On April 16, 2015, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights announced that more than 310,000 people had been killed in Syria’s uprising-turned-civil war.
The Syrian conflict began on March 15, 2011, triggered by protests demanding political reforms and the ouster of dictator Bashar al-Assad.
And who does the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights–safely based in England–blame for this Islamic self-slaughter? Why, the West, of course.
According to its website:
“The silence of the International community for the war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Syria encourages the criminals to kill more and more Syrian people because they have not found anyone that deter them from continuing their crimes that cause to wound more than 1500000 people; some of them with permanent disabilities, make hundreds of thousands children without parents, displace more than half of Syrian people and destroy infrastructure, private and public properties.”
Got that? “They have not found anyone that deter them from continuing their crimes”–as if it’s the duty of non-Muslims to bring civilized behavior to Islamics.
And why are all these murderers “continuing their crimes”? Because of an inner-religious dispute within Islam that traces back to the fourth century.
Yes, it’s Sunni Muslims, who make up a majority of Islamics, versus Shiite Muslims, who comprise a minority.
Each group considers the other takfirs–that is, “apostates.” And, in Islam, being labeled an apostate can easily get you murdered.
But, according to the Syrian Observatory, it’s the duty of the West to convince these murderers to stop slaughtering one another.
There is, however, another perspective to consider–that of the late political scientist Samuel Huntington. In his bestselling 1996 book, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, he warned:
“The fundamental problem for the West is not Islamic fundamentalism. It is Islam, a different civilization whose people are convinced of the superiority of their culture and are obsessed with the inferiority of their power.”
This is starkly outlined in the 2009 book, Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat, by Dr. Peter Hammond.
Hammond explores the impact of an increasing Muslim population on non-Muslim society–and the changes that can be expected to occur within that society.
Dr. Peter Hammond
According to Hammond:
Islam is not a religion nor a cult. It’s a complete system of religious, legal, political, economic and military components. The religious component encompasses all the others.
“Islamization” occurs when there are enough Muslims in a country to agitate for their “religious rights.”
The Pew Research Center estimates there are 2.5 million Islamics in the United States. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) puts the figure at seven million.
In December, 2015, almost 150 Muslims in Fort Morgan, Colorado, gave a demonstration of what happens when the number of Islamics rises within a non-Islamic society.
Cargill Meat Solutions, headquartered in Wichita, Kansas, is a division of Cargill Inc., which employees 155,000 people in 68 countries.
On December 18, 11 workers at Cargill’s beef processing plant in Fort Morgan wanted to go pray at the same time in a room in the plant that is set aside for prayer and reflection. A supervisor told the employees they could go pray, but only three at a time, so production would not be affected.
The workers complied with the supervisor’s request and went in smaller groups to pray. But after their shift ended, 10 of the 11 workers resigned, turning in their badges and hard hats.
The following Monday, about 150 employees from the Somali Muslim community didn’t show up to work for three consecutive days. The company fired them all.
Cargill is now hiring to replace those who walked out.
Areas have been set up at Cargill since 2009 to accommodate anyone who requested time to pray.
“There are times when accommodation is not possible,” Michael Martin, a Cargill spokesman, told CBS News. “But in an overwhelming majority of instances, we do everything we can to ensure that we do accommodate employees.”
Tony Aden, one of the fired employees, explained the situation thus: “It don’t matter if I don’t have a job, my religion is more important.”
Negotiating on behalf of the striking–and then fired–employees was the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).
In 2007, CAIR was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Hamas-support trial of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLFRD). The defendants were charged with giving more than $12 million to support Hamas.
Hamas is designated as a terrorist organization by the European Union, Egypt, Japan, Canada, Israel and the United States.
On November 24, 2008, the government obtained guilty verdicts on all counts against HLFRD and the five individual defendants in the retrial.
As the Islamic population rises within the United States, non-Islamics can expect increasing demands for “Islamic rights.” According to Dr. Hammond:
At five percent of the population, Islamics try to get the ruling government to let them rule themselves under Sharia (Islamic) law.
At 10%, they use lawlessness to complain about their conditions.
At 20%, Islamics riot, form jihad militias and burn Christian churches and Jewish synagogues.
At 40%, nations experience widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks and ongoing militia warfare.
Their ultimate goal: To extend Sharia throughout the world–enforcing it on Muslims and non-Muslims alike.
Bureaucracybuster's Blog 
2008 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, 9/11, ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, ANDERSON COOPER, ANTI-COMMUNISM, BARACK OBAMA, BILL CLINTON, BIRTHERS, CBS NEWS, CITIZENSHIP, CNN, DONALD TRUMP, FACEBOOK, JOSEPH ARPAIO, LAURENCE TRIBE, MSNBC, MUSLIMS, NAZI GERMANY, NAZI PARTY, NBC NEWS, RAFAEL "TED" CRUZ, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REPUBLICANS, SS, THE BOSTON GLOBE, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, TREASON, TWITTER, UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT, USA TODAY
THE RIGHT DEVOURS ITS OWN CHILDREN
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Politics, Social commentary on January 14, 2016 at 12:12 am“All revolutions,” said Ernst Rohem, leader of Adolf Hitler’s brown-shirted thugs, the S.A., “devour their own children.”
Ernst Rohem
Fittingly, he said this as he sat inside a prison cell awaiting his own execution.
On June 30, 1934, Hitler had ordered a massive purge of his private army, the S.A., or Stormtroopers. The purge was carried out by Hitler’s elite army-within-an-army, the Schutzstaffel, or Protective Squads, better known as the SS.
The S.A. Brownshirts had been instrumental in securing Hitler’s rise to Chancellor of Germany on January 30, 1933. They had intimidated political opponents and organized mass rallies for the Nazi Party.
But after Hitler reached the pinnacle of power, they became a liability.
Ernst Rohem, their commander, urged Hitler to disband the regular German army, the Reichswehr, and replace it with his own legions as the nation’s defense force.
Frightened by Rohem’s ambitions, the generals of the Reichswehr gave Hitler an ultimatum: Get rid of Rohem–or they would get rid of him.
So Rohem died in a hail of SS bullets–as did several hundred of his longtime S.A. cronies.
SS firing squad
At least one member of the Republican Party is now learning that an apparently useful weapon can become a liability.
Ever since Barack Obama became a Presidential candidate in 2008, Republicans have accused him of being ineligible to hold office.
Without a political scandal (such as Bill Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky) to fasten on, the Republican Party opted for slander: Obama had been born in Kenya–and thus was not an American citizen.
From this there could be only one conclusion: That he would be an illegitimate President, and should be removed from office if elected.
And this smear campaign continued after he won the election. Right-wingers like real estate billionaire Donald Trump insisted that Obama had been born in Kenya, not Honolulu.
During his first two years in office, Obama tried to ignore the charge.
But polls repeatedly showed that large segments of the country believed it. Finally, even Obama’s closest advisers warned him: You must address this and put it to rest.
So, on April 27, 2011, the President released the long-form of his Hawaii birth certificate.
The long-form version of President Obama’s birth certificate
For the vast majority of Americans, this settled the issue. In 2012, they re-elected Obama to a second, four-year term.
Nevertheless, for many Right-wingers, even the release of Obama’s long-form birth certificate meant nothing.
Joseph Arpaio, the Right-wing sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona, claimed that his “investigators” were certain that Obama’s birth certificate was fraudulent.
Responding to Arpaio’s claims, Joshua A. Wisch, a special assistant to Hawaii’s attorney general, said: “President Obama was born in Honolulu, and his birth certificate is valid. Regarding the latest allegations from a sheriff in Arizona, they are untrue, misinformed and misconstrue Hawaii law.”
Fast forward to 2015.
Donald Trump, who had threatened to run for President in 2012, announced his candidacy on June 16. Since then, he has been the front-runner for Republican voters.
But then Texas’ United States Senator Rafael “Ted” Cruz entered the race. As radical and ruthless as Trump, he quickly became the billionaire’s most dangerous competitor.
Rafael “Ted” Cruz
What to do?
Then Trump–or someone in his campaign–had an inspiration. Why not use against Cruz the same “he’s-not-an-American” charge that had been used against Obama?
Cruz, born outside the United States, was not really a natural-born American citizen–and was thus ineligible to be President.
Cruz was born in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, to an American mother and a Cuban father.
The U.S. Constitution states specifically that “No person except a natural born Citizen …shall be eligible to the Office of President.”
Cruz has argued that because his mother was an American, he became an American citizen at birth.
But courts have never ruled on the issue of what constitutes a “natural-born” citizen.
At first, the issue seemed confined to Republican politicians and those likely to vote for them. But then others outside the Right began investigating it.
Mary McManamon, a constitutional law professor at Widener University’s Delaware Law School, concluded in an Open Editorial for The Washington Post:
“Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) is not a natural-born citizen and therefore is not eligible to be president or vice president of the United States.”
Cruz got an even bigger slap in the face from Laurence Tribe, the celebrated professor of Constitutional law at Harvard University. He has argued before the United States Supreme Court 36 times.
Writing in The Boston Globe, Tribe stated:
“…The kind of judge Cruz says he admires and would appoint to the Supreme Court is an ‘originalist,’ one who claims to be bound by the narrowly historical meaning of the Constitution’s terms at the time of their adoption.
“To his kind of judge, Cruz ironically wouldn’t be eligible, because the legal principles that prevailed in the 1780s and ’90s required that someone actually be born on US soil to be a “natural born” citizen.” [Italics added.]
So long as Cruz stays in the race, Trump will continue to use the “birther” charge against him. And it will continue to dog him, as it did Obama.
Thus, the evil that politicians do lives after them.
Share this: