Wednesday, August 31, 2011

Was There a Possible CBW Event at Scott AFB in Illinois?

By Jerry Gordon
HAZMAT team at Scott Air Force Base

Shades of the 2001anthrax terror events.  A suspicious’ sulfur spelling package somehow got into the  post office at the  US Transportation Command  located at Scott AFB in Southern Illinois-about 25 miles east of St. Louis across the Mississippi River.  You may recall that those 2001 Amerithrax terror packages sent by mail started a week following 9/11 and shut down  Congressional offices and resulted in the deaths of  5 people and infecting a dozen  individuals.

For a discussion of the 2001 Anthrax attacks and  capabilitie  by  sponsors of Middle East terror groups, see our interview with Dr. Jill Dekker on Syria's Bio-warfare threat in the December, 2007 edition of the NER.  Given the  current threats from al Qaeda and  affiliate Islamic terrorist groups, the FBI had heightened concerns about possible attacks in anticipation of the 10th anniversary of 9/11, next Sunday. Today’s possible CBW event will doubtless increase the ‘fear factor’ and raise both national and homeland security levels, pending forensic examination of the contents of the mail package received at Scott AFB and examination of the persons immediately affected by the exposure.  In the small world of things, Vice Admiral Anne E. Rondeau, now President of the National Defense University was Deputy Commander of the United States Transportation Command at Scott Air Force Base in Illinois from December 2006 to 2009. See our NER article, here.

Here are the current details from a FoxNews report,  “3 Hospitalized After Suspicious Parcel at Air Base.”

Three people were hospitalized Wednesday and a hazmat team responded to a post office at Scott Air Force Base after a suspicious package was discovered.

The three apparently broke out in a rash and were treated at a nearby hospital. Over a dozen others at the mail center were being decontaminated as a precaution at the mail center.

Authorities are directing any base personnel who visited its post office Wednesday and exhibit any abnormal symptoms to report to a Pronto's Pizza, reported. Loud speakers on the base could be heard warning personnel to avoid the west side of the base, reported.

The package uncovered Wednesday morning prompted precautionary evacuations of the base's education center, bowling alley and other services near the mail center.

Garland didn't have any information on what made the package suspicious, although local media reported it emitted a sulphur-like smell.

Garland says the hospitalized people showed no symptoms other than the rash. There is no immediate threat to the community, the base said in a statement.

With the 10th anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks less than two weeks away, Scott spokesman Thomas Kistler said no extra precautions were in place on the base. He said officials are not treating this as a potential terrorist incident.

"I think they're treating it as a normal suspicious package right now," he said.

The package discovered Wednesday morning prompted precautionary evacuations of the base's education center, bowling alley and other services near the mail center. Kistler said officials were confident there was no reason for anyone else to leave.

"We have evacuated an area around the package but we haven't enlarged the evacuation area," he said. "We don't anticipate there's any danger to the rest of the base or to the community as a whole."

Ferrero said the area had been cordoned off although she did not believe there was any immediate danger. She noted that the base routinely performs exercises for incidents like this and was ready to respond.

"We are reacting on the side of caution," she said.

Master Sgt. Jerome Baysmore said "several" firefighters at the base were overcome by heat and treated by on-base medics. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported that four firefighters affected.

Traffic flowed in and out of the base through one of the main gates by late morning.

The air base is near Mascoutah, Ill., about 25 miles east of St. Louis, and serves as a global mobility and transportation hub for the Defense Department. The base is home to the U.S. Transportation Command, Air Mobility Command, the 618th Air and Space Operations Center and Air Force Network Integration Center. It is also one of four bases in the Air Force to house both a Reserve unit -- the 932nd Airlift Wing -- and an Air National Guard unit -- the 126th Air Refueling Wing.

The base's Web site says its population is 45,749.

After 9/11, Denial is Not a Strategy: An Interview with David Beamer

by Jerry Gordon (September 2011)

On this tenth anniversary of the terror attacks on September 11, 2001, we spoke with David Beamer, father of Todd Beamer, one of the heroes of Flight 93. The younger Beamer along with many of the 40 passengers and crew attacked their Jihadi skyjackers, thereby dooming the plane, but sparing countless lives and unknown trauma in our nation’s Capitol, the ultimate target of these Islamic radicals. 

To the cry of “Let’s Roll,” Todd Beamer and his fellow Flight 93 passengers initiated what his father David calls the first counter-attack on 9/11. All within an elapsed time of less than 30 minutes after seizure of the aircraft. The 9/11 episode aboard Flight 93 was memorialized in a Universal Studios production, that David Beamer considers a faithful re-telling of the realities aboard the hijacked plane and the actions of his son Todd and other valiant passengers and crew.  

The elder Beamer was in a business meeting in Palo Alto, California that fateful day, when the events aboard Flight 93 concluded in a struggle forcing the plane with its passengers, crew and Islamic Jihadi attackers to crash in a field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania. The crash site is now the last of three memorials to the fallen on 9/11.  The Pentagon Memorial was completed and dedicated in 2008, while the Memorial in Lower Manhattan, at the former site of the World Trade Center, will be dedicated on this tenth anniversary. 

David Beamer did not get definitive word of the fate of his son and the other passengers and crew on Flight 93 until later that week.  Because virtually no air traffic was allowed in the days following 9/11, the elder Beamer and a business partner drove across the US to Todd’s home in New Jersey to prepare for a Memorial service that weekend. The irony was that Todd Beamer and his wife Lisa were not expected back from a trip to Italy until the following week.

In the decade following the events of 9/11 that struck down his son and thousands of others, David Beamer has become an articulate opponent of the Islamic Jihad doctrine, its proponents here in America and the politically correct attitude toward fundamentalist Islam espoused by both the Bush and Obama Administrations in Washington. He has appeared in frequent media interviews, hearings before Congress and public presentations across the US. I chanced to hear and meet him at two such occasions in Florida paired with an American Israeli father, a former IDF special operations officer, Tuly Wultz, who lost his son, Daniel to a Palestinian suicide bomber in 2006 while on a visit to Israel.

We were fortunate to interview David Beamer in partial commemoration of 9/11.

Watch this FoxNews YouTube Video interview with David Beamer. 

Fear, Inc.: The Obama Re-election Strategy for Muslim Votes

New English Review

by Jerry Gordon (Sept. 2011)
Daniel Greenfield aka Sultan Knish published a prescient FrontPageMagazine article about the political dynamics of appealing to Muslim American voters in the US, “The Islamic Political Takeover of America.” He noted:

American presidents have traditionally been the governors and the senators of key states. The rise of sizable politically active Muslim populations in those states positions Islamic groups to exert a strong and disproportionate influence on national politics. A governor or senator who seeks out Muslim support to get elected at a state level will form alliances that he will carry forward with him into the White House.
Basic diversity and multiculturalism means that state officials in key states are forming ties with Islamic associations that serve as front groups for the Muslim Brotherhood or other organizations that are equally antithetical to the long term survival of the United States. Through a few meetings, the Brotherhood is gaining a lever that it can use to move presidents.
Like California, Texas and New Jersey—Virginia and Ohio now rank among the top ten Muslim populated states in the country.
[. . .]
Urban representation is another factor. Muslim populations are still negligible even in the top ten states, but they are often clustered in urban areas. Muslims made up 10 percent of the population of Washington D.C. in 2000. The numbers are probably higher today.

There is cause for believing that the Obama Administration is enlisting supporters to implement such a strategy in the upcoming re-election contest. They are accomplishing that by engaging in a deliberate campaign to combat counter-jihadists who oppose recognizing Islamic Sharia law by US Courts. Then there is the Obama Administration’s intervention in local suits over expansion of mega mosques. In the matter brought by local citizens in Chancery Court in Murfreesboro, Tennessee against the county government for authorizing expansion of the Islamic Center without proper public notification, the US Department of Justice under Attorney General Eric Holder filed an amicus brief on behalf of the defendants. This summer, Secretary of State Clinton has furthered this effort by sanctioning outreach to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation on declarations of human rights that appear to abet criminalizing criticism of religion, specifically Islam under its blasphemy laws.

In late August two media events occurred, one in Nashville on reporting of culture clashes over mosque developments in the buckle of the bible belt, and the second, the release of a dossier by a Washington, DC think tank accusing counter-jihadists of fomenting ‘Islamophobia’. The think tank has close connections to the Obama White House. These events illustrate the Obama re-election campaign strategy seeking American Muslim votes.

New Jersey Anti-Bullying Bill of Rights: A Very Slippery Slope

Winnie Hu in her New York Times article, "Bullying Law Puts New Jersey Schools on [the] Spot", reports, "Under a new state law in New Jersey, lunch-line bullies in the East Hanover schools can be reported to the police by their classmates this fall through anonymous tips to the Crimestoppers hot line." The law is called the Anti-Bullying Bill of Rights. But whose rights does it protect?

According to Winnie, "In Elizabeth, children, including kindergartners, will spend six class periods learning, among other things, the difference between telling and tattling. And at North Hunterdon High School, students will be told that there is no such thing as an innocent bystander when it comes to bullying: if they see it, they have a responsibility to try to stop it."

Winnie goes on to say that this puts an unfunded mandate on New Jersey schools. So more money is needed to investigate those who bully. Another reason to increase public school funding magically appears right before our eyes. She totally misses the big picture.

What Winnie misses is just what concerns many parents, teachers and school based administrators about this onerous law. The Anti-Bulling Bill of Rights infringes upon the first Ten Amendments to our Constitution. The law goes overboard by crminializing something that is normal and common. Children expressing their opinions about other children. It puts into the hands of an "antibullying specialist" the requirement to investigate complaints. Is this a new layer of law enforcement? As Richard G. Bozza, executive director of the New Jersey Association of School Administrators, said. “I think this has gone well overboard. Now we have to police the community 24 hours a day."

New Jersey has now outlawed what exactly - having an opinion?

What is the legal definition of bullying? What if one child passes along a opinion about another child? Who has violated the law? The child who initially stated the opinion or the child (or children) who pass it along? What if a child disagrees with another child about something? Is saying they disagree with their classmate constitute bullying?

Let me give you three examples:
1. A child states that another child in the school is an illegal alien and reports that fact to other students. Congress has passed legislation making illegal immigration a crime. Is the child bullying the illegal alien student?
2. What if a Muslim child says to a gay child that he disagrees with his classmate's life style because of his firm religious beliefs. Is that bullying? Or is that freedom of speech and freedom of religion?
3. Or how about a black child voicing an opinion about how a white child dresses or behaves around other minority students. Is that bullying?

What about the reverse of each of these examples?

This law begs so many questions that delve into the morals and behaviors of individual children without foundation. In public schools many children are too young to understand what they are expressing. Remember that old saying, "Out of the mouths of babes"? Sometimes children will, well, just be children and tell the truth that upsets another child. Is that criminal? What will parents now do if their child is faced with a crime and criminal record at the age of 6 years-old?

On September 1, 2011 any child can now call the Crimestoppers hot line in New Jersey and snitch on another child. What if the snitch is found to be wrong? Will the snitch be then charged with bullying or bearing false witness or lying?

Do you see the dilemma and slippery slope New Jersey has created? When is a snitch a bully and when does a bully become a snitch in order to bully? Who makes that determination and based upon what? Bullying is not a crime unless and until it becomes violent. Then the perpetrator has committed a real crime - assault.

Feel good laws like the New Jersey Anti-Bullying Bill or Rights always have serious unintended consequences. I fear this law will do much more harm than good to our most precious resource - our children.

Let children be children. I see schools under this New Jersey law filled with those who will not express their opinions in the very places where the free exchange of ideas is paramount.

This so-called Bill of Rights is actually a Bill of Oppressive Silence. Shades of the former Soviet Union and its network of informers.

B4U-ACT Baltimore Conference: Pedophiles are just "minor-attracted persons"

The organization B4U-ACT sponsored its Summer 2011 Symposium in Baltimore on August 17th, which was attended by pro-pedophile activists and mental health professionals. The conference examined the ways in which “minor-attracted persons” could be involved in a revision of the American Psychological Association (APA) classification of pedophilia.

B4U-ACT classifies pedophilia as simply another sexual orientation and decries the “stigma” attached to pedophilia. B4U-ACT science director Howard Kline has criticized the definition of pedophilia by the American Psychological Association, describing its treatment of “minor-attracted persons” as “inaccurate” and “misleading.”

The featured speaker at the event was Fred Berlin, M.D., Ph.D., founder, National Institute for the Study, Prevention and Treatment of Sexual Trauma; founder, Johns Hopkins Sexual Disorders Clinic. Other speakers included: Renee Sorentino of Harvard Medical School, John Sadler of the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, and John Breslow of the London School of Economics and Political Science.

B4U-ACT according to its website was established in 2003 as a 501(c)(3) organization with the following purposes:
  • To publicly promote services and resources for self-identified individuals (adults and adolescents) who are sexually attracted to children and seek such assistance,
  • To educate mental health providers regarding the approaches helpful for such individuals,
  • To develop a pool of providers in Maryland who agree to serve these individuals and abide by B4U-ACT's Principles and Perspectives of Practice, and
  • To educate the citizens of Maryland regarding issues faced by these individuals.

According to, "Speakers addressed the around 50 individuals in attendance on themes ranging from the notion that pedophiles are “unfairly stigmatized and demonized” by society to the idea that “children are not inherently unable to consent” to sex with an adult. Also discussed were arguments that an adult’s desire to have sex with children is “normative” and that the APA’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) ignores the fact that pedophiles “have feelings of love and romance for children” in the same way adult heterosexuals and homosexuals have romantic feelings for one another." [My emphasis]

In an interview with LifeSiteNews (LSN), Liberty University Visiting Professor of Law Judith Reisman, who attended the conference, said that “post the ‘landmark’ Lawrence v. Texas decision in 2003, paraphrasing Justice Antonin Scalia, everything goes.”

“I go into detail on this in my last book, ‘Sexual Sabotage,’” she said. “Following Alfred Kinsey ‘sexologists’ began to occupy our schools, so that educated professionals have largely been trained to be a form of sexual anarchists.”

“Although the stupidity of advocating harmless amoral sexuality overwhelms us daily, our arrogant ‘educated’ populations say morality has no place in our sexual lives,” Reisman said. “Just as AIDS is a natural outgrowth of amoral sexual education and media, so too is child sexual abuse. We are breeding a new human character and child sexual abuse is increasingly part of that character.”

“I, for one, have had enough,” Barber told LifeSiteNews. “These sexual anarchists, whatever their perverse stripe, need to leave our children alone and let kids be kids.”

According to Professor Reisman, "“They know that to own the future, they must own the minds of our children. Hence, groups like B4U-ACT, the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, Planned Parenthood and the like, utilize academia, from pre-school to post-graduate, in order to brainwash and indoctrinate.”

Liberty Counsel Action Vice President Matt Barber, who attended the conference states, "These mental health ‘professionals,’ and self-described pedophile and ‘gay’ activists were inexplicably able to cavalierly discuss, in an almost dismissive way, the idea of child rape. They used flowery, euphemistic psychobabble to give quasi-scientific cover to a discussion about the worst kind of perversion.”

I do not know what to say at this point in my column. We see our public schools, colleges, universities, politicians and President embracing the gay lifestyle with vigor. It is now clear that we are breeding a new human character where anything goes, even pedophilia.

Welcome to the world of the American "Sexual Anarchist".

NOTE: In a related column the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has declared children as "sexual beings". To read the column please go here:

Obama Administration Declares Children as 'Sexual Beings'

Alfred C. Kinsey
Indiana University Zoologist Dr. Alfred C. Kinsey shocked the nation in 1948 with the publication of Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, followed in 1953 by Sexual Behavior in the Human Female.

Since the publication of these two reports Dr. Kinsey and his research have been scientifically debunked.

However, he lives on in the hearts and minds of the gay, lesbian, bi-sexual and transgender movement as a sage. Gays, when confronted with their behaviors, always say the person confronting them is gay also. This has most recently been used against Republican presidential candidate and Texas Governor Rick Perry who has been called gay.

According to Robert H. Knight, "[T]his comes from Kinsey stating that 95 percent of men committed sexual crimes such as rape, sodomy, incest, homosexuality, adultery, public exposure, fornication or other offenses. If most men were sexual criminals of one sort or another, Kinsey reasoned, then society should redefine what is 'normal' and reduce penalties for sex offenses." [My emphasis]

It appears that the Obama administration and the U.S. Department of Health and Human services agree with Dr. Kinsey. Time to redifine "normal", especially in children.

According to Fox News, reporting on parenting tips listed on the U.S. Department of Health website, found this advice, "Children are 'sexual beings' who shouldn't be discouraged from touching themselves unless it gets out of hand. . .The site also says teenagers may 'experiment' sexually with members of the same sex regardless of whether they are gay or straight." [My emphasis]

I recently reported on a group named B4U-ACT, which promotes pedophilia. B4U-ACT redefines pedophiles as "minor-attracted" persons. Dr. Kinsey, B4U-ACT and now the Obama administration are all on the same sexual behaviors page.

They are all what Liberty University visiting Professor of Law Judith Reisman calls "Sexual Anarchists".

Kinsey was instrumental in denigrating men, women and families. He was partial to single parent mothers, gay men and pedophiles. Kinsey's experimental research is particularly telling. Of special note were Kinsey's experiments with children from the age of 2 months to 15 years who were exposed to pedophiles. These children are known as the "children of table 31". According to "How Alfred C. Kinsey’s Sex Studies Have Harmed Women and Children by Robert H. Knight":

"Kinsey also based his liberal view of child rape on research tabulated in Graph Tables 31-34 in the male volume, which chronicled systematic sexual abuse of boys aged 2 months to 15 years old. Kinsey concluded that the boys, despite violent reactions and crying, enjoyed being manually and orally stimulated by pedophiles. To Kinsey, what most people thought was rape was merely 'sex play' with children, which was essentially harmless, particularly if the child gave 'consent.' He also included this chilling observation: 'Orgasm is in our records for a female babe of 4 months.'

The Kinsey Institute, situated on Indiana University’s campus, continues to refuse to open the records of the Kinsey child sex data to public scrutiny."

Robert states, "With his benign view of child sexual abuse, Kinsey became an activist on behalf of child molesters. In 1949, for example, he testified before the California General Assembly’s Subcommittee on Sex Crimes, urging them to liberalize sex offense statutes. He argued specifically for granting immediate paroles to suspected child molesters, and warned that societal 'hysteria' does more harm to children than the actual molestations."

Fast forward to today and B4U-ACT's definition of pedophiles as "minor-attracted persons" coupled with the U.S. Department of Health's declaration of children as "sexual beings". B4U-ACT states pedophiles are “unfairly stigmatized and demonized' by society to the idea that 'children are not inherently unable to consent' to sex with an adult." The U.S DOH stating, "teenagers may 'experiment' sexually with members of the same sex regardless of whether they are gay or straight."

Are you connecting the dots?

The Obama administration, B4U-ACT, GLSEN, ALSO, the Rainbow PUSH Coalition and other gay advocacy organizations are the new sexual anarchists.

Center for American Progress Labels America 'Islamophobic'

New York is the epicenter of the interfaith dialogue movement. New York was the target of Shariah Islam on 9/11 and is the proposed home for the highly controversial "Ground Zero" mosque.

David Rockefeller founded the Downtown Lower Manhattan Association in 1958 to advance the Rockefeller's vision of Lower Manhattan as a global model for a modern central business district. The Inter-Church Center (TIC), which houses the Muslim Consultative Network (MCN), is a member of the Morningside Area Alliance created by David Rockefeller in 1947. 

What does this all mean? Please bear with me as I explain.

Mayor Bloomberg announced that religious leaders will not speak at the 10th anniversary of 9/11. (Read his announcement by going here)

I believe that Mayor Bloomberg made his decision because if he allows religious leaders to speak at the 10th anniversary ceremony of 9/11 then one of them, in the name of interfaith dialogue and diversity, must be Muslim. If he and New York are committed to interfaith dialogue and diversity then to exclude a Muslim Imam would be taken, right or wrong, as an insult to Islam.

On the other hand having an Imam give a prayer at ground zero on the 10th anniversary of the attack would be tantamount to endorsing the geo-political, military, social, economic and judicial system of shariah Islam. Shariah Islamists planned and executed their most effective and devastating attack on the United States, Western values and those who do not embrace Islam on 9/11/2001. Mayor Bloomberg would anger the 9/11 families, New York's first responders, and Jews and Christians across America.

Do you see the Mayor's dilemma?

It is time to understand that interfaith dialogue is a Trojan horse. Interfaith dialogue assumes that shariah Islam is a religion which embraces the right of all other religions to exist peacefully. That is the fatal flaw in how many Americans view sharia Islam. Those who promote shariah Islam demand and get a pass on its violent roots against any and all other religious beliefs.

Two Sets of Books blog put it best stating:

"'Interfaith dialogue' is a waste of time in my opinion. It's based on the premise that there's one God we all believe in, and we're all basically good and decent people who can get along quite well if we all just understand one another. It's socialism/liberalism/multicult-diversity foolishness to the Nth degree.
Seyyid Qutb, the father of the modern Muslim Brotherhood, said very clearly in his book, Milestones, that a bridge was NOT to be built for non-Muslims and Muslims to mix, but to come over to Islam ONLY. I have no idea what is hard to understand about that. Which probably isn't the problem; the problem is that the people running these places don't look deep enough to learn such things.
There are also numerous Do Not Mingle with the Kuffar Qur'anic verses (except to advance the cause of Islam). My guess is the people running these things don't know about those, either."

The most direct Qur'anic verses forbidding the embrace of interfaith dialogue by shariah Islamists are:
[5:33] The just retribution for those who fight GOD and His messenger [Mohammed], and commit horrendous crimes, is to be killed, or crucified, or to have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides, or to be banished from the land. This is to humiliate them in this life, then they suffer a far worse retribution in the Hereafter.
[5:34] Exempted are those who repent before you overcome them. You should know that GOD is Forgiver, Most Merciful.

The interfaith bridge for Jews and Christians allows for travel in both directions. For shariah Islam travel is restricted to only one direction - toward the embrace of shariah Islam.

Mayor Bloomberg must open the 10th anniversary of 9/11 to religious leaders. The question is: Should that include those who adhere to shariah Islam? I think not.

Center for American Progress Labels America 'Islamophobic'

The Center for American Progress, which according to its website "provides progressive ideas for a strong, just and free America", has issued a report titled "Fear Inc.: The Roots of the Islamophobia Network in America". In the report multiple organizations and individuals dedicated to stopping the spread of sharia Islam in America are mentioned. Each is labeled "Islamophobic".
Among the more notable organizations are:
Frank Gaffney, founder and President of the Center for Security Policy;
Brigitte Gabriel, founder of ACT! For America, headquarted in Pensacola, FL;
The First Coast TEA Party, located in Jacksonville, FL
The TEA Party of Fort Lauderdale, Fort Lauderdale, FL
Tom Trento, President of The United West (formerly known as the Florida Security Council) headquarters in Lake Worth, FL;
The report also names politicians and leaders including:
Congresswoman and Presidential Candidate Michele Bachmann
Congressman Allen West, representing Florida District 22
Florida Senator Mike Fair from Greenville, FL
What is it each of these organizations and individuals have done? They have dared to speak out peacefully against shariah Islamists in America.
The report says this about Tom Trento, "That $17 million, provided by a single anonymous source (who is alleged to be Chicago businessman Barre Seid, according to the website, helped pay for a DVD the Clarion Fund distributed, “Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West,” to more than 28 million swing-state voters beforethe 2008 presidential election. And that DVD, says the Florida Security Council’s director Tom Trento, who helped distribute the film in 2008, is “the single most powerful piece of mediaover the past five years in persuading average Americans to the Islamist threat.” In the subsequent chapters of this report, we’ll demonstrate just how accurate Trento’s observation is."
To order Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West please go here.
What is so distributing about an award winning documentary, showing shariah Islam for what it really is? Does this classify it as Islamophobic?
May I humbly suggest Fear Inc. needs to look at the words and deeds of shariah Islamists, not only in America, but across the world. To see shariah Islam in daily practice simply look at Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq.
The Center for American Progress on its website states, "Sharia, or Muslim religious code, includes practices such as charitable giving, prayer, and honoring one’s parents—precepts virtually identical to those of Christianity and Judaism." In fact, sharia is a geo-political, military, judicial, financial and social system dedicated to spreading its doctrine globally. As the Qur'an states:
[5:33] The just retribution for those who fight GOD and His messenger, and commit horrendous crimes, is to be killed, or crucified, or to have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides, or to be banished from the land. This is to humiliate them in this life, then they suffer a far worse retribution in the Hereafter.
[5:34] Exempted are those who repent before you overcome them. You should know that GOD is Forgiver, Most Merciful.
The Center for American Progress is part of the "Shariah Defense Lobby" according to Frank Gaffney, Founder and President of the Center for Security Policy. Mr. Gaffney was nominated by President Reagan to become the Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy in 1987.
Mr. Gaffney, in his column "Center for American Progress Defends Shariah, Charges America with Islamophobia" states, "The ‘Shariah Defense Lobby' is in a race against time to hide the grim reality of Shariah law as it is actually enforced, as Islamist movements and political parties throughout the Arab world are aggressively seeking to govern by Shariah. Most significantly, the ‘Shariah Defense Lobby' refuses to discuss a simple fact: secular and democratic activists in Egypt and elsewhere in the Muslim world oppose Shariah in their countries, just as Americans oppose it here."
What is concerning is the rubric Islamophobia being used to paint ordinary Americans as something they are not. This is the tactic best used by those who themselves fear the light of scrutiny. Shining the light of truth on shariah Islam is no different than shining the light of truth on Nazism, Fascism, or Communism in America.
Everyone listed in this report that I have contacted agree they are making a real difference. If they were not then this spurious report would not be unnecessary.
As Frank Gaffney observes, "The Center for American Progress-- authors of "Fear, Inc."-- are trying to make Americans afraid of discussing one of the greatest national security threats we face. Thankfully, the American people aren't buying what they're selling: the campaign is having the opposite effect of what the Lobby intends."
Please read Sharia: The Threat to America.

Is Rick Perry a Compassionate Conservative On Illegal Immigration?

Texas Governor Rick Perry has thrown his hat into the Presidential primary race with all the success he likely hoped for. I like Governor Perry and he has indeed shot to the top of the polls. reports, "Well, that was easy. Two weeks after announcing he'd seek the Republican presidential nomination, and just as the country is starting to pay attention, national and key state polls show Gov. Rick Perry has vaulted to the top of the GOP field."

But who is Rick Perry?

Governor Perry has accepted invitations to debates in Iowa and Florida. He will be tested on his political beliefs but more importantly on his actions and statements as Governor of Texas.

Conservatives are looking for the perfect candidate. That person does not exist. However, there are key issues facing America that are of broad concern to you and I. One of those is illegal aliens. Here in Florida illegals cost the state over $5 billion annually. Illegals are at the top of the list when it comes to taking advantage of free healthcare and public education. Illegals also fill Florida's jails costing taxpayers over $100 million annually. Every illegal alien is an unfunded liability to legal and naturalized Americans.

So where does Governor Perry stand on illegal immigration?

Is he tough on illegals or is he a compassionate conservative like George W. Bush on this issue? Debates have a way of making candidates either stand by what they said and did or shift like desert sands to gain votes.

Perhaps it is time to review this video of his public statements on securing America's borders and illegals:

I for one am not looking for a compassionate conservative. I am not seeking Bush Light. I do not want Obama like amnesty continued by a President Perry. I do not want pandering. I want a candidate who will uphold the U.S. Constitution. The illegals issue is key, Perry has taken a stand on it. Will he be principled and stick by his open borders position as governor? Or will he slip and slide away from this issue?

How he answers these questions is as important as the answer he gives. Perry is the proverbial new kid on the block; it is early and he could still fall from grace with conservatives. Immigration may be the topic which poses him the most risk.