There are currently 0 users and 21 guests online.
Linz's New Book
Is Edward Snowden a hero?
Hell yes! His actions were moral.
Hell no! Put him away for treason.
Yes and no. It's a grey area.
Other (please specify)
Total votes: 20
Islamofascism And The Age Of Treason
Submitted by tvr on Fri, 2013-11-15 05:23
"In the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying." - Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf.
The term 'Islamofascism' refers not only to an analogy of two political ideologies, it also identifies a contemporaneous political camaraderie that has existed for almost 100 years.
History is a continuum and so should be viewed as such. Nazism and fascism didn't just die at the end of the Second World War along with the apparent death of Hitler. They have lived on in the minds of the millions of surviving Nazis and fascists and those of their offspring who have gone on to become influential players in the world affairs these last 68 years.
Arab Muslims were among those who most admired Hitler, with many Arab countries importing variations of his antisemitic fascist ideology to their political regimes during and post WWII, including Iran, Iraq, Syria, Palestine, Egypt and Lebanon to name a few. Both the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem in Palestine Muhammad Amin al-Husayni and the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt Hassan al-Banna were admirers and allies of Hitler. Hitler was recorded in his later years as saying that he considered Islam to be an ideal religion to complement Nazism, lamenting how Germans in his time were Christian and not "Mohammedan".
Islamofascism, by which I mean political and/or militant Islam, is embodied today among Sunni Muslims by the Saudi-financed Wahhabis, the Pakistani jihadists known as Jama'atis, and the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood. Among Shia Muslims, it is exemplified by Hezbollah in Lebanon and by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and those loyal to him in Iran.
Now and then:
The West is not participating in a new war today, but the revival of an old one.
The following interview is a must see. John Loftus is in a unique position to inform us about the link between WWII Nazism and today's Islamofascism. He worked for the US Department of Justice in the Office of Special Investigations which was charged with prosecuting and deporting Nazi war criminals in the US. He was given a level security clearance that gave him access to files that only a tiny handful of people in history have ever had access to. He now considers himself an historian and an author:
In order to grasp the state of affairs today and the status of the un-mentionable war we all find ourselves in, we should turn to quotes by the master of war himself, Sun Tsu, and see how they relate to the facts:
The latest report on the cost of the US wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan is that they will cost American taxpayers up to $6 trillion, making the US' response to 9/11 “the most expensive and prolonged war in US history", with no end in sight.
Prior to 9/11, the Muslim Brotherhood established powerful lobby groups to conduct "lawfare" in the West and managed to place operatives in the bowels of western governments, including in the CIA and the White House; European Muslim populations grew exponentially due to the UN's multiculturalist agenda foisted on western countries combined with high Muslim birth rates, whereby stronghold communities of politically motivated Muslims became established in key cities across Europe; the Saudis acquired all the shares in ARMACO and grew it into the most valuable company in the world worth trillions of dollars, then spent billions funding madrases all around the world with the aim of indoctrinating young Muslims into becoming anti-West antisemitic Wahhabist Muslims; other Arab oil producing states nationalized their oil industries, which, together with the environmentalist policies adopted in the West, made the West dependent on Islamic states for oil; the CIA secretly funded, armed and helped train a large militia of Muslim Brotherhood members to fight against the Soviets in the Soviet-Afghan war - a militia that came to be known as al-Qaeda (see Loftus interview video above); Pakistan obtained the nuclear bomb thus becoming the first nuclear armed Islamic state, nuclear armament being necessary for the Caliphate to be revived; the percentage of US citizens enrolled for active military service halved from what it has been just 30 years earlier (and is at present less than a third of what it was during the Vietnam War).
So, were the Islamofascists ready to wage war against the West, and the US in particular, pre-9/11? Absolutely. They had been planning and preparing for decades.
From Wikipedia: "The military of the United States is deployed in more than 150 countries around the world, with 172,966 of its active-duty personnel serving outside the United States and its territories. Most of these overseas personnel are deployed in combat zones in the Middle east, as part of the War on Terror."
Americans have elected and now re-elected a president who is Socialist in all but name, and who has gone to great lengths to hide his Islamic past, dodgy connections and "university years". Regarding the latter, perhaps the following video has something to do with the silence and mystery, along with Obama's known visit/s to and connections in Pakistan in 1980s and the pledge in his autobiographical book Audacity of Hope [p260-261] where he essentially promises that if push ever came to shove he would "stand by ... Arab and Pakistani Americans" before the rest of America if he ever had to make a choice between the two:
It is unmistakably implied in what Percy Sutton says in the interview that Obama's Harvard years were funded by the Saudi Royals.
The man he mentions approaching him to endorse Obama at Harvard, Dr Khalid al Mansour from Texas, was a black nationalist Muslim author and lawyer on the payroll of the Saudi Royal family. Al Mansour has written many books on the struggle of bringing Islam to the West. Al Mansour has refused to comment on the revelation disclosed by Sutton, and his Wikipedia page was mysteriously deleted shortly after the interview went to air.
Before concluding that Sutton is a doddering old fool, keep in mind he was "a prominent black American political and business leader. A civil-rights activist and lawyer, he was also a Freedom Rider and the legal representative for Malcolm X. He was the highest-ranking African-American elected official in New York City when he was Manhattan borough president from 1966 to 1977, the longest tenure at that position. He later became an entrepreneur whose investments included the New York Amsterdam News and the Apollo Theater in Harlem." It is evident in the video that Sutton's thinking had become sluggish, but surely it is much more likely that any mental deterioration is what let the secret slip out, rather than his imagination getting away on him.
Despite all the red flags, America, in its self-induced blindness over its infatuation with his skin color and American Idol persona voted (and re-voted) Obama into power anyway, and by extension his Islam-coddling socialist-leaning administration along with him.
After his election, Obama wasted no time changing White House vernacular by replacing the term "War on Terror" with the obfuscatory term "Overseas Contingency Operation". Since his re-election, Obama has ordered US military and law enforcement to remove all references to Islam altogether from its training materials.
If one can't name the enemy or know its nature, how can one defend against it?
Between the lawfare being waged by "moderate" Muslims and the warfare being waged by militant Muslims, the West finds itself being surrounded, attacked and divided by politically and militantly active Muslims everywhere despite Muslims still being a relatively small minority group within Western countries. Meanwhile, all Westerners are hearing from their leaders and the mainstream media is screams of "tolerance" and that "Islam means Peace".
Islam's prophet Muhammed also said "War is deceit". The most deadly terrorist attack on US soil since 9/11, the Fort Hood shooting, involved a Muslim psychiatrist gunning down thirteen unarmed soldiers while yelling praises to Allah. The massacre was and still is being called by the White House and government agencies "work place violence" without any mention of Islam or terrorism. Appeasement and political correctness ... or propaganda?
In 2009, Obama, in an act of unprecedented fealty, gave an unreciprocated bow to the Saudi King on international television. Unbelievably, the White House then denied that the bow ever happened and the subject has never been raised since. Earlier this year, in another unprecedented display of fealty toward Islam, Pope Francis bowed to the Jordanian queen. Are these two very public bows to two of the world's most powerful Muslim rulers by arguably the two most powerful Western rulers mere coincidence? The Islamofascists would like non-Muslims to think so. The bows embolden the Muslim world while confusing and weakening the morale of those in the western world. The quadrillion dollar question is whether the bows were meant to have that effect, or they just happened to.
And who exactly is Barack Hussein Obama, the current commander and chief of the US armed forces, anyway? Where does his true allegiance lie? Despite claiming to be a Christian, the little that we do know about him (but which is seldom if ever reported by the mainstream media) includes:
1) His closest living relatives on his father's side are devout Muslims, one half-brother (who reciprocated being best man at each other's weddings) is reported as having ties to the Muslim Brotherhood while his uncle is reported to have ties to Muslim World League, and his step-grandmother and cousin to have received special treatment from the Saudi Royals when they performed the Hajj (video link to the cousin's al-Jazeera interview here);
There are signs everywhere today of a pro-Islamic agenda in Western politics, and in US politics especially, such as this interview with the Obama-appointed NASA administrator which the White House later tried to dismiss:
Then of course there was the Benghazi scandal.
President Woe-bama attracts scandals and suspicion like no other president before him. Why?
I am not claiming that the above short-list constitutes proof that Obama is a crypto-Muslim practicing the Islamic principle of deception, Taqiyya, to push an Islamosfascistic agenda, only that the evidence is compelling and that he seems to care nothing about how much suspicion he generates concerning himself and his true intentions. A man possessing scruples and honor does not only tell the truth, he also does his best to avoid becoming or remaining the subject of suspicion and scandal. Deceivers and liars do not concern themselves with avoiding being the subject of suspicion or scandal, their only concern is with avoiding actual proof of their misdeeds and deceit from surfacing, and if something does surface, from it being believed by those who they are trying to deceive.
This I believe is huge, yet has been all but ignored by the mainstream media. At the beginning of the year only an exclusive handful of countries were members of the US' Trusted Traveler program called Global Entry, namely Canada, Mexico, South Korea and the Netherlands. It was quietly announced earlier this year that the Global Entry Program which “allows expedited clearance for pre-approved, low-risk travelers upon arrival in the United States”, would be granted to Saudi Arabia(!).
Here is a short video explaining what that involves:
In August of this year Qatar, India, the UK and Germany have also been added to the program.
Between the three EU countries, 40% of the EU's 15 million Muslims can now apply for and potentially gain easier entry into the US with diminished scrutiny, along with 200 million other Muslims from Near and Central Asia, 30 million of whom live in what are designated as terrorist-sponsoring states (per the State Department's own reports on Saudi Arabia and Qatar).
According to IPT News "this development marks the first time that the Saudi government has a direct role in vetting who is eligible for fast-tracked entry into the United States."
Need we be reminded that of the 19 Muslims who hijacked American planes on September 11, 2001, 15 were from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia??
How exactly does excluding trusted allies from having membership in one's "Trusted Traveler program" while adding gateways into the US from the world's most populous and extremist Islamic countries qualify as being "low-risk"??
As if it to give us comfort, US Embassy press attaché Mofid Deak pointed out earlier this year that there are no Saudi citizens on the US black list. “We have actually overcome the crisis of Sept. 11”, he said. While the U.S. Ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Ford Fraker, has stated that "the overhang of a neutral to a negative reaction to America as a holdover of the 9/11" is now a "corner ... turned". Fraker said that what brought about inviting the Saudis to be members of the program is that "Every time I went to see senior Saudi officials they did not want to talk about Iran or Iraq. They wanted to talk about visas. It was overwhelming the relationship," adding "It wouldn’t have happened if it hadn’t been for the President’s trips and his engagement from the top down."
All this in a year when the Saudi's are warning of a rift taking place in the Kingdom's relations with the US, echoing the Saudi King's warning of August 29, 2001 when he wrote a letter to George W. Bush, published in the Wall Street Journal, which said, "A time comes when peoples and nations part. We are at a crossroads. It is time for the United States and Saudi Arabia to look at their separate interests." Two weeks later America endured its most deadly attack on home soil in its 225 year history.
The Islamofascists know what they want and are smart enough to identify, push for and exploit a golden opportunity when they see it. Easier entry for politically motivated and/or militant Muslims into the US in effect is a lowering of the drawbridge. Any guesses as to who is acting as the Trojan Horse?
Civilization Jihad is what the Muslim Brotherhood calls it. The Alliance of Civilizations is what the UN calls it (see below). "Overseas Contingency Operation" is what the White House now calls it. (Could the UN and US be any more appeasing and deceptive if they tried?!) The fact of the matter is that a politicized Islam (note that the Qur'an proclaims that the whole Earth belongs to Allah and instructs all Muslims to fight for and foist Islamic ideology on society whenever practical) cannot ever be made compatible with an enlightened civilization (Western or otherwise), i.e., that recognizes individual liberty as being sacrosanct and reason as absolute. Enlightenment recognizes that the source of rights is Natural law (i.e. principles that are discoverable in nature using reason), while Islam instructs that the source of rights is Qur'anic Law (i.e. Allah's literal word). This difference is politically irreconcilable. For Islam to be made compatible with Western civilization qua Western civilization, meaning, with an enlightened West's notions of justice, rights and law, Muslims would need to accept that the Qur'an is not the literal word of God and adopt an interpretation of the Qur'an that ignores much of what is written therein. I submit that that is not possible and I challenge any Muslim reading this to explain how it could be.
A non-submitted Muslim, a partially-submitted Muslim or a Muslim who has submitted to Islam's dictates only on their own rationalized terms are, I submit, all oxymorons.
Apologists for and sympathizers of Islam point towards "secular" Turkey as an example of how an Islamic nation may be made politically compatible with Western civilization. I refute this claim in here. And, let us now read what today's democratically elected Prime Minister of Turkey has had to say about his aspirations for and understanding of Islam in today's modern world:
Perhaps "moderate" Indonesia has less grandiose aspirations? Think again:
Islamic leaders in even the most moderate and "secular" countries are ostensibly (albeit tacitly) backing the Muslim Brotherhood's call for "Civilization Jihad".
Perhaps the United Nations is not on the same bandwagon? I submit that they are:
Read: "We're from the government of governments, and we're here to help you welcome and embrace Islam". Evidence of this one way agenda can be seen in the way countries that are supporting the UNAOC are reporting their own actions. Western countries are reporting that they are implementing plans to promote understanding of and tolerance for Islam, while the Islamic countries are reporting that they are promoting the same to Westerners who visit or reside in their countries with little to no promotion of understanding or tolerance of Western ideals and values to Muslims.
Signs of the West committing suicide on account of an Islamofascistic agenda are everywhere. What is one to do about it though?
At the very least, at the personal level each of us must commit to educating ourselves of the facts and truth and sharing our knowledge with all who will listen. As to what action should be taken at a national level, I refer you to this article.
~ Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf
Malik Obama holding a photo of himself with his close friend and younger half brother, the President of the United States:
Obama showing his enthusiasm for and allegiance to America during the National Anthem:
More SOLO Store
The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand
Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand