Islamic investments into the core of America, often come with unwanted baggage. Like Sharia law for example.

And while Islamic Sharia law slowly creeps into our very lives across America, the liberal main street media continue to pretend otherwise.

Maybe if we close our eyes... it will go away.


Paper Throws Race Card, Misses Bigger Picture: Muslim Banking in America by Warner Todd Huston - NewsBusters

The Daily Record in Baltimore, Maryland recently published a story by Brendan Kearney that oddly seems to present a conflict between a bank employing Islamic Shari'ah law with its American investments and some black American borrowers and painting it as a racist issue. Sadly, the real story, that of Islamic law being imposed on American investors, is sidelined in order to pursue the race card. (Full story reprinted at BlackEnterprise.com)

As The Record reports, a black couple in Baltimore -- I identify their race because it is pivotal to how The Daily Record reports the story -- had contracted with the Church's Chicken restaurant chain to open a new outlet in Baltimore. Unfortunately for the entrepreneurial couple, as they were investing in their chicken outlet, Church's Chicken was purchased by Crescent Capital Investments Inc., the US affiliate of the Bahrain-based First Islamic Investment Bank BSC. And, upon the restaurant chain's purchase, these new Islamic corporate owners decided to institute Shari'ah laws upon their investments.

This caught the Beasleys new restaurant in a tough spot because pork products were on the morning breakfast menu for the Church's Chicken chain. Because Shari'ah law principles had been imposed on the Beasleys' new restaurant, they would be barred from serving their breakfast menu items, their corporate owners informed them. This barring from being able to serve their breakfast items, the couple maintains, contributed to the restaurant's failure and their eventual bankruptcy.
...

This race focus, however, completely misses the real issue here. The real issue is that a Muslim owned investment banking concern unfairly instituted Shari'ah laws on its American borrowers without due consideration. I should point out here, that I am on record as saying that Shari’ah based investing in the U.S. is not necessarily a bad thing. As long as the lender and borrower both agree to the terms of Shari'ah based investing and money lending, then what is the harm? If this new style of lending and banking operates in accordance with the religious tenets of both parties and both parties are in full agreement, we have no need to become alarmed. But, when an investment bank that takes possession of American companies begins to impose Shari'ah laws on its American customers, then we have a major problem.
Full Read here

U.S. Treasury fears Islamic strings on investments

The U.S. Treasury is struggling with how to handle any political or Islamic ramifications as Persian Gulf sovereign wealth funds look to make substantial investments in capital-poor American banks and securities firms.

Since the beginning of the year, Dubai and Abu Dhabi, two of the largest United Arab Emirate states, have been in discussions with the U.S. Treasury, offering reassurances that their investments in U.S. banks and security firms would not impose restrictions usually dictated by Islamic law, commonly know as sharia.

When they control our money, they control us.

Foreign investment firms are buying up America at an astounding pace. Little by little, piece by piece, city by city... the story continues... sounds of crickets chirping across the U.S..

MSNBC ~ Ignore Partisanship?
LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL

LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL

Typical Clinton... if it's not about them, their not interested.

Bill Clinton cops a few z's during the Martin Luther King celebration at the Convent Avenue Baptist Church in Harlem, N.Y. yesterday.

From video by the New York Post titled "Clinton has a Dream."

Say "Thank You" to our troops this Thanksgiving.

 

Move away from MoveOn.org

Fight the bully smear merchants at MoveOn.org

This is one of the logos MoveOn.org doesn’t want you to see: Go ahead. Sue.

Earlier in the week, the LA Times reported that MoveOn.org, the infamous left-wing thugs who sponsored the “General Betray Us” ads, had unleashed its lawyers on Internet retailer Cafe Press, which allows folks to sell custom-designed t-shirts, bumper stickers, etc. The anti-military smear merchants don’t take kindly to be being mocked and satirized on homemade items and knick-knacks:

MoveOn... Sue this!

Almost 48 hours after the fiasco at Columbia University, it should be crystal-clear to Lee Bollinger that his invitation to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to the Ivy League campus was a huge mistake. His personal attacks on the Iranian President during his most craven and unprofessional introduction on Monday, are making a bigger stir then the ridiculous statements made by Ahmadinejad. Go figure.

I think the eye of Columbia University is blackening as we speak.

World reaction so far are quite emphatic.

I find nothing courageous about the Bollinger's insulting introductory remarks. On the contrary, they amount to a monumental cheap shot and pandering to a biased audience. It would have been far more appropriate, and much more in keeping with the presumable spirit that led to the invitation in the first place, to have thanked Ahmadinejad for his willingness to address the audience and to have welcomed a forum for discussion.

David Herlihy, Boston USA

***

Respecting guests _ whoever they are is a universal principle. Either you invite somebody or if you do you have to respect them. Bollinger's violation of this etiquette was nothing but lack of culture in a professor, hopefully not in good people of America.

Farzad, Iran

***

Not very fund of Mr. AhmadiNejad but the introduction by the Univ. President was in accordance with neither of:

a)typical univ dialogue manner
b)accepted treatment of an invited guest
c)diplomacy
d)setting a good example for students

He discredited the Univ. by reading a political statment and insulting the president of Iran. Any other leader of a country with cold relations to the U.S. should be a fool to walk to that podium. It's a shame how media impacts a person of his statue.

Jaami, Toronto

***

Iranian president was a invited guest to Columbia University and was invited by its president Bollinger and should have been treated as such. He was insulted and humiliated which was wrong. In future do not invite anybody to your home and then insult him in your home. It is a disgrace to Columbia University.

Pundalik Shenoy, Parsippany, NJ

***

It is a cruel cruel act to Insult a head of State of any country and that too after inviting him. If it was a street protest that was something else. Mr Bollingers should have not invited him in the first place if his intention was to insult him. He has not only lost a chance of creating peace but has made it even worse.

[ssami80], Toronto, Canada

***

Although Ahmadinejad (AJad) is no saint, he managed to score some very good points. He stayed composed in the face of childish insults from Bolwinkel:),he made some very good points on hypocrisy of US with regards to terrorits & Nuclear issue. As he pointed out, US has designated the MEK as a terrorist organization yet it harbors them in Iraq because they serve its purpose. AJad's speech showed the hypocrisy of the West and media that were trying so hard to discredit him by spinning the outcome!

Bahram, San Jose

***

Mr. Bollinger should not have given the Iranian president the benefit of his anger. Ahmadinejhad knows that the best way for him to gain attention on the world stage is to deny the Holocaust- it shocks people, it makes the news, people listen to him. If any leader had the guts to say, well you have a right to your opinion, I'm interested to know why you think that way sir, I'm sure Ahmadinejad would drop his silly act. Bollinger only made the man looked insulted and himself lowered.

Michelle, Albuquerque

***

This was not an invitation to embrace freedom of speech. It was a propaganda campaign organized by Mr. Bollinger and co. - one which they lost to Ahmadinejad. How can the president of a famous university be so "astonishingly uneducated" as to take it upon himself to dictate to his audience what to think of his guest? Is this freedom of thought, common courtsey?
Rather than insulting a nation by insulting its elected president, Mr. Bollinger should take a look at his own president right at home.

hamid, Toronto

***

Although I strongly disagree with Mr. Ahmadinejad's politics, I believe it was right to allow him to speak at Columbia. To deny him his right to speak freely is to deny him the right in which Americans most strongly believe. We do not need to agree with Mr. Ahmadinejad, but when we are accusatory and insulting, it does no good for the already strained relationship between our country and many others, including Iran. Diplomacy must be tried before all else-mission is definitely not accomplished.

SK, New York City

***

The reactions and actions of American unlearned society and their institutional behaviour at Columbia University shows how arrogant Americans are. American education is geared toward bully rather than the pursuit of knowledge. By insulting Ahmadinejad Americans have shown the world their shallow, hallow cognition. I had predicted this would happen. American politics, civil administration and social institutions are intertwined. You are with us or against us is the thinking. What a dementia hell

Obwota Omwony, Magwi, Sudan

***

Bollinger acted disgracefully, in a way all too typical of loud, obscene Americans. What a poor example to give to the students of the university! Mr Ahmadinejad was invited to express his opinions and should have been welcomed as a guest rather than insulted and ridiculed by a petty uni president.

Anthony Nixon, Dundalk, Ireland

***

So the president of the University called Mahmoud Ahmadinejad a petty and cruel dictator. This is so typical of the ignorance of world affairs by US citizens. How rude can Americans get?

[cunnind], La Chatre, France

***

Mr. Lee was not only rude but also ungentlemanlly. I gather the impression that the Iraninan President was not invited for purely academic reasons as the host would like us the beleive. Rather it was intended to make him a public redicule / spectacle and to emphasise the extent of hate Americans have towards him. such a move in my is a disgrace to modern diplomacy.I wonder if Bush would not receive the same reception in Cameroon.

Kwendi, Buea, Cameroon

***

Mr Lee Bollinger's was not agood Amaricans representative when he presented his rudly speech against Irans president.He showed that what U.S always tell about Iran coming true about it self.Mr.Ahmadinejat defeted the iranians rights logicaly,camly and ofcourse politly.He prove that Iranians want to achieve their rights in this way but the U.S want to privant Iran from it's right in such way Mr Lee Bollinger's talked to him ...illogical and rude.

mitra, Shiraz

***

Ahmadinejad is an elected president of my country. I may not agree with him on many things but I would hate to see him being disrespected by a few idiots who haven't set a foot outside a coutry that doesnt know what culture, etquete and knowledge really is.

Leyli Karima, Tehran, Iran

***

"This was not an invitation to embrace freedom of speech. It was a propaganda campaign organized by Mr. Bollinger and co. - one which they lost to Ahmadinejad. How can the president of a famous university be so "astonishingly uneducated" as to take it upon himself to dictate to his audience what to think of his guest? Is this freedom of thought, common courtesy?"

hamid, toronto

Ugly... but true!

The following are scenes from previously unseen footage from the ABC's miniseries "The Path to 9/11," which was recently obtained by the Fox News Channel and is expected to be aired on Fox's "Hannity's America" show.

This scene in which Sandy Berger (played by Kevin Dunn), the national security adviser to President Bill Clinton from 1997-2001, refuses to give the CIA the authority to attack Osama bin Laden while American's were right there with boots on the ground and in imminent danger. It really shows how bad the liberals are when it comes to American security.
All talk... No action.

"Are there any men left in Washington... or are they all cowards"?

ABC's Politically Censored version of Path to 911
Sandy Berger / Osama bin Laden Scene


ABC's Original Uncensored version of Path to 911
Sandy Berger / Osama bin Laden Scene


The former National-Security adviser Sandy (Burglar) Berger pleaded guilty to stealing highly classified documents from the National Archives building in Washington D.C., in which many are now believed to have vanished.

CAIR hates it... America loves it... Go figure!

Stuck Mojo with Open Season


Open Season by the Band "Stuck Mojo"
From their new album, "Southern Born Killers,"
Music: Rich Ward
Lyrics: Aborn, Nelson
String Arrangement: Eric Frampton

I speak peace when peace is spoken, But I speak war when your hate is provoking, The season is open 24-7-365, Man up yo time to ride, No need to hide behind slogans of deceit, Claiming that you're a religion of peace, We just don't believe you, We can clearly see through, The madness that you're feeding your people, Jihad the cry of your unholy war, Using the willing, the weak and poor, From birth drowning in propaganda, rhetoric and slander, All we can say is damn ya

My forefathers fought and died for this here
I'm stronger than your war of fear
Are we clear?
If you step in my hood
It's understood
It's open season

I don't need a faith that's blind, Where death and hate bring me peace of mind, With views that are stuck deep in the seventh century, So much sand in your eyes to blind to see, The venom that you leaders preach, Is the path to your own destruction, Your own demise, You might say that I don't understand but your disgust for me is what I realize, Surprise!
Your homicidal ways has got the whole world watching, Whole world scoping, So if you bring it to my home base, Best believe it, The season's open

My forefathers fought and died for this here
I'm stronger than your war of fear
Are we clear?
If you step in my hood
It's understood
It's open season

I see you, Hell yeah I see you, Motherfucker naw, I don't wanna be you, If you come to my place, I'll drop more than just some bass, Yo you'll get a taste of a, Sick motherfucker from the Dirty, I ain't worrying not a fucking bit, I'm telescoping like Hubble, Yo you in trouble, Yo on the double, I'm wild with mine, Bring that style with mine, Fuck with my family I'll end your life, Just the way it is, Just the way it be, Do you understand? No matter if you're woman or man, or child, My profile is crazy, That shit you do doesn't amaze me, I'm ready to blaze thee

I don't give a damn what god you claim, I've seen the innocent that you've slain, On my streets you're just fair game, Like a pig walk to your slaughter, The heat here is so much hotter, And my views won't teeter totter or fluctuate, Step to me you just met your fate, And I'll annihilate, With the skill of a Shogun assassin, Slicing and dicing precise with a passion, In any shape form or fashion, Bring it to my home, Welcome to the danger zone, Cause your attitude's the reason, The triggers keep squeezing, The hunt is on and it's open season

It's Open Season

My forefathers fought and died for this here
I'm stronger than your war of fear
Are we clear?
If you step in my hood
It's understood

It's Open Season

Here is a re-mix by Stop CAIR Now


Rich Ward Responds to CAIR Attack on Stuck Mojo

Two Fox News journalists, Steve Centanni and cameraman Olaf Wiig of New Zealand were released Sunday, almost two weeks after being seized by militants, ending the longest-running drama involving foreign hostages in the Gaza Strip.

They were dropped off at Gaza City's Beach Hotel, several hours after appearing in a video released by their captors.

What is happening in the Middle East is a great example of how people of different cultures can view the same thing and come away with totally different opinions and ideas.

With U.S. involvement in Iraq, Iran, Lebanon and Syria, not to mention the problems with Hamas, the Palestinian's and North Korea, it is easy to say that the United States is in a real predicament and that the Bush administration in real political trouble. I for one, would not want to be in his (Bush's) shoes these days.

Some in the MSM say with midterm elections approaching, the Bush comeback is now in serious doubt. Is this wishful thinking on their part or an accurate assessment of the obvious?

Mideast strife derails Bush comeback

The latest crisis in the Middle East has disrupted President Bush's plans domestically and internationally at a sensitive juncture, reopening divisions with allies abroad and jeopardizing attempts to restore public confidence at home, according to officials, analysts and diplomats.

The discord at a conference in Rome yesterday over a proposed cease-fire in Israel and Lebanon underscored the widening gap between the United States and Europe over how to stop the fighting. And the images of mayhem from the two-week-old war, combined with the rising death toll in Iraq, have further rattled a domestic audience that polls show was already uncertain about Bush's leadership.

The crisis imperils one of Bush's signature ambitions. This is a president who eschewed Middle East peacemaking of the past as futile, embarking instead on a grand plan to remake the region into a more democratic, peaceful place. A year ago, a wave of reform seemed to take hold. Yet today radicalism is on the rise, Iran is believed to be closer to nuclear weapons and Bush is sending thousands more troops to Baghdad to quell spiraling violence.

"You've got Lebanon, Israel and the Palestinian territories aflame, you've got Iraq still aflame, and you've got the Iran issue now unresolved," said Carlos Pascual, a senior State Department official until this year. "It has hurt the U.S. internationally because it has only reinforced in everyone's mind that the U.S. was not being strategic, it was not looking ahead to how to handle the whole panoply of issues in a way that's both realistic and effective."

On the other hand one of China's online news agencies, the People's Daily Online, sees the Middle East turmoil providing the U.S. with an opportunity rather than a predicament in what they call the United State's "Great Middle East (Democratic Transformation) Project."

Middle East turmoil provides U.S with opportunity

The situation in the Middle East has been deteriorating since early this year with incessant bombings in Iraq, repeated crises on the Iranian nuclear program, frequent abductions of Israeli soldiers, the resurgence of Palestine-Israeli conflicts and military clashes between Israel and Lebanon's Hezbollah is approaching Syria. So, the region has been plunged into the stark and most turbulent turmoil.

The similar chaotic situation had occurred only at the beginning of the 1980s. Afterward, the situation in the region has never been so turbulent as it is today, though conflicts happened at times. The international community is, as a whole, worried about a new, all-round war that might possibly break out in the Middle East, and the US government is most worried about it. But what has puzzled people is that the United States responded to it slowly, and sent its diplomatic envoys there for manoeuvring only after the United Nations, the European Union, France and Russia.

International terrorism spread all over the globe shortly after September 11 attack in 2001. Around the outbreak of the Iraq War in 2003, the United States proposed the "Great Middle East (Democratic Transformation) Project" and its hegemonic posture reached the unprecedented height strategically.

At present, turmoil in the Middle East is resultant from the continuous development of the long-term contradictions in the region on one hand and, on the other it also has something to do with the absolute hegemony of the United States. So in this sense, the turmoil in the region does not conflict with the US ultimate intention.

The Unite States, Iran, Syria, other Middle East countries, and even more Islamic militant forces are drawn into the present escalating military conflicts and the Great Middle East Project has gone into bankruptcy. Meanwhile, the U.S. can fully arouse the forces of various parties to refrain Israel's military strikes from going too disproportionate, so that Syria, Iran and other countries involved would retain restraint. Hence, a corresponding basis has been laid for the United States to "bring great disorder under heaven" into "great order and peace across the land." In other words, this provides the U.S. a great opportunity.

Meanwhile, the aspiration of the international community, big powers in particular, to overhaul and rein in the situation in the Middle East and put it in order, has reached its climax over the past two-plus decades. For the time being, the international community, including the UN, the EU, France, Russia and China, are all ready to contribute their efforts to steadily resolve the Middle East issue appropriately instead of letting the situation out of control in the region.

