Sunday, June 30, 2013

Why is the Right Embracing an Anti-American Traitor?

This is the creep who a significant proportion of the right is embracing as their new hero. Sickening.

Why Snowden Picked Ecuador

The NSA leaker knows that President Rafael Correa wants to be the next Hugo Chávez.
by
Jaime Daremblum
Bio
June 26, 2013 - 12:42 am
Edward Snowden says that he leaked classified information about National Security Agency surveillance programs because he believes those programs represent a major threat to civil liberties. Ironically, Snowden has now requested asylum in a country — Ecuador — where civil liberties are routinely trampled by an elected autocracy.
As of this writing, he is apparently still in Moscow, awaiting a formal response from the Ecuadorean government. If Quito approves his asylum request and Snowden successfully makes it to Ecuadorean territory, he will be the second high-profile leaker to take refuge there over the past year. The first, of course, was WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who entered Ecuador’s London embassy last June and officially received asylum in August.
Why did Snowden pick Ecuador? Like Assange, he recognizes that President Rafael Correa is an anti-American leftist who has repeatedly clashed with Washington and has eagerly embraced U.S. adversaries. Indeed, Correa is a Hugo Chávez acolyte who reportedly received money from Colombian FARC terrorists during his 2006 presidential campaign; who in 2009 expelled a U.S. embassy official named Armando Astorga and forced the U.S. military to leave Manta air base (which had been used for anti-drug operations); who in 2011 expelled U.S. ambassador Heather Hodges; who in 2012 withdrew Ecuadorean troops from the U.S.-based Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation and also threatened to expel USAID from Ecuador; and who boycotted the 2012 Summit of the Americas to protest the exclusion of Cuba. His government has also strengthened ties with Iran, and there is compelling evidence that the Iranians have used their close relationship with Ecuador to evade international sanctions and access the global financial system. Ecuadorean foreign minister Ricardo Patiño has called Iran a “strategic partner,” and Correa has defended the Iranian nuclear program.
As Ramiro Crespo of Quito-based Analytica Investments tells the Washington Post, “Ecuador is looking to be an antagonist of the United States and looking for causes that will permit it to do that.” That’s why it granted asylum to Julian Assange, and that’s why it may soon grant asylum to Edward Snowden. Earlier this week, Foreign Minister Patiño condemned U.S. officials for their efforts to apprehend the NSA leaker. “The one who is denounced pursues the denouncer,” he said, according to the New York Times. “The man who tries to provide light and transparency to issues that affect everyone is pursued by those who should be giving explanations about the denunciations that have been presented.” For his part, President Correa tweeted that “we will analyze the Snowden case very responsibly and we will make with absolute sovereignty the decision that we believe is most appropriate.”

Given his anti-U.S. record and his desire to succeed the late Hugo Chávez as the leader of Latin America’s populist-left coalition, there is good reason to expect that Correa will approve Snowden’s request. However, while Correa is known for his “anti-imperialist” rants and frequent denunciations of U.S. foreign policy, Ecuador still has a dollarized economy, and it still sends 45 percent of its exports to the United States (mostly oil, food products, and flowers), making America its largest trade partner. Since the early 1990s, Ecuador has benefited from U.S. trade preferences that are scheduled to expire on July 31. Thanks to these preferences, 23 percent of Ecuador’s U.S.-bound exports are exempt from tariffs. If Correa shelters Snowden, he will obviously jeopardize his country’s trade status.
Either way, the idea of Correa as a champion of civil liberties is laughable. Outside of the Communist regime in Cuba and the Chávez regime in Venezuela, no other Latin American government has conducted such an aggressive and sustained campaign against opposition media outlets. Freedom House now classifies the Ecuadorean press environment as “not free,” and the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) has said that Correa’s record on press freedom is “among the very worst in the Americas.” Back in April, three Correa opponents (one National Assembly member and two activists) were sentenced to prison for allegedly “slandering” the Ecuadorean president. Freedom House criticized the sentencing as “a grave violation of free speech rights.” More recently, the Correa-allied National Assembly enacted a controversial media law that will further reduce press freedom. The CPJ called it “a severe blow to freedom of expression,” and the Inter-American Press Association described it as a “grave setback for freedom of the press and expression.”
When the Obama administration took office, it seemed to believe that U.S.-Ecuador relations had soured because of the Bush administration’s incompetence and/or ideology. In reality, the deterioration of bilateral ties was a result of Correa’s hostility toward the United States. That hostility is what prompted Edward Snowden to ask the Ecuadorean government for asylum. With Ecuador’s U.S. trade preferences set to expire, will Correa show his pragmatic side? Or will he once again place anti-Americanism ahead of his country’s best interests?

Time Misleads in Support of Jihadists

This is completely misleading on the part of Time. Whatever the Buddhists have done is in REACTION to the Islamic jihad being waged against them. There is no Buddhist terrorism. This is the type of propaganda used against the Serbs and Israel, where victim and aggressor have been inverted by the global mass media.

Burma Bans Time Magazine Labeling Monk as 'Face of Terror'

TIME Magazine keeps licking the jackboots of the global jihad time and time again. According to TIME magazine, Buddhist monk = face of terror (no, this is not the Onion). Next they'll have Mother Theresa with a bomb strapped to her habit.
Why doesn't the media ever ask, hmmmmm, everywhere Muslims immigrate there is conflict. The higher the population, the bigger the conflict. Why is that?
Buddhist monks have to carry guns for self-defense. Think about that. Don't buy the Muslim myth of victimhood in Burma. What's comical is that Buddhism really is a religion of peace. Continue reading

Saturday, June 29, 2013

Sharia Law in Britain

It is now a crime in England for an infidel just merely to walk through a muslim neighborhood. Throughout Europe there are sharia no go zones. Muslims have essentially carved out their own separatist societies within society with the acquiescence of authorities. How long before there is an armed insurrection with muslims claiming the right to be given their own state out of those territories? It's not far-fetched.

UK: EDL leaders attacked then arrested for attempting to walk through "Muslim area"

Now just walking down the street gets you arrested in the UK if it might upset Muslims. The entry ban against Robert Spencer and I and  now this while the left and the Islamic supremacists beat their chests in victory. Sign this petition now. Read the rest

Carter Equates Christianity with islam on Women's Rights

Apparently Carter thinks not allowing women to become priests is equivalent to
female genital mutilation, child marriage and "honor" murders.

Jimmy Carter: Catholic Church As Bad As Islam On Women’s Rights…

0428-South-Korea-North-Korea-Carter_full_600-500x333
What a troll.
ATLANTA (AP) — Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter says religious leaders, including those in Christianity and Islam, share the blame for mistreatment of women and girls across the world.
The 88-year-old human rights activist said Friday that male religious leaders perpetuate misguided doctrines of male superiority, from the Catholic Church forbidding women from becoming priests to some African cultures mutilating the genitals of young girls.
Carter says the doctrines contribute to a political, social and economic structure where political leaders passively accept domestic violence against women, sexual trafficking, and inequality in the workplace and classroom.
The 39th president delivered his analysis during an international conference on women and religion. He’s hosting representatives from 15 countries at The Carter Center, the human rights organization he launched in 1982 after leaving the White House.
http://weaselzippers.us/

Tuesday, June 25, 2013

Mindless Mob Mentality

I have become very disenchanted with the tea party recently due to its opposition to drone strikes, NSA surveillance and its support of traitorous punk Snowden. The NSA surveillance was dealt with during the Bush years and was declared constitutional. Conservatives back then rightly supported it, but now they don’t. I’m disgusted by the hypocrisy and playing politics with national security. The anti-government extremism on the right poses a danger to our national security. The next terrorist attack, the blood will be on the hands of the anti-government extremists on the right, who along with the left gutted a program that enabled officials to “connect the dots”. When they ask why didn’t the government prevent the attack, they can look in the mirror at who’s to blame. Opposition to big intrusive government, low taxes, free markets etc. are all worthy ideas, but once you come to the defense of a traitor, you have lost all credibility as a movement.

The Limitations of the NSA/IRS Comparison
Text  

As an attorney suing the IRS on behalf of 25 conservative groups (with more to be added soon), I’m more than familiar with the Obama Administration’s willingness and ability to abuse its power for partisan and ideological ends. Indeed, as a conservative, I’m well aware of the overwhelming temptation for any administration — Democrat or Republican — to misuse and abuse the vast power of a vast government.
As a veteran of the Iraq War, I’m also familiar with our jihadist enemy — its boundless savagery, its expansionist ideology, and its bitter hatred for America. When people ask me what I took away most from Iraq, I always say, “I had no idea what true evil was until I saw al-Qaeda.”
And that brings me to my core problem with the argument that the IRS scandal shows us how government can be abused, thus we should roll back our surveillance programs. But in the IRS case, the entire targeting program was created out of whole cloth to punish one set of Americans for exercising core First Amendment freedoms. The conservative targeting program was an abuse by definition and illegal from its conception. With the IRS, there was no threat to address, while the government abuse is very real and substantiated.
With the NSA, by contrast, the threat is very, very real, and the government abuse at least seems to be hypothetical. As Andy McCarthy has repeatedly pointed out, based on the facts that we have, our surveillance programs comply with applicable law.
Moreoever, as Dr. Krauthammer, Jonah Goldberg, and others have noted, items like F-16s and Abrams tanks can also be abused — in fact, there is a long international history of formidable standing armies being turned on the citizenry — but we also recognize that national defense is a core, constitutional function of government, and there is a tradition of honorable conduct by American military leaders.  In other words, despite its matchless capacity to do harm, we trust the Army.
Here is my question to those most concerned about the NSA scandals: given the very real jihadist threat combined with the constitutional obligation of the government to “provide for the common defense” while still securing the “blessings of liberty,” how should we guard the nation? Let’s recall, of course, that our enemy exploits our military and legal self-restraint to magnify our vulnerabilities.
I am by no means wedded to the notion that the surveillance programs recently revealed are necessary to achieve a reasonable level of security. I do think, however, that it’s unwise to think that we can replace them with nothing — especially as we roll back our offensive operations overseas — without paying a terrible price.
One final note: It is difficult to defend the NSA programs when one doubts the will of the Obama Administration to act even when surveillance yields useful intelligence. Let’s not forget that our government has a history of identifying terrorists — only to let them walk free and attack Americans:
Tamerlan Tsarnaev is the fifth person since 9/11 who has participated in terror attacks after questioning by the FBI. He was preceded by Nidal Hasan; drone casualty Anwar al Awlaki; Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad (born Carlos Leon Bledsoe), who murdered an Army recruit in Little Rock in June 2009; and David Coleman Headley, who provided intelligence to the perpetrators of the Mumbai massacre in 2008. That doesn’t count Abdulmutallab, who was the subject of warnings to the CIA that he was a potential terrorist.
The right balance between freedom and security is worth debating, but if ideology and incompetence leave us with neither freedom nor security, then the need for debate ends.
Neither freedom nor security?  Historians may later call that the “Obama Doctrine.”  

Friday, June 21, 2013

The Dangerous Course of the Conservative Movement on National Security

Anyone still treating that traitorous scum Snowden as a hero, is a mindless, partisan idiot.  Snowden doesn't care about the privacy rights of ordinary Americans, he is a hater of America who is protecting terrorists and helping China. For that matter Rand Paul isn't trying to protect ordinary Americans either, what he is doing also amounts to protecting terrorists. At heart Rand Paul, just like leftists, believes that America provokes muslim terrorists. Ergo, if they believe we are at fault, then naturally they view any act of American self-defense as illegitimate. Unfortunately libertarianism has become the predominant view on the right as opposed to the national security minded conservatism that used to prevail on the right.

Rand Paul’s ‘Here’s to Crime’ Act
His interpretation of the Fourth Amendment would be a boon for lawbreakers.


The National-Security Right Goes Silent        

Thursday, June 20, 2013

Iran's New "Moderate" Jihadist President

This is the new Iranian ruler the western media keeps referring to as "moderate". I guess by their standards terrorists who confine their targets to Jews and Israel are considered to be "moderate". And a "moderate" muslim leader is also one who doesn't openly state his intentions for a nuclear holocaust against the Jews.

New Iranian President Tied to 1994 Bombing

85 were killed in bombing of Argentinian Jewish Center
Rubble of the Buenos Aires Jewish Community center, July 18, 1994 / AP
Rubble of the Buenos Aires Jewish Community center, July 18, 1994 / AP
BY: 
Iranian President-elect Hassan Rowhani was on the special Iranian government committee that plotted the 1994 bombing of a Jewish community center in Buenos Aires, according to an indictment by the Argentine government prosecutor investigating the case.
The AMIA bombing is considered the deadliest terrorist attack in Argentina’s history, killing 85 and wounding hundreds more. The Argentine government had accused the Iranian government of planning the attack and Iran’s terrorist proxy Hezbollah of carrying it out. Numerous former and current Iranian officials are wanted by Interpol in connection with the bombing.
Former Iranian intelligence official Abolghasem Mesbahi, who defected from Iran in the late 1990s, testified that the decision to launch the attack was made within a special operations committee connected to the powerful Supreme National Security Council in August 1993.
According to the 2006 indictment, Mesbahi testified that Rowhani, who was then serving as secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, was also a member of the special committee when it approved the AMIA bombing.
“With regard to the committee’s role in the decision to carry out the AMIA attack, Moghadam stated that this decision was made under the direction of Ali Khamenei, and that the other members of the committee were [then-Iranian president Ali Akbar Hashemi] Rafsanjani, Mir Hejazi, Rowhani, Velayati and Fallahijan,” the indictment says.
Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei led the special committee, according to the indictment, and Khamenei and Rafsanjani made the ultimate decision to go ahead with the attack.
While Rowhani was allegedly present for deliberations about the planned bombing, it is highly unlikely he would have had approval authority, according to Iran experts.
“Rowhani’s power at that time comes directly from one individual, and that’s Rafsanjani,” said Reuel Gerecht, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.
“As far as that bombing was concerned, because Rafsanjani had to give his approval for that, there was no doubt Rowhani was aware of it, and obviously his approval’s not necessary,” Gerecht continued. “He’s a subordinate. But he certainly would have been aware of all the discussions that led to the attack.”
Rowhani has been portrayed as a moderate reformer by the media and some Iranian regime supporters despite his close relationship with Iran’s Supreme Leader Khamenei. Rowhani also supported deadly crackdowns on student protesters in 1999, and claimed that he deceived the West into allowing Iran’s nuclear program to progress while serving as Iran’s nuclear negotiator with the Europeans.
Gerecht said it is difficult to determine exactly what role Rowhani may have played in the AMIA bombing without being privy to the actual deliberations. But he added that there was “nothing in Rowhani’s background that would suggest to you he has any moral qualms about bombing the enemies of the [Islamic] Republic.”
“In all probability, we would have heard about it if [Rowhani] had risen up [at the meeting] and said ‘Don’t do that, it’s a disgrace,’” said Gerecht. “We would have known that.”

ACLU Protecting Terrorists

Conservatives might want to think twice about finding common cause with the ACLU, Glen Greenwald and Rand Paul. These are folks that also oppose surveillance specifically targeted at the muslim community. They aren't trying to protect ordinary Americans from government overreach, they are protecting terrorists.

ACLU Sues NYPD, Claims Surveillance Prevents Muslims from Practicing their Religion by Inciting Terror

June 19, 2013 By Daniel Greenfield 21 Comments


  19

 Print This Post



This is just tragic. It’s the worst violation of religious freedom since the NYPD prevented a voodoo cult from practicing human sacrifice. I’m still waiting for the ACLU to sue over the imprisonment of a Christian filmmaker for uploading a trailer to YouTube. I imagine I’ll be waiting for a very long time.



 

In a lawsuit being filed Tuesday, the lawyers say the spying has hindered residents from freely practicing their religion. It is the third significant legal action filed against the NYPD Muslim surveillance program since details of the spy program were revealed in a series of Associated Press reports in 2011 and 2012.


The lawsuit says Muslim religious leaders in New York have modified their sermons and other behavior to not draw additional police attention.


If your sermons have content that you don’t want police listening to, there might just be something wrong with your sermons or your religion. Continue reading

Friday, June 14, 2013

islam's Treatment of Women

Someone needs to inform Bill Cosby just how muslims protect their women. What aspect of islam does he suggest we should emulate? Is it the "honor" murders, the female genital mutilations,  marrying little girls off to old men, marrying cousins, polygamy, the beheadings, the bombings etc.?

Violence Against Women ‘wielded mercilessly’ in Muslim countries

The silence of women's groups and the faux feminist movement is criminal.
"Gender-based violence ‘wielded mercilessly’ in Muslim countries" Worldwatch Monitor June 13, 2013 by Hélène Fisher Christian
Jeddah, Saudi ArabiaJeddah, Saudi Arabia Continue reading

Thursday, June 13, 2013

Unhinged "Conservatives" Defend Traitor

For those of you mindless crackpots who think Snowden is a hero, he's threatening to reveal secrets to China. This is who you are cheering on. Are you proud of yourselves? He is also seen as a hero in Beijing, Moscow, amongst jihadists and the international left. Is this who you want to be on the same side as? He didn't leak this stuff about the NSA because he cares about the privacy rights of Americans, but because he is anti-American and wants to help our enemies.  


Snowden Threatens to Reveal More 'Explosive' NSA Secrets

Image: Snowden Threatens to Reveal More 'Explosive' NSA Secrets
Edward Snowden dropped out of sight after checking out of a Hong Kong hotel on June 10, but The South China Morning Post newspaper said it was able to locate and interview him on June 12.
Wednesday, 12 Jun 2013 02:13 PM

Share:
More . . .

Former U.S. spy Edward Snowden on Wednesday vowed to fight any bid to extradite him from Hong Kong and promised "explosive" new revelations about Washington's surveillance targets, The South China Morning Post reported.

Specifically, Snowden reportedly showed the newspaper "unverified documents" describing an extensive U.S. campaign to obtain information from computers in Hong Kong and mainland China.

Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/US-security-intelligence-HongKong/2013/06/12/id/509564?s=al&promo_code=13CCF-1#ixzz2W8yJTLye
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!

Surveillance of muslim Terrorists

This is the argument the right could be making, specific surveillance of islamic targets.
Instead they lionized a traitor, aligned with Glen Greenwald, Michael Moore and the jihad enabling left to discredit the very notion of surveillance altogether. The right is afraid of being accused of racism and so won't do this. Political expediency has caused "conservatives" to align with anti-American forces for the purpose of bringing down Obama. National security be damned. 

The One Place You Can Be Free of Surveillance is a Mosque


mosques
There is nothing wrong with law enforcement monitoring Muslim terrorists or potential Muslim terrorists. But unfortunately, as I wrote in the Dumb Police State, that’s not really the system we have.
Instead our system “spreads the pain” and specifically excludes Muslims from some of the same experiences to avoid “alienating” them and to win their cooperation.
Since October 2011, mosques have been off-limits to FBI agents. No more surveillance or undercover string operations without high-level approval from a special oversight body at the Justice Department dubbed the Sensitive Operations Review Committee.
Who makes up this body, and how do they decide requests? Nobody knows; the names of the chairman, members and staff are kept secret.
We do know the panel was set up under pressure from Islamist groups who complained about FBI stings at mosques. Just months before the panel’s formation, the Council on American-Islamic Relations teamed up with the ACLU to sue the FBI for allegedly violating the civil rights of Muslims in Los Angeles by hiring an undercover agent to infiltrate and monitor mosques there.
Before mosques were excluded from the otherwise wide domestic spy net the administration has cast, the FBI launched dozens of successful sting operations against homegrown jihadists — inside mosques — and disrupted dozens of plots against the homeland.
If only they were allowed to continue, perhaps the many victims of the Boston Marathon bombings would not have lost their lives and limbs. The FBI never canvassed Boston mosques until four days after the April 15 attacks, and it did not check out the radical Boston mosque where the Muslim bombers worshipped.
This is particularly disturbing in light of recent independent surveys of American mosques, which reveal some 80% of them preach violent jihad or distribute violent literature to worshippers.
We need enforcement and surveillance, but it needs to be smart and targeted surveillance. And that can only happen under leaders who stop apologizing for singling out members of an ideology responsible for our long war because of their beliefs.
We’re at war with an ideology. Singling out members of that ideology is the only rational way to fight that war.

Tuesday, June 11, 2013

More Submission to islam

This is not a symbol of religious tolerance. It is a symbol of submission to islam. There is no reciprocal tolerance in islam, so ultimately any accommodation to muslims amounts to submission.

UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO REMOVED CHURCH PEWS FROM 88-YEAR OLD CHAPEL TO ACCOMMODATE ISLAMIC PRAYERS

More and more accommodation ......
REPORT: University of Chicago removed pews from 88-year old chapel to accommodate Islamic prayers Campus Forum, June 10, 2013 (hat tip snake)
University of Chicago (UC) administrators permanently removed pews from an 88-year old chapel on campus in order to accommodate Islamic prayers, according to a local news report. Continue reading

Snowden is a Traitor

Regardless of what one thinks of the NSA program, this guy committed treason. In any case, the prism program was not unconstitutional. It did not violate the right to privacy.

I never thought I'd see the day that "conservatives" would be lionizing a traitor. If this is the new conservatism, count me out. I prefer the old conservatism of Ronald Reagan who was strong on national security. I want no part of Rand Paul, Glenn Beck and Judge Napolitano's "conservatism" which resembles that of code pink and the other radical left elements when it comes to national defense. The conservative movement is so obsessed with Obama, they are not thinking rationally at all.

This resembles the mindless conservative opposition to drone strikes a few months back, but even worse. Now  “conservatives” are defending an outright traitor. They are playing politics with national security and it is revolting. I don’t recognize what passes for conservatism these days.  Reason and the safety of America have gone out the window. The only thing that matters is opposing Obama for the sake of opposing him.


Monday, June 10, 2013

Turning Public Spaces into Mosques

When does the pandering stop? Stealth jihadists are manipulating public officials into turning public spaces into mosques. If they want to pray five times a day as commanded, they can wait until they are
in their own homes or mosques. Instead they convince these stupid dhimmi public officials that creating islamic prayer spaces is necessary for them to carry out their "religious" obligations. This is such bullshit. What this really is about is imposing islam on non-muslim societies.  And the politicians who are accommodating them  are facilitating the establishment of sharia in America,  unbeknownst to them.

Thursday, June 6, 2013

Hollywood Comes to the cause of a Traitor

Leave it to hollywood to defend a traitor.  Celebrities are quick to jump on to any anti-American cause. What have they done for real soldiers who are loyal to our country? What have they done for soldiers who have been punished by our own government for having killed terrorists? Or how about standing up for the filmmaker in jail for offending muslims? You would think as artists and entertainers, standing up for the first amendment would be a top priority. But not a peep from Hollywood. But a traitor in jail for leaking classified material prompts these louts to speak out. What possesses them to hate their own country, the country which enabled them to achieve a high degree of success?


Hollywood Celebs: 'I Am Bradley Manning'

 282
 2
 1307

 


Print ArticleSend a Tip

On Tuesday, Hollywood celebrities released a teaser video defending alleged traitorous soldier Private Bradley Manning, who is accused of leaking classified documents to Julian Assange of Wikileaks.

“I am Bradley Manning,” the celebrities proclaim. The video stars Oliver Stone, Russell Brand, Peter Sarsgaard, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Moby, Wallace Shawn – and even some leftist journalists like Matt Taibbi, Phil Donahue, and Chris Hedges.

“It’s very hard for a lower-level soldier to turn on his officers and say, ‘There was a war crime here,’” says Stone, a Fidel Castro sympathizer, to the camera.


Then the various actors read, quick cut style, “If you saw incredible things, awful things, things that belonged in the public domain and not in some server stored in some dark room in Washington, D.C., what would you do? What would you do?”


Tom Morello finishes: “If you know nothing about Bradley Manning, you should find out, and then you should help me bust him out of jail.”


Ben Shapiro is Editor-At-Large of Breitbart News and author of the New York Times bestseller “Bullies: How the Left’s Culture of Fear and Intimidation Silences America” (Threshold Editions, January 8, 2013).