Another Tack: Galling like de Gaulle
To those among us with some historical memory, these tense days might be reminiscent of days no less tense on the eve of the Six Day War. Then too Israel was beset by existential threat.

Egypt had blockaded the Tiran Straits, kicked out UN forces from Sinai and filled our airwaves with bellicose bluster about annihilating the Jewish state, a.k.a. the loathsome “Zionist entity.” Four and a half decades later, we are threatened by Iranian nukes and all around us is regurgitated the bellicose bluster about annihilating Israel, a.k.a. the loathsome “Zionist entity.” To those of us who still remember, the vehement vows to obliterate us sound eerily similar.

But the comparables hardly end here. Our nervous systems are today mercilessly put through the wringer – but not for the first time. Yesteryear too, our very existence seemed to equally hang in the balance during a protracted waiting period of uncertainly, compounded by the realization that somewhere, behind closed doors, life-and-death decisions are being weighed by pressured individuals tugged in contradictory directions and bearing unenviable burdens. We didn’t know back then, in 1967, about Yitzhak Rabin’s breakdown but plenty of us felt at the end of our own tether.

And as our white-knuckle ride on history’s roller coaster tumbled and tossed us 45 years ago, the world watched with apathetic aplomb. Our grueling anxiety was no skin off assorted foreign noses. It was our misfortune and none of their own. Just as now.

Already back in 1967 what concerned the august statesmen of fellow democracies was hardly our welfare and survival. What they feared most was an Israeli preemptive strike. That, they warned sternly, would grievously upset the international apple cart.

What they counseled was that we just learn to live with the very potent threats to our continued presence on the face of this planet. We should embrace our endangered species status and count on their diplomats to powwow as per polite protocol. Perhaps they can win us a smidgen of extra time, but only on condition that we don’t fly off the handle.

Sound familiar? It should.

What US President Barack Obama fears most, as he campaigns for reelection, is not the Iranian bomb but Israeli action against that bomb – especially if the dreaded Israeli preemption occurs before the race for the White House concludes. That would really be a political killjoy. And so Obama and his diverse mouthpieces – some in uniform – issue severe and unsympathetic admonitions against Israeli adventurism.

They prefer us diminished, demoralized, dependent on their good will, and, most of all, no trouble during a close electoral showdown. While we compliantly cower in our assigned corner, they could lay it on real thick and announce that they’re our devoted friends. Our fate and future must be entrusted to their superior judgment because Obama knows best. He often tells us so.

This bears uncanny resemblance to the attitude of another omniscient friend – French president Charles de Gaulle. Indisputably, Obama appears the more likable of the two but his policy bottom line is just as galling as de Gaulle’s.

Back in 1967 many of us still convinced ourselves, despite mounting evidence to the contrary, that de Gaulle was our best bud. There was no American aid back then but France occupied a warm spot in Israeli hearts. In its earliest days Israel came to regard France as an ally, which it literally was during the 1956 Sinai Campaign, but it also offered military and scientific collaboration (which begot our nuclear reactor in Dimona). France was Israel’s premier weapons retailer. Israel’s first modern fighter jets were the French Mirages.

New York MTA Prepares to Post Ad Critical of Islam as Muslims Across the Globe Riot to Suppress Free Speech

New York MTA Prepares to Post Ad Critical of Islam as Muslims Across the Globe Riot to Suppress Free Speech

New York, New York (September 14, 2012) — In the wake of protests, riots, murder, and mayhem perpetrated by Muslims who claim to be angered by a YouTube video that was critical of Islam, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority of New York’s (MTA) is making final arrangements – by order of a federal judge – to display an advertisement on its buses that is critical of savage acts committed by jihadists against Israel.

The specific advertisement, which is sponsored by a human rights organization, the Freedom Defense Initiative (FDI), and its executive directors, Pamela Geller, and Robert Spencer, states, “In Any War Between the Civilized Man and the Savage, Support the Civilized Man. Support Israel. Defeat Jihad.”

The MTA had initially refused to run the advertisement in September 2011 because it claimed that it violated the MTA’s policy against displaying “images or information that demean an individual or group of individuals on account of race, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, gender, age, disability or sexual orientation.”

As a result of the MTA’s refusal to run the advertisement, the American Freedom Law Center (AFLC), a national non-profit Judeo-Christian law firm, filed a civil rights lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of FDI, Geller, and Spencer, challenging the speech restriction. On July 20, 2012, Federal Judge Paul A. Engelmayer issued a preliminary injunction, ruling that the MTA’s speech restriction violated the First Amendment. However, the court granted the MTA thirty days to attempt to cure the violation by amending its “no-demeaning” regulation.

On August 29, 2012, Judge Engelmayer issued a final ruling striking down the MTA’s “no-demeaning speech” restriction and ordering the MTA to display the bus advertisement. The order converted the preliminary injunction into a permanent injunction, and it declared that the MTA speech regulation violated the First Amendment right to free speech. The judge also awarded FDI nominal damages.

The MTA had until September 12, 2012 to seek a stay of the district judge’s order with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The MTA failed to obtain the stay. Consequently, the MTA is now required to run the advertisement. And if it does not do so promptly, it will risk being held in contempt of the court’s order.

David Yerushalmi, Co-Founder and Senior Counsel of AFLC, commented: “In light of the Obama administration’s dhimmitude and abject weakness in the face of savage attacks against U.S. personnel through coordinated violence directed at American sovereignty embodied by our embassies and consulates in the Muslim Middle East, the court’s ruling in favor of our cherished First Amendment right to criticize violence driven by Islam’s law of sharia sends a message to our enemies around the world and here at home: Americans will not be cowed into silence. We know when America is under attack when we see it. If speech critical of Islam can send men into wild murderous rages, then they are savages and deserve to be labeled as such.”

Robert Muise, Co-Founder and Senior Counsel of AFLC, commented: “What should be evident to every freedom loving American who is watching the events unfold in the Middle East is that sharia is contrary to our fundamental constitutional rights. Under our Constitution, government officials have a constitutional duty to stop a violent mob intent on suppressing speech. Indeed, in our society, which is guided by Judeo-Christian principles, free speech and religious freedom are protected against censorship or punishment. There is no room under our Constitution for a more restrictive view. Judge Engelmayer’s decision in this case upholds and protects those precious American freedoms that the Obama administration is quick to cast aside in favor of its appease-Muslims-at-all-costs policy.”

The American Freedom Law Center is a Judeo-Christian law firm that fights for faith and freedom. It accomplishes its mission through litigation, public policy initiatives, and related activities. It does not charge for its services. The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations, and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization. Visit us at


American Freedom Law Center

Contact: Robert J. Muise, Esq.
Phone: (855) 835-AFLC (2352)

Choose Option “3”



Obama to Israel: Let’s renew relations (ANOTHER APOLOGY?)
Israel National News
Friday, September 14, 2012
President Obama on Thursday released a video greeting to the Jewish people in honor of Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year. Obama suggested that the New Year was a time to repair his country’s relationship with Israel, Read more…

Read more:

White House clarifies Obama: Egypt is ally
President Obama’s deputies are walki…
Read more…

Read more:
Dems fault Napolitano, Obama for DHS waste
Los Angeles Times
Friday, September 14, 2012
Democrats on the House Homeland Security Committee and a senior Republican colleague voiced doubts Thursday about the viability of BioWatch, the system for detecting biological attacks that has been plagued by false alarms. Democrat, Rep. Yvette D. Clarke (D-N.Y.), blamed the Obama administration. Read more…

Read more:
Six Chinese ships enter Japenese waters
Associated Press
Friday, September 14, 2012
The Japanese government and coast guard said six Chinese surveillance ships entered Japanese waters Friday near disputed islands in the East China Sea, adding to tensions between the Asian giants. Read more…

Read more:


My brilliant friend Andrew Bostom whose must read new book will appear very soon reminded me this morning (at 6:30 A.M.) that the Arab uprisings in Lybia, Yemen and Egypt are policy issues owned strictly by our President.

This crisis is one you can’t blame on George Bush or anyone else by any stretch of imagination. Obama’s obsequious outreach to the Moslem world and the uprisings and subsequent rise of Islamic Jihadists in power (it is not only the Boyz in the Moslem Brotherhood Terrorhood) all occurred under this President’s watch.

And, how fitting that Bill Clinton addressed the Democratic Convention. As we watch in horror our Ambassador’s body dragged through the streets and Obama’s late and lame response, we are reminded of Bill Clinton’s craven response when in Mogadishu in 1993 an American soldier’s body was dragged through the streets by a savage crowd.

In October of 1993, Clinton sent United States Rangers and Special Forces to stabilize Somalia. His plan, presented to Congress with a timetable, was “to conclude our role there honorably but we do not want to see a reversion to the absolute chaos and the terrible misery which existed before.” His words came back to bite him. Subsequent investigations disclosed that U.S. soldiers on the ground were left without armed vehicles or sufficient firepower from the air. The Clinton administration and then Secretary of Defense, the late Les Aspin, repeatedly denied the Special ops teams’ and the Rangers’ requests for more armored vehicles, AC-130 gunships and tanks.

The American public witnessed gruesome televised scenes of rampaging Muslim Somalis dragging and desecrating the bodies of American troops. Congress demanded a withdrawal and Clinton did a “cut and run” operation leaving Somalia in worse shape than ever and Aidid unbowed. The end result was the perception that America can be defied by any rag tag army of terrorists.

Sound familiar?

RICH LOWRY: ROMNEY WAS RIGHT! When a U.S. embassy gets stormed by protesters overseas, it’s usually a matter of public concern. And it might even occasion debate between presidential candidates. Unless one of the candidates is President Barack Obama and the other is Mitt Romney. Then, everything changes. In the immediate aftermath of the deadly attacks on U.S. diplomatic […]


There are two positions one can take regarding the Iranian nuclear program: (a) it doesn’t matter, we can deter them, or (b) it does matter, we must stop them.

In my view, the first position — that we can contain Iran as we did the Soviet Union — is totally wrong, a product of wishful thinking and misread history. But at least it’s internally coherent.

What is incoherent is President Obama’s position. He declares the Iranian program intolerable — “I do not have a policy of containment; I have a policy to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon” — yet stands by as Iran rapidly approaches nuclearization.

A policy so incoherent, so knowingly and obviously contradictory, is a declaration of weakness and passivity. And this, as Anthony Cordesman, James Phillips, and others have argued, can increase the chance of war. It creates, writes Cordesman, “the same conditions that helped trigger World War II — years of negotiations and threats, where the threats failed to be taken seriously until war became all too real.”

This has precipitated the current U.S.-Israeli crisis, sharpened by the president’s rebuff of the Israeli prime minister’s request for a meeting during his upcoming U.S. visit. Ominous new developments; no Obama response. Alarm bells going off everywhere; Obama plays deaf.

The old arguments, old excuses, old pretensions have become ridiculous:

CLARE LOPEZ: ARAB SPRING EXPLODES IN ATTACKS AGAINST AMERICA As Americans everywhere remembered the attacks of September 11, 2001 today, in Cairo, Egypt, they stormed the U.S. Embassy and penetrated the perimeter. They ripped down the American flag, tore it to bits, and burned the pieces. Shouting “[w]e will sacrifice ourselves for you, Allah’s messenger!” the crowds then ran up the black flag […]

PETER BROOKES: NO TIME FOR US PASSIVITY While details trickle in on the troubling and tragic events involving our diplomatic missions in Cairo and Benghazi on Tuesday, one thing is certain: America remains in the cross-hairs of violent Islamist extremists. So much for the liberalizing effects of the Arab Spring. Unfortunately, some of the Islamist forces (including, potentially, terror groups) that […]


A recent article in Frontpagemag, “Muslims Have More DNC Delegates than Montana, Utah and Oklahoma Put Together” listed some very interesting stats:

Number of delegates for the Great State of Oklahoma – 50

Number of delegates for the Great State of Utah – 34

Number of delegates for the Great State of Montana- 31

Number of delegates for the Great State of Vermont – 27

Number of delegates for the Great State of Nevada – 44

Number of delegates for the Great State of Iowa – 65

Number of Muslim delegates – 100

The statement that there are 100 Muslim delegates comes from CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) and can be found in an article that was published by the Washington Post on September 5, 2012,

The number of Muslim delegates attending the Democratic National Convention has quadrupled since 2004, according to a Muslim advocacy group.

The Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations counts more than 100 Muslim delegates representing some 20 states at the Democratic convention in Charlotte, N.C., this week. That’s up from 25 delegates in 2004, according to CAIR.

The Washington Post article continued with a quote from Robert McCaw,

CAIR government affairs coordinator Robert McCaw said the numbers were “a sign of the American Muslim community’s growing civic engagement and acceptance in the Democratic Party.” He also said that Democrats had targeted outreach to American Muslims.

The statement, “the numbers were a sign of the American Muslim community’s growing civic engagement and acceptance” reminded me of one specific part of the Muslim Brotherhood plan known as “The Project” and I decided that it was time to revisit it given the upcoming elections and world events.

The document, known in counterterrorism circles as “The Project”, was recovered in a raid by Swiss authorities in November 2001, just two months after 9/11. The 14-page plan written in Arabic and dated December 1, 1982, outlines a 12-point strategy to “establish an Islamic government on earth” – identified as The Project.

The following points are among the many recommendations made in “The Project”,

Networking and coordinating actions between likeminded Islamist organizations;
Avoiding open alliances with known terrorist organizations and individuals to maintain the appearance of “moderation”;
Infiltrating and taking over existing Muslim organizations to realign them towards the Muslim Brotherhood’s collective goals;
Using deception to mask the intended goals of Islamist actions, as long as it doesn’t conflict with shari’a law;
Avoiding social conflicts with Westerners locally, nationally or globally, that might damage the long-term ability to expand the Islamist powerbase in the West or provoke a lash back against Muslims;
Establishing financial networks to fund the work of conversion of the West, including the support of full-time administrators and workers;
Conducting surveillance, obtaining data, and establishing collection and data storage capabilities;
Putting into place a watchdog system for monitoring Western media to warn Muslims of “international plots fomented against them”;
Cultivating an Islamist intellectual community, including the establishment of think-tanks and advocacy groups, and publishing “academic” studies, to legitimize Islamist positions and to chronicle the history of Islamist movements;
Developing a comprehensive 100-year plan to advance Islamist ideology throughout the world;
Balancing international objectives with local flexibility;
Building extensive social networks of schools, hospitals and charitable organizations dedicated to Islamist ideals so that contact with the movement for Muslims in the West is constant;
Involving ideologically committed Muslims in democratically-elected institutions on all levels in the West, including government, NGOs, private organizations and labor unions;
Instrumentally using existing Western institutions until they can be converted and put into service of Islam;
Drafting Islamic constitutions, laws and policies for eventual implementation;
Avoiding conflict within the Islamist movements on all levels, including the development of processes for conflict resolution;
Instituting alliances with Western “progressive” organizations that share similar goals;
Creating autonomous “security forces” to protect Muslims in the West;
Inflaming violence and keeping Muslims living in the West “in a jihad frame of mind”;
Supporting jihad movements across the Muslim world through preaching, propaganda, personnel, funding, and technical and operational support;
Making the Palestinian cause a global wedge issue for Muslims;
Adopting the total liberation of Palestine from Israel and the creation of an Islamic state as a keystone in the plan for global Islamic domination;
Instigating a constant campaign to incite hatred by Muslims against Jews and rejecting any discussions of conciliation or coexistence with them;
Actively creating jihad terror cells within Palestine;
Linking the terrorist activities in Palestine with the global terror movement;
Collecting sufficient funds to indefinitely perpetuate and support jihad around the world;

What reminded me of the “Project” was the CAIR comment about the 100 plus Muslim delegates. One of the specific goals that the “Project” has, as noted above,

Involving ideologically committed Muslims in democratically-elected institutions on all levels in the West, including government, NGOs, private organizations and labor unions

As the saying goes, “it’s right out of the (Muslim Brotherhood) playbook”.

This is no coincidence, nor does it just happen to be a group of patriotic American Muslims. I have yet meet or hear any Muslim here in America refer to themselves as a “American Muslim” as opposed to a “Muslim American”.

Interestingly, until post 9/11 Muslims were overwhelmingly Republican. According to the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), 78 percent of Muslims voted Republican in 2000.

The switch to the Democratic Party by an overwhelming number of Muslims is simple… It is the same party that wants to stifle religion yet backs the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) on Resolution 16/18 on issues of freedom of religion and speech. In other words: making it a criminal offense to speak negatively on Islam or Muslims.

OBAMA THE SPOKESMODEL FOR TYRANNY: STELLA PAUL Barack Obama is not a real president, though he does play one on TV. So what is he? It’s my contention that the bizarre creature currently residing in the White House is sponsored by America’s mortal foes to serve as an attractive spokesmodel for our destruction. The time for politely mincing words is over. […]