The conflicting parties are relatively reasonable with their calculations, as fighting a large-scale war does not conform to their original intentions. The new Israeli government had dealt harsh attacks at Hamas and Lebanon's Hezbollah, but the escalation of the conflict will go against the desire of the government iself. For Hezbollah, if the situation is continuing to worsen, it will definitely not have the all-out support of the Lebanese government, and the one-third of the seats it has had in the cabinet might lose the base of the people. And Hamas, too, does not want to bet on the livelihood of people. Hence, there is a fairly big room for international mediations

Bio-security, in the Middle East strewn with various types of complex contradictions, is very fragile indeed. The international community unanimously supports the effort to establish peace at the Middle East region, and it is therefore both necessary and urgent for a regional security mechanism to set up and provides the the aim of the United States with a fairly favorable international support.

"Misfortune may be an actual blessing." A resembled challenge to the U.S. has provided it with a major potential opportunity. For the next step, the United States should stop Israel, the most important and reliable ally in the Mideast region, from using its forces as disproportionate. And this constitutes a major, severe test for the U.S. to seize the opportunity and make the full use of it.

Or is this simply the opportunity the U.S. has been waiting for to move toward the "New Middle East." (a different and much less known project)

Only time will tell.

Changing Times, a chilling video by Bryan Preston presented by Hot Air Films reminds us of that horrible day in September, 2001 and what the New York Times is doing to us all by continuing to undermine the administration's efforts to fight this 'War on Terror'.

Tony Snow, the White House Press Secretary said on June 26, 2006, to the White House press corps, "The New York Times ought to think about somebody’s right to live."

He continued, "The New York Times and other news organizations ought to think long and hard about whether a public’s right to know, in some cases, might overwrite somebody’s right to live, and whether, in fact, the publications of these could place in jeopardy the safety of fellow Americans."

There appears to be a lot of anger still brewing with regard to the New York Times latest printing of yet another leaked U.S. national security program. Many calling for the prosecution of the Times.


Bush berates newspaper after its latest exposure

National Review Online
Stop the Leaks

Every passing week, it becomes more apparent that disgruntled leftists in the intelligence community and antiwar crusaders in the mainstream media, annealed in their disdain for the Bush administration, are undermining our ability to win the War on Terror. Their latest body blow to the war effort is the exposure, principally by the New York Times, of the Treasury Department’s top-secret program to monitor terror funding.

President Bush, who said on Monday morning that the exposure “does great harm to the United States of America,” must demand that the New York Times pay a price for its costly, arrogant defiance. The administration should withdraw the newspaper’s White House press credentials because this privilege has been so egregiously abused, and an aggressive investigation should be undertaken to identify and prosecute, at a minimum, the government officials who have leaked national-defense information.

Real Clear Politics
The New York Times at War With America

Why do they hate us? No, I'm not talking about Islamofascist terrorists. We know why they hate us: because we have freedom of speech and freedom of religion, because we refuse to treat women as second-class citizens, because we do not kill homosexuals, because we are a free society.

No, the "they" I'm referring to are the editors of The New York Times. And do they hate us? Well, that may be stretching it. But at the least they have gotten into the habit of acting in reckless disregard of our safety.

Why do they hate us? Why does the Times print stories that put America more at risk of attack? They say that these surveillance programs are subject to abuse, but give no reason to believe that this concern is anything but theoretical. We have a press that is at war with an administration, while our country is at war against merciless enemies. The Times is acting like an adolescent kicking the shins of its parents, hoping to make them hurt while confident of remaining safe under their roof. But how safe will we remain when our protection depends on the Times?

Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler
Let’s Be Polite to the Ones Trying to Murder Us

LC & IB Ace, for reasons unknown to anybody but himself, has had enough of the “hate speech crap”:

No more veiled or not so velied threats of violence against reporters, liberals, etc.

His blog, his rules.

As to myself, I’m sorry if I can’t find it in myself to claim the moral “high” ground here. You see, when journaljizzmers decide, deliberately and after having thought about it for a while, to place the lives of myself and, more importantly, my wife and children in greater danger than they were before, I’m having a hard time not taking it personally.

No, I don’t give a flying fuck about their motives. I couldn’t give less of a shit about their pissing and bleating about “public interest” if I spent 12 years at Indifference University getting a doctorate in caring less, all I care about is the fact that their treasonous actions placed the lives of myself and my loved ones in greater jeopardy.

If you’re a journaljizzmer working for one of those rags, just keep it a secret if you’re around me, m’kay?

Because if I find out that you are, I’m going to jam my fist so far down your throats that I can pull your livers out.

And I will.

California Conservative
NY Times Continues Terrorist Support

It has become increasingly clear that multiple members, if not most, of the leftist mainstream media no longer care about either the fate of the American people at the hands of terrorists or the survival of the United States. The latest example is that of the New York Times publishing yet another article that stabs our country and its people in the back, by publishing classified information regarding the tracking of radical Islamic terrorists’ international banking activities.

