blind_html Traped

  • From: "Betteye" <the_boldens@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <blind_html@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 15:09:19 -0400

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> 


  *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* <>*.*

  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 

  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 

  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 

  *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.*


  *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 
  To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
  For more options, visit this group at

  Posted By Nimer Jaber to Nimer's Political Blog at 8/12/2009 02:48:00 PM

Other related posts:

  • » blind_html Traped - Betteye