Recent News from ACT! for America

comment by Jerry Gordon

picture-of-father-keith-roderick.gifFather Keith Roderick is a long time personal friend. As Washington Representative for Christian Solidarity International, he has been in the forefront of fighting for the recognition of the perilous status of non Muslim Christian minorities in predominately Islamic countries. Roderick has taken on the status of the Christian and Animist South Sudanese and the millions slaughtered and enslaved, well before the emergence of the Islamist central government assault on nominally black Muslims in the Darfur region. He has endeavored to raise public consciousness of Coptic Christians in Egypt, Maronite Christians in Lebanon and Christians in Pakistan. Last fall, he and another friend, author and journalist Ken Timmerman were part of a delegation that went to Jordan and Iraq to investigate the plight of Assyrian Chaldean Iraqi Christian refugees desperately seeking admission to the US under our misguided legal humanitarian refugee system. In this important FrontPageMagazine interview with editor Jamie Glazov, Roderick articulates the perilous status of the threatened Christian minorities in the Muslim ummah as dhimmis under strict Islamic Sharia law. Note these comments from Roderick:

    Roderick: The goal of the Islamist is to order all things in society by Islamic law. That goal is inherently racist. It assumes that a favorable balance of power favoring Muslims is the norm. Some argue that co-existence between Muslims and non-Muslims in the past is a template for today. However, unless there is the acceptance of true parity between Muslims and non-Muslims it is delusional to believe that such a peaceful “co-existence” can be achieved. The imbalance of power always and inevitably works against the non-Muslim in Islamic society.

    Therefore, to be resilient in the face of this reality means that the minority must seek to preserve the integrity of his own culture. When one finds that all of the institutions of society are constructed to ensure that non-Muslims remain second class citizens, it becomes necessary to seek out one’s own cultural institutions to identify with and strengthen. Integration into a society of mutual benefit presupposes equality and security. When these are denied to minorities, “co-existence” becomes a facade to justify the status quo of discrimination and prejudice.

    It is true that, even in the deepest throes of “Jim Crow” American society, whites and blacks lived and worked together. However, this did not signify a just society. Institutional inequality, prejudice, and insecurity made true co-existence impossible until the black minority asserted their basic civil rights and the white majority, under the pressure of that movement, institutionalized into law equal rights and security for all.

FrontPageMagazine, Interview by Jamie Glazov, July 25, 2008

FP: Rev. Keith Roderick, welcome to Frontpage Interview.

Roderick: Thank you.

FP: We’re here today to discuss the capability that of non-Muslim minorities to resist Islamization. What do you think is the reality and where is the potential?

Roderick: Non-Muslims have survived centuries of Islamization, but just barely. The fact that they still exist in spite of conquest, violent persecution and institutional discrimination is remarkable. Unfortunately, accommodation to the pressures of Islamization has opened their communities to demise. Non-Muslims in Islamic societies never speak from the perspective of power. The historic realities of living as a “them” in a society that is religiously, politically, and economically delineated between “us” (Muslim) and “them” (Khafir) means that non-Muslims speak from the perspective of victimization. Their survival response has often been to submit to the forces of their own oppression rather to resist them. Accommodation as the strategy for survival has all too often meant abandonment of their cultural identity and values. Nevertheless, Christians and other non-Muslims have shown remarkable resilience.

Perhaps resilience itself may be the most powerful force of resistance to Islamization.

FP: What is the goal of the Islamist?

Roderick: The goal of the Islamist is to order all things in society by Islamic law. That goal is inherently racist. It assumes that a favorable balance of power favoring Muslims is the norm. Some argue that co-existence between Muslims and non-Muslims in the past is a template for today. However, unless there is the acceptance of true parity between Muslims and non-Muslims it is delusional to believe that such a peaceful “co-existence” can be achieved. The imbalance of power always and inevitably works against the non-Muslim in Islamic society.

Therefore, to be resilient in the face of this reality means that the minority must seek to preserve the integrity of his own culture. When one finds that all of the institutions of society are constructed to ensure that non-Muslims remain second class citizens, it becomes necessary to seek out one’s own cultural institutions to identify with and strengthen. Integration into a society of mutual benefit presupposes equality and security. When these are denied to minorities, “co-existence” becomes a facade to justify the status quo of discrimination and prejudice.

It is true that, even in the deepest throes of “Jim Crow” American society, whites and blacks lived and worked together. However, this did not signify a just society. Institutional inequality, prejudice, and insecurity made true co-existence impossible until the black minority asserted their basic civil rights and the white majority, under the pressure of that movement, institutionalized into law equal rights and security for all. (Continue Reading this Article)

 

comment by Jerry Gordon

aclu-logo.jpgfbi-logo.jpgThe ACLU and its acolytes on Capitol Hill were complaining about the million names of Americans on the so-called terrorist watch list that invaded our privacy, since 9/11, allegedly. Now comes word that the actual number of terrorists among us has grown from the 5,000 estimated post 9/11 to four times that figure or 20,000. Enough to cause an FBI official, Leonard Boyle to comment on it publicly. Boyle noted on a C-SPAN interview, that the watch list has more like 400,000 names and less than 5% of those are US citizens. That still is no comfort knowing that the 20,000 terrorists are enough to commit mayhem and mini-9/11s here at home.

My problem with the ACLU is that they trumpet the fact that they have a strategic relationship with Muslim Brotherhood (MB) front, CAIR on ‘religious profiling issues’. Not long ago, the ACLU filed a motion on behalf of another MB front, the Islamic Society of North America the Dallas Federal District Court to try and expunge the name of an other unindicted co-conspirator in the retrial of Holy Land Foundation ‘charity’ matter that begins in September. It is no wonder that IBD states that perhaps the ACLU ought to be included on the government ‘watch list’ as a terrorist facilitator.

Investors Business Daily, Editorial, July 25, 2008

Homeland Security: Forced to defend its growing terrorist watch list, the FBI let slip a chilling fact that should silence ACLU grumblers: America is teeming with 20,000 terrorists.

After 9/11, federal authorities estimated that as many as 5,000 terrorists were living in the U.S. The new figure is jarring not only because it’s four times as large but because it’s based on real persons, not estimates.

It’s not something headquarters wanted to publicize. Officials had downplayed the threat so as not to spook the public. The spin had been that Britain has the homegrown problem, not us.

But that was before the ACLU launched a campaign with the Democrat Congress to demonize the watch list as a Gestapo-like tool. The FBI had no choice but to knock down their myths.

The ACLU charged that an “out-of-control” FBI is adding mostly innocent people to the list, ballooning it to “over 1 million names.” “I doubt this thing would even be effective at catching a real terrorist,” ACLU spokesman Barry Steinhardt harrumphed.

In fact, the list has saved countless lives, according to the head of the FBI’s terrorism screening center — an assertion backed up by a recent independent review by the GAO.

And the watch list monitors only 400,000 people, not a million, says the FBI official, Leonard Boyle. The rest are aliases due to the myriad spellings and variations of Arabic surnames.

In a rare public appearance on C-Span, Boyle added that the overwhelming share of individuals on the terrorist list are foreigners, while “5% to 6%” of individuals are U.S. citizens or legal residents.

That still pencils out to at least 20,000 people living in this country right now — at large and on the streets — who have “some relationship with terrorist activity,” as Boyle described it.

They pose a big enough threat for airlines to legally bounce them off planes, and for every law enforcement authority from border agents to local police to detain them for questioning.

At 20,000 strong, these suspected homegrown terrorists number a full army division. And they don’t include the more than 440 active terrorists the Justice Department already has put behind bars since 9/11. Britain, by comparison, is watching just 8,000.

But never mind all that. The ACLU and its allies on the Hill want to scrap the terrorist watch list and take law enforcement’s eye off these potentially dangerous suspects.

In a perfect world, the ACLU might qualify as a terrorist facilitator deserving of its own spot on the list.

 

comment by Jerry Gordon

336667117.jpgbarck-hussein-obama.jpgBarrack Hussein Obama had a large photo op in Berlin yesterday a send up to the late JFK and his “ich bin ein berliner” speech in 1961. But on his media tour of Eurabia, the presumptive Democratic nominee couldn’t take time out to visit severely wounded US troops at the Ramstein Landstuhl medical facility. The reason, ‘no photo ops’. Not sure that went down very well with the hospitalized servicemen and women there, nor does it with many of us who are veterans here in the US.


by Ed Morrissey, HotAir.com, July 25, 2008

NBC’s Jim Miklaszewski & Courtney Kube get the skinny on the abrupt cancellation of Barack Hussein Obama’s visit to Landstuhl & Ramstein yesterday. The campaign tried to excuse it by claiming that it wouldn’t be appropriate to visit while on a campaign-funded portion of his trip, but that wasn’t the real problem. When Barack Hussein Obama found out he couldn’t use the visit as a photo op, he canceled:

One military official who was working on the Obama visit said because political candidates are prohibited from using military installations as campaign backdrops, Obama’s representatives were told, “he could only bring 2 or 3 of his Senate staff member, no campaign officials or workers.” In addition, “Obama could not bring any media. Only military photographers would be permitted to record Obama’s visit.”

The official said “We didn’t know why” the request to visit the wounded troops was withdrawn. “He (Obama) was more than welcome. We were all ready for him.”

In fact, those same rules applied for the CODEL trip to Iraq & Afghanistan. They serve to keep politicians from exploiting military facilities for political reasons & to ensure that all visitors get treated fairly. Andrea Mitchell, also of NBC, complained of this very issue during the earlier visits with the troops when she told Chris Matthews that the media couldn’t get access to Obama when visiting troops in Iraq & Afghanistan.

This makes the decision track very clear. Obama & his team set up the visits to military installations before going overseas. After seeing how the media got excluded in Iraq & Afghanistan, they decided it wasn’t worth traveling to Ramstein & Landstuhl to visit the severely wounded troops because they couldn’t bring the campaign & get the photo ops they wanted. Instead, Obama went shopping in Berlin.

As I wrote yesterday, that’s certainly a revealing set of priorities for a man who wants to lead these troops as Commander-in- Chief.

 

comment by Jerry Gordon

islamic-saudi-academy.jpg3913238492.jpgSecretary of State Condi Rice copped out on the decision by the Fairfax County, Virginia leasing property to the Royal Saudi Embassy for the controversial Islamic Saudi Academy and its Islamic studies hate texts the subject of reviews by the US Commission on International Religious Freedom. Here are the salient comments in the Fairfax County Times article on a State Department Letter sent to Fairfax County:

    “The [State Department] has not objected to the [Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia] leasing the property in question for the Academy,” reads the letter to Fairfax Board chairman Gerry Connolly on behalf of Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice.

    Although the county board voted in May to renew the school’s lease, they reconsidered after the allegations by the USCIRF were released. Since the school is leased through the Saudi Arabian government, Fairfax asked the State Department to weigh in, a request that agency has now denied.

    “No authorization from the Department to renew the lease is required,” the federal response reads, putting the ball firmly in Fairfax County’s court.

Now, the ‘hot potato’, as we have called it, is back in the hands of Fairfax County Board of Supervisors Chairman, Gerry Connelly, the Democratic candidate for a Congressional House seat in the 11th District. We suspect that U.S. Rep. Frank Wolf of northern Virginia will not be pleased by the State Department decision. He may possibly call for a hearing by the House State and Foreign Operations Subcommittee of House Appropriations Committee on the subject of the ISA and the County request to State that was left to the Board of Supervisors to make a determination. In light of the Second Saudi text studies released by the Hudson Institute Center for Religious Freedom, both the State Department and Fairfax County are faced with a dilemma, given evidence that the Saudi Education Ministry has not produced texts used by the ISA cleansed of Wahhabi hate doctrine for the new school year as originally promised. Stay tuned for further developments.

By Monty Tayloe, Fairfax County Times, July 23, 2008

The U.S. State Department has left it up to Fairfax County whether to continue leasing county buildings to the Islamic Saudi Academy, a local Islamic school that has operated in Alexandria and Fairfax for more than 20 years.

Textbooks used by ISA were recently found by the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom to promote religious intolerance and violence.

“The [State Department] has not objected to the [Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia] leasing the property in question for the Academy,” reads the letter to Fairfax Board chairman Gerry Connolly on behalf of Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice.

Although the county board voted in May to renew the school’s lease, they reconsidered after the allegations by the USCIRF were released. Since the school is leased through the Saudi Arabian government, Fairfax asked the State Department to weigh in, a request that agency has now denied.

“No authorization from the Department to renew the lease is required,” the federal response reads, putting the ball firmly in Fairfax County’s court.

As of press time, county supervisors had not indicated what their next step might be.

At the academy, school is out for the summer, but the controversy has created a lot of work for school officials, who have worked to create new textbooks without offending passages in time for the coming school year. The new textbooks have been sent out to Islamic studies professors at several American universities for review.

“They’re checking the new books over with this issue in mind,” said ISA Director of Education Rahima Abdullah, referring to the controversial passages.

According to Abdullah, the school is not sure which passages in the old textbooks the USCIRF specifically referred to, but hopes the review will eliminate future problems. Many passages of the school’s old textbooks, which were provided by Saudi Arabia, were not taught at the school, Abdullah said.

The older books included “some extremely troubling passages that do not conform to international human rights norms,” according to USCIRF.

“We don’t teach hate or intolerance,” said Abdullah, whose three children attended the Saudi Academy.

USCIRF Director Judith Ingram said that new books without the controversial language would fix the problem “as long as the new books were publicly available. … They have to be able to be verified.”

The ISA has its hopes set on the upcoming school year, when “the new textbooks will hopefully be ready in time” and the school won’t have to deal with the protesters who marched outside its gates at the close of the last school year, while students were taking their final exams.

 

Page 384 of 394

<< Start < Prev 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 Next > End >>


You are here:   HomeLearnRecent NewsRecent News