphatically Wednesday that he does not plan to vote for Donald Trump, his party’s presumptive — and divisive — presidential nominee.”(Highlighting Forum’s.)
But in the April 26, 2016 Maryland GOP closed primary, 54% of participating voters cast their ballots for Donald Trump.
“In last Tuesday’s Maryland GOP presidential primary, 444,204** Republicans voted compared with 248,468 in the Maryland 2012 presidential primary: an increase of 195,736!
Also in last week’s Maryland GOP primary, Donald Trump prevailed among Republicans in every Maryland congressional district and county.
This increase in voters likely came from cross-over Democrats and independents; from Republicans disillusioned with their party’s leadership who had been staying home at election time; and even from long-time citizens who had not previously voted.
Trump was clearly the energizer here as he was in Delaware, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Connecticut.
(Readers may click here for Maryland State Board of Elections numbers and information. See also The Green Papers here.)
So what are some of the key concerns driving Trump voters everywhere?
Putting American interests at home and abroad first:
specifically getting control of the levels of legal as well as illegal immigration (including a pause in the admission of Muslims);
negotiating trade deals that benefit our workers and preserve our sovereignty;
rebuilding our defenses while avoiding reckless overseas conflicts.
**Numbers as of May 1, 2016.”
But as Ann Coulter tweeted right after the speech–
“Anyone who plans to talk about Trump ever again has to see this speech. Your opinion is irrelevant unless you listened to him today.”
We now have the answer to the question posed in our May 1 post: The head of the Maryland GOP, governor Hogan, clearly does not welcome the Old Line State’s Trump voters.
Of course, these Trump voters might end up “orphaning” Hogan.
Common Defense Richard Falknor on 29 Dec 2015
“Turning the Tides” — January 8 & 9 in Annapolis–Friday Dinner & Saturday Conference–For Northern Virginia,West Virginia Panhandle As Well As Maryland Activists
Turning the Tides is a heavy-hitting gathering sponsored by Maryland Citizens Action Network — click here for registration and full details — covering existential threats to our Republic.
Bring along some of your local GOP officials and state lawmakers!
Common Defense Richard Falknor on 08 Dec 2015
This week the House of Representatives Republican Leadership apparently plans (click here, then here) on continuing to bankroll the Administration’s expanding “refugee” program — and in spite of the Islamist-engineered slaughter in San Bernardino. This morning open-borders Speaker Paul Ryan showed here he still didn’t “get” the peril.
Now is the tipping point: will the GOP Establishment rise to the challenge and put their country ahead of their donors?
National-security expert Frank Gaffney has a lucid explanation — “It’s Shariah, Stupid” — of the danger here.
“If we are to survive the collective effort of shariah-adherent Muslims and their enablers around the world to force ‘non-believers’ to submit to that toxic ideology, we have to recognize that a) that we are not just confronting the Islamic State, but all those who embrace and practice the same ideology; b) we must counter both the violent and the pre-violent jihadists; and c) this will require a comprehensive, clear-eyed and patient strategy akin to that utilized decisively by President Reagan to destroy the last totalitarian ideology that sought world domination: Soviet communism.”
Conservative Review senior editor Daniel Horowitz gives us a John Quincy Adams illustration here of what we should expect from immigrants.
Constitutional scholar Andrew McCarthy reminds us here—
“The promotion of constitutional principles and civic education has always been foundational to the American immigration and naturalization process. We fatally undermine this process by narrowly vetting for terrorism rather than sharia adherence.” (Highlighting Forums.)
Members who vote to continue bringing in swaths of people many of whom are Shariah-adherent will bear a heavy responsibility for future slaughters about which Trump warns — click here.
And so will we if we don’t push the Congress hard — right now — to defund these dangerous but taxpayer-supported programs.
Common Defense Richard Falknor on 15 Jul 2015
Iran Surrender — Worse Than Munich: Congress Greased The Way By Approving Corker Scheme With Huge Majorities Bigger Than Chamberlain’s in 1938
But first, let’s look in a little detail at how both houses of the Congress emasculated themselves last May so they would have very little leverage over the final instrument of surrender.
“With passage of the Corker-Cardin Democrat protection bill, it has become abundantly clear that Senate Republicans are utterly useless.
Due to the outrageously false perception of this bill, only 6 Republicans opposed shutting off debate (Sens. Cruz, Cotton, Grassley, Lee, Moran, and Sullivan) and only Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) voted against it in the final passage.”
The House Republican leadership simply rammed it through. Again, Daniel Horowitz explains (click here) “House Leadership Blocking Out Conservatives on #IranDeal.”
From Maryland and Virginia, the only no votes were those of Andy Harris and Dave Brat. (See footnote***)
The Machinery of the Corker Scheme
The invaluable constitutional expert Andy McCarthy spelled out this Monday in NRO the consequences of the Corker Scheme (click here).
Here are few salients excerpts, but read all of McCarthy’s analysis — after all, this surrender is likely to be a matter of war and peace.
“Who are you gonna believe, your honey or your lyin’ eyes? That is the question that springs to mind upon reading the ‘dissent,’ forwarded to Rich by a friend who prefers to remain anonymous, from my weekend column on the dangerously misguided Republican response to Obama’s Iran deal.“
The legislation will help President Obama pave Iran’s way to become a nuclear-weapons power. This seems counterintuitive to those with higher expectations of Obama’s Republican opposition than I have: The bill overwhelmingly passed the GOP-controlled Congress after being proposed by Foreign Relations Committee chairman Bob Corker (R., Tenn) with co-sponsorship by the likes of Senator Ben Sasse, the freshman Nebraska Republican who drew strong conservative support (and who figured prominently in my weekend column). Yet it is simply a fact that the Corker bill reverses the Constitution’s presumption against international agreements: instead of requiring the president to convince a two-thirds supermajority of the Senate to approve the Iran deal, it requires opponents to convince a two-thirds supermajority of the full Congress to defeat the deal.”
“As the Times elaborates, Democrats were among the Corker bill’s biggest boosters because it ensures the deal cannot be killed unless Republicans muster 67 disapproval votes in the Senate (as well as 291 in the House). Naturally, President Obama signed the bill because it assures him of victory.”
“The Corker bill does not require Congress to approve the Iran deal before sanctions can be extinguished; Obama gets his way if Congress fails to disapprove the deal. These GOP ‘Iran hawks’ well know that Congress will surely fail to enact a joint resolution of disapproval. As the above-excerpted Times report points out, (a) Obama will veto it if one is passed, and (b) more than enough Democrats will stand with him to defeat any override attempt.”
“The dissenter would do well to remember that, in order to get the Corker bill across the finish line with White House support, Republican leadership provided Democrats with astonishing help: defeating amendments that, among other things, would have required Obama to certify that Iran had ceased supporting anti-American terrorism; would have automatically re-imposed sanctions in the absence of such a certification; would have required treating the deal as a treaty; would have required Iran to free the Americans it is holding in its prisons; and would have required Iran to accept Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state. The dissenter is sorely mistaken in believing that only Democrats stand to be politically embarrassed by positions the Corker legislation has boxed them into
“Iran is an enemy of the United States and its acquisition of nuclear weapons, like its promotion of terrorism, is unacceptable. This situation thus presents a duty to prevent what is unacceptable, not an opportunity to abide what is unacceptable while scoring political points. Using Congress’s constitutional powers to stop the Iran deal would be statesmanship. The Corker bill is gamesmanship.” (Highlighting Forum’s throughout.)
Congress now has a brief period in which it could pass — then overcome a veto of — a joint resolution of disapproval of the Iran Surrender.
How likely is this with a Republican leadership that strove so hard for the Corker self-emasculation?
Andy McCarthy also reveals (click here)–
“Cravenly elevating their own political interest over the national interest, many on the GOP side of the political class calculate that it is more important to avoid blame for frustrating Obama — this time, on his delusional Iran deal — than to succeed in actually frustrating Obama. But alas, that annoying Constitution is again an obstacle to shirking accountability. It does not empower the president to make binding agreements with foreign countries all on his own — on the theory that the American people should not take on enforceable international obligations or see their sovereignty compromised absent approval by the elected representatives most directly accountable to them.
Thus, the Constitution mandates that no international agreement can be binding unless it achieves either of two forms of congressional endorsement: a) super-majority approval by two-thirds of the Senate (i.e., 67 aye votes), or b) enactment through the normal legislative process, meaning passage by both chambers under their burdensome rules, then signature by the president.
The Corker bill is a ploy to circumvent this constitutional roadblock. That is why our post-sovereign, post-constitutional president has warmed to it.” (Highlighting Forum’s throughout.)
And maybe there is even more to it — American companies straining at the leash to export to Iran?
For Big Business always has the head chair around the Congressional Ruling Class table.
Yesterday Veronique de Rugy told us in her NRO post, “Boeing Is Going Back to Tehran — Could It Be with Ex-Im’s Help?” (click here)–
“A friend shares the following tweet, from the Tehran bureau chief of the New York Times: ‘Iran state news agency IRNA reports that Boeing wants to send a delegation to sell planes.'”
A Glance At The Munich Debate–
House of Commons, October 3-6, 1938
After Munich, Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain’s government was sustained (click here and go to bottom of last page) by a vote of 369 to 150 — far higher opposition numbers than against the Corker Scheme.
But note Chamberlain’s tone — so different than Mr. Obama’s — on British rearmament:
“I am told that the policy which I have tried to describe is inconsistent with the continuance, and much more inconsistent with the acceleration of our present programme of arms. I am asked how I can reconcile an appeal to the country to support the continuance of this programme with the words which I used when I came back from Munich the other day and spoke of my belief that we might have peace in our time. I hope hon. Members will not be disposed to read into words used in a moment of some emotion, after a long and exhausting day, after I had driven through miles of excited, enthusiastic, cheering people–I hope they will not read into those words more than they were intended to convey. I do indeed believe that we may yet secure peace for our time, but I never meant to suggest that we should do that by disarmament, until we can induce others to disarm too.“(Highlighting Forum’s.)
Make no mistake: Munich was still a disaster. Historian Martin Gilbert reports —
“For the first time in his political career — and it was nearly forty years since he had first stood for Parliament — Churchill’s optimism deserted him. Despite his appeal in Parliament for a national revival, the events of September 1938 filled him with a deep despondency….”
What is to be done now? First, promptly and markedly improve the current GOP leadership, so that their successors do not shrink from confronting the president. Second, use the power of the purse and the impeachment power over key Obama appointees to limit damage from the Iran Surrender. All of this will depend on whether Republicans at all levels across the US are sufficiently alarmed by this existential threat from Iran and the threat of Big Immigration.
*** When you hear Virginia GOP members — save for the courageous Dave Brat — blasting the Iran Surrender, ask them why they voted for the Corker scheme. As Brian Darling points out today in Conservative Review (click here) “Republicans will spend the next month denouncing the deal and trashing President Obama when they voted to allow the Corker-Cardin framework to govern the procedure to oppose the deal.”
Common Defense Richard Falknor on 12 Jul 2015
Virginia’s 10th District U.S. Representative Barbara Comstock attended a “Sharing Ramadan” event earlier this month, apparently under the auspices of Emerge USA (click here for Discover The Network’s take on Emerge USA).
The Virginia first-termer spoke (listen here to the YouTube) of the importance of the First Amendment, and gushed about the work of Emerge USA.
Is Emerge USA truly a “great group,” as Mrs. Comstock declared on the YouTube? And here is her endorsement on Emerge USA’s website.
FrontPage.com’s Joe Kaufman revealed in May of 2014 (click here)–
“Emerge USA is a Florida-based organization whose unstated goal is to give radical Muslims a political voice in America.”
And noted that–
“the head of the Democratic Party Debbie Wasserman Schultz canceled her keynote address in front of Emerge just two years earlier”
Kaufman in 2014 described Emerge USA’s co-director, Florida attorney Khurrum Basir Wahid–
“Prior to helping found Emerge, Wahid was a legal advisor for the national office of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and a director of CAIR’s Florida chapter. In 2007 and 2008, CAIR was named by the U.S. Justice Department as a co-conspirator to the financing of millions of dollars to Hamas.
In 2011, Wahid himself was placed on a U.S. government terrorist watch list.”
Comstock (click here for the YouTube) talked to her Ramadan hosts about the First Amendment.
But does she grasp the deep conflict between free speech and Sharia?
“In the wide net cast by sharia law’s repressive blasphemy standards, such speech includes critical examinations of Islam, no matter how accurately they represent Islamic supremacism—a mainstream interpretation of Muslim doctrine that is bellicose, misogynistic, harshly discriminatory, and often cruelly punitive.”(Highlighting Forum’s)
McCarthy explains the world-wide Islamist effort to make free speech conform to Sharia’s harsh restrictions, and how this Administration enables that effort–
“At the conference in what has become known as the ‘Istanbul Process,’ Secretary Clinton lamented that the effort to stamp out the common sense commonly demagogued as ‘Islamophobia’ had been hampered by the inconvenient fact that ‘for 235 years [of American history], freedom of expression has been a universal right at the core of our democracy.’ The First Amendment made it extraordinarily difficult for government to prohibit speech explicitly. Still, she maintained that Leviathan could get the job done by an alternative route—one no doubt near and dear to the hearts of the sharia enthusiasts in her audience. The Obama administration, she promised, would ‘use some old-fashioned techniques of peer pressure and shaming, so that people don’t feel that they have the support to do what we abhor.'”(Highlighting Forum’s)
After watching the Comstock YouTube, one seasoned northern Virginia Republican lamented, “Barbara sure has time for these folks, but hardly any for Tea Partiers.”
Our lawmakers need to do their homework on emerging Islamist threats!
We are not suggesting that Mrs. Comstock is some secret Sharia adherent.
What we are urging is that she — and those Virginia state lawmakers who sponsored a General Assembly commendation (click here) for the ADAMS Center (click here then here for our earlier stories) — begin their (apparently neglected) due diligence on Sharia and Civilization Jihad.
This is no time for willful blindness.
Common Defense Richard Falknor on 02 Jul 2015
Are tunnels like those also, in the eyes of ISIS, a developing instrument for attacks across our southern border?
Listen to these two “Secure Freedom” podcasts of last Tuesday to get the full force of Gordon’s message–
- “What ISIS learned from Hamas’ most recent loss in Gaza”
- “Why is the U.S. more vulnerable to terror-tunnel attacks than Israel?”
- “The tempting target that San Diego makes, and how ISIS could infiltrate it”
Dan Gordon explains “The Middle East for ISIS is a R & D laboratory for what they intend to do to the United States.”
Click on podcast below.
- “Is an ISIS safe-haven in Northern Mexico logistically possible?”
- “A united Arab coalition against Obama’s Iran policy”
- “Concerns that the U.S. Congress and Administration have put the world on a path towards nuclear brinkmanship”
- “Where the current level of unrest in the Middle East compares to the last thousand years”
Click on podcast below.
Dan Gordon’s advice to the Congress–
Get us out of the Iran deal immediately; arm the Kurds and make them a base of action; get serious about our air strikes — needed 150 -200 strikes per day; overall, deal with ISIS in the Middle East before they come here.