For the Jews Palin Offers Life Obama Means Death

You Decide

Here it is. The stark differences in two leaders. There it is, right there.

Sarah really is the best. Righteous.

Happy Rosh Hashanah
by Sarah Palin on Tuesday, September 7, 2010 at 11:49pm

As Jewish families gather to celebrate the New Year and a new beginning marking the Day of Creation, I want to join them in praying for a good and sweet year ahead. This day marks the beginning of a period of reflection and repentance. It is a time to remember our responsibilities to our families, our communities, our country, and our world.

This is also a time to remember who we are as Americans and our responsibilities to help our friends and allies as they seek peace and security. The people of Israel have overcome so many challenges, taken so many risks, and made so many sacrifices in the pursuit of peace and a better life for their children. This New Year begins with a new hope for peace, but the threats to Israel – and to us – have not gone away.

These are challenging times as Iran continues to work on building a nuclear weapon, Hamas attacks innocents on the eve of peace talks, enemies refuse to recognize Israel’s right to exist, and even in Europe and the United States we hear voices from those trying to delegitimize Israel.

To our Jewish friends and neighbors on this Rosh Hashanah, may you be inscribed in the Book of Life. And for our friends in Israel, know that the American people will continue to stand with you in this New Year as you strive for peace and security.

Shanah tovah u'metukah.

- Sarah Palin

President Obama spoke to the Jewish people as they began their New Year, by addressing the so-called peace process. That was his message -- submit to suicide or homicide.

"At a time when Israelis and palestinians have returned to direct dialogue, it's up to us to encourage and support those who are willing to move beyond their differences and work towards security and peace in the Holy Land," the president said. "Progress will not come easy and it will not come quick. But today we have an opportunity to move forward toward the goal we share: two states, Israel and palestine, living side by side, in peace and security."

He is politicizing the Rosh? When Jewish children are being targeted and Jewish couples are being slaughtered in their cars? I heard no similar lecturing in his message to the Muslim world for Ramadan. Where was his council on Islamic antisemitism, kaffirophobia, gender apartheid, Christians murdered, as well as Hindus and Sikhs, the worldwide persecution of non-Muslims, or the Jewish genocide? The brutality and oppression of the sharia was absent from his remarks.

But he did come out for the Ground Zero Islamic supremacist mega mosque at the first of two Iftar dinners.
Pamela Geller, Atlas Shrugs

After the Saturday People, They'll Come After the Sunday People

There's a popular meme among Israel's opponents in the US that says that if only the United States did not support Israel, it would not need to worry about Islamic terror. The Investigative Project on Terrorism blows that meme out of the water.

While Israeli action, or the country's mere existence, may indeed serve as a source of motivation for some terrorists, it is not the primary cause. For proof, look no further than a 1998 fatwa issued by the World Islamic Front, widely considered to be synonymous with Al Qaeda, calling on Muslims "to kill Americans and their allies-civilians and military." The primary justifications for the edict?

• "First, for over seven years the United States has been occupying the lands of Islam in the holiest of places, the Arabian Peninsula, plundering its riches, dictating to its rulers, humiliating its people, terrorizing its neighbors, and turning its bases in the Peninsula into a spearhead through which to fight the neighboring Muslim peoples.
• Second, despite the great devastation inflicted on the Iraqi people by the crusader-Zionist alliance, and despite the huge number of those killed, which has exceeded 1 million…despite all this, the Americans are once against trying to repeat the horrific massacres, as though they are not content with the protracted blockade imposed after the ferocious war or the fragmentation and devastation. So here they come to annihilate what is left of this people and to humiliate their Muslim neighbors.
• Third, if the Americans' aim behind these wars are religious and economic, the aim is also to serve the Jews' petty state and divert attention from its occupation of Jerusalem and murder of Muslims there. The best proof of this is their eagerness to destroy Iraq, the strongest neighboring Arab state, and their endeavor to fragment all the states of the region such as Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Sudan into paper statelets and through their disunion and weakness to guarantee Israel's survival and the continuation of the brutal crusade occupation of the Peninsula."

A plain-text reading of the fatwa suggests that America's support for Israel constitutes one half of one of the three main justifications of terrorism. The fatwa places far more emphasis on justifying terrorism against Americans who are "the crusaders" and are "occupying" and "plundering" Muslim lands such as Iraq and Saudi Arabia.

Even when Osama bin Laden talks about Palestine, analysts believe it is at least partially a cynical play at popular support. He started speaking more exclusively about Palestine in 2008, prompting Nigel Inkster, Director of Transnational Threats and Political Risk at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, to note the shift came as Al Qaeda in Iraq was defeated.

In addition, many Muslims turned against it after Al Qaeda attacks killed so many fellow Muslims.

"Al Qaeda could now be preparing its followers for a strategic failure in Iraq," Inkster told the BBC. "It therefore needs a rallying cry and Palestine is a no-brainer."

A Slate magazine article reached a similar conclusion four years earlier:

"Bin Laden continues to emphasize the plight of the Palestinians, as he has since the second intifada broke out in 2000, because he knows that is a bigger winner for him with ordinary Muslims than the corruption of the Saudi monarchy, his old hobbyhorse."

I would add another proof that Islamic terror would continue even if - God forbid - Israel were to cease to exist: Europe. Europe has for the most part not supported Israel for thirty years. Would anyone seriously argue that Islamic terror is not a threat to Europe?

Israel Matzav

Marxists & Jihadis Impose Sharia Law in India

Babu Suseelan, Hindu human rights activist, comments on this Islamic (sharia) brutality. Mr Suseelan spoke at our "Protest against the 911 Islamic Supremacist mosque here":

This brutal, inhuman, Sharia crime of chopping a hand of a Professor happened in the Marxist ruled Kerala, the land of Sankaracharya. What a shame! And Jihadis did it on a day time at a public road where on lookers were scared off with a fire bomb.

It is nothing new in Kerala. Few months ago a Hindu teacher was butchered alive in front of students in the class room. There is criminal nexus in Kerala against Hindus and our civilization. Marxists have been colluding with Jihadi terrorists for a long time. Criminal Jihadis and Marxist murderers are never apprehended, or prosecuted for their heinous crimes. These brutal chopping of hands clearly shows that Islamic destructiveness is active in Kerala. Marxists government has carved out a district (Mallapuram) for Jihadis. Now they have established a branch of Aligarh Muslim University in Kerala. The Marxist government wanted to introduce an Islamic Bank in Kerala. Thanks to Dr. Subramaniyan Swamy's legal fight and the court has banned it.

These criminal acts clearly shows their spiritual malignancy. Muslims and Marxists believe and practice destructiveness. They want to kill all non-believers in their own selected ways, fast or slow, sooner or later.

Our best defense against Islamic destructiveness lies in the courageous application of our strength and determination. To see all forms of Islamic and Marxist destructiveness from the standpoint of their dominant principles would seem to be logical progress toward preservation of our life and culture.

One would expect that in the face of these overwhelming blows at the hands of Jihadis and Marxists, Hindus would join together and oppose steadfastly to dealt with destruction caused by jihadis. But this is not the case.

Why not Hindus question the death instinct of Muslims? Why not Hindus unite and strongly and valiantly fight against Islamic brutality and Marxist violence?

Glenn Beck, Think Before You Preach
by Pamela Geller
03/15/2010

Something very disturbing happened last Monday on FOX. Glenn Beck, who has, for the most part, steered clear of jihad, sharia and Islamic supremacism, put his toe in the water, and for the first time since I started fighting the long war, I got nervous.

Beck called the Dutch politician Geert Wilders, who produced the film Fitna about Islamic Koran-based violence, a fascist, and far-right.

What is Beck doing?

Why would he stigmatize Wilders this way? Wilders is the embodiment of what our founding fathers extolled. Individual rights. Freedom of speech. Not sharia law.

Morons McCain Limbaugh NYTimes Smear Obama

Morons Smear Obama

Wingnuts fabricate tales that appeal to the voter’s fears and prejudices. Refuting these lies involves some mental effort.

Barack Obama had no religion until he became a Christian.

Obama never was a Muslim.

Ali Eteraz, HuffPost

“Luttwack, NYTimes, says:

As the son of the Muslim father, Senator Obama was born a Muslim under Muslim law as it is universally understood. It makes no difference that, as Senator Obama has written, his father said he renounced his religion. Likewise, under Muslim law based on the Koran his mother's Christian background is irrelevant.

With few exceptions, the jurists of all Sunni and Shiite schools prescribe execution for all adults who leave the faith not under duress; the recommended punishment is beheading at the hands of a cleric, although in recent years there have been both stonings and hangings.

There are fundamental problems with views like Luttwack's.

First of all, under orthodox Islamic law, the punishment for apostasy can only be carried out by the state. Luttwack, with his facile understanding of Sharia, clearly doesn't understand this. The clerics Luttwack is talking about can't just stroll up to Obama and stick him in the sand. They have to go through the established procedural norms of Islamic criminal law which is inherently tied to the functioning of a state apparatus. This means that a country like Saudi Arabia or Iran or Pakistan would have to indict Obama on apostasy charges in their courts. Obviously this is not going to happen, because none of these countries have jurisdiction over Obama. Not only is it asinine for any of these countries to make such an indictment, it doesn't make sense under international law -- which, in case Mr. Luttwack has forgotten, is what the world is suppose to abide by. Luttwack's affirmation of Islamic law over and above international law should raise concerns, not only about his expertise, but also his allegiances.

Second, it may be true that there will be fanatics who believe that they can flout the rules of Islamic law and try to assassinate Obama without permission from a state. However, these people probably want to assassinate American presidents regardless -- so considering their opinion is a bit farcical. Is there a functional difference between a fanatic that wants to kill our president because he is a Western Cowboy and a fanatic that wants to kill our president because he is a Western Apostate? Luttwack's article is solid fear-mongering.

Third, people that appear to be Muslims, but don't follow Islam and choose another religion, are permitted under Islamic law to leave Islam without penalty. A major case in Malaysia recently handed down -- a woman who was Muslim for some time in order to marry an Iranian was permitted to go back to Buddhism -- is an example. Obama, unlike the Malaysian woman, didn't even make a profession of faith to Islam, so it makes even less sense for him to be considered an apostate.

Fourth, Islamic law recognizes abandonment by the biological father. Obama's Kenyan father abandoned Obama. As such, any religious imprimatur he may have had over Obama -- which is already a stretch since the man was an atheist -- is null and void. In such a situation, Obama's mother's religion is controlling. She was not Muslim. Even if someone makes the argument from patriarchy: that Obama's paternal grandparents were his rightful guardians, that would fail since they also constructively abandoned him.

There is a corollary issue here: what about the fact that Obama's second father, the Indonesian, was a "non-practicing Muslim." Doesn't his faith transfer over to Obama? The answer is no. Under Islamic law, step-fathers do not acquire ownership over the child. Their relationship to the child emanates from their relationship to the child's mother. Again, Obama's mother was not Muslim. If a practicing Muslim man marries a Christian woman with children from a previous marriage, her children wouldn't automatically become Muslim. Here, the new father wasn't even practicing.

Luttwack and the other fake experts promoting this new smear do not understand Islam. Religion is not hereditary as it is in Judaism. Islam is not a race. Just because a child has a Muslim father -- which, again, Obama didn't -- doesn't mean anything unless the child is being raised as a Muslim. At the time of birth, Muslims engage in a symbolic act -- of saying the Call to Prayer in the child's ear -- that renders a child Muslim. If Obama's father was agnostic/atheist, then he wouldn't have done such a thing.

No call to prayer in the ear, not raised as a Muslim, born to an atheist father, and then abandoned to a Christian mother both by father and his family, equals not Muslim. Obama is right to say he had no religion until he became a Christian.”