And, Along the Same Lines: Jihad In U.S. Streets From American Congress for Truth

One of my favorite sites for information and the true intent of jihadists is American Congress for Truth. The site is run by Brigitte Gabriel and, if you'll notice, there is a big icon here. To go to Ms. Gabriel's site, simply click on the icon.

Ms. Gabriel KNOWS whereof she speaks in these matters. Read her story. She's compelling--and she knows.

This is today's offering from her site. It goes right along with the Ft. Dix story.

JIHAD IN U.S. STREETS
http://editorials.arrivenet.com/society/article.php/11383.html

JIHAD IN U.S. STREETS
Zealot Muslims now plan to bathe America’s streets with gunfire just as is going on in Iraq, Afghanistan, Sudan, Darfur and so forth.
Distribution Source : ArriveNet Editorials

J. Grant Swank, Jr. (ArriveNet Editorials - May 04, 2007) -- "These killers are known as "paintball jihadists" in that they practice in paintball game style what they have planned for America’s streets. They are already training others in "urban combat" using paintball guns. They will engage in paramilitary-style training right under our noses, and lie about it to our faces. They are protected, in some cases, by the religious Imams, some who even encourage or schedule such outings."

Zealot Muslims now plan to bathe America’s streets with gunfire just as is going on in Iraq, Afghanistan, Sudan, Darfur and so forth.

Once these Allah devotees get hold, they don’t stop. Street fighting never ends. Further, these fighters are more than willing to sacrifice their own bodies and those of their families and neighbors in order to see through Islam World Rule.

Douglas J. Hagmann, Director, Northeast Intelligence Network, reports that American officials already know of the process. However, both government and media are muffling detail.

Jihad will come to the United States due to "Muslim men inside the U.S., (the latter) adhering to the Islamist ideology of jihad, preparing for war on the streets of America."

The ‘insider’ reports are very troubling and are purposely being downplayed by official sources and go largely unreported in the media.

"One case, however, can serve as an example of what is taking place all across the U.S. involving the procurement and disbursement of weapons to Muslim ‘jihadists.’ On Tuesday, May 2, 2007, a federal indictment was unsealed in the U.S. federal court in St. Louis naming eight Islamic men as defendants in a case involving the buying, selling or hiding of automatic weapons, an anti-personnel mine and other explosives.

"The case originated with the arrest of Mousa M. ABUELAWI, 22, of Creve Coeur, MO on December 29, 2006. He was charged with three counts of illegal possession or distribution of a machine gun and conspiracy to violate machine gun statutes. A superseding indictment unsealed yesterday, charges ABUELAWI and seven others with machine gun charges and charges of conspiracy, lying to the FBI and other firearms violations.

"The other seven defendants identified in the indictment are identified as: Thaer Abde SUMAD, 23, of Florissant, MO, Abdikarin WARSAME, 28, Charley M. HUNT Jr., 45, Darnell T. THORNTON, 25, and Hussein Ali NURE, 29, all from Jennings, MO, Mohamed JUDEH, 20, of Maryland Heights and Otha L. BAKER, 20, of St. Louis. If found guilty of the charges, the men face 5-10 years in prison."

Jihadists are stockpiling weaponry and explosives via secret cells. Mosque leaders are cooperating with them."

In the case of ABUELAWI and the other seven defendants, the men met at gas stations located in north St. Louis between August 2006 and January 2007 to buy or transfer automatic weapons and explosives. In the original documents charging Abuelawi, Sumad is quoted in a meeting with ABUELAWI and a government informer as saying that ‘he wants to buy as many explosives as possible because, "we're going to war."

"Visit http://www.homelandsecurityus.com/ Northeast Intelligence Network

Sphere: Related Content

So There's No Real Terror Threat Within Our Borders, Huh?

For all of the people out there suffering from a combination Bush Derangement Syndrome and Ostrich Syndrome, how, pray tell, do you explain today's story of the six muslims and their plan to invade Ft. Dix, NJ?

Hm...........seems this has been a plot over 15 months in the making, the terrorists are here illegally (one employed as a pizza delivery person who could get onto Ft. Dix). The full stories are here and here.

Now, I know one "little" story about illegal terrorists being foiled in their plot to invade a military base is NOT going to change the mind of any of the defeatist, traitor, treasonistic crowd. But isn't it amazing how the very things this crowd bitches about have paid off? The surveillance and profiling? The wire-tapping (for all the screaming about the alleged illegal wire-tapping of citizens, I have to wonder--if the citizens have nothing to hide, what are they so worried about?) has, in this one instance, shown its value in stopping yet another incident. And FYI for the wire-tapping screamers? The only people being wire tapped are those who appear to be a danger for one reason or another, not every single citizen.

The point is, profiling, wire-tapping, increased security measures post 9/11 have paid off.

The secondary point? pelosi, reid, murtha, et al have emboldened these terrorists to go after a truly "hot" target instead of a "soft" target.

Kumbaya and give peace a chance my ass! Three cheers for Bush, Cheney, et al for standing firm against the traitors!

Sphere: Related Content

CAIR Cheers "Thought Crime" Bill Passage.

The latest from American Congress For Truth.

Of course, we already have thought crime in America. When public figures and media talking heads (you know who I'm talking about -- almost everybody, Left and Right) relentlessly purvey polite fictions about Islam as a religion of peace instead of having the courage to challenge the American Muslim community, we have thoughtcrime. Challenge the American Muslim community? Yes -- to confront the elements of Islam that the jihadists are using to justify violence and formulate positive ways to neutralize their capacity to be used in such a way. In other words, to institute large-scale programs -- transparent, sincere, and verifiable ones -- to teach against the jihad ideology and Islamic supremacism in American schools and mosques. This would actually empower the reformers these people claim to support, since no reform can begin until one is ready to admit that something needs reforming.
But the Matthews and Dobbses and Hannitys and Becks of the world would rather play pretend. They'd rather tell their viewers fantasies and fictions rather than deal with harsh realities, because to do otherwise would be to commit thoughtcrime. CAIR and its ilk have already been quite successful in casting any honest discussion of the elements of Islam that are being used today by the jihadists to justify their actions as "anti-Muslim," "Islamophobic," "bigoted," "hateful," etc. And the fearless free media cowers in terror.
In reality, however, it is not anti-Muslim, "Islamophobic," bigoted or hateful simply to point out what Muhammad taught, according to the earliest Islamic sources, and what the Qur'an says, as interpreted by the mainstream Sunni schools of jurisprudence, and what Islamic law says, and what the record of Islamic history is. How could such a thing be hateful, or loving, for that matter? It is what it is. The fact that almost no major media types will dare to look at this material squarely shows how effective the Orwellian mau-mauing has been. Thoughtcrime is real, and few are willing to commit it.
And now the House of Representatives of the United States of America has joined the cowering crowd, passing a bill that, if it becomes law (as it likely will once a Democratic president is in office in 2009), will make it illegal to discuss the root causes of the problem that threatens to destroy Europe within our lifetimes, forces every Israeli to leave his home every day not knowing if he will return, and was responsible for the largest mass murder ever on American soil (no, the perp wasn't Cho Seung Hui). That CAIR loves this bill and has worked for it is no surprise -- it is the same sort of thing as their Flying Imams lawsuit. That one would make Americans too afraid to report a Muslim acting suspiciously in an airport or on a plane, effectively giving jihad terrorists a free hand. This one could make quoting bin Laden and asking peaceful Muslims to stand up against jihad terrorism more effectively in both words and deeds into a crime -- that of "Islamophobia," as the mau-mauers have dubbed it. It's funny how the noble and glorious words of the Qur'an become "hate speech" when I simply quote them -- it reminds me of a wonderful short story by Jorge Luis Borges about which I'll be writing more soon -- but that is what I do, and that is an accusation I have often received.
Here is a WND story shedding some light on how this bill criminalizes thoughts. The article deals mostly with Christians and moral issues, but obviously since CAIR is on board so energetically they clearly see its usefulness to stifle free inquiry into the elements of Islam that need reforming.
The ever-vigilant Pamela over at Atlas Shrugs (thanks to News4U) has the details:
I warned against the thought crimes bill here. I even said "I can just see CAIR scampering to get this passed." They will wield this legislation like a club. Well it passed the House and CAIR is ecstatic. Here is the CAIR alert;
CAIR PRAISES HOUSE PASSAGE OF ANTI-HATE CRIMES BILL
(WASHINGTON, D.C., 5/3/2007) - The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) today congratulated the US House of Representatives on its passage of the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act.
To see how your U.S. representative voted, go here: http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll299.xml
CAIR has supported the act since 2005 and last week renewed its call for the community to urge elected officials to pass the measure.
SEE: Support the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007http://capwiz.com/cair/home/
The Senate now must consider its version of the bill, known as S. 1105.
If passed, the law would allow the Attorney General to provide federal assistance to local law enforcement to aid investigations of crimes motivated by "...prejudice based on the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin..." of the victim.
The White House has indicated that it will most likely veto the measure if it reaches the President.

Sphere: Related Content

Can we leave peacefully?

To all you "cut and run" "surrender and retreat" people out there, I want you to consider something. Do you honestly think that al-Qaeda will just watch us if we withdraw from Iraq, leaving us to go peacefully, maybe tossing a few "we won, we won, nyah nyah nyah nyah nyaaaah nyaaaaaaah's" at out troops? How many of you have really taken into consideration what happens during demobilization operations if we were to abandon Iraq to it's own devices at this point in the game? Here is what al-Qaeda has plans for in the event that we cut and run:

Hat Tip, Miss Beth's Victory Dance via Victory Caucus.

New Tape: Al Qaeda No. 2 Wants 200,000-300,000 U.S. Dead in Iraq

Ayman al-Zawahiri Says Al Qaeda Wants to Spill More U.S. Blood Before America Withdraws

In a new video posted today on the Internet, al Qaeda's number two man, Ayman al Zawahiri, mocks the bill passed by Congress setting a timetable for the pullout of U.S. troops in Iraq.

"This bill will deprive us of the opportunity to destroy the American forces which we have caught in a historic trap," Zawahiri says in answer to a question posed to him an interviewer.


Continuing in the same tone, Zawahiri says, "We ask Allah that they only get out of it after losing 200,000 to 300,000 killed, in order that we give the spillers of blood in Washington and Europe an unforgettable lesson."


Based on the references to the bill, the tape, produced by al Qaeda's propaganda arm, as-Sahab, appears to have been made after Congress passed the legislation last week but before President Bush vetoed in on Thursday.


According to Laura Mansfield, a counter terrorism analyst with Strategic Translations, an organization that monitors al Qaeda postings, the tape was posted on the Internet this morning and covers the usual range of Zawahri's topics including Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine.


There has been a flurry of audio and video releases featuring Zawahiri, although no new communication from Osama bin Laden since mid-2006.

How many times do the American people have to be told that these people want us all DEAD? How many times does it have to be said before it penetrates thick skulls? Will it take the deaths that this man is calling for? Will it take another incident like 9/11 before people fully realize that these people are serious?

I'm serious in asking this. WHAT is it going to take for people to undersand that these radical fascist imperialist Islamic extremist want us utterly destroyed and the survivors subjegated to them?

I'm simply and utterly confounded by the mentallity of cutting and running, MORE so the mentallity of "let's fight them over here instead." It simply amazes me. In my mind, we HAVE to keep them busy on their own turf so they can't have time to concentrate on mayhem and destruction here. Too many innocent civilians in our own population depend on it, not to mention the people in the Middle East who don't fall in lockstep behind this mindset.

Simply amazing.

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man

Cross Posted from Wake up America and written by HCdl.

.

Sphere: Related Content

I WISH Fred Thompson Would Throw His Hat In the Ring!!!

Fred Thompson's latest post from TownHall.com here:

The man makes sense; perhaps too much sense for D.C.

Excerpt: Prepared Remarks for Speech to Lincoln Club Annual Dinner
By Fred Thompson
Saturday, May 5, 2007

So we meet again, and I'm honored, because I know we're here for the same reasons: Love of our country and concern for our future.

A lot of Americans have these concerns tonight. They are concerned about the way things are going in our country right now. Some fear we may be in the first stages of decline. We've heard this malaise talk before.

Of course Iraq is a large part of it. Not only is it tough going, but the effort is besieged on all sides. From those playing the most crass kind of politics with it at home to criticism from around the world.

Even at home, as we enjoy the benefits from one of the best economies we've ever had, people seem uncertain; they raise concerns about global competition or a growing economic disparity among our citizens.

These are challenges. But how we react to them is more important than the challenges themselves. Some want us, to the extent possible, to withdraw from the world that presents us with so many problems, in the hope they will go away. Some would push us towards protectionist trade policies. Others see a solution in raising taxes and redistributing the income among our citizens.

Wrong on all counts. These are defensive, defeatist policies that have consistently been proven wrong. They are not what America is all about.

Let's talk about the issues here at home, first. A lot of folks in Washington suffer from a big misconception about our economy. They confuse the well-being of our government with the wealth of our nation. Adam Smith pointed out the same problem in his day, when many governments mixed up how much money the king had with how well-off the country was.

Taxes are necessary. But they don't make the country any better off. At best they simply move money from the private sector to the government. But taxes are also a burden on production, because they discourage people from working, saving, investing, and taking risks. Some economists have calculated that today each additional dollar collected by the government, by raising income-tax rates, makes the private sector as much as two dollars worse off.

To me this means one simple thing: tax rates should be as low as possible. This isn't anything ideological, and it really isn't some great insight. It's common sense arithmetic.

That's why the economy booms when taxes are cut. When the Kennedy tax cuts were passed in the 1960s, the economy boomed. When Reagan cut taxes in 1981, we went from economic malaise to a new morning in America. And when George Bush cut taxes in 2001, he took a declining economy he inherited to an economic expansion -- despite 9-11, the NASDAQ bubble and corporate scandals.

The Democrats, of course, want to raise taxes. They only want to target the rich, they say. A word of advice to anyone in the middle class -- don't stand anywhere near that target. Wouldn't it be great if, instead of worrying so much about how to divide the pie, we could work together on how to make the pie bigger?

On globalization -- we're not afraid of it. It works to our benefit. We innovate more and invest in that innovation better than anywhere else in the world. Same thing goes for services, which are increasingly driving our economy. Free trade and market economies have done more for freedom and prosperity than a central planner could ever dream and we're the world's best example of that. So, why do we want to take investment dollars out of growth, and invest it in government?

I'd say cash flow to the government is already going quite well. Over the past year our current tax structure generated record levels of revenue for Washington. In fact it's time to seriously consider what we're getting for our "investment" in government.

For many years, several functions of the federal government have been descending into a sorry state of mismanagement and lack of accountability. I published a 68-page report on government's waste, duplication and inability to carry out some of its basic responsibilities. That was back in 2001 before 9-11, and it got little attention. Now the government's shortcomings are affecting our national security and are getting a lot of attention.

The growth of government is not solving these problems; it's causing a lot of them. Every level of new bureaucracy that is created develops a level of bureaucracy beneath it, which creates another one. Pretty soon there is no accountability in the system. A new head of a department or agency comes in from out of town and, after a protracted confirmation fight, wants to spend his or her few years in Washington making great policy and solving national problems, not fighting with their own bureaucrats. So they just let well enough alone. Then you start seeing the results. Departments that can't pass an audit, computer systems that don't work, intelligence breakdowns, people in over their heads.

Yet people in both parties continue to try to federalize and regulate at the national level more and more aspects of American society -- things that have traditionally been handled at the state and local level. We must remember that we have states to serve as policy laboratories for innovation and competition. That's how we got welfare reform. Our system also allows for the diversity of our large country. Our attitude should be, let the federal government do what it is supposed to be doing -- competently. Then maybe we will give it something else to do.

The government could start by securing our nation's borders. A sovereign nation that can't do that is not a sovereign nation. This is secondarily an immigration issue. It's primarily a national security issue. We were told twenty years ago if we produced a comprehensive solution, we'd solve the illegal immigration problem. Twelve million illegals later, we're being told that same thing again. I don't believe most Americans are as concerned about the 12 million that are here as they are about the next 12 million and the next 12 million after that. I think they're thinking: "Prove you can secure the border and then people of good will can sit down and work out the rest of it, while protecting those folks who play by the rules."

Speaking of reforms and our economy, there is nothing more urgent than the fate that is awaiting our Social Security and Medicare programs. The good news is that we are living longer. However, we don't have enough young working people to finance these programs from their taxes.

People say the programs are going bankrupt. They won't go bankrupt. Even as these programs sap every dime of the government's revenue, the folks in Washington will raise the taxes necessary to cover the problem. At this rate the federal government is going to wind up as nothing more than a transfer agent -- transferring wealth from one generation to another. It will devastate our economy.

Sometimes I think that I'm the last guy around who still thinks term limits is a good idea. The professionalization of politics saps people's courage. Their desire to keep their job and not upset anybody overrides all else -- even if it hurts the country.

So the entitlement problem gets kicked a little further down the road. This action is based on the premise that our generation is too greedy to help the next generation. I believe just the opposite is true. If grandmom and granddad think that a little sacrifice will help their grandchildren when they get married, try to buy a home or have children, they will respond to a credible call to make that sacrifice -- if they don't think that the sacrifice is going down some government black hole.

I am going to quote my friend, Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma. I don't think he'll mind, even though it was a private conversation. He said, "People talk a lot about moral issues, but the greatest moral issue facing our generation is the fact that we are bankrupting the next generation. People talk about wanting to make a difference. Here we could make a difference for generations to come."

It's clear with close numbers in the House and the Senate we need bipartisanship to have any chance at real reform in any of these areas. And there are many responsible people who are willing to try to make it happen. But the level of bipartisanship needed for real progress can only be achieved when politicians perceive that the American people are demanding it. That's why leaders of reform and hopefully our next President, will have a mandate to go directly to the American people with truth and clarity.

These days in Washington, there's an awful lot of talk about the need for conversation -- that we should talk more to our nation's enemies; that we should speak "truth to power." However the speakers are usually turned in the wrong direction. Instead of talking to each other, leaders need to be speaking more to the American people.

The message would be simple: "My friends we have entered a new era. We are going to be tested in many ways, possibly under attack and for a long time. It's time to take stock and be honest with ourselves. We're going to have to do a lot of things better. Here's what we need to do and here's why. I know that, now that you're being called upon, you will do whatever is necessary for the sake of our country and for future generations. You always have."

When the American people respond to that, as I know they will, you will have your bipartisanship.

Sphere: Related Content