Thursday, October 09, 2014

This Weeks' Weasel Of The Week!


Drum roll, please!! It’s time to present this week's statuette of shame, The Golden Weasel!!

Every Tuesday, the Council nominates some of the slimiest, most despicable characters in public life for some deed of evil, cowardice or corruption they’ve performed. Then we vote to single out one particular Weasel for special mention, to whom we award the statuette of shame, our special, 100% plastic Golden Weasel. This week's nominees were all slime-worthy,but in thr end the winner by a nose was....

The United States Supreme Court!

 http://www.commondreams.org/sites/default/files/styles/cd_large/public/views-article/6871940454_69d18c7c14_b.jpg?itok=Li1wUW7R

 Rhymes With Right : The United States Supreme Court. On Monday the nine Justices of the Highest Court in the Land abrogated their responsibility to hear a case and provide precedent on gay marriages. In declaring their refusal to hear any of the pending appeals, they in effect legalized gay marriage in every state in several judicial circuits and put their thumb on the scale in pending appellate decisions on the matter that were likely to provide contrary decisions.

Oh indeed they did! It takes real craven, quivering cowardice to cave in to a politically powerful elite and disenfranchise the majority of voters  in 5 states, let alone the voices of the people in the remaining 26 states that still prohibit same sex marriage. They're now going to have  their laws limiting marriage to one man and one woman struck down one by one as same sex marriage advocates judge shop and file suit. And talk about weasels, shoving this major change down America's collective throat against the people's wishes without  even bothering to hear arguments or make a ruling!



 https://claytoonz.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/cjones10072014.jpg
Yes, they've certainly earned their Golden Weasel, but I have to confess that there's a slight problem. After we informed the senior Court clerk of the award, it took a number of phone calls for us to finally learn that the Justices were unable to decide whom would accept the award on their behalf. So we just boxed it, put a rainbow sticker on it and left it at the entrance to their chambers.

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum and every Tuesday morning, when we reveal the week's nominees for Weasel of the Week!

And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere and you won’t want to miss it... or any of the other fantabulous Watcher’s Council content.


And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that, y'know?

Wednesday, October 08, 2014

Watcher's Council Nominations: Obola Edition

http://barbedwiresatire.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/003c.jpg?w=500&h=353&crop=1

Welcome to the Watcher's Council, a blogging group consisting of some of the most incisive blogs in the 'sphere, and the longest running group of its kind in existence. Every week, the members nominate two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council.Then we vote on the best two posts, with the results appearing on Friday morning.

Council News:


This week, Blazing Cat Fur, The Pirate's Cove and The Other McCain earned honorable mention status with some great articles.

You can, too! Want to see your work appear on the Watcher’s Council homepage in our weekly contest listing? Didn’t get nominated by a Council member? No worries.

To bring something to my attention, simply head over to Joshuapundit and post the title and a link to the piece you want considered along with an e-mail address (mandatory, but of course it won't be published) in the comments section no later than Monday 6PM PST in order to be considered for our honorable mention category. Then return the favor by creating a post on your site linking to the Watcher’s Council contest for the week when it comes out on Wednesday morning

Simple, no?

It's a great way of exposing your best work to Watcher’s Council readers and Council members while grabbing the increased traffic and notoriety. And how good is that, eh?

So, let's see what we have for you this week....


Council Submissions

Honorable Mentions

Non-Council Submissions


Enjoy! And don't forget to like us on Facebook and follow us Twitter..'cause we're cool like that!And don't forget to tune in Friday for the results!

Tuesday, October 07, 2014

Burning Down The House Without Thinking

 

The Supreme Court today effectively disenfranchised the overwhelming majority of citizens in 5 states when it refused to hear appeals in cases involving Virginia, Oklahoma, Utah, Wisconsin and Indiana that had defined marriage as between one man and one woman, leaving intact lower-court rulings striking down those laws.

Rather than actually rule on same sex marriage, the Court simply decided not to take a position, just as they cravenly did with California's Proposition 8.The Court did not even  bother explaining why it refused to hear the appeals.

This pretty much means that the remaining 26 states that still prohibit same sex marriage will have their laws struck down one by one as advocates of same sex marriage shop around for a judge likely to rule that the laws limiting marriage to one man and one woman are illegal.

The fact that all of these existing laws were enacted by a majority of the people in these states means nothing.

Is this the Court's new direction, to disenfranchise people based on political correctness? Are we back to the days of Dred Scott?

It's one thing if the people of a given state wish to change the definition of marriage to include gay couples. It's quite  another to ignore their wishes if they choose not to, especially without even the courtesy of hearing arguments and making a ruling.

And make no mistake about it. This is very much about changing the definition of marriage and not a civil rights issue. To prove this to yourself, ask any gay person of your acquaintance who rabidly favors legalized same sex marriage on the grounds of 'equal rights' if they would be satisfied with law that establishes every one of those rights they claim they don't have but refers to civil unions instead of marriages. You'll invariably get an indignant 'no!' in almost all cases.

This was never about equal rights.It was always about redefining marriage.

Is this good for society? We're told that it is, because it supports the doctrine of equal rights for everyone, will extend the stability of marriage to the homosexual community, and won't have any effect on traditional marriage.

Is this true? Let's take a look.

First of all, rather than supporting the doctrine of equal rights, the way this has been done serves to undermine respect for the Constitution, the Supreme Court and the rule of law. What we saw here was the catering to a powerful group politically at the expense of the majority. Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel openly voiced this sentiment  when he talked about gays being " the new Jews" in terms of Democrat fund raising.

In California, for instance, we saw the spectacle of Governor Jerry Brown, then the state's Attorney General refusing to enforce state law or defend it in court after politicians in various jurisdictions began illegally issuing same sex marriage licenses.

And it just took one judge, Federal District Judge Vaughn Walker,an open homosexual and gay marriage advocate to rule Proposition 8 'unconstitutional' after the state Supreme Court declared that it was, and send it to the Supreme Court...who refused to rule on the case on the grounds that the people of California 'lacked standing' to argue their case!

 http://www.scientificamerican.com/media/inline/blog/Image/Human-rights-blog.jpg

There are numerous other examples of similar scenarios across the nation. Not only that, but we've seen increased bullying and intimidation of business owners and clergymen who have declined to service homosexual weddings for reasons of faith...or whom even donate to groups whom support traditional marriage.

http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/School_Homosexual_Indoctrination_01_250px.gif


 The real motivation of many gay activists in insisting on redefining traditional marriage isn’t equality per se, but forcing the normalization and mainstreaming of their lifestyle by whatever means necessary. The effect of this is already evident, as children in many public schools are already being indoctrinated to believe that LGBT behavior is exactly that, regardless of their religious or ethical beliefs or those of their parents, who are paying for the indoctrination.

 So we're talking about some animals simply being more equal than others, ala' George Orwell's Animal Farm.

There's no way to argue that this sort of tyrannical implementing of the redefinition of marriage strengthens our freedoms or respect for law. Instead, what it has taught people is that lawfare and sleazy tactics matter more than the law, and that is going to set a horrendous precedent.

But will gay marriage affect traditional marriage? Of course it will. And the reasons may surprise you.

The first effect of diluting marriage - for that is exactly what 'expanding' the definition of marriage amounts to - will be to encourage all sorts of variations to dilute it even further. Same sex marriage is certain to lead to a slippery slope of legalized polygamy and mainstreaming of the euphemism favored by a number of well established, mainstream polygamy advocates here in the US, "polyamory" (group marriage).

University of North Carolina Professor Mim Chapman's "What Does Polyamory Look Like" is regarded as one of the 'bibles' of the movement, along with Deborah Anapol's "Polyamory: The New Love Without Limits". And the movement already has a flagship magazine in Loving More...which is actually supported by the taxpayers, believe it or not.

Once you do a little research, you find out that a lot of the advocates for diluting traditional marriage tend to be..wait for it..lawyers, especially family law lawyers,including the late Paula Ettelbrick who taught law at the University of Michigan, New York University, Barnard, and Columbia, and was the executive director of the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission as well as New York City's Stonewall Community Foundation; Emory University law professor Martha Fineman, who is also an affilited scholar with the ultra-Left Center For American Progress; University of Maryland Carole Hanan Sibel; Research Professor of Law Martha Ertman; Mary Anne Case, Arnold I. Shure Professor of Law, University of Chicago Law School; Judith Stacey, the Professor of Social and Cultural Analysis and Sociology at NYU and the author of "Unhitched" essentially an advocacy book for 'non-traditional marriage' and David Chambers, a professor of law at the University of Michigan.

And surprise! A number of these academics actually champion the radical remaking and even the dissolution of traditional marriage as an institution in favor of a series of 'contractual' relationships, and are quite open about championing same sex marriage as a entryway towards the abolishing of traditional marriage as we now know it.

 http://members.chello.nl/m.jong9/map15/lawyers.gif

It‘s obvious why a number of the most outspoken advocates of same sex marriage are lawyers. After all, they're the ones who will be pocketing handsome fees for a whole new round of divorces, custody battles and the drawing and redrawing of marital 'contracts' once same sex marriage, polygamy and polyamory become the law of the land.


Another group that has been virtually silent about homosexual marriage even though many of them are violently opposed to it are Islamist organizations like CAIR, The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) And The Muslim Public Affairs Committee (MPAC). They see this as a spear point for legalizing the polygamy Islam allows as well as other aspects of sharia law. They also see it as a selling point to proselytize for Islam to people whom may not be  particularly affiliated religiously, but retain traditional attitudes towards homosexuality.

 Like it or not, traditional monogamous marriage between one man and one woman is one of the foundations of western society, as well as the preferred environment for raising children as all serious research on the subject shows. That's why it's lasted as long as it has. Diluting marriage and diminishing  that foundation  will almost certainly  lead to a number of bad effects on our society, most of which can already be seen in Europe.

  Much of Europe has had same sex marriage for a while now, and de facto legal polygamy is already a fact there because of the huge influx of Muslim immigrants. Parts of Europe even have a problem with bestiality in the form of animal prostitution that they're unable to eliminate because of their existing laws on sex and marriage. And why not? How can one discriminate legally between 'lifestyle choices'?

The clear trend there since same sex marriage became legal is for less marriage, drastically lower birthrates, and a vastly greater amount of out of wedlock births. In order to make a society like that work even slightly, you need a vast and well-funded welfare state. Again looking at Europe as an example, not only doesn't such a state work if you have massive immigration, but it freezes social and financial mobility and eventually topples under its own weight into bankruptcy once you run out of other people's money to spend.While redefining marriage isn't the only thing shoving us in that direction, it's going to be an important part of it.

What consenting adults do sexually in the privacy of their own homes is of no interest to me. But  it's pretty clear to me that redefining marriage like this, especially given the way it's being done  is going to have big picture consequences for Western society that will only become apparent as time passes.If you doubt this, do a little research yourself about what happened to other societies that legalized same sex marriage and normalized such relationships.

We're burning down our house it took centuries to build..without thinking.

Monday, October 06, 2014

This Weeks' Nominees For Weasel Of The Week!!

https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/89/256833910_dc5e794df2.jpg

Hello and welcome to the Watcher's Council's 'Weasel Of The Week' nominations, where we award the golden plastic Weasel to a public figure who particularly deserves to be publicly slimed and mocked for his or her dastardly deeds during the week. Every Tuesday morning, tune in for the Weasel of the Week nominations and check back Thursday to see which Weasel gets the votes and walks off with the statuette of shame!

 
Here are this weeks' nominees:

 http://thefederalistpapers.integratedmarket.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/quammen_0.jpg

Science Fiction Writer And Self Accalimed Expert On Everything David Quammen!

The Independent Sentinel : David Quammen, alleged Ebola expert, for saying this on Anderson Cooper 360Thursday:

"You can’t isolate neighborhoods, you can’t isolate nations. It doesn’t work. And people talk about, “Well, we shouldn’t allow any flights from Liberia.” I mean, we in America, how dare we turn our backs on Liberia given the fact that this is a country that was founded in the 1820s, 1830s because of American slavery. We have a responsibility to stay connected to them and help them see this through."

Liberia was founded in 1826 after prominent American abolitionists helped thousands of freed African-American slaves colonize a patch of western Africa. The ex-slaves set up slavery for the locals.

