Not surprising, but the Obama Administration has shown that it's firmly behind the proposed Ground Zero Mosque and its Islamist, Muslim Brotherhood affiliated Imam, Feisal Abdul Rauf.
Imam Rauf is being sent on a taxpayer funded junket to the Middle East by our State Department, including visits to Saudi Arabia, Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Bahrain and Qatar....all countries that have a history of extensive funding of both the Ground Zero Mosque and ASMA, Rauf's organization promoting Islam and sharia in America. And yet, the Obama Administration expects us to believe that Rauf isn't going to do any Ground Zero fundraising while he's there...
"He is a distinguished Muslim cleric," said State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley. "I think we are in the process of arranging for him to travel as part of this program, and it is to foster a greater understanding about the region around the world among Muslim-majority communities," he added.
Crowley said no fund-raising for the mosque and cultural center during the trip would be permitted. "That would not be something he could do as part of our program," he said.
Ri-ight.He's somehow not going to solicit funds from the same people who are funding him already? Are they going to monitor him 24-7?
Abdul Rauf already lied to his gullible western enablers when he said that the $5 million in cash for the land purchase came from US Muslims, when according to ASMA's own records he received a great deal of financing from the Muslim world, over half a million from Qatar alone. He's practicing the same sort of taqiya when he says that the estimated $100 million needed to complete the Ground Zero Mosque will come from US.Muslims and his congregation.
Abdul Rauf has a very different story speaking in Arabic Just the other day in London-based Arabic-language newspaper Asharq Al-Awsat that a large chunk of the estimated $100 million construction cost will also come from Islamic countries...in other words, the same people he's meeting with here at the expense of US taxpayers.
Nor is the Obama Administrations support limited to paying for the imam's fundraising activities.
Our State Department spent your time and money to publish the entire text of NY City Mayor Michael Bloomberg's execrable speech supporting the Ground Zero Mosque on www.america.gov, it's official affiliated government website aimed towards an overseas audience.
When asked why our State Department chose to do this, Spokeshole PJ Crowley said it was merely a way to help interested foreigners 'understand the debate'. Which, of course, is why only Bloomberg's remarks were published and no opposing views.
Riddle me this: what would America's Left think if an American administration supported building a huge Christian cathedral on Ground Zero, and paid for the pastor to go overseas to collect funds to build it? What would they say if our State Department published speeches endorsing it on an official government website?
What if it was a huge Chabad Center?
How do you think it would take the ACLU or the Center for Constitutional Rights to sue?
4 comments:
The Muslims have made a major tactical blunder with the Ground Zero Victory Mosque, and we Islamically-aware counterjihadists need to use it and strike while the iron is hot. The Muslim grand strategy requires incremental creeping Sharia and supremacism, where Islam insidiously takes over and slowly destroys Western civilization by a thousand cuts. Every advance should be so small that the 'najis kafir sons of pigs and monkeys' (that's us, folks!) either don't notice it, or can't be bothered to oppose such a minor irritation.
But this abomination has half awoken the sleeping giant of American Public Opinion. We need to keep prodding the giant to prevent him falling back to sleep, and hopefully get him to awake fully. To do this we need to spread our message beyond the counter-jihadist blogosphere, using local media and social networks etc.
We also need to link the Mosque issue to the general problems of Islamic supremacism in as many ways as possible, a full list of topics can be found here: http://crombouke.blogspot.com/2010/01/everything-you-need-to-know-about-islam.html
A particular example that most Americans will be unaware of is the Islamic motivation for the Beslan child-rape orgy and massacre, the sixth anniversary of which approaches. The MSM went to great lengths to cover up both the vileness of the sexual tortures, and the Muslim involvement and Islamic doctrinal basis of this attack on kafir children http://crombouke.blogspot.com/2010/01/beslan-child-rape-torture-enforced.html
Although Beslan did not produce the greatest number of casualties of the current jihad, it exceeds all others in its sadism and depravity, and graphically illustrates what we have allowed into the West. Please ensure through your blogs and forums that the anniversary of Beslan is not forgotten this year.
Hello Trencherbone.
I hear you, but it is important to realize that not all Muslims are jihadists..it is extremely important to remember that.At least in the US, a good portion of home grown Islamist terrorist cells have been exposed by fellow Muslims informing on their violent co-religionists.
We in the West bear at least partial responsibility for the fact that the Salafist, Khomenist and wahabi brands of Islam have grown so powerful. Our politicians and elites were bribed and/or stupid enough to have allowed millions of dollars of American and British equipment to be 'nationalized' (stolen)in the early seventies by the Saudis and others, allowed OPEC to be formed and allowed the Shah in Iran, a western ally to be overthrown by Khomeini and the US embassy overrun virtually without retaliation on our part.
With the petro-dollars, the Islamists virtually took over many of the mosques and madrassahs of the West,bribed more politicians, co-opted Muslims already living here and funded the Muslim Brotherhood's stealth jihad against our society.
Over time, many of these mosques have become exactly what Tayip Erdogan said they were - ouposts of Muslim jihad against the West.
My readers will remember my 20-60-20 formula, originally demonstrated by Hitler's Germany.
Twenty percent will be hard core foot soldiers, another twenty percent will be appalled and the remaining sixty percent will be people who lean in varying degrees one way or the other but are mostly concerned with their day-to-day life.
The sixty percent will mainly end up swaying with the prevailing wind, which is exactly what is happening with Muslims in the west now. The more successful the infiltration of stealth jihad is, the more support it will get from the sixty per cent.
Regards,
Rob
Rob,
Your response to Trencherbone is very interesting to me. You cite a "mistake" in allowing British equipment to be nationalized. The conventional wisdom on this among Americans, most "Westerners", and probably the British themselves is that the Brisish with American complicity were stealing Iranian oil and were exploiting the Iranians. Furthermore the over throw of the Iranian government in the 50s by American and British agents is believed to have inflamed the situation. As to allowing our embassy to be overrun, we simply "had it coming." Since this is the conventional wisdom among Americans and many of our leaders, it became very dificult to muster the moral confidence necessary to defend our embassy.
As for OPEC, the conventional wisdom is it was necessary to counter "Western" exploitation. We had wronged them in the past. As such, who are we to tell them they can't organize? I think even if we wanted to prevent the formation of OPEC its unlikely we could have.
I'm not suggesting I agree with the conventional wisdom but it is the conventional wisdom and must be countered if we are going to counter Iran effectively. How would you suggest we counter the conventional wisdom with regards to Iran?
In my opinion the biggest mistakes we made are as follows. 1.)failing to develop more of our own oil and gas reserves and building more refineries. If we develop all of our own oil and gas reserves, use "coal to oil" technologies, and build more refineries, we could meet all of our oil needs domestically and have production left over. To do this will take some time. Probablly 10 years or so to get every thing in place. As I said, a BIG mistake has been made. 2.)We and other oil importing countries should have formed an organization to act as a counter weight to OPEC. This could be OPIC, standing for Organization of Petroleum Importing Countries. The problem with this right now is America is almost universally dispised. While America's enemies are largely unified in opposition to America, America is largely left to fend for itself, as any allies it has are feckless at best. As I said a BIG mistake has been made.
The conventional wisdom on Islamic terrorism is it is a result of explotation of Arabs on the part of Aemrica. In summary, how do we counter the conventional wisdom regarding the Iranian conflict and the conflict with Arabs in general?
Rob,
I found your response to Trencherbone very interesing. You cite as a "mistake" allowing British equipment to be atolen. The conventional wisdom on this among Americans, "Westerners", and possibly even most British is the British with the help of America were stealing Iranian oil. Also an unjustified over throw of Iran's government in the early 50s further inflamed the situation. As such, when our embassy was over run. We found it difficult to muster any kind of response. After all we "had it coming."
As for "radical Is;am" its the end result of decades of American exploitation of Arabs. At least this is the conventional wisdom.
O'm not suggesting I agree with the conventional wisdom here, however, if we are going to cunter Iran we need to find a way to counter it. How would you suggest we do this?
I think the biggest mistkes we have made are as follows. 1.)We should have developed all of our own oil and gas reserves and built more refineries. If we developed all of our own oil and gas reserves, utilized "coal to oil" technologies, and built more refineries we could meet all of our oil and gas needs domestically and have production left over. Unfortunately getting this in place will take time. 2.) It seems unlikely we could have prevented the formation of OPEC. We should have worked with other oil importing nations to form an organization to counter OPEC. This would have given us some leverage to negotiate with OPEC. I'd call the organization OPIC meaning organization of oil importing countries.
Post a Comment