OK, so the IRS lame duck was testifying yesterday. I didn’t watch the whole thing because, to be honest,I like keeping my blood pressure someplace near normal, and I knew I’d be able to catch up. What seems clear is that the IRS has played politics, either on their own, or under direction from […]
. . . → Read More: Götterdämmerung
|
|||||||
|
This is dhimmitude on steroids. In an official training manual s given to national and local law enforcement, the Department of Homeland Security is still emphasizing ‘Right Wing extremists’ but gives the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamists a pass, advising law enforcement to defer to them. In contrast to that famous 2009 report talking about the dangers of veterans, pro-life advocates, critics of same-sex marriage, 2nd Amendment advocates and Evangelicals, the training manuals on Islamists cautions law enforcement, “Don’t use training that equates radical thought, religious expression, freedom to protest, or other constitutionally-protected activity, including disliking the U.S. government without being violent” when it comes to Islamists. The manual, which was produced by an inter-agency working group from DHS and the National Counterterrorism Center, advises, “Trainers who equate the desire for Sharia law with criminal activity violate basic tenets of the First Amendment.” This would be a hoot if the DHS wasn’t deadly serious – Sharia law violates the First Amendment and most of the rest of the Bill of Rights explicitly! The checklist also advised against using Muslim “trainers who are self-professed ‘Muslim reformers’” – i.e, non-jihadi moderates – because they “may further an interest group agenda instead of delivering generally accepted, unbiased information.” I don’t know which is worse…what the DHS is saying about itself or what it’s saying about Muslims, that they’re naturally radical and only generally accept the Islamist and Muslim Brotherhood point of view. The manual also tells law enforcement not to rely on “unsubstantiated theories” and “conspiracies,” that say that “many mainstream Muslim organizations have terrorist ties” or are “fronts for Islamic political organizations whose true desire is to establish Sharia law in America.” And this manual advises advises trainees not to assume Muslim groups are “using democratic processes, like litigation and free speech, to subvert democracy and install Sharia law.” Never mind that our own Justice Department proved just that in Federal Court in the Holy Land Foundation trail, and that U.S. District Court Judge Jorge Solis said as much in his 2010 ruling, writing, “The government has produced ample evidence to establish the associations of CAIR [Council on American-Islamic Relations], ISNA [Islamic Society of North America], NAIT [North American Islamic Trust], with the Islamic Association for Palestine, and with Hamas.” As a matter of fact, most of the senior executives of these Muslim Brotherhood fronts would be sitting in jail for money laundering and material aid to terrorism if Attorney General Eric Holder and the Obama Justice Department hadn’t filed declinations to prosecute motions on all of the individuals and groups cited as unindicted co-conspirators. That ended what would have been the second Holy Land Foundation trial, an open and shut case because the groups appealed the first one, leading to Judge Solis’ ruling. Obama’s Justice Department essentially let CAIR, ISNA, and NAIT off the hook, as well as the executives involved. Instead, we now have people in influential positions in the Obama Administration with strong Muslim Brotherhood ties and an official ‘training manual’ for law enforcement that could have been put out by the Brotherhood itself.Aside from the chilling effect this will have on law enforcement actually working to prevent jihad in America, it will also have the effect and stigmatizing American Muslims whom choose not to toe the Islamist line. In later years – perhaps, unfortunately after we have a few more incidents that end up with more dead Americans – it will come out that the Obama Administration was just as thoroughly penetrated by the Ikhwan, the Muslim Brotherhood as the Truman Administration was penetrated by Soviet spies and sympathizers. And it will have cost us dearly in the meantime. (h/t to Charles C. Johnson at the Daily Caller) http://s7.addthis.com/static/btn/v2/lg-bookmark-en.gif
. . . → Read More: DHS Is Training Law Enforcement To Give Muslim Brotherhood, Radical Islamists A Pass A short but important post for today. This is from a 1952 editorial in the Wall Street Journal, and comes to us with a hattip to Villainous Company On the sea there is a tradition older even than the traditions of the country itself and wiser in its age than this new custom. It is the tradition […] My friend LadyImpactOhio was there at the beginning, and you can read her account here, but here’s the graphic timeline (via Michelle Malkin) Here is the IRS Org Chart – Use as you see fit, but this is massive. Whether our Teflon President has anything stick to him or not isn’t as important as understanding […] There is no doubt anymore. What the Tales has been saying in posts, long before the mainstream media has finally seemed to recognize at this late date, is that their has been a major cover-up going on regarding the terror attack in Benghazi, Lib… . . . → Read More: The Co-Conspirators In The Benghazi Cover-up Hat tip: Megyn Kelly of the Fox News Channel who correctly observed that [the reason four Americans were killed in Benghazi] “must have never made a difference to Hillary Clinton”.
From the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Jan. 23, 2013, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made her infamous screech “What difference, at this point, does it make [why four Americans were killed in Benghazi]?”, when answering a question from Senator Johnson, R-WI. Besides how revolting that comment is to the victims, the victims families, and the American people, notice how she puts in the qualifying “at this point“, to imply that it did make a difference at the beginning but it is now so long ago [in the words of presidential spokesman Jay, the useful idiot, Carney] that it no longer makes a difference. But now we have evidence from Darrell Issa’s House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on Wednesday May 8, 2013 from Benghazi whistle-blowers Gregory Hicks, Mark Thompson and Eric Nordstrom that it really never must have made a difference to Secretary Clinton. Gregory Hicks, who became the top diplomat in Libya with the death of Ambassador Chris Stevens, said under oath that there was never a protest in Libya and the so-called hateful “U-Tube video was a non-event” event in Libya. It was known from diplomatic e-mails going around that an Islamic terrorist group, Ansar Al-Sharia, associated with Al Qaeda, took credit for the attack in Benghazi. There were never any demonstrations and everyone in the state department should have known that. When Mr. Hicks got a call from Ambassador Stevens, just before he would be murdered by the Islamic terrorists, he told Mr. Hicks: “Gregory, we are under attack.” Those may have been the last words Ambassador Chris Stevens ever uttered. With all that in mind, think of the telephone call Hillary Clinton made at 2 am Benghazi time, to Ambassador Gregory Hicks. All she asked was what Mr. Hicks plan was. He said they were going to evacuate. She said that was a good idea. Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, never asked about what happened, she never asked about a demonstration that got out of hand, she never mentioned her anger at a U Tube video. The reason Hillary Clinton never asked, surmised Gregory Hicks, because she knew it was a terrorist attack at that moment. Mr. Hicks said all of the correspondence that was being sent back and forth already labeled this a terrorist attack with an Al Qaida group taking credit for the attack, so there was no reason for Hillary Clinton to ask what happened. Hillary had to know there were no demonstrations, there was no outrage because of a U Tube video, and that this was a planned terrorist attack by Al Qaeda terrorists. The “incurious” Hillary Clinton never made another call that night to Gregory Hicks. Even if you stretch the bounds of reality and Hillary Clinton was the only one out of the loop who didn’t really know that what occurred in Libya was a terrorist attack, she surely couldn’t have thought this was because of U-Tube video, because no one in Libya mentioned any video and no one in Libya had demonstrated because of a video. If that doesn’t upset you enough it gets even more sickening. When the bodies of the four dead Americans who were attacked in Benghazi were brought back to Andrews Air Force Base a few days later, Hillary Clinton told the parents of the families that the maker of the U Tube anti Mohammad video was responsible for a crowd getting out of hand and killing their sons. How could the Secretary of State tell that to grieving parents? Think about that, she was talking to the parents of the patriots who got killed by terrorists and lied in their faces. Mark Steyn was on the Hugh Hewitt radio show on last Thursday night with substitute host Guy P Benson and put it this way: “Hillary Clinton literally lied over the coffin of her supposed “good friend” Chris Stevens.” From Hot Air: “Tyrone Woods’s father went a step further and alleged that she [Hillary Clinton at the Andrew Air Force Base ceremony] vowed to have the filmmaker arrested and prosecuted.” That filmmaker was arrested and is still in jail today. So, to Hillary Clinton, we know by her words at the Senate committee hearings that it didn’t make a difference to her if the Americans were killed by some “Libyans just out for a walk who decided to kill some Americans” or, I guess, some Martians from outer space. Now we know from sworn testimony it didn’t make a difference to Hillary Clinton from the get go what led to the death of the Americans. She talked on the phone to the man on the ground who would know and she never asked. Unlike the American people, unlike the families and friends of the Benghazi four patriots killed by terrorists, to Hillary Clinton it never made a difference. What obviously did make a difference to Secretary Clinton was how this attack would affect her political fortunes. That is sad indeed for the families of these victims and for the entire nation.
|
|||||||
Articles are the property of their respective owners all else copyright © 2013 Sago - All Rights Reserved Powered by WordPress & Atahualpa |
|||||||
