Archive for the ‘Leftist-Islamic Alliance’ Category

Obama’s Community Organizing Based Foreign Policy

Monday, November 2nd, 2009

Our naive Crypto Dictator Barack Husein Obama views all nations as equals. He is convinced that all countries have shared interests. He views the concerns of our enemies as legitimate and even sides with them against our allies. His foreign policy is based on his experiences as a Community Organizer. He thinks the world is like the south-side of Chicago, which is a dangerous view to have. Nations have their own interests and they don’t always coincide with ours. We must recognize this, but not Obama. He really believes in nuances and that all nations have good intentions.

ObamaChavez

President Obama is applying the same tools to international diplomacy that he once used as a community organizer on Chicago’s South Side, constructing appeals to shared interests and attempting to bring the government’s conduct in line with its ideals.

The limits of Obama’s cool, interests-based approach are visible in Afghanistan, where European allies continue to resist sending additional combat troops to fight an increasingly unpopular war, and in his attempts to assemble a common front against Iran’s suspected nuclear weapons program. In Afghanistan, his efforts to reinvigorate the relationships neglected by the previous administration have yielded few tangible results on the battlefield. In Iran, months of careful, culturally sensitive diplomacy have met with a recalcitrance that U.S. conservatives say will never change

Obama’s approach to the world as a community of nations, more alike than different in outlook and interest, has elevated America’s standing abroad and won him the Nobel Peace Prize. But on the farthest-reaching U.S. foreign policy challenges, he is struggling to translate his own popularity into American influence, even with allies that have celebrated his break from the Bush administration’s emphasis on military strength, unilateral action and personal chemistry.

Conservatives think Obama is undermining U.S. power abroad by failing to recognize the degree to which countries, whether allies or adversaries, are immune to appeals to shared interests. And critics from opposite ends of the political spectrum say Obama has too often muted his public support for American ideals — notably human rights and democracy — in his pursuit of common goals.

Read the rest.

Obama is a reckless, naive and stupid President. The world is an evil place with nations and organizations that don’t have good intentions. The President of the United States should stand up for America’s interests. By pursuing non existent common interests, our adversaries are running circles around Barack Hussein Obama. There are no common interests. The US has nothing in common with Iran, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, Venezuela and China. We should have our own agenda and not subvert our interests to others.

Barack Hussein Obama is doing this for a sinister purpose. He is a Transnationalist Progressive who views the US as part of a Global Community. He wants to make the US a defacto colony of foreign interests. He is a dangerous man whose naivete will be our ruin.

Progressive-Islamic Alliance seek to silence Global Media

Sunday, November 1st, 2009

Barack Hussein Obama is attempting to control and silence the opposition media here in America. However, what he is doing is not unique to America. Progressive and Islamic regimes throughout the world are attempting to silence the media. This is ironic since the Global Media sympathizes with with Progressives and Islamic movements. Our Crypto Dictator Obama is just copying what his International Progressive and Islamic allies are doing.

The Obama administration’s un-American attempt to vilify Fox News only increased the network’s popularity. But this White House debacle can’t be judged in isolation: There’s a global leftwing assault on the freedom of information.

Intense leftist sentiment in most of the international media isn’t enough. Extremists seek total control.

The one thing leftists just can’t bear is criticism. (Mass murder’s fine, but don’t stray from the party line.) As early as the French Revolution, the left grasped that a free press is inherently subversive to its doctrines.

Read the rest.

America is currently under Progressive Occupation. This alien Un-American movement is attempting to seize total control. To achieve this, they must silence people. The Media has for years supported the Islamic-Progressive Coalition and did everything in their power to elect Barack Hussein Obama. However, there are outlets like Fox News that call out the Totalitarians.

As Americans we must be aware that Obama is the 1st Anti/Post American president. He really hates what this nation is about and is a Radical. It is no shocker he is doing what his buddies Chavez and Ahmadinejad are doing in their nations. They are all Totalitarian Radicals that seek to reshape their world in their evil image.

Progressivism and Islam are both Totalitarian Ideologies that must be defeated!

The Totalitarian Progressive destruction of America Pt. II

Friday, October 30th, 2009

Goodmorning Blogmocracy Netizens! I am off to the office so this is a quick post.

Several days ago I posted an article by Thomas Sowell, where he describes how Progressives are changing America by destroying it from within. Well, this morning the 2nd part of that article is out. This is a must read and he nails the Anti-American agenda of Progressives.

Many years ago, at a certain academic institution, there was an experimental program that the faculty had to vote on as to whether or not it should be made permanent.

I rose at the faculty meeting to say that I knew practically nothing about whether the program was good or bad, and that the information that had been supplied to us was too vague for us to have any basis for voting, one way or the other. My suggestion was that we get more concrete information before having a vote.

The director of that program rose immediately and responded indignantly and sarcastically to what I had just said– and the faculty gave him a standing ovation.

After the faculty meeting was over, I told a colleague that I was stunned and baffled by the faculty’s fierce response to my simply saying that we needed more information before voting.

“Tom, you don’t understand,” he said. “Those people need to believe in that man. They have invested so much hope and trust in him that they cannot let you stir up any doubts.”

Read the rest.

Make no mistake about it, the Progressive movement is anti-American. They seek to make us weak and part of a global system. They are turning us into a colony of the Global Community. We need to defend our independence the founders gave us. Progressives hate the American experiment and will do anything to destroy it.

Progressive Immigration Policies enabling Islamic Penetration of the West

Thursday, October 29th, 2009

Europe, Canada and to a small degree America is being over run with Islamic immigrants. Unlike Immigrants from other parts of the World, like India, Latin America or Asia, they have no intention of integration. Instead they created No Go Zones for Non Muslims in European cities. This was done on purpose by Progressive Politicians in Europe to create a Multi-Cultural society. In reality all this has done is to enable Islam to gain a foothold and influence politics.

A FEW weeks ago in London, British Foreign Secretary David Miliband told me that 75 per cent of the terrorist plots aimed at Britain originated in the federally administered tribal areas of Pakistan. Some 800,000 Pakistanis live in Britain.

The vast majority, it goes without saying, are law-abiding citizens. But there is a link between uncontrolled Muslim immigration and terrorism.
It is extremely difficult to talk honestly about Muslim immigration. All generalisations about it are subject to countless exceptions. Muslims are very different from each other. Most are reasonably successful.

But a much bigger minority end up with social, political, extremist or other problems resulting from a lack of integration than is the case with any other cohort of immigrants in Western societies. A lack of honest discussion about this results in bad policy.

Read the rest.

The Progressives call anyone who discusses this fact as a an Islamophobe. However it is a truth that Islam is a Transnationalist Ideology that does not recognize Nation States. Islam imposes it’s Arabic based culture wherever it goes. Islam is not compatible with Western Societies which is why Muslim Immigrants are causing problems. The sooner this is acknowledged, the sooner it can be dealt with. Progressives welcome Islamic Immigration as they view them as allies against Christians and Jews. That is the real reason for the Leftist-Islamic alliance.

Have You Ever Wondered Why Britain Allowed So Many Islamic Immigrants In? Well, The Truth Is Out…It Was Planned, It Was All About Multiculturalism

Wednesday, October 28th, 2009

Blogmocracy In Action

Guest Blogger: Ornery Elephant

As it says in this article at Family Security Matters, the “cat is out of the bag” and the news is disturbing at the very least. The word is out that the humongeous and hideous number of islamic immigrations into Great Britain over the past decade and a half was all planned by the government….it was executed on purpose IN ORDER TO MAKE BRITAIN MORE MULTICULTURAL! I kid you not.

Read this and if you are in Britain, weep. If you are in America, read this and get ready to fight this new plague upon our land.

The Uncovered Conspiracy to Transform Britain

So now the cat is well and truly out of the bag. For years, as the number of immigrants to Britain shot up apparently uncontrollably, the question was how exactly this had happened.

Was it through a fit of absent-mindedness or gross incompetence? Or was it not inadvertent at all, but deliberate?

The latter explanation seemed just too outrageous. After all, a deliberate policy of mass immigration would have amounted to nothing less than an attempt to change the very makeup of this country without telling the electorate.

There could not have been a more grave abuse of the entire democratic process. Now, however, we learn that this is exactly what did happen. The Labour government has been engaged upon a deliberate and secret policy of national cultural sabotage.

This astonishing revelation surfaced quite casually last weekend in a newspaper article by one Andrew Neather. He turns out to have been a speech writer for Tony Blair, Jack Straw and David Blunkett.

And it was he who wrote a landmark speech in September 2000 by the then immigration minister, Barbara Roche, that called for a loosening of immigration controls. But the true scope and purpose of this new policy was actively concealed.

In its 1997 election manifesto, Labour promised “firm control over immigration” and in 2005 it promised a “crackdown on abuse.” In 2001, its manifesto merely said that the immigration rules needed to reflect changes to the economy to meet skills shortages.

But all this concealed a monumental shift of policy. For Neather wrote that until “at least February last year,” when a new points-based system was introduced to limit foreign workers in response to increasing uproar, the purpose of the policy Roche ushered in was to open up the UK to mass immigration.

This has been achieved. Some 2.3million migrants have been added to the population since 2001. Since 1997, the number of work permits has quadrupled to 120,000 a year.

Unless policies change, over the next 25 years some seven million more will be added to Britain’s population, a rate of growth three times as fast as took place in the ‘80s.

Such an increase is simply unsustainable. Britain is already one of the most overcrowded countries in Europe. But now look at the real reason why this policy was introduced, and in secret. The Government’s “driving political purpose,” wrote Neather, was “to make the UK truly multicultural.”

It was therefore a politically motivated attempt by ministers to transform the fundamental makeup and identity of this country. It was done to destroy the right of the British people to live in a society defined by a common history, religion, law, language and traditions.

It was done to destroy for ever what it means to be culturally British and to put another “multicultural” identity in its place. And it was done without telling or asking the British people whether they wanted their country and their culture to be transformed in this way.

Spitefully, one motivation by Labour ministers was “to rub the Right’s nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date.”

Even Neather found that particular element of gratuitous Left-wing bullying to be “a manoeuvre too far.”

Yet apart from this, Neather sees nothing wrong in the policy he has described. Indeed, the reason for his astonishing candor is he thinks it’s something to boast about. Mass immigration, he wrote, had provided the “foreign nannies, cleaners and gardeners” without whom London could hardly function.

What elitist arrogance! As if most people employ nannies, cleaners and gardeners. And what ignorance. The argument that Britain is better off with this level of immigration has been conclusively shown to be economically illiterate.

[...]

But the most shattering revelation was that this policy of mass immigration was not introduced to produce nannies or cleaners for the likes of Neather. It was to destroy Britain’s identity and transform it into a multicultural society where British attributes would have no greater status than any other country’s.

A measure of immigration is indeed good for a country. But this policy was not to enhance British culture and society by broadening the mix. It was to destroy its defining character altogether.

It also conveniently guaranteed an increasingly Labour-voting electorate since, as a recent survey by the Electoral Commission has revealed, some 90 percent of black people and three-quarters of Asians vote Labour.

In Neather’s hermetically sealed bubble, the benefits of mass immigration were so overwhelming he couldn’t understand why ministers had been so nervous about it.

They were, he wrote, reluctant to discuss what increased immigration would mean, above all to Labour’s core white working class vote. So they deliberately kept it secret.

They knew that if they told the truth about what they were doing, voters would rise up in protest. So they kept it out of their election manifestos.

It was indeed a conspiracy to deceive the electorate into voting for them. And yet it is these very people who have the gall to puff themselves up in self-righteous astonishment at the rise of the BNP.

No wonder Jack Straw was so shifty on last week’s Question Time when he was asked whether it was the Government’s failure to halt immigration which lay behind increasing support for the BNP.

Now we know it was no such failure of policy. It was deliberate. For the government of which Straw is such a long- standing member had secretly plotted to flood the country with immigrants to change its very character and identity.

This more than any other reason is why Nick Griffin has gained so much support. According to a YouGov poll taken after Question Time, no fewer than 22 per cent of British voters would “seriously consider” voting for the BNP.

That nearly one quarter of British people might vote for a neo-Nazi party with views inimical to democracy, human rights and common decency is truly appalling.

The core reason is that for years they have watched as their country’s landscape has been transformed out of all recognition – and that politicians from all mainstream parties have told them first that it isn’t happening and second, that they are racist bigots to object even if it is.

Now the political picture has been transformed overnight by the unguarded candor of Andrew Neather’s eye-opening superciliousness. For now we know that Labour politicians actually caused this to happen – and did so out of total contempt for their own core voters.

[...]

Condemned out of its own mouth, it is New Labour that is responsible for the rise of the BNP — by an act of unalloyed treachery to the entire nation.

(Cross Posted at Holger Awakens)

Progressives causing dark times for America

Wednesday, October 28th, 2009

Goodmorning Blogmocracy Netizens! I hope everyone slept well and will have a healthy day today! I came across a dark post by the great Victor Davis Hanson I must post on.

The Progressive Tyrannical Regime in Washington D.C., is selling a fantasy to the American people. They keep increasing our debt, due to low interest rates. They are selling out our allies on the hopes that our enemies will like us. The Cap-N-Trade scheme’s true costs are down played and the hyped “green” economy is emphasized. The Obamacare plan is being promoted as consumer choice, when in reality it’s a form of Eugenics based control. These are dark times for America and one wonders whether the Progressives are naive, or if this is all by design?

Obama’s mega-borrowing is predicated on a rather thin margin of safety. We can service nearly $2 trillion in additional debt this year—on top the of the existing $11 trillion—only because interest rates are so low.

But as a veteran of the near usury of the 1970s and early 1980s, I see no reason why interest rates won’t shoot up to 10% once the economy recovers and the U.S. has to convince lenders to buy our paper in an inflationary spiral. In other words, we could fork out each year about $150-200 billion in interest costs on our annual red ink, in addition to paying annually another trillion dollars to service the existing debt. (We forget that many of us young people in the 1970s and 1980s simply never bought anything new due to high interest: my first new car was not purchased until 1989 when interest was only 7.2% on it; my parents bought a small condo in 1980 for the unbelievably low rate of 8.8%, due only to redevelopment incentives in a bad neighborhood of Fresno. Inflation will be back, even in this quite different age of globalized competition and low wages.)

When Obama talks of a trillion here for health care, a trillion there for cap-and-trade, it has a chilling effect. Does he include the cost of interest? Where will the money came from? Who will pay the interest? Has he ever experienced the wages of such borrowing in his own life? Did he cut-back and save for his college or law school tuition, with part-time jobs? Did he ever run a business and see how hard it was to be $200 ahead at day’s end?

What destroys individuals, ruins families, and fells nations is debt—or rather the inability to service debt, and the cultural ramifications that follow. When farming, I used to seen the futility in haggling over diesel prices, trying to buy fertilizer in bulk, or using used vineyard wire—when each day we were paying hundreds in dollars in interest on a “cut-rate” 14% crop loan.

Read the rest.

Victor Davis Hanson, who is a historian, does a great analysis here. This has happened before and this is how a great society falls. Progressives are leading America down a dark road and they need to be called out on it. They are on purpose destroying the fabric of this nation. It is their agenda to create a Neo-Feudal Totalitarian dark age system here. They want pure power and will stop at nothing to achieve this evil agenda. The Conservative-Libertarian Coalition must ignore the RINOs and take on these fascist thugs. It is our liberty and way of life at stake!

If we lose, an American Dark Age will set in.

Adolescent Boys Used as Sex Slaves by Powerful Men in ‘Anti-Homosexual” Muslim Afghanistan

Tuesday, October 27th, 2009

Blogmocracy in Action

Guest Blogger: Moe Katz

Young Afghan boys are taken from their families, made to dance in women’s costumes, and raped by prominent men in a widespread, centuries-old practice that is disapproved of by Muslim scholars but nonetheless tolerated in that war-torn society. By their later teens, many of these boys will end up as male homosexual prostitutes earning scarce money for their families:

Despite the dangers, they continue to dance, making $30 for the night — a night that usually ends in assault — because they say it is the only thing they know and their only way to make money. There are no opportunities in Afghanistan for people like them.
And once branded as men who danced as women, there is no turning back.
“We are not happy with this line of work,” Jamel said. “We say that it would be better if God could just kill us rather than living like this.”

Read the rest.

Guess who’s coming to dinner? (Mohammed Bakri and Hamid Dabashi)

Thursday, October 22nd, 2009

Blogmocracy in Action

Guest Blogger: Delectable

Israel Matzav and Artists 4 Israel have the scoop on the underlying story of the Manhattan JCC supporting a film festival, and Shabbat dinner, that promotes blood libels against Israel. (The Shabbat dinner is sponsoring Mohammed Bakri as a speaker – he was the filmmaker behind Jenin, Jenin, which claimed Israel committed a genocide in Jenin. He was later sued for libel by soldiers, and admit he lied in his ‘documentary.’)

I was scanning over the JCC’s “Other Israel Film Festival” web page today, and found another juicy little “nugget” of information.

In addition to the “Other Israel Film Festival” being co-founded by Mohammed Bakri, who was the filmmaker behind the blood libel, Jenin, Jenin, our old friend Hamid Dabashi is also supportive of this festival.

That is right – Hamid Dabashi. He is the known bigot who is a cheerleader for both Hamas and the Iranian regime. Source, source, and source. He has made his career openly supporting a regime (Iran) and fake-regime (Hamas) that brutalizes their own people.

This is what we are up against.

The JCC is allying itself with the Iranian regime (via Dabashi), propagandists for Jihad (Bakri), and J Street. (no real difference between the three at this point)

On the plus side, I now understand why J Street opposed the Toronto Film Festival’s attempted boycott of Israeli films! Carole Zabar (of the Zabar’s food store fame), founder of this “film festival,” explained that she opposed the Toronto Film Festival’s boycott because she believes it is better to show anti-Israel Israeli-made films!

This all makes sense now! Rather than boycott the Israeli film industry, it is apparent that the Manhattan JCC, and J Street, support the Israeli film industry…which they see as a vehicle for their version of anti-Israeli activism! Recall that one of the claims J Street makes about it being “pro-Israel” is that they were against the Toronto Film Festival’s boycott. They are doing all this while claiming to be “pro-Israel.” (pro-Israeli surrender, but in their eyes, that might be considered “pro-Israel”)

I find it shocking, how these progressives are twisting reality into such a cartoonish caricature.

The other positive I can say is that I now see the money train from Zabar’s to Jihad-supporting activities. I never would have imagined that Zabar’s of all places would support such a twisted ideology, but now at least I am aware of where part of the money train is emanating from.

Update by Delectable:

One point of clarification…

When I compared J Street to the Iranian regime, I did so because they are the only major Jewish organization to oppose sanctioning the regime, and they invited a paid lobbyist for the Iranian regime (Trita Parsi) to speak at their Annual Gala. They also invited Salam al-Marayati (who has repeatedly linked himself with terror groups), Palestinian Authority representatives, and many other supporters of terrorism.

J Street was also the only major Jewish organization to oppose Cast Lead, support the “settlement freeze,” oppose building in Jerusalem, and not oppose the Goldstone Report.

I just wanted to clarify why I stated what I stated.

Perhaps I was being a tad overdramatic to say there is “no difference” between J Street” and the Iranian regime, but there are open connections between J Street and the Iranian regime, and clear unification of policy in many respects.

Obama Lied and People Died

Tuesday, October 20th, 2009

Good morning Blogmocracy Netizens! I hope everyone is well, I am under the weather a bit which is why I have not been posting much. As usual I have to bring grim news of the antics of our Progressives leaders.

Our Radical Totalitarian Progressive president Barack Hussein Obama, lied during the 2008 campaign. He discussed how important Afghanistan was and that he would do what it takes to win. After approving an initial increase earlier this year, the situation is deteriorating. The Taliban is on the offensive and they are taking advantage of the new Rules of Engagement Obama imposed this year. Obama also is dragging out his decision whether to approve Gen. McChrystal’s request for more troops. While all this is happening ,our troops are dying and their frustration is rising.

WASHINGTON — Only nine months ago, the Pentagon pronounced itself reassured by the early steps of a new commander in chief. President Obama was moving slowly on an American withdrawal from Iraq, had retained former President George W. Bush’s defense secretary and, in a gesture much noticed, had executed his first military salute with crisp precision.

But now, after nearly a month of deliberations by Mr. Obama over whether to send more American troops to Afghanistan, frustrations and anxiety are on the rise within the military.

A number of active duty and retired senior officers say there is concern that the president is moving too slowly, is revisiting a war strategy he announced in March and is unduly influenced by political advisers in the Situation Room.

Read the rest.

Obama promised victory and that he would take the advise of the generals. Clearly this is not the case and our soldiers are suffering because of his indecision.They are fighting with little Air or Artillery support. They are unsure if their Commander in Chief supports them.

Obama lied and people have died!

We are winning! Senators/Congressmen are dropping out of J Street’s Annual “Gala” like flies!

Monday, October 19th, 2009

Blogmocracy in Action

Guest Blogger:Delectable

This post is meant to inspire you all to further action. On Friday, I posted a call to action for Blogmocracy readers, to email their senators/congressmen, telling them to drop out of the J Street Annual Gala. Please read that post right here. It contains critical information about J Street!

I wanted to let you all know that this advocacy has been working and WE ARE WINNING!

Just check out what the Weekly Standard has to say:

The names of Reps. John Salazar (CO-03) and Ed Towns (NY-10) have been scrubbed from the list of congressmen serving on the host committee for J Street’s inaugural conference. That brings to ten the number of congressmen, Republicans and Democrats, senators and representatives, who have bailed on J Street after learning that, contrary to their promotional materials, they are not a pro-Israel group. Apparently even the Friday afternoon roll out of Jim Jones as the conference’s keynote speaker — an announcement that J Street surely would have preferred to make on Monday but which they were compelled to move up lest their entire roster of Congressional supporters defect en masse — wasn’t enough to stanch the bleeding. The tally of defections so far:

Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR)
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY)
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY)
Sen. Thad Cochran (R-MS)
Rep. Mike Castle (R-DE)
Rep. Mike Ross (D-AR)
Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX)
Rep. Leonard Boswell (D-IA)
Rep. John Salazar (D-CO)
Rep. Ed Towns (D-NY)

Among the members who remain on that list there are a few who aren’t likely to hang around much longer. Senator Mark Udall is too savvy to be caught up in this mess. Will Senator Mark Pryor really go to the mat for an anti-Israel, pro-Hamas organization? And what about Republican Reps. Charles Boustany, Brian Bilbray, and Howard Coble? Are there large anti-Israel constituencies in those districts of which I was previously unaware?

I doubt those three are even aware their names are on this list, but after watching J Street speaker Josh Healey’s rousing performance of “Queer Intifada” in which he declares that “Guantanamo is Auschwitz” and “Anne Frank is Matthew Shepard,” I’m pretty confident they will ask to have their names removed.

Healey also wrote a poem about how “We’re the ones writing numbers on the wrists of babies born in the ghetto called Gaza.” A few weeks ago in his speech to the UN, Israeli PM Bibi Netanyahu drew some very obvious parallels between the Iranian regime and Nazi Germany. The anti-Israel left went nuts (see Andrew Sullivan here, Juan Cole here, and Philip Weiss here, for example), but here is a J Street confederate who compares Israel and the United States to Nazi Germany every time he picks up a pen. Even by the left’s own standards this kind of thing is beyond the pale. What member of Congress can attach his name to an event where the speakers will accuse the United States of running a concentration camp at Guantanamo?

Our advocacy is WORKING! Please continue to write to your senators/congressmen and keep up the pressure on J Street!

Already J Street is complaining of the scary “neocons” who are running them out of town! Poor, poor progressive babies!

The updated list of senators/congressmen attending J Street is right here. Please check if your senator/congressman is on the list!

We cannot let this progressive organization succeed in re-defining the English language!