Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:34 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 15 words, total size 1 kb.

Dana Mathewson

... and others who "like Ron Paul's ideas." Or just wonder what Ron Paul is all about.

http://rightwingnews.com/democrats/ron-paul-not-a-serious-candidate/

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:34 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 24 words, total size 1 kb.

Jack E. Kemp

This is the most profound insight I've seen in a while. It ranks with "politics is organized hate." Posted at Tea Party Nation by Tm Nerenz,

Below are the opening lines and a link. One may have to register (for free) to access the link, but it is well worth the small effort.

http://www.teapartynation.com/profiles/blogs/rich-is-the-new-gay

Rich Is The New Gay
Posted by Tim Nerenz on January 24, 2012 at 7:25pm
It’s ok to hate them for who they are. It’s ok to vandalize their property, taunt them, seize their assets, deny them government benefits, make them register and buy a license to practice their alternative lifestyle.

You can hound them at their workplace, you can bully them in schools, you can picket their homes, you can send them death threats with impunity, and you can occupy public buildings for months on end chanting bad things about them.

Rich is the new gay.

It is no longer permissible in our civil society to hate based on skin color, gender, ethnicity, religion, disability, or sexual preference. But wealth – that’s a free-fire zone. Wealth is evil. Capitalism is sodomy. Free enterprise is lewd and lascivious conduct. Wall Street is the new Castro Street, only it’s ok to light it on fire. Even Tiffany Newt feels free to tee off on Mitt Romney for being (gasp) too rich – think Ellen reefing on Elton John to win George Michael’s vote.

You can say the most hateful things imaginable about rich people - even the President does it, cheered on by a wealth-o-phobic media. Imagine how the fur would fly if a President blamed all his failures on homosexuals, or if he expressed support for violent mobs rioting in the streets if it were the 3.6% instead of the 1% whose heads are demanded on a pole.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:29 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 310 words, total size 2 kb.

William Been

When the Founders created our Republic, it was their intention that the two senators from each state were to be representative of the political policies and direction of the individual state. With this objective in mind, Article 1, Section 3 of the Constitution establishes the Senate as follows: The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote.”

Among the various reasons that the Founders considered when designating the State Legislatures was their desire and intent to assemble a select assembly. Quoting John Jay from No. 64 of the Federalist Papers: "…as the State Legislatures who appoint the senators will in general be composed of the most enlightened and respectable citizens, there is reason to presume that their attention and their votes will be directed to those men only who have become the most distinguished by their abilities and virtue, and in whom the people perceive just grounds for confidence.”

Throughout the 19th century, there were various calls to change the senator selection process to a direct election by the people. Among the reasons given for changing the selection process were corruption charges at the state level during the selection process while the Populous and Progressive Movements pushed from the perspective of pure democracy. Eventually, during the heights of the Progressive Movement of Woodrow Wilson, the selection process was changed by the ratification of the 17th Amendment on April 8, 1913. The 17th Amendment simply changed the appointment by the State Legislative bodies to a direct election of the people from each state.

Fast forward to 2012. The worst of the Founders fears is now playing out across our country as we now talk about how much money it will take to win an election, we now hear that 20% of the voters don’t make up their minds until the last two months before an election, we now see radio and television ads of questionable integrity designed to sway the voters, we now see multiple special interest groups outside of the state influencing elections, we see disinterest at all levels of society, we see the Hollywood image trumping enlightenment, and sadly we see elections where the majority of the voters do not participate believing their vote will make no difference.

So now we approach the election of 2012 when Bob Casey is running for re-election as U. S. senator in Pennsylvania . While pondering the picture of Senator Casey, one cannot help but question the lack of wisdom exhibited by ratification of the 17th Amendment. Instead of the sitting Senator being closely tied to his state as the Founders intended, Senator Casey portrays himself as being a servant to the sitting President. His picture in his senatorial office is truly worth a thousand words. It reflects the diametrical opposite to what the Founders intended.

Again referencing the Federalist Papers, No. 64, John Jay makes it clear that the Founders desired to avoid elections by the people "where the activity of party zeal” takes advantage of the electorate. Party zeal and obedience to President Obama have been portrayed throughout Senator Casey’s current term. While the Pennsylvania electorate is belittled by the President as those who cling to their guns and religion, the sitting senator turns his back on the people of Pennsylvania and professes his unqualified support for the President with a 98% voting record favoring Obama Progressivism. Further illustrating Senator Casey’s disdain for Pennsylvania citizens, as well as the traditions of our great country, was his appearance as one of the keynote speakers at the Pennsylvania Progressive Summit held in January, 2011 at Pittsburgh.

Rather than representing the state of Pennsylvania as intended by the Founders, Senator Casey has identified himself as a part of the Progressive Movement that portrays its anti-American ideology through various radical organizations. His behavior and his record have defined him as being part of the Soros/Obama transformation of America. Perhaps Senator Casey should describe what America looks like when the Progressive Movement completes this transformation process that he so eagerly embraces.

Concerning corruption being a detriment to the original Constitutional intent, an attorney friend stated firmly that it would be much better to have the corruption closer to the people at the state level rather than being buried in the huge Washington bureaucracy. This statement is validated by the fact that over 30% of the money donated to Senator Casey comes from outside of Pennsylvania from various special interests. Also, consider the huge amount of money that George Soros and his allies pour through various PACs into the Democrat Party for support of Democrat candidates. As Eli Pariser of the Soros funded MoveOn.org stated after the 2004 election cycle concerning the Democrat Party: "Now it is our party, we bought it, we own it...”

In closing, as we watch dishonesty being the rule rather than the exception at all levels of political discourse, it is worthwhile to again consider the original intent of the Founders where State Legislatures would select those men who are most distinguished by their abilities and virtues. With 23 Democrat seats up for re-election, now is the time to elect conservatives who value the Constitution and roll back the Progressive Movement. The 17th Amendment would be a great starting place.

No Pennsylvania Senator should be ideologically tied to the President as a part of OBAMA’S PEOPLE which the Pennsylvania elections of 2010 made perfectly clear. However, 2010 was only a starting point and many Americans do not recognize the threat posed by the Progressive Movement which still holds the power in Washington DC by having infiltrated the federal government through the election of officials who blindly follow the transformation leaders to a destination that has never been defined to the American people.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:20 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 978 words, total size 6 kb.

Jack Kemp

January 27th is the date for the U.N.'s Holocaust Memorial Day, designated in 2005. The same memorial day is observed by the European Union. This January date coincides with the liberation of Auschwitz, yet Israel observes "Yom HaShoah" (Holocaust Day) on a Hebrew calendar date that falls in March or April of each year. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust_Memorial_Day

Why the discrepancy in dates? When the Israelis designated their day of Holocaust remembrance, they wisely looked to a future when most younger Holocaust survivors would be aging. Going outside to a memorial service in the dead of winter, even in a place like Jerusalem, is a daunting thing for a senior citizen. The U.N. And the Israeli government knew that American, Canadian and British Jews would hold their commemorations on or near the same date as the commemorations in Jerusalem. By having the event in the spring, the outdoor weather would not be such a problem for a future diminishing population of survivors.

While there is symbolism in picking the January date, yet there were many other concentration and labor camps besides Auschwitz scattered across Germany, Poland, France, the Soviet Union and elsewhere. The U.N. "coincidentally" chose a date most inconvenient for elderly Jews. By 2005, when the U.N. declared their memorial date, a twenty year old Holocaust survivor would be eighty, might live in Canada or Chicago or Stockholm - and would probably have to stay home to avoid snow drifts and strong winds. Thus the U.N. and the European Union chose a date that is the equivalent of free Bungee jumps for seniors. It was a sophisticated insult, in my opinion. Yes, most of the original survivors were dead by 2005, but their adult children, often around age sixty by 2005, would also be inclined to avoid a U.N. "cold shoulder commemoration" in northern climes.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:12 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 313 words, total size 2 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

Over at Ecofascism, William Kay writes about the IPCC:

http://www.ecofascism.com/review27.html

"The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is at the forefront of the global warming hoax. IPCC Assessment Reports are gospels to politicians and journalists. Two recent publications – investigative journalist Donna Laframboise’s woefully titled The Delinquent Teenager who was Mistaken for the World’s Top Climate Expert, and economics professor Ross McKitrick’s What is Wrong With the IPCC? – slam-dunk these Assessment Reports into the dumpster. What follows is a collated, abridgement of these two documents."

Ecofascism is a must-visit for anyone interested in the Global Warming swindle.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:09 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 106 words, total size 1 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

Yet more proof that Mitt Romney is horribly clueless.
http://www.breitbart.tv/mitt-hits-newt-very-easy-to-criticize-debate-moderator/

First, the stupidity of the GOP in general to give liberal mainstream media marionettes control over the debates goes beyond astonishing. Why does our side put the enemy in charge? Just because a guy is a network anchor doesn't mean he has any credibility. It's time we stop affording the Left's attack dogs respect. Perhaps we have to accept this in the general election debates, but why the primaries?

It's like making Richard Dawkins the moderator of an ecumenical church council debate.

Second, if Romney thinks that the media should be allowed to run roughshod over us because they claim to be the unbiased investigators, then he is either a titanic fool or worse. Does Romney really believe the media is NOT biased? Does he not understand that they are diametrically opposed to our interests? Can't he fathom that they will turn on him as soon as he is the nominee? If he doesn't understand this simple fact then he is not the man to lead us. Worse if he does understand it and is using this to his advantage.

How much hand-ringing did Conservatives do over the "attack on Capitalism" by Newt's PAC; will their be comparable wailing and gnashing of teeth over this? I think this is worse, because it suggests that we should listen to the mainstream media and accept their views as honest. The media is owned by Obama, lock, stock, and barrel. They are liars and the father of lies. That is a fundamental axiom of Conservatism, because the media has mischaracterized our views and assassinated our character since the inception of electronic media, and even back into the days of print. You cannot be conservative if you accept the wisdom and honesty of the mainstream media.

This speaks volumes about what Romney believes and what he is willing to do. There is no way a man who defends an attack from the media on a fellow - even if that fellow has been horrible to him - can claim to be a conservative, and there is no way he is going to win the Presidency. Romney has just lost the race, in my opinion.

But then, he, like John McCain before him, is the media choice for GOP candidate.

Let's look at the track record of GOP Establishment candidates.

In 2008 we had John McCain, a darling of the media. He was always invited on Sunday talk shows because he was always good for bashing conservatives. Obama beat him handily.

George W. Bush was an Establishment candidate, but he had a nip-and-tuck with McCain. We may all remember he stalemated with the embarassingly dorkie and idiotic Al Gore in 2000, winning by just a few votes. After becoming President Bush whittled away the GOP margins, losing first the House then the Senate, and finally handing over complete control to the Democrats in 2008.

Bob Dole, the viagra spokesman, so lacked virility that he was soundly beaten by Bill Clinton, a man who was facing impeachment for perjury and obstruction of justice. Clinton had no problems similar to Dole's, I might add.

George Herbert Walker Bush, the consummate insider, lost to Clinton because of a very minor recession, one that the media promoted with enormous fanfare prior to the elections. I remember the "signs that a recession may be coming" stories in the media up to a year before the election, and, of course, they managed to destroy consumer confidence to the point that we had a teeny, tiny recession (which the Clinton/Gore camp refered to as the worst economy since the Great Depression) and the bland Mr.Bush lost - despite having been a hugely popular war President, with sky-high numbers only a year before.

In 1980 the Establishment wanted George H.W. Bush, or Bob Dole, to be the nominee. Fortunately Ronald Reagan won, and he ended up annihilating the Democrats - twice!

In 1976 the Establishment promoted default President Gerald R. Ford over Ronald Reagan. Ford was beaten by the pathetic smiley face Jimmy Carter, a man who had to fend off a "killer rabbit" and who gave interviews to Playboy magazine admitting he "lusted in his heart". Carter was a national embarassment, and the Establishment candidate couldn't even beat him.

So now we are to believe the Establishment knows best, that we can only win with the guy who provided the model for Obamacare, with the fellow who was pro-abortion before he was against it, who wants amnesty for illegal aliens and then doesn't, for a Ken doll lookalike without Ken's personality. And this guy is defending the media! Why not nominate Tom Daschle and be done with it? (I hear he isn't too busy these days.) He'd get better press.

In a saner world Romney would be finished with this. Too many conservatives have put their eggs in the Romney basket, and prefer them there to on their faces. (See Ann Coulter's latest act of electorial malpractice here http://www.wnd.com/2012/01/re-elect-obama-vote-newt/

Speaking of eggs, Romney has laid a beauty.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:48 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 851 words, total size 5 kb.

(Here is an oldie but a goodie. This first appeared at Intellectual Conservative.)

By Timothy Birdnow, on January 4th, 2008


Why do our intelligence people think it will take six years or more for Iran to develop a nuclear device, when the United States was able to do it from scratch in just four, using Second World War technology?

In 1933 a startling idea occurred to a transplanted Hungarian at a traffic light at Southampton Row in London. This physics professor and former student of Albert Einstein had once read H.G. Wells' 1913 The World Set Free in which "atomic disintegration" was used as a superweapon to destroy the industrial world. Our young physicist, a Hungarian-born gentleman by the name of Leo Szilard, knew about the research of Ernest Rutherford in which the great man had discovered the inner structure of atomic nuclei. Daydreaming while at the stoplight, the thought occurred to Szilard that it should be possible to hit atoms with fast moving neutrons and thus split them. At this time there was not a name for such a thing, and it was not even considered theoretically possible. Szilard imagined a superweapon, Wells' "atomic disintegration," which would utilize a chain reaction, neutrons striking atoms, splitting off more neutrons that would strike more atoms, etc.

He went with this to see Rutherford, who summarily tossed him out of his office as a crank.

Szilard began searching for an element that would react as he envisioned. He would have to search for 5 years.

It was the purest of chance. In 1938 Dr. Lise Meitner, a physicist and Jewish woman who had once been at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute in Berlin but had fled to Sweden to escape the rising anti-Semitism of Nazi Germany, received a letter from an old friend. Dr. Otto Hahn, a longtime collaborator and former student of Rutherford, had bombarded uranium with neutrons, and some of the uranium seemed to have turned into barium. He scribbled out a letter to Meitner, realizing that he was about to either make a total fool of himself or go down in scientific history. Meitner's nephew, Viennese-born Dr. Otto Frisch, happened to be visiting as she was reading the remarkable letter from her old friend. Frisch discussed the matter with a friend who happened to be a biologist, and dubbed the new phenomenon "nuclear fission," naming it after the process of cell division..

Frisch was a staff member of the great Niels Bohr, and he casually related this story to the famous professor. Bohrs was going to Princeton to spend several months at the Institute for Advanced Study, and he leaked the word of Hahn's discovery to some of the members of the Institute. On January 25 he was made a last-minute speaker at the fifth annual Washington Conference, where he gave the details of nuclear fission. The conference exploded.

Still, the matter was considered only of intellectual interest. Szilard and his friend, fellow Hungarian Edward Teller (later to be known as the Father of the Hydrogen Bomb), began agitating for the Roosevelt Administration to fund a project to develop this point of intellectual interest into a superweapon. Nazi Germany had been systematically gobbling up Europe, and the Thousand Year Reich was better positioned to develop such a weapon. They had the scientific firepower, the uranium, and the will to do it. Szilard understood that whoever possessed such a weapon could dominate the world.

But the Roosevelt Administration did not grasp this fact, and they offered lukewarm support, even after Albert Einstein wrote his famous letter (at Szilard's request) advocating the development of an atomic bomb. (He ended up writing a second letter since the first drew virtually no response.)

It would take pressure from the British government and Hitler's amazing early success in Russia before the Roosevelt government would get serious about the effort. Even then, the "Uranium Committee" was given a small budget, and unclear goals. They did not even invite Szilard, Teller, or Enrico Fermi to sit on the committee, since they were immigrants and not considered reliable! The idea of using nuclear power for submarines seemed more promising than building a bomb.

The project was not given full support by Roosevelt until a meeting on October 9, 1941; fully two years after Einstein sent his letter.

On August 6, 1945 the city of Hiroshima disappeared in a mushroom cloud and hellfire. Nearly 140,000 people perished.

This most lethal of weapons was developed entirely from scratch in under 4 years, just 7 years after the uranium atom was first split, 12 years after the vaguest idea that such a thing was even remotely possible occurred to Szilard. Here is a timeline of events. Go here for more on the Manhattan Project.

Consider the difficulties; computers had just been invented, and they did not have calculators, so most of the calculations required had to be done by slide rule and with paper and pencil. There were no transistors or other such electronics, so any equipment they needed had to function with vacuum tubes. They did not have centrifuges that were powerful enough to enrich the Uranium, so they had to use magnets to pick the U235 out atom by atom. (Nobody had ever done such a thing before.) They did not know the critical mass needed; since neutrons strike the atomic nuclei and send more neutrons to strike more atoms-much like one of those domino displays-the exact amount and shape of the Uranium was crucial. Too much and the neutrons would bog down and the chain reaction would fail, too few and it would not get started. The researchers had no idea how much they would need, some of them thought they would need tons. They didn't know how to trigger the reaction, and all sorts of ideas were considered and discarded. (They would finally hit on the idea of using a gun firing uranium bullets for the U bomb but would be forced to develop a means of triggering an implosion for the plutonium variant, since the reaction would have to occur in 1/1,000 of a second.)

They solved all of these problems in under four years with 1940's technology. In fact, they solved it twice, since they not only developed Little Boy which was a uranium-based device, but also Fat Man which was plutonium-based. These were two completely different approaches to the problem, and both worked.

Seven years later the first fusion bomb was exploded by the United States at Enewetak.

On August 29, 1949 the backward Soviet Union had their "First Lightening" atomic test; this from a nation with no known Uranium reserves. Four years later, in 1953, the Soviets detonated a fusion bomb of their own. By 1955 they were testing thermonuclear devices in the megaton range.

Recently our intelligence community put out a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) http://www.odni.gov/press_releases/20071203_release.pdf which stated "with moderate confidence" that Iran could not be capable of producing enough Highly Enriched Uranium (HEW, at or above 20% U235, as opposed to Low Enriched Uranium LEW below 20%) to produce an atomic bomb before 2009, and they believe it unlikely before 2013, although they admit that Iran has been running an enrichment program and is currently seeking to purchase more centrifuges for the enrichment of uranium. They judge with "high confidence" that Iran is incapable of producing and reprocessing enough plutonium for a weapon before 2015.

They say that Iran had suspended its nuclear program in 2003.

Huh? They have an enrichment program, but that does not constitute a nuclear weapons program? Somebody please explain to me the difference; enrichment of uranium IS the nuclear weapons program!

Iran does not need to work out any technical details. They could obtain design blueprints from North Korea, or purchase them from the Russians or Chinese, or could have gotten them from A.Q. Khan, the father of the Pakistani atomic bomb, before his little cottage industry was broken in 2003 (interesting year, wasn't it?). The myriad details that were worked out by the Manhattan Project in less than four years are of no concern to the terror masters in Iran. For that matter, they could probably download a schematic from the Internet.

The crucial issue is the procurement of nuclear material; a nuclear weapons program requires little more than that.

Granted, that is not an easy thing to do. One must either obtain material already processed (something that would be difficult, but not necessarily impossible since the collapse of the old Soviet Union has left materials scattered about and there is no reason to believe that the Chinese would not sell a little on the side — or North Korea) or do the processing oneself.

To make weapons-grade uranium, it is necessary to separate out the highly fissionable U235 from the unrefined ore. (U235 constitutes just .72% of most ore.) This can be accomplished through electromagnetic isotope separation (EMIS), the method first used at the Y-12 plant at Oak Ridge, Tennessee, in which electromagnets separate uranium ions. Another early technique requires that the uranium be processed into uranium hexafloride gas and then passed through a filter which allows more of the U235 to penetrate. Rinse, lather, then repeat until you reach 95% U235. Perhaps the most efficient method is to whirl the uranium hexafloride in centrifuges; the heavier isotopes tend to settle to the outside (just like processing sugar). This technique requires far less energy, but necessitates rather sophisticated centrifuge technology; the Manhattan Project could not make this method work, for example. A really high-tech method is to use lasers to selectively excite atoms. The Iranians experimented with this, but abandoned it because it would not allow them to produce what they needed in abundance. Here is a website explaining the enrichment process.

Making plutonium requires a nuclear reactor; U238 is bombarded with neutrons inside a "breeder" reactor to produce U239, which then decays into Neptunium239. The highly radioactive Neptunium then decays into Plutonium 239 which can be "harvested" and used in atomic weapons. The technicians had best be careful; plutonium is highly poisonous, and will kill anyone who is accidentally exposed to it. Should a terrorist try to build a bomb from purchased plutonium he will likely wipe out his entire cell by mishandling the material. Go here to learn more about plutonium production.

In both cases, it is difficult to hide a clandestine nuke program; the enrichment process generally requires a large amount of space and energy, and things which can often be detected. Plutonium requires running a nuclear reactor — something we should not miss.

But difficult is not impossible, and North Korea developed their atomic weapons right under our noses.http://www.isis-online.org/publications/dprk/currentandfutureweaponsstocks.html This from a nation under intense scrutiny and with extremely limited resources. Of course, the Chinese likely assisted them in their quest, but they still managed to catch the intelligence community by complete surprise. It should be pointed out that they have been partnering with Iran, and had been assisting the Syrians to build a reactor for plutonium production. http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=23202

The conclusions of the latest NIE not only contradict their own report from '05, but disagree with aspects of this Congressional Research Services report from September of `06. http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:32uqnHf_XOAJ:fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/RS21592.pdf+Iranian+nuclear+enrichment+program&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=7&gl=us&ie=UTF-8

Here is a list of Iranian enrichment sites. http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/RS22531.pdf

Iran has had a nuclear program since before the Revolution, and the collapse of the Soviet Union, coupled with the proliferation of nuclear technology, has made it much easier to advance these programs. Why do our intelligence people think it will take six years or more for Iran to develop a nuclear device, when the United States was able to do from scratch in just four, using Second World War technology? They have a clandestine network assisting them. They have all the blueprints and schematics necessary. They have merely to acquire enough fissile material, and they may well have that supplied to them. Granted, their centrifuge technology may require more time to complete, but where there's a will there's a way. This report takes the Iranians at their word, something extraordinarily foolish in such a dangerous world. I wouldn't be surprised if they already have a bomb; they won't test it until they have more than one. Despite what the culprits responsible for this report (Donald Kerr, Van Vann Diepen, etc.) may believe, closing an official office hardly means shutting down the entire operation. As long as Iran continues to enrich uranium, they continue to have a nuclear program.

The thought occurs to me that perhaps this is some sort of ruse; we may be preparing some sort of action and want to catch the Iranians by surprise? It would be a very sound strategy, but President Bush simply does not operate in such a devious realm, and the political fallout would be very damaging if the public were not prepared.

No, it seems far more likely that the loose cannons in the CIA and at State have taken it upon themselves to undermine the President and our national policy. They have effectively removed the stick from our diplomatic position, and this will allow Iran to openly flaunt what they are doing, without fear of our response.

The idea that it will take Iran considerably longer to COMPLETE their program than it took America to develop one from scratch with inferior technology is ludicrous. A casual glance at history should tell us otherwise.

The clock is ticking, and time may be shorter than we think.
Share

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:06 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 2254 words, total size 14 kb.

Jack Kemp

I didn't plan it, but a series of events conspired today to find me near West Side Presbyterian, the Upper West Side of Manhattan church that had their $2,400 office laptop and the cover to their baptismal font stolen when they gave sanctuary to Occupy Wall Street members. That was written about in a previous article at
http://tbirdnow.mee.nu/what_ows_really_thinks_of_the_99_percent

After asking a woman staff member at the doorway what is the status of the stolen cover, she replied that the church is in contact with an artisan who will make a new one for their baptismal font. Then we were joined by a central figure from the earlier article.

"With all the problems of poverty in this neighborhood, we didn't need this. Ninety percent of the parishioners  are shocked by what happened," said Rev. Bob Brashear. He further added that the theft of the cover (and the unwanted removal of the baptismal font to another location on the premises) really damaged the parishioners' sense of safety and serenity in the church building. For what it was worth, I told him of people reacting positively in supportive comments  posted at another website.

Rev. Bob Brashear spoke of the disparity in wealth in this country, echoing a liberal theme. I strongly suspect he and I have significantly different ideas on how to best change the U.S. economic situation for the betterment of all, but I have to say that I respect his daily personal efforts to help the poor and afflicted in his community. This is a man who is there to assist people every day and not just for "photo ops" like a certain Mayor in New York I could name.

After we shook hands and I started to walk away, Rev. Brashear called me back to ask where he could find what I wrote about his situation. I gave him the Birdnow website name and hoped his web search would lead to his reading the previous article on this subject.

This is the first time I've ever written this, but although I wouldn't change a word, I hope I haven't put off Rev. Brashear with my previous remarks and he appreciates my viewpoint on what transpired at his church regarding the Occupy Wall Street crowd.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:00 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 384 words, total size 2 kb.

(My caregiver)

Timothy Birdnow

A quick personal note for readers.

As most of you know, I suffered heart failure back in September and have been forced to lug around a portable defibrilator. I have been on a horrible diet for diabetic cardiac patients, with no salt, no processed meats, no cheese, no processed foods, no sugar, low starch, restricted fluid intake, and absolutely no taste. I have been moved to insulin, which I take twice a day, as well as a drug called corvedilol, which makes me dizzy and weak. It's been a hard three months.

I've been quite dilligent about doing what I am supposed to do, and all praise belongs to my saintly wife who has devoted her life to keeping me above ground. (My sister-in-law refers to her as Nurse Ratched, or the Food Nazi.) I had an echocardiogram on Monday.

Good news! My ejection fraction has risen from 25% to 45%, a major increase! I am no longer in danger of Sudden Death Syndrome (a wonderful party favor of my weak heart) and so was able to unplug myself from the chain I forged in life (whenever I wore the accursed thing I felt like the ghost of Jacob Marley) and return to , well, life!

The Lifevest is a wonder; a vest that resembles a gun vest but is actually more like a brazziere (a cardiozziere?) with heart monitors on wrap-around arms and front and back "treatment pads" which are electro-shock paddles. The unit itself is like an old-fashioned camera, about five pounds and can be worn on the belt (theoretically). It transmits a signal to the company, who are always recording what is happening with the patient's ticker. If the heart stops a siren goes off, and the patient has to press a button or he will be defibrilated. Mine went off several times during my tenancy (it's a rented machine) although I was never defibrilated. I suspect I had a missed beat.

The gadget is hideously expensive, and the insurance company doesn't like to pay for it (they are happy to pay for a permanent pacemaker/defibrilator which it turns out I didn't need). I am in a second appeal to the denial of benefits on the gadget now. (It costs $3300 per month.) If they won't pay I suppose I'll be able to make a deal with the company. They have been excellent to deal with, I might add.

But OH! how I longed to be free of that gadget! It's tight, and has to be worn 24/7. When you try to turn over in your sleep you have to raise up first, or you will pull the contacts lose and get a gong sound that will wake you. Whenever you move you have to think about the unit. Going to the bathroom means picking up the thing and carrying it. Taking my insulin was a chore; I had to set the unit down, then rotate my body to perform the small tasks to get the syringe ready and give myself the shot. While it may not seem like a big deal, it's much like the Chinese water torture; after a while it drives you mad.

I would leave it off for an hour in the mornings; I just couldn't stand using it.

But now I'm free! To quote Pinoccio:

"I've got no strings to hold me down, to make me laugh, to make me frown, I had strings, but now I'm free, there are no strings on me!"

I'm not out of the woods yet; my heart is still below normal strength, and the recovery is fragile. I'm still stuck with the horrible diet, and will have to take the corvedilol for the rest of my life. Hopefully my body will eventually get used to it. It makes me dizzy.

But the worst appears to be over. I suspect I'll be heading back to the Ozark Hilton in the reasonably near future, and can at least expect to live through the visit!

I'll keep everyone posted.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 05:54 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 682 words, total size 4 kb.

By Alan Caruba

It seems like a bizarre notion, but does Barack Obama want to lose the election in November?

I think he does!

One is struck by the way Obama has visibly aged in the job. He may well have grown weary being POTUS.

By any rational standard, one would say he wants a second term, but Obama has always operated in a fantasy world where mere words are supposed to translate into reality. And he has repeatedly talked about being a one-term president.

He is, after all, his own invention; the author of two memoirs of a life that had little achievement to point to other than getting elected first to the Illinois legislature and then to the Senate where he lingered a bare two years before running for president.

I raise the question because Obama seems to be deliberately irritating the very people who are supposed to be his "base”; the hard core liberals, the Hollywood crowd, youth, and unions, among others. His partisanship has put Congress into total gridlock.

When members of the Occupy movement showed up in Washington, D.C., one of them threw a smoke bomb onto the White House lawn. Others who have been camped out in a park there are likely to be tossed out if for no other reason than the place is overrun with rats and has become a public health hazard.

The decision to stop the Keystone pipeline is a deliberate offense to the unions that have contributed millions to his campaign. Why? It pleased the environmental groups like the Sierra Club and Friends of the Earth. Americans, however, understand the pipeline represented both jobs and oil, two things they deem worth having.

Then there are all the vacations Obama and his family takes. They have one thing in common. They are ostentatiously expensive. Obama or Michelle always seem to be going on vacation or returning from one. The characterization may be unfair, but perception is everything.

Americans are very keen on their military and, of all the government programs Obama could have chosen to trim, he's had the knives out for the Pentagon since he took office. While a war-weary public was likely pleased when he withdrew troops from Iraq (neither Bush, nor Obama had a choice as the Iraqis made it clear they wanted U.S. troops out), the fact remains that the main news out of Iraq these days are bombings as the Sunni versus Shiite conflict has returned. Afghanistan remains a millstone.

Even in the face of a clear threat, it is unlikely that Obama would respond militarily between now and Election Day. The most likely scenario, however, would be an Israeli decision to strike at Iran before it becomes a full-fledged nuclear threat. It must be said, however, that Obama and other NATO nations have positioned some military assets in the Persian Gulf, but would he pull the trigger? It's doubtful.

The most obvious problem Obama faces is unemployment. It's variously set at anywhere from 11% to 20% depending on the part of the nation you're discussing. It still is far too high everywhere and he gives every impression of being, if not indifferent to it, at least in no hurry to address it. Most certainly none of his programs have reduced it. His alleged "stimulus” was little more than a political slush fund that added billions to the national debt and failed.

Every President is subject to "events” and the likely default of Greece and financial troubles of several European nations are likely to impact the national election as Americans try to sort out what effect it will have here. Obama has already presided over the first downgrade of America's debt rating and we shall surely be reminded of that in the months ahead.

The other event will be the Supreme Court hearing of the case against Obamacare in March. They may not issue a decision right away or they might issue one just before November 6th.

There are two lines of thought about the forthcoming national election. Past Presidents were relieved to leave office despite its power and prestige. (1) Obama may not like being President and (2) he has concluded that he will be defeated. He gives the impression of not caring about public opinion anymore.

The only people publicly defending him seem to have Attention Deficit Disorder. Either they haven't paid attention to what a disaster his term has been thus far or they just don't think it's his fault.

I think he will go through the motions, but I also think a majority of voters no longer believe a word he says anymore.

© Alan Caruba, 2012

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 05:30 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 782 words, total size 5 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

In what can only be termed a breathtaking display of hypocrisy, Barack Obama promised to promote shale gas and oil production in the U.S.
http://www.thegwpf.org/international-news/4829-obama-pushes-shale-gas-a-oil-drilling-to-create-600000-us-jobs.html

"We have a supply of natural gas that can last America nearly 100 years, and my administration will take every possible action to safely develop this energy,” Obama said in his State of the Union speech last night.

Why is this a breathtaking act of hypocrisy? It was Obama who shut down Gulf drilling. It was Obama who killed the Keystone pipeline (which could have been used to transport AMERICAN oil as well). It was the Obama Administration that recently restricted the mining of uranium. It was the Obama people who have locked up useful coal deposits in government "parks" and that has made operating coal-fired electric plants prohibitively expensive. It was the Obama EPA that issued a report falsely claiming that fracking chemicals were polluting groundwater http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2011/12/14/Tainted-EPA-Report-on-Fracking-Blasted-by-Gas-Co.aspx and has done it's best to block the practice. http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/energy-intelligence/2011/12/01/fracking-key-to-the-energy-revolution-if-epa-gets-out-of-the-way

It was Barack Hussein Obama who, when asked about the high price of gasoline (at over 4 bucks a gallon) during his election campaign said he was glad for high gas prices, but that he wished they would have risen more slowly. The man is a committed Green, and does not want Americans to have access to cheap energy.

His statement - after having killed the Keystone XL pipeline and the accompanying 20,000 American jobs - is the most cynical of lies, purely a campaign promise that it would be easy to renege on after the election. The man is shameless and despicable.

But some Americans will doubtlessly believe it, just as they believed his "green jobs" promise four years ago.

This Administration is hostile to energy. It hates every aspect of the modern industrial economy, from the first pinprick in the earth to the final usage in cars and air conditioners and automation. It hates oil companies, oil refineries, gas stations. It hates automobiles and the Americans who drive them (rather than ride public transportation like good little serfs). It hates these things because America pioneered much of this and gives Americans their lavish lifestyle. Leftists hate comfortable lifestyles - except for themselves. They retain a hangover from the old Puritan view that life is supposed to be hard and austere, and they want that for their fellows (while exempting themselves) as a way to create a virtuous populace. They snear at the American, fat and happy with his gas guzzling SUV, driving off to his gun show then going out to dinner at some meat packing plant-sized restaurant, guzzling beer and enormous chunks of meat in air-conditioned comfort. They hold this in complete contempt. (Of course, their prius takes them to a sushi bar where they smack their lips over raw fish and Kobi beef and guzzling saki, after having attended a lecture on the evils of capitalism, then they go home to their 5000 square foot homes using as much energy as a small city, but they are entitled because they CARE so much...) How dare America live well when there are starving people in Africa! It is our duty to make other Americans sacrifice for those poor wretches!

And it's about control; a rich populace, mobile, armed, is a danger to the ultimate plans and ambitions of Liberals. They can't put the public under their thumbs if they have no leverege over them. They need the public to be dependent on them, dependent on them to eat, drink, heat their homes, move about. Government cannot rule (and that is what they want, rule and not govern) if it cannot control, and it cannot control those who have what they need.

What a free people need most is energy. With energy they have no need of government except as a servant.

So when a man like BHO says he wants more energy in this country, look rather at his actions, and not his words. Every half bright liberal knows that green energy is not going to work on any scale; they advocate it precisely for that reason. It is a way to equalize America, to cut the fat, beer guzzling hicks down to size. If Obama wanted more energy he would not have followed any of the policies he has followed. He is a liar!

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:23 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 729 words, total size 5 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

Spengler predicts economic collapse in Egypt in a piece in Asia Times Online.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/NA24Ak02.html

From the article:

"Egypt faces a disaster of biblical proportions, and the world will do nothing about it. Officially, Egypt's foreign exchange reserves fell by half during 2011, including a $2.4 billion decline during December - from $36 billion to $18 billion, or about four months of imports.

But the situation almost certainly is worse than that. More than $4 billion left the country during December, estimates Royal Bank of Scotland economist Raza Agha, noting that the December drop in reserves was cushioned by a $1 billion loan from the Egyptian army and a $1 billion sale of dollar-denominated treasury bills.

The rush out of the Egyptian pound is so rapid that Egyptian investors refuse to hold debt in their own national currency, even at a 16% yield. After Islamist parties won more three-quarters of the seats in recent parliamentary elections - 47% for the Muslim Brotherhood and 25% for the even more extreme al-Nour Party - the business elite that prospered under military rule is counting the days before exile.

The first reports of actual hunger in provincial Egyptian towns, meanwhile, are starting to trickle in through Arab-language press and blog reports. A shortage of gasoline accompanied by long queues at filling stations and panic buying was widely reported last week.

In some towns, for example Luxor in Upper Egypt, the disappearance of diesel fuel shut down bakeries, exacerbating the spot shortages of bread."

End excerpt.

Food riots seem likely to come soon. The Obama Administration, completely oblivious to the forces they were unleashing, has handed Egypt to the Islamists, and has guaranteed the collapse of the Egyptian economy at the same time. Egypt is a critical nation in the region, and should Egypt topple the whole Middle Eastern economy is likely to go with it - and Greece will doubtlessly follow. Then the dominoes will fall one after another, inexorably.

We appear to be perched on the precipice of a worldwide catastrophe, and the man in the most critical position is too busy playing golf and fighting Global Warming to be bothered.

Hat tip: Ron De Haan

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 04:54 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 371 words, total size 2 kb.

Jack Kemp

The mainstream media was very upset about a few Marines urinating on the bodies of dead out of uniform terrorists who have been trying to kill them in a war. This story was all over many websites. Even Hillary Clinton denounced the Marines who did this. http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/world/2012-01/13/c_131357085.htm At the same time, Obama union ally the SEIU supports Occupy Wall Street. http://biggovernment.com/mvadum/2011/10/20/stephen-lerner-seiu-neo-communist-union-boss-uses-ows-to-spread-fear-economic-mayhem/ But when OWS members urinated on a cross in a Brooklyn church that gave them sanctuary, as well as stole from a Manhattan church, the mainstream media and New York local Democrats remain silent on the issue reported in a major newspaper.


The NY Post reported http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/god_awful_ows_mob_VqPjFDW0n234NhA9hxsxnL that Occupy Wall Streeters will no longer allowed to find sanctuary at the West Park Presbyterian Church, on West 86th Street in Manhattan – unless they return part of baptismal font that was stolen and make amends for their damage. The Church has given them two weeks to leave. West Park Presbyterian, with both services in English and Spanish http://westparkchurch.org/worshipsp.htm listed on their website, found a bronze basin and lid to a baptismal font gone. Although the basin was later found, the lid is still missing. The Post also reported an unusual expression of outrage for a churchman – but not for a New Yorker – when the Rev. Bob Brashear told the Occupiers that the vandalism "was like pissing on the 99 percent.”


The Post also reports more outrageous acts by the "people’s movement,” OWS:
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/god_awful_ows_mob_VqPjFDW0n234NhA9hxsxnL

BEGIN QUOTE

The artifact vanished just three weeks after a $2,400 Apple MacBook vanished from Brashear’s office.

SECTION OMITTED

In Brooklyn, at another church housing OWS protesters, an occupier urinated on a cross, according to Rabbi Chaim Gruber, who has angrily abandoned the OWS movement.

In a letter last week to OWS obtained by The Post, the rabbi fumed, "The Park Slope church housing occupiers was desecrated when an occupier peed inside the building and the pee came into contact with a cross.”

END QUOTE

These are the same Euro Utopians, "building a better world,” who took over a house in Brooklyn, raped a woman in Philadelphia http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2011/11/woman-raped-at-occupy-philadelphia/ and allegedly raped a man in New York, http://www.theblaze.com/stories/there%E2%80%99s-sexual-assault-going-on-alleged-protester-details-deaf-mans-rape-at-ows/ nurtured conditions for a tuberculosis outbreak at their encampment in Atlanta – and tried to shut down all ports on the West Coast of the United States while having some success in shutting down Oakland’s port. http://occupyoakland.org/2011/10/blockade-port-of-oakland-during-nov-2-general-strike/


The OWS disrespect for communities has gotten so bad that even earlier supporter and New York City Councilman Charles Barron (D) has turned against them http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/brooklyn/klyn_pol_supporter_flip_flops_on_Pt6THF9XMmgk89vVXlPiOO because of the OWS house occupation and related reasons.

I recall seeing Charles Barron in person at the New York City Council hearing in February, 2011 on the issue of whether to allow Walmart to open a store in Brooklyn. As Wikipedia documented, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Barron#Protest_against_Walmart

BEGIN QUOTE
Barron called Walmart a "roving plantation" and said "There are no slaves in East New York. We will not be your slave workers.”
END QUOTE

I believe Newt Gingrich addressed Mr. Barron’s concerns about entry level jobs that teach skills to teenagers when he replied to Juan Williams, telling of his (Newt’s) daughter working as a church janitor as a teen. And at that City Council hearing, I was surprised that Barron didn’t object to black teens working at McDonald’s, where many a black teen gets their first opportunity and job training – and pocket money. I guess attacking McDonald’s would be way too unpopular a remark for him to make about the beloved "Mickey D’s.”

Charles Barron is clearly a liberal, as are the two clergymen quoted above - but even they have to draw the line somewhere – between legitimate protest and nihilistic anarchy and license which destroys a community. They are finding out that when Lenin (borrowing from Robespierre in the French Revolution) said you have to be willing to break a few eggs in order to make an omelet, that often in a political movement one gets more broken eggs at one’s feet than nourishment. And the mess from the "broken eggs” flows into their communities, not just staying as clean illustration on the pages of some book of political sayings one can pass along to one’s followers.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 04:44 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 713 words, total size 5 kb.

Jack Kemp forwards this from Tea Party Nation:

http://www.teapartynation.com/forum/topic/show?id=3355873%3ATopic%3A1804496&xgs=1&xg_source=msg_share_topic

The truth about repealing Obamacare
Posted by Judson Phillips on January 24, 2012 at 10:22am

Holy Cow!

It is a good news, bad news scenario for liberal Mitt Romney. One of his top advisors comes out and says that Romney (nor any other Republican) will not repeal Obamacare!

If it were not the day of the State of the Union speech, this story would probably gain some traction.

From the Hill:

http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/politics-elections/206077-romney-adviser-norm-coleman-predicts-republican-president-wont-repeal-health-law

Mitt Romney adviser Norm Coleman, a former senator from Minnesota, predicted in a recent television interview that the GOP won't repeal the Democrats' healthcare reform law even if a Republican candidate defeats President Obama this November.
"You will not repeal the act in its entirety, but you will see major changes, particularly if there is a Republican president," Coleman told BioCentury This Week television on Sunday. "You can't whole cloth throw it out. But you can substantially change what's been done."
Coleman's remarks are remarkable because every Republican candidate - including Romney - has vowed to make repealing the law a priority. Coleman is also the chairman of the American Action Network, which has urged the courts to strike down the law's individual mandate and its Medicaid expansion.

Romney's campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

No kidding they were not responding. They were busy telling Norm Coleman to shut the hell up!

The truth of what Norm Coleman said cannot be ignored. Mitt Romney is not going to repeal Obamacare. He will work to have some of the more egreigious parts of it repealed or amended but he will not repeal it.

This is the truth about the Republican establishment and why we must defeat them. The Republican establishment does not want to reduce government or change the way things are done. They simply want to control big government.

Norm Coleman has told us why we must defeat Romney and make certain a conservative is elected. Mitt Romney and the big government Republican establishment types will not change anything.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 04:41 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 349 words, total size 3 kb.

Ron De Haan

You know, I really like big dreams, big concepts and big plans and I really hope common sense will return to the USA before we all end up with a windmil in our garden and obligatory tree hugging ceremonies wearing Mao inspired suits and a tin foil hat.

And just for the record, I am a great proponent of space research and exploration.

But I also think we have a few minor problems to solve first like preventing a pending collapse of the financial system and the US dollar, rolling back the Patriot Act and the NDAA Bill in order to restore our freedoms and a role back of Obama red tape, regulations and laws that stifle the Nation.

Newt Gingrich however has his own priorities.

Despite the economic crises and despite the small detail that he’s not elected President yet, Gingrich is already blasting into Space http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/22/gingrich-plans-major-speeches-including-one-on-space/

What a guy.

But hey, he didn’t earn his nickname Newt Skywalker for noting. He worked hard for it.
http://www.disinfo.com/2011/12/the-saga-of-newt-skywalker-gingrich/

It is really great to know that Gingrich, just like Obama, won’t have any problems spending large amounts of money.
This is exactly what we expect from our new President. Big idea’s and big spending.

He couldn’t make me happier.


This article first appeared at Sullivan's Travellers.
http://rarereaders.seablogger.com/2012/01/he-isnt-president-yet-hasnt-solved-the-economic-crises-but-hes-already-blasting-off-into-space/

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:29 AM | Comments (19) | Add Comment
Post contains 221 words, total size 2 kb.

This courtesy of ACT for America:

Many Muslim children in U.S. being taught hate

Dear Timothy,

We direct today’s email, not only to the attention of our members, but to those enablers and apologists for radical Islam whose only defense of this supremacist ideology is to call anyone who criticizes it a "racist” or "Islamophobe.”

Please read the eye-popping investigative report below (highlights added), and then, if you know of someone who is quick to wield the "Islamophobia” epithet, please forward this to them.

For if they are genuinely concerned about "hate,” and not just the advance of a politically correct agenda, they would do well to open their eyes to see the hate they are defending, aiding and abetting.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Muslim Children in America are Being Taught to Hate

Dave Gaubatz

January 18, 2012

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.11242/pub_detail.asp

In the last five years I have personally visited over 250 Islamic Centers, Mosques, and Islamic Schools throughout America. The goal of my research has been to determine what Islamic leaders are teaching the young and innocent Muslim children. The findings are abhorrent, sad, unbelievable, frightening, and most disturbing is the fact our government is keeping this dangerous fact from the American people. Muslim children attending mosques and Islamic schools are being taught to hate America, our government, our military personnel, and its non Muslim population. In this article I will identify three significant mosques in America that are leading the way in teaching Muslim children to hate and to influence them to commit violent acts inside our country.

In America we have been programmed by the media and political leaders to believe violent teachings of Islam are only being taught to children in Palestine. We have watched the Muslim Palestinian children spew their taught hatred of the Israelis. What Americans are not being shown (due to political correctness) are that Muslim children throughout the world and specifically inside America are being taught violence and hatred in mosques, Islamic schools and Islamic Centers.

Children as young as 7 years old are being taught that to assimilate with America is to disrespect and dishonor Islam. They are being taught our military personnel are the enemies of Islam and it is justifiable to kill anyone who dishonors or oppresses the Islamic ideology.

During my research I have identified numerous mosques that are teaching young Muslim children to hate America and are leading them to commit future violent acts against our country and innocent people. I would like to focus on three such mosques. They are:


1. Dar al Hijrah, Falls Church, VA

2. Al Farooq, Nashville, TN

3. At Taqwa, Brooklyn, NY


Anwar al-Awlaki was an imam at the Dar al Hijrah Mosque from January 2001 until 2002. Three of the 9/11 hijackers, Khalid al-Mihdhar, Nawaf al-Hazmi and Hani Hanjour, attended some of Awlaki’s sermons at this mosque.

My researchers and I spent several weeks at the Dar Al Hijrah mosque in Falls Church, VA. Almost immediately we were informed to obtain our study material from the Halaco Bookstore which is located nearby the mosque. It was very apparent upon entering the store and reviewing the materials that the bookstore provides materials for the Sunni (Wahhabi) Muslim population across the U.S. and specifically for Dar Al Hijrah. I was able to spend many hours talking with store personnel and was invited to the home of one employee to discuss Islamic issues. There is a large section in the store dedicated to the education of the Muslim children. I discovered materials that are being sent to Islamic schools across America. Much of the material deals with Sharia and Jihad. One of the DVD’s and books I obtained was by an Islamic scholar Ahmad Sakr. Sakr travels the U.S. visiting Islamic schools and educates them in Sharia law. I have watched one of his videos in which he tells the young children our government is evil and not to follow the laws of our country and Americas government leaders will all go to hell.

The material provided by Dar Al Hijrah and their selected Islamic bookstore also was filled with violent Jihad. There were manuals informing the readers how to destroy America and how to kill anyone who oppresses Islam. They are told how to obtain weapons to include weapons of mass destruction. Although all of the above is very disturbing and should (and actually is) against the law, the Muslim leaders of Falls Church, Val are allowed by our government to indoctrinate the Muslim children into future violence against our country. The next mosque (Al Farooq/Nashville, TN) is even more disturbing.

My research team and I spent two weeks at the Al Farooq mosque in Nashville, TN. The mosque was Sunni and had the typical violent books and DVD’s/videos pertaining to the overthrow of any government system that oppresses Islam. They also had numerous teachings from current Islamic leaders operating in America who are teaching the Muslim population to hate our country and its people. Although this should frighten all concerned citizens, there was even sadder and disturbing intelligence collected at this mosque. Lately we have all read about the child brides and forced marriages in Afghanistan and in Saudi Arabia. What most Americans do not realize is that child marriages are occurring throughout our country and specifically in Nashville, TN.

One young 7 year old Muslim girl at Al Farooq talked to our researcher about being beaten (MP3 file) by her Islamic leaders and being married (MP3 file) to a Muslim man. I reported the matter to the Nashville authorities but almost from the beginning they were reluctant to intercede because this was a religious institution and more importantly to them it was Islamic. Senior law enforcement authorities of the Nashville police department informed me they were afraid of being sued by Islamic organizations such as CAIR if they got involved and it would be a political nightmare to get anything done at the mosque. What bothered me most of all is the fact I contacted Islamic organizations to help this innocent Muslim child and they also balked. This reinforced to me that Islamic law (Sharia) is alive and very active inside our country, to include child marriages. The next mosque I am going to discuss is led by an Islamic leader I have previously described as the most dangerous man in America.

At Taqwa mosque in Brooklyn, NY is led by an Islamic scholar who is not only a major fundraiser for CAIR (terrorist supporter) but travels throughout the U.S. teaching his violent ideology of Islam. He is Imam Siraj Wahhaj. For those who have never visited the Islamic district of Brooklyn it would come to a surprise to many that the area around At Taqwa is similar to the Wahhabi land of Saudi Arabia. I have previously described Wahhaj as the most dangerous man in America. I have reviewed hundreds of his Friday (Juma) mosque lectures.

In this speech (MP3) he tells his followers that around the world Muslims will wake up and say

"I don’t want to follow the way of the colonial masters any more. I want the Sharia. I want Islam. We want to be ruled by Islam. And all we have to do is go back to that golden generation.”

He routinely called America an evil country and is a strong leader in developing Sharia law inside our country. His violent lectures are available to the adult and child Muslims throughout America.

"Those who struggle for Allah, it doesn't matter what kind of weapons, I'm telling you it doesn't matter! You don't need nuclear weapons or even guns! If you have faith in Allah and a knife!! If Allah wants you to win, you will win! Because Allah is the only one who fights. And when his hand is over your hand. whoever is at war against my friends, I declare war on them."

From a video by Sirah Wahhaj called "The Afghanistan Jihad," Toronto, Canada, of a sermon from Sept. 28, 1991.
"If we go to war, brothers and sisters – and one day we will, believe me – that’s why you’re commanded [to fight in] jihad. When Allah demands us to fight, we’re not stopping and nobody’s stopping us."

Sermon by Siraj Wahhaj entitled "Stand Up to Justice,” delivered on May 8, 1992 and distributed as a video. Islamic teachings such as this are what led the Major Nidal Hasan, the Fort Hood Murderer, to commit his acts.

Although I have only focused on three mosques that lead the way, introducing Muslim children to violence and hatred, there are hundreds scattered across the U.S. Few states are immune from this growing threat. The violence spewed by these Islamic leaders will ultimately lead to more violence in the name of Islam. I have witnessed firsthand the violence being taught. There are numerous such Islamic centers in NC, FL, VA, NY, and CA.

Unless Muslim parents decry the violent teachings of Islam to their children, there will continue to be more and more Siraj Wahhaj type Islamic leaders in America. The ultimate result will be the suffering of our country as we now see in France, Britain, and Canada.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:25 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1531 words, total size 10 kb.

Jack Kemp

Red State's Daniel Horowitz proposes a plan that Congressional Republicans who actually believe in fighting for our country's present and future should go to the wall to pass. If the Democrats kill this, they will have, in my opinion, handed the Presidency to the GOP on a silver platter.

Mr. Horowitz writes:
http://www.redstate.com/dhorowitz3/2012/01/23/congressional-republicans-can-and-must-force-obamas-hand-on-keystone-pipeline/

Immediately prior to the congressional recess in December, Congress passed an inefficacious two-month extension of the Social Security tax cut. Additionally, they reauthorized another two months of unprecedented long-term unemployment benefits, along with more spending for Medicare ‘doc fix.’ None of it, including the entitlement spending, was paid for in any meaningful way.

Nevertheless, you might ask, didn’t we get the Keystone pipeline as part of the deal? Well, in reality we got nothing.
SECTION OMITTED

It is not too late to force Obama’s hand on the pipeline. According to the latest CRS legal analysis, http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/205579-report-congress-can-require-keystone-pipeline-approval
"f Congress chose to assert its authority in the area of border crossing facilities, this would likely be considered within its Constitutionally enumerated authority to regulate foreign commerce.”

SECTION OMITTED
Congress’s power over foreign commerce is plainly enumerated by the Constitution, suggesting that its authority in this field is preeminent.”

In other words, Congress has plenary power to either absolutely force Obama to issue the permit or to issue it themselves.

The House should immediately pass Keystone legislation, either in a standalone bill or as part of other "must-pass” legislation. They should ship it off to the Senate and let the 23 Democrats who are up for election stand before their constituents and kill job creation. Not surprisingly, the overwhelming majority of voters agree.
END OF QUOTE

In other words, the Republicans should act as if they know who returned them to some power in 2010, the Tea Party, and not act like some country club members contemplating whether to get new wall paper for the main dining room or install iPhone phone charging stations in the main hall. There is a lot here at stake, i.e., both the jobs of out of work Americans - and soon to be out of work Congresspeople. When my own district threw out Anthony Weiner's Democrat successor, they weren't looking to continue the policies of Bob Michel and Charles Halleck - and Thurston Howell III - from a half century ago.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:24 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 400 words, total size 3 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

Mitt Romney - the Supermarionation candidate!
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/44112

Why is Romney sinking, and Gingrich on the rise? I examine the matter at Canada Free Press.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 04:01 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 33 words, total size 1 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

Monkey business with temperature data of Iceland by GISS.
http://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2012/01/18/the-icelandic-saga-continues/

From the article:

"Just to recap, we have learnt that GISS temperatures for Iceland and Greenland have been artificially adjusted, with the result that current temperatures appear much warmer than when compared with the warm period during the 1940’s. Temperature data for Reykjavik from the Iceland Met Office confirmed that this adjustment was wholly artificial and resulted in a net warming of about a half a degree centigrade since 1940 and that the actual mean temperatures in the last decade are about a degree less than GISS show."

End Excerpt.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:07 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 131 words, total size 2 kb.