blind_html Re: Traped
- From: Nimer Jaber <nimerjaber1@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: blind_html@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 15:27:04 -0600
Hello,
First, i am not a lady. I repeat, I am not a lady. Second, you can
unsub. I repeat, you _can unsubscribe. Did you send your
unsubscription to the right address? Did you put unsubscribe in the
subject line? If you have done so, I would be interested in knowing
this, as this would mean that there is a major bug with freelists and
should be reported to the managers of freelists. Also, if you haven't
read my recent posts, I am pondering a switch over to google groups.
Possibly, if we make the switch over to google groups, we would not
have these issues?
thanks
nimer J
On 8/13/09, Betteye <the_boldens@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> This lady is crazy. She has the nerve to call her list blind html. To make
> maters worse you can't unsub from her list. I've tried to unsub but continue
> to get her crazy posts. I wish she would allow me to use the name of blind
> html? I would really post about html allow person to unsub from the list. I
> want off the list.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Nimer Jaber
> To: blind_html@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 4:48 PM
> Subject: blind_html [Nimer's Political Blog] [Fwd: Understanding Islam's
> Threat to U.S. Vital]
>
>
> Here's another idiot that knows nothing about religion trying to tell us
> who Islam is at war with. Beautiful!!
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Understanding Islam's Threat to U.S. Vital
> Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 15:33:55 -0500
> From: Travis <baconlard@xxxxxxxxx>
> Reply-To: politics-current-events@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To: baconlard@xxxxxxxxx
> References: <018801ca1a80$7f1db5b0$7d592110$@com>
> <aef954850908111248x507d900dk6b17f5ad93e614e4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
>
>
> *Newsmax.com*
>
>
> http://www.newsmax.com/frank_gaffney/islam_obama_shariah/2009/08/10/246009.html
>
> *Understanding Islams Threat to U.S. Vital*
>
> Monday, August 10, 2009 1:29 PM
>
>
> *By:* Frank Gaffney Jr.
>
> John Brennan, the assistant to the president for homeland security and
> counterterrorism, last week approvingly recalled a key point in the
> speech Barack Obama delivered in Cairo in June: "America is not and
> never will be at war with Islam." Unfortunately, that statement ignores
> the fact that the decision as to whether the United States is at war
> with anybody is not entirely up to our leadership or people. The real
> question is: Is Islam' at war with us?
>
> It is certainly true that hundreds of millions of Muslims the world over
> are not seeking to wage war against the U.S. or other non-Muslim states.
> America has, as Brennan noted in his remarks before the Center for
> Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) on Aug. 6, a powerful
> interest in not making all those who practice Islam into our enemies.
>
> Yet, it would be a grave mistake to construe the problem we face as
> Brennan proceeded to do in his speech at CSIS: "We are at war with
> al-Qaida which attacked us on 9/11 and killed 3,000 people. We are at
> war with its violent extremist allies who seek to carry on al-Qaida's
> murderous agenda." He described that agenda as seeking "to replace
> sovereign nations with a global caliphate."
>
> Unfortunately, that is the stated goal of all those who adhere to what
> authoritative Islam calls Shariah a number that includes many millions
> of people the world over. Brennan's speech made no reference to this
> wellspring of jihadism.
>
> Of course, not all those who embrace Shariah are prepared to use terror
> against us. Shariah requires though that if its adherents do not
> actually engage in violent jihad, they must support it through financial
> or other means. After all, according to Shariah, the purpose of jihad is
> to bring about the triumph of Islam over the entire world. Shariah
> commands that the faithful must use violence where possible to advance
> that objective, and non-violent means where not.
>
> By failing to recognize this justification and catalyst for the threat
> we face, Obama and his administration effectively foreclose the
> possibility of countering it effectively. Worse yet, in their
> understandable desire not to give gratuitous offense to Muslims, the
> U.S. government has repeatedly deferred to those who are most easily and
> most vocally offended.
>
> Specifically, the latter notably, the putatively non-violent, but
> virulently Islamist Muslim Brotherhood and its myriad front
> organizations have come to dictate what our officials can and cannot say
> about the danger posed not just by al-Qaida and its "violent extremist
> allies," but by all those who embrace the teachings, traditions,
> institutions, and dictates of what authoritative Islam defines as
> "mainstream": Shariah.
>
> This practice effectively disenfranchises American Muslims who reject
> this Shariah program precisely the sorts of people we should most want
> to empower. Last week, I discussed this problem on our talk radio
> program with someone who is trying to do something about it: Rep. Sue
> Myrick of North Carolina.
>
> *To hear Gaffneys interviews with Myrick and Sen. John Cornyn **go here
> now* <http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/index.xml>*.*
>
> As it happens, Myrick's district is not far from where Daniel Patrick
> Boyd and other alleged "homegrown" jihadists were reportedly plotting
> attacks abroad, and possibly here. What is more, the financial sector so
> prominent in the Charlotte community she represents is also a prime
> target of one of the most insidious forms of what author Robert Spencer
> calls "stealth" jihad: Shariah-compliant finance.
>
> Myrick, a co-founder of the House anti-terror caucus, recently convened
> a meeting to afford "moderate" Muslims an opportunity to interact with
> representatives of various federal law enforcement and other agencies
> responsible for securing this country. According to Myrick, some of the
> officials seemed to be discovering for the first time that there are
> practitioners of Islam who do not embrace the seditious tenets of
> Shariah and who were extremely concerned about the government's almost
> exclusive reliance on those who do.
>
> Fortunately, decisions in federal court in recent weeks may produce some
> urgently needed policy course-corrections. Judge Laurence Zatkoff in the
> Eastern District of Michigan recently cleared the way for accelerated
> and wide-ranging discovery in connection with a suit brought by a
> Michigan Iraq war veteran, Kevin Murray, against the Treasury Department
> and Federal Reserve. Murray is challenging on constitutional separation
> of church-and-state grounds the practice of a U.S. government-owned
> company, the insurance conglomerate AIG, promoting Shariah-compliant
> products.
>
> It seems likely that the depositions that will now be taken by Murray's
> legal team securities litigator and Shariah expert David Yerushalmi and
> attorneys at the Thomas More Law Center, led by its director Richard
> Thompson will shed important light on the federal government's
> understanding of authoritative Islam's seditious program. It may also
> reveal the extent to which U.S. officials have, with their failure to
> comprehend the true nature of the threat we face, acted, either
> wittingly or unwittingly, in ways that have enabled it to metastasize
> further.
>
> Whether through the revelations of this law suit or through the work of
> influential legislators like Myrick, the time has come to recognize that
> even if we insist we are not at war with Islam, the authorities of Islam
> /are/ at war with us. Only by so doing can we connect with and empower
> our natural allies in this war Muslims who want to enjoy liberty in a
> Shariah-free America. And only by so doing, do we have a chance of
> prevailing.
>
>
> *Frank J. Gaffney Jr. is president of the Center for Security Policy, a
> columnist for the Washington Times, and the host of the nationally
> syndicated Secure Freedom Radio.*
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *2009*
>
> *Copyright 2009 ** All Rights Reserved*
>
> __,_._,___
>
>
> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Politics & Current Events" group.
> To post to this group, send email to
> politics-current-events@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> politics-current-events+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/politics-current-events?hl=en
> -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
>
> --
> Posted By Nimer Jaber to Nimer's Political Blog at 8/12/2009 02:48:00 PM
>
blind_html
To unsubscribe, please send a blank email to
blind_html-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
with unsubscribe in the subject line.
To access the archives, please visit:
//www.freelists.org/archive/blind_html
Thanks
Other related posts:
