Jeremiah Wright - Hamas - CAIR: Is there a Connection?

Cross-posted by Maggie at Maggie's Notebook

UPDATE

I came across this piece on CNN Political Ticker, which seems to indicate that the below information is not just a "photoshop."

---------

As I was looking around the web today for confirmation about Wright's statement that his Doctorate is in "the area of Islam," I came across some posts that are linking to jpegs to more of Dr. Jeremiah Wright's church bulletins, showing Dr. Wright's copyright.

I'm passing on the links without comment because of the urgency to understand all that we can about what Barack and Michell Obama believe. There's a lot to digest.

My suggestion is that you begin at BizzyBlog, and follow the links there, although the individual links for each posting are given below.

March 17, 2008
TUCC's Church Bulletins from July 2007

March 19, 2008
Obama: It Looks Like There's More Where Wright Came From

March 20, 2008
WorldNetDaily: Obama Church Published Hamas Terror Manifesto

Church Bulletin Bonus: Omid Safi and the Progressive Muslim Union (PMU)

Pastor's Page: A Fresh View of the Palestinian Struggle


Technorati Tags: Trinity United Christian Church, Senator Barack Obama, Jeremiah Wright, Islam, Muslim, War on Terror, Jihad, CAIR,

Crescent of Shame in Honor of 19 Terrorists

Crescent of Shame in Honor of 19 Terrorists

Stop the Memorial Blogburst: Why only 38 Memorial Groves?

One prominently advertised feature of the Flight 93 Memorial is the “40 Memorial Groves,” one for each of the murdered heroes:

Why then does the actual design only contain 38?

The Memorial Groves are built into the crescent of what was originally called the Crescent of Embrace. The crescent forms part of the symbolic heavens in architect Paul Murdoch's crescent and star shaped design. Infidels cannot be memorialized in the Islamic heavens, so the 38 Memorial groves have to be a memorial to someone else. Who?

It is a simple geometric fact that a line across the most obtruding tips of the crescent of Memorial Groves points approximately to the White House:

A line across the Memorial Groves has the same slope (129° clockwise from north) as a line between the crash site and area of Washington DC that contains the Pentagon, the White House and the Capitol.

Notice also that the 38 groves can be seen as a set of 19 nested crescents. Take two groves away from the arc of 38 and a line across the tips of the remaining 36 will also point to the White House. Ditto for 34 groves, 32, etcetera, down to 2. One nested crescent for each of the nineteen 9/11 terrorists, each pointing to Washington, the specific target of the Flight 93 and Flight 77 terrorists and the symbolic target of all nineteen 9/11 terrorists.

Architect Paul Murdoch proves that he intends the 38 groves to be seen as a set of 19 nested crescents by surrounding the Tower of Voices with its own set of 19 nested crescents:

The Tower array contains nineteen nested crescents of various lengths, some as short as two trees, the same as with the Memorial Groves. Using arcs as short as two trees long is Murdoch’s trick for hiding the number of nested crescents in the Tower array. It isn’t until one finds the 19 nested crescents in the Memorial Groves, where the shortest crescent is made up of only 2 groves, that one knows to count the pairs of trees as crescents.

The Tower array also contains four single trees, giving special recognition to the four Flight 93 hijackers.

If anyone wants to think that this is coincidence, that is fine. (If not for all the other Islamic and terrorist memorializing features in the design, it might even be reasonable.) But even if it is coincidence, the American people still need to know that the planned Flight 93 memorial does in fact contain two sets of 19 nested crescents, and decide for themselves whether it is okay that the memorial contain elements like this that can be interpreted as honoring the 9/11 terrorists.

Fuller explanation of the Murdoch's 19-nested-crescents theme here.

What can you do? Some suggestions here.

The Superintendent said you have to show “intent”. There was a supposed “investigation” wherein the investigator did no investigating. We have been contacting Popular Mechanics to verify the claims of Islamic intent in this design; but have instead been lumped in with the conspiracy theorists of the Truther genre. But if it’s true that this is a wacked out conspiracy theory, then surely it can be debunked, right? So where are the debunkers?

“Intent” here is overt and demonstrated in simple facts, all of which are plainly evident. It is crystal clear that Murdoch is paying tribute to the terrorists who murdered the Flight 93 passengers and crew in this memorial design. The mathematical probability of all of these ‘accidentally’ occurring in one architectural design is astronomically improbable, if not completely impossible. Just the one feature - of the memorial facing to mecca - is less than 1 in 300. That one feature is compounded by features so numerous and redundant it would be in sane to deny that they exist, or that it’s a ‘misunderstanding’. You can’t see a crescent where a crescent doesn’t exist; it’s not possible. It’s not possible to measure the direction to mecca with different tools unless that exists, or an Islamic Sundial that precisely measures by shadow length the times for prayer throughout the year, and so on.

The “there is no direction to Mecca” claim as a rebuttal should have made whoever said it a laughing stock. Americans need to be alerted that another terrorist attack is about to happen on the Flight 93 crash site…should this memorial begin construction as planned.

When was the last time you saw all of these things converge BY ACCIDENT into one design? The Washington Monument can’t be an Islamic Sundial even in the wildest stretch of the imagination. All you have to do is look at the complicated calculations that are necessary to create one to see that. People were shocked and dismayed at the overt bare naked red crescent and star design, but the redesign which added a few trees behind the mosque retains all the terrorist memorializing features of the original.

This project must be stopped and a proper and appropriate memorial should be planned for the crash site of Flight 93.

—————

If you want to join the blogroll/blogburst for the Crescent of Betrayal blogburst, email Cao at caoilfhionn1 at gmail dot com, with your blog’s url address. The blogburst will be sent out once a week to the participants, for simultaneous publication on this issue on Wednesdays.

Thanks to Caos Blog

Trackpasted to:

Cao's Blog and Stop the ACLU

Crescent of betrayal/surrender Blogburst Blogroll

1389 Blog - Antijihadist Tech
A Defending Crusader
A Fine Line Between Stupid and Clever
And Rightly So
Big Dog's Weblog
Big Sibling
Cao's Blog
Chaotic Synaptic Activity
Error Theory
Faultline USA
Flanders Fields
Ft. Hard Knox
GM's Corner
Ironic Surrealism II
Jack Lewis
Kender's Musings
My Own Thoughts
Nice Deb
Ogre's Politics and Views
Part-Time Pundit
Right on the Right
Right Truth
Stix Blog
Stop the ACLU
The View From the Turret
The Wide Awakes
FaultlineUSA

America’s Jihad Sympathizers

Michelle Malkin’s blog today, “In the Mental No-jihad zone,” reminded me that the motivations of America’s jihad sympathizers, who are hell-bent on dragging us all into their cultural suicide schemes, needs a much deeper examination.

Michelle wrote:

“Diana West has the must-read column of the day on the pathetic inability of
Westerners to call the war and the warriors who want infidels beheaded what they
are. Too many of our political and military leaders here and across the pond are
stuck, Diana writes, in a “mental no-jihad zone. . .

Stifling dissent is precisely the mission of the likes of CAIR, which has
chosen veteran syndicated columnist and radio commentator Cal Thomas
as its latest target (via WTOP): . . .

I’d settle for keeping the jihad enablers and sympathizers at CAIR out of
White House events. But we can’t even ensure that. Steve
Emerson reports this morning: . . .”

It looks like the left is winning this political correctness game even as it reaches into the White House. Isn’t it time we really began to understand why the cultural left is so willing to play into the Islamists hands???

Now and then I read a book that is so provocative and so well-documented that I know it’s going into my Hanging Lefties by Their Sorry Words Toolbox. “The Enemy at Home: The Cultural Left And It’s Responsibility For 9/11” by Dinesh D’Souza is such a book. Not only does this book have an impressive index, each chapter’s endnotes run into pages providing a treasure trove of sources and quotes by the major lefty political players.

D’Souza has some impressive credentials. This is from his blog:

DINESH D'SOUZA is the Rishwain Fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford
University. Previously he was a domestic policy analyst at the White House. He
is the best-selling author of several books, including Illiberal Education, The End of
Racism, and What's So Great About America. . .

The book, “The Enemy at Home”, published 2007 by Doubleday, has been causing apoplexy among lefty bloggers and D’Souza has come in for plenty of harsh criticism. If you visit Amazon looking for the book you will first encounter the unfavorable Publisher’s Weekly review.

Conservative pundit D'Souza (Illiberal Education) roots the blame for the
9/11 attacks in the left wing's "aggressive global campaign to undermine the
traditional patriarchal family" in this mostly lucid but unconvincing argument.
Pointing to Hillary Clinton, Britney Spears and Noam Chomsky, he decries those
who have teamed up with Hollywood and the U.N. to foist an irreligious, sexually
licentious, antifamily liberal culture—epitomized by Eve Ensler's play The
Vagina Monologues and gay marriage initiatives—on a Muslim world that rightly
reviles it. By deliberately attacking Islamic values, the left tacitly allies
itself with al- Qaeda in its effort to defeat Bush's war on terror and thus
discredit conservatism at home, he asserts. But D'Souza's claim that Islamic
extremists are inflamed solely by America's music videos and feminists—not its
U.S. bases in Saudi Arabia, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict or American support
for Muslim dictators—is too single-minded. . .

This is what D’Souza actually says on the book’s jacket:

In faulting the cultural left, I am not making the absurd accusation that
this group blew up the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. I am saying that the
cultural left and its allies in Congress, the media, Hollywood, the non-profit
sector, and the universities are the primary cause of the volcano of anger
toward America that is erupting from the Islamic world. The Muslims who carried
out the 9/11 attacks were the product of this visceral rage – some of it based
on legitimate concerns, some of it based on wrongful prejudice, but all of it
fueled and encouraged by the cultural left. Thus without the cultural left, 9/11
would not have happened. . .

If you scroll down the Amazon review site you will find a few more favorable reviews such as this excerpt from a review by C. Cotten:

It seems that every reviewer here read an interview, or saw the author on Comedy Central, then rushed to write a review here loaded only with a vague
concept of this book's central themes.

First, it should be noted that the author talks about the motivation behind
the book, that in today's public discourse there is very little focus on the
cultural aspects of America that could be fomenting hate and terrorism against
us. There was a void on the subject which he has filled; as he says, "let the
debate begin."

Now whether you ultimately agree with him or not, this IS a debate worth
having, not just as it impacts our current conflict, but as it informs us as a
nation to take a good hard look in the mirror at times. . .

Permalink:
http://faultlineusa.blogspot.com/2007/07/americas-jihad-sympathizers.html

Trackback URL:
http://haloscan.com/tb/txwise/3091430262644852343

Tachnorati tags:

cultural left
leftists
Muslim
Islamists
jihad

Global Warming Caused By Lack of Faith in Allah

Originally posted at Right Truth

Mohammed Omran, described as a radical sheik, blamed 'the devastating drought, climate change and pollution -- on Australians' lack of faith in Allah.' He said "The fear of Allah is not there. So we have now a polluted earth, a polluted water, a wasteland..." according to this report. That's not all he, and some other clerics had to say:

What are the people now crying for? The prophet told you hundreds of years ago, 'Look after the water'."

A Sunday Herald Sun investigation also found clerics railing against "evil" democracy, vilifying Jews and Christians and encouraging jihad and polygamy.

And in a popular DVD selling locally, a foreign sheik exhorts Muslims to take control of Australia by out-breeding non-believers.

British-based Sheik Abdul Raheem Green forbade Muslims from having fewer than four children so Australia would become an Islamic state.

Behind the closed doors of some Melbourne mosques and bookshops, sheiks push for Sharia law, declare Islam at war with the "sick" West and gloat that September 11 boosted Muslim numbers. [snip]

"The birth rate in the Western countries is going down. People are more interested in their careers . . . they don't want to have babies," Sheik Green says in one DVD.

"So don't you think, Muslim brothers and sisters, we've got a bit of an opportunity here? They're not having babies any more. So what if, instead, we have the babies?

"In Canada one in three or one in four children being born is a Muslim. What does that do to the demographic shift of a Muslim population in 20 years' time? (source)

Also check out Culture wars: Target vs. Halal meat, The HILL Chronicles. Then read my post Fast food, Halal food, followed by The Merry Widow's article Is halal meat sacrificed to idols?

While you're on a reading roll, check out Political correctness and multiculturalism gone bad . If you still want some good reading check out Interview with Wafa Sultan

Islamification, Christianity and WWIII: Islam’s Subtle Political Maneuvers

If we are to escape further Islamification, we must take back our churches and all of our cultural institutions. Stand up, speak out, and if you must, walk out and withdraw financial support!!!

NEW YORK (BP)--Much of the church is asleep or in “deep, dark denial” about Islam, Anglican Archbishop Henry Luke Orombi of Uganda said in New York City at the Kairos Journal Award dinner Jan. 26. . . . The inner attack on the church is the shifting of authority away from the Bible toward a “false gospel,” Orombi said. But from without, he said, the church’s most significant threat is Islam. . . . the church is generally ignorant about Islam, its doctrine, its ideology and its expansionist strategy, the Anglican leader said. Most churches have no plan or vision about reaching Muslims and even shy away from evangelism out of fear and the prospect of retaliatory violence. . . . Mark Durie, vicar of St. Mary’s Anglican Church, Caulfield, in Melbourne, Australia, echoed that sentiment. Failure to address Islam with the Gospel will result in falling prey to it. At present, he said, the future of the world is less than certain.

What exactly is Islamification?

The simplest definition is can be found at WorldViews in a 2004 review “The Islamification of Europe.” This was a review of a WSJ article by Johns Hopkins professor Fouad Ajami.

Here’s an excerpt: (Bold highlights added by me)

On the op-ed page of the "Wall Street Journal" (subscription required) is a remarkable article by Johns Hopkins professor Fouad Ajami on how radical Islam has been nurtured specifically in Europe, and why the Europeans feel they must be on the Arabs' side, even as they are threatened by an unassimilated and growing population that owes them no loyalty.

Europeans imported huge numbers of Muslim laborers in the 1960's. Their numbers swelled as refugees fled the wars and tyrannies of their own countries. The mideast regimes were so oppressive that the dissidents fled to Europe, where they took advantage of the freedom they could never have at home to develop their radical Islamic ideologies. And, according to Ajami, as the immigrant population booms and the native Europeans have fewer and fewer children, the radicalized Muslims are gaining more and more power in the European democracies. But while they are willing to take advantage of the opportunities afforded in their new homelands, the Muslims are insisting that they owe allegiance to no nationality; only to Islam.

For a good view of Islamification see the video Islamification of Britain.

January 27, 2007: “We are in the midst of a third World War,’ former Mossad chief Efraim Halevy told weekly newspaper Expresso.”

See “World War III has already begun, says Israeli spy chief”
Former head of Israel's intelligence service tells Portuguese newspaper it would take at least 25 years before battle against fundamentalist terrorism is won; says nuclear strike by Muslim terrorists 'very likely'.

Hat Tip to Mr. Minority

A third World War is already underway between Islamic militancy and the West but most people do not realize it, the former head of Israel’s intelligence service Mossad said in an interview published Saturday in Portugal.

‘We are in the midst of a third World War,’ former Mossad chief Efraim Halevy told weekly newspaper Expresso. . .

Halevy, who was raised in war-time London, predicted it would take at least 25 years before the battle against Islamic fundamentalist terrorism is won and during this time a nuclear strike by Islamic militants was likely.

Hat Tip to Dhimmi Watch
“How the Pope sees Islam” (2/6/07) Here’s an excerpt. (Bold highlights added by me.)

The Egyptian Jesuit priest Fr. Samir Khalil Samir, S.J. here explains the thoughtful, careful, and realistic approach that Pope Benedict XVI has adopted toward the Islamic world. "When Civilizations Meet: How Joseph Ratzinger Sees Islam," from Asia News via Chiesa, with thanks to D.:

Benedict XVI is probably one of the few figures to have profoundly understood the ambiguity in which contemporary Islam is being debated and its struggle to find a place in modern society. At the same time, he is proposing a way for Islam to work toward coexistence globally and with religions, based not on religious dialogue, but on dialogue between cultures and civilizations based on rationality and on a vision of man and human nature which comes before any ideology or religion. This choice to wager on cultural dialogue explains his decision to absorb the Pontifical Council for Inter-religious Dialogue into the larger Pontifical Council for Culture.

While the pope is asking Islam for dialogue based on culture, human rights, the refusal of violence, he is asking the West, at the same time, to go back to a vision of human nature and rationality in which the religious dimension is not excluded. In this way – and perhaps only in this way – a clash of civilizations can be avoided, transforming it instead into a dialogue between civilizations. . . .

. . .But the key point that he tackles is that of shari’a. He points out that:

“the Koran is a total religious law, which regulates the whole of political and social life and insists that the whole order of life be Islamic. Shari’a shapes society from beginning to end. In this sense, it can exploit such freedoms as our constitutions give, but it cannot be its final goal to say: Yes, now we too are a body with rights, now we are present [in society] just like the Catholics and the Protestants. In such a situation, [Islam] would not achieve a status consistent with its inner nature; it would be in alienation from itself”.

This alienation could be resolved only through the total Islamization of society. When for example an Islamic finds himself in a Western society, he can benefit from or exploit certain elements, but he can never identify himself with the non-Muslim citizen, because he does not find himself in a Muslim society. . . .

With regard to the Jesuit’s statement above concernining Sharia: “it can exploit such freedoms as our constitutions give” please take a look at “Our Vulnerable Religious Freedoms”

Our greatest National strengths can also be our biggest points of vulnerability. I have written earlier that our freedom of expression, freedom of equal protection as citizens, and the “wall of separation” between church and state in the United States, as guaranteed by the Constitution and the 1st, 2nd and 14th amendments, is vulnerable to being undermined for one specific reason. Our nation has never attempted to define what constitutes a religion. . .

Hat Tip to BookWorm Room

At FrontPage Magazine, you can read an interview with Bill Warner, the the director of the Center for the Study of Political Islam. Warner discusses Islam’s dualistic nature, which can hold simultaneously two opposite thoughts (such as the instruction to treat nonbelievers decently and the instruction that they must be destroyed as infidels). Thus, Warner contrasts Islamic beliefs with the Golden Rule, a principle that appears in all of the world’s other than Islam . . .

Here’s a typical response from a moderate Muslim to all this so-called “Islamophobia”. Although I am very glad to hear a “moderate” Muslim’s response against Islamic terrorism, note the dualistic denial. (BOLD highlights added by me).

Britácora Almendrón
Una mirada al mundo artistico, cultural y political

By Zeeshan Hashmion, who served in the British Army between 2000 and 2005. He is now a student at Cambridge (THE TIMES, 06/02/07):

. . .I do feel increasingly impatient when engaged in debates about my faith, its so-called link with extremism and its so-called rejection of democracy. I wish I could shout out loud and say that a majority of Muslims believe in the core message of Islam, which is peace. We are tolerant of others and comfortable coexisting in a multicultural, multi-ethnic environment. Islam does not dictate that one can only be Muslim and not British or Chinese at the same time.

Unfortunately, there are those among us who are ill-educated, misled and are indeed extremists. My message to those who preach extremism and a false concept of jihad is that our Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) not only stood up but asked his companions to do the same when the funeral of a Jew was passing near by. One’s responsibility to the Muslim ummah demands logic and reasoning in achieving long-term, peaceful solutions based upon coexistence. Isolation and extremism is not the answer; initiating a dialogue is.

Those in power should be more responsible and sincere when discussing conflict resolution. Stop using the notion of democracy to justify loss of human life; we need to ensure that we create a more stable and less bloody future for coming generations. This is the least we owe to those who have made sacrifices. Political systems and doctrine can not effectively be imported from one region to another facing a different range of problems.
As individuals, we ought to be more open and receptive in our approach towards fellow humans, in peace time or in conflict. “For those who have had to fight for it, Life has truly a flavour the protected shall never know.”


Trackposted to Right Celebrity, third world county, Maggie's Notebook, basil's blog, The Bullwinkle Blog, Cao's Blog, Jo's Cafe, Pursuing Holiness, Right Voices, and Conservative Thoughts, Outside the Beltway, A Blog For All, The Random Yak, and Gone Hollywood, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.