Thursday, December 3, 2015
Patriots. IMPORTANT. Difference between Sikhs and Muslims. Please read and share!
PATRIOTS: KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN INDIAN SIKH WITH A TURBAN & ISLAMIC/MUSLIM HEADGEAR:
Most Americans mistake Sikhs for Muslims due to their turbans, which often
makes Sikhs targets of attacks meant for Muslims.
I urge all those who read this to find a Sikh person with a Turban and let him know that you appreciate him for being a loyal American. He may not sound like you, but 99.9% of them are 100% loyal to America. In 130 years there has never been a Sikhs act of Terror against America.
ISLAM HAS BEEN AT FOR HUNDREDS OF YEARS!!
DESERT PEOPLES & MUSLIM TERRORISTS have long used the turban to keep sand out of their faces, as this man from Africa is likely doing. Members of nomadic tribes have also used turbans to disguise themselves. And sometimes, the color of a person’s turban can be used to identify his tribal affiliation from a distance across the dunes. This man’s turban is a very light blue. In some parts of North Africa, blue is thought to be a good color to wear in the desert because of its association with cool water.
KNOWING THE DIFFERENCE CAN SAVE YOUR LIFE
Friday, November 27, 2015
ISLAM AND THE WHITE SLAVE TRADE.
LEARN REAL HISTORY ABOUT HOW MUSLIMS HAVE TREATED WHITES WHEN THEY CONTROL THEIR WORLDS!
Did you know that Muslims branded white slaves with hot irons – then as well as now
“There
is a long history of girls being kidnapped from Europe and ending up in
Morocco [and from there to Turkey and Saudi Arabia].”
— Portugese police on child abduction
— Portugese police on child abduction
A Medieval painting showing Muslims branding Caucasian girls
captured in sex-slave raids into Christian Europe. Muslims who purchased
such girls in Islamic slave markets had them branded with red-hot
irons.
.
WHEN EUROPEANS GOT INTRODUCED TO ISLAM:
American and European historians have studied all aspects of the
enslavement of Africans by whites, but have deliberately ignored the
slavery of whites by North Africans, during approximately the same
period as the transatlantic traffic, and which devastated hundreds of
coastal communities. In the thought of today’s nations, slavery is only
of blacks, while the Mediterranean slave history is, in fact, more
horrible than American slavery. UNESCO behaves with hypocrisy obscuring
trafficking in Arabia and Africa, while forgetting the history of abuse
of Europeans.Muslim invasions, theft, mass murders, rape waves, booty raids, slave raids, wars continuing from 620 AD until as late as 1920 AD without interruption, destroyed the entire European Classical and Medieval civilization leaving nothing but a shell.
.
Why is there so little interest in the slavery that took place in the Mediterranean while the education and reflection on the slavery of blacks never ends? As the slaves of white masters, white slaves do simply not fit “the master narrative of European imperialism”. Patterns of victimization so dear to intellectuals require white wickedness, not white suffering. For centuries, Europeans themselves lived in fear of the whip. With a little effort, it is possible to imagine the Europeans concerned about slavery as much as blacks. If the Europeans had grievances regarding the slaves of the galleys in the same way that blacks have grievances for workers in the fields, European policy would be certainly different. There would be no creeping excuses for the “Crusades”.
Muslims attacked our countries
relentlessly on slave and booty raids. From 620 AD onwards reaching all
the way into 1920 AD there was not a single year of peace from Muslim
aggression. How come our children are not being taught the truth in
school? Because oil trade and Arab financing demand that people should
be lied about Islam. Therefore, all trade must cease once and for all,
completely, with all Muslim nations.
The current Western mentality mode demonstrate severe amnesia about his unfortunate story of its own people forced into slavery of whites, submitted by hundreds and hundreds of thousands to the ferule (submission) of islam (more a million during the 16th and 17th centuries and subsequently). This Treaty of white surpasses in number the digits of the slave which is estimated at 800,000 people, so there was more annually razzies white slave than Africans deported to the Americas, this trade, they practiced for centuries and it remains today, one of their unfortunate specialties (Mauritania) and elsewhere in some Muslim countries.
Muslims negotiating the price of a
European slave captured in slave raids across Europe. Over 6 million
Europeans are estimated to have been taken as slaves, although the
numbers are likely much higher considering these raids continued for
more than 1,000 years. It is due to these raids that Europe has a
history of repeated bans on slavery since the 1300’s, that constantly
failed.
.
When the Arabs began to arrive in Vieste (South of the Italy) in
1554, they kidnapped 6,000 whites. The Algerians took 7,000 slaves in
the same year in the Bay of Naples. Spain also suffered large-scale
attacks. After a raid on Grenada in 1556, which reported 4,000 men,
women and children captured into slavery, they were told that it was
“raining Christians on Algiers”, and that these raids dropped the price
of slaves so much that slave masters could “barter a Christian for an
onion”. The appearance of a large fleet could scare an entire population
inland, emptying the entire coastal regions. The Muslims did not object
to desecrate churches and often ignored the bells, to reduce to silence
the distinctive voice of Christianity..
Between 1530 and 1780, there were almost a million and a half of white European Christians enslaved by Muslims of the Barbary Coast. This surpasses the generally accepted figure of 800,000 Africans transported to the colonies in North America and later in the United States. There has been estimates of 3 – 6 million Europeans being taken into slavery. But considering that the slave raids and attacks were relentless for over 1,000 years and not the 250 years from 1530 to 1780, we can presume these numbers are highly understated.
Not only were the white slaves goods, but they were above all infidels, and deserved all the suffering of a master imposed them. Christian slaves were often so abundant and so cheap that he had no interest in their well-being or prolonged health, if at least from an economic perspective, and many owners worked them until premature death and quickly bought replacements.
The Christian West occupied only the third place on the podium of slavery. Twelve million people were deported to the Caribbean and the Americas. But others have done worse on the second step of the podium, there… blacks enslave themselves (Blacks against blacks), which produced at least 200 million captured people sold in Muslim slavery for 14 centuries.
MUSLIM SLAVERY TODAY: SAUDI ROYAL FAMILY OWNED USA CHILD SEX/REPRODUCTIVE SLAVES
“I would like to come back to my United States family. I really want to see my Dad who I was closest but I have two children by the Prince now, a boy and a girl. I never see him unless I am fertile. I feel close only to my children because I have no way out. I would like to live back in the United States with them but I don’t see that ever happening because the Prince is my master and I am his girl.”
— – A USA child reproductive slave in Saudi Arabia note smuggled out by an Asian area work slave assigned to her.
.
ARABIAN PENINSULA AND THE INTERNATIONAL SEX SLAVE TRADE
The Arabian Peninsula inhabitants have long been involved in purchasing slaves. Up until recently, most of these slaves were purchased in Africa. With the advent of oil wealth the Saudi princes have been able to extend their slave purchases throughout the world. This has enabled the Saudi princes to become more selective and specialized in their tastes for slaves.
The Saud family continue to be the prime purchasers on the international slave trade and are known as high end buyers. The Saudi Arabian Government continues to refuse to sign the United Nations treaties on slavery or other human rights issues because they do not want to be subject to their provisions.
They will not sign extradition treaties even with Washington.
They constantly declare they are free of slavery but will not allow international scrutiny. We will deal with the kidnaping of US male and female children by Saudi princes and their associates in this issue. We will substantiate the pattern of abuse using documented occurrence where the princes and their associates have been caught.
.
STATE DEPARTMENT SENSITIVITIES TOWARDS THE SAUDI ARABIAN INTERNATIONAL SLAVE TRADE
It has been an open secret in Washington that the State Department has been extremely sensitive to criticism of its actions regarding Saud Arabia and its princes. There has been an unusual amount of personnel turnover at the Saudi Arabian desk where officials showing the slightest tendency towards ethics and morality are either transferred or terminated to make an example to others.
Why the State Department sensitivity? There are things going on in Saudi Arabia which are so embarrassing to Washington that if the United States citizenry knew, their worst fears about Washington would be corroborated. We will deal with one of these sensitivities in this issue, child abduction by Saudi princes. This is one of several issues we have been reluctant to publish because of the emotional ramifications to families of children who have been abducted around the world in general and the United States in particular.
We had to balance what the Saud princes involved in these abductions would do upon publication. In considering publishing this article against the potential benefits of making known their actions, we chose the latter. The humanitarian action would be for the Saudi Arabian Government to return the sex slaves to their US families so they could receive hospitalization and rehabilitation. We believe this will be considered impractical because of the numbers as well as the legal and political ramifications.
We have seen time and time again US media reported scandals when slaves of Saudi princes and their associates brought into the United States try to escape. The State Department then intervenes on behalf of the Saudi princes with diplomatic or retroactive diplomatic immunity.
This is the same Saudi Arabia who Financed Hussein Obama's Education at Harvard.
http://www.wnd.com/2012/09/saudi-billionaire-did-help-obama-into-harvard/
Saudi Arabia's Funding of American Mosques
Today, it has been estimated that 80 percent of American mosques are
under Wahhabi influence, described by both scholars and U.S. officials
as a radical, violent philosophical platform used by terrorists and
their supporters to justify violence against Christians, Jews and other
"non-believers."
This is part of the Obama Agenda!!
YOU SHOULD KNOW & WANT TO STOP IT!
Thursday, November 26, 2015
Can MARCO RUBIO serve as President or Vice President. REad and tell me what you think!
As much as one may like a Candidate... you must love the Constitution MORE.
The question must be addressed. Can Marco Rubio legally serve as President or Vice President of America. Is it allowed by the Constitution as it is written.. TODAY!
Rubio is, quite simply, not a "natural-born citizen" by the accepted legal, English-language standard as it has been known throughout American history. He was born in Florida to two non-U.S. citizen parents.
I know this question is not a popular notion among Republicans who support either Rubio or Ted Cruz.
Remember it wasn't popular among Democrats when we challenged Obama's eligibility.
Shouldn't the Constitution always trump political expediency ?
You cannot be a Consistent Conservative with principles to Restore America .... IF you apply on standard of Obama and another standard for Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio.
If we don't adhere to the Constitution on matters as significant as Presidential eligibility, then the Constitution ceases to be a meaningful document for guiding our nation.
If not then, it becomes the kind of living document that many liberals have claimed it should be - ever changing to new circumstances. Who knows when someone can then challenge the 2nd amendment and change that too?
Here are the facts:
Mario and Oriales Rubio became naturalized U.S. citizens on Nov. 5, 1975, four years after Marco Rubio was born.
That's really all you have to know. That simple fact — one not in dispute — disqualifies him legally, barring an amendment to the Constitution or a complete and deliberate misinterpretation of the Constitution, from being president or vice president.
Those are the only two offices in the U.S. that have such a requirement.
The definition of natural-born citizen approved by the first U.S. Congress can be seen in the Naturalization Act of 1790, which regarded it as a child born of two American parents. The law, specifying that a natural-born citizen need not be born on U.S. soil, stated: "The children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond sea, or out of the limits of the United States shall be considered as natural born citizens: Provided, that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States."
While the act was repealed five years later, it, nevertheless, represented the will of the Congress that someone with dual loyalties not lead the U.S.
Rep.John Bingham of Ohio, a principal framer of the 14th Amendment, affirmed in a discussion in the House on March 9, 1866, that a natural-born citizen is "born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty."
"The Law of Nations," a 1758 work by Swiss legal philosopher Emmerich de Vattel, was read by many of the American founders and informed their understanding of law later established in the Constitution.
Vattel specified that a natural-born citizen is born of two citizens and made it clear that the father's citizenship was a loyalty issue: "The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. ... In order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country."
Significantly, when the U.S. Senate resolved in 2008 that Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., the Republican presidential nominee, was a natural-born citizen, it specified that his parents were American citizens.
The non-binding resolution, co-sponsored by then-Sen. Obama, stated that McCain — born to two American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936, "is a 'natural-born citizen' under Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States." Slick don't you think? It made sure that McCain would not challenge Obama's Status! Two peas in an illegal pod scheme!
Of course, this raises a question: What about Obama? It's a good question — and goes right to heart of all the controversy about Obama's eligibility for the last four years. He is not eligible. He never was. It doesn't matter where he was born. It never did. What mattered — and still matters — is who his parents were. According to Obama and the limited and questionable documentation he has provided to date, his father was a Kenyan student who never became a U.S. citizen.
Therefore, he NEVER met the test of eligibility. The fact that he has reluctantly provided highly questionable documentation to establish his birth in Hawaii is irrelevant, except that it suggests he is trying to obscure the real facts and the real substance of his eligibility. I guess if his father was Frank Marshall Davis we might have another discussion. A DNA test could help to set the record straight once and for all!!
But now... back to the issue of Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz. It would by hypocritical and wrong and set a dangerous precedent for all section in our Constitution if we accept the Leftis notion that the Constitution is not ABSOLUTE!!
America permited an ineligible Obama to serve as president by a de facto changing of the constitutional standard through neglect and ignorance for the future. Now if we look the other way for our Candidates we have lost our moral high ground with regards to the Constitution and we open the door for interpretation of every ammendment!
Sure if America wants to have a national debate about the meaning of this requirement, let's have it in ways allowed by the Constitution. If not dissolve the Constitution and start anew ( that would be Revolution). But let's not allow conventional expedient wisdom on this matter to become so corrupted that we accept this on our side blithely as though it does NOT MATTER because it affects our Candidate's eligibility. If we do we have become political bastards just like them. We have no standing in the future!
And let's not stumble into nominating a president or vice president who tests the boundaries of eligibility in such a monumentally important election in 2016.
WE MUST STAND ON PRINCIPLE OR LOSE OUR REPUBLIC !
Can TED CRUZ legally serve as President or Vice President? Read and tell me what your think.
I like Ted Cruz.. I really Do!
....but in this extremely volatile dangerous world can we afford any controversy when it comes to choosing our NEXT President? We cannot afford the controversy of the Obama Citizenship issue in our ranks. We need a total true focus on winning without any distractions
Here is the Cruz Citizenship Timeline (documented)
This is an authenticated timeline of known facts concerning the citizenship of Senator Ted Cruz.
I like Ted Cruz,
I have been doing some detailed research and some gut wrenching soul
searching and I have come to the conclusion that Ted Cruz is ineligible
to be President or Vice President.Sure there are many scholars who have argued that Cruz like Obama are both "Natural Born Citizens" but read the post and tell me why I am wrong?
I really like Cruz and wanted him to be Donald Trump's VP and then go on to be the President 8 years from 2016 but I cannot in good conscience endorse him after the research I have done. Ted Cruz is a great American who would be a great VP to Trump and President in the future, but if I am to be consistent I cannot support Cruz in those two positions. I do this with a heavy heart, but the Constitution trumps my emotions.
FACTUAL CRUZ CITIZENSHIP TIMELINE
(Everything presented in this timeline is a matter of public record.
All of it is based upon publicly reported events, public statements made by
Rafael Cruz, Ted Cruz, officials with the Elect Ted movement or US
and Canadian officials."
1957 - After working
as a teen to help Fidel Castro gain power in Cuba, and being imprisoned for his
actions by the Batista regime, Cuban Rafael Cruz applies for admittance
to the University of Texas as a foreign student and enters
the US on a four year student visa to attend four years of college. He is a
Cuban citizen attending a US college on a student visa obtained through the US
Consulate in Havana.
1961 – 1962 After graduating college at
the University of Texas, and upon the expiration of his student visa, Cruz Sr.
applied for and received “political asylum” and was issued a “green card”. A green card is a permit to
reside and work in the United States, without becoming a
“citizen” of the United States, in this case, under
political asylum from Castro’s Cuba. His citizenship status was that of a Cuban
national living and working in the United States, under a green card work
permit. According to US laws, the “green card” holder must maintain permanent
resident status, and can be removed from the United States if certain
conditions of this status are not met.
1964-1966 Cruz Sr.
takes a few odd jobs, marries and moves
to Canada to work in the oil fields. The Cruz family resides in Canada for the
next eight years. “I worked in Canada for eight years,” Rafael Cruz says.
“And while I was in Canada, I became a Canadian citizen.” – (From an
interview with NPR )
1970 - Ted Cruz is born in Canada, to two parents who had lived in Canada for at least four years at that time, and had applied for and received Canadian citizenship under Canadian Immigration and Naturalization Laws, as stated by Rafael Cruz. As a result, US statutes would have voided the prior “green card” status which requires among other things, permanent residency within the United States and obviously, not becoming a citizen of another country during the time frame of the US green card.
1970 - Ted Cruz is born in Canada, to two parents who had lived in Canada for at least four years at that time, and had applied for and received Canadian citizenship under Canadian Immigration and Naturalization Laws, as stated by Rafael Cruz. As a result, US statutes would have voided the prior “green card” status which requires among other things, permanent residency within the United States and obviously, not becoming a citizen of another country during the time frame of the US green card.
1974 The Cruz family moves to the United States
when Ted is approximately four years old. Rafael Cruz has publicly stated that
he remained a citizen of Canada until he renounced his Canadian citizenship
when he applied for and became a US Naturalized citizen in 2005. As a result,
his wife and son were also Canadian citizens, his son being born a citizen of
Canada in 1970.
2005 - Rafael Cruz applies for legal
US citizenship and renounces his Canadian citizenship. No record of Ted
renouncing his Canadian citizenship or applying for US citizenship exists as of
2005
2013 Freshman Senator
Ted Cruz is a rising star in the Tea Party movement, and calls
for him to run for the White House begin. in July,
Ted Cruz is questioned by the press about his interest in running for President, and
the issue of his Canadian born citizenship is brought up
August 2013 As Ted’s political stock rises , so do press
questions about his eligibility for office. Ted decides to
quiet the questions by releasing his birth certificate, which now becomes absolute proof of
Ted’s Canadian citizenship at birth, 1970, Calgary. The release of the Canadian birth records only serve
to further fuel the controversy
Ted seeks legal counsel, as the media is now pressing members of
Canadian Immigration and Naturalization to clear the matter up, when
instead, Canadian officials confirm the Ted Cruz was in fact born a
legal citizen of Canada, the son of two parents who had also applied for
and received Canadian citizenship prior to Ted’s
birth.
Generally speaking, under the Citizenship Act of 1947, those born in Canada were automatically citizens at Birth unless their Parent was a foreign diplomat.
So Ted’s Legal counsel advises Ted to “renounce his Canadian citizenship” in order to make himself eligible to run for the Presidency. Of course, renouncing one’s original citizenship only further proves one’s original citizenship.
May 2014 Ted Cruz legal counsel files to renounce Ted’s Canadian citizenship in an effort to make him eligible to run for high office under the natural born Citizen clause Article 11 in the US Constitution.
Austin, TX Ted Cruz has
given up his citizenship from his birth country of Canada.
News that he had renounced his citizenship was
first reported by the Dallas Morning News. The newspaper also broke that
Cruz had dual Canadian- US Citizenship when he released his birth certificate in August.
However the
Constitution does not require that one be only an American citizen, but
rather a natural born Citizen.
SO
THE CONTROVERSY RAGES ON AS TO WHO IS A “NATURAL BORN CITIZEN” IF OBAMA IS NOT.. THEN TED CRUZ IS NOT!!
My
question remains .. CAN WE AFFORD THE DISTRACTION OF THE CONTROVERSY? AMERICA’S
POSITION IS SO PRECARIOUS THAT I PREFER A CLEAN PATH
This problem exists for Marco Rubio as well.
A “natural born Citizen” of the United States is a child born in the USA of two (2) U.S. Citizens. The parents can be Citizens by Birth or they can be Citizens by Naturalization after immigrating to the USA. But to create a “natural born Citizen” of the United States both parents must be Citizens at the time the child is born in the USA. See this legal reference book used by the founders and framers of our Constitution: Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law, Vol.1 Chapter 19 Section 212, Emer de Vattel, 1758-1797. The overwhelming majority (probably 85%+) of citizens in the United States are natural born Citizens.
This clause was added for future presidents as a national security clause. It is from the group of natural born Citizens that our founders prescribed in the presidential eligibility clause in Clause 5, Section 1 of Article II of the U.S. Constitution that we shall choose a President and Commander in Chief of our military as a strong check against foreign influence via birth allegiances on the person in that singular and most powerful office. One needs all three citizenship legs to be a natural born Citizen and have sole allegiance and claim on you at birth to one and only one country — the United States: 1. Born in the USA. 2. Father must be a U.S. Citizen (born or naturalized). 3. Mother must be U.S. Citizen (born or naturalized). Like a three legged stool if you take away any of these three citizenship legs of the Article II constitutional intent and requirement to being a natural born Citizen, i.e., being born with unity of citizenship in and sole allegiance to the USA, the child is born with more than one country’s citizenship and claim of allegiance/citizenship on them at their birth and thus they are NOT a natural born Citizen of the United States. And as in the analogy of a stool designed to stand on three legs and it is missing a leg, it falls down, likewise the person’s claim to natural born Citizenship fails if the person does not have all three citizenship legs required to be a natural born Citizen at the time of their birth.
SO IF WE AS CONSERVATIVES ARE TO APPLY THE SAME STANDARD FOR ALL.. IT IS WITH A HEAVY HEART THAT I MUST CONCLUDE THAT TED CRUZ IS NOT ELIGIBLE TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT OR VICE PRESIDENT. HE WOULD MAKE AN AWESOME ATTORNEY GENERAL.
This problem exists for Marco Rubio as well.
A “natural born Citizen” of the United States is a child born in the USA of two (2) U.S. Citizens. The parents can be Citizens by Birth or they can be Citizens by Naturalization after immigrating to the USA. But to create a “natural born Citizen” of the United States both parents must be Citizens at the time the child is born in the USA. See this legal reference book used by the founders and framers of our Constitution: Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law, Vol.1 Chapter 19 Section 212, Emer de Vattel, 1758-1797. The overwhelming majority (probably 85%+) of citizens in the United States are natural born Citizens.
This clause was added for future presidents as a national security clause. It is from the group of natural born Citizens that our founders prescribed in the presidential eligibility clause in Clause 5, Section 1 of Article II of the U.S. Constitution that we shall choose a President and Commander in Chief of our military as a strong check against foreign influence via birth allegiances on the person in that singular and most powerful office. One needs all three citizenship legs to be a natural born Citizen and have sole allegiance and claim on you at birth to one and only one country — the United States: 1. Born in the USA. 2. Father must be a U.S. Citizen (born or naturalized). 3. Mother must be U.S. Citizen (born or naturalized). Like a three legged stool if you take away any of these three citizenship legs of the Article II constitutional intent and requirement to being a natural born Citizen, i.e., being born with unity of citizenship in and sole allegiance to the USA, the child is born with more than one country’s citizenship and claim of allegiance/citizenship on them at their birth and thus they are NOT a natural born Citizen of the United States. And as in the analogy of a stool designed to stand on three legs and it is missing a leg, it falls down, likewise the person’s claim to natural born Citizenship fails if the person does not have all three citizenship legs required to be a natural born Citizen at the time of their birth.
SO IF WE AS CONSERVATIVES ARE TO APPLY THE SAME STANDARD FOR ALL.. IT IS WITH A HEAVY HEART THAT I MUST CONCLUDE THAT TED CRUZ IS NOT ELIGIBLE TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT OR VICE PRESIDENT. HE WOULD MAKE AN AWESOME ATTORNEY GENERAL.
Saturday, October 17, 2015
OBAMA DITCHES US FLAG FOR ARABIC GOLD CURTAINS. Obama also has an Islamic Wedding Ring.
Have you too noticed that the decor at the White House has
changed since Barack Hussein Obama moved in.
The Oval Office is now stripped of the traditional red, white, and blue, and replaced with middle eastern wallpaper, drapes, and decor. The hallway that he walks out of to talk to the press now has middle eastern chairs, drapes, etc.
The Oval Office is now stripped of the traditional red, white, and blue, and replaced with middle eastern wallpaper, drapes, and decor. The hallway that he walks out of to talk to the press now has middle eastern chairs, drapes, etc.
And the thing
that has bothered me the most is the bright yellow drape behind him
every time he speaks from the white house. Hideous Billious Yellow Gold.
It's supposed to be a Middle Eastern Style Curtain with exotic Middle Eastern style prints on it, to subtly symbolize his Islamic allegiances and has been there from the beginning.
It's supposed to be a Middle Eastern Style Curtain with exotic Middle Eastern style prints on it, to subtly symbolize his Islamic allegiances and has been there from the beginning.
What is missing at Barack Hussein Obama's press conferences most of the time?
No it is not the teleprompters. See the other president's pics for a clue.
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA (aka BARRY SOETORO)
GEORGE WALKER BUSH
WILLIAM JEFFERSON BLYTHE CLINTON
GEORGE HERBERT WALKER BUSH
RONALD WILSON REAGAN
That's right...no American flags and if there ever is one.. they are coyly and obscurely placed as an after thought so that the Hideous Yellow Gold Silk brocade is front and center.!!!
So do you believe it was just an accident! It is intentional. So I ask, why is it intentional?
He told you he would change America, didn't he? He also said all this....
Yes here is another Picture
Its a Gold Arabic Vanity Curtain...
GEORGE HERBERT WALKER BUSH
RONALD WILSON REAGAN
That's right...no American flags and if there ever is one.. they are coyly and obscurely placed as an after thought so that the Hideous Yellow Gold Silk brocade is front and center.!!!
So do you believe it was just an accident! It is intentional. So I ask, why is it intentional?
He told you he would change America, didn't he? He also said all this....
Yes here is another Picture
Its a Gold Arabic Vanity Curtain...
THEN THERE IS OBAMA'S
WEDDING RING..
As a student at Harvard Law School, then-bachelor Barack Obama’s practice of wearing a gold band on his wedding-ring finger puzzled his colleagues.
Now, newly published photographs of Obama from the 1980s show that the ring Obama wore on his wedding-ring finger as an unmarried student is the same ring Michelle Robinson put on his finger at the couple’s wedding ceremony in 1992.
Moreover, according to Arabic-language and Islamic experts, the ring Obama has been wearing for more than 30 years is adorned with the first part of the Islamic declaration of faith, the Shahada: “There is no God except Allah.”
The Shahada is the first of the Five Pillars of Islam, expressing the two fundamental beliefs that make a person a Muslim: There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is Allah’s prophet.
Sincere recitation of the Shahada is the sole requirement for becoming a Muslim, as it expresses a person’s
rejection of all other gods
Egyptian-born Islamic scholar Mark A. Gabriel, Ph.D., examined photographs of Obama’s ring at WND’s request and concluded that the first half of the Shahada is inscribed on it.
“There can be no doubt that someone wearing the inscription ‘There is no god except Allah’ has a very close connection to Islamic beliefs, the Islamic religion and Islamic society to which this statement is so strongly attached,” Gabriel told WND.
“Dreams from My Real Father” producer Joel Gilbert, an Arabic speaker and an expert on the Middle East, was the first to conclude that Obama’s ring, reportedly from Indonesia, bore an Islamic inscription.
Photographs published last week by the New Yorker from Obama’s time at Occidental College, taken by fellows students, indicate that the ring Obama wore three decades ago is the one he is wearing in the White House.
As WND reported in July, previously published photos have shown Obama wearing a gold band on his wedding-ring finger continuously from 1981 at Occidental, through graduation at Columbia in 1983, in a visit to Africa in 1988 and during his time at Harvard from 1988 to 1991. But none, until now, have displayed the ring with enough detail to identify it as the one he currently is wearing.
WND reported a satirical edition of the Harvard Law Review published by students in 1990 contains a mock Dewers Scotch profile advertisement poking fun at Obama. Among a list of Obama’s “Latest Accomplishments” is: “Deflecting Persistent Questioning About Ring On Left Hand.”
The comment suggests the ring was a subject of student curiosity at the time and that Obama was not forthcoming with an explanation.
He still has not explained why he wore the band on his wedding-ring finger before he married Michelle.
The Occidental ring
The photographs published last week by New Yorker magazine indicate Obama was wearing the ring at Occidental College.
One photo shows Obama sitting alongside Occidental roommate Hasan Chandoo in 1981, apparently waiting for a meal to be served.
In the above photo, the ring’s design can be seen, including a series of parallel bars that distinguish its outer circumference.
Declaration
Gabriel, born to Muslim parents in Upper Egypt, grew up immersed in Islamic culture. He memorized the Quran at age of 12 and graduated in 1990 with a Masters degree from the prestigious Al-Azhar University in Cairo, the preeminent Sunni Muslim institution of learning.
He explained that on Obama’s ring, the declaration “There is no god except Allah” (La Ilaha Illallah) is inscribed in two sections, one above the other. On the upper section, “There is no god” is written in Arabic letters, from right to left: Lam, Alif, Alif, Lam, Ha. On the lower section is “except god,” written in Arabic letters from right to left: Alif, Lam, Alif, Alif, Lam, Lam, Ha.
In the lower section, the word “Allah” is written partially on top of the word “except,” noted Gabriel, the author of “Islam and Terrorism” and “Journey Inside the Mind of an Islamic Terrorist.” It is common in Islamic art and Arabic calligraphy, especially when expressing Quranic messages on jewelry, to artfully place letters on top of each other to fit them into the allotted space.
The exhibit below shows how the Arabic inscription fits over the two parts of the Obama ring.
‘I have known Islam on three continents’
Filmmaker Joel Gilbert, an expert on Islamic history, noted Obama wore the ring during his high-profile speech in Cairo on June 4, 2009, in the first months of his presidency.
“Now we have a new context for what Obama meant when he told the Islamic audience in Cairo that he has ‘known Islam on three continents,” Gilbert said. “He also told the Cairo audience that he considered it part of his responsibility as president of the United States ‘to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.’ All religious Muslims are by definition required to defend Islam.”
The Obama wedding ring
The ring was mentioned in a New York Times article in 2009 recounting the Obamas’ wedding.
In the story, Jodi Kantor described its “intricate gold design,” noting it came from Barack Obama’s boyhood home of Indonesia and was not traditional, like Michelle’s.
Kantor wrote:
Just before the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. pronounced Barack Obama and Michelle Robinson man and wife on the evening of Oct. 3, 1992, he held their wedding rings – signifying their new, enduring bonds – before the guests at Trinity United Church of Christ. Michelle’s was traditional, but Barack’s was an intricate gold design from Indonesia, where he had lived as a boy.
There was no mention in the article that Obama already had been wearing the ring for more than a decade.
The photos of the ring from the 1980s can be compared with more recent photos, such as the ones published by the Huffington Post in 2010 in an article by Anya Strzemien, “Obama’s ‘Intricate’ Indonesian Wedding Band
gold, Arab vanity curtain.
gold, Arab vanity curtain.
Saturday, October 10, 2015
If you want a strong Republican Led Congress for the next 12 month... WE NEED NEWT GINGRICH
FRIENDS. IF YOU WANT A STRONG REPUBLICAN CONTROLLED CONGRESS WHO WILL STAND UP TO HUSSEIN OBAMA.....YOU HAVE A MORAL OBLIGATION TO DO THIS..
➡Please read and share and Act Now. We have 10 Days from October 10th before the Vote in the House
➡ We Conservatives desperately need a SPEAKER of the House of Representatives who has proved his Political Conservative Cred (once again) during the 2012 Republican Presidential Campaign and yes actually almost beat Romney.
Newt Gingrich is the most experienced House of Representative's Politician who could fill the seat of SPEAKER.
➡ ➡ ➡ Here is the LINK to find the number of your Congressman
This Is Newt's Facebook Page. Go there and ask him to accept the Position.
Some other good names have been floated like Allen West and and Rudy Gulliani and others but the fact is that to be a competent Speaker of the House.. you need a "specialized skill set" and not just an ideology. Its a SKILL. NEWT HAS THEM.
Here are some of his accomplishments. Some Kool Aid Drinkers will call him an NWO... or a Progressive... but these facts are re-searchable. OK let me also be clear I do not agree with him 100%. Like his view of the Pope... but being Speaker of the house.. is about Containing HUSSEIN OBAMA AND THE LEFTIST SENATE AND THE OLIGARCHS!
Yes...Newt has a long history of accomplishments. He faced down GHW Bush over proposed tax increases; the face-off actually shut down the government. It led Bush to endorse Romney. Yes its GHW Bush who is the NWO, Agenda 21 president & he does not endorse Newt.
He faced down Clinton, cut spending, balanced the budget, reduced the debt and reformed welfare. He is the only person in modern history to cut the size of government. Clinton said he can work with people to get things done.
He ushered in a Republican take-over of the house for the first time in 40 years; everyone said it couldn’t be done.
The Washington Times has called Newt Gingrich “the indispensable leader” and Time magazine, in naming him Man of the Year for 1995, said, “Leaders make things possible. Exceptional leaders make them inevitable. Newt Gingrich belongs in the category of the exceptional.”
Newt served on the Defense Policy Board under President George W. Bush, which provided strategic counsel to the Pentagon and Secretary of Defense on how to better address threats facing the United States. He is also the longest-serving teacher of the Joint War Fighting course for Major Generals at Air University and taught officers from all five services.
In 2003, Newt founded the Center for Health Transformation to develop free market healthcare reforms to foster a 21st Century System of health and healthcare that is centered on the individual
He is the only Speaker in the history of Modern America to have
* Four consecutive balanced budgets
* Over $500 billion of debt paid off
* Major welfare reform accomplished
* 11 million new jobs for America
* Unemployment falling to under 4%.
It takes negotiating skills and a firm understanding of issues and procedures and a whole lot of courage to dare a lawless president to do something illegal.
Some of you are touting Paul Ryan.... !! Really ? Nice guy but he choked when Joe Biden said "Boo" in the VP Debates.
Newt Gingrich for Speaker
Republicans should rattle the political system by bringing back the former speaker.
There are a number of things that recommend him for the job – most of all the fact that it is almost certain he doesn't want it. His return to the office would not mark a return to power or to the political life so much as it might be the act of a modern day Cincinnatus returning to the arena not out of ambition but because he is needed. It would be a call by Conservative America for a champion to deal with a increasingly despotic President backed by an emboldened Leftist/Progressive movement that sees abject weakness in the current gaggle of Republicans.
Gingrich is primarily a teacher. As the restored head of the Republican conference in the House, he would have the opportunity to mentor his more junior colleagues in the art of governing and leadership modeled on his successful "Listen, Learn, Help, Lead" formula.
As to the complaints from the back benches that Boehner and his leadership team have been too timid and too accommodating when it comes to taking on Obama, remember: Gingrich is the man who took on Bill Clinton, who on his worst day was a far cagier and far better politician than Obama will ever be at his absolute best. Gingrich will get more than he has to give up.
So come on people be smart and swallow your political pride and induct some who can do the job and does not actually want it. He will have no ulterior motive than to help HIS country survive the last of a LAWLESS Period in American History.
Look we will EVEN HAVE ONE EXTRA VOTE IN THE HOUSE!!
☎ Please contact your Congressman and blast his office with demands that he Vote for Newt Gingrich as Speaker. We need 247 Votes....☎
Here is the LINK to find the number of your Congressman
This Is Newt's Facebook Page. Go there and ask him to accept the Position.
PLEASE SHARE ...
More Info...
When you need the "Plumbing fixed"... you call the Plumber. When you need stuff Exterminated you call the Exterminator.
Look do not let your heart rule your logical mind. Using all the rules of Congress is not for someone who has not been there and done that! This position needs someone who has the experience and the skills in Congress to maneuver through all the arcane rules and regulations and play to win.
There are only a few people with the experience of how to negotiate with the asshole who is President right now ( That would be Obama ) like New Gingrich can. Remember his fiery Debate Performances in 2012?
He is a Conservative and I challenge anyone to produce any evidence to the Contrary. ( A video with Pelosi is not proof.. get real! )
And here is more proof that he left hates his guts:
YES WE NEED A MAN LIKE NEWT GINGRICH FOR SPEAKER:
Please read my post and understand my Logic.
We need an outsider with no POLITICAL "RE ELECTION" AGENDA OF HIS OWN THAT MAKES HIM NEED TO APPEASE.
HE HAS BEEN THERE BEFORE... HE HAS THE GUTS TO SHUT DOWN GOVERNMENT TO REIN IN SPENDING AND HAS WON AGAINST BILL CLINTON.
HE KNOWS THE MOVES AND THE EXPERIENCE!
READ HIS CONTRACT WITH AMERICA THAT HE GOT THROUGH !!
http://www.rialto.k12.ca.us/rhs/planetwhited/AP%20PDF%20Docs/Unit%2014/CONTRAC7.PDF
NEW GINGRICH... WAIT YOU SAY....HE IS NOT IN THE HOUSE.. YES.. ALL THE BETTER..
Read MY POSTULATION.. THEN TELL ME WHY YOU DISAGREE!
✨
CONSIDER AND SHARE THIS ON YOUR WALL AND IN EVERY GROUP YOU BELONG TO... TIME IS SHORT !!
THIS COULD BE A STOP GAP MEASURE!! CONSIDER THIS OPTION PATRIOTS:
NEWT Gingrich for Speaker of the House of Representatives: He worked with Clinton and knows how to kick DEMOCRAT ass!!
Here is the Scenario.
THE Speaker of the United States House of Representatives:
The Constitution DOES NOT require that the Speaker be an elected Member of Congress.
The Speaker of the United States House of Representatives (or Speaker of the House) is the presiding officer of the chamber. The office was established in 1789 by Article I, Section 2 of the United States Constitution, which states in part, "The House of Representatives shall choose their Speaker...
The Constitution DOES NOT require that the Speaker be an elected Member of Congress.
The Speaker is second in the United States presidential line of succession, after the Vice President and ahead of the President pro tempore of the U.S. Senate. The speakership of the House is a leadership position in the majority party and the office-holder actively works to set that party's legislative agenda; the office is therefore endowed with considerable political power. The Speaker does not usually personally preside over debates, instead delegating the duty to freshman members of the House from the majority party.
Aside from duties relating to heading the House and the majority political party, the Speaker also performs administrative and procedural functions, and represents his or her congressional district.
Selection
The House of Representatives elects the speaker of the house on the first day of every new Congress. Each party nominates a candidate. There is usually some degree of consensus within each party's leadership as to who the favored candidate will be. Whoever receives a simple majority of the votes is elected. The new Speaker is then sworn in by the Dean of the House, the chamber's longest-serving member.
Click on the Link here and you can see there is no requirement that the SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE... be an elected member. Its elects a Speaker by SIMPLE MAJORITY!!
NEWT GINGRICH FOR SPEAKER...WHAT DO YOU SAY ?? IF YOU THINK THIS IS A GOOD IDEA..AND THAT HE WOULD PUT A CHECK ON OBAMA... WITHOUT HAVING TO WORRY ABOUT A POLITICAL BACKLASH SINCE HE IS NOT RUNNING FOR ANY SEAT!!
COPY PASTE AND SHARE IF YOU THINK THIS WOULD BE A GREAT IDEA TO EXPLORE!
Read this to understand the process of selecting a Speaker
http://www.shmoop.com/constitution/article-1-section-2.htmlFriday, October 9, 2015
How Eisenhower Dealt With America’s First Illegal Alien Crisis.... Lesson For Donald Trump. Do not be afraid!
FYI READ AND SHARE...
🔨 THIS IS A HISTORY LESSON: How Eisenhower Dealt With America’s First Illegal Alien Crisis 🔨
🌟Read and Share! READ WHERE THE TERM OPERATION "WETBACK" CAME FROM!! 🌟
This is not the first time the US has dealt with an illegal immigration problem. Only last time it was dealt with in a decidedly swifter and sterner manner. The response, coordinated by President Dwight Eisenhower, resulted in nearly 3 million illegal immigrants being sent home. We can do it again.
During his administration, Eisenhower became the first American president forced to deal with problems stemming from illegal immigration. Only, in Eisenhower’s time the politically correct culture of liberal sensitivities had yet to emerge. There was not much in the way of sympathy for those who had crossed into the country illegal.
Eisenhower told the New York Times exactly what had caused the problem: “The rise in illegal border crossing by Mexican [illegal immigrants] to a current rate of more than 1 million cases a year has been accompanied by a curious relaxation in ethical standards extending all the way from the farmer-exploiters of this contraband labor to the highest levels of the federal government.”
‘Ike’ took quick and decisive action. He used 1,075 Border Patrol Agents to seal the border. In doing so, he achieved a task our government today deems impossible with a force that is 10% larger. Once the border was sealed, Eisenhower went about the process of removing the millions of illegal aliens.
In June of 1954, he appointed retired General Joseph “Jumpin’ Joe” Swing to head “Operation Wetback,” which sent local and federal officials on sweeps of Mexican neighborhoods looking for illegals.
Within one month 50,000 illegals had been captured and deported, while nearly half a million more fled the country to avoid arrest. By September 80,000 more illegals had been removed from the state of Texas alone, and between 500,000-700,000 more had fled the country.
These illegals weren’t just dropped at the border; Swing arranged for buses and trains to take immigrants deep into Mexico before releasing them. Tens of thousands more were shipped by boat from Texas to Vera Cruz, Mexico.
Using less man power and resources than the federal government has today, Eisenhower was able to seal the border and send nearly 3 million illegal aliens home. The policy had the added effectiveness of deterring future illegal crossings.
Whereas today illegal immigrants are given government aid and college tuition, policies which have undoubtedly contributed to an increase in illegal immigration.
The economic effects aside, the level of illegal immigration today represents a grave national security concern. Whereas Eisenhower’s policies deterred such activity, President Obama’s executive amnesty will only further encourage the flow of these illegal aliens over our southern border.
This skews our Voting electorate even if they do not vote because based on the census the Electoral College awards seats based on population and for example California gets 5 additional Electoral College votes based on the Illegal Aliens in California and that neutralizes smaller state like North Dakota and Montana who have only 3 Electoral College Votes.
THIS MUST STOP.. and DONALD TRUMP IS THE MAN WHO WILL MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)