Obama Claims Victimhood for Extremist Islam

Originally posted by Maggie at Maggie's Notebook

UPDATE July 17, 2008

If there was any doubt how Barack Obama views America on the world stage, his own words now make his position deadly clear.

Obama's July 13th statement defies words. Is he ignorant, a sociopath, or a hardcore Muslim-leaning leftist? The details:

Obama went public and placed unabashed blame on "the West" for Islamic extremism. In an interview on July 13th with CNN's Foreign Affairs Analyst, Fareed Zakaria asked:

[ZAKARIA]: But how do you view the problem within Islam? As somebody who saw it in Indonesia ... the largest Muslim country in the world?

Obama reminisced about the years he lived in Indonesia (late 1960's, early 1970's) and then calmly offered up a very firm opinion about "the problem with Islam."

[Obama] And what's interesting is, you can see some correlation between the economic crash during the Asian financial crisis [1997], where about a third of Indonesia's GDP was wiped out, and the acceleration of these Islamic extremist forces.

It isn't to say that there is a direct correlation, but what is absolutely true is that there has been a shift in Islam that I believe is connected to the failures of governments and the failures of the West to work with many of these countries, in order to make sure that opportunities are there, that there's bottom-up economic growth.

Just to be clear: Obama states unequivocally that "the West" caused a "shift in Islam," and the "shift" caused by the Free World is the "problem with Islam."

Here are reminders of the "problem with Islam," 4 of which occurred before the Asian financial crash.

A hat tip to Korla Pundit who supplied the details of the March 1, 1973 murder
March 1, 1973 - American diplomats taken hostage in Khartoum, Sudan by the Black September terrorists. 3 dead - 2 of them American officials. A declassified Department of State document states [this is an amended document dated May 4, 2006 - 25 years after the murders] :

The Khartoum operation was planned and carried out with the full knowledge and personal approval of Yasir Arafat, Chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), and the head of Fatah. Fatah representatives based in Khartoum participated in the attack,...

...one of the primary goals of the operation was to strike at the United States because of its efforts to achieve a Middle East peace settlement which many Arabs believe would be inimical to Palestinian interests.

The open participation of Fatah representatives in Khartoum in the attack provides further evidence of the Fatah/Black September Organization relationship. The emergence of the United States as a primary fedayeen target indicates a serious threat of further incidents similar to that which occurred in Khartoum

The word "fedayeen" in the above paragraph, refers to (I think) the Black September Organization - fedayeen meaning "fighters for the faith," and not Saddam's Hussein's fedayeen.
See the original declassified State Department amended document at World Net Daily.

During Bill Clinton's two terms in office [1993-2001], Arafat was invited to the White House more than any other international political figure. (Clinton met Arafat a total of 24 times in eight years.)

This deadly serious cartoon courtesy of Raf Nagidimov

When Arafat died, UN secretary-general Kofi Annan, shaking with emotion, called it “a grave day for the world,” and instructed headquarters in New York to especially fly the UN flag at half-mast. (This is despite the fact that Arafat did not represent any UN member state, and the UN doesn’t usually mark the death of leaders of even its member states in this way. The UN didn’t fly its flag at half-mast when, for example, Ronald Reagan died a few months before Arafat.)

The Black September Organization executed 11 Israeli atheletes at the 1972 Munich Olympics, barely 5 months before the murders of Americans in Khartoum.

April 1983 - U.S. Embassy Bombing in Beirut, Lebanon: 80 died - 17 Americans, 32 Lebanese embassy employees and 14 passersby. Islamic Jihad Organization claimed responsibility.

October 1983 - Beirut U.S. Marine Corps Barracks Bombing: 241 U.S. Marines were murdered and 80 were seriously injured when Islamic factions trucked-in the equivalent of 12,000 tons of TNT, and blew-up American military barracks in Lebanon. Islamic Jihad Organization claimed responsibility, however, Hezbollah - organized, trained and funded by Iran's Revolutionary Guard, is believed to be the perpetrator of the attack. In February 2008, a truck bombing in Damascus, Syria erased Imad Mughniyah from the world's civil societies. Better known to Americans as Hajj, Mughniyah was instrumental in the formation of Hezbollah and was always among the heads of the snake.

October 1985 - The Achille Lauro (an Italian cruiseship) was hijacked by the PLO (Palestinian Liberation Organization) off the coast of Egypt. One American murdered. Leon Klinghoffer, celebrating his 36th wedding anniversary with his wife, was shot in the head and chest while sitting in his wheelchair. The ship's barber and a waiter were forced to throw Mr. Klinghoffer's body overboard. Klinghoffer was Jewish. 400+ passengers were on-board during the two-day saga.

June 1985 - TWA Flight 847 (an American-owned airline) was hijacked by Hezbollah. The airliner was taken over in Athens, then flown to Beirut, Lebanon where it released a few passengers, refueled and continued to Algeria - again releasing a few passengers. Navy Diver, Robert Stethem was identified as U.S. military - beaten, shot and his body dumped on the Beirut tarmac. Over a period of 16 days, passengers were terrorized and flown back and forth between Beirut and Algiers before the whole horrible terrorist act was over.

While cowards commandeered the airplane, a heroic flight attendant, Uli Derickson, hid the passports of Jewish passengers and used her own credit card to purchase jet fuel.

February 1993 - First World Trade Tower Bombing: Terrorism arrived on American soil. 6 dead, over 1,000 injured. Conspiracy theories still fly, but what we do know to be true is that the perpetrators were Muslim. They intended to bring down both World Trade Towers, the plot was enormous - this was no small bombing event. It left a 95' wide crater, multiple stories up and down destroyed. The mastermind, Ramzi Yousef, planned simultaneous bombings of U.S. aircraft. He was captured by Pakistani forces in an Al-Qaeda safehouse in Islamabad, Pakistan, two years after the bombing. He was tried and sentenced in an American court and is serving a life sentence in Colorado, supposedly in solitary confinement. The taxpayers get to pay for his keep and speculate how many terrorist gangs he has organized, and how many apostles he has gained, while in "solitary confinement." His uncle is Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, a member of Al-Qaeda and a close association of Osama bin Laden. Yousef and his uncle are both Muslims.

October 2000 - USS Cole is bombed: 17 dead American sailors, 39 injured. It is believed that Al-Qaeda and the Sudenese government worked together to assault the USS Cole as it refueled in Yemen. According to the CIA Factbook, "Military regimes favoring Islamic-oriented governments have dominated [Sudanese] national politics since independence from the UK in 1956.

September 2001 -
American Airlines Flight 11 hijacked and crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center: 92 passengers, crew and Islamic terrorists dead.

United Airlines Flight 175 hijacked and crashed into the South Tower of the World Trade Center. 56 passengers, crew and Islamic terrorists dead.

American Airlines Flight 77 - 9:37 am: Hijacked and crashed into the Pentagon. 64 passengers, crew and Islamic terrorists dead. 125 dead in the Pentagon.

American Airlines Flight 93 - Hijacked and crashed into a field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania. 44 passengers, crew and Islamic terrorists dead.

A total of 2974 persons are considered dead due to the September 11, 2001 attacks. How many died in each separate building? There seem to be no statistics "by building." I think we know why. Are the 19 terrorists in this count? I don't know the answer. 24 persons are considered missing.

Along with the North and South World Trade Towers, 5 additional buildings in the complex were destroyed and three others were destroyed or were beyond repair: St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church, The Deutsche Bank Building, and the Borough of Manhattan Community College's Fiterman Hall.

The "Asian Financial crises" (recovering began within 9 months) was multi-layered, but to offer it as an excuse for Islamic terrorism is unconscionable.

As we head to the November election, let us be ever mindful of not only those Americans who have died at the hands of the "government" of Islam, but the thousands injured who will never be able to forget for even one day. Let us remember with certainty, that Obama blames America for Muslim Rage.

Obama's Global Poverty Act - Here's the Evil in S.2433

Originally posted by Maggie at Maggie's Notebook

This post is a revision, for clarity, of a previous post.

The issues are staggering, and while we might be compelled to believe that these things can never happen to America, read the following and see if you still feel, in today's devious world political climate that these evils cannot surmount our freedoms.

Barack Obama's Global Poverty Act will undoubtedly cost the U.S. billions in new monies for foreign aid, but that' not the most important issue.

All text in red and all bold text is Maggie's emphasis.

Is Senator Obama's Global Poverty Act (Senate Bill 2433) tied to the United Nations, the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) or the U.N.'s Millennium Development Goal (MDG) in anyway?

Yes. S.2433, the language of the Bill says: "A bill to REQUIRE the President to develop and IMPLEMENT," "the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal." Senator Obama's S.2433 cannot be separated from the U.N. Millennium Development Goal.

Who implements S.2433 after the President "creates" a plan?
The Secretary of State, Condoleesa Rice, her appointees with Congressional oversight by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, the Senate Appropriations Committee, the House Foreign Affairs Committee and the House Appropriations Committee.

What do we know about the United Nations Development Program (UNDP)?
Follow the links and be prepared for sudden nausea.

Does the United Nations Accept the Rule of Law?

The UN's Gravy Train to Iran

Ros-Lehtinen Statement on UNICEF Ties to Saudi Extremist-Linked Charity

Report Shows U.N. Development Program Violated U.N. Law, Routinely Passed on Millions to North Korean Regime

The UN Corrupting Itself - A Chavez Connection

Does S.2433 require a specific strategy (some believe that it does not)?
The Bill says that we [the U.S.] will IMPLEMENT the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal? Can it be any clearer?

Does The Global Poverty Act subjugate the United States to the will of the United Nations?
Yes, and it does so through the United Nations' Millennium Development Goal. It is important to remember that the MDG is a U.N. program.

The following is the proof that the MDG is a "tax on the world" levied by the United Nations. The text addresses only the requirements to be placed upon the U.S. and other countries, it leaves out most of the goal of eradicating poverty and disease, and focuses on how that eradication will be accomplished. Text taken directly from the U.N. General Assembly Millennium Forum.

The Forum (urges, advocates, calls upon or insists): The United Nations

To introduce binding codes of conduct for transnational companies and effective tax regulation on the international financial markets, investing this money in programmes for poverty eradication.

Here's a tax on international finances! Who are transnational companies?

To explore the feasibility of a legally binding convention on overcoming poverty, to be drafted in effective consultation and partnership with people living in poverty themselves.

To carry out the objective of moving towards the abolition of war by practical means, the United Nations Secretariat and interested Governments, or a separate group of Governments, should develop a draft proposal for global disarmament to be discussed in a fourth special session of the General Assembly on disarmament.

Someone, I think Orwell, said War is evil, but it is often the lesser evil. The U.N. plans for globalism, with the U.N. at the head of the snake, to abolish war. They think they are God.

To respect national sovereignty and the prohibition of the use of force, which are fundamental in the Charter of the United Nations. This principle must not be undermined. In the solution of conflicts, all peaceful methods in accordance with Chapter 6 of the Charter must be tried before measures of force are undertaken in accordance with Chapter 7. The General Assembly should set up a broad commission to analyse standards for forceful action in cases where crimes against humanity, war crimes or genocide are committed.

1) The U.N.'s "prohibition" of force is not to be undermined.
2) How does a global principle protect anyone's sovereignty?
3) "Peaceful method" means un-acted upon Resolutions - we have painful historical reminders. .

To expand the United Nations arms register in order to show the production and sale of small arms and light weapons. It should include specific names of their producers and traders.

Our Second Amendment rights monitored by the United Nations.

Together with nearly all Governments that participated in the recent Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty review conference, Forum participants consider that unilateral deployment of nationwide missile defence by any country could have dangerously destabilizing effects and create pressures to permanently retain high levels of nuclear weapons or even to increase existing levels. The deployment of theatre missile defences in Asia or other regions could have serious regional destabilizing effects. Such plans should be relinquished in favour of a worldwide missile launch warning system and a conference to review methods of ending production of long-range surface-to-surface missiles and long-range bombers

To establish a commission at the United Nations to devise ways of stopping the technological development of new and more advanced weapons that create new imbalances in global power relationships. The Conference on Disarmament should also establish a working group on this subject.

The U.S. met their non-proliferation goals five years early, while the U.N. was enabling Iran to grow its nuclear program.

1) No long-range bombers for the U.S.
2) No surface-to-surface missiles for the U.S.
3) No missile defense for the U.S.
4) No new technological development
5) No more power to protect our nation

To initiate a worldwide freeze on armed forces and a 25 per cent cut in production and export of major weapons and small arms, and to that end to adopt an international code of conduct on arms exports, as the beginning of worldwide build-down of conventional forces.

That's a "worldwide freeze" on armed forces - on our Marines, our Army, our Navy, our Reserves, our Coast Guard! AND an international "code of conduct" to implement a "build-down" of conventional forces.

To increase their efforts to promote and to comply with international humanitarian laws, limiting the methods and means of war and protecting non-combatants, civilian populations and humanitarian personnel.

The international community civil society, Governments and the United Nations has a responsibility to stop promptly any genocide, war crimes or any massive violations of human rights. All those involved should seek to avoid any confusion between humanitarian help and military intervention.

Internationalism governs. Sovereignty is abolished. The United Nations Security Council reigns. Islam is implemented throughout the world.

If you are not familiar with the U.N. Security Council, here are some informative links:

Arabs Seek to "Halt" UN Security Council Meetings

The UN Security Council Takes Action Against Terrorism

Iran's 25-Year Atomic Program and the UN Failure to Launch

Rape in War: Will the United Nations Walk its Talk?

For everything you need on the U.N. Security Council go to:
Eye on the UN and UN Watch.

Globalization needs defining....it is transforming our world into a global village...We, of all ages, in particular our future generation the youth claim a space for that transnational civil society that even now is rising on the world scene with unprecedented ties, networking, exchanges and common action among peoples, groups, communities and organizations.

The youth of the world will "claim a space" for "that transnational civil society" in the world's "global village..." Where might that "space" be? Do the people in that "space" have a say about the youth's claims? Again, for emphasis: a transnational civil society

To develop a legally binding framework for regulating the actions of transnational corporations (TNCs), respecting the international labour, human rights, and sustainable environmental standards set by the United Nations and its relevant specialized agencies. The regulatory mechanism should include the active participation of workers and communities directly affected by TNC operations in order to prevent abuses and to subordinate TNCs to democratic civil authority and community-based modelling of socio-economic systems.

As I look around the web, I find no list of the evil-doing transnational corporations. If the U.N. plans to "subordinate" the transnationals to "civil authority" and "community-based modelling," we need to know who the culprits are. Could Google be on the list? Nah. Halliburton? I think so. "Big Oil" - oh yeah, but only careful "subordination" here, because the world needs "Big Oil" tax money, as well as its investment in exploration and drilling. Oh...there's always "nationalizing" the world's oil fields. The Islamic countries know how to drill for oil. They rule the U.N. Very convenient - but this is only a guess.

To examine and regulate transnational corporations and the increasingly negative influence of their trade on the environment. The attempt by companies to patent life is ethically unacceptable.

What does this mean, and who is patenting the life of others?

To move towards democratic political control of the global economy so that it may serve our vision.

The vision: The U.N. controlling a global economy - to serve the U.N.'s vision

How is a democracy defined within the hallowed halls of the U.N.? You and I don't have a clue but we know such democracies will be "subordinated" to the U.N.'s "civil society"

To develop migration policies, both emigration and immigration, in conformity with human rights standards, particularly to respect the global principle of freedom of circulation for all.

This is terrifying, really. The goal is to remove the sovereignty of our borders. We need to get up each morning with the idea of the U.N.'s "global principle of freedom of circulation" vision, think about it again at noon, and let it be the last thing we think about before sleep, because surely we will offer up a prayer to the Almighty that our leaders will repel this disgusting organization.

To make serious commitments to restructure the global financial architecture based on principles of equity, transparency, accountability and democracy, and to balance, with the participation of civil society organizations, the monetary means to favour human endeavour and ecology, such as an alternative time-based currency.

Restructuring the global financial architecture? Alternative time-based currency?

Sustainable funds could be raised through a currency transfer tax,...which could also help to reduce currency speculation, and a tax on the rental value of land and natural resources.

Here's the tax on currency transfers and land. When has the MSM reported this. When has Barack Obama spoken of this?

Stop imposing economic sanctions, which deprive people of their basic economic, social and environmental rights and which make their struggle for survival, as well as for civil and political rights, more difficult.

We can make the case that sanctions are worthless, as it is the U.N. which strengthens them. Iraq and Saddam Hussein comes immediately to mind, especially the Oil-for-Food Program. Then and now, there's Iran. How does the U.N., always wanting diplomatic solutions to prevail, propose that we deal with tyranny ?

To fully incorporate women into leadership at every level and gender perspectives into all its operations; to hold Governments accountable for their obligations to promote and protect the human rights of women and girls; and to act as monitors of the implementation of commitments to end discrimination and violence against women and girls.

When it comes to Women's Rights, (or human rights for that matter) the worst offenders are Muslim countries. It's all is a matter of "degree," isn't it? I notice at the Millennium Development Goal monitoring sites, some Arab countries have shown some degree of improvement. What does that mean? How has it changed the life of women under the control of Islam and their Islamic male dominaters? The free world will finance achieving this goal? Think again.

To establish a global habitat conservation fund to purchase comprehensive protection of threatened, critical ecological habitat worldwide. The fund should accrue revenues from a nominal (0.5 -1.0 per cent) royalty on worldwide fossil energy production oil, natural gas, coal, collecting at least $5 billion to $10 billion annually.

Here's the tax on fossil fuels that is continually denied.

End of text from Millennium Forum.

A tax on fossil fuels, land, currencies, etc.? Investor's Business Daily didn't make it up, Lee Cary at American Thinker didn't make it up.

You can "monitor" the Millennium goals by country beginning here, although you won't learn much. Most of what we want and need to know falls into the "Insufficient Information" category.

I reject the U.N. and everything it stands for, because everything it stands for is against the best interests of Americans and freedom anywhere, and usually is intent on feathering the nests of a U.N. diplomat and a cozy relationship with the worst of the terrorizing scums on the face of the earth.

There are 21 co-sponsors of S.2433:

• Sen. Barack Obama [D, IL]
• and 21 Co-Sponsors
  • Sen. Joseph Biden [D, DE]
  • Sen. Jeff Bingaman [D, NM]
  • Sen. Barbara Boxer [D, CA]
  • Sen. Sherrod Brown [D, OH]
  • Sen. Maria Cantwell [D, WA]
  • Sen. Robert Casey [D, PA]
  • Sen. Susan Collins [R, ME]
  • Sen. Christopher Dodd [D, CT]
  • Sen. Richard Durbin [D, IL]
  • Sen. Russell Feingold [D, WI]
  • Sen. Dianne Feinstein [D, CA]
  • Sen. Charles Hagel [R, NE]
  • Sen. Thomas Harkin [D, IA]
  • Sen. Tim Johnson [D, SD]
  • Sen. John Kerry [D, MA]
  • Sen. Richard Lugar [R, IN]
  • Sen. Robert Menendez [D, NJ]
  • Sen. Barbara Mikulski [D, MD]
  • Sen. Patty Murray [D, WA]
  • Sen. Gordon Smith [R, OR]
  • Sen. Olympia Snowe [R, ME]

The usual RHINO's support this traitorous Bill: Susan Collins, Chuck Hagel, Richard Lugar, and Olympia Snowe. Gordon Smith (R-OR) is also a co-sponsor and I do not have much information on him. He's from Oregon, so...


Technorati Tags:U.N.,U.N.D.P.U.N.Millennium Development Goal, United Nations, Globalism, Senator Barack Obama, One World Order, Reject the U.N., Senate Bill 2433, Obama's Global Poverty Act

Here's "The Meat" of Obama's Global Poverty Act, S.2433

Cross-posted by Maggie at Maggie's Notebook

I received a comment on my Obama's U.N. Global Poverty Act - Supported by a Wicca Witch post that I want to reply to, and I think the best way to do this is post about her comments. Of the several Obama Tax on the World posts I've done, it is amusing that she picked this one to post her reply.

Right up front, because this is a long article, I want to offer the link that supports the serious reporting on Senate Bill 2433, sponsored by Barack Obama. This link supports the claim that the Bill is complicit in achieving the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) - a tax on fossil fuels, land, currencies, etc. Investor's Business Daily didn't make it up, Lee Cary at American Thinker didn't make it up. The MDG "Agenda" is very long, and I've posted below the most significant points - but you can read it for yourself at Millennium Forum

The commenter's (Ms. Williams) statement is shown in full, with my reply in red text.

Senator Obama's S.2433 cannot be separated from the U.N. Millennium Development Goal and here's why:

Ms. Williams says: "Currently, U.S. global development policies and programs are scattered across 12 departments, 25 different agencies, and almost 60 government offices. Increased coordination is sorely needed to be effective."

Maggie: If this is true, and I have no doubt that is true and may be even worse than 12 departments, 25 different agencies and almost 60 government offices - because, after all, this is "government." We pay the administrators and starve the hungry.

Ms. Williams says: "The Global Poverty Act, S.2433, is an authorizing piece of legislation which sets a directive for those departments under the Secretary of State to create a plan to address the first United Nations Millennium Development Goal."

Maggie: S.2433, within the language of the bill, is "A bill to REQUIRE the President to develop and IMPLEMENT," "the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal.

This bill is NOT an appropriating piece of legislation that would direct any new funds (or global taxes) to United States foreign assistance. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that this legislation would cost less than $1 million to implement.

Maggie: Let's not be naive. There's nothing in Washington D.C. that costs only $1 million dollars, and especially with the United Nation's U.N. Development Program (UNDP) at the helm. I reject the U.N., I deplore the UNDP, which is corrupt at it's core. To make my case, here's some back-up information:

Does the United Nations Accept the Rule of Law?

The UN's Gravy Train to Iran

Ros-Lehtinen Statement on UNICEF Ties to Saudi Extremist-Linked Charity

Report Shows U.N. Development Program Violated U.N. Law, Routinely Passed on Millions to North Korean Regime

The UN Corrupting Itself - A Chavez Connection

The Millennium Development Goal is a tax on the world, and that statement is verified and clarified as you read on.

Ms. Williams, from your very professional email, you must have some background on the U.N. As an American, how do your defend that this Bill REQUIRES the President to develop and IMPLEMENT the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal?

Ms. Williams says: S.2433 does not prejudge what the strategy should be, only that a strategy should be created.

The Bill says that we will IMPLEMENT the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal? Can it be any clearer, or is it a poorly written Bill?

Ms. Williams says: The Global Poverty Act does not subjugate the United States to the will of the United Nations. The strategy would apply only to those programs administered by the United States and the strategy would have complete Congressional oversight.

Maggie: Congressional "oversight" is not a comforting thought to Conservatives.

HERE'S THE MEAT:
The U.N. Millennium Forum plans to subjugate the the U.S. to the U.N., if it can possibly do so, and I, as opposed to your comment, will validate my claims.

So here's the meat: Everything above is just fluff compared to the following selected, devious and downright evil assertions (click the Millennium Forum link above to read the entire agenda):

The Forum (urges, advocates, calls upon or insists): The United Nations
To introduce binding codes of conduct for transnational companies and effective tax regulation on the international financial markets, investing this money in programmes for poverty eradication.

To explore the feasibility of a legally binding convention on overcoming poverty, to be drafted in effective consultation and partnership with people living in poverty themselves.

To carry out the objective of moving towards the abolition of war by practical means, the United Nations Secretariat and interested Governments, or a separate group of Governments, should develop a draft proposal for global disarmament to be discussed in a fourth special session of the General Assembly on disarmament.

To respect national sovereignty and the prohibition of the use of force, which are fundamental in the Charter of the United Nations. This principle must not be undermined. In the solution of conflicts, all peaceful methods in accordance with Chapter 6 of the Charter must be tried before measures of force are undertaken in accordance with Chapter 7. The General Assembly should set up a broad commission to analyse standards for forceful action in cases where crimes against humanity, war crimes or genocide are committed.

Maggie: We have painful reminders from history. "Peaceful method" mean un-acted upon Resolutions.

To expand the United Nations arms register in order to show the production and sale of small arms and light weapons. It should include specific names of their producers and traders.

Maggie: If the U.N. can, this will include you and me.

Together with nearly all Governments that participated in the recent Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty review conference, Forum participants consider that unilateral deployment of nationwide missile defence by any country could have dangerously destabilizing effects and create pressures to permanently retain high levels of nuclear weapons or even to increase existing levels. The deployment of theatre missile defences in Asia or other regions could have serious regional destabilizing effects. Such plans should be relinquished in favour of a worldwide missile launch warning system and a conference to review methods of ending production of long-range surface-to-surface missiles and long-range bombers.

Maggie: The U.S. met their non-proliferation goals five years early, while the U.N. was enabling Iran to grow its nuclear program.

To initiate a worldwide freeze on armed forces and a 25 per cent cut in production and export of major weapons and small arms, and to that end to adopt an international code of conduct on arms exports, as the beginning of worldwide build-down of conventional forces.

To establish a commission at the United Nations to devise ways of stopping the technological development of new and more advanced weapons that create new imbalances in global power relationships. The Conference on Disarmament should also establish a working group on this subject.

To increase their efforts to promote and to comply with international humanitarian laws, limiting the methods and means of war and protecting non-combatants, civilian populations and humanitarian personnel.

The international community civil society, Governments and the United Nations has a responsibility to stop promptly any genocide, war crimes or any massive violations of human rights. All those involved should seek to avoid any confusion between humanitarian help and military intervention.

Maggie: I do not know that this is a reference to the U.S. in Iraq, but it probably is.

Globalization needs defining....it is transforming our world into a global village...We, of all ages, in particular our future generation the youth claim a space for that transnational civil society that even now is rising on the world scene with unprecedented ties, networking, exchanges and common action among peoples, groups, communities and organizations.

Just for emphasis: a transnational civil society

To develop a legally binding framework for regulating the actions of transnational corporations (TNCs), respecting the international labour, human rights, and sustainable environmental standards set by the United Nations and its relevant specialized agencies. The regulatory mechanism should include the active participation of workers and communities directly affected by TNC operations in order to prevent abuses and to subordinate TNCs to democratic civil authority and community-based modelling of socio-economic systems.

Maggie: Who are the "transnational corporations?" As I look around the web, I find no list of these evil-doers.

To examine and regulate transnational corporations and the increasingly negative influence of their trade on the environment. The attempt by companies to patent life is ethically unacceptable.

Maggie: What does this mean, and who is patenting the life of others?

To move towards democratic political control of the global economy so that it may serve our vision.

Maggie: And how does the U.N. define a democracy?

To develop migration policies, both emigration and immigration, in conformity with human rights standards, particularly to respect the global principle of freedom of circulation for all.

Maggie: This is terrifying, really. The goal is to remove the sovereignty of our borders. The North Korean dictator will surely applaud this.

To make serious commitments to restructure the global financial architecture based on principles of equity, transparency, accountability and democracy, and to balance, with the participation of civil society organizations, the monetary means to favour human endeavour and ecology, such as an alternative time-based currency.

Maggie: Who do these people think they are?

Sustainable funds could be raised through a currency transfer tax,...which could also help to reduce currency speculation, and a tax on the rental value of land and natural resources.

Maggie: Yep, here it is. A tax on currency transfers and land.

Stop imposing economic sanctions, which deprive people of their basic economic, social and environmental rights and which make their struggle for survival, as well as for civil and political rights, more difficult.

Maggie: We can make the case that sanctions are worthless, as it is the U.N. which strengthens them. Iraq and Saddam Hussein comes immediately to mind, especially the Oil-for-Food Program. Then and now, there's Iran. How does the U.N., always wanting diplomatic solutions to prevail, propose that we deal with tyranny ?

To fully incorporate women into leadership at every level and gender perspectives into all its operations; to hold Governments accountable for their obligations to promote and protect the human rights of women and girls; and to act as monitors of the implementation of commitments to end discrimination and violence against women and girls.

Maggie: When it comes to Women's Rights, (or human rights for that matter) most of the worst offenders are Muslim countries. It all is a matter of "degree," isn't it? I notice in the Millennium Development Goal monitoring sites, some Arab countries have shown some degree of improvement. What does that mean? How has it changed the life of women under the control of Islam and their Islamic male dominators? The free world will finance achieving this goal? Think again.

To establish a global habitat conservation fund to purchase comprehensive protection of threatened, critical ecological habitat worldwide. The fund should accrue revenues from a nominal (0.5 -1.0 per cent) royalty on worldwide fossil energy production oil, natural gas, coal, collecting at least $5 billion to $10 billion annually.

Maggie: Uh huh. Here's the tax on fossil fuels.

Ms. Williams offered two informational links in her comment:
For more information on the myths related to this bill, please visit: http://www.bread.org/take-action...-fact- sheet.pdf.

For more information, you can easily read this bill at: http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/qu...emp/ ~c110vneZOT

I have read s.2433 over and over. It is included at the end of this post. It says nothing but means many things. I've had a link up on my webpage for weeks to take readers to the bill, to press and to blog coverage.

Ms. Williams, many of us reject the U.N. and everything it stands for, because everything that it stands for is against the best interest of Americans, and usually is intent on feathering the nests of a U.N. diplomat, somewhere in the world.

You can read the Millennium Development Goals here.

You can "monitor" the goals by country beginning here, although you won't learn much. Most of what we want and need to know falls into the "Insufficient Information" category.

Full text of Barack Obama's Senate Bill 2433:

Global Poverty Act of 2007
A bill to require the President to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the United States foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day.

There are 21 co-sponsors:

• Sen. Barack Obama [D, IL]
• and 21 Co-Sponsors
  • Sen. Joseph Biden [D, DE]
  • Sen. Jeff Bingaman [D, NM]
  • Sen. Barbara Boxer [D, CA]
  • Sen. Sherrod Brown [D, OH]
  • Sen. Maria Cantwell [D, WA]
  • Sen. Robert Casey [D, PA]
  • Sen. Susan Collins [R, ME]
  • Sen. Christopher Dodd [D, CT]
  • Sen. Richard Durbin [D, IL]
  • Sen. Russell Feingold [D, WI]
  • Sen. Dianne Feinstein [D, CA]
  • Sen. Charles Hagel [R, NE]
  • Sen. Thomas Harkin [D, IA]
  • Sen. Tim Johnson [D, SD]
  • Sen. John Kerry [D, MA]
  • Sen. Richard Lugar [R, IN]
  • Sen. Robert Menendez [D, NJ]
  • Sen. Barbara Mikulski [D, MD]
  • Sen. Patty Murray [D, WA]
  • Sen. Gordon Smith [R, OR]
  • Sen. Olympia Snowe [R, ME]

The usual RHINO's support this traitorous Bill: Susan Collins, Chuck Hagel, Richard Lugar, and Olympia Snowe. Gordon Smith (R-OR) is also a co-sponsor and I do not have much information on him. He's from Oregon, so...

Ms. Williams, you do not have a homepage, but you did leave your email address. I'll let you know that I have replied and I hope that you'll comment once again.

Related: Obama's Senate Bill S.2433 - A UN Global Tax on the U.S.
Obama's Global Poverty Tax Bill up for Vote in Days from Loyal Eagle
Virtual “Global Poverty Act” Tea Party from Ironic Surrealism II
Obama and His Global Poverty Bill from Jus' Sayin'

Why American Jews are Democrats. An Answer? Perhaps.

Originally posted by Maggie at Maggie's Notebook

I somewhat frequently ask why American Jews vote Democrat. It has been a puzzle for years, and after 9/11, there seemed to be some hope that the Jewish vote would lean to the conservative side. It was a shortsighted, and perhaps naive hope.

I was perusing the posts over at Instapundit last night and found a piece by Ellen W. Horowitz - Justifying and Deconstructing Hagee and Ourselves. Ms. Horowitz characterizes Pastor John Hagee's recent and controversial "rhetoric" as the

...magnanimous political, humanitarian, and even theological support that the Jewish state is receiving from Pastor Hagee and the American evangelical community.

as well as attributing Hagee as "a well-intentioned, very generous and determined philo-Semite," but goes on to say:

That being said, we Jews need to remain vigilant because it is an historic truism that philo-Semitism can be a mere hair away from anti-Semitism, and when the church and Christians make sweeping and bold moves towards reconciliation – and Jews reciprocate in turn - sometimes things can go terribly wrong. So the Talmudic formula of “respecting and suspecting” would seem to be the wise approach.

I must admit that I Googled around for the definition of "philo-semite." Wikipedia says:

Philo-Semitism or Philosemitism, is an interest in, respect for, and appreciation of the Jewish people, their historical significance and the positive impacts of Judaism in the history of the western world, in particular. Within the Jewish community it also includes the significance of Jewish culture and the love of everything Jewish. The word is not new, but it has recently (ca. 2000) become a significantly growing phenomenon in the modern world. It is characterized (among other things) by an interest in Jewish culture and history, as well as increasing university enrollment by non-Jews in courses relating to Judaism (including Judaism, Hebrew and Jewish languages)[citation needed]. A Philosemite is one who substantially subscribes to, or practices, any of the above.

Philo-Semitism has been the subject of a series of books and journal articles (see partial listing below). The rise of philo-Semitism has been met by a mixed response among world Jewry. Some warmly welcome it and argue that it must lead Jews to reconsider their identity. This viewpoint has been expressed by the leading liberal Jewish publication The Forward (Editorial, 10 November 2000):

Others reject philo-Semitism, as they feel it (like its apparent opposite anti-Semitism) implicitly gives a special status to Jews. This contradicts the traditional goal of Zionism to make Jewry "a nation among nations." Daniel Goldhagen, Harvard scholar and author of the controversial Hitler's Willing Executioners, argues that philo-Semites are often closet anti-Semites. His detractor Norman Finkelstein agrees. The thesis is that Jew haters feel a need to talk about Jews, and with anti-Semitism no longer being socially acceptable they must instead make exaggerated positive statements.

So...now understanding that supporting Israel can be either a good thing or a bad thing (???), what really caught my attention was the back-and-forth bantering of two commenters - two Jewish gentlemen - regarding Christian proselytizing or "missionizing," and the monies that may flow to the Holyland from Christian organizations, specifically John Hagee's Christians United for Israel (CUFI). One of the commenters views this as "Zionist Christian support" and wants no part of it:

...we can live without their donations some of which I am convinced go towards missionizing, directly or indirectly.

This commenter (the one not wanting Christian support) mentions a book written by "a sort of relation," A Match Made in Heaven by Zev Chafets. In reading through an interesting review of this book, there's this:

“Jews are Democrats, Israelis are Republicans.”

Okay. Now I'm beginning to "get it." American Jews vote Democrat because their American friends (or not) attempt to bring their Jewish friends to Jesus. It makes more sense than the explanation I usually get: American Jews vote Democrat because "American Jews have ALWAYS voted Democrat and ALWAYS will." That's not much of an answer considering today's ever-present Islamic threat to annihilate Israel. Most of us could, rather quickly, get-over an old and harmful habit, when faced with extinction, but perhaps it is just easier to spite Christian "persecution" and pull the lever for a Democrat.

After a long, long time digesting this Instapundit post, I'm wondering if it is actually possible, in this day and time, that American Jews are simply frustrated at, or angry about, Christians attempting to convert them? And so they vote Democrat?

If this still isn't making a point with you, voting Democrat supports Islam. Voting Democrat supports Hamas, voting Democrat supports Syria, voting Democrat supports Iran (Speaker Pelosi claims that some of the success of the Iraq surge "is the goodwill of the Iranians - they decided when the fighting in Basra would end..."), voting Democrat supports the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision granting Constitutional rights to terrorists (in this case, Islamic terrorists) - who may have been complicit in bringing down the World Trade Towers, and if not complicit, would have been if they could have been. Voting Democrat demands that America remain tied to middle-eastern oil ($$$ flowing to Islamic countries - not comforting to those Republican-thinking Israeli's, I think). Did I mention that voting Democrat supports Hamas?

Do Jews ever attempt to tell their Christian friends that the Messiah has not yet come? Of course they do. I'm not angry about it, though.

The Horowitz piece, and the comments, are far more intricate than my focus in this post. To be clear, one commenter points out: "Jews and Israel need help now and Christian evangelicals are giving that help now. Jews should be embracing these Christian evangelicals. That does not mean embracing Christianity." Author and commenters: well-worth the read - please do read them.

Note: It's my opinion that ALL of Israel's land, should be Israel's land - no land for peace.

Others talking about the Jewish view of John Hagee and Christians United for Israel:
Daniel Pipes: John Hagee, the Holocaust and Me: Thinking About Allies
Anglicans for Israel - The Rise of CUFI,
Jews on First: Leader of Reform Judiasm Discourages Cooperation with Christians United for Israel

U.S. Rep. Thaddeus McCotter Explains "Democrat-Speak"

Cross-posted by Maggie from Maggie's Notebook

Your host here at Truth and Consequences, Jim Simpson, sent me (Maggie) an email this morning. It prompted the post below. Jim is busy, busy, busy right now and does not have time to put this news into a post format, so I'm sharing mine with Truth and Consequences readers:

H/T to Jim Simpson at Truth and Consequences (a Maggie's Notebook contributor). Here's Jim's email, which expresses my sentiments, including a very good idea to call Congressman McCotter and thank him for speaking out:

It is hilarious, spoken to the full House, explaining Democrat terms like "progressive" and "revenue enhancement."

Call his office to congratulate him on this rare act of relative courage (for Congressional Republicans). His number is 202-225-8171.

I told his staffer that it is nice to see a Republican showing some guts for a change, and that maybe he should encourage others to follow suit, rather than sitting around with their thumbs up their asses like they are now. The staffer told me, laughing, that the Congressman probably agrees with my sentiments.

Jim

Video courtesy of YouTube.com and The Minority Report Blog and Jim's source: Right Wing News

McCotter represents Michigan's 11th District and chairs the House Republican Policy Committee and is a member of the House Financial Services Committee.

Technorati Tags:2008 Elections, Congressman Thaddeus McCotter, U.S. House of Representatives, Democrats, Progressives, Liberals,

The Meat: Jeremiah Wright Publishes CAIR Founder's Manifesto

Cross-posted by Maggie at Maggie's Notebook

Photo of Hamas Leader Mousa Abu Marzook
Photo courtesy of WorldNetDaily.

A message to Barack Obama voters: Research the connection between Barack and Michelle Obama's Pastor, Dr. Jeremiah Wright. Wright supported terrorism by giving a platform to a terrorist. Some details below.

The media are not reporting: (1) Pastor Wright's affinity for and support of Musa Abu Marzook, a Hamas co-founder and leader, and (2) Marzook's connection to the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), and CAIR's documented connection to terrorism.

Voters - think about it. Are you okay with electing a President who, for whatever reasons, supported this church with his time, his talents and his service?

The purpose of this post is to show that Pastor Wright published a terrorist manifesto in his church bulletin on the "Pastor's Page," on July 22, 2007. The author of that manifesto is Musa Abu Marzook, who is solidly connected to CAIR. This post links Marzook's various aliases, criminality and the Hamas Charter that Marzook passionately defends. Jeremiah Wright chose to promote the "Hamas stand," within his Christian Church.

Some background:

Who and what is CAIR? The Anti-CAIR website summarizes well, and lest you blow this off as an "Anti-with-no-substance" opinion, think again. CAIR filed a defamation law suit against Anti-CAIR for claims made on the Anti-CAIR website. The suit was eventually dismissed with no capitulation by Anti-CAIR (i.e. removing statements from the website). Daniel Pipes, writing for FrontPageMag said "[Anti-CAIR] won a sweet victory, while CAIR suffered a humiliating defeat." Here's more from Dr. Pipes:

Specifically, CAIR had complained about [Anti-CAIR] calling it a “terrorist supporting front organization … founded by Hamas supporters” that aims “to make radical Islam the dominant religion in the United States.” It also objected to being described as “dedicated to the overthrow of the United States Constitution and the installation of an Islamic theocracy in America.”

The Anti-CAIR website is an important read for all who treasure American freedom.

Another FrontPageMag.com piece by Evan McCormick gives insight into the view of Congress on CAIR:

September 10th, 2003 will forever be remembered as a grim day for the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR). On that day, the eve of the second anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, CAIR faced up to its own terrorist connections. It ran away from testifying before an influential Senate panel that heard a barrage of incriminating evidence about the group and its connections. It saw one of its former officials plead guilty to terrorist-related crimes in Federal Court. And, it was stood up by two Department of Justice officials at an immigration symposium in Florida. CAIR should find it hard to recover from this string of defeats....

Senators turned out in force to connect the dots between CAIR and the deviant Islamic extremism that led to the vicious attacks of 9/11....

Senator Chuck Schumer, a New York Democrat who has been steadfast in his efforts to uncover the nexus of Hamas front groups in the U.S., was ruthless in his portrayal of CAIR as part of an international terror network. In his opening remarks, Senator Schumer stated that prominent members of CAIR—referring specifically to Nihad Awad and Omar Ahmed—have “intimate links with Hamas.” Later, he remarked that “we know [CAIR] has ties to terrorism.”

The Problem: The self-stated goal of Hamas (represented in Obama's church by Marzook's manifesto) is to rid the world of Israel, believing that Israel has no right to a home in the Holy Land. Palestine is the home of Hamas. Palestinians believe that Israel is occupying land that belongs to Palestinians. All Israeli's are considered infidels, as are all persons who do not follow Islam.

IsraPundit and BizzyBlog have been hot on the trail of verifying the "printed bulletin." Both sites have posted jpegs of the TUCC bulletin, and you can view them by following the links to their websites. IsraPundit has posted comprehensively about Jeremiah Wright - all of which is essential reading for a voting American.

I'm linking here to my transcription of the Hamas manifesto (transcribed from the above mentioned jