Overreaching and out of bounds. Intrusive. Harassment. The above is the tenth or eleventh notice I have had from the census bureau.
For the past month I have been called, harassed and visited by a Pamela Childs of the Census Bureau, who was pursuing me for an interview. Knowing my rights under the law, even under the current coup, I did not respond. I filled out my form -- that which is required by law -- but still received calls, visits, notes. Daily.
At one point, I left a message saying I would not speak to her. Period.
A week passed, and now I am being harassed again by another census goose stepper, Constance Atman. They want to interview me poisonally.
The country is going bankrupt and they can't throw money away fast enough on this power play.
It's pretty clear Obama intends to use the census to fix the next and future elections so as to ensure his Radical Left polices prevail for the long-term.
- Morris points out that Obama will:
- 1. Legalize millions of illegal aliens
- 2. Use Acorn to “assist” with the next census
Census goons prying into my private life. Welcome to
Oganda. But I suspect there is more in the offing. I am not a member of the Libertarian party, nor do I back their positions on drugs,
foreign policy and the like, but I agree with the statement of their chairman, William Redpath:
"The Libertarian Party believes that the federal government's current census procedures are unconstitutional, unnecessary, and too expensive. We believe that the census is constitutionally limited to collecting only one piece of information about each residence: the number of persons living in it. We urge Congress to change the census laws to comply with this constitutional limitation.
"The U.S. Constitution empowers Congress to provide for a census in order to apportion Representatives correctly. The Constitution does not empower Congress to use a census for any other purpose. There is no need for Congress to collect additional information such as names, races, ages, sexes, or home ownership status. Unfortunately, the federal government wants to use the additional information to fine tune its control over the lives and money of the American people.
"The 2010 census is expected to cost over $14 billion. A recent report from the Inspector General of the Department of Commerce indicates that preparations for the 2010 census have already been filled with waste and bloat. A proper census, limited to just a headcount, would be far less expensive.
Anders Gravers and Stephen Gash of the
Stop the Islamisaton of Europe report into me with latest crushing attack on free speech.
Police illegally stop party to use the freedom of speech
Denmark is slowly moving towards a situation where people fear reprisals if they openly say their opinions.
Police are actually supporting the violent forces who want to silence the people who tell the truth about them.
The SIOE Party wants to demonstrate in front of the mosque that is going to be rebuilt to be one of the biggest mosques presently in Denmark. The demonstration is planned for 27th March at 14.00 outside the existing mosque on Vibevej in Copenhagen.
The huge mosque is going to be built with blood-money from the most bloodthirsty organisation in the Iranian theocracy, namely the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).
The president of Iran, Ahmedinejad, held a meeting with the Danish based Iranian imam - who is going to run the mosque - when he was in Denmark at the climate conference in December.
Therefore SIOE expects the worst from this mosque, when it is obvious that it is directly connected to one of the worst brutes in the world – puppet-president Ahmadinejad - and that is why SIOE intends to fight it by all legal means.
However the Copenhagen police have denied us the right to demonstrate in front of the mosque, because Ahmadinejad’s muslim and Danish adherents could cause trouble when they demonstrate against SIOE. That is why the police have ordered SIOE to demonstrate in front of a government building that is situated far from the mosque. The Danish politicians are not present in the building on Saturdays, so we have of course said no to that place and demand that we get the permission to demonstrate in front of the mosque.
We urge the Danish politicians to demand that the Police obey the Danish constitution.
§ 79 Citizens shall, without previous permission, be at liberty to assemble unarmed. The police shall be entitled to be present at public meetings. Open-air meetings may be prohibited when it is feared that they may constitute a danger to the public peace.
Given that a breach of the peace is not to be feared from SIOE, the police cannot forbid our demonstration, but may only prohibit possible counter-demonstrations that the police might fear could cause a breach of the peace.
We have now send a complaint to the National Commissioner of the Danish Police and are awaiting an answer.
The party SIOE finds it completely disastrous, that Denmark is fighting a fight against a tactic called "war on terror" instead of being honest and calling it the war against islam, because islam is in war with us! At the same time our soldiers fight and die for our freedom in Afghanistan, the politicians who have stationed the Danish soldiers there, have approved special treatment in Denmark for that so-called faith, that kills our soldiers in Afghanistan.
The politicians have not only approved a mosque, they have also denied the original population to object to the mosque funded by Ahmadinejad.
A mosque is not just a kind of church, like many Danish people think, and as the adherents of islam want us to believe. A mosque is a kind of political headquarters for islam, given that islam is an ideology. From the big mosque islam’s infrastructure will expand in Denmark, acountry that has not yet become islamic.
When the Islamic infrastructure is solid and wellfounded with enough mosques spread around Denmark the islamisation will start in earnest.
Therefore SIOE will not accept that the enemy we are fighting in Afghanistan can expand its infrastructure in our country, unrestricted. It is very startling that the Danish police are denying our right to demonstrate outside the political headquarters of Ahmadinejad.
If you are angry that the freedom of expression is violated in Denmark, then write to the National Commissioner of the Danish Police here:KPE004@politi.dk
and/or to the Danish Prime Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen: stm@stm.dk
The UN hood is driven by the Organization of the Islamic Conference. So of course any figure or organization that works ideologically, violently, politically, by stealth, by any means necessary to achieve Islam's objective of worldwide domination will be protected and advanced.
The Brotherhood's stated goal is to instill the Qur'an and Sunnah as the "sole reference point for ... ordering the life of the Muslim family, individual, community ... and state" across the world.
Quietly removing a key player in the Brotherhood is deeply troubling, but more shocking and disturbing is Obama's tacit approval. Obama has been consistent in the advancement of jihad.
U.N. Drops Muslim Brotherhood Figure From 'Terrorist Finance' List Mark Hosenball, Newsweek hat tip Rut
The U.N. Security Council has quietly dropped Youssef Nada, a prominent financial and diplomatic representative of the Muslim Brotherhood, from an international sanctions list directed at curbing the activities of alleged terroristfinanciers. The delisting of Nada, by the Al-Qaida and Taliban Sanctions Committee, was announced by this official notice posted on the Security Council’s Web site. In addition to Nada himself, the notice declares that two businesses associated with him, Waldenberg AG of Liechtenstein and Youssef M. Nada & Co. GMBH of Vienna, also have been removed from the U.N. sanctions list.
The Security Council’s announcement does not explain why the council decided to drop financial sanctions against Nada and his companies—sanctions intended to curb their ability to conduct financial activities anywhere in the world. But Victor Comras, a former adviser on financial sanctions to the U.S. State Department and, later, an adviser to the committee that produced the sanctions lists, says he find the U.N. action troubling. "To my mind this is a great mistake. I'm kind of mystified by it," Comras told Declassified. When Nada was put on the U.N. sanctions list, it was done with great public fanfare, Comras said. But when the U.N. decided to take his name off, it was done with a minimum of public discussion.In an e-mail, Comras added: "Even though Nada may no longer be involved in funding Al Qaeda, he has made it clear a number of times that he will continue as a major financial supporter of Hamas . . . As you know, Nada never really suffered from the [U.N. listing]. He continued to live well, travel, and, most likely, to access and manipulate his assets through his family and others." Nada has previously denied any involvement with Al Qaeda
Comras also noted that given the fact that all listing and delisting decisions by the U.N. sanctions committee have to be unanimous, at some point, in his view, the Obama administration would have had to signal that it was willing to go along with Nada's delisting. Nada and his companies were placed on a terrorist-finance sanctions list maintained by the U.S. Treasury before they were added to U.N.'s list; according to the list currently available on the Treasury Department's Web site, Nada and his companies are still on it.
In a statement, a Treasury spokesperson said that the U.S. has supported "the removal of those individuals who are no longer appropriate for listing pursuant to that specific regime." But the spokesperson added that Nada remains on the Treasury's U.S.-only sanctions list.In a telephone call to NEWSWEEK on Wednesday afternoon, Nada confirmed that he was aware that his name had been dropped from the U.N. sanctions list but that it was still on the American list. He expressed puzzlement as to why he's still on it. Nada said he had applied about a year ago for his name to be taken off the U.N. list.
Nada reiterated his longtime denials that he had been involved in any dealings or contacts with either Al Qaeda or the Taliban. He also denied any contacts with Hamas, which he said was separate from the Muslim Brotherhood, of which he still acknowledges he is a member. Nada said he was "not going to sue anyone" in pursuit of compensation for the sanctions that have now been dropped, but that he was going to try to unfreeze and recover assets that had been frozen as a result of the U.N. action
An animated but courtly individual who once welcomed Declassified's authors into his home for two days while we filmed a documentaryfor PBS, Nada reputedly served for years as a semiofficial diplomatic representative of the Muslim Brotherhood, an Egypt-based fundamentalist movement that ultimately seeks the worldwide creation of an Islamic caliphate, but purports to do so through peaceful means. After splitting from the Brotherhood, disaffected members of the movement, such as deputy Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri, subsequently created more violent and militant Islamist factions. While Nada has denied any connection with Al Qaeda, he has expressed support in the past for Palestinian resistance fighters. As one of the Brotherhood’s diplomatic representatives, he also had dealings with both the late Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein and the ayatollahs who now rule Iran.The Bush administration added Nada, his companies, and a key business associate to the U.S. terrorist-finance sanctions list in the wake of 9/11 after examining intelligence suggesting that a network of Islamic investment companies called Al-Taqwa, based in Switzerland, Liechtenstein, and the Bahamas, had handled money for people believed to be associates of Osama bin Laden. At one point, as NEWSWEEK reported after 9/11, Nada's Bank Al Taqwa was sued in the Bahamas by Ghalib Mohammed Binladin, a brother of Osama, for failing to pay out $2.5 million that Ghalib claimed he was owed. The lawsuit was dismissed.
The Bush administration touted the use of financial sanctions—which it and the U.N. Security Council both routinely imposed on companies and individuals without first offering them an opportunity to challenge the sanctions listings—as an effective method of shutting down terrorist networks without having to reveal intelligence secrets in public. However, human-rights activists complained that such procedures were unfair and illegal because they lacked any semblance of due process for those sanctioned.
Does any group do less for humanity than "human rights groups"? They are anti-human, pro-savage.
Every time I see BHO sign another bill, I am fascinated at how he holds a pen. He holds a pen like an illiterate. Have you seen it? Like a little kid who just learned how to write and he signs a scribble.
He makes an O instead of an X.
Just sayin.More treason from the America-hater in the White House. Oil is a strategic commodity, an element in our national security.
And you know damn well that those Russian drilling ships and oil platforms will be bristling with electronic listening antennas -- for spying on the U.S.
We have oil up to our eyeballs that we won't drill -- instead, we fund jihad and the barbaric ideology of madmen.
Obama surrenders gulf oil to Moscow
The Russians are coming - to drill in our own backyard
By THE WASHINGTON TIMES (hat tip Van)
The Obama administration is poised to ban offshore oil drilling on the outer continental shelf until 2012 or beyond. Meanwhile, Russia is making a bold strategic leap to begin drilling for oil in the Gulf of Mexico. While the United States attempts to shift gears to alternative fuels to battle the purported evils of carbon emissions, Russia will erect oil derricks off the Cuban coast.
The Obama administration, however, views energy policy through green eyeshades. Every aspect of its approach to energy is subordinated to radical environmental concerns. This unprecedented lack of balance is placing offshore oil resources off-limits. The O Force would prefer the country shift its energy production to alternative sources, such as nuclear, solar and wind power. In theory, there's nothing wrong with that, in the long run, assuming technology can catch up to demand. But we have not yet reached the green utopia, we won't get there anytime soon, and America needs more oil now.
Russia more sensibly views energy primarily as a strategic resource.
If there is any justice, impeachment proceedings await Pelosi, Reid and Barry Obama if they putsch the health bill through. The American people don't want it. Period.
We are a government of the people, by the people, for the people. Who the hell do these power-mad clowns think they are?
Obama said this on TV last night: “and this health care plan will reduce your premiums up to 3,000 percent!” And the audience of idiot drones started cheering…
Atlas reader James wrote, "It’s like the game show Family Feud":
Host: “Name something that people do with their shoe laces”
Idiot Drone Contestant #1: “They eat them!”
Idiot Drone Family starts clapping and shouting out : “Yeah! Good answer! Good Answer!”
Yeah, when pigs fly.
I will give a hat tip to Brett Baier in his interview with the little O last night. He kicked his ass and Obama sounded like a bumbling thug.
Commentary by Robert Tracinski
1. Defeat and Dishonor
All eyes are on the "whip count" of yes and no votes for the health care bill in the House.
The latest news is the flip-flop of Dennis Kucinich, who will now vote "yes" after previously strongly opposing the bill because it didn't go far enough toward socialism—or rather, because it moved toward the wrong variant of socialism: the fascist model.
But my impression is that Kucinich doesn't really change the count. I don't remember seeing him on anyone's list of potential swing votes against the bill. Most vote counters have already factored in the likelihood that the far left will go along with the bill simply because it's a step toward a government takeover.
So the whip count now stands at about 205 "yes" votes, 11 votes short of passage, and it's not clear that the Democrats will be able to add much to that total. As Jack Wakeland noted to me: "The original House bill passed 220-215. The election of Republican Scott Brown to be the new Senator from Massachusetts, as well as continued tea party and other grassroots opposition, has cost at least 15 votes in the House—and possibly as many as 25."
If things go well, that could be the real significance of the vote: it will allow us to measure the exact political impact—so far—of the tea party movement.
What also gives me cause for hope is the general air of pathetic desperation in the House leadership's machination to get a health care bill rammed through somehow.
Since many House Democrats had problems with the Senate version of the bill, and they didn't trust the Senate to be able or willing to make those changes later, Democrats first proposed passage of the bill in the House simultaneously with the Senate's passage of revisions demanded by the House. But then the Senate parliamentarian shot that down, quite sensibly pointing out that the Senate can't vote on revisions to a law that doesn't exist yet.
So their latest attempt is a "self-executing rule," also called the "Slaughter Rule" after House Rules Committee Chairwoman Louise Slaughter, in which the House would pass its preferred changes to the Senate bill, and in passing those changes would "deem" the Senate bill to be passed. But this doesn't actually change the outcome. Once the Senate bill is "deemed" to be passed, it would go on to the president to be signed—while the changes to the bill could still be forgotten and abandoned by the Senate.
So the whole idea of this parliamentary pretzel is to allow House Democrats to say that they never really voted for the Senate bill, that they just voted for the corrections—while actually having them vote for the Senate bill. Or rather, its goal is to have them vote for the Senate bill without actually voting for it.
This is pretty clearly unconstitutional, violating the procedure set out in Article 1, Section 7 of the Constitution for the passage of a bill into law. The Constitution states that both Houses must have an official vote for a bill with the exact same wording—precisely the situation the House's "self-executing" maneuver is intended to avoid.
Such constitutional provisions are rarely enforced by the Supreme Court—though they did so in the case of this rule's most immediate precedent, the line-item veto, which was struck down for a similar reason. Still, the Supreme Court is generally very reluctant to insert itself into the procedural rules that Congress sets for itself. That is precisely why these constitutional rules must be internalized by Congress. It should be the rulebook they follow because they themselves believe it is the right thing to do—and not just because they are afraid of being slapped down by the Supreme Court.
But the left regards the Constitution as an irrelevant obstacle. As President Obama just put in an interview with Fox News, he doesn't "spend a lot of time worrying about what the procedural rules are." Or as the left used to say, in defending Communist dictatorships, you can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs. Except that it wasn't eggs they were breaking; it was skulls.
But I think the Democrats are deluding themselves if they think anyone is going to be fooled by any parliamentary maneuvers. Saying that they voted for the health care bill without voting for the health care bill is going to go over about as well as John Kerry saying that he voted for the bill before he voted against it. The American people have a lot of experience with dishonest politicians, and they can spot a cheap evasion when they see it.
The article below describes some of the controversy over the Slaughter Rule and describes some good Republican tactics to flush Democrats out into the open, including forcing them to hold a vote on whether they are going to vote on the Senate bill. Can you imagine having to defend voting "no" on that one?
This is going to be hair-raisingly close, but I still stand by my earlier prediction. In trying to shove this bill through, the left had to choose between legislative defeat and dishonor. They chose dishonor. They will get defeat—and not just in this vote.
Legal blogger William Jacobson describes what the Democrats are doing as "slaughter by self-execution," meaning that this vote may be "self-executing" for the Democrats' political careers.
Or as TIA Daily reader Ron Chandler puts it: "Nancy Pelosi wants the House to say the Senate bill is 'deemed passed,' so they can pass the bill without voting on it. Can the American people then say that Obama, Biden, Pelosi, and Reid are 'deemed impeached'?"
"'Deem and pass': Democrats' New Tactic for Healthcare Reform Bill," Gail Russell Chaddock, Christian Science Monitor, March 16
With 178 seats in the House–and four of 13 seats on the powerful Rules Committee–Republicans don't have the votes to defeat this strategy, but they aim to make it as costly to Democrats as possible, especially those in tough races in 2010."Make no mistake, this will be a career-defining and a Congress-defining vote," said Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell on Tuesday. "Anyone who endorses this strategy will be forever remembered for trying to claim they didn't vote for something they did. It will go down as one of the most extraordinary legislative sleights of hand in history."
The procedure of one vote to both adopt a resolution and concur on a Senate amendment to a bill has been around since 1933…. But all sides agree that it's never been used on a measure this significant.
"It's a procedure typically used on very routine matters," says Ross Baker, a political scientist at Rutgers University in New Brunswick, NJ….
GOP leader John Boehner of Ohio announced today that Republicans plan to force a vote on a resolution requiring an up-or-down vote on the Senate health care bill. Even if the resolution fails, it will put Democrats on record in a way that can be used in 2010 election campaigns….
Meanwhile, Rep. David Dreier (R) of California, the top Republican on the House Rules Committee, is calling for the Rules Committee debate on this issue to be televised. "With the Democratic majority poised to turn the rules of the House on their head just to get their government takeover of healthcare through, we need cameras there to record it," he said in a statement on Tuesday.
2. No Consent from the Governed
Why are House Democrats so suicidally focused on pushing through an unpopular bill? Because they believe that the Republicans will never be able to repeal it and that they will have established a permanent new government entitlement that will only grow in future decades, pushing this country permanently farther toward the left.
Mark Steyn makes this point and also concludes that the Democrats are probably right—that the history of the Republicans' response to the welfare state indicates that they don't have the backbone to roll it back.
But there is something different about this bill. Previous welfare-state expansions enjoyed public support and passed with bipartisan majorities—which served to demoralize any opposition. Never has a bill like this gone through on a strict one-party vote when the American people oppose it by nearly two to one. And that means that there is no reason for the Republicans to accept this bill.
And that's why a pledge to repeal the bill is gaining momentum, with 37 House and Senate members on board—including a number of rising stars in the party. Even more telling is the fact that 163 Republican congressional candidates have signed it.
CBO Denies Official Release of Obamacare Cost Estimate
The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration's War on America
UPDATE: Pence to the preliminary CBO score as given on ABC’s Top Line moments ago:
“Only in Washington, DC can you spend a trillion dollars and say you’re gonna save the taxpayer’s money.”
Why does the world give its tacit approval to Muslims killing Jews, but recoils in revulsion at Jewish self-defense?
If Muslims are firing missiles at the Jews.
The Jews should be firing bigger, deadlier missiles at the Muslims.
Hamas has called for a new intifada, a new war against the Jewish people.
Check out "al qaeda: inspired" -- al qaeda in arabic is HQ. Think Centcom, Islamic Centcom. It's all Islam, all the time. Hezballah -- party of god. Every Islamic group shares the same ideology, the same text, the same teachings. It's all Islam, and Islam teaches kill the Jews (and the Christians and all non-believers.)
Israel vows fierce response after Kassam kills Thai worker Jerusalem Post
Al-Qaida-inspired group claims responsibility for attack from Gaza - the third in 24 hours after two rockets land near Sderot; comes as EU foreign policy chief Ashton visits Strip.
Israel warned of a harsh response on Thursday afternoon after a Thai greenhouse worker was killed when a Kassam rocket fired by Gazaterrorists exploded in the Netiv Ha’asara area.
The man, in his 30s, was evacuated to Ashkelon’s Barzilai Hospital, where doctors were forced to pronounce him dead.
A small Islamist faction calling itself Ansar al-Sunna claimed responsibility for the attack.
In a statement e-mailed to reporters in Gaza, the al-Qaida-inspired faction said the attack was a response to Israel's "Judaization" of Islamic holy places in Jerusalem and elsewhere in the West Bank.
A second group, the Aksa Martyrs Brigades, also later claimed responsibility.
Vice Premier Silvan Shalom warned that the attack would lead to a strong reaction, and said that Hamas was ultimately responsible.
“It is severe escalation,” said Shalom in remarks broadcast on Army Radio. “Israel will not return to the situation of before Operation Cast Lead. The response will be particularly fierce...I hope Hamas will learn a lesson.”
The attack came on the same day as a visit to Gaza by Europe's top diplomat, EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton, who had just crossed into the territory when the rocket was fired.
"I condemn any kind of violence. We have got to find a peaceful solution to the issues and problems," she said. She was the most senior international official to visit Gaza in more than a year.
Obama Jeopardizing U.S. Relationship With Israel
U.S.-Israeli relations have hit a 35-year low over the contentious east Jerusalem building project. Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren said, “Israel’s ties with the United States are in their worst crisis since 1975 . . . a crisis of historic proportions.”
This is because, according to Barack Obama, Jewish homes in east Jerusalem “hinder peace” with Muslims. According to The Associated Press, “Israel’s already strained relationship with the U.S. hit a new low last week when it announced the construction plans during a visit by Vice President Joe Biden. The timing of the announcement deeply embarrassed the Obama administration and put plans for indirect peace talks with the Palestinians in jeopardy.”
What about the timing of the Palestinian Authority’s “honoring” of a mass-murdering female genocidal bomber, for whom the Palestinians are naming a square in Ramallah? The Jerusalem Post reported: “The ceremony was scheduled to take place on the 32nd anniversary of the attack, the worst terrorist incident in Israel’s history, in which terrorists commandeered a bus and murdered 37 people, including 10 children.”
It too was scheduled to take place during Biden’s visit, but was postponed for a week after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu asked Obama’s Middle East envoy, George Mitchell, to get the Palestinians to cancel it.
“The announcement of the settlements on the very day that the vice president was there was insulting,” said Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Obama adviser David Axelrod also said: “This was an affront; it was an insult, but most importantly, it undermined this very fragile effort to bring peace to that region. For this announcement to come at that time was very, very destructive.”
Neither Clinton nor Axelrod mentioned anything about the honoring of the jihad terrorist being insulting. And it will still take place, just a week late. Yet Obama is pressuring Israel, not the Palestinians.
Jews living in their holiest city is unacceptable, but senior Palestinian Authority officials joining the Fatah youth movement in a “popular inauguration” ceremony for a square named for a terrorist is just fine. The stalkers of the Jews are no hindrance to peace.
What is insulting is America’s abandonment of our most loyal and trusted ally in a region that can only be described as a hot mess, full of backward, oppressive, and brutal hellholes — save for Israel.
What a freak show. This is one really creepy period in American history. Obama is validating every page on my book.
Add Sharpton to Obama's other playmates: Edward Said, Rashid Khalidi, William Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, Samantha Power, Susan Rice...... does he have one normal friend?
Obama Partners Openly with Racist and Anti-Semite hat tip Jane
Barack Obama’s deliberate, willful, and racist contempt for white people and especially Jews by Bill Levinson
The front page feature of today’s Wall Street Journal, “Obama’s New Partner: Al Sharpton,” tells us everything we need to know about Barack Obama’s character, integrity, and fitness for public office. Al Sharpton has no more place in or near the Oval Office than David Duke of the Ku Klux Klan or Tom Metzger of the White Aryan Resistance. Obama’s decision to partner with this individual is, however, totally consistent with the racist content in Dreams From My Father, membership in a racist (as shown by its standing ovation for Michael Pfleger’s “There were a whole lot of white people crying”) church, Jeremiah Wright’s blood libels of both the United States and Israel, and 9/11 denier Van Jones.
It is already well known that Obama (and Hillary Clinton, and adulterer John Edwards) appeared at the 2007 meeting of Al Sharpton’s National Action Network: arguably a hate group like the Ku Klux Klan or White Aryan Resistance as shown by its conduct at Freddy’s Fashion Mart, a Jewish owned store in Harlem. Just as the Klan once threatened Black people who moved into white neighborhoods, or opened businesses in white neighborhoods, the National Action Network, under Al Sharpton’s leadership and supervision, screamed racial epithets and even threatened to burn the store down. A deranged individual who acted on the NAN’s hate speech later did set the store on fire, much like a lone wolf white supremacist acting on verbal sewage from the likes of Duke or Metzger.
Wikipedia offers the following definitions of hate organizations and hate speech.
A hate group is an organized group or movement that advocates physical or verbal aggression toward or refusal to interact with persons on the basis of those persons’ possession and/or exhibition of a certain characteristic.…Dr. Ehud Sprinzak, an expert on terrorism and hate crimes, argues that verbal violence is “the use of extreme language against an individual or a group that either implies a direct threat that physical force will be used against them, or is seen as an indirect call for others to use it.” Sprinzak argues that verbal violence is often a substitute for real violence, and that the verbalization of hate has the potential to incite people who are incapable of distinguishing between real and verbal violence to engage in actual violence.
From where we sit, the National Action Network qualifies as a hate group every bit as repugnant as the Klan and White Aryan Resistance, and its conduct at Freddy’s Fashion Mart meets the above definition of hate speech. In addition, a deranged lone actor heeded the NAN’s “indirect call for others to use [physical force]” on the “greedy Jew bastard” and “white interloper”–the latter from Sharpton himself.
Now let us take a look at the National Action Network’s behavior outside Freddy’s Fashion Mart in 1995.
It would have taken no great effort for the reporters covering the Apollo debate to have walked across 125th Street from the theater to visit Freddy’s Fashion Mart, where in 1995 eight people died in a murderous rampage inspired by Mr. Sharpton. …But at Freddy’s, Mr. Sharpton was even more malevolent. He turned a landlord-tenant dispute between the Jewish owner of Freddy’s and a black subtenant into a theater of hatred. Picketers from Mr. Sharpton’s National Action Network, sometimes joined by “the Rev.” himself, marched daily outside the store, screaming about “bloodsucking Jews” and “Jew bastards” and threatening to burn the building down. After weeks of increasingly violent rhetoric, one of the protesters, Roland Smith, took Mr. Sharpton’s words about ousting the “white interloper” to heart. He ran into the store shouting, “It’s on!” He shot and wounded three whites and a Pakistani, whom he apparently mistook for a Jew. Then he set the fire, which killed five Hispanics, one Guyanese and one African-American–a security guard whom protesters had taunted as a “cracker lover.” Smith then fatally shot himself.
To put this another way, the National Action Network acted toward Freddy’s Fashion Mart the way the Ku Klux Klan once acted toward Black-owned businesses that moved into the “wrong” neighborhoods: racist hate speech, threats to burn the business down, and actual firebombings by deranged individuals who acted on the Klan’s hate speech.
Al Sharpton’s and the National Action Network’s hate speech did not involve Freddy’s business practices; statements like “Freddy’s Fashion Mart is Unfair,” whether true or false, are not hate speech. Phrases like “Jew bastards,” “bloodsucking Jews,” “white interlopers,” “cracker lovers,” and “don’t give the Jew a dime” are hate speech, and hate speech is a characteristic of hate organizations. “Don’t give the Jew a dime” seems to fulfill the definition “refusal to interact with persons on the basis of those persons’ possession and/or exhibition of a certain characteristic” perfectly. Next we have:
The Nine Lives of Al Sharpton By: John Perazzo
FrontPageMagazine.com | Thursday, April 12, 2007
In 1995, Sharpton led his National Action Network in an ugly boycott against Freddy’s Fashion Mart, a Jewish-owned business in Harlem, New York. The boycott started when Freddy’s owners announced that because they wanted to expand their own business, they would no longer sublet part of their store to a black-owned record shop. The street leader of the boycott, Morris Powell, was the head of Sharpton’s “Buy Black” Committee. Repeatedly referring to the Jewish proprietors of Freddy’s as “crackers,” Powell and his fellow protesters menacingly told passersby, “Keep [going] right on past Freddy’s, he’s one of the greedy Jew bastards killing our [black] people. Don’t give the Jew a dime.”
We also note that, unlike former segregationists George Wallace and Strom Thurmond, and former Klansman Robert Byrd, Al Sharpton has never, to the best of our knowledge, apologized for or retracted his statements and actions.
Read it all.
