A horrendous switch

This is what has happened all over Europe and Canada and it is coming to the USA faster than you can imagine!

The following is a copy of an article written by Spanish writer Sebastian Vilar Rodrigez and published in a Spanish newspaper on Jan. 15. 2011. It doesn't take much imagination to extrapolate the message to the rest of Europe - and to the rest of the world.

THIS WAS IN A SPANISH NEWSPAPER:
"EUROPEAN LIFE DIED IN AUSCHWITZ "

By Sebastian Vilar Rodrigez

"I walked down the street in Barcelona and suddenly discovered a terrible truth - Europe died in Auschwitz ...We killed six million Jews and replaced them with 20 million Muslims. In Auschwitz we burned a culture, thought, creativity, and talent. We destroyed the chosen people, truly chosen, because they produced great and wonderful people who changed the world.

The contribution of this people is felt in all areas of life: science, art, international trade, and above all, as the conscience of the world.

These are the people we burned.

And under the pretence of tolerance, and because we wanted to prove to ourselves that we were cured of the disease of racism, we opened our gates to 20 million Muslims, who brought us stupidity and ignorance, religious extremism and lack of tolerance, crime and poverty, due to an unwillingness to work and support their families with pride.

They have blown up our trains and turned our beautiful Spanish cities into the third world, drowning in filth and crime. Shut up in the apartments they receive free from the government, they plan the murder and destruction of their naive hosts.

And thus, in our misery, we have exchanged culture for fanatical hatred, creative skill for destructive skill, intelligence for backwardness and superstition. We have exchanged the pursuit of peace of the Jews of Europe and their talent for a better future for their children, their determined clinging to life because life is holy, for those who pursue death, for people consumed by the desire for death for themselves and others, for our children and theirs.

What a terrible mistake was made by miserable Europe.. A lot of Americans have become so insulated from reality that they imagine America can suffer defeat without any inconvenience to themselves. Recently, the UK debated whether to remove The Holocaust from its school curriculum because it 'offends' the Muslim population which claims it never occurred. It is not removed as yet. However, this is a frightening portent of the fear that is gripping the world and how easily each country is giving in to it.

It is now more than sixty years after the Second World War in Europe ended. This e-mail is being sent as a memorial chain, in memory of the six million Jews, twenty million Russians, ten million Christians, and nineteen-hundred Catholic priests who were 'murdered, raped, burned, starved, and beaten, experimented on and humiliated.' Now, more than ever, with Iran, among others, claiming the Holocaust to be 'a myth,' it is imperative to make sure the world never forgets.

The REAL Palestine

Many of you folks have been lied to or not done your homework on the Palestinian situation! Let me give you a brief history and if you don't like this, I am hoping to get tickets for you on the next failed flotilla headed to Gaza. You are an idiot and I will be glad and maybe lucky if you won;t be around to vote anymore! It is long past the time we should cut off ALL funding to these muslim scum! obama, our usurper in chief has TRIPLED the money going there with YOUR money! Lets get to the facts:

In the spring of 1964, while the Vietnam War was underway, the space program had brought close up photos of the moon, and the Beatles were topping the charts; the Arab League convened to try and find a way to complete the ethnic cleansing of Jews from Israel. They had tried it once before in 1948, with incomplete results. Back then, the Arab forces had managed to capture and ethnically cleanse the eastern half of Jerusalem, as well as seizing and annexing the West Bank and Gaza. But for 16 years, Israel had managed to frustrate their designs by stubbornly continuing to exist.

What the Arab governments wanted was a terrorist organization that could cross the border and carry out attacks inside Israel. And they wanted plausible deniability so that Israel and the UN couldn’t hold them responsible for those attacks. And so cloaked in a lot of smoke and mirrors about “Palestinian Arab nationhood”, the Palestine Liberation Organization was born.

The PLO had three tasks, to harass Israel through terror, to cultivate a fifth column inside the country that would come into play in an invasion, and to make it seem as if the Arab world wasn’t a bunch of genocidal maniacs, but wanted to destroy Israel in the name of “Palestinian rights”.

The Arab League had never believed in an independent Palestinian state. Even while they were creating the PLO, Jordan had already annexed the West Bank. And Gaza was in Egyptian hands. The PLO’s purpose was not to liberate these areas, or even to govern them. Its own charter made that abundantly clear.

Article 24. This Organization does not exercise any regional sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, in the Gaza Strip or the Himmah area. Its activities will be on the national popular level in the liberational, organizational, political and financial fields.

The PLO’s own founding charter had already conceded that the West Bank was not part of Palestine, and instead recognized Jordan’s annexation of the area. When the PLO talked about “liberating” Palestine, it only meant the parts of Israel that the Arab League members had not succeeded in seizing in 1948. When the PLO talked about liberating Palestine, up until 1967, it had nothing to do with the West Bank or Gaza, it simply meant destroying Israel.

It was not until 1967, when the latest Arab League attempt to “drive the Jews into the sea” failed, that the PLO began talking about their rights to Gaza and the West Bank. Previously they had staged terrorist attacks on Israel from bases in Gaza and the West Bank, under the sponsorship of Egypt and Jordan. After Israel reclaimed Gaza and the West Bank, and reversed the ethnic cleansing of Jews carried out in 1948, the PLO began focusing on the territories that their sponsors had lost in 1967, rather than just those they had lost in 1948.

From its founding, the PLO had always been a tool of larger movements in the Arab Muslim world

From its founding, the PLO had always been a tool of larger movements in the Arab Muslim world. It began as a tool of Arab Socialism, and Pan-Arabism, the dream of a single Arab state encompassing the entire Arab world. An Arab socialist Caliphate. Even while agitating for the Palestinian cause, Shukairy went on promoting Pan-Arabism, in which there would be no independent Palestine. But then again an independent Palestine had never been the point.

By the 70’s and 80’s, the PLO had become a poisoned knife that cut the hands of its wielders. This is the common enough fate of those who create terrorist groups and imagine that they can control them. The PLO had managed to commit a number of terrorist atrocities in Israel, and Arafat, the 3rd successor to Shukairy, had become a household name. But it had achieved nothing except headlines.

In the seventies, the PLO attempted to seize control of part of Jordan, which after all compromised the majority of the Palestine Mandate. But the PLO was brutally suppressed by the Jordanian regime of King Hussein, and was expelled from the country. It tried the same thing again in Beirut a few years later, trying to carve a “Second Palestine” out of Lebanon. It failed again, with horrifying results for the entire country.

By the late eighties, the PLO was done. Egypt had made a peace deal with Israel. Jordan had a tacit understanding with Israel under the table. Syria was the only Arab country bordering Israel that was still somewhat supportive of the PLO, but it had little use for the PLO as a terrorist organization inside Israel, because the PLO was Arab, and the Golan Heights which Syria hoped to conquer was Druze. Instead Syria was far more interested in using the PLO to spread chaos in Lebanon for its own purposes.

Had Israeli and American leaders not chosen to engage in act of breathtaking stupidity bordering on treason, the PLO would have faded away by now, much the same way that Habash’s PFLP has. Its Arab Socialism was already dated. It had been created to pave the way for another invasion of Israel by the Arab Powers that after 1973 seemed to be permanently on hold. After Jordan and Lebanon, no one in the Arab world trusted Arafat anymore. And with the Soviet Union in decline, the PLO was swiftly running out of backers. 

In a better world, by 2004, Arafat’s death would been a historical footnote putting an end to what had once been a serious terrorist threat.

But instead the PLO was rescued, given its own state and army, along with billions of dollars from the United States and Europe. A terrorist organization created in order to destroy Israel, that had been brutally expelled from two Arab countries, was given its own autonomous territory inside Israel. Words like madness and treason are almost too good and rational a description for this course of action. But corruption is the only one that properly suits.

In the late eighties, the PLO had become a weapon without a wielder. The PLO had gained its influence from its ability to cause chaos, but Israel’s intervention in Lebanon had robbed it of even that. While the foreign press couldn’t get enough photos of masked stone throwers onto their front pages, the reality is that the PLO’s influence existed mainly in the media. The PLO had come full circle, to become just as irrelevant as it had been in 1964. But then the United States decided that it could become the PLO’s wielder.

The Saudi infiltration of the American government meant there was still a small body of very influential people in the foreign policy establishment who kept repeating over and over again, that a “settlement” to the Israeli-Palestinian was vital to the stability of the region. The media helped keep this slogan in circulation with editorials and news stories. And successive administrations kept on pressuring Israel to reach a “settlement”.

In 1991, the US pressured a conservative Israeli government into participating in the Madrid Conference. The negotiations failed to achieve anything, but for the first time Israel was forced to negotiate with terrorists. Israel’s conservative government collapsed, and was replaced with a left wing coalition that conducted further illegal negotiations with the PLO. Those negotiations ratified under Clinton’s benevolent smirk in the Rose Garden, brought the PLO back with a vengeance.
 
Given territory and troops, Arafat reverted back to his old formula. He would cause chaos through terrorism in order to gain more power. The plan worked like a charm. Arafat recognized that Arab Socialism was done, and he Islamized the Palestinian Authority. The educational system under the authority of the PA taught a primal Islamic hatred for Jews and other infidels. The cult of the suicide bomber provided religious authority to support PLO terrorism. And what had been a mild terrorist problem before Arafat was given a state inside Israel, became a horrifying nightmare afterward.

Via Fatah, the PLO was treated as a political party. Through Fatah’s control over the Palestinian Authority, it was treated as a government. Terrorist attacks were attributed to various “extremist” or “militant” subgroups, whom naturally Arafat couldn’t control. Even though Arafat’s own militias were engaging in terrorism, the US pretended that it had nothing to do with Arafat or the PA or Fatah. Just more “extremists” and “militants” trying to disrupt the peace process. A process which involved Israel making concessions while under fire.

Clinton had taken ownership of the accords, and predictably refused to admit that anything was wrong, until the very end, when Arafat laughed at his dreams of a final status agreement. Only then did Clinton belatedly realize that Arafat was not interested in peace. But then why would Arafat have ever been interested in peace? The PLO was a terrorist organization. Its ideology called for the destruction of Israel. It gained nothing from peace, except the end of its legitimacy.

The new Bush Administration initially got it. It treated Arafat as a pariah, and avoided the constant drumbeat of criticism and demands for concessions from Israel that had been common under Clinton. Colin Powell as Secretary of State had little power and influence over Bush, and was in any case busy with the War on Terror. Once again the PLO seemed to have reached a dead end. Without American political influence protecting Arafat, Israel was able to respond to PLO terrorism by smashing into Arafat’s compound and seizing important documents that showed Arafat’s involvement in terrorism.

But in 2004 Arafat died. Colin Powell announced his resignation that same year. The old Bush Dream Team of people like Rumsfeld and Cheney lost their influence. And the new single most influential figure was the new Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice. Rice had been heavily influenced by James Baker, the architect of the Madrid disaster. She had been a board member of Chevron, a company that had been formerly known as the Arabian American Oil Company or ARAMCO. Like Baker, Rice was an eager tool of the Saudis, and the old foreign policy came back with a vengeance.

The PLO’s prospects were revived again under Rice. The death of Arafat had brought forward a seemingly more suitable replacement. Mahmoud Abbas, a KGB trained operative, had become a useful compromise candidate. Abbas wore a suit, spoke softly and was generally considered ineffectual and useless by potential rivals who allowed him to hold the top spot as a figurehead. 

Bush Jr liked Abbas a good deal more than he had liked Arafat. Once again weapons and money began flowing to the PLO. And once again Israel was pressured to make more concessions to the terrorists.

There was one problem. The PLO had become a hollow shell. The Palestinian Authority government that the US and the EU had spent billions on, was nothing more than a facade. The real money was going into the bank accounts of top officials and used to buy the loyalty of street militias. But money wasn’t enough anymore. And the tide was coming in.

Arafat had accurately foreseen that Islamic terrorism was the future, but he hadn’t hopped far enough or fast enough on the bandwagon. Hamas had gotten there before him. And Hamas had its own sources of financing and weapons, primarily from Iran. Like the PLO, Hamas was a weapon, but not of Pan-Arabism, but of Pan-Islamism. Hamas had been carved out of the Muslim Brotherhood, its ideal was that of the Caliphate, its mission was Jihad or religious war. Like the PLO, Hamas did not take the idea of Palestinian independence seriously. But unlike the PLO, its allegiance to a Global Caliphate was part of a rising tide of Islamic terrorism.

Hamas was a weapon with a purpose. The PLO no longer had a purpose anymore. As Fatah, it bought loyalty with American dollars and European euros. As the PA, it denounced Israel and demanded negotiations which it had no interest in participating in. Its only real backers anymore were in Washington D.C. and in Brussels, which meant that it had become the foreign element in the region. When Rice pushed for open elections, Hamas won, and Fatah lost. When Rice pushed Abbas to suppress Hamas, the militias that had been happy to take American dollars, ran as fast as they could. Hamas took Gaza. And Abbas has been left sitting in Ramallah, while pretending to run a state.

And so now we come to the latest turn of the wheel. The PLO is reaching the very end of its relevance. There is no chance whatsoever of Fatah retaking Gaza. The only reason Hamas hasn’t taken the West Bank, is because Israeli soldiers are in the way. But Israel’s blockade of Gaza, has allowed Hamas to build ties with Western anti-war groups. Regionally, Egypt is still backing Fatah, but Erdogan’s Turkey has thrown its weight behind Hamas. Syria and Iran are heavy Hamas supporters.

There are only so many ways this can play out. The likeliest of them is that some key Fatah leaders will broker a compromise with Hamas, and change sides. Iranian money will be used to buy the loyalty of key militias. There will be a few days of light fighting, followed by a few hundred executions. Maybe more. And then Hamas will rule in both Gaza and the West Bank. No amount of effort by American generals to train Palestinian Authority “police” will change that. And extracting concessions from Israel will only put more territory in the hands of Hamas.

But US foreign policy on Palestine has never been based on any kind of reality. In Washington D.C., they’re certain that Salam Fayyad’s reforms will fix everything. That all Abbas needs is a “modern” police force and the situation will reverse itself. Of course it will not. And any attempt at another election will quickly show why. Meanwhile the refusal to hold elections, exposes Abbas and Fayyad as a sham, a puppet regime without any legal authority.

So naturally in the face of all this, Abbas is declaring statehood. It’s an insane last gamble by a leader with a vanishing base of authority and no real future. Instead of stepping back though, Abbas and Fayyad are playing out their final gamble at the UN.

Abbas doesn’t represent anyone, except the militias and bureaucracy that he pays with US and EU money. His term has expired. He has no legal status for conducting any negotiations. But you won’t read that in the press, which takes great care to blame Netanyahu for delaying negotiations, when in fact it was Abbas who repeatedly rejected direct talks, primarily because they may well end up being his death warrant.

The media and the Obama Administration remain wired into a purely “Blame Israel” mode. One story after another insists that the main obstacle to peace is a few private Israeli homes going up in Jerusalem or Judea and Samaria. It is as if Hamas’ control of Gaza doesn’t exist for them. The elephant in the room armed with rockets and suicide bombers, controlling all of Gaza, might as well be a non-issue, as far as they’re concerned. No one in the media asks when was the last time Abbas won an election. A minor issue that goes to the minor question of whether Abbas is even actually empowered to reach any binding agreements.

It might be 2011, but it might as well be 1996 or 2003 or any year in between. Except that the PLO’s power is about done. The negotiations don’t matter. Abbas will do his best to see that they fail, because it’s the only way he can survive his own people. And he needs to have the blame for the failure fall on Israel, because it’s the only way he can hang on to US and European support. As usual, nothing Israel can do will work, and whatever it does, it will get the blame. The media will go on chattering about settlements, as if that were the endgame here.

Statehood is a fiction that will move more money into the pockets of the Fatah elite, but it’s also a double-edged sword. Fatah’s only defense against a Hamas takeover is that it can extract territory through negotiations—something Hamas cannot do because it refuses to negotiate for anything but temporary truces. A unilateral statehood declaration, if taken seriously, would also mean the end of negotiations. That’s something Abbas can’t afford because then his usefulness to Hamas is at an end.

Abbas needs Israel to keep from being overrun by Hamas, but he needs Hamas to keep his image as the moderate alternative to those crazy guys in Gaza. The balancing act has drawn billions in foreign aid, but infuriated everyone. Now Abbas is playing an even more dangerous game, going for broke to shake down Israel and the world into giving him some breathing room. It’s a desperate move, but it may also work in the short term. In the long term though, the whole shebang is still doomed.

The Palestinian Authority is not a government, it’s a terrorist organization in suits and ties. It has shown that it is not self-supporting and not capable of running anything besides a rocket launcher. It existed only as long as it was useful to someone.

The PLO began life because it was useful to the Syrians and Egyptians. When they no longer wanted it, it was still useful to the USSR. When the USSR no longer wanted it, it became useful to America. But now it’s running out of sponsors.

The United States has been funding the Palestinian Authority since 1992 and it has gotten nothing for it

The United States has been funding the Palestinian Authority since 1992 and it has gotten nothing for it, and while the foreign policy establishment insists on blaming Israel for that, there’s only so long that game can go as well. The Bush Administration dumped Arafat and Abbas knows that sooner or later his turn will come. With no more options, no ability to reach a final status agreement and Western patrons whose foreign aid budgets will start tightening in the face of the bankruptcy, he is playing his only remaining card.

Either way the Palestinian myth is on the verge of flickering out. Hamas may talk about Palestinian rights, but it has even less interest in them than the PLO did. Hamas was spawned by the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood. Its goal is an Islamic state in Egypt and Gaza, and then all of Israel. It has replaced the Pan-Arabism of a Shukairy with a Pan-Islamism, that it meant to lead to a Global Caliphate. The leaders of Hamas are no less corrupt than Arafat’s cronies were, but it will take longer for the average Israeli Arab to figure that out.

The Arab and Muslim world has made very effective use of Israeli Arabs as terrorists and bullies. From the Lebanese Civil War, to the streets of Iran, where Palestinian Arab terrorists are being used as snipers and gunmen to suppress protests against Ahmadinejad, they have always been weapons. Ideology has served to frame a mythical Palestinian identity for them in terms that make them all into mercenaries, terrorists and martyrs. Where Israel took in Jewish refugees, the Arab world deliberately perpetuated an Arab refugee problem in order to turn them into weapons. Once they were the weapons of Arab Socialism. Now they are the weapons of Islam. 

Obama foreign policy financing the extermination of all blacks in Tripoli?

Well I am sure this will never hit the mainstreet media!

Obama’s war was in fact unauthorized by Congress and therefore unconstitutional, the picture of the total moral breakdown of the US foreign policy is complete

The blood of the ongoing murder of migrant blacks in Tripoli has a name on it many will never see: President Barack Obama and his Foreign Policy.
Gadaffi is gone; his family safely ensconced in Algeria and the Obama-supported rebels left in charge are now conducting a “large scale cleaning in the areas under their control with the extermination of all blacks in the capital”, according to The Independent.Without the permission of Congress and minus the blessing of We the People, Obama took the US to war in Libya.  He sided with the rebels and ultimately, in effect the “extermination of all blacks”, which was bought and paid for with $839 million American.
There is no proof that the blacks being exterminated—lynchings in many cases—are pro-Gadaffi fighters but increasingly reasonable claims that they are migrant workers, working on construction jobs turned down by native Libyans.“The oil reserves of Libya made the Gaddafi family rich, and also gave Gaddafi the opportunity to invest in developing the infrastructure of the country in order to bribe the population which has been restless for a long time due to the high levels of corruption and bureaucratic red tape. The gigantic construction projects started by Gaddafi required more – and better educated – workforce. Some of it came from Eastern Europe and the Middle East. The bulk of the immigrant workers came from Sub-Saharan Africa. (Independent.co.uk, Aug. 27, 2011).

“Tribalism and racism have always been strong in Islam, especially in those areas of the Arab world which border black Africa – Sudan, Ethiopia, Mauritania, Mali. Libya’s population has always been divided into different tribal groups and driven by strong tribal chauvinism; in fact, the bulk of the rebel army fighting against Gaddafi consists of men of tribes traditionally hostile to Gaddafi’s own tribe, and his most loyal supporters come from his own tribe. In addition to the strong tribal feelings, Libya also has a history of racism, as powerful Arab warlords in the 18th and 19th centuries made fortunes by selling black slaves to the markets in North Africa and the Middle East. Widespread racist views have always been common in the Arab world, and Libya has them too.”

Was it only Hurricane Irene which kept this story from having legs?
A Canada Free Press (CFP) cursory Google search proves that as of yet no major American media outlet has picked up and run with the Independent story.
Bojidar Marinov picked up the story and ran it on his blog godfatherpolitics.com yesterday in the hopes of making it go viral.
A reformed missionary to his native Bulgaria for over 10 years, Marinov preaches and teaches doctrines of the Reformation and a comprehensive Biblical worldview.  Having founded Bulgarian Reformation Ministries in 2001, he and his team have translated over 30,000 pages of Christian literature about the application of the Law of God in every area of man’s life and society, and published those translations online for free.  He has been active in the formation of the Libertarian movement in Bulgaria, a co-founder of the Bulgarian Society for individual Liberty and its first chairman.
“Now, The Independent reports, we have crowds of armed men without any authority or self-restraint to control them, roaming the streets of Tripoli, rounding up every black migrant worker they can find, tying their hands behind their backs and executing them on the spot. The excuse is that those are “Gaddafi loyalists,” but the truth is, no one has been able to provide the proof that these migrant workers actually fought on the side of the dictator. The score-settling is clearly racist, motivated by racist hatred. There is no economic reason for it, for the migrant workers often took the lowest paying jobs that Libyans seldom take,” Marinov wrote.

“Apparently, Obama’s administration involved America in a war without much preparation, without clear understanding of the American interests in the region, and without the slightest effort to ensure the protection of the rights of civilians caught in the war. After proving he is not the “peace” president that the politically motivated Nobel Committee declared him to be, Obama now proves that the last thing he cares for is the protection of black Africans.
“America’s support for the rebels in Libya will prove to be just as harmful to the US position in the region as Clinton’s wars in Yugoslavia in the 1990s when America backed the corrupt, uncivilized and brutal Muslim clans in Bosnia and Kosovo whose main business was smuggling drugs and sexual slaves to Western Europe, and who after the American troops secured their territory, conducted ruthless ethnic cleansing – just as what the Libyan rebels are doing now. When we add to this the fact that Obama’s war was in fact unauthorized by Congress and therefore unconstitutional, the picture of the total moral breakdown of the US foreign policy is complete.”

Thanks to American Thinker.com we already know about Obama’s ties to Gadaffi before the bloody revolution in Libya.
“Last year, right around the time Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi called Obama “our son”, Obama earmarked $400,000 for two Libyan charities. (Camie Davis, American Thinker, July 17, 2010).  “The money was divided between two foundations run by Gaddafi’s children; Gaddafi International Charity and Development Foundation, run by his son Saif, and Wa Attassimou, run by his daughter Aicha.  What noble causes did our tax dollars potentially help support thanks to Obama’s generosity?

“Funding of the ship Amalthea: The Amalthea sailed to Israel with the intent of breaking the Israeli blockade on Hamas.  It carried aid for a pseudo humanitarian crisis and supporters who were said to be “keen on expressing solidarity with the Palestinian people in the plight amidst the siege imposed on Gaza”.  The ship was funded by Saif Gaddafi’s charity,  Gaddafi International Charity and Development Association.  Obama’s friend, Bill Ayers, joined attempt # 1 against Israel’s blockade on Hamas.  Saif joined attempt # 2.  One has to wonder which of Obama’s friends will step up to the plate at attempt # 3.”

Meanwhile, the mewlings of the United Nations in the face of so much civilian bloodshed is absurd.  While black migrant workers are being rounded up, have their hands tied behind their backs and are being executed on the spot, The UN has issued another piece of paper, “an urgent call for restraint by both sides in the aftermath of the Tripoli takeover”.

THE SOURCE OF THE PRESIDENT'S ANTI-ISRAELISM

 We all know how obama views the Jews and his disdain for Israel, but where did he get it? He obviously has refused to read their history, yet he is so pro-muslim. A frightening thought on its own.  As with this black gentleman below, I too have anti-Jewish sentiment in my family...which is neither black nor Jew. By now I think it is very obvious where I stand on this issue. I,  for some reason have always backed the underdogs and the Jews have been at the top of that pile.  Here is what E.W. Jackson has to say on obama:

 Why Obama is Opposed to Israel

A BLACK AMERICAN CLERGYMAN POINTS TO THE SOURCE OF THE PRESIDENT'S ANTI-ISRAELISM

Like Barack Hussein Obama II, I am a graduate of Harvard Law School. I too have Muslims in my family. I am black, and I was once a leftist Democrat. Since our backgrounds are somewhat similar, I perceive something in Obama's policy toward Israel which people without that background may not see. All my life I have witnessed a strain of anti-Semitism in the black community. It has been fueled by the rise of the Nation of Islam and Louis Farrakhan, but it predates that organization.

We heard it in Jesse Jackson's “HYMIE town” remark years ago during his presidential campaign. We heard it most recently in Jeremiah Wright's remark about “them Jews” not allowing Obama to speak with him. I hear it from my own Muslim family members who see the problem in the Middle East as a “Jew” problem.

Growing up in a small, predominantly black urban community in Pennsylvania , I heard the comments about Jewish shop owners. They were “greedy cheaters” who could not be trusted, according to my family and others in the neighborhood. I was too young to understand what it means to be Jewish, or know that I was hearing anti-Semitism. These people seemed nice enough to me, but others said they were “evil”. Sadly, this bigotry has yet to be eradicated from the black community.

In Chicago, the anti-Jewish sentiment among black people is even more pronounced because of the direct influence of Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam. Most African Americans are not followers of “The Nation”, but many have a quiet respect for its leader because, they say, “he speaks the truth” and “stands up for the black man”. What they mean of course is that he viciously attacks the perceived “enemies” of the black community – white people and Jews. Even some self-described Christians buy into his demagoguery.

The question is whether Obama, given his Muslim roots and experience in Farrakhan's Chicago, shares this antipathy for Israel and Jewish people. Is there any evidence that he does? First, the President was taught for twenty years by a virulent anti-Semite, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright. In the black community it is called “sitting under”. You don't merely attend a church, you “sit under” a Pastor to be taught and mentored by him. Obama “sat under” Wright for a very long time. He was comfortable enough with Farrakhan – Wright's friend – to attend and help organize his “Million Man March”. I was on C-Span the morning of the march arguing that we must never legitimize a racist and anti-Semite, no matter what “good” he claims to be doing. Yet a future President was in the crowd giving Farrakhan his enthusiastic support.

The classic left wing view is that Israel is the oppressive occupier, and the Palestinians are Israel's victims. Obama is clearly sympathetic to this view. In speaking to the “Muslim World, “he did not address the widespread Islamic hatred of Jews. Instead he attacked Israel over the growth of West Banksettlements. Surely he knows that settlements are not the crux of the problem. The absolute refusal of the Palestinians to accept Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state is the insurmountable obstacle. That's where the pressure needs to be placed, but this President sees it differently. He also made the preposterous comparison of the Holocaust to Palestinian “dislocation”.

Obama clearly has Muslim sensibilities. He sees the world and Israel from a Muslim perspective. His construct of “The Muslim World” is unique in modern diplomacy. It is said that only The Muslim Brotherhood and other radical elements of the religion use that concept. It is a call to unify Muslims around the world. It is rather odd to hear an American President use it. In doing so he reveals more about his thinking than he intends. The dramatic policy reversal of joining the unrelentingly anti-Semitic, anti-Israel and pro-Islamic UN Human Rights Council is in keeping with the President's truest – albeit undeclared red – sensibilities

Those who are paying attention and thinking about these issues do not find it unreasonable to consider that President Obama is influenced by a strain of anti-Semitism picked up from the black community, his leftist friends and colleagues, his Muslim associations and his long period of mentor-ship under Jeremiah Wright. If this conclusion is accurate, Israel has some dark days ahead. For the first time in her history, she may find the President of the United States siding with her enemies. Those who believe, as I do, that Israel must be protected had better be ready for the fight. We are.

NEVER AGAIN!

E. W. Jackson is Bishop of Exodus Faith Ministries, an author and retired attorney

 

la raza Funding Skyrockets After Obama Hires Its VP

This racist mexican terrorist group should be defunded, charged with sedition, jailed and then deported! Yet you are paying millions a year in tax-payer dollars to put them in a cushy Washington, DC office building to protect mexican/OTM [Other Than mexican], cop, border patrol, ATF and other law enforcement killers, human/drug smugglers and illegal aliens. Where is the media on this?

NCLR Funding Skyrockets After Obama Hires Its VP

A Judicial Watch investigation reveals that federal funding for a Mexican La Raza group that for years has raked in millions of taxpayer dollars has skyrocketed since one of its top officials got a job in the Obama White House.

The influential and politically-connected National Council of La Raza (NCLR) has long benefitted from Uncle Sam’s largess but the group has made a killing since Obama hired its senior vice president (Cecilia Muñoz) in 2009 to be his director of intergovernmental affairs.

Ignored by the mainstream media, Judicial Watch covered the appointment because the president issued a special “ethics waiver” to bring Muñoz aboard since it violated his own lobbyist ban. At the pro illegal immigration NCLR, Muñoz supervised all legislative and advocacy activities on the state and local levels and she was heavily involved in the congressional immigration battles that took place in the George W. Bush Administration.

She also brought in a steady flow of government cash that’s allowed the Washington D.C.-based group to expand nationwide and promote its leftist, open-borders agenda via a network of community organizations dedicated to serving Latinos. Among them are a variety of local groups that provide social services, housing counseling and farm worker assistance as well as publicly-funded charter schools that promote radical Chicano curriculums. Judicial Watch published a special report on this a few years ago.

This week a JW probe has uncovered details of the alarming increase in federal funding that these NCLR groups have received since Muñoz joined the Obama Administration. In fact, the government cash more than doubled the year Muñoz joined the White House, from $4.1 million to $11 million.

Not surprisingly, a big chunk of the money (60%) came from the Department of Labor, which is headed by a former California congresswoman (Hilda Solis) with close ties to the La Raza movement. Since Obama named her Labor Secretary, Solis has launched a nationwide campaign to protect illegal immigrant workers in the U.S.Just this week Solis penned declarations with Guatemala and Nicaragua to preserve the rights of their migrants.

The NCLR also received additional taxpayer dollars from other federal agencies in 2010, the JW probe found. The Department of Housing and Urban Development doled out $2.5 million for housing counseling, the Department of Education contributed nearly $800,000 and the Centers for Disease Control a quarter of a million.

Additionally, NCLR affiliates nationwide raked in tens of millions of government grant and recovery dollars last year thanks to the Muñoz factor. An offshoot called Chicanos Por La Causa (CPLC) saw its federal funding nearly double to $18.3 million following Muñoz’ appointment.

A social service and legal assistance organization (Ayuda Inc.) that didn’t receive any federal funding between 2005 and 2008 got $600,000 in 2009 and $548,000 in 2010 from the Department of Justice. The group provides immigration law services and guarantees confidentiality to assure illegal aliens that they won’t be reported to authorities.

Are the dems playing the race card?

In short, they always have. This is a subject that is very close to my heart and has been since I was a kid. I hung around skateboarding in a black neighbourhood and I learned from an early age that when I was in trouble or hurt, people tried to help...ALL people, regardless of skin colour. Nobody was thinking "Its a white kid, let him fend for himself" they were just as concerned. These incidents quickly dispelled what I and society in general thought and were told about 'other' races. I also learned that by telling people that the status quo was wrong, that ALL people cared, I found myself talking to a brick wall. Few listened or wanted to hear it and fewer yet believed me. Although things have changed a lot on the personal level, racial divides are alive and well in politics, which saddens me immensely. Some of these people from my childhood are and still family to me.

 In politics, divorcing the races has moved to new levels and unfortunately it tends to work. Divide and conquer comes to mind and we see it in our left wing media on a daily basis.

 Last week, Congressman Clyburn reached into his deck, discarded the queens, aces and jokers, and played the ‘Race Card’. “The fact of the matter is, the president’s problems are in large measure because of the color of his skin,” quoth Clyburn. Not the economy, an unwanted war or a politician who acts like a social butterfly while his constituents shovel spam from jars and dine on government cheese. It’s the color of his skin.

 But does anyone seriously think that if Obama had brained himself with a golf club early in his term, that Biden wouldn’t be equally besieged by angry voters and the political opposition? And unless Biden successfully pulled a Clinton, and claimed to be America’s third black president, he would have had to do it all without the benefit of a race card.

We have discovered that just about anything you can say about Obama, besides ‘Messiah’ is some sort of racist code word. Two years it was revealed that calling him a socialist is racist. This week we learned that calling him European is also a slur. Calling him a ‘European Socialist’ might just qualify as a hate crime.
This isn’t really about racism. If it were, much more overtly racist comments made in private by top Democrats like Harry ‘light-skinned with no negro dialect’ Reid or Bill ‘Obama would be getting us coffee’ Clinton, would have lasted for more than a 5 minute news cycle of outrage. It’s about the political uses of race. The bigotry farming that makes racism into a constant part of the political landscape.

To Democrats, racism isn’t a problem. It’s a solution

To Democrats, racism isn’t a problem. It’s a solution. Their speeches about looking forward to the end of racism, are as genuine as oil executives talking about the day when we get all our energy from the sun. Sure it sounds good in theory, but it would also put them out of business. One day we’ll all join hands and sing about brotherhood. But today we’ve got to go on MSNBC and explain how objecting to higher taxes is coded racism.
The Democrats have played both sides of the racial divide going on a century and a half. They have been the Klansmen and the civil rights activists. The bully club boys and the reformers. If you can think of a position on race, you can find a Democrat hiding behind it. In politics they call that ‘divide and conquer’. And from segregation to desegregation, that has been their game. Create and exploit divisions. Then promise to heal them.

The civil rights legacy of the Democratic party is one of pandering to white and black racists

The civil rights legacy of the Democratic party is one of pandering to white and black racists. From George Wallace to Al Sharpton, the Democratic party has played host to racists of both colors. And Asa Earl Carter who penned Wallace’s ‘Segregation Forever’ lines, also wrote Oprah’s favorite book about a little Indian boy suffering from discrimination. Over the course of two decades, the party reinvented itself along with George Wallace as the ‘anti-racists’.  But this was a change in orientation, not in ideology.
Depression era economic malaise had served the big government agenda under FDR. But economic boom times forced the party to shift their narrative from the economy to race. Eisenhower showed that the Republicans couldn’t be beaten on the old economic social justice line anymore. But healing racial conflict was another matter.
The Democratic party had no more interest in repairing the racial divide, than they had in repairing the economy. What they wanted was an issue that would allow them to broaden government control over the states and lock in a voting base in a state of perpetual poverty. And so they began the transition from poverty hucksters to racial hucksters. Just as today the party is moving from racial hucksterism to environmental hucksterism. Forget the first black president and stay tuned for the rise of the very first green president.
The successful capitalization of race has created fortunes, but not for those most affected by it. It deepened racial tensions, as it was designed to do. At no juncture did the Democratic party really try to make things better. What they did best was pose and preen against the backdrop of suffering. That is still what they do today. The entire industry of declaring things racist, that occasionally shows up on MSNBC is the perpetuation of George Wallace’s old segregationism under new colors.
The unreason of it isn’t limited to the United States. In England, Camden decided to rename Selous Street after Nelson Mandela. Why Selous Street? Because there was a Fredrick Selous, who was an African explorer and colonialist, even if Selous Street wasn’t actually named after him, but the painter Henry Courtney Selous. The painter Selous had to have his name purged, because it was the same as that of another man entirely, to make way for a politically correct terrorist.
Like Cinna the Poet, in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, the politically correct mob cries, what matter if he’s Selous the Colonialist or Selous the Painter. It is no matter, his name is Selous. Tear him apart for his paintings, if not his colonialism. The dialogue on Obama is equally irrational. Distant connections are made with the one aim of proving that his critics are racists. Birthers have nothing on Racers, who can turn anything from Socialist to European into racial invective.
Was it racist when Gingrich called Obama the “food stamp president”. The discussion itself is a tangent, because regardless of what you think of Gingrich or Obama—47 million Americans are still on food stamps. The Newspeak of political correctness obsessively parses language, while ignoring consequences. It would rather rename streets, than take on the poverty and social dysfunction living on them. It pretends to be concerned about racism, when it is only concerned about the political exploitation of race.

No sooner does a Republican candidate rise up, then the media rings the race bell

No sooner does a Republican candidate rise up, then the media rings the race bell. Even if it’s as pathetic as accusing Romney of slurring Obama by calling him a European. An obvious reference to the nation’s long history of anti-European racism. But while the bell keeps ringing, the dogs have stopped salivating. The stimulus reflex has been broken and cries of racism only lead to yawns. That is the final tragic legacy of the Democratic party’s exploitation of racism. Their exploitation has killed any interest in actual racism. They have spent so much time crying wolf, that no one pays attention anymore.
America’s racial problems have always been economic at heart, whether it was plantation owners realizing that African slaves they never had to set free were a better deal than indentured Irish servants , or the net effect of black migration to northern cities in search of jobs that vanished when the soldiers began coming home, or the present day segregated government subsidized economy that provides selective opportunities to minorities while cutting them off from the larger marketplace. The rise of Mexican illegal immigration and its impact on both whites and blacks is part of that same economic narrative.
The Democratic party used race to build socialism. Rather than aiming for a post-racial society, they exploited segregation and deepened racial tensions, to implement their long term agenda. That agenda is passing through one final phase. The race card is being played out. And when that’s done, the party will turn its focus elsewhere. And black people will once again be left behind by a party that no longer has any use for them.