After a bloody coup, the Liberian-Americans left and moved back to the United States.For the most part, the people now living in Liberia have nothing to do with American slavery and live in a brutal culture.

This was – excuse me – over 200 years ago. Hello!?! This is irrational.

If we all contract Ebola over here, that will really help all those people over there.

Mr. Quammen should get his butt right over to Liberia and help everyone with Ebola. If he gets Ebola, he can consider it atonement for slavery in 1826.I can’t take this crazy talk any longer. It has to stop.

 http://l1.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/2GWSsJgi8s0A6UQM_xW.jA--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Zmk9ZmlsbDtoPTQyMTtweG9mZj01MDtweW9mZj0wO3E9NzU7dz03NDk-/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/afp.com/1a61b3dc4b859a17fd4c7c49a7a4964f4c63fb8f.jpg
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Tom Frieden!

The Noisy Room : I nominate with enthusiasm, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Tom Frieden for saying a travel ban to the countries facing an Ebola outbreak could paradoxically make the problem worse. Right... That's insane. He is also claiming the Ebola outbreak in the US is totally under control and it is unlikely it will spread in the US, because wait for it... they know how to contain it and stop the spread of it in its tracks. Because they've done such a bang up job so far, you know. Nothing to see here, keep flying and just ignore the vomiting in the next aisle over. The CDC and the Obama Administration have done nothing but lie about everything concerning this pandemic from day one. But don't panic, for heaven's sake.

 Virginia Right!: I nominate Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Dr. Thomas Frieden who is in denial of the dangers of Ebola spreading in the US. Preventing people with the disease from entering the country can only help contain the outbreak.


 http://images.politico.com/global/2014/08/03/130117_valerie_jarrett_ap_605.jpg
Obama Consigliere Valerie Jarrett!

GrEaT sAtAn"S gIrLfRiEnD: For her role as President Obama's behind the scenes fixer, her championing of self-identified communist Van Jones (as green jobs czar), and the die-hard advocate of wealth redistribution Cass Sunstein (as regulatory czar), and her role as the White House's unofficial compass on  minority issues.

 http://washingtonnote.com/twn_up_fls/Biden.jpg
Vice President Joe Biden!!

The Right Planet : Like a bad case of herpes, VP Joe Biden is the "gift" that just keeps giving. The vice president recently apologized to Turkey and UAE for his recent comments linking the two nations to al-Qaeda (although I don't necessarily disagree with that), and may or may not apologize to Saudi Arabia for similar comments. He apologized to the ADL for using the derogatory term "shylock." He's taken heat for using the term "Orient" to describe Asia. He praised Bob Packwood in front of a women's group. He's mocked the EU's economy. And "Jumbled Joe" struck again by claiming China was part of North America. Biden recently joked to a student body vice president at Harvard that being vice president is a "bitch." I'll tell ya what's a "bitch" ... thinking this guy is just a heartbeat away from the presidency.





http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/43/Supreme_Court_US_2010.jpg

The Supreme Court Of The United States!

 Rhymes With Right : The United States Supreme Court. On Monday the nine Justices of the Highest Court in the Land abrogated their responsibility to hear a case and provide precedent on gay marriages. In declaring their refusal to hear any of the pending appeals, they in effect legalized gay marriage in every state in several judicial circuits and put their thumb on the scale in pending appellate decisions on the matter that were likely to provide contrary decisions.

 Well, there it is! Are these worthy weasels or what? Check back Thursday to see which Weasel walks off with the statuette of shame!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum.

And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you won’t want to miss it...or any of the other fantabulous Watcher's Council content.

And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that, y'know?

Major Explosion At Iranian Nuclear Site

Satellite images of Iranian nuclear facility (file)

A severe explosion ripped though Iran's Parchin military compound near Tehran today according to the BBC. The Beeb cited the dissident website Sahamnews as saying that the explosion on Sunday evening was “so intense that windows of buildings 15 km (nine miles) away were shattered.”

“The glare from the blast could also be seen from a great distance,” the report said.

Iranian media has also reported on this "incident in which two workers of this production unit lost their lives."

Iran has consistently refused to allow IAEA inspections of its Parchin facility, where it has been alleged that there have been secret tests of technology that could be used only for detonating a nuclear weapon.

A statement by Israeli Intelligence Minister Yuval Steinitz, issued a day before Iranian President Hassan Rouhani was to make a speech to the UN General Assembly said that internal neutron sources like uranium were used in nuclear implosion tests at Parchin.


The number of 'work accidents' at the facilty would seem to bear that out.

Sunday, October 05, 2014

Forum: Should Islam In America Be Subject To Some Kind Of Regulation Or Control?



Every week on Monday morning , the Council and our invited guests weigh in at the Watcher's Forum, short takes on a major issue of the day, the culture, or daily living. This week's question: Should Islam In America Be Subject To Some Kind Of Regulation Or Control?

The Independent Sentinel: Mosques need to be under surveillance. Radical Islamic communities need to be under surveillance and banned if they are training commandos as reports indicate they are.

Instead of trying to ban the name, "Washington Redskins", they need to ban Shariah law. They should also ban Shariah finance.

We should stop immigration to this country from terrorist nations until we have a better handle on radical Islam. Radical Islam presents an existential threat to the United States.

The Razor: Absolutely not. We do not – and should not  – regulate hate speech. Nazis are free to spout off their dreck, white supremacists theirs. Islamists should be allowed to do the same.

What we need to do is stop making excuses for Islam. I’m tired of being told what Islam isn’t by non-Muslims and shown what Islam is by Muslims like Hamas and ISIS. What other religion has caused as much havoc over the past 50 years? If a Christian sect started wrapping women in bags, banning non-believers from their holy sites, and made conversion out of their faith punishable by death there would be an outcry from the secular as well as religious communities the likes of which have never been seen. Yet Islam gets a free pass.

In the US the Westboro Baptist Church is held up as the epitome of Christian hate because of its protests against homosexuality, yet the WBC does not preach violence against non-believers. If WBC were an Islamic sect it would be considered moderate to liberal by outsiders because of its religious tolerance and treatment of women and minorities. It’s also ironic that WBC holds the same abhorrence of homosexuality that Islam does, but does not call for the murder of homosexuals as many Islamic clerics do.

Why is Islam treated differently than other religions? The reason is that the vast majority of Americans aren’t familiar with the religion. They have only a superficial knowledge of it gleaned from various media sources, and so fill in the blanks with their own experience of the Judeo-Christian religions. They assume that Islam is just like Christianity or Judaism. It even recognizes Jesus and Moses as prophets. This blend of naiveté and ignorance provides plenty of space for Muslims to portray Islam as progressive while it’s social order is based on 7th century Arabian tribes, and peaceful at the same time it works for the overthrow of any non-Islamic political or religious regime and the establishment of a worldwide caliphate.

The solution is not to regulate Islam: it’s to convince Americans and Europeans to confront reality and ask what Muslims are going to do to make their religion fit the modern world.

 Simply Jews: I think any extremist outfit should be under control - if not under lock and key. Saying this, I still do nurture some hope that adherents of Islam are not extreme and violent en masse, and that only a relatively small cells of domination-thirsty individuals could be (as the should be) controlled. This, by the way, goes for any potentially subversive, violent and disruptive religious or ideological organization.

The real problem with nowadays Islamic population is that its members are very unwilling to separate themselves from and to isolate and expel the extremist elements. This creates an additional and almost insurmountable issue for FBI and other security organizations (all over the world, by the way) in their fight against the extremism.

It is educational to see that most of FBI successes in this direction, at least the published ones, are in the area of so called "entrapment", where a dupe, who may have never thought up by himself a violent act, is carefully led by his "handler" into a situation that eventually resolves itself in a widely trumpeted success in anti-terrorist activity.

I hope that by making more investment in quality humint - planting successfully trained agents on the ground in places like mosques, where much of potential extremists are grown and nurtured, by detecting and isolating the real culprits in the brain-washing, indoctrination and recruiting of suggestible youngsters - FBI will eventually able to get an upper hand.

 JoshuaPundit: Well, it depends.  Do we want it to control us, as the Qu'ran mandates? There's no getting away from the fact that this is what Islam commands its followers to strive for, and what Mohammed ordered them to do.It remains an imperative to this day, and while many Muslims reject it, there are almost certainly  more whom do not, especially overseas.

In order to answer the question at hand, we would need to decide what 'radical Islam' is as opposed to what we consider 'acceptable' or 'moderate' Islam, something I think is farcical for non-Muslims to try and figure out. The only guidelines, really, are the legal and cultural norms we have for our own society and the degree to which Islam can conform to them, rather than the other way around.


Fortunately, as I've written in the past,  we have those guidelines already in our Constitution and in applicable  legal precedents. As a matter of fact, every time religious practices in the past have clashed with those guidelines and precedents, our courts have ruled against the religion.

Islam, however, is not subjected to any of this.

We aren't applying those guidelines and precedents to Islam,quite simply,  because there is huge money in it for a number of government officials and politicians, even extending to the White House. One merely needs to look at who funded a large part of the presidential libraries of Presidents George W. Bush and Bill Clinton, who funds the Carter Peace Foundation that provides former President Jimmy Carter with a handsome stipend, the connections between the Bush  Family, the Carlyle Fund the Saudis and  several of the Emirates, and how President Clinton became a multimillionaire after he left office. And they are by no means the only ones. A look at which politicians and former functionaries (not to mention their family members) are the beneficiaries of lucrative business opportunities, six figure honorariums, legal retainers, speaking fees and 'consulting fees' from the likes of the Saudis and the UAE is absolutely astounding.

We need merely to take away the golden carrot  and apply our laws and our Constitution, perhaps with a few perfectly legal and constitutional tweaks.

The Noisy Room :Yes. Here is why...

One of the founding principles of this country, one that was so important that it was enshrined in the First Amendment -- an Amendment without which the Constitution could not be ratified -- was the principle of religious freedom. More particularly, the freedom to practice a religion of one's own choosing, not one imposed by the State. It goes without saying that this includes a religion imposed by a non-State actor, such as a big, evil corporation. Islam turns this precept on its ear. Islam is a State as well as a religion. Islam has a legal and political arm. The acceptance of Islam into a society of diverse religions is similar to the acceptance of an invasive species of fish into the Great Lakes. The system by which Islam is propagated is one of simple, physical conquest - raw force. Providing a safe haven for a religion which is a State and a legal system, is immediately hostile to the concept of the free practice of religion, because a primary precept in Islam is that no other religion shall be tolerated. Consequently, Islam as it is practiced almost everywhere in the world negates the First Amendment. The irony is that if one buys the idea that freedom of religion means accepting Islam, one buys the idea that's okay for one religion to displace others and that somehow freedom of religion means allowing one of them to take over the world.

The analogy of invasive species is imperfect, but provides a model for projecting the outcome of allowing into your midst a hostile philosophy which feeds on your freedoms to destroy them.

So, therefore it would seem prudent to keep a watchful eye -- profiling if you prefer -- on areas where Islam has inserted itself, displacing other religions. It is part and parcel of Islamic doctrine that force, misrepresentation, lying and intimidation -- practices against which we have a whole system of laws -- are simply routine tools of the trade to propagate their beliefs. Consequently, Islam, regardless of its size, regardless of its age, regardless of its "stature" in the world... must be regarded with the same skepticism normally reserved for cults. It is a broken philosophy, one which runs completely against modern concepts of liberty and survival norms that are part of a thriving and moral society.

It must be strictly enforced that the nation's laws as they descend from the Constitution and the principles of its founding are held to be senior to any system of "religious law" practiced under the flag of religion. For example, a religious law that prescribes how one shall beat his wife is, in this country, automatically null and void. There are many other examples of religious law under Islam, too many to list here, which simply would never be accepted, practiced outside a religious framework. Essentially, assimilation into the culture of liberty that underpins this country is important to the adoption of new communities and where a community is seen to isolate itself from our culture, creating an island of not-really-America, hostile to the rest of America, that community must be constrained even ejected.

We seem to have people in positions of authority and power, who desperately seek to import Islam and its practitioners before our society catches on to the fraud and subterfuge to accomplish a coup from within, feeding on our freedoms to destroy them. Incidentally, the behavior of "feeding on your freedoms to destroy them," is something you'll recognize from a non-religious framework: the sociopathic individual who uses the social norms and laws of society as weapons against his victims.

In summary, profiling and background checks (especially for those being elected and appointed to positions of power) should be implemented thoroughly and extensively, despite how distasteful that measure is to a free people.

GrEaT sAtAn"S gIrLfRiEnD : Trick question.

There are actually built in operational methodologies to regulate undesired and reinforce desired behavior. The Constitution and Bill of Rights.

As best understood, certain elements cannot accept the legitimacy of the American secular system, which "is against the orders and ordainments of Allah."

Perhaps the best piece out there on certain mindsets that need unbridled power to change America and make it more like any number of illiterate barbaric rat's nests in the 3rd world is by Shamim "Skippy" Siddiq. (available here in PDF)

Cryptically titled Methodology of Dawah Ilallah in American Perspective (more idiomatically rendered as "The Need to Convert Americans to Islam"), this 168-page study, published in Brooklyn, remains largely unavailable to general readers . In it, in prose that makes up in intensity and vividness for what it lacks in sophistication and polish, Siddiqi lays out both a detailed rationale and a concrete plan for Islamists to take over the United States and establish "Islamic rule" (iqamat ad-din).

As America is burdened with secular sinfulness, "The orientation of the Qur'an pushes us in the exact opposite direction."The United States has "no thought, no values, and no ideals"; if Mohammedists "stand up, with the ideology that we possess, it will be very easy for us to preside over this USA."

Why America? In Siddiqi's judgment, the need to assume control here is even more pressing than the need to sustain the revolution of the mullahs in Iran or to destroy Israel, for doing so will have a much greater positive impact on the future of Islam. America is central not for the reasons one might expect—its large population, its wealth, or the cultural influence it wields around the world—but on three other grounds.

The first has to do with Washington's role as the premier enemy of Islamism (or, possibly, of Islam itself). In Siddiqi's colorful language, whenever and wherever Muslims have moved toward establishing an Islamic state, the "treacherous hands of the secular West are always there . . . to bring about [their] defeat." Nor are Muslim rulers of any help, for they are "all in the pockets of the Western powers." If, therefore, Islam is ever going to attain its rightful place of dominance in the world, the "ideology of Islam [must] prevail over the mental horizon of the American people." The entire future of the Muslim world, Siddiqi concludes, "depends on how soon the Muslims of America are able to build up their own indigenous movement."

Secondly, America is central because establishing Islamism here would signal its final triumph over its only rival, that bundle of Christianity and liberalism which constitutes contemporary Western civilization. (One cannot help noting the irony that Siddiqi's tract appeared in the same year, 1989, as Francis Fukuyama's famous article speculating that, with the collapse of Communism and the apparent triumph of liberal democracy, we had begun to approach the "end of history.")

And thirdly, and still more grandly, the infusion of the United States with Islamism would make for so powerful a combination of material success and spiritual truth that the establishment of "God's Kingdom" on earth would no longer be "a distant dream."

For Islamists, converting Americans is the central purpose of Muslim existence in the United States, the only possible justification for Muslims to live in an infidel land. In the view of Shamim Siddiqi, there is no choice in the matter—American Muslims are "ordained by Allah" to help replace evil with good, and otherwise "have no right even to breathe." "Wherever you came from, you came . . . for one reason—for one reason only—to establish Allah's din [faith]."

Siddiqi sees Islamists in power in Washington before 2020. Implementation of the shari'a in the United States "appears to be approaching fast," and in contemplating what that means his language grows ecstatic:

"I have a vision in America, Muslims owning property all over, Muslim businesses, factories, halal meat, supermarkets, all these buildings owned by Muslims. Can you see the vision, can you see the Newark International Airport and a John Kennedy Airport and LaGuardia having Muslim fleets of planes, Muslim pilots. Can you see our trucks rolling down the highways, Muslim names. Can you imagine walking down the streets of Teaneck, [New Jersey]: three Muslim high schools, five Muslim junior-high schools, fifteen public schools. Can you see the vision, can you see young women walking down the street of Newark, New Jersey, with long flowing hijab and long dresses. Can you see the vision of an area of no crime, controlled by the Muslims?"

Laura Rambeau Lee Right Reason : Regulation or controls will not solve the problem of radical Islam in America. We must rely on the Constitution and the First Amendment, which reads: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...”

Everyone in this country must be able to freely exercise their religion. What Muslims need to understand is that their right to freely exercise does not allow them to impinge on others’ rights. The laws of the Constitution of the United States and state constitutions must always take precedence over foreign or religious laws. Individual rights must always be upheld.

What we are experiencing is civilization jihad, and Muslims and pro-Muslim groups have learned how to use our laws and the left’s political correctness against us. They have become bullies, and our leaders have been caving in to their tactics. United Voices for America celebrates Muslim Capitol Day in several states, and grooms promising Muslim high school students to attend universities and become involved in politics. They are growing their presence in local, state, and national politics in an attempt to subvert our laws to shari’ah.

At the local level, here in Tampa, we have experienced Florida CAIR director Hassan Shibley speaking to high school students in an AP History class without parents having been given prior knowledge or the option to opt out. I attended several school board meetings where concerned parents and grandparents expressed their objections. Most are associated with Tea Party groups and were of course labeled as racist, bigoted, and Islamophobic. The school board did nothing.

In 2009 we experienced the brutal beating and murder of Fatima Abdallah, an Israeli Palestinian woman, and whether it was an honor killing or domestic violence, the local police and medical examiner determined her death to be accidental; the result of a fall. One must ask oneself, if a woman can be beaten to death in America, in Tampa, Florida, and our police do not pursue justice, who among us is really safe?

Last year CAIR-Florida attempted to advertise on our county HART buses. Their “My Jihad” campaign wanted the buses to bear slogans such as:

“My Jihad is to stay fit despite my busy schedule. What’s yours?”

“My Jihad is to build friendships across the aisle. What’s yours?”

“My Jihad is to not judge people by their cover. What’s yours?”

The attempt to insert the word “jihad” into everyday slogans was deceitful, and after public outcry they pulled the advertising for a more “acceptable” advertising slogan:

“Embracing Diversity at Work, Defending Civil Rights in the Community”

The “Embracing Diversity” advertisement was approved by the board after the board counsel advised if they did not approve the ads they would most certainly face a First Amendment lawsuit.

All of these incidents demonstrate a lack of courage on the part of our elected officials. We need people with courage to stand up to the bullying and who are not afraid to call violence committed in the name Islam “terrorism.” We need our government to have the courage to acknowledge that the violence at Ft. Hood; the shooting of Marine recruiter Private William Long in June 2009 in Little Rock, Arkansas by Carlos Bledsoe, a young man radicalized through Muslim student organizations at Tennessee State University; the 2013 Boston bombing; and the recent beheading of 54 year old Colleen Hufford at her Oklahoma workplace; were all terrorist attacks committed in the name of Islam.

Americans must realize that Islam is the second largest religion in twenty states in America, and that Muslims outnumber Jews in America today. We are seeing more women in hijabs and niqabs in our malls and shopping centers. Communities, schools, colleges and universities, police and government agencies at all levels, must understand the threat of civilization jihad. We have seen its consequences in Europe, and we are seeing its expansion in America.

We could and should expose those who preach extremist ideology and incite violence against America and Americans. Our government should be able to profile and root out those who seek to commit violence against Americans in the name of Islam or for any reason. The only thing that will stop radical Islam from growing in America is the courage of Americans to face these bullies and not bow down to their demands.

 The Right Planet : Years ago I was in downtown Indianapolis with a friend of mine who was from Latvia. As we made our way toward the Circle, we were confronted with a huge police presence. There were cops everywhere. Rows of police cruisers lined each side of the street. I politely asked a police officer what was going on. He said there was a simultaneous KKK and Black Panther rally being held at the Circle that day. Obviously, the city thought it prudent to prepare for any mayhem that might ensue. Since my Latvian friend had not been in the States for very long, he was quite eager to see what all the fuss was about.

When we arrived at the Circle, there was a small group of around 30 blacks listening to the hate-filled rantings of Mmoja Ajabu, leader of the Indianapolis Black Panther Militia. On the other side of the Circle, I saw a man dressed in some sort of KKK garb spewing his hate-filled crap to a crowd of one. Obviously, there weren't too many people in Indy interested in listening to either the Black Panthers or the Ku Klux Klan. Although I have no use for the Black Panthers or the KKK, I still support their First Amendment rights. We have the right in this country to express our beliefs, regardless of how loathsome or vile those beliefs may be. On the flipside, the First Amendment does not give anyone the right to engage in violence or usurp the law.

Muslims are free to peaceably assemble and worship as they see fit in this country. That being said, there is one regulation or control I would support regarding Islam in America--no Sharia Law in this country, period. Allowing any group to implement their own form of jurisprudence outside the legal system we already have is akin to opening up Pandora's Box. If Muslims are allowed to practice their own set of laws, then why can't Christians and Jews have their own legal system? And I'm sure the Satanists would want their own set of laws--and on and on and on. As long as you obey the law, you can be whatever you want to be in America, even if I hate it.

 The Glittering Eye : No. My feelings about the question are actually stronger but I'll leave it at that.

The five countries with the largest Muslim populations are Indonesia, India, Pakistan, Egypt, and Nigeria. Together they account for about half of all of the Muslims in the world. To the extent that we have problems with the Muslims in any of those countries it is largely due to hatred-preaching imams who are funded by rich Saudis or even by the Saudi government. I think the reasonable conclusion to draw from that is that we don't a have problem with Muslims but with a relatively small number of Saudis and we need to address that seriously.


Well there you have it. 

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum. and every  Tuesday morning, when we reveal the weeks' nominees for Weasel of the Week!

And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you won’t want to miss it...or any of the other fantabulous Watcher's Council content.

And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that, y'know?

Friday, October 03, 2014

Sweden Recognizes 'Palestine' As A Sovereign State

One of the results of the recent Swedish election which put a Leftist minority government of Social Democrats and Greens in power is the recognition of 'Palestine'. Prime Minister Stefan Lofven announced the move today.

"The conflict between Israel  and Palestine can only be solved with a two-state solution, negotiated in accordance with international law," Swedish PM Stefan Lofven said during his inaugural address in parliament.

Sweden's new Prime Minister Stefan Lofven announces his new government in the Swedish Parliament in Stockholm Friday, Oct. 3, 2014. (photo credit: AP Photo/Jonas Ekstromer, TT News Agency)

"A two-state solution requires mutual recognition and a will to peaceful co-existence. Sweden will therefore recognize the state of Palestine."

So Sweden is going to recognize a  'country' with no recognized borders, ruled for the past decade by an unelected dictator and partnered up with Hamas, a genocidal terrorist group.

 http://www.investors.com/image/RAMclrfnl-092211-palestine-.jpg.cms

The former center-right coalition government did not recognize 'Palestine' for exactly those reasons.

This still needs to be voted on in Sweden's parliament.If the Leftist government pushes this through Sweden would be the first country to recognize 'Palestine' while being a member of the European Union.

The American response by State Department spokesperson  Jen Psaki called Sweden's action "premature"

 “We believe that the process is one that has to be worked out through the parties to agree on the terms of how they’ll live in the future of two states living side-by-side,” she said.

The U.S., Britain and Australia are on record as opposing the UN Resolution by 'Palestine' to impose a settlement.

The Swedish government's action is, of course, not really concerned with international law or even with peace or 'Palestine' as such. This is simply  a hit out as Israel.Does anyone really think Sweden would recognize a non-state like 'Palestine' if they weren't in conflict with the Jews?

The ironic thing is that, based on the news I hear coming out of Sweden almost every day,  the last thing the Swedes ought to be concerned about is 'Palestine' and empowering Islamists like Hamas. They'd be far better off concentrating on saving their own country, their quality of life, their culture  and their women and children from what appears to be a great many  of the Muslims they've imported.

Scenes From A Country With No Borders 10/03/14

 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0f/Protests.jpg/220px-Protests.jpg

The amnesty for illegal aliens lobby - oh, pardon, 'immigration activists' has gone far beyond merely asking for anything. This is no longer our country but theirs, you see, and they have demands that must be met - or else.


 http://cdn2-b.examiner.com/sites/default/files/styles/image_content_width/hash/2f/73/2f7379962cd641c215152aa8103421d7.jpg?itok=6WaVmOjl

Rep. Louis Gutierrez (D-IL), one of the radical members of the lobby made that plain in a meeting of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus last Wednesday.

"Imagine for a moment the president of the United States makes an announcement. We figure out who the 5 million, 6 million people are. We get ready to register them [to vote] and the Republican majority decides they will obstruct the process. They will be the end of the Republican Party as a national party in the United States of America, because then it won’t be that the Democrats didn’t act and that the Republicans didn’t act. It will be the last act."

"This is a concrete example of justice for a community of people that we love and cherish and will defend. I’m ready for the president to act. And let me tell you something. Whoever attacks the decision of the president to bring justice and fairness to millions of undocumented immigrants and allow them to have justice in this country, I’m ready for that fight and I’m ready to join everybody in this room in winning that fight."

That sounds very much like 'no justice no peace', a threat to riot if President Obama's promise to break established law isn't fulfilled and there is no amnesty for illegal aliens...from a sitting congressman who swore an oath to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same."

How would you rate Rep. Gutierrez's 'true faith and allegiance' to the Constitution and our laws?

That aside, Gutierrez's threat to Republicans has no basis in reality, as I've pointed out before.

If Republicans in congress knuckle under and allow this blatantly illegal action to happen, they will become a permanent minority party if they even continue to exist at all. Aside from the effect of 5 or 6 million additional voters ( a number you can double once chain migration is accounted for), many of whom don't speak English and are easily manipulated by demagogues like Gutierrez, they will lose most of the 2/3 of the Hispanic vote that's currently up for grabs and their party's base, which will never vote Republican again but seek to develop a new political party.

President Obama, for his part seems entirely ready to deliver. And why not? It doesn't matter that Americans overwhelmingly oppose amnesty by better than 2 to 1. It doesn't matter that we have almost one hundred million Americans who have given up looking for work and are no longer in the labor force, a record number. It doesn't matter that 3 million people who are trying to enter America legally are being done an injustice.It doesn't matter that schools will struggle to maintain our already poor levels of public education to accommodate the influx of illegal aliens, many of whom are not even literate in Spanish let alone English. Or that diseases are coming to America unimpeded that we've never seen before or that were eradicated in this country decades ago.

What matters to President Obama and his party is pure politics. This is about changing the electorate to stay in power and turning America into something very different than our founders intended.

http://contextlysiteimages.contextly.com/thumbnails/fusiondotnetwordpress/2115441/220x125.jpg

At a dinner last night with the aforementioned Hispanic Congressional Congress, President Obama promised an executive order granting amnesty between the midterm elections and the year's end.

“This is not a question of if, but when,” he said.

He also boasted about riding over to the dinner with two CHCI (Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute) interns whom he called 'Dreamers' because they are two of the illegal aliens brought to America as children the president already has given amnesty to by executive order.

The president also said that he needed Hispanics to 'have his back' and to get out the vote for Democrats.

The president finished by leading a chant of “Sí se puede, si votamos" ('yes we can, if we vote).

What, you thought this was about anything else but partisan politics?

The Council Has Spoken! This Weeks' Watcher's Council Results



The Council has spoken, the votes have been cast, and the results are in for this week's Watcher's Council match up.

“We took the liberty to make some inquiries concerning the ground of their pretensions to make war upon nations who had done them no injury, and observed that we considered all mankind as our friends who had done us no wrong, nor had given us any provocation.

The Ambassador [of Tripoli] answered us that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise
- (Letter from the commissioners, John Adams & Thomas Jefferson, to John Jay, 28 March 1786}” ― Thomas Jefferson, Letters of Thomas Jefferson.

"...it is the duty of those who have accepted them [Allah's word and message] to strive unceasingly to convert or at least to subjugate those who have not. This obligation is without limit of time or space. It must continue until the whole world has either accepted the Islamic faith or submitted to the power of the Islamic state" - Bernard Lewis in The Political Language Of Islam, 1988.

..We -- with Allah's help -- call on every Muslim who believes in Allah and wishes to be rewarded to comply with Allah's order to kill the Americans and plunder their money wherever and whenever they find it. We also call on Muslim ulema, leaders, youths, and soldiers to launch the raid on Satan's U.S. troops and the devil's supporters allying with them, and to displace those who are behind them so that they may learn a lesson. - Osama bin-Laden, World Islamic Front Statement, 23 February 1998

 

Thanks to the jihadist beheading 'workplace violence' in Oklahoma and other recent events, Islamist terrorism was very much on some Council member's minds among them Bookworm Room, whom came out with Is it time to dig out the bullets packed in pig grease? (And let's identify the real Islamophobes.) *UPDATED* , a funny yet right on target essay about the question of whether pork ammo ought to be used against jihadis.

Here's a slice:

Practically from the moment after September 11, 2001, people started saying that the most effective way to fight Muslims was to lace American ammunition with pork.  Finally, in 2013, an Idaho company came up with pork-laced ammunition for non-military customers:
Jihawg Ammo today announced release of the industry’s first truly defensive ammunition.
Not only does Jihawg guarantee that all of their ammunition meets or exceeds S.A.A.M.I. standards for velocity, penetration, and accuracy, they also coat each projectile with a special ballistic paint infused with pork to make it “Haraam” or unclean to a radical Jihadist.
This makes Jihawg Ammo the only commercially available ammunition with the added deterrent factor of eternal damnation for fundamentalist Islamic Jihadist.
The response was swift: Islamophobia! Ignorant, Islamophobic hicks thought that they could out-think the religion of peace. These bullets were the equivalent of a Muslim-directed genocide. And they were insulting!!

In the remainder of this post, I’ll explain why the military should start using pork-laced weapons (or spread rumors that they’re doing so), as well as explaining why those exposed to pork-laced bullets are the real Islamophobes.

Clearly, the U.S. military will never use pork.

But maybe it should….

At American Thinker, Clarice Feldman directs readers to Louis René Beres’s article for the Gatestone Institute, The Jihadists’ Promise: Power over Death. Boiled down to its essence, the article explains that the Quran holds, and fervent Muslims believe, that this life is but a way-station to the real world, which real world is an afterlife complete with unending, exquisite, and quite carnal, earthly pleasures. In other words, Muslim fanatics don’t have a death cult; they have an (After)Life Cult. Their entire goal is to shuck this mortal coil in such a way as to ensure that they go straight into the arms of those seventy-two virgins (or raisins).

Christians, too, have an afterlife, but (as I understand it), they do not envision it as the carnal pleasures of this life, only on steroids.  It is, instead, a higher form of existence. Moreover, you don’t get there by killing but, instead, by living this life well. Both Christians and Jews (who do not have a specific heaven) believe that, to the extent that God has blessed us with life, we have a moral obligation to cherish and enjoy life as a prerequisite to ascending to a higher level upon our death. The Judeo-Christian culture has, if you will a (This)Life Cult as a necessary prerequisite to an (After)Life Cult.

Much more at the link.

In our non-Council category, the winner was the one and only Mark Steyn with a piece that may very well become a modern classic,Winning Heads And Minds submitted by The Noisy Room submitted by The Noisy Room.Umm, let's just say it a real head's up and cuts to the heart of the matter.


Here are this week’s full results. Only Ask Marion was unable to vote this week, but  was not affected by the 2/3 vote penalty:

Council Winners

Non-Council Winners


See you next week!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum. and every  Tuesday morning, when we reveal the weeks' nominees for Weasel of the Week!

And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you won’t want to miss it...or any of the other fantabulous Watcher's Council content.

And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that, y'know?

Thursday, October 02, 2014

The Watcher's Council Weasel Of The Week!!

 http://www.goldencockroach.org/images/goldenweasel-award2.jpg

Fanfare!! It's time It's time to present this weeks' statuette of shame, The Golden Weasel!!

Every Tuesday, the Council nominates some of the slimiest, most despicable characters in public life for some deed of evil, cowardice or corruption they've performed. Then we vote to single out one particular Weasel for special mention, to whom we award the statuette of shame, our special, 100% plastic Golden Weasel. This weeks' nominees were all certainly contenders  but by a nose, here is our winner..

 https://s.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/yhbb.kHsQ5tl118CsBZmng--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Zmk9ZmlsbDtoPTM3NztweG9mZj01MDtweW9mZj0wO3E9Njk7dz02NzA-/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/gma/gma/ht_obama_salute_kab_140923_16x9_992.jpg

President Barack Hussein Obama!

 The Noisy Room:  Barack Obama for his 'Latte Salute' of his Marine guard this past week. It was one of the most disgraceful, disrespectful things I have ever seen. The salute reveals Obama's true feelings towards the military and his contempt and utter disrespect for our warriors. How very un-presidential... how very un-Commander-in-Chief.

While it is protocol for U.S. service members in uniform to salute the Commander-in-Chief, it’s not required for a civilian president to salute back, military experts say. Ronald Reagan is thought to have set precedent for the practice back in 1981, so this is also a slap at Reagan. The salute is not required, but expected by Americans and the military. Since Obama is also left handed, some looked at this gesture as calculated. He did it with his right hand. By the way, Obama is a tea drinker normally, not a coffee drinker.


The Independent Sentinel: I have to name Barack Obama again. He blamed the intelligence community for his refusal to act on the ISIS threat during a 60 Minutes interview Sunday.

“Well, I think our head of the intelligence community, Jim Clapper, has acknowledged that I think they underestimated what had been taking place in Syria,” Obama told Steve Kroft of 60 Minutes.
Everyone in the world who is paying attention knows he's lying.

*********************************************************


Congrats, Mr. President! The statuette of shame is yours, and richly deserved!


Accepting the award for the president was one Armando Perez, who claimed he was the president's golf caddy. The only ID he had on him was a Mexican  Matricula Consular card, but I figure if that's good enough for ICE and the DHS it's good enough for us.And at least he wasn't coughing and didn't have any running sores or anything...

http://memecrunch.com/meme/SKJM/obama-s-golf-caddy/image.jpg

  Well, there it is!  Check back every Tuesday  to check out our  Weasel of the Week nominees and every Thursday to see who walks off with the statuette of shame!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum.

And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you won’t want to miss it...or any of the other fantabulous Watcher's Council content.

And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that, y'know?

Wednesday, October 01, 2014

Watcher's Council Nominations -When Justice Just Is Not Edition

http://blogs.denverpost.com/opinion-cartoons/files/2014/09/eric-holder-resigns-cartoon-mckee.jpg


Welcome to the Watcher's Council, a blogging group consisting of some of the most incisive blogs in the 'sphere, and the longest running group of its kind in existence. Every week, the members nominate two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council.Then we vote on the best two posts, with the results appearing on Friday morning.

Council News:


The Council In Action!!

The Noisy Room's Terresa Monroe-Hamilton is now affiliated with a new group, the Stop Qatar Now Coalition along with a number of other journalists, national security experts, publishers, and independent researchers. I urge you to drop by, read their report on what amounts to a narco-terrorist enabler and find out what this is all about.

Virginia Right's Tom White continues to be a major source when it comes to Virginia Politics. This week, he was cited by a local CBS affiliate WTVR in a report on a controversial video being shown to local schoolchildren that essentially blames 9/11 on America..his fine piece this week this week goes into further details.

This week, TheMidKnight Review, The Prate's Cove and The Elder Of Ziyon earned honorable mention status with some great articles.

You can, too! Want to see your work appear on the Watcher’s Council homepage in our weekly contest listing? Didn’t get nominated by a Council member? No worries.

To bring something to my attention, simply head over to Joshuapundit and post the title and a link to the piece you want considered along with an e-mail address (mandatory, but of course it won't be published) in the comments section no later than Monday 6PM PST in order to be considered for our honorable mention category. Then return the favor by creating a post on your site linking to the Watcher’s Council contest for the week when it comes out on Wednesday morning

Simple, no?

It's a great way of exposing your best work to Watcher’s Council readers and Council members while grabbing the increased traffic and notoriety. And how good is that, eh?

So, let's see what we have for you this week....


Council Submissions

Honorable Mentions

Non-Council Submissions

Enjoy! And don't forget to like us on Facebook and follow us Twitter..'cause we're cool like that!And don't forget to tune in Friday for the results!