Expose the Left
Snow: NY Times ‘Ought To Think’ About Somebody’s ‘Right’ To Live (VIDEO)

Q We’re told the Vice President is going to make similar comments at his appearance today. With the President and the Vice President, in essence, going after The New York Times today, are they trying to create a chilling effect on media outlets that might cover stories of this nature?

MR. SNOW: I don’t think so, no. No, I don’t think so. It’s a very good question. No, if The New York Times decides that it is going to try to assume responsibility for determining which classified secrets remain classified and which don’t, it ought to accept some of the obligations of that responsibility; it ought to be able to take the heat, as well. So the administration certainly is going to lay out its concerns and what it may mean for the safety of the American people and the integrity of the process of developing intelligence that can permit us to track down terrorists and prevent them from killing again.

That’s what this is all about. It’s about what we can do in a time of war. Traditionally in this country in a time of war, members of the press have acknowledged that the Commander-in-Chief, in the exercise of his powers, sometimes has to do things secretly in order to protect the public. This is a highly unusual departure. It’s interesting, The Times, talking about this being a—this program having been a departure from previous banking efforts. This is also a departure from long-standing traditions here in the United States.

So it is—it’s not designed to have a chilling effect. I think what it’s—if The New York Times wants a spirited debate about it, it’s got it. But, certainly, nobody is going to deny First Amendment rights. But The New York Times and other news organizations ought to think long and hard about whether a public’s right to know, in some cases, might overwrite somebody’s right to live, and whether, in fact, the publications of these could place in jeopardy the safety of fellow Americans.

The New York Times Shows Bush Who's The Boss

ThePeoplesCube.com
The Bush administration and The New York Times are again at odds over national security, this time with new exposures of the administration's immoral attempts to protect imperialist America from heroic Islamic freedom fighters.

In today's issue the fearless NYT showed the world how the militaristic US government was co-opting major capitalist financial institutions to track global financial transfers.

The message this sends is clear - give up, George Bush! Protecting America is a useless task when you face the glorious destructive force of progressive media! America must be destroyed! It is a historical inevitability whose time has come!


SCROLL DOWN FOR UPDATES

Heather Mac Donald calls The New York Times "A National Security Threat."

BY NOW IT'S UNDENIABLE: The New York Times is a national security threat. So drunk is it on its own power and so antagonistic to the Bush administration that it will expose every classified antiterror program it finds out about, no matter how legal the program, how carefully crafted to safeguard civil liberties, or how vital to protecting American lives.

Now that the Times has blown the cover on this terror-tracking initiative, sophisticated terrorists will figure out how to evade it, according to the Treasury's top counterterrorism official, Stuart Levey, speaking to the Wall Street Journal. The lifeblood of international terrorism--cash--will once again flow undetected.

Clarice Feldman says "It’s Fish or Cut Bait Time, Mr. Attorney General"

In March, Gabriel Schoenfeld wrote a brilliant piece in Commentary in which he argued that the New York Times revelations about the NSA program warranted prosecution under Section 798 of Title 18, the so-called Comint statute. In the article he details the history and language of the Act and its 1950 amendment and argues that the language is unambiguous and certainly covers the paper’s disclosures of the NSA program, which substantially harmed our counter terrorism activities.

Schoenfeld argued in March:

“What the New York Times has done is nothing less than to compromise the centerpiece of our defensive efforts in the war on terrorism. If information about the NSA program had been quietly conveyed to an al-Qaeda operative on a microdot, or on paper with invisible ink, there can be no doubt that the episode would have been treated by the government as a cut-and-dried case of espionage.

If Schoenfeld is wrong, and the Act is insufficient to prosecute these breaches of security by the leakers and the publishers, than the Attorney General should have proposed new legislation. He hasn’t. Therefore, I assume Schoenfeld’s point is correct: the Act is adequate to proceed.

So, what’s keeping the Attorney General from acting to halt this bleeding of critical information to our enemies?

Frankly, if he doesn’t act soon, Attorney General Gonzales should be removed and replaced by someone with the will to Act . Failing to Act is simply emboldening further those who apparently think the war on the war on terror is more important than what our elected officials consider critical to the war on terror’s success

The peoples outrage toward the NY Times must be kept on the front burner. This blatant, irresponsible behavior has to be stopped. Stop your subscriptions, boycott advertisers or contact the Attorney General with calls for prosecution, whatever we can do, we must do.

UPDATE: (6-25-2006) New York Times Publishes More Classified Information.
U.S. General in Iraq Outlines Troop Cuts

The top American commander in Iraq has drafted a plan that projects sharp reductions in the United States military presence there by the end of 2007, with the first cuts coming this September, American officials say.

According to a classified briefing at the Pentagon this week by the commander, Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the number of American combat brigades in Iraq is projected to decrease to 5 or 6 from the current level of 14 by December 2007.

Under the plan, the first reductions would involve two combat brigades that would rotate out of Iraq in September without being replaced. Military officials do not typically characterize reductions by total troop numbers, but rather by brigades. Combat brigades, which generally have about 3,500 troops, do not make up the bulk of the 127,000-member American force in Iraq, and other kinds of units would not be pulled out as quickly.

General Casey's briefing has remained a closely held secret, and it was described by American officials who agreed to discuss the details only on condition of anonymity. Word of the plan comes after a week in which the American troop presence in Iraq was stridently debated in Congress, with Democratic initiatives to force troop withdrawals defeated in the Senate.

As the Washington-based nonprofit group CAIR insists it receives no financial support from foreign countries, the United Arab Emirates with ties to September 11, has pledged a multi million dollar endowment to the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

The CAIR-U.A.E. Connection

The United Arab Emirates recently announced on its official government website that it has set up an endowment serving as a source of income for CAIR. The amount of the funding is undisclosed, but sources say it will be enough to help CAIR finance the construction of a new $24 million office building and a planned $50 million public-relations campaign aimed at repairing Islam's -- and the UAE's -- image in America.

CAIR -- Washington's biggest Muslim lobbying group -- is quoted in the UAE statement, but has not released its own statement. It is not commenting publicly about the size of the endowment or other details.

But the UAE, which formally recognized the Taliban and acted as a launching point for the 9-11 hijackers, has already taken a nearly $1 million stake in CAIR's existing headquarters near the U.S. Capitol. As first reported in the book, Infiltration, Dubai holds the deed to the building. The transaction took place in 2002, according to local property records.

Sheikh Hamdan bin Rashid Al Maktoum, Deputy Ruler of Dubai and UAE Minister of Finance and Industry okays setting up endowment in US

"The endowment will serve as a source of income and will further allow us to reinvigorate our media campaign projecting Islam and its principles of tolerance, which is based on promotion of peace, co-existence and dialogue among various religions and cultures,” said Nihad Awad, Executive Director of CAIR, following a meeting here on Saturday between Sheikh Hamdan and representatives of the North American organisation.

UAE Official Web Site

The Trader Times has done it again. The New York Times reported on a LEGAL, yet secret U.S. counter terrorism program where the U.S. had access to an international database which they used to track financial transactions of al-Qaeda members and other potential terrorist. This program went into effect weeks after the September 11 attacks and has been vital to the U.S. in tracking methods and means to how the terrorist move money within their network.

Bank Data Is Sifted by U.S. in Secret to Block Terror

NY Times (June 22, 2006) - Under a secret Bush administration program initiated weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks, counterterrorism officials have gained access to financial records from a vast international database and examined banking transactions involving thousands of Americans and others in the United States, according to government and industry officials.

The program is limited, government officials say, to tracing transactions of people suspected of having ties to Al Qaeda by reviewing records from the nerve center of the global banking industry, a Belgian cooperative that routes about $6 trillion daily between banks, brokerages, stock exchanges and other institutions. The records mostly involve wire transfers and other methods of moving money overseas and into and out of the United States. Most routine financial transactions confined to this country are not in the database.

Viewed by the Bush administration as a vital tool, the program has played a hidden role in domestic and foreign terrorism investigations since 2001 and helped in the capture of the most wanted Qaeda figure in Southeast Asia, the officials said.

The program, run out of the Central Intelligence Agency and overseen by the Treasury Department, "has provided us with a unique and powerful window into the operations of terrorist networks and is, without doubt, a legal and proper use of our authorities," Stuart Levey, an under secretary at the Treasury Department, said in an interview on Thursday.

Officials described the Swift program as the biggest and most far-reaching of several secret efforts to trace terrorist financing. Much more limited agreements with other companies have provided access to A.T.M. transactions, credit card purchases and Western Union wire payments, the officials said.

Nearly 20 current and former government officials and industry executives discussed aspects of the Swift operation with The New York Times on condition of anonymity because the program remains classified. Some of those officials expressed reservations about the program, saying that what they viewed as an urgent, temporary measure had become permanent nearly five years later without specific Congressional approval or formal authorization.

These current and former government officials and industry executives who shot off their mouths, on condition of anonymity, should be tracked down and locked up as traders to the U.S..

Stuart Levey, an undersecretary at the Treasury Department, said the program "has provided us with a unique and powerful window into the operations of terrorist networks." However the Trader Times obviously feels it's more important to let the terrorist know what we are doing and how we are doing it, then to capture them.

Officials also claimed the data provided by this program also helped identify Uzair Paracha, a Brooklyn man who was convicted on terrorism-related charges in 2005.

We are reminded today by Emperor Darth Misha I, of the great quote by Ann Coulter, some time ago when she said, that her only regret about Timothy McVeigh was that he didn’t park outside the offices of the New York Times.

My sentiments exactly.

More@
NYTIMES BLABBERMOUTHS STRIKE AGAIN

Dammit. These people don't know when to stop. The anonymous leak-addicted NYTimes tag team of Eric Lichtblau and James Risen is at it again. Their front-page, splashy piece posted on the web tonight and top-linked on Drudge:

Whose side are they on?

Call me crazy, but since the program is legal and since the administration argues it has helped stop terror attacks, isn’t the weight of the public’s interest in this story on the side of keeping the program under wraps so that it can continue to stop terrorists?

The 'Bush Spied Privacy Died' Hysterics At The NYT Are Back

Well that didn't take long. The dynamic duo who blew the cover of the NSA surveillance program designed to monitor who is co-operating with al-Qaeda, is back in full force. Eric Lichtblau and James Risen of the inimitable New York Times, the newspaper for the misinformed, are on the war path again. The NYT declined a White House request last night not to publish a story about the Government's legal inspection of monies flowing in and out of the country post 9/11.

Michelle Malkin Updates with: MESSAGES FOR THE BLABBERMOUTHS

This cartoon by Atlanta Journal-Political cartoonist Mike Luckovich says it all. According to liberals, the United States and Al Qaeda are morally equivalent.


Just another example of the left’s blatantly absurd moral equivalency scheme. How disgusting a people. This is why liberals are no longer taken serious.
They just don't get it!
Share your feelings. Vote Here.

If you listen to all the BS coming from the MSM in the last couple of days, it sounds like the liberal left in America and the main stream media are grieving the loss of the great Al-Qaeda leader, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. They can't seem to come to grips with their loss.

Some are already throwing around and spreading military misconduct rumors like this AP story that cites an unidentified source claiming to see American soldiers ripping Zarqawi from an ambulance and beating him to death after finding him alive after the bombings.

The Iraqi, identified only as Mohammed, said residents put a bearded man in an ambulance before U.S. forces arrived. He said the man was found lying next to an irrigation canal.

"He was still alive. We put him in the ambulance, but when the Americans arrived they took him out of the ambulance, they beat him on his stomach and wrapped his head with his dishdasha, then they stomped on his stomach and his chest until he died and blood came out of his nose," Mohammed said, without saying how he knew the man was dead.

Yeah this sounds like a reliable source with a believable story to me.

Let me say this, If true... Who cares?

I hope the last thing that went through his mind was a US military issue, size 11, boot. OK?

This is absolutely crazy. We drop two (2), 500 lbs. bombs on the bastard. What does the left expect us to do... run in and save his life? Maybe some mouth to mouth resuscitation to save the sorry murdering creeps life?

Maybe mama Sheehan and papa Berg will help nurse him back to good health for us all. You know... just to show... no hard feelings.

GET A LIFE PEOPLE!

But No Worries... Democrats Vow to Fight On After Zarqawi Loss
From the Scrappleface Network Newsroom
by Scott Ott

(2006-06-09) — As Blackberry devices and cell phones on Capitol Hill hummed with news of the death of terrorist leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi yesterday, Congressional Democrats vowed that despite the loss they would fight on in “the war on the war on terror.”

“Zarqawi will be missed because he put a human face on the futility of the illegal U.S. occupation of Iraq,” said one unnamed lawmaker, who assured a reporter that “Democrats are still optimistic. We’re still looking for the silver lining.”

Rep. John Murtha, D-PA, a former Marine and vocal critic of the military occupation of Iraq, immediately denounced “the Zarqawi massacre” and suggested that the F-16 pilot who dropped the bombs had snapped under pressure and murdered the al Qaeda leader “in cold blood.”

Sen. Arlen Specter, R-PA, demanded an explanation of the secret intelligence gathering techniques and surveillance used to find Mr. Zarqawi.
“I want to give the president an opportunity to explain the program to the Congress and to assure the American people that nobody’s civil rights were violated,” said Sen. Specter.

Meanwhile, Democrat National Committee Chairman Howard Dean and former presidential candidate Al Gore observed a moment of silence as they heard of the passing of Mr. Zarqawi, a fellow Internet pioneer.

Listen to the Podcast from ScrappleFace.com

UPDATE: (Sun. June 11, 2006) U.S. Military Rejects Reports Al-Zarqawi May Have Been Beaten