Archive for February, 2010

Question: Could it be true that the Democrats covertly inserted language into an annual intelligence bill that specifically targeted CIA and intelligence community officers by creating a new criminal offense that would apply only to them, without any consideration by the House Intelligence Committee or consultation with Republicans or the intelligence agencies it would negatively impact?

This article reveals the disgusting and/or disgraceful answer to this question-You Decide:

House Leaders Stop Vote to Ban Degrading Treatment: “GOP wins fight to remove provision”-Posted on The Washington Times-By Eli Lake-On February 26, 2010:


These are pertinent excerpts from this article:

“The House Democratic leadership stopped a vote Thursday night on the $50 billion classified intelligence budget after Republicans mounted a campaign against one of its provisions to ban degrading treatment of detainees and some moderate Democrats indicated they would not vote for the bill.

The Republican lawmakers, led by Rep. Pete Hoekstra, Michigan Republican, opposed what they saw as backdoor legislation that would impose fines and prison terms on intelligence officers who abuse captured terrorism suspects.

A Democratic House aide told The Washington Times that the leadership supported the amendment and urged the House Rules Committee to place it in a slate of provisions to the bill known as a managers amendment.

Courtney Littig, a spokeswoman for the House intelligence committee said, “To my knowledge the first time we learned of the McDermott amendment was when we received copies of the amendments from the Rules Committee [Wednesday] afternoon.” Rep. Jim McDermott, Washington Democrat, was the original author of the provision, known as the Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Interrogation Prohibition Act of 2010.

The amendment would authorize federal sentences of up to life in prison for cruel interrogation if it led to a detainee’s death or other penalties for lesser offenses.

President Obama has used executive orders to ban all so-called enhanced interrogation techniques covered in the legislation. However, making the prohibition a law limits presidential authority should Mr. Obama ever seek to use the techniques in a national emergency, such as questioning someone who has information about a pending nuclear or chemical attack.

House lawmakers began debating the provision on the floor Thursday after the Senate extended by voice vote the provisions of the USA Patriot Act that would have expired on Sunday without legislative action. The provisions include roving wiretaps tapping lines related to an individual without explicit court approval for new phone lines. Also included are surveillance powers targeting lone-wolf terrorism suspects, and the authority of the federal government to seize assets and records in anti-terrorism probes.

The McDermott amendment would have outlawed measures such as threatening detainees, using prolonged isolation and applying duct tape over a prisoner’s eyes. It would also prohibit an interrogator from “using force or the threat of force to coerce an individual to desecrate the individual’s religious articles, or to blaspheme his or her religious beliefs, or to otherwise participate in acts intended to violate the individual’s religious beliefs.”

Rep. Hoekstra, the ranking Republican on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, said the amendment was far too vague, noting, “If a woman interviews a Muslim without a head covering, is that blasphemy?”

On the House floor, intelligence committee Chairman Rep. Silvestre Reyes, Texas Democrat, said the amendment was only codifying what Mr. Obama already outlawed in his first executive orders after he took office in January 2009.

His spokeswoman, Ms. Littig, said, “At the end of the day this chairman believes this vote on the amendment is a vote of conscience.”

The amendment’s sponsor, Rep. Jim McDermott, made a protest visit to Iraq in 2002 prior to the U.S. invasion. In 2008, a federal indictment against Muthanna Al-Hanooti, the man who arranged Mr. McDermott’s trip, said then-Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein’s Iraqi intelligence service paid for the trip.

Mr. Hoekstra said he was concerned that the bill would make intelligence officers more risk-averse.

“In the intelligence community today, these folks already believe they are under attack by this administration, and this just reinforces this,” Mr. Hoekstra said. “This is outrageous. There has not been one minute of hearings or debates on this amendment, and you are putting something in an [intelligence] bill that could put officers in jail for life. What are you thinking?”

Last year, Mr. Obama authorized the disclosure of Justice Department memos that provided a legal rationale for waterboarding, or simulated drowning, and other enhanced interrogation techniques. He also released to the public a CIA inspector general’s report on the enhanced interrogation program that was used on avowed terrorist leaders such as Khalid Shaikh Mohammed.

Liz Cheney, daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney and the chairman of Keep America Safe, a group that opposes making the enhanced interrogation illegal, said Democrats were threatening intelligence professionals.

“Democrats in Congress now want to threaten them with criminal prosecutions and deprive them of valuable tactics that protect America,” she said.”

Note: The following articles and/or blog posts relate to and/or support the above article and/or blog post-You Decide:

Lawyer: Some CIA interrogation tactics not OK’d!Posted on Yahoo News-On July 15, 2010:


Hoekstra, GOP Demand Anti-CIA Bill Be Pulled!-Posted on NewsMax.com-On February 25, 2010:


Islamists Play Shell Games with Security!Islamist Watch Blog Posted By David J. Rusin-On February 23, 2010:


Ex-CIA Director Hayden Praises Obama for ‘Continuity’ in War on Terror!Posted on NewsMax.com-By Jim Meyers-On February 28, 2010:


Note:  The above articles and/or blog posts relate to and/or support my following blog posts-You Decide:

When Did the American People Elect Eric Holder Commander in Chief?


Obama and Holder’s Hidden Agenda!


Where Is America Today?


Washington Times Calls for Obama’s Impeachment!


A Nation Adrift Theme and Disclaimer:


“Food For Thought”

“God Bless & Keep Our USA Safe”

Semper Fi!

Read Full Post »

Question: Do we know the history of homosexuals in the military and why is that important?

The following article and/or blog post does a meticulous job of revealing the chronological history of homosexuals in the military-You Decide:

Homosexuals in the Military-Posted on WallBuilders.Com-By David Barton – 2001:


This is the article and/or blog in its entirety:

Preface: There was a series of events that led to the need for this historical analysis. Below is a general chronology providing context. There were, no doubt, numerous other events that occurred—newspaper articles, magazine articles, government reports, meetings, etc. However, these key events will preface the analysis:

January 20, 1993–William Jefferson Clinton assumes the Presidency, promising to end the historic ban on homosexuals serving in America’s Armed Forces.

January 29, 1993–President Clinton issues the following memorandum to the Secretary of Defense, Les Aspin:

I hereby direct you to submit to me prior to July 15, 1993, a draft of an Executive Order ending discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in determining who may serve in the Armed Forces of the United States.

June 2-21, 1993–survey entitled, “Congressional Survey of All Active-Duty Admirals and Generals Shows Overwhelming Opposition to Lifting Military Gay Ban.” Ninety-seven and a half percent do not wish to have homosexuals serve in the military. Over ninety percent of the military’s senior officers question “national security” if homosexuals are allowd to serve.

July 19, 1993–“Don’t ask; don’t tell” plan announced by the President. Under this plan, new recruits are not to be asked if they are homosexual. Homosexual “orientation” is allowed; homosexual conduct remains a reason for separation.

July 23, 1993–Senate Armed Services Committee votes to pass law supporting President Clinton’s policies.

July 27, 1993–House Armed Services Committee offers similar legislation.

Court challenges started by the ACLU and others, and debate rages in the media.

Elected officials and others begin requesting an historical perspective on homosexuals in the military. David Barton prepares the following essay, supporting the contention that immoral conduct never has been allowed in America’s Armed Forces.

In recent years, widespread discussions and hearings have been held concerning the issue of homosexuals serving in the United States military forces. This monograph will explore the issue via three questions:

  1. Has homosexuality always been incompatible with military service?
  2. Why should the military be concerned with a person’s morality?
  3. Why should homosexuality concern us as a society?

Has Homosexuality Always Been Incompatible With Military Service?

While the issue of homosexuals in the military has only recently become a point of great public controversy, it is not a new issue; it derives its roots from the time of the military’s inception. George Washington, the nation’s first Commander-in-Chief, held a strong opinion on this subject and gave a clear statement of his views on it in his general orders for March 14, 1778:

At a General Court Martial whereof Colo. Tupper was President (10th March 1778), Lieutt. Enslin of Colo. Malcom’s Regiment [was] tried for attempting to commit sodomy, with John Monhort a soldier; Secondly, For Perjury in swearing to false accounts, [he was] found guilty of the charges exhibited against him, being breaches of 5th. Article 18th. Section of the Articles of War and [we] do sentence him to be dismiss’d [from] the service with infamy. His Excellency the Commander in Chief approves the sentence and with abhorrence and detestation of such infamous crimes orders Lieutt. Enslin to be drummed out of camp tomorrow morning by all the drummers and fifers in the Army never to return; The drummers and fifers [are] to attend on the Grand Parade at Guard mounting for that Purpose. 1

General Washington held a clear understanding of the rules for order and discipline, and as the original Commander-in-Chief, he was the first not only to forbid, but even to punish, homosexuals in the military.

An edict issued by the Continental Congress communicates the moral tone which lay at the base of Washington’s actions:

The Commanders of . . . the thirteen United Colonies are strictly required to show in themselves a good example of honor and virtue to their officers and men and to be very vigilant in inspecting the behavior of all such as are under them, and to discountenance and suppress all dissolute, immoral, and disorderly practices, and also such as are contrary to the rules of discipline and obedience, and to correct those who are guilty of the same. 2

Noah Webster—a soldier during the Revolution and the author of the first American dictionary—defined the terms “dissolute” and “immoral” used by Congress:

Dissolute: Loose in behavior and morals; given to vice and dissipation; wanton; lewd; debauched; not under the restraints of law; as a dissolute man: dissolute company.

Immoral: Inconsistent with moral rectitude; contrary to the moral or Divine law. . . . Every action is immoral which contravenes any Divine precept or which is contrary to the duties which men owe to each other. 3

This meaning of the word “moral” versus “immoral” was understood throughout American society; the practice of sodomy was clearly adverse to and “contravene[d] Divine precept.” The order to “suppress all dissolute, immoral, and disorderly practices . . . contrary to the rules of discipline and obedience” was extended throughout all branches of the American military, both the Army and the Navy. 4

It can be safely said that the attitude of the Founders on the subject of homosexuality was precisely that given by William Blackstone in his Commentaries on the Laws—the basis of legal jurisprudence in America and heartily endorsed by numbers of significant Founders. 5 In addressing sodomy (homosexuality), he found the subject so reprehensible that he was ashamed even to discuss it. Nonetheless, he noted:

What has been here observed . . . [the fact that the punishment fit the crime] ought to be the more clear in proportion as the crime is the more detestable, may be applied to another offence of a still deeper malignity; the infamous crime against nature committed either with man or beast. A crime which ought to be strictly and impartially proved and then as strictly and impartially punished. . . .

I will not act so disagreeable part to my readers as well as myself as to dwell any longer upon a subject the very mention of which is a disgrace to human nature [sodomy]. It will be more eligible to imitate in this respect the delicacy of our English law which treats it in its very indictments as a crime not fit to be named; “peccatum illud horribile, inter christianos non nominandum” (that horrible crime not to be named among Christians). A taciturnity observed likewise by the edict of Constantius and Constans: “ubi scelus est id, quod non proficit scire, jubemus insurgere leges, armari jura gladio ultore, ut exquisitis poenis subdantur infames, qui sunt, vel qui futuri sunt, rei” (where that crime is found, which is unfit even to know, we command the law to arise armed with an avenging sword that the infamous men who are, or shall in future be guilty of it, may undergo the most severe punishments). 6

Because of the nature of the crime, the penalties for the act of sodomy were often severe. For example, Thomas Jefferson indicated that in his home state of Virginia, “dismemberment” of the offensive organ was the penalty for sodomy. 7 In fact, Jefferson himself authored a bill penalizing sodomy by castration. 8 The laws of the other states showed similar or even more severe penalties:

That the detestable and abominable vice of buggery [sodomy] . . . shall be from henceforth adjudged felony . . . and that every person being thereof convicted by verdict, confession, or outlawry [unlawful flight to avoid prosecution], shall be hanged by the neck until he or she shall be dead. 9 NEW YORK

That if any man shall lie with mankind as he lieth with womankind, both of them have committed abomination; they both shall be put to death. 10 CONNECTICUT

Sodomy . . . shall be punished by imprisonment at hard labour in the penitentiary during the natural life or lives of the person or persons convicted of th[is] detestable crime. 11 GEORGIA

That if any man shall commit the crime against nature with a man or male child . . . every such offender, being duly convicted thereof in the Supreme Judicial Court, shall be punished by solitary imprisonment for such term not exceeding one year and by confinement afterwards to hard labor for such term not exceeding ten years. 12 MAINE

That if any person or persons shall commit sodomy . . . he or they so offending or committing any of the said crimes within this province, their counsellors, aiders, comforters, and abettors, being convicted thereof as above said, shall suffer as felons. 13 [And] shall forfeit to the Commonwealth all and singular the lands and tenements, goods and chattels, whereof he or she was seized or possessed at the time . . . at the discretion of the court passing the sentence, not exceeding ten years, in the public gaol or house of correction of the county or city in which the offence shall have been committed and be kept at such labor. 14 PENNSYLVANIA

[T]he detestable and abominable vice of buggery [sodomy] . . . be from henceforth adjudged felony . . . and that the offenders being hereof convicted by verdict, confession, or outlawry [unlawful flight to avoid prosecution], shall suffer such pains of death and losses and penalties of their goods. 15 SOUTH CAROLINA

That if any man lieth with mankind as he lieth with a woman, they both shall suffer death. 16 VERMONT

Based on the statutes, legal commentaries, and the writings of prominent military leaders, it is clear that any idea of homosexuals serving in the military was considered with repugnance; this is incontrovertible, with no room for differing interpretations. 17 The thought of lifting this proscription is a modern phenomenon, and would have brought disbelief, disdain, and condemnation from those who established our Armed Forces.

Why Should the Military Be Concerned With a Person’s Morality?

Concern for the character and morality of military personnel has a strong historical basis. Our Founding Fathers recognized the importance of pure morals in our free society, and that philosophy extended to our military.

Before considering the importance of morality to the military, first consider some general statements on the importance of morality by those responsible for originally creating the rules that have stirred so much controversy of late in the debate over homosexuals in the military. John Adams (the founder of the Navy), on October 13, 1798, while serving as President of the United States and Commander-in-Chief, told the military:

We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. . . . Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. 18

Adams similarly explained:

Statesmen, my dear sir, may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. 19

George Washington, the nation’s first Commander-in-Chief, summarized the same truth in his “Farewell Address.” Significantly, this address was also partially authored by John Jay (the author of America’s first military discipline manual) and Alexander Hamilton (a General during the Revolution). These three military leaders emphasized the necessity of moral behavior, declaring:

Of all the dispositions and habits which leads to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity [happiness]. Let it simply be asked, “Where is the security for property, for reputation for life, if the sense of religious obligations desert . . . ?” And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. ‘Tis substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it [free government] can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric? 20

Since moral behavior was necessary for society in general, it was even more necessary for military personnel in whose hands rested the security, and thus the future, of the nation. The importance of good morals in the military can be seen in the following three selections from Washington’s general orders:

It is required and expected that exact discipline be observed and due subordination prevail thro’ the whole Army, as a failure in these most essential points must necessarily produce extreme hazard, disorder, and confusions; and end in shameful disappointment and disgrace. The General most earnestly requires and expects a due observance of those articles of war established for the government of the Army which forbid profane cursing, swearing, and drunkenness; And in like manner requires and expects of all officers and soldiers not engaged on actual duty a punctual attendance on Divine service to implore the blessings of Heaven upon the means used for our safety and defence. 21

His Excellency [George Washington] wishes [it] to be considered that an Army without order, regularity, and discipline is no better than a commissioned mob; Let us therefore . . . endeavor by all the skill and discipline in our power, to acquire that knowledge and conduct which is necessary in war—our men are brave and good; men who with pleasure it is observed are addicted to fewer vices than are commonly found in Armies; but it is subordination and discipline (the life and soul of an Army) which next under Providence, is to make us formidable to our enemies, honorable in ourselves, and respected in the world. 22

Purity of morals being the only sure foundation of public happiness in any country and highly conducive to order, subordination, and success in an Army, it will be well worthy the emulation of officers of every rank and class to encourage it both by the influence of example and the penalties of authority. It is painful to see many shameful instances of riot and licentiousness. . . . A regard to decency should conspire with a sense of morality to banish a vice productive of neither advantage or pleasure. 23

Consequently, moral improprieties were met with severe punishment in the American military—as illustrated by the opening example in this paper.

Why Should Homosexuality Concern a Society?

Public discussions concerning homosexuality are a purely recent phenomenon; it was long considered too morally abhorrent and reprehensible to openly discuss. Consider, for example, the legal works of James Wilson, a signer both of the Declaration and the Constitution and appointed by President Washington as an original Justice on the U. S. Supreme Court. Wilson was responsible for laying much of the foundation of American Jurisprudence and was co-author of America’s first legal commentaries on the Constitution. Even though state law books of the day addressed sodomy, when Wilson came to it in his legal writings, he was too disgusted with it even to mention it. He thus declared:

The crime not to be named [sodomy], I pass in a total silence. 24

America’s first law book, authored by founding jurist Zephaniah Swift, communicated the popular view concerning sodomy:

This crime, tho repugnant to every sentiment of decency and delicacy, is very prevalent in corrupt and debauched countries where the low pleasures of sensuality and luxury have depraved the mind and degraded the appetite below the brutal creation. Our modest ancestors, it seems by the diction of the law, had no idea that a man would commit this crime [anal intercourse with either sex]. . . . [H]ere, by force of common law, [it is] punished with death. . . . [because of] the disgust and horror with which we treat of this abominable crime. 25

John David Michaelis, author of an 1814 four-volume legal work, outlined why homosexuality must be more strenuously addressed and much less tolerated than virtually any other moral vice in society:

If we reflect on the dreadful consequences of sodomy to a state, and on the extent to which this abominable vice may be secretly carried on and spread, we cannot, on the principles of sound policy, consider the punishment as too severe. For if it once begins to prevail, not only will boys be easily corrupted by adults, but also by other boys; nor will it ever cease; more especially as it must thus soon lose all its shamefulness and infamy and become fashionable and the national taste; and then . . . national weakness, for which all remedies are ineffectual, most inevitably follow; not perhaps in the very first generation, but certainly in the course of the third or fourth. . . . To these evils may be added yet another, viz. that the constitutions of those men who submit to this degradation are, if not always, yet very often, totally destroyed, though in a different way from what is the result of whoredom.

Whoever, therefore, wishes to ruin a nation, has only to get this vice introduced; for it is extremely difficult to extirpate it where it has once taken root because it can be propagated with much more secrecy . . . and when we perceive that it has once got a footing in any country, however powerful and flourishing, we may venture as politicians to predict that the foundation of its future decline is laid and that after some hundred years it will no longer be the same . . . powerful country it is at present. 26

In view of the arguments listed by historical and legal sources, there is substantial merit for maintaining the ban on homosexuals in the military. 27 The Founders instituted this ban with a clear understanding of the damaging effects of this behavior on the military. This ban has remained official policy for over 200 years and one would be hard-pressed to perceive the need for altering a policy which has contributed to making America the world’s foremost military power.


1. George Washington, The Writings of George Washington, John C. Fitzpatrick, editor (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1934), Vol. XI, pp. 83-84, from General Orders at Valley Forge on March 14, 1778.(Return)

2. Journals of the American Congress (Washington: Way and Gideon, 1823), Vol. I, p. 185, on November 28, 1775.(Return)

3. Noah Webster, An American Dictionary of the English Language (Springfield, MA: George and Charles Merriam, 1849).(Return)

4. Acts Passed at the First Session of the Fifth Congress of the United States of America (Philadelphia: Richard Folwell, 1797), pp. 456-457.(Return)

5. See, for example, James Madison, Letters and Other Writings of James Madison (NY: R. Worthington, 1884), Vol. III, p. 233, in his letter dated October 18, 1821. See also the writings of Founders James Kent, James Wilson, Fisher Ames, Joseph Story, John Adams, Henry Laurens, Thomas Jefferson, John Marshall, James Otis, et. al. (Return)

6. Sir William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1769), Vol. IV, pp. 215-216.(Return)

7. Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia (Philadelphia: Matthew Carey, 1794), p. 211.(Return)

8. Thomas Jefferson, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Andrew A. Lipscomb, editor (Washington, D. C.: Thomas Jefferson M emorial Association, 1904), Vol. I, pp. 226-227, from Jefferson’s “For Proportioning Crimes and Punishments.”(Return)

9. Laws of the State of New-York . . . Since the Revolution (New York: Thomas Greenleaf, 1798), Vol. I, p. 336.(Return)

10. The Public Statute Laws of the State of Connecticut (Hartford: Hudson and Goodwin, 1808), Book I, p. 295.(Return)

11. A Digest of the Laws of the State of Georgia (Milledgeville: Grantland & Orme, 1822), p. 350. (Return)

12. Laws of the State of Maine (Hallowell: Goodale, Glazier & Co., 1822), p. 58.(Return)

13. Laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia: John Bioren, 1810), Vol. I, p. 113.(Return)

14. Collinson Read, An Abridgment of the Laws of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia, 1801), p. 279.(Return)

15. Alphabetical Digest of the Public Statute Laws of South-Carolina (Charleston: John Hoff, 1814), Vol. I, p. 99.(Return)

16. Statutes of the State of Vermont (Bennington, 1791), p. 74.(Return)

17. Randy Shilts’ revisionist work, Conduct Unbecoming, attempts to provide historical precedent for homosexuals in the military by claiming that the General Baron von Steuben, a Prussian fighting for the American cause, was gay (see also Newsweek, Feb. 1, 1993, “What’s Fair in Love and War,” pp. 58-59). Shilts’ accusations against von Steuben are unacceptable to the very source he cites—a biography authored by John Palmer (see John McAuley Palmer, General Von Steuben , New Haven: Yale University Press, 1937). Palmer, although acknowledging an anonymous 1777 letter accusing the Baron of sexual improprieties, concluded that it was “probably a malicious slander that originated among Steuben’s enemies,” further stating that “the charge is inconsistent with the conception of Steuben’s personality that has grown up in my mind after eight years’ study.” Additionally, Shilts claims that the Baron’s 17 year old interpreter, Pierre Etienne Du Ponceau, was his lover, citing his youth and lack of linguistic skills as proof. However, Thomas McKean, signer of the Declaration of Independence, says that Du Ponceau had offered “satisfactory proof of his knowledge in the languages.” Furthermore, the Dictionary of American Biography says of the married Frenchman that “his contributions to historical and linguistic literature were numerous, particularly on philological subjects.” Shilts’ claims lack credible historical documentation, and are a hindrance to any substantive debate on this extremely important issue.(Return)

18. John Adams, The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States, Charles Francis Adams, editor (Boston: Little, Brown, 1854), Vol. IX, p. 229, dated October 11, 1798.(Return)

19. Ibid, Vol. IX, p. 401, dated June 21, 1776.(Return)

20. Address of George Washington . . . Preparatory to His Declination (Baltimore: Christopher Jackson, 1796), pp. 22-24.(Return)

21. Washington, Writings, Vol. III, p. 309, from General Orders from Cambridge on July 4, 1775.

22. Ibid, at Vol. IV, pp. 202-203, from General Orders from Cambridge on January 1, 1776.(Return)

23. Ibid, Vol. XIII, pp. 118-119, from General Orders from Fredericksburgh on October 21, 1778.(Return)

24. James Wilson, The Works of James Wilson (Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1967), Vol. II, p. 656, from lectures given in 1790 and 1791.(Return)

25. Zephaniah Swift, A System of Laws of the State of Connecticut (Windham: John Byrne, 1796), Vol. II, pp. 310-311.(Return)

26. Sir John David Michaelis, Commentaries on the Laws of Moses, Alexander Smith, translator (London: F. C. and J. Rivington, 1814), Vol. IV, pp. 115-117.(Return)

27. For a summary of the current medical and military arguments supporting the ban on homosexuals, see Gays: In or Out? The U. S. Military & Homosexuals—A Sourcebook, by Col. Ronald D. Ray, USMCR (NY: A Maxwell Macmillan Company, 1993). Col. Ray’s Bibliography lists many of the numerous books and studies detailing homosexuality’s inherent physiological, sociological, and psychological problems. (Return)

American Eagle-Mine

Note: The following article and/or blog relates to and/or supports the above article and/or blog-You Decide:

News With Views-Servando Gonzalez

THE GAY MOVEMENT AND THE CFR’s ANTI-RUSSIA PSY-OP!Posted on NewsWithViews.com-By Servando Gonzalez-On March 1, 2014:

The Winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia, have become a point of friction between the anti-Christian, pro-gay, pro-New World Order U.S. and the pro-Christian, anti-gay, anti-NWO Russia. To make things even worse, Obama decided to skip the Sochi Games and instead appointed three openly gay athletes – Billie Jean King, Brian Boitano and Caitlin Cahow – to lead the U.S. delegation. This was made as an obvious insult to Putin and the Olympic hosts.[1]

“Conservative” Republicans, who love and yearn the good old days of the Cold War, are itching for a fight at the OK Corral. Lacking any arguments to justify their newly-found love for the NWO gays, they argue that Putin should not be trusted, because he was a member of the dreaded KGB.[2] They seem to forget, however, that their beloved George H. W. Bush was a Director of the dreaded CIA, a CFR-created and controlled organization[3] that has done more to destroy America than the KGB.[4]

Faced with strong criticism during a recent news conference of the World Congress of Families at Washington D.C., Alexei Komov, the WCF representative in Russia, mentioned that some “Wall Street bankers” were among the “international professional forces of evil,” that had “introduced communism” and “imposed” it on Russia. As expected, his comments were immediately refuted by some “conservative” Republicans as just another anti-Semite conspiracy theory.

Nevertheless, despite claims to the contrary, there is overwhelming evidence that communism actually was introduced to Russia by international bankers as a way to eliminate competition in the oil business.

Russia Discovers Oil

The main problem the international bankers and oil magnates had with Russia was that a large amount of oil had been discovered in Baku, near the Caspian Sea in Azerbaijan. At the time, the Baku oil field was considered the largest known oil deposit in the world. By the early 1880s, Russian crude production reached 10.8 million, almost a third of U.S. production.[5]

As expected, John D. Rockefeller and his criminal associates of the American International Corporation (AIC), Andrew Mellon, J.P. Morgan and Andrew Carnegie, were deeply alarmed about the Russians challenging their ambitions of controlling the world oil supply, and they began conspiring to develop a plan to stop the Russians in their tracks.[6] They concluded that the only way to achieve their goal was to depose Czar Nicholas II, and the only way to accomplish that was through a “revolution.”

History books, mostly written by unscrupulous CFR-controlled disinformers passing as historians, have painted the Russian revolution as the result of a spontaneous uprising of Russia’s exploited proletarian masses against their oppressive government.

This vision, however, does not coincide with the facts.

Mainly thanks to the efforts of scholars such as Antony Sutton,[7] G. Edward Griffin[8] and others, now we know that the “spontaneous” Russian “revolution” was actually a covert operation planned and carried out by a conspiracy of international bankers and oil magnates.[9] That operation would have been impossible to succeed without the money supplied by some of the most notable millionaires at that time.

Between 1907 and 1910 the conspirators met several times with Russian revolutionary Leon Trotsky, already living in exile in New York, and with Vladimir I. Lenin, another Russian revolutionary living in exile in Zurich. Eventually the arch-capitalists struck a deal with the arch-anti-capitalists: in exchange for financing their “revolution,” the capitalists would be allowed to have a hidden hand in designing the economy of what was soon to become the Soviet Union —allegedly the staunchest anti-capitalist nation in the world.

With the help of the conspirators, Lenin returned to Russia with plenty of gold in his famous “sealed” train, and, soon after, Trotsky, under the protection of President Wilson and Colonel House, followed Lenin’s path with more gold. This gold made possible the Russian “revolution.”[10]

The fact, however, that the Russian “revolution” was actually a covert operation concocted by international bankers, is not new.

In a speech to the House of Commons on November 5, 1919, Winston Churchill exposed in a few words the whole conspiracy:

. . . Lenin was sent into Russia . . . in the same way that you might send a vial containing a culture of typhoid or of cholera to be poured into the water supply of a great city, and it worked with amazing accuracy. No sooner did Lenin arrive than he began beckoning a finger here and a finger there to obscure persons in sheltered retreats in New York, Glasgow, in Bern, and other countries, and he gathered together the leading spirits of a formidable sect, the most formidable sect in the world . . . With these spirits around him he set to work with demoniacal ability to tear to pieces every institution on which the Russian State depended. Russia was laid low. Russia had to be laid low. She was laid low to the dust.[11]

What Churchill failed to mention, though, was that the ones who had disseminated the Communist plague were bankers from England, Europe and the U.S., among them the Rothschilds, Sir George Buchanan and Lord Alfred Milner (members of the Round Table, who had been instrumental in the creation of the CFR), the Warburgs, the Rockefellers and J.P. Morgan. With their investment, the conspirators had created a pseudo-enemy they controlled —to some extent. Soon after, the Soviet Union became the bogeyman they used for many years as a credible threat to manipulate and control the U.S. and other Western countries. Unfortunately, the credible threat they had created disappeared when the Soviet Union imploded in 1989. Then they were forced to create a makeshift new bogeyman: terrorism. The rest is history.

Currently, faced with a new Russia that firmly opposes the New World Order, the CFR conspirators have created a new virus they want to poison the Russian people with: the Gay Movement.

The Gay Movement: a Trojan Horse for the New World Order[12]

Initially, the main interventionist tool the CFR conspirators used to control the policies of other countries was the U.S. Marines.[13] Later, however, they resorted to more subtle tools, like the Peace Corps. It seems that now the interventionist tool of choice is the gay movement, which they plan to use as a fifth column to influence the policies of foreign countries. This is why Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, a senior CFR agent, just recently declared that the U.S. would only provide aid to countries that support “gay rights.”[14]

Nevertheless, despite their claims, the gay movement leaders do not care for the rights of homosexuals in the U.S., much less abroad. Actually, they are using homosexuals as pawns to advance their secret agenda and the globalization plans of their CFR masters in a dirty political game.

In recent times, only two countries in the world have harassed, persecuted and interned homosexuals in concentration camps: Nazi Germany and Castro’s Cuba. But there is a less known fact: both Hitler and Castro were surrounded by a coterie of closet homosexuals. Ernst Rohm, Rudolf Hess, Reinhardt Heydrich, and even Hitler’s driver, Emil Maurice, were well-known homosexuals.[15] In the same fashion, Castro’s close friend Alfredo Guevara (no relation to Che) and his brother Raúl, just to mention two of the most notorious ones, are well-known closet homosexuals.[16] But neither in Germany, nor in Cuba, were those macho gay homosexuals in power harassed, persecuted or interned in concentration camps. On the contrary, some these warmongering, virile gay homosexuals played a key role in sending effeminate homosexuals to concentration camps.

Gays VS Homosexuals

Though for political reasons gay leaders and propagandists use the terms “gay” and “homosexual” as synonyms, the terms in fact denote two very different things. The confusion, however, is not the product of chance, but of a carefully designed disinformation campaign (PSYOP) developed by the American gay movement with the secret help of very powerful people, who have used it as a smokescreen to hide its true nature. But gay and homosexual are not synonyms. As a matter of fact, the terms denote two very different phenomena, and the distinction is not merely linguistic.

Webster defines “homosexual” as “of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex.” A homosexual is a person who has sex with persons of his/her own sex.

The term gay, on the contrary, is political, and does not refer to any specific sexual practice. It denotes a type of homosexuals who are zealots, partisans, chauvinists and persecutors, dogmatists in their fanaticism. Contrary to homosexuals, gays are militant homosexuals, members of an action movement, actively engaged in activities to advance a particular agenda in the political sphere. Actually, the process of “coming out of the closet,” by which a person tells to the world that he is gay, is basically not a sexual but a political act.

In synthesis, the difference between homosexuals and gays is very similar to the difference between a vegetarian and a vegan, a Jew and a Zionist, and between Liberace and Elton John.

A vegetarian is a person who, for health, taste or any other reason, does not eat meat. A vegan is an extremist vegetarian who thinks that by not eating meat he is saving planet Earth, and he feels ethically and morally superior to meat eaters. A Jew is a person professing a particular religion. A Zionist is a person pushing a particular political agenda. In the same fashion, Liberace was a pianist who became famous in the 1950s. Though everybody knew that he was a homosexual, nobody cared, because the kept it private. On the contrary, Elton John is a gay man who is also a pianist. He uses his fame as a pianist to push the gay agenda.[17]

So, it is obvious that there are two different types of homosexuals. The difference between them is so obvious that some researchers already created names to distinguish them. As early as 1945, German historian Samuel Igra called these militant homosexuals “homosexualists.”[18] I simply call them by the term they themselves coined to disguise their true nature: gays.

According to the gay movement’s disinformation story, the term “gay” was created to counteract the negative connotations attached to the term “homosexual.” But, contrary to their claims, homosexual and heterosexual have always been neutral terms, with no negative connotations whatsoever. Proof of it is that the gay movement keeps using the term bisexual.

Actually, the term gay —most likely a creation of the Tavistock Institute, the Stanford Research Institute, or some other of the conspirators’ psychological warfare think tanks — was specifically coined to create cognitive dissonance: far from being lighthearted, carefree, cheerful, showy, brilliant — which aptly designates the widespread stereotyped image of effeminate homosexuals — the core of the men who call themselves “gays” belong to the “butch” type of virile, tough, aggressive, warmongering, Spartan macho homosexuals who are everything but gay in the original meaning of the word.

For the “butch,” macho gays, young attractive boys are the most desirable option for sexual pleasure, while heterosexual males, feminine women and effeminate homosexuals, are regarded in this order as progressively inferior.

However, though most gays are actually homosexuals, not all homosexuals are necessarily gays. Actually, despite the fact that, as a result of cultural imperialism, most homosexuals in Latin America jumped on the gay bandwagon and now call themselves “gays,” the concept is totally alien to the Hispanic culture. The reason for this is that in Latin America homosexuality had never been politicized — until now.

But, blinded by the massive propaganda campaign pushing the gay agenda —which is actually a subset of the New World Order conspirators’ agenda — most homosexuals around the world began calling themselves gays. They have never suspected that had been recruited under a false flag.

Moreover, as Obama’s recent declaration has proved beyond any doubt, the term “gay” properly includes all types of people, homosexuals or not, who, in one way or another, out of conviction, fear or opportunism, actively support and advance the gay political agenda — which is very close to the CFR conspirators’ agenda.

In the same fashion, millions of homosexuals around the world, particularly in Third World countries, who do not support the gay agenda and have no intention of making a political statement by coming out of a closet they have never been in by openly proclaiming their homosexuality, cannot be properly called gays. Obviously, “gay” is a political term, while “homosexual” is a sociological one. The fact that some gays are homosexuals does not mean that the terms are interchangeable.

Though most people, including most homosexuals, erroneously use the terms as synonyms, the distinction between gay and homosexual is of cardinal importance to understand the essence of the gay phenomenon. As a matter of fact, the American gay movement is fully aware of the distinction, and uses the terms as synonyms for their own ideological purposes, as a way to distort reality. The fact that “gay” and “homosexual” are not synonyms was perhaps the best-kept secret of the gay movement.

Seen from this perspective, it is relatively easy to understand the otherwise unexplainable fact that in the early seventies, while the Castro government was harassing and torturing homosexuals by the thousands and interning them in concentration camps, many American gays joined the Venceremos Brigade and traveled to Cuba,[19] allegedly to work in the sugar crop but actually to give support to the Castro regime. American gays, who are essentially anti-homosexual, had no objections to the harassment and torturing of homosexuals in Castro’s concentration camps.

Under this light, it is easy to understand why San Francisco gays of the pro-Castro organization “Queers for Cuba,” boycotted in San Francisco Bay Area theaters the film Before the Night Falls, based on the autobiography of Cuban writer and homosexual Reinaldo Arenas. Arenas was one of the thousands of homosexuals persecuted in Cuba by the Castroite gays and interned in concentration camps, who escaped the Island during the Mariel boatlift of 1980.

It is also easy to understand why when the more than twenty thousand homosexuals who had escaped from the harassment and persecution in Castro’s gay paradise arrived in the U.S., the American gay organizations turned their backs on them. Only religious charitable organizations, mostly Catholic, gave the Cuban homosexuals a helping hand.

Just a few years ago, the gay-friendly Latin American Studies Association (LASA), received Mariela Castro, the daughter of gay Raúl Castro, the main instigator of the persecution of homosexuals in Cuba, as a hero during its International Congress in San Francisco on May 2012. Further evidence that the gay movement has nothing to do with sexuality, but with politics is that the panel on which Mariela participated was titled Una mirada a la Diversidad Sexual desde lo Político (A View at Sexual Diversity From a Political Point of View). It was not a coincidence that, just a few days before the opening of the LASA Congress, there were government-sponsored marches for gay rights in several Cuban cities.[20]

Currently, American gay leaders, with the full support of the CFR-controlled media presstitutes, are trying to convince the American people that Cuba, the most repressive country in the Western Hemisphere, has suddenly become a heaven for gays. But you have to be very naïve to believe that in Castro’s Cuba, a country where women, blacks, workers, effeminate homosexuals and practically anybody who does not fully support the government have no rights, gays have suddenly become the only ones who have rights. The parades actually show that, like everywhere in the world, gays support the oppressors, including their oppression of homosexuals, which, despite claims to the contrary, still exist in Castro’s Cuba. Despite the American gay movement’s claims on the contrary, there’s nothing to be proud about ignoring the harassment of homosexuals in Castro’s Cuba and showing their support for their oppressors.

The American gay movement paints itself as liberal, progressive and socially conscious. Actually, however, it has willingly become a secret tool of the Council on Foreign Relations, probably the most reactionary organization in America, where oil magnates, Wall Street bankers and CEOs of transnational corporations conspire to bring about the communo-fascist society they euphemistically call the New World Order. This explains why nowhere in the gay literature one can find a condemnation of the tyranny the NWO conspirators are pushing upon the American people and the peoples of the world — including homosexuals. This also explains why you don’t see any rainbow flags held by the protesters outside the Bilderberg meetings.

Since the Russian government declared that it would not tolerate pro-gay propaganda during the Winter Olympic Games, a barrage of anti-Russia gay propaganda exploded in the CFR-controlled press about gay harassment in Russia.[21] What a pro-gay author who wrote about the harassment failed to mention, however, is that gays are notorious for staging false-flag attacks to play the role of victims and demonize their opponents.[22]

As soon as Ronald Reagan took his Oath of Office, he began working hard in the pursuit of his dream: putting an end to the evil Soviet empire. Reagan didn’t hate the Russian people and he didn’t want to destroy Russia, he just wanted to free them from the oppressive Soviet regime. No wonder Reagan earned the hatred of the CFR conspirators who had created and kept artificially alive the evil empire that was enslaving the Russian people.

In one of those unexplainable turns of history, just in a few years Russia became the country Reagan had in mind, while America, under the control of a few psychopaths, is on the way to becoming the evil empire he hated so much.[23]

Some “conservative” Republicans cannot accept even the possibility that Russia may be changing back into a Christian country.[24] Well, I can’t blame them. If twenty years ago somebody would have told me that America was going to change into an anti-Christian, communo-fascist dictatorship I would not have believed it — but it is happening very fast right before my eyes.

Granted, like most politicians such as the Bushes, the Clintons and Obama, Vladimir Putin might be corrupt and power hungry. But there is a big difference that makes him a fierce enemy of the NWO conspirators: contrary to his American counterparts, Putin loves his country. His dream is to change Russia into a first class industrialized country with a large middle class.

Moreover, Putin is not associated with the Council on Foreign Relations, the Bilderberg Group, the World Economic Forum or any other globalist organizations. He is not conspiring in the shadows to eliminate Russia’s sovereignty and create a New World Order — a global government controlled by oil magnates, international bankers and CEOs of transnational corporations.

Contrary to his CFR foes, Putin’s goal is not to turn back history and change Russia again into the medieval, hunger-games-like society the CFR conspirators imposed on the Russian people for more than half a century and now envision for the rest of the world, including the U.S.

And that makes a big difference.

The CFR globalist conspirators hate Putin for the same reasons they hated Kennedy and Reagan, the last presidents who really loved America. It will not be so easy for them, however, to get rid of Putin the same way they got rid of Kennedy and tried to eliminate Reagan.

Despite all the anti-Russian propaganda related to the Winter Olympics at Sochi, Russian leaders do not hate homosexuals. They simply don’t want the gay movement to turn the event into a tribune to advance the gay movement’s New World Order agenda. Evidence of this is President Putin congratulating and embracing openly gay speedskater Ireen Wust for her gold medal.[25]

Proof that the CFR conspirators’ criticism of Russia’s anti-gay policies is politically motivated is that U.S. allies such as Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Qatar, U.A.E., Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Yemen, Uganda and Kenya, have more strict anti-gay laws than Russia, but that is never mentioned in the CFR-controlled mainstream media.[26] The fact that most Russians now know who brought communism to their country, and that some Christians in the U.S. currently see Russia as an ally, only proves that people are awakening from their media-induced stupor. You cannot fool all the people all the time.

The ones who now want to convince us that communists are still in control in Russia[27] are the same ones who told us that Saddam Hussein was a threat to the US because he had weapons of mass destruction. Apparently, the collaboration of the US government with the same Muslim terrorist groups they initially blamed for the 9/11 events has become so obvious that the War on Terror hoax is untenable and no longer useful. Therefore, they want to fall back to the old, trusted pseudo-enemy: Soviet communism.

But, despite their best wishes, communism is dead in Russia. On the other hand, it seems that, like a zombie, communism is reincarnating in the US. So, if those super patriots are so eager to fight communism they don’t need to travel far away, much less learn Russian. Just by looking around they can find plenty of communism to fight right here in God-fearing America.

The bottom line is that Russia has become the main obstacle in the globalist conspirators way to fully implement their gay New World Order; that’s why they have been encircling Russia trying to bring her to her knees.[28] Currently, any attack on Russia is an attack on the freedom-loving peoples of the world, particularly on the few remaining freedom-loving Americans. We should not fall for our real enemies’ propaganda.

As an active, militant tool of the New World Order conspirators, the gay movement has become an enemy of freedom-loving Americans. We must unmask the gay movement and show the people what it really is: a reactionary, extremist political movement disguised as a progressive social one.

Of course, every one who attacks the gay movement is immediately accused of being homophobic. Unmasking militant gays, however, has nothing to do with sexuality, much less with an irrational fear of homosexuals (the true meaning of “homophobia”). On the contrary, if History teaches us something, it is that whenever gays take political control of a country, non-militant homosexuals are the first ones who end up interned in concentration camps. It happened in Nazi Germany, it happened in Castro’s Cuba, it was attempted in Japan,[29] and it will happen here in America if pro-NWO, militant gays are allowed to grab power.

Help your brainwashed homosexual friends to liberate themselves from the gay mental straitjacket. Tell them who their true enemy is.

© 2014 Servando Gonzalez – All Rights Reserved


1. See, Nancy Armour, “Vladimir Putin visits Team USA in Sochi,” USA Today, February 14, 2014.

2. Other “conservative” Republicans are now pushing the recent theory that it was the KGB who killed Kennedy. Well, unless somebody proves beyond any reasonable doubt that Allen Dulles was a KGB agent infiltrated into the CIA, I won’t buy it!”

3. On CIA’s anti-American activities, see, Servando Gonzalez, Psychological Warfare and the New World Order (Spooks Books: Oakland, California, 2010), pp. 108-149.]]]

4. This is not an exaggeration. For example, most of the “communists” in the State Department Senator McCarthy accused of anti-American activities actually were either CFR members or CFR-controlled agents. Proof of this is that the ones who immediately jumped to defend the traitors and vilify McCarthy were President Eisenhower, Secretary of State Dean Acheson, Assistant Secretary of War John McCloy, and journalist Edward Murrow, all CFR members themselves.

5. See, Daniel Yergin, The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money and Power, Part I (New York: Pocket Books, 1991), p. 59.

6. John Christian Ryter, “The Secret Life of AIC,” NewsWithViews.com, March 31, 2009.

7. Antony C. Sutton, Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution (New Rochelle, New York: Arlington House, 1974).

8. G Edward Griffin, The Creature From Jekyll Island: A Second Look at the Federal Reserve (Appleton, Wisconsin: American Opinion, 1994).

9. Any resemblance to the “spontaneous” revolutions of the so-called Arab Spring and the one now taking place in the Ukraine is not the product of a coincidence.

10. Everything indicates that the CFR globalist conspirators are repeating their game in the Ukraine. See, Paul Craig Roberts, “Washington Orchestrated Protests are Destabilizing Ukraine,” Infowars.com, February 13, 2014.

11. [Link]

12. On October 2013, WorldNetDaily devoted a whole issue of its printed magazine Whistleblower, to the subject of how the “gay rights” movement has become a Trojan horse for totalitarianism. Unfortunately, however, the issue fell short of its goal because most articles deal more with homosexuality and its social implications than with the political aspects of the gay movement itself. Actually, the only article that deals with the gay movement’s political implications, erroneously links the gay movement only to the Democratic Party. See, Joseph Farah, “Where Sexual Anarchy is Leading Us: Identifying the Totalitarian Movement Whose name No One Dares Utter,” Whistleblower, Volume 22, No. 10 (October, 2013), pp. 4-5.

13. See, General Smedley D. Butler, War is a Racket (Los Angeles: Feral House, 2003). Butler joined the Marine Corps when the Spanish American War broke out. During his 34 years of Marine Corps service, Butler was awarded two Congressional Medals of Honor, the first one for the capture of Veracruz, Mexico in 1914, and the second one for the capture of Ft. Riviere, Haiti in 1917. In addition, he was awarded numerous medals for heroism, including the Marine Corps Brevet Medal (the highest Marine medal at its time for officers) He was one of only 19 people to be twice awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor.

14. See, “Hillary Clinton on Gay Rights Abroad: Secretary of State Delivers Historic LGBT Speech in Geneva,” The Huffington Post, December 6, 2012. See also, “U.S. to Use Foreign Aid to Promote Gay Rights,” Religion Today, December 7, 2011.

15. The intimate connection between American gays and the Nazis is evidenced by the admiration some macho guys feel for the Nazi paraphernalia. Just a look at photos from the San Francisco Gay Parade events show them proudly clad in black leather and riding boots SS-style. See, Judith A. Riesman, “The Pink Swastika as Holocaust Revisionist History,” The Institute for Media Education, February 1998.

16. Both Hitler and Castro have been accused of being homosexuals. See, i.e., Lothar Machtan, Hitler’s Secret: The Double Life of a Dictator. See also, Eleonora Bruzal and Luis José Uzcátegui, Los hombres que erotizó Fidel. According to Machtan, Hitler himself never condemned homosexuality, but he allowed the persecution of effeminate homosexuals in order to disguise his own true colors. This could be easily applied to Castro.

17. Interesting: “conservative” Republican mouthpiece Rush Limbaugh hired gay activist Elton John to entertain the guests attending Rush’s wedding party in 2010.

18. Samuel Igra, Germany’s National Vice (London: Quality Press, 1945). More recently, author Judith Riesman calls them “homosexists.”On her Oct. 27 WorldNetDaily column, Judith Riesman made use of the heretofore unknown word “homosexist.” According to Riesman, “Homosexists are zealots, partisans, chauvinists and persecutors, dogmatists in their fanaticism.”

19. Venceremos Brigade pro-Castro activities in Dennis Altman, Homosexual Oppression and Liberation (New York: Avon, 1971), p. 218.

20. LASA Conference, May 23-29 2012, San Francisco. See, “March for gay rights in Cuba,” BBC.co.uk, May 19, 2012.

21. See, i.e., J.G. Vives, “LGBT Community Attacked, Tortured and Imprisoned in Russia as Regime Threatens to Imprison Gay Olympians: Peaceful people in Russia are being attacked and imprisoned at an alarming rate for being open about their sexual orientation,” Intellihub.com, August 8, 2013.

22. [See, i.e., “Another Fake Gay Hate Crime … With a Twist,” Gay Christian Movement Watch, November 26, 2013, also, “Cops: Lesbian Fakes Attack In Which She Carved Anti-Gay Slurs Into Skin,” CBS, August 22, 2012, Kate Briquelet, “Lesbian Waitress in “anti-gay” Receipt Flap Fired,” New York Post, December 7, 2013, also, “Joseph Baken, Montana Man, Pleads Guilty To Fabricating Anti-Gay Attack,” The Huffington Post, August 8, 2012, Hayley Bruce, “Police: Gay man faked hate crime in Iowa City,” The Daily Iowan, July 29, 2011, “Arson at Illinois gay bar likely a fake hate crime by owner,” Insurance Fraud News, November 2, 2013.]

23. If you think that I went too far by claiming that the U.S. is becoming the new evil empire, please watch this video and see some of our sociopath leaders shamelessly joking about their war crimes: “5-minute video: US ‘leaders’ JOKE about OBVIOUS War Crimes, war lies, war murders: Arrest them,” Infowars.com, February 9, 2014.

24. Unknowingly, in their total ignorance of communism, those “conservative” Republicans have accepted the late Soviet Premier Leonid Brezhnev’s doctrine of the irreversibility of communism! Nevertheless, despite CFR machinations behind our backs, like Russia, one day Cuba will change back into a democratic republic.

25, See, Andrew Springer and Kirit Radiaa, “Openly Gay Medalist ‘Cuddles’ With Putin,” ABC News, February 10, 2014.

26, See, Paul Joseph Watson, “Why is the Mass Media Promoting ‘Gay Rights’?Infowars.com, February 8, 2014.

27, See, i.e., Greg Corombos, “Bolton: Putin Plot to ‘reconstitute Old Soviet Union,’” WND Radio, According to the article, CFR agent John Bolton warned “of Vladimir Putin’s attempts to reconstitute the old Soviet Union.”

28, The fact that the CFR globalist conspirators are encircling Russia is the only explanation for their otherwise unexplainable role in the so-called “Arab Spring, their support for the CIA-backed anti-government insurgents in Syria, Egypt and Libya, and their current efforts to destabilize the Ukraine. It is interesting to see how the CFR-controlled mainstream media is giving full coverage to the Ukrainian “rebels,” while mostly ignores the fight of the Venezuelan people against Castro’s military occupation forces.

29, On November 25, 1970, author Yukio Mishima and some members of his Tatenokai (“shield society”) neo-Nazi, gay militia group tried to gain power in Japan through a coup d’etat. Fortunately, they failed in their attempt.

Source Link:


Note:  What follows are numerous other articles and/or blogs, report, book and videos that relate to and/or support the above articles and/or blogs-You Decide:

Military-Obama intimidated top military brass- Agree with policy on gays or resign

Obama intimidated top military brass: Agree with policy on gays or resign!-Posted on Biz Pac Review-By Tom Tillison-On April 2, 2014:



GAY’ U.S. SOLDIERS CAUGHT IN ASTONISHING ACT: ’Sellout crowd attends LGBT fundraiser on military base’!Posted on WND.com-On March 2, 2014:


NWO-Victims of sex assaults in military are mostly men

Victims of sex assaults in military are mostly men: Women are more likely to speak up!Posted on The Washington Times-By Rowan Scarborough, The Washington Times-On May 20, 2013:


NEW IN ‘GAY’ PARADE: U.S. TROOPS IN UNIFORM: ‘Command-level decision breaks down decades of limits on use of military image!-Posted on WND.com-By Bob Unruh-On July 18, 2012:


NOW MEN ARE VICTIMS OF MILITARY SEX ASSAULTS: ‘Male-on-male attacks up since repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’!Posted on WND.com-By Bob Unruh-On April 23, 2012:


SEX CRIMES SURGE IN U.S. ARMY: ‘Phenomenal numbers of rapes, sexual assaults, forcible sodomies!’-Posted on WND.com-By Bob Unruh-On April 17, 2012:


LIBEL CASE AGAINST OBAMA’S ‘GAY’ ACCUSER TOSSED: ‘Larry Sinclair claimed president’s campaign paid to rig polygraph!’-Posted on WND.com-By Jerome R. Corsi-On April 24, 2012:


BILL LETS CHAPLAINS HOLD BIBLICAL VIEW OF ‘GAYS’: ‘Congressman says everyone’s constitutional rights should be protected!’-Posted on WND.com-By Bob Unruh-On March 17, 2012:


MARINES ‘STARTING TO LOOK RIDICULOUS’: ‘Base official calls homosexual kiss ‘typical’!-Posted on WND.com-By Bob Unruh-On March 3, 2012:


1950 Congressional Report On Perverts In Government (S. Res. 280)!Posted on USASurvival.org:


Despite Plea from Obama Administration, Conference Committee Restores Military Ban on Sodomy, Bestiality!-Posted on CNSNews.com-By Pete Winn-On December 15, 2011:


Senate Poised to Legalize Sodomy and Bestiality in U.S. Military!Posted on CNSNews.com-By Pete Winn-On December 1, 2011:


Okay to Be Openly Gay in U.S. Military!Posted on CNSNews.com-By Susan Jones-On September 20, 2011:


Defense Secretary Panetta Expected to Certify End of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’!-Posted on CNSNews.com-By LOLITA C. BALDOR, Associated Press-On July 22, 2011:


Navy Authorizes Chaplains to Perform Same-Sex ‘Marriages’ in Naval ChapelsPosted on CNSNews.com-By Pete Winn-On May 9, 2011:


On the Eve of Osama’s Death, Obama Forces Gay Propaganda on the MilitaryPosted on Floyd Reports-By Ben Johnson-On May 3, 2011:


Marines Get Trained on Accepting Gay RecruitsPosted on NewsMax.com-On April 28, 2011:


Hang on! ‘Don’t Ask’ repeal faces fresh fire: ‘Congress wary after generals admit they ‘don’t know’ how ‘gays’ impact readiness’Posted on WND.com-By Drew Zahn-On April 22, 2011:


KNIGHT: Marching in lockstep with homosexual agenda ‘Obama militants shoot warrior tradition first, ask questions later’Posted on The Washington Times-By Robert Knight, The Washington Times-On April 5, 2011:


Military indoctrinated on gays kissing, behavior: ‘Materials offer scenarios on gays’Posted on The Washington Times-By By Rowan Scarborough, The Washington Times-On March 23, 2011:


Obama Destroys the Masculine MilitaryPosted on Floyd Reports-By Guest Writer-On March 14, 2011:


Obama’s Gay Reeducation for Marines on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”Posted on Floyd Reports-By Ben Johnson-On February 17, 2011:


Evangelical chaplains may face ultimatumPosted on OneNewsNow-By Chad Groening-On February 2, 2011:


The Honors ListPosted on The American Spectator-By George Neumayr-On January 6, 2011:


What do military heroes think of sex experiments? ‘The mission is fight and win wars. President’s job is to protect nation’Posted on WND.com-By Bob Unruh-On January 1, 2011:


67 Percent of Marine Combat Forces Say Putting Homosexuals in Their Units Will Hurt Their Effectiveness in the Field, Says DOD ReportPosted on CNSNews.com-By Terence P. Jeffrey-On December 20, 2010:


Rep. West: ‘Crazy’ to Fight Over ‘Don’t Ask’ With War to WinPosted on NewsMax.com-By Jim Meyers and Kathleen Walter-On December 3, 2010:


McCain: 264,600 may quit military: ‘3 top commanders warn Senate: Don’t accept open homosexuality, reject ‘reprogramming’Posted on WND.com-By Brian Fitzpatrick-On December 3, 2010:


Army, Marine chiefs cast doubt on gay servicePosted on National Review Online-By ANNE FLAHERTY, Associated Press-On December 3, 2010:


Combat Troops’ Opposition Not an ‘Insurmountable Barrier’ to Letting Gays Serve in Military, Defense Secretary SaysPosted on CNSNews.com-By Edwin Mora-On December 03, 2010:


Don’t Ask Don’t Tell BlackmailPosted on National Review Online-On December 2, 2010:


McCain Questions Pentagon on Repeal of Gay BanPosted on The New York Times-By ELISABETH BUMILLER-On December 2, 2010:


The Real Pentagon Poll: 91% of Service Members Reject Homosexual Leaders – 1 in 4 Would QuitPosted on AIPNews.com-On December 1, 2010:


Bradley Manning: Poster Boy For ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’Posted on Human Events-By Ann Coulter-On December 1, 2010:


McCain Says He Will Oppose Repealing Law That Bans Homosexuals from MilitaryPosted on CNSNews.com-By Matt Cover-On November 15, 2010:


Supreme Court Ruling Keeps Ban on Gays From Openly Serving in the MilitaryPosted on FoxNews.com-By Lee Ross-On November 12, 2010:


Gates urges Congress to repeal gay ban nowPosted on Yahoo News- By ANNE GEARAN, AP National Security Writer-On November 7, 2010:


‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ May Go, But Military’s Don’t-Do-Sodomy Law Still in Place-Posted on CNSNews.com-By Matt Cover-On October 21, 2010:


White House: Obama Will Push Lame-Duck Congress to Legalize Homosexuality in U.S. Armed ForcesPosted on CNSNews.com-By Fred Lucas-On October 19, 2010:


Military Recruiters Told to Accept Gays-Posted on The New York Times-By The Associated Press-On October 19, 2010:


Judge’s Order Bars Military from Enforcing Federal Law Against Homosexuals Serving in MilitaryPosted on CNSNews.com-By Matt Cover-On October 14, 2010:


Republicans Block Bill to Lift Military Gay BanPosted on NewsMax.com-On September 21, 2010:


Move to End ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Stalls in SenatePosted on The New York Times-By DAVID M. HERSZENHORN-On September 21, 2010:


Do Senators Understand Truth Behind Homosexuals’ Military Service?Posted on Townhall-By Peter Sprigg-On September 20, 2010:


New gay Army: Top general calls Christian soldiers ‘bigots’Editorial posted on The Washington Times-On September 16, 2010:


Obama Threw “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” Case-Posted on Floyd Reports-By Ben Johnson-ON September 13, 2010:


Judge Strikes Down Military Ban on Gays-Posted on The New York Times-By The Associated Press-On September 9, 2010:


Marines don’t want to share rooms with gays: generalPosted on Reuters-On August 24, 2010:


Unpatriotic Democrats want a Gay Military Culture-Posted on ExposeObama.com-By Kevin “Coach” Collins, Coach Is Right-On August 12, 2010:


Half of Democrats Favor Punishing Soldiers Who Oppose Homosexuality, Survey FindsPosted on CNSNews.com-By Adam Cassandra-On August 11, 2010:


Military Homosexual Scandal 
Tied to WikiLeaks Treason-Posted on USASurvival, Inc.-By Cliff Kincaid-On August 1, 2010:


The Battle of the BloodPosted on The American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property–By John Horvat-On June 15, 2010:


Conservative media fiddle while the military burnsPosted on OneNewsNow.com-By Robert Knight, Guest Columnist-On May 28, 2010:


Saving Soldiers from Gay Death!-Posted on USASurvival.org-By Cliff Kincaid-On May 27, 2010:


Democrats’ War Funding Amendment Would Allow Homosexuals to Serve in MilitaryPosted on CNSNews.com-By Matt Cover, Staff Writer-On May 28, 2010:


House Votes to Repeal ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ as Vote Nears in SenatePosted on ABCNews.com-By HUMA KHAN and Z. BYRON WOLF-On May 27, 2010:


Majority of Americans Believe Future of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Should be Left Up to Military Commanders, Zogby Poll FindsPosted on CNSNews.com-By Nick Dean-On May 27, 2010:


New Blockbuster Video Exposes Dangers of Gay Blood and Gay SoldiersPosted on USASurvival.org:


Famed War Hero Speaks Out Against Obama Decision to End ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’Posted on Culture and Media Institute-By Jeff Poor, Business & Media Institute-On May 26, 2010:


Report Exposes Unacceptable Risks of Changing Pentagon’s Homosexual Exclusion Policy-Posted on USASurvival.org-By Cliff Kincaid:


White House eyes a compromise on gays in militaryPosted on Yahoo News-By PHILIP ELLIOTT, Associated Press Writer-On May 24, 2010:


Marine Corps General James Conway: Marines Would Not Be ‘Forced’ To Live With Gay SoldiersPosted on The HuffingtonPost.com-By ANNE FLAHERTY-On March 26, 2010:


Senate Armed Services Chairman Did Not Know That Bill He is Sponsoring Would Legalize Bisexual Behavior in the MilitaryPosted on CNSNews.com-By Nicholas Ballasy, Video Reporter-On March 08, 2010:


Sen. Nelson: ‘Premature To Make Any Decision’ On Allowing Homosexuals To Openly Serve in Military-Posted on CNSNews.com-By Nicholas Ballasy, Video Reporter-On March 08, 2010:


Sen. Lieberman Proposes Legalizing Bisexual Behavior in the U.S. MilitaryPosted on CNSNews.com-By Nicholas Ballasy, Video Reporter-On March 08, 2010:


‘Don’t ask, don’t tell’ study already under firePosted on Yahoo News-By ANNE FLAHERTY, Associated Press Writer-On March 3, 2010:


Outraged Conservatives: Barring Critic of Obama’s Gays-in-Military Policy from Air Force Prayer Meeting Is Attack on Free Speech-Posted on CNSNews.com-By Pete Winn and Karen Schuberg-On March 01, 2010:


Air Force Retracted Invitation for Conservative Leader to Speak at Prayer Luncheon After He Criticized Obama’s Position on ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’Posted on CNSNews.com-By Pete Winn, Senior Writer/Editor-On February 26, 2010:


Ask Obama About Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell: “Gay voters are growing impatient for equality”-Posted on The Wall Street Journal Opinion Journal-By RICHARD SOCARIDES-On January 24, 2010:


Military leaders doubt repeal of limits on gaysPosted on Reuters.com-By Susan Cornwell-On February 23, 2010:


Chiefs warn against lifting gay ban too quickly-Posted on Yahoo News-By ANNE FLAHERTY, Associated Press Writer-On February 23, 2010:


The Case Against Gays in the Military: “Open homosexuality would threaten unit cohesion and military effectiveness”Posted on The Wall Street Journal Opinion Journal-By MACKUBIN THOMAS OWENS-On February 2, 2010:


CRS: Homosexuals and the U.S. Military: Current Issues-Congressional Research Report 7-5700-By David F. Burrelli, Specialist in Military Manpower Policy and Jody Feder, Legislative Attorney-On July 22, 2009:


Should Homosexuals Serve Openly in the Military?Posted on SpeakOut.Com-By Brian Hughes-On April 26, 2000:


Soros Owns the Left; Now Wants to Control the Right: “The Gay Infiltration of the Conservative Movement”-Posted on USASurvival.org-By Cliff Kincaid-On February 22, 2010:


Video: Barack Obama Gay Sex Scandal New Evidence!-Posted on YouTube.com-By billdemo2-On May 15, 2008:


The “Born Gay” HoaxPosted on MassResistance.Org-By Ryan Sorba-2007:


Note: The above articles and/or blog posts, reports and book relate to and/or support my following blog posts-You Decide:

The Military Pays the Price for Obama’s Agenda!


Veterans and members of our Armed Forces under attack!


Kagan spit in the eye of America’s Armed Forces!


Have the “power elite” and pseudo-experts covertly sold us corruption disguised as freedom?


Where Is America Today?


A Nation Adrift Theme and Disclaimer:


“Food For Thought”

“God Bless & Keep Our USA Safe”

Semper Fi!

Read Full Post »

Question: Could it be true that UC San Diego recently threatened to punish students for protected speech by freezing 33 media groups and dissolving student TV?

This article reveals the eye-opening answer to this question-You Decide:

UC San Diego Freezes Funds to 33 Media Groups, Dissolves Student TV, Threatens to Punish Students for Protected Speech-Posted on TheFire.Org-On February 23, 2010:


These are pertinent excerpts from this article:

“SAN DIEGO, February 23, 2010—The University of California, San Diego (UCSD) and its student government have violated the First Amendment by freezing funds for 33 student media organizations, dissolving the student-run television station, and threatening to punish students involved in a controversy over a party invitation for an event called the “Compton Cookout.” Student government president Utsav Gupta has explained that his repressive actions were due to “fracturing of the student body on an issue” and “hateful speech.” Further, under pressure from state legislators who seek to punish protected speech, UCSD has launched “aggressive investigations” into the party invitation. After many students came to the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) for help, FIRE has written two letters to UCSD defending the First Amendment both on and off campus.

“UCSD is detracting from its message of moral outrage by committing so many violations of the First Amendment,” said FIRE Vice President Robert Shibley. “UCSD now must undo the damage to free speech and resist the pressure to punish protected expression.”

The invitation for the February 15 party, which first appeared on social networking site Facebook, celebrated racial stereotypes, asked female partygoers to dress as “ghetto chicks,” and invited partygoers to “experience the various elements of life in the ghetto.” The party reportedly was a DVD release party organized by “Jiggaboo Jones,” an African-American “shock jock”-style performer whose persona relies on deliberately provocative and offensive expression. Members of UCSD fraternities reportedly were involved in organizing the event.

Last week, several members of the California State Legislature called for the investigation and punishment of those students involved. Among the elected officials urging punishment for protected speech were Speaker-elect John A. Pérez, Speaker Karen Bass, and most of all Assemblymember Isadore Hall, III, who “want[s] names” and suspensions or expulsions. UCSD did not rule out punishment and has announced “aggressive investigations” into possible disciplinary violations.

FIRE’s letter today to UCSD Chancellor Marye A. Fox points out that the investigation of protected speech is likely a violation of the First Amendment rights of those investigated and urges the school to announce that it will never investigate protected speech.

This is not the only violation of the First Amendment on UCSD’s campus. Last Thursday, student organization The Koala broadcast a defense of the party on UCSD’s Student Run Television (SRTV), including language that many persons on campus found highly offensive. In response, student government president Utsav Gupta took immediate action to shut down the broadcast and then the entire station because the broadcast was “deeply offensive and hurtful.”

On February 19, Gupta stated publicly that “[w]e will only open [SRTV] again when we can be sure that such hateful content can never be aired again on our student funded TV station.”

Gupta also unilaterally froze the funding for 33 student media organizations because of the content of The Koala’s expression, stating that he was compelled to act because such expression was “fracturing … the student body on an issue.” A Facebook group opposing the “mass censorship” currently has more than 1,100 members.

FIRE’s letter yesterday to Gupta and Fox points out that these actions violate the constitutional rights of the organizations involved, not least because the student government, Associated Students of UCSD (ASUCSD), is an agent of UCSD and is thus bound by the First Amendment.

“In the name of protecting students from controversial speech, President Gupta has suppressed expression throughout the campus and has alienated hundreds of students, even those who share his moral outrage at the party invitation,” said Adam Kissel, Director of FIRE’s Individual Rights Defense Program. “UCSD and ASUCSD must immediately restore access to funding for all organizations, put SRTV back on the air, follow the official procedures for handling complaints at SRTV, refrain from investigating or punishing protected speech both on and off campus, and publicly announce that protected speech will never be investigated.”

FIRE is a nonprofit educational foundation that unites civil rights and civil liberties leaders, scholars, journalists, and public intellectuals from across the political and ideological spectrum on behalf of individual rights, due process, freedom of expression, academic freedom, and rights of conscience at our nation’s colleges and universities. FIRE’s efforts to preserve liberty on campuses across America are described at thefire.org.

TAKE ACTION: Tell UCSD to focus on its own message and stop violating individual rights. Send a letter to UCSD officials here.


Adam Kissel, Director, Individual Rights Defense Program, FIRE: 215-717-3473, adam@thefire.org

Marye A. Fox, Chancellor, University of California, San Diego: 858-534-3135, chancellor@ucsd.edu

Utsav Gupta, President, Associated Students of UCSD: 858-534-4452, aspresident@ucsd.edu

Note: These articles relate to and/or support the above article-You Decide:

University of California at San Diego: First Amendment Violations at UCSD-Posted thefire.org-On February 26, 2010:


‘Compton Party Part Deux’ Organizer Defends His Actions-Posted on NBCSanDiego.com-By MICHELLE WAYLAND-On February 21, 2010:


Racial Tensions Boil at UCSDPosted on NBCSanDiego.com-By MICHELLE WAYLAND-On February 20, 2010:


Pope Center Report Reveals Threats to Free Speech at North Carolina’s Universities-By Azhar MajeedPosted on thefire.org-On February 18, 2010:


Note: These articles relate to and/or support my recent blog posts-You Decide:

Temple University Charges Unconstitutional ‘Security’ Fee for Geert Wilders Event!


The FCC Should Not Interfere With The Internet!


‘Game Change’: New Book Reveals 2008 Campaigns’ Messy Moments-To Include Racism!


Senior Citizens & Others Disgustingly Kept In Dark By The MSM!


“Food For Thought”

“God Bless & Keep Our USA Safe”

Semper Fi!

Read Full Post »

Question: Could it be true that the President recently appointed an OIC Envoy who defended an activist who aided a terrorist group?

This recent article reveals the eye-opening answer to this question-You Decide:

Obama’s New OIC Envoy Defended Activist Who Aided Terrorist Group-Posted on CNSNews.com-By Patrick Goodenough, International Editor-On February 15, 2010:


These are pertinent excerpts from this article:

CNSNews.com) – President Obama’s newly appointed envoy to the Organization of the Islamic Conference was quoted in 2004 as saying an American who aided a Palestinian terrorist group was the victim of “politically motivated persecutions” who was being used “to squash dissent.”

Rashad Hussain was quoted as telling a Muslim students’ event in Chicago that if U.S. Muslims did not speak out against the injustices taking place in America, then everyone’s rights would be in jeopardy.

The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (WRMEA) cited Hussain as making the remarks in connection with Sami al-Arian, a university professor and activist sentenced in 2006 to more than four years in prison (including time already spent in custody) after he had pleaded guilty to conspiring to aid the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ).

The U.S. government designated the PIJ as a foreign terrorist organization in 1997, and in 2003, then Attorney-General John Ashcroft described it as “one of the most violent terrorist organizations in the world.”
Palestinian Islamic Jihad has killed more than 100 Israelis in suicide bombings and other attacks. Its victims include American citizens Alisa Flatow, a 20-year-old New Jersey college student killed in a 1995 suicide bombing in Gaza, and 16-year-old Shoshana Ben-Ishai, shot dead in a bus in Jerusalem in 2001.

In sentencing al-Arian, Judge James Moody of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida described him as a “leader of the PIJ” and a “master manipulator.”

Al-Arian remains under home detention in Virginia pending contempt of court charges relating to his refusal to testify in an unrelated case involving an Islamic think tank. Sympathizers view him as a victim of post-9/11 law enforcement zeal and anti-Muslim prejudice. (The WRMEA article described him as “an innocent man targeted for free-speech activities, whose rights were stripped thanks in part to the PATRIOT Act.”)

Among those sympathizers, evidently, was Rashad Hussain, who at the time of the cited remarks was a Yale Law School student and an editor, from 2003-2005, of the Yale Law Journal. He went on to serve as a Department of Justice trial attorney and in January 2009 was appointed White House deputy associate counsel.

On Saturday, Obama named the Texas-born, 31-year-old Indian-American as his envoy to the OIC, the 57-member bloc of Islamic states. The appointment is in line with the president’s goal, expressed in his speech in Cairo last June, to reach out to the Islamic world.

Obama made the announcement in a video address at a U.S.-Islamic World Forum meeting in Qatar, which Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Hussain attended over the weekend.

“Rashad has played a key role in developing the partnerships I called for in Cairo,” Obama told the gathering in the video message. “And as a hafiz of the Koran, he is a respected member of the American Muslim community, and I thank him for carrying forward this important work.” (A hafiz is someone who has memorized the Islamic text.)

Article edited:

Around three years after the WRMEA article quoting Hussain first appeared, it was edited to remove all references to him.

A copy of the original 2004 article, retrieved via the Nexis news database, includes the following sentences:

Al-Arian’s situation is one of many “politically motivated persecutions,” claimed Rashad Hussain, a Yale law student. Such persecution, he stated, must be fought through hope, faith, and the Muslim vote (…) Along with many others, said Yale’s Hussain, Dr. Sami Al-Arian has been “used politically to squash dissent.” The Muslim community must speak out against the injustices taking place in America, he emphasized. Otherwise, everyone’s rights will be in jeopardy.

But in the version of the same story currently available on the WRMEA Web site those sentences – and only those sentences – have disappeared. An Internet archive search indicates that the edits were made sometime after October 2007.

Contacted by email on Sunday, the writer of the original article expressed surprise but said she no longer worked at WRMEA and could not explain the edit. Queries sent to WRMEA editors brought no response. They were asked whether either Hussain, or anyone else, had asked for the archived story to be altered (see the revised pages).

(Editor’s note:  The point concerning the mysterious edits in the WRMEA article and details about Rashad Hussein’s background were initially reported on the Web site of The Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Report, on Feb. 14, 2010.)

How to combat terrorism:

Some of Hussain’s views on how the U.S. should deal with terrorism and extremism can be found in his writings.

A lengthy 2007 article in the Texas Journal on Civil Liberties & Civil Rights examined anti-terrorism initiatives in the U.S. in the post-9/11 era, such as a requirement that nonimmigrant visitors from specified countries register for fingerprinting and questioning. Of 25 countries identified, all but North Korea were Islamic, and 17 were Arab.

“Some policies appear to be based on the notion that certain characteristics make one more likely to be a terrorist: e.g., membership in a particular religious group, having a particular national origin, and membership in a particular racial group,” Hussain wrote.

Not only was selective enforcement unconstitutional, but it might also be “counter-productive from a national security perspective,” he argued, noting for instance that aliens from non-Muslim nations where al-Qaeda had an active presence, such as Britain and Spain, were not targeted.

Hussain concluded: “Federal law should adopt a standard that protects national security while forbidding the targeting of non-citizens solely on the basis of their racial, religious, or ethnic backgrounds.”

In another article, published by the Brookings Institution in 2008, Hussain and co-author Al-Husein N. Madhany explored the role of Islam in U.S. counterterrorism policy.

They said policymakers should understand that people attracted to terrorist ideology would be less persuaded by calls to Western-style freedom and democracy than by “calls to Islam.”

“[B]ecause the vast majority of Muslims view Islam as fundamentally opposed to terror and many Muslims associate American freedom and democracy with immorality and impermissible secularism, does it make sense to advertise our efforts as anti-‘Islamic terrorism,’ ‘pro-freedom,’ and ‘pro-democracy?’” Hussain and Madhany asked. “Or, might it be more effective, to focus on the notion that terrorism is antithetical to the teachings of Islam?”

Hussain will be the second U.S. envoy to the OIC; President Bush first appointed one in 2008, naming Pakistan-born Texas businessman Sada Cumber to the post.
Headquartered in Saudi Arabia, the 40-year-old OIC has become increasingly visible in recent years, thanks to its activism at the U.N., where it continues to promote a campaign against the “defamation” of Islam.

The Islamic bloc says there is a need to combat “Islamophobia” that has reared its head since 9/11; critics of the campaign include free speech groups and religious freedom advocates, who call it an attempt to shield Islam and Islamic practices from legitimate scrutiny.”

Note: This recent article relates to and/or supports the above article-You Decide:

Obama’s Envoy to Islamic Bloc Admits Controversial Statements About Supporter of Terror Group-Posted on CNSNews.Com-By Patrick Goodenough, International Editor-On February 22, 2010:


These are pertinent excerpts from this article:

CNSNews.com) – President Obama’s envoy to the Islamic bloc acknowledged Friday that he was accurately quoted in 2004 as calling the treatment of activist Sami al-Arian, then facing trial for supporting a Palestinian terrorist group, an example of “politically motivated persecutions.”

Rashad Hussain made the admission after Politico.com obtained an audio recording of the Muslim Students Association (MSA) event in Chicago where, as a Yale law student, he made the remarks.

“I made statements on that panel that I now recognize were ill-conceived or not well-formulated,” he said.

Earlier, Hussain—through White House spokesmen—said he could not recall having made the statements.

Hussain also revealed that he had contacted the publication, which had quoted him, the Washington Report on Middle Eastern Affairs, to complain about the story. He told Politico he did so on the grounds that it had “attributed comments to me without context, leaving a misimpression.” He said the WRMEA had later “modified the article.”

The controversy erupted early last week after CNSNews.com and the Global Muslim Brotherhood DailyReport discovered that Hussain had been quoted as having made the comments – and that the WRMEA story had later been edited to remove them.

CNSNews.com then contacted both the WRMEA editors, who said “an intern” had erred in attributing the comments to Hussain rather than to another attendee, and the reporter who wrote the report, Shereen Kandil, who stood by her story.

WRMEA News Editor and Executive Director Delinda Hanley was unable to provide details about what prompted the decision to alter the archived story more than four years after it was written. She denied a cover-up and suggested the inquiries were evidence of anti-Muslim discrimination.

Hussain, a 31-year-old U.S.-born Indian-American, was appointed a deputy associate counsel for the White House in January 2009.

On Feb. 13 Obama named Hussain as his special envoy to the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), the 57-member bloc of Islamic states.

In the recording of the MSA event, Hussain is heard commenting on the case of al-Arian, a former University of South Florida professor accused of supporting the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), a group which the Clinton administration designated a foreign terrorist organization in 1997.

At the time Hussain made the comments in September 2004, al-Arian was in custody, having been indicted on charges of raising funds for a group that had killed more than 100 people, including two Americans, in suicide bombings over a 10-year period. According to the Department of Justice, he was “the alleged leader of the PIJ in the United States.”

In his subsequent trial, al-Arian was acquitted on a number of counts, pleading guilty to one count of conspiring to aid the PIJ. He was sentenced in 2006 to more than four years in prison.

In the recording, Hussain mentioned the al-Arian case and several others, describing them as “politically-motivated persecutions.”

Explaining his reason for calling them politically motivated, he said that “the attorney general and the president have the complete discretion to bring these cases. If they decide that these cases shouldn’t be brought, these cases will not be brought,” Hussain said.

Hussain also recalled that al-Arian had been “photographed with President Bush in Newsweek magazine.”  He said the al-Arian family was “a friend of the Bush administration before 9/11, and how quickly that friendship turned into disaster, which is what has happened in so many cases after 9/11.”

He also said there was a “fairly strong possibility” that if Democratic Sen. John Kerry won the 2004 presidential election – two months away at the time Hussain was speaking – politically motivated Justice Department prosecutions would end.

Al-Arian posed with then-Texas Gov. Bush at the Florida Strawberry Festival on March 12, 2000. Bush was campaigning ahead of the 2000 presidential election.

The picture was later reprinted by Newsweek, which wrote in March 2003, “For George W. Bush, it was just another campaign stop. But for Sami Al-Arian, a University of South Florida engineering professor, it was a golden opportunity. When Bush appeared at Tampa’s Strawberry Festival in March 2000, Al-Arian sidled up to the candidate and had his picture taken.”

After al-Arian’s arrest it was also reported that he had attended a meeting hosted by the White House in June 2001.

Al-Arian was one of 160 American Muslim Council (AMC) members who attended a meeting addressed by White House political chief Karl Rove and other officials at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building. The AMC was having its annual convention in Washington at the time, and accepted an invitation to a briefing.

When the reports emerged in 2003, AMC spokesman Faiz Rehman was quoted by the Associated Press as saying the briefings were a regular event, adding that he believed al-Arian had also attended one the previous year, during the Clinton administration.”

Note: This video and articles relate to this issue-You Decide:

ISLAMIC COUP ON THE WHITE HOUSEPosted on Atlas Shrugs-On June 12, 2010:


Obama adviser: American freedom, equality are just ‘myths’: ‘Muslim activist declared affinity for radicalism of Bill Ayers’ Weather Underground movement’Posted on WND.com-By Aaron Klein-On May 4, 2011:


Report: Iran Paying Taliban to Kill U.S. TroopsPosted on FoxNews.com-By Sunday Times-On September 5, 2010:


Muslim leader implodes on air: “Key critic of Rep. Sue Myrick exposed as radical by radio jock”-Posted on WND-On February 28, 2010:


When Denial Can KillPosted on Time.com-By IRSHAD MANJI-On Jul. 17, 2005:


Note: These recent articles relate to and/or support my recent blog post-You Decide:  

High Level Pentagon Official Blames U.S. For Al-Qaeda Attacks!


Islam’s Child Martyrs in America!


Where Is America Today?


Is it time to call for Obama’s resignation!


Washington Times Calls for Obama’s Impeachment!


A Nation Adrift Theme and Disclaimer:


“Food For Thought”

“God Bless & Keep Our USA Safe”

Semper Fi!

Read Full Post »

Question:  Could it be true that today’s educators are using our home grown communist terrorist’s “teaching” methods in our schools that consist of communist tactics of brainwashing and disinformation, similar to what had been exposed decades earlier in Communist Party defector Louis Budenz’s book, “The Techniques of Communism”?

This shocking report provides us with the eye-opening answer to this question-You Decide:

Indoctrination without Apology: Social Studies Teachers Share Strategies on How to Mold StudentsPosted on America’s Survival, Inc.-By Mary Grabar:


This is the Introduction from this report written by Cliff Kincaid, President of America’s Survival, Inc.:


By Cliff Kincaid

America’s Survival, Inc. (ASI) held a “Communism in the Classroom” conference at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. on August 20, 2009. Professor Mary Grabar was a featured speaker, analyzing the activities of University of Illinois Professor Bill Ayers, a former leader of the communist terrorist group, the Weather Underground. Bill Ayers and President Barack Obama were political associates and worked on educational issues together when Obama was an Illinois state senator.

In his best-selling book, Dreams from My Father, Obama said that when he went to college he picked Marxist professors and others as friends in order to avoid being perceived as a “sellout.” On page 100 of the book, he declared, “To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully….The Marxist Professors and structural feminists and punk rock performance poets.”

Grabar’s ASI report, The Extreme Make-Over of William Ayers: How a Communist Terrorist Became a “Distinguished” Professor of Education, proves that Ayers is an educational fraud and that his “teaching” methods consist of communist tactics of brainwashing and disinformation, similar to what had been exposed decades earlier in Communist Party defector Louis Budenz’s book, The Techniques of Communism. This report and other material on corruption in education can be found at our web site www.usasurvival.org

Grabar turns her attention in this report to the powerful National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS), which says it represents K-12 classroom teachers, college and university faculty members, curriculum designers and specialists, social studies supervisors, and leaders in the various disciplines that constitute the social studies. Obama’s sister, “peace educator” Maya Soetoro-Ng, was supposed to be a speaker at this conference but has been rescheduled for 2010. Her official bio says that, “From 2007 to 2008, Maya Soetoro-Ng was an avid campaigner for her brother, President Barack Obama, for whom she worked on outreach to teachers, women, Latinos, and Asian Pacific Americans. Part of her campaign work involved visiting schools and discussing Obama’s education platform. She has a long and rich background in global and multicultural education.” It can safely be said that she believes in education for a purpose.

That is the same mission of the NCSS.

Despite the failure of Soetoro-Ng to appear, Grabar found much at the NCSS to investigate and analyze. Her shocking analysis finds that this educational association operates on the following assumptions:

  • That the use of Euro-thinking, i.e., linear and logical methods, be avoided in favor of other methods associated with Native American traditions.
  • That students eschew contemplative activities for group work, puppets, songs, and quick responses to emotional prompts.
  • That students be groomed to become “global citizens” committed to “social justice.”
  • That students eschew writing for multimedia “doing” projects.
  • That students practice good citizenship by taking on community projects and community service.
  • That students be exposed to Islam as a positive alternative to the Judeo-Christian traditions.
  • That students gain an understanding of LGBT (Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) issues.
  • That students gain sympathy for illegal aliens.
  • That students be used to promote political issues, i.e., for D.C. statehood at the behest of its “shadow senator.”
  • That liberal-left National Public Radio should provide curricula and teachers to the classroom.
  • That government agencies should have a presence in the classroom and recruit children to do their bidding, like bugging parents to fill out Census forms.
  • That in discussing World War II attention should be focused on victims of the Nazis, but not of communist regimes.

We have found fresh evidence of how the schools are being used for political indoctrination. Pamela Geller’s blog Atlas Shrugs revealed that an Ohio school teacher was handing out “Organizing for America” internship forms to recruit students to “build on the movement that elected President Obama by empowering students across the country to help us bring about our agenda…” Organizing for America is the successor to Obama for America.

She reported, “Chuck, a reader of my website AtlasShrugs.com, has a daughter in the eleventh grade in a public high school, Perry Local in Massillon, Ohio. The teacher in her government class passed out a propaganda recruiting paper — headed with Obama’s distinctive ‘O’ logo — asking students to sign up as interns for Organizing for America… The form carries a recommended reading list, including Rules for Radicals by the notorious hard left community organizer and Obama mentor Saul Alinsky; two Huffington Post articles by Zack Exley, ‘The New Organizers’ and ‘Obama Field Organizers Plot a Miracle.’ The first of those, published in October 2008, enthuses about ‘an insurgent generation of organizers’ inside the Obama campaign that has, “almost without anyone noticing … built the Progressive movement a brand new and potentially durable people’s organization, in a dozen states, rooted at the neighborhood level.”

Mary Grabar’s report about social studies teachers makes it clear that this is not an isolated example. The Ohio case is simply more overtly partisan than most.

Grabar was born in Slovenia and escaped communist Yugoslavia as a two-year-old with her parents.  She grew up in Rochester, New York, and moved to Atlanta in the 1980s.  She earned her Ph.D. in English from the University of Georgia in 2002, and now teaches part-time on two campuses in and near Atlanta.  She writes for such publications as The Weekly Standard, Pajamas Media, Minding the Campus (Manhattan Institute), Clarion Call (The John William Pope Center for Higher Education), CNS News, The American Spectator, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Big Government, and Townhall. Her poetry and fiction have been published in Saint Ann’s Review, The Pedestal, Ballyhoo Stories, and other journals.  She is a contributing editor to the Chattahoochee Review and has completed two novel manuscripts, one a satire about the sexual revolution and higher education, and another, a semiautobiographical literary mystery involving immigrants from communist countries.”

Note: Cliff Kincaid, President of America’s Suvival, Inc. http://www.usasurvival.org revealed that the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review ran an editorial praising the Mary Grabar report on indoctrination in the schools.

Here’s what the paper says: A new shocking report on social studies “professionals” using classrooms as leftist indoctrination centers should prompt parents and taxpayers to reassert local control over public education. Mary Grabar, writing for America’s Survival Inc., recounts what she witnessed at the National Council for the Social Studies’ 2009 annual meeting. Ms. Grabar—whose parents escaped communist Yugoslavia when she was 2, holds a doctorate in English and teaches part-time—found only negative views of the U.S. and the West.

Patriotism was absent from sessions and speeches urging that students:

  • Become “global citizens” committed to “social justice”
  • Sympathize with illegal aliens
  • Do the bidding of such government agencies as the U.S. Census Bureau and such liberal outlets as National Public Radio Work in groups, play with puppets, sing songs and do multimedia projects instead of thinking and writing.

That’s just the tip of this iceberg listing hard to the left. The public must scan schools’ curricular horizons and demand course corrections for “education” that properly should be called socialist studies.

In light of what Mary Grabar has uncovered about the political agenda of the National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS), parents must take the information in this report, carefully analyze what their children are being taught in the schools, and then take their findings to school teachers, principals, and school boards.”

Note: The above report relates to and/or supports my blog posts-You Decide:

The Strange Case of Kevin Jennings!


Communism in Hawaii and the Obama Connection!


Ongoing Concerns With This President and His Administration!


Where Is America Today?


The Russian View of What Has Been Happening In America!


Is it time to call for Obama’s resignation!


Washington Times Calls for Obama’s Impeachment!


A Nation Adrift Theme and Disclaimer:


“Food For Thought”

“God Bless & Keep Our USA Safe”

Semper Fi!

Read Full Post »

Question: What is the “Mount Vernon Statement” and it’s philosophical foundation?

The following article reveals the answer to this question-You Decide:

Notable Conservative Leaders Craft Manifesto To Energize, Coordinate SupportersPosted on The Washington Times-By Jerry Markon, Washington Post Staff Writer-On February 16, 2009:


These are pertinent excerpts from this article:

“Some of the nation’s most prominent conservative leaders will gather Wednesday to unveil what they propose as a manifesto for a growing movement against the political establishment.

The “Mount Vernon Statement,” to be signed on an Alexandria estate once owned by George Washington, is billed as a declaration of conservative values and beliefs. Organizers say it is modeled after the 1960 Sharon Statement, signed at the Connecticut home of William F. Buckley Jr., which helped usher in the modern conservative movement.

“We don’t talk about specific issues or parties or the current political situation,” said Alfred S. Regnery, publisher of the American Spectator magazine. He helped draft the statement as part of the Conservative Action Project, a new group seeking to coordinate the chorus of voices. “It’s a philosophical foundation, based on the concept of constitutional conservatism. It’s written so most conservatives can say, ‘Yeah, this is just what I think.’ ”

Ahead of Wednesday’s meeting, organizers released only an excerpt of the two-page document. It says in part, “The federal government today ignores the limits of the Constitution, which is increasingly dismissed as obsolete and irrelevant. . . . The change we urgently need, a change consistent with the American ideal, is not movement away from but toward our founding principles.”

The gathering of more than 80 leaders, to be led by Reagan-era attorney general Edwin Meese III, comes as the conservative movement’s many strands are joining together in opposition to Obama’s policies — and to moderate Republicans they see as insufficiently conservative. The network of loosely affiliated conservative blogs, radio hosts, “tea party” organizers and D.C. institutions is spreading through new media and increasingly coordinating its message.

Yet tensions linger between the conservative establishment in Washington and younger, grass-roots activists. Some question whether a meeting of Beltway elder statesmen would accomplish much in a political climate that has spawned a year of tea party protests, fiery town-hall meetings and the triumph of Republicans in Massachusetts, Virginia and New Jersey.

“It’s nice to make a statement, but without a strategy to implement these ideas, what does it really accomplish?” said Ned Ryun, president of American Majority, a grass-roots group that has trained several thousand tea party activists. Ryun, the son of former congressman Jim Ryun (R-Kan.), said conservatives “have been stuck in the mind-set that good ideas win out simply because they’re good ideas. Without proper organization, they don’t.”

A Democratic National Committee spokesman did not respond to phone calls and e-mails seeking comment on the conservative group’s plans.

The statement emerged from a working group set up by the Conservative Action Project, which is chaired by Meese and has been circulating influential memos “for the movement” on issues such as health care and judicial nominations. The project is an offshoot of the Council for National Policy, a highly secretive organization of conservative leaders and donors.

The working group, led by Heritage Foundation President Edwin J. Feulner, produced a draft that has been circulating among conservatives for months.

Organizers said the document — which will be posted Wednesday on a new Web site, http://www.themountvernonstatement.com, for people to read and sign — was timed to coincide with Thursday’s start of the annual Conservative Political Action Conference.

“It’s a compass for every single issue, whether it’s social, economic or national defense conservatives. It’s meant to guide you,” said L. Brent Bozell III, president of the Media Research Center in Alexandria, which monitors perceived liberal media bias.

It was Bozell’s uncle, Buckley — founder of the conservative magazine National Review — who was instrumental in the original Sharon Statement, and his father, L. Brent Bozell, was a signer. The younger Bozell said it was “humbling” that the Mount Vernon document “will reach millions of people” through the Internet, television and talk radio, while his father and uncle were “some guys who sat around and drank bourbon and smoked cigarettes and had lofty thoughts.”

“It was just rudimentary, bubble-gum technology,” Bozell said.”

Note:These recent articles and/or blog posts and videos relate to and/or support the above article-You Decide:

Rep. Massa Alleges Emanuel Forced Resignation Over Healthcare VotePosted on NewsMax.com-On March 8, 2010:


Rep. Blackburn: Obamacare Is in TroublePosted on NewsMax.com-By John Rossomando-On March 5, 2010:


How Does the 1 percent Control the 99 percent?-Posted on Personal Liberty Digest-By Bob Livingston-On March 1, 2010:


“Individual Mandate” at Core of ObamaCare is Unconstitutional, New Report Concludes-Posted on National Center for Public Policy Research-On March 1, 2010:


Obama’s amazing disrespect for the American people-Posted on American Chronicle-By Bill Haymin-On February 27, 2010:


Is There a Doctor in the House? “Four Congressional Doctors Diagnose the Healthcare Debate”Posted on PJTV-On February 26, 2010:


Obama’s Political Skills Built on Hot Air-Posted on NewsMax.com-By Ronald Kessler-On February 25, 2010:


Paul Ryan: Obamacare Will Raise Medical Costs-Posted on NewsMax.com-By Dave Eberhart-On February 25, 2010:


Liberalism Exposed: Beyond the Elitist, Preening America-Hating StereotypesPosted on PJTV-On February 25, 2010:


Jeb Bush: Obama Charts ‘Dangerous Course,’ His Policies ‘Not American’-Posted on NewsMax.com-By Jim Meyers-On February 23, 2010:


Consumer confidence falls sharplyPosted on Yahoo News-By ANNE D’INNOCENZIO, AP Retail Writer-On February 23, 2010:


The rotten fruits of the “carbon credit” scam-Posted on Laigle’s Forum-On February 23, 2010:


Read His Lips: Obama Calls for Increasing Payroll Taxes on ‘Households’ Earning Less Than $250,000 Per YearPosted on CNSNews.com-By Terence P. Jeffrey, Editor-in-Chief-On February 23, 2010:


Morning Bell: Can They Make Obamacare Worse? Yes They Can!Posted on The Heritage Foundation-On February 23, 2010:


Boehner: President’s Health Care Proposal Jeopardizes Summit, Doubles Down on Failed Approach Americans Have Already RejectedPress Release Posted By Boehner-On February 22, 2010:


Morning Bell: The White House Learned Nothing from Massachusetts-Posted on The Heritage Foundation-On February 22, 2010:


If China Stops Buying our Debt, Will Calamity Follow?Posted on Brookings-By Gary Burtless, Senior Fellow, Economic Studies, National Journal-On February 22, 2010:


10,000 Strong At CPAC 2010: Dana Loesch & Tom Schatz Talk Citizens Against Government WastePosted on PJTV-On February 20, 2010:


Ron Paul Wins Conservative Straw Poll-Posted on NewsMax.com-On February 20, 2010:


Gingrich: GOP Wins Congress, White House in 2012-Posted on NewsMax.com-On February 20, 2010:


Doug Schoen Predicts Massive Democratic Losses in 2010-Posted on NewsMax.com-By Dan Well-On February 19, 2010:


Conservatives Pack Largest-Ever CPACPosted on NewsMax.com-By Ronald Kessler-On February 18, 2010:


Tea Is For Tripartisan: Will The Tea Parties Bring Rs, Ds & Is Together? Newt Gingrich Thinks SoPosted on PJTV-On February 26, 2010:


Tea Party Movement vs. the Elites-Posted on The National Republican Trust Political Action Committee-By Scott Wheeler-On February 18, 2010:


Tea Party Patriots Launch ‘Contract From America’-Posted on NewsMax.com-By Ronald Kessler-On February 18, 2010:


Angry Voters: Will angry voters toss out the incumbents this fall?Posted on PBS NOW-On February 19, 2010:


Energized Conservatives Pound on Democrats at CPAC-Posted on USA Today-By Susan Page, USA TODAY-On February 18, 2010:


CPAC Embraces the New Mitt Romney-Posted on Politico-By Ben Smith-On February 19, 2010:


Ron Paul’s Speech at CPAC-Posted on Wake Up 1776-By John Smithers-On February 20, 2010:


James O’Keefe says next video ‘ready to go’-Posted on Politico-By KENNETH P. VOGEL-On February 18, 2010:


Tea Party Lights Fuse for Rebellion on RightPosted on The New York Times-By David Barstow-On February 15, 2010:


Heritage’s Matt Spalding and James Carafano on a Panel at a New York Area Committee Event 2/11/10-Posted on The MyHeritage.org-On February 11, 2010:


Tea Party Express III: Just Vote Them Out – *NEW* TV Ad-Posted on YouTube-On February 11, 2010:


INTRODUCING: Tea Party TV-Posted on PJTV-On February 11, 2010:


Question: Who is the Tea Party Leader?

This video gives you the undisputable answer to this question-You Decide:


Note: These articles and/or blog posts and videos relate to and/or support my recent blog posts-You Decide:

Positive Political Change In The Air For 2010!


Tyrannical Takeover of Our Financial Services Sector By the Federal Government!


Can America Survive Obamanomics and Remain a Capitalist Society?


Nearly 80 percent don’t trust the government!


Have Americans Stopped Having Confidence In Their Government?


Where Is America Today?


Is it time to call for Obama’s resignation!


Washington Times Calls for Obama’s Impeachment!


A Nation Adrift Theme and Disclaimer:


“Food For Thought”

God Bless & Keep America Safe:


Semper Fi!

Read Full Post »

Question: Could it be true that we are slowly/patiently being overtaken from within by Islamic organizations that are supported by CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) and some in our own government?

This is a recent article that contains a Frontpage Interview with Dave Gaubatz, the first U.S. civilian (1811) Federal Agent deployed to Iraq in 2003, that gives us the eye-opening answer to this question-You Decide:

Islam’s Child Martyrs in America-Posted on FrontPageMag.Com-By Jamie Glazov-On February 9, 2010:


These are pertinent excerpts from this article:

“Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Dave Gaubatz, the first U.S. civilian (1811) Federal Agent deployed to Iraq in 2003. He is the owner of DG Counter-terrorism Publishing [2]. He is currently conducting a 50 State Counter-terrorism Research Tour (CTRT). He is the co-author (with Paul Sperry) of the new book, Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld that’s Conspiring to Islamize America. [3] He can be contacted at davegaubatz@gmail.com [4] and his site is MuslimMafiaInternational.com [5].

FP: Dave Gaubatz, welcome to Frontpage Interview.

I would like to talk to you today about jihadi torture videos that have come into your possession and also about Islam’s child martyrs in America.

But first, give us some updates on your new research in terms of counter-terrorism.

Gaubatz: Thank you Jamie.

I just returned from DC, MD, PA, WV, VA, and NJ conducting various counter-terrorism (CT) research. I would like to say that while various realms of our government are doing an outstanding job in protecting our families from future Islamic based terrorist attacks, we have several serious problems. One of them is that our President doesn’t even officially have any type of plans on a “War on Terrorism.” Sadly, we are being overtaken by these groups. I meet Americans and other concerned citizens from Canada and the UK, and they know America and their countries are slowly/patiently being overtaken from within, while their leaders are ignoring the national threats.

FP: Give us some specifics on what you have recently discovered.

Gaubatz: I am beginning to see more and more violent material published and distributed to young Muslim children advocating killing Jews and Christians, and how to conduct treason/sedition inside America and to ultimately take our country down as we know it.

CAIR (Muslim Brotherhood) strongly informs its followers to not assist our law enforcement agencies and to not conduct slander and backbiting against Islamic leaders. Within Sharia law there are severe penalties for undermining the efforts of the ‘Islamic Ummah’ (Nation) and their specific target of a worldwide Ummah under Sharia law.

I have been provided hundreds of DVD’s originally videotaped by Islamic terrorist groups while they conducted torture and killings of people (even Muslims) who have helped their enemies (Israel, America, UK, Canada, etc…) to further (in their opinion) oppress the Muslim Ummah.

FP: Talk a bit more about these videos.

Gaubatz: This part of my work is very depressing because I have to review the most extreme animal actions by terrorist groups on innocent people, to include young children. I reviewed hundreds of videos the American people and law enforcement do not get to see, and our government does not want the American people to see. Why? I will explain later. I witnessed innocent people being slaughtered like animals. The Islamic terrorist groups had children cut and behead a fellow Muslim. In addition several young Muslim men had to stand in line and wait their turn to have their tongues removed by an al-Qaeda member with a razor blade. Several men had to put their arm on a board and a terrorist used a baseball to break his arm. Then he had to put his other arm out for the same treatment.

These are the type of people CAIR supports and even our government supports. The IRS grants CAIR and other such organizations non-profit organizational status and tax free benefits, while you and I are forced to pay taxes to support the ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood. Something doesn’t seem right and politicians who protect these groups will lose in the end. The American people will not allow our children to suffer at the hands of terrorist groups.

FP: Share with us how Muslim children are being taught to kill “oppressors” of Islam, even inside America.

Gaubatz: For many years I have tracked the materials coming into America from Saudi Arabia and Pakistan specifically. Based on my research, these two countries are responsible for distributing jihadi materials, not just to adults, but to Muslim youth right here in America.

The message is clear: “Islam is a religion of Jihad, in peace and in war. Jihad is one of the noblest principles of Islam.” The manual where this message is found is titled, “A Guide for The Young Muslim.” The manual further describes Jihad as being physical fighting against their enemies and oppressors. It is admired to be a “martyr.” This book was found in northern VA, and a CAIR pamphlet was beside it.

“Martyrdom means transfusion of blood into a society, especially a society from anemia. It is the martyr who infuses fresh blood into the veins of the society.” The manual in which this teaching was contained was found in VA (again alongside a CAIR brochure). It is titled “The Martyr” and was originally printed in Houston, TX.

I would like to explain how the above statement is applicable here in America and reaches Muslim children. When Maj. Hasan murdered the innocent people at Fort Hood, he was trying to revitalize the Muslim people to not lose hope, to continue pursuing the agenda of al-Qaeda and others, and most importantly to let them know there are “martyrs” working inside America who are ready to die for Islam. He is 100% correct. Sleeper cells are alive and well not only in America, but Canada, the UK, and most countries worldwide.

(Continue reading interview)

Note: The following articles and/or blog posts and video reveal President Obama’s possible ties to Muslims-You Decide:

The Vetting: ‘Obama, Radical Islam and the Soros Connection’!Posted on We The People USA-By Jake Martinez-On July 24, 2012:


Barack Obama’s Early Years as a Muslim!Posted on DanielPipes.org-By Daniel Pipes-Updated on October 23, 2008:


“I am a Muslim” Obama Tells Egyptian Foreign Minister!Posted on Atlas Shrugs-On June 12, 2010:-Posted on Atlas Shrugs-On June 12, 2010:


Video: Obama Must Convert To Islam, Or Else…..-Posted on YouTube.com-By lnfideI-On Dec 5, 2008:


Obama’s Grandmother Prays for Conversion to IslamPosted on Israel National News-By Maayana Miskin-On February 26, 2011:


Obama to face Shariah court? ‘Cleric says president ‘must embrace Islam’ or be tried when Muslims take over U.S.’Posted on WND.com-On February 27, 2011:


Obama: Consistently Anti-AmericanPosted on Big Government-By Pamela Geller-On March 21, 2011:


Why Obama is a cultural Muslim-Posted on The Washington Times-By Jeffrey T. Kuhner-On July 8, 2010:


Why Americans think president is Muslim: ‘Obama bears the lion’s share of the responsibility for any confusion’Posted on WND.com-On August 20, 2010:


1-in-4 Americans Believe Obama is a Muslim; Here’s Why-Posted on ImpeachObamaCampaign.com-By Ben-On August 19, 2010:


Video: Obama’s Middle East Ties!


NoteWhat follows is a three-part series of eye-opening articles and/or blog posts regarding the infiltration of Shariah within the U.S. written by Chuck Norris-You Decide:

Holy Week, Holy Shariah (Part 1 of 3)Posted on Human Events-By Chuck Norris-On April 19, 2011:


US Shariah Infiltrations (Part 2 of 3)Posted on Townhall-By Chuck Norris-On April 26, 2011:


US Shariah Infiltrations (Part 3 of 3)Posted on Townhall-By Chuck Norris-On May 3, 2011:


Note:  The following articles and/or blog posts and videos relate to and/or support the above articles and/or blog posts and videos-You Decide:

A Recent Case Sheds Light on the Muslim Brotherhood, but Most Republicans Ignore It!-Posted on Accuracy In Media-By Andrew McCarthy-On August 27, 2012:



Follow-up Letter To NM U.S. Senator Udall Requesting Congressional Investigation Into Allegations Made By Sheriff Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse!-Posted on We The People USA-By Jake Martinez-On April 30, 2012:


‘CIVILIZATION JIHAD’ AND OBAMA’S CONNECTIONS: ‘Video series exposes ongoing plan to overthrow America from within!’-Posted on WND.com-On April 28, 2012:


Muslim Children in America are Being Taught to Hate!-Posted on Family Security Matters-By Dave Gaubatz-On January 18, 2012:


Boy Scouts infiltrated by Muslim Brotherhood?-Posted on WND.com-By Aaron Klein-On October 8, 2011:


Home-grown terrorism suspect testifies about plot to kidnap and kill!-Posted on LA Times-By David Zucchino in Durham, N.C.-On September 29, 2011:


A decade on for the ‘American Taliban’!-Posted on BBC News-By Steve Swann and Gordon Corera-On September 29, 2011:


American Al-Qaeda Spokesman Calls On Americans To Carry Out Random, Lone-Wolf Attacks!-Posted on The Blaze-By Naked Emperor News-On June 4, 2011:


DoD Detainee Debriefs Re: Al-Qaida Targeting and Recruiting Children/Juveniles!-Posted on Judicial Watch-On Mach 11, 2011:


Video: Muslim Student Association Pledge of Allegiance ‘Jihad is my spirit..I will die to establish Islam’Posted on Blazing Cat Fur-On March 31, 2011:


Muslim Student Group a Gateway to Jihad?Posted on CBN.com-By By Erick Stakelbeck, CBN News Terrorism Analyst-On March 30, 2011:


The Jihadist Next DoorPosted on The New York Times-By ANDREA ELLIOTT-On January 27, 2010:


Custodian of U.S. mosques promotes slaying Americans-NAIT: ‘It is the duty of Islam to fight him until he is killed’-Posted on WND-On March 7, 2010:


Muslim leader implodes on air: “Key critic of Rep. Sue Myrick exposed as radical by radio jock”-Posted on WND-On February 28, 2010:


Uncivilized Tactics at UC Irvine (Rough Cut)Posted on YouTube-By StandWithUs2009-On February 9, 2010:


Obama’s New OIC Envoy Defended Activist Who Aided Terrorist Group-Posted on CNSNews.Com-By Patrick Goodenough, International Editor-On February 15, 2010:


Islamists Play Shell Games with SecurityIslamist Watch Blog Posted By David J. Rusin-On February 23, 2010:


America as a Jihad State: 
Middle Eastern perceptions of modern American theopoliticsReport fromFaith and Public Policy Seminar at Kings College, London On April 21, 2009:


Note: The above articles and/or blog posts and videos overwhelmingly support my following blog posts-You Decide:  

What are CAIRs obstructionist goals?


The Islamic Infiltration: Inside Our Government, Armed With Our Secrets!


Muslim Brotherhood Declares War on America-Will America Notice!


Godfather of The Islamic Revolution!


Is Shariah Law A Danger To Our U.S. National Security?


What do American Citizens Know About “Sharia Law” and Is It Something That We Should Know More About?


Are Intelligence Personnel Empowered to Employ Their Ingenuity and Resourcefulness to Connect The Dots?


Why Should Terrorists Be Given The Extraordinary Protections That You and I Have As American Citizens?


When Did the American People Elect Eric Holder Commander in Chief?


Obama and Holder’s Hidden Agenda!


Ongoing Concerns With This President and His Administration!


Where Is America Today?


Washington Times Calls for Obama’s Impeachment!


A Nation Adrift Theme and Disclaimer:


“Food For Thought”

“God Bless & Keep Our USA Safe”

Semper Fi!

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »