Pro-American Demonstrations Prove Not All Muslims Hate The US

Today in Benghazi and Tripoli Libya there were large demonstrations, with a different twist: These demonstrators were protesting against the terrorists and in favor of the US.  A wide range of ages was represented, from small children to seniors - both men and women.  Signs were present in both Arabic and English - but no matter what the language, they were universally pro-American and anti-terrorist.

Some of the signs in English:

"Benghazi is against Terrorism"

"Christ Stevens Was A Friend To All Libyans"

"R.I.P. Christopher Stevens"

"Thugs and Killers Don't Represent Benghazi nor Islam"

"This does not represent us"

"Islam against terrorism"

"Libyans against TERROR, Murder is NOT Islam."

"We are sorry....."

Held by a small boy: "Sorry People of America this not the behavior of our Islam and Prophet"

In Arabic:

"No to al Qaeda, no to terrorism, this is a youth revolution."

"No No No to Al Qaeda."

In reference to the attackers and assassins, "Sorry prophet Mohamed, these are followers of Gaddafi."

"Sorry our prophet, sorry USA. Disloyalty not our character."

"We are NOT going to be new Somalia"

Given the fact that news reports now indicate that even those who protested against the "anti-Islam movie" were peaceful, and that the attack came from a small group of terrorists who used the demonstration as "cover", these demonstrations are not surprising.  The Libyan people do remember who stood with them as they fought for freedom - and they are willing to risk becoming targets of the terrorists in order to let us know.

What lessons can we learn from this?  Simple, we need to help Muslims gain their freedom, as we did in Libya.  If we don't, we risk all of these countries becoming like Egypt - were we did little to help the people gain their freedom - and they voted in the hard line Muslim Brotherhood.  Right now, Syria hangs in the balance.  With a small amount of help, the people could gain their freedom and deal a huge blow to Iran.  If we do that, the reaction of the Libyan people is an indication that they will not forget.  If we fail to help them, they will likely remember that too.

P.S. - According to Fox News, Libyan security forces took causalities, including several killed, in an attempt to protect our ambassador.  It has also been reported that the Libyan government has arrested some of the terrorists.  If true, this may indicate that they had minimal, if any public support - since it would appear that someone reported them.

Links:

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/09/does-not-represent-us-moving-photos-pro-american-rallies-libya/56803/

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162-57511998/libyans-express-shame-regret-over-deadly-attack/

http://www.facebook.com/pages/المركز-الليبى-للتوثيق/199587446754525

Fast and Furious Timeline and News Links - September 2012

Previous Page - Main Page - Next Page

September 9, 2012 - Fox News: New hearing set on Fast & Furious scandal

September 9, 2012 - Arizona Daily Star: Fast & Furious: Who knew what?

September 10, 2012 - The Hill: Oversight Chairman Issa forced to delay 'Fast and Furious' hearing

September 10, 2012 - Arizona Daily Star: Fast and Furious hearing in D.C. is delayed a week

September 10, 2012 - Fox News: Issa pushes back Fast and Furious hearing for DOJ’s inspector general report to next week

September 11, 2012 - Fox News: New report faults ATF, DOJ for Fast and Furious

September 11, 2012 - Fox News: EXCLUSIVE: Long-awaited 'Furious' report places blame on ATF, Justice

September 11, 2012 - Fox News: 'Fast & Furious' report lays blame on field agents, Justice

September 11, 2012 - Fox News: Medellin Cartel Gets Fast and Furious Guns

September 11. 2012 - The Daily Caller: Long-awaited Fast and Furious report places blame on ATF, DOJ

September 11, 2012 - Politico: Report: IG rips DOJ on Fast and Furious

September 11, 2012 - World Net Daily: 'Furious' report places blame on ATF, Justice

September 11, 2012 - UPI: Report places blame for 'Fast & Furious'

September 11, 2012 - Main Justice: Fast and Furious IG Report Tears Into ATF, DOJ Supervisors

September 14, 2012 - American Thinker: Fast and Furious Embodies Corruption at Highest Levels

September 16, 2012 - News 4 Tucson: Terry family speaks of healing and justice

September 17, 2012 - Orlando Sentinel: Family of slain border agent seeks answers

September 17, 2012 - Newsmax.com: Walberg: We Still Want Answers on Fast and Furious

September 17, 2012 - ticklethewire.com: Family of Slain Border Patrol Agent Speaks About Frustrations

September 18, 2012 - Human Events: 20 months later: Terry family still waits for answers

September 18, 2012 - Terra.com: Family of slain Border Patrol agent calls for "accountability"

September 18, 2012 - Fox News: Has the DOJ been using Media Matters to spin the press?

September 18, 2012 - Fox News: Did Media Matters, Justice Department cross legal lines?

September 18, 2012 - Fox News: Emails show Justice working with Media Matters on stories that target critics

September 18, 2012 - World Net Daily: Emails: Justice 'collaborates' with Media Matters

September 18, 2012 - Examiner.com: Emails reveal Department of Justice, Media Matters partners in spinning news

September 18, 2012 - The Daily Caller: Emails reveal Justice Dept. regularly enlists Media Matters to spin press

September 18, 2012 - The Daily Caller: Pavlich: DOJ using Media Matters to cover up Fast and Furious

Previous Page - Main Page - Next Page

Has President Obama Struck Out With Jewish Voters?

The largest group of pro-Israel voters in the U.S. are evangelical Christians, most of whom believe that the Jews have a divine right to a nation in the Holy Land.  For political purposes, one could include Mormons in this group.  The Obama administration does not care one bit about this group because most oppose his policies and traditionally vote Republican.  He wrote this group off long ago.

The second largest group of pro-Israel voters is the Jewish community in the U.S.  This group usually votes Democratic, and supported President Obama in 2008.  Conventional wisdom has always said that Democrats need their vote, especially in the swing state of Florida.  Now recent events seem to indicate that he may have written off Jewish voters too.  In my humble opinion, the Democrats and President Obama have struck out on the issue of Israel.

The first indication was when the Obama administration stated that the international community should not draw any "red lines" restricting Iran's nuclear weapons development.  Yep, they said that.  No red lines, the crossing of which would result in military action to prevent the nation that as said Israel should be "wiped off the map" from obtaining nukes.  Strike One.

The second indication was the 1st draft of the Democratic platform - approved in advance by Obama (as is the case when any president runs for re-election).  All references to God were omitted as was support for Jerusalem being the capital of Israel.  This was in stark contrast to the 2008 platform that contained both.  After an outcry from Christians of all stripes and other religious believers,  President Obama asked that they be reinserted.  A 2/3 vote was required - but it is clear that at best, only 50% of delegates voted for it.  No matter, the chair simply said it got 2/3rds, resulting in even more boos.  Strike Two.

The third indication happened today.  President Obama refused a request from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Nentayahu to meet in the United States this month while Nentayahu is in the U.S. for a UN meeting.  That's right, with Israel in danger of nuclear attack from a mad man in Iran, and time running out to stop it, President Obama has snubbed the Prime Minister of Israel.  How do you think this makes the average Israeli Jew feel about U.S. support?  I bet they are very glad that President Bush approved the sale of the weapons needed for a preemptive attack before he left office - because it appears highly doubtful that President Obama would have done so.  At this point, he seems more interested in distancing America from Israel as this crisis comes to a head - rather than sending signals that he supports the Jewish state.  Strike Three.

That's how I call it - but I am not the umpire, Jewish voters are.  I don't know for sure how they will call it, but I find it ironic that on the 11th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks there is a great deal of doubt if America really stands with Israel while they face a much, much greater threat.  A threat that could kill more Jews than have been killed since the Holocaust.  As they make their call, our Jewish friends should keep in mind President Obama's comment to Putin: "I will have more "flexibility" after the election".

Right On Brad Pitt!

Today's news informs us that Brad Pitt, widely known to be a political liberal, is also a gun owner and a gun rights advocate. My reaction is "Right on Brad Pitt!" While I am a political conservative, I believe that civil rights - including gun rights - are American rights that should be supported by all political parties.

I find it interesting that while the US mainstream media is basically ignoring this story, the British and commonwealth press is covering it extensively - and they are mostly slamming Brad Pitt. These folks need to remember that on April 19, 1775, British troops set out to confiscate the "assault weapons" of the day from the good citizens of Lexington and Concord. That event started the revolutionary war, and a battle in which the best army in the world got their butts kicked by a citizen militia.

Only one other nation has comparable feelings regarding personal gun rights: The Swiss. Yes, the nation known for being peaceful and neutral also love their guns and their gun rights as we do. They come in 2nd or 3rd in gun ownership - but that figure doesn't count hundreds of thousands of military "assault rifles" stored at home by members of their "militia army". These are fully automatic machine guns. Not only this, the Swiss government allows their soldiers to buy their military rifles upon discharge. In addition, the Swiss government provides ammunition at less than cost to anyone - military or not - who wants to practice at a target range. The Swiss have a "gun culture" that may be stronger than ours - perhaps that is why many of our federal agents and even some of our military units carry Swiss handguns.

If those in the UK - who 237 years later are still trying to dictate gun policy to their thankfully former colony - are right, blood should be running in every Swiss street. Instead, Switzerland is a peaceful nation with a history of democratic government nearly as long as our own (if not longer) and almost 200 years of unbroken peace. Even Hitler - who really wanted to invade - was afraid to take on this nation of "gun lovers". In addition, they have an extremely low crime rate. I wonder why? Could it be that Swiss criminals are afraid to break into homes armed to the teeth?

Brad Pitt is 100% right. Guns are a part of our culture - and they are not the cause of the violence in our society. The cause - and the solution - lies elsewhere.

Got Guns? Not For Long, Thanks To Obama And ATF

In a move that can only be described as chilling, the Obama administration has decided to authorize the ATF to seize anyone's firearms without convicting, or even charging them with, any crime.

 How can this happen?  Simple: Civil forfeiture.

Civil forfeiture has been used for decades in the drug war - and the abuses have been widely reported in a variety of media across the political spectrum.  Police departments - local, state and federal - have used it to seize any large amount of cash they may find.  They simply assert that the funds are "drug money".  The owner must then hire a lawyer and sue the government to get it back.  The process is long and the government wins if 51% of the evidence points to the cash being drug related.  No conviction is required.  The owner need not even be charged with any crime.

What happens to the money?  The police agency gets to keep it.  This creates a strong conflict of interest by creating a strong incentive to confiscate as much money as possible.

Even worse is how this system works in the real world.  If a cop seizes $500,000.00 in cash, it makes sense to spend $10,000.00 on a lawyer to attempt to get it back.  However, if that same cop seizes 5,000.00 from a business owner, hiring a lawyer at a cost of $10,000.00 just doesn't make sense.  Therefore, if a cop simply wants to raise money for his department, he knows that he can simply take any amount of money less than what it would cost to get it back.  As a result, in actions reminiscent of the classic small town speed traps, a few small town police departments have raised enough money to cover all of the departments expenses - including the salaries of the officers seizing the money.

Now the Obama administration has decided to extend this power to BAFTE, commonly called the ATF so they can sieze firearms under the same rules.  They have done so in the wake of the worst scandal in the agency's history - Fast and Furious.  This is saying a lot when one considered that this is the same agency that brought us Waco and Ruby Ridge.  Even if we fully accept the administration's view on Fast and Furious, it still raises questions about the honesty and reliability of ATF as an agency.

Now ATF will have the power to confiscate any firearm they wish, anywhere, any time.  For instance, if you buy a new gun they can literally stop you at the door of the store and confiscate the gun.  All they have to do is assert that you bought it to resell it to a drug dealer. (A straw purchase.)  You then must hire a lawyer and prove that you did not do that. One problem:  The lawyer costs more than the gun is worth.  You can just buy another gun cheaper.

This is only one way ATF can abuse civil forfeiture.  Effectively, they can now take any gun away from any one, any time, anywhere.  Unless the gun is worth a lot of money, they can be fairly sure you won't even try to get it back.

So, only weeks before the election, President Obama has proven that in spite of all the assurances to the contrary he really is out to take away our guns. 

Democratic Party Nearly Godless

No one expects political parties to become religious organizations, but it is important that those we elect recognize that the people have rights that are given by God, not granted by the government. Those of us who have observed the Democratic party were not at all surprised when the original draft of the party platform contained zero references to God. When this was discovered and highlighted by conservatives, President Obama intervened to get a single reference inserted. Even so, AT LEAST HALF THE DEMOCRATIC DELEGATES VOTED TO OMIT ANY REFERENCE TO GOD FROM THEIR PARTY'S PLATFORM. It is no wonder that a recent report documented the highest level of religious persecution ever in the US. BE SURE TO LISTEN FOR YOURSELF!