Anwar al-Awlaki was the preacher of the Dar al-Hijrah mosque, in Falls Church, Virginia.
The Fort Hood jihadi Major Hasan, the sole suspect in the jihad massacre of 13 fellow US soldiers in Texas, worshiped at the controversial Dar al-Hijrah mosque in Falls Church, Virginia. That mosque was led by the devout Muslim imam, Anwar al-Awlaki, who is said to have been a "spiritual adviser" to three of the hijackers who attacked America on Sept 11, 2001.
The preacher at the Dar al-Hirah mosque was also in regular contact with the Christmas balls bomber, who tried to blow up a passenger jet on Christmas day. Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab sat on top of the fuel tank (seat 19A) and tried to detonate a bomb hooked up to his tiny genitalia.
And just last week, the Virginia legislature had the latest inciter from the Dar-al-Hirah mosque open the legislative session with a devout Islamic prayer. Got that?
Yemen-American imam calls for US Muslim revolt
A Yemeni-American Muslim preacher known for his ties to extremists [devout Muslims - Atlas] operating in the U.S. called on American Muslims in a new audio message to turn against their government because of its actions against Muslims around the world.
Anwar al-Awlaki's latest message, excerpts of which were aired on CNN Wednesday, described his own radicalization after U.S. operations against Muslims and called on those in the U.S. to follow his path, according to the SITE Intelligence Group, which monitors extremist Web Sites.
"To the Muslims in America I have this to say, how can your conscience allow you to live in peaceful coexistence with a nation responsible for terrible crimes against your own brothers and sisters?" he asked. "How can you have loyalty to a government leading the war against Muslims?"
Al-Awlaki, who has used his personal Web site to encourage Muslims around the world to kill U.S. troops in Iraq, disappeared in Yemen a year ago, according to his father. Yemeni security officials say they believe he is hiding in a region of the mountainous nation that has become a refuge for Islamic militants.
He was in regular contact with Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, who is accused of killing 13 people in a rampage at the Fort Hood Army post in Texas. He communicated with al-Awlaki in e-mail exchanges 10 to 20 times over several months last year.
Al-Awlaki also is believed to have been in contact with Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, a Nigerian who attempted to blow up a passenger airliner in Detroit on Christmas day with explosives concealed in his underwear.
"Our brother, Umar Farouk, has succeeded in breaking through the security systems that have cost the U.S. government alone over $40 billion since 9/11," he said in an excerpt of the tape provided by SITE.
U.S. authorities have been increasingly worried about the presence of Americans supporting jihad inside the country. Over the past week, a Pennsylvania woman, who went by the name "Jihad Jane," was accused in a plot to kill a Swedish cartoonist; a New Jersey man was held by authorities in Yemen; and five young Pakistani-American men from Northern Virginia were charged by Pakistani officials with planning terrorist attacks in the South Asian country.
They can cut a thousand, a million tongues, but you can't cut out the truth about Islamic jihad. No comment from Obama, who was working feverishly to ethnically cleanse Jerusalem of the Jewish people.
LAGOS, Nigeria – Attackers killed 12 people Wednesday morning in a small Christian village in central Nigeria, officials said, cutting out most of the victims' tongues in the latest violence in a region where religious fighting already has killed hundreds this year.
The attack almost mirrored the tactics used by those who carried out similar massacres in Christian villages last week when more than 200 people were slaughtered.
Under the cover of darkness and a driving rain, raiders with machetes entered the village of Byie early Wednesday, setting fire to homes and firing gunshots into the air to drive frightened villagers into the night, witness Linus Vwi said.
The truth about Islamic jihad
The Prime Minister of Turkey is promising mass deportations of Armenian Christians. Isn't that how the last Armenian genocide began?
As if the jihad slaughter against millions of Armenian Christians wasn't bad enough, if you speak of it the Islamic Turkey regime promises another one.
The more things change, the more the jihad stays the same. Almost a hundred years have passed since the wholesale slaughter of Christians by jihad, but do not say it. It defames Islam!
Has Obama condemned this? He is too busy demanding that Jerusalem be ethnically cleansed of the Jewish people.
Read my previous coverage of this issue: Armenian Genocide.
Turkey threatens to expel 100,000 Armenians BBC hat tip Rut
Turkey's prime minister has threatened to deport 100,000 Armenian migrants, amid renewed tensions over Turkish mass killings of Armenians in World War I.
Recent resolutions in the US and Sweden have called the killings "genocide".
Recep Tayyip Erdogan told the BBC that of 170,000 Armenians living in Turkey "70,000 are Turkish citizens".
"We are turning a blind eye to the remaining 100,000... Tomorrow, I may tell these 100,000 to go back to their country, if it becomes necessary."
Thousands of Armenians, many of them women, work illegally in Turkey. Most do low-skilled jobs such as cleaning.
Faltering diplomacy
Mr Erdogan was speaking in an interview with the BBC's Turkish Service, in which he was asked about the recent votes by lawmakers in the US and Sweden.
The resolutions, recognising the mass killings of Armenians by Ottoman Turks as "genocide", were passed narrowly, and in both cases Turkey reacted angrily.
Mr Erdogan said the resolutions "harm the Armenian people as well... and things become deadlocked".
Armenian Prime Minister Tigran Sarkisian was quoted as telling parliament on Wednesday that Mr Erdogan's comments only reminded Armenians of the mass killings.
"These kinds of political statements do not help to improve relations between our two states," he said.
"When the Turkish prime minister allows himself to make such statements it immediately for us brings up memories of the events of 1915."
edible message -- prophetic, really. Reinstitutionalizing the spirit and love of America.
War is coming for Israel. Hamas has called for a new intifada. Obama's America has switched sides.
Muslim "protester" with ax in Jerusalem
Imagine this walking around in your neighborhood with a Hamas flag, an ax and a keffiyeh wrapped around his head. How would you feel? I have seen the pro-jihad marches in America and Europe. This is the future.
Benjamin Netanyahu's first term as Israeli prime minister collapsed in 1999 in part because he had an unhappy relationship with President Bill Clinton. It is understandable then that Mr. Netanyahu's current government had, until last week, strived to stay close to President Barack Obama.That strategy would have been entirely sensible if Mr. Obama were simply another president in the long line since Franklin Roosevelt who vigorously asserted U.S. national interests, championed our friends (especially beleaguered ones), and kept alliances strong. But Mr. Obama is different. He is our first post-American president. He looks beyond American exceptionalism and believes that our role on the world stage should be merely one nation among many. Mr. Netanyahu's strategy is therefore out-of-date and flawed.
Israel has sought to accommodate Mr. Obama on two critical issues: negotiations with Palestinians and Iranian nuclear weapons. These efforts have largely kept bilateral disagreements out of sight. But now the suppressed conflicts are fully visible and will either be resolved or cause a serious collision between Israel and the U.S.
On the Palestinian front, Mr. Netanyahu's government has tolerated 14 months of feckless administration diplomacy that has not altered geopolitical realities between Israel and the Palestinians.
Last week's announcement of the construction of new settlements in East Jerusalem while Vice President Joe Biden was visiting Israel was an unnecessary step.
[Readers tell me "Ramat Shlomo" where the building permits were discussed being given is decidedly NOT in "East Jerusalem," despite what the media keep saying. Frankly, it's irrelevant anyway -- Atlas]
But optics are not the real problem. Mr. Biden's response ("I condemn the decision"), approved in advance by Mr. Obama, and then emphasized by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in a blistering Friday phone call to Mr. Netanyahu, foreshadows what lies ahead. It won't be pretty.
Mr. Netanyahu's efforts to avoid open disputes with Washington have not won him White House plaudits. Mr. Obama almost certainly believes the real obstacle to peace is not new housing or unfortunate timing but so-called Israeli intransigence.
On Iran, Mr. Netanyahu has faithfully supported Mr. Obama's diplomacy, hoping to build credibility with the president against the day when Israel might have to strike Iran's weapons program pre-emptively. Jerusalem, for example, currently backs U.S. efforts to increase sanctions against Iran's nuclear program, doomed to failure though they are. As time passes, Israel's military option grows more difficult and the chances for success shrink as Iran seeks new air-defense systems and further buries and hardens nuclear facilities.
Mr. Netanyahu's mistake has been to assume that Mr. Obama basically agrees that we must prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. But the White House likely believes that a nuclear Iran, though undesirable, can be contained and will therefore not support using military force to thwart Tehran's nuclear ambitions.
What's more, Mr. Obama is also unwilling to let anyone else, namely Israel, act instead. That means that if Israel bombs Iranian nuclear facilities, the president will likely withhold critical replenishments of destroyed Israeli aircraft and other weapons systems.
We are moving inexorably toward, and perhaps have now reached, an Israeli crisis with Mr. Obama. Americans must realize that allowing Iran to obtain nuclear weapons is empowering an existential threat to the Israeli state, to Arab governments in the region that are friendly to the U.S., and to long-term global peace and security.
Mr. Netanyahu must realize he has not been banking good behavior credits with Mr. Obama but simply postponing an inevitable confrontation. The prime minister should recalibrate his approach, and soon. Israel's deference on Palestinian issues will not help it with Mr. Obama after a pre-emptive strike against Iran's nuclear program. It would be a mistake to think that further delays in such a strike will materially change the toxic political response Israel can expect from the White House. Israel's support will come from Congress and the American people, as opinion polls show, not from the president.
Mr. Obama is not merely heedless of America's predominant global position. He is also embarrassed enough by it not to regret diminishing it. In fact, we have achieved pre-eminence not simply to preen our American ego, but to defend our interests and those of like-minded allies. Ceding America's role in world affairs is not an act of becoming modesty but a dangerous signal of weakness to friends and adversaries alike. Israel may be the first ally to feel the pain.
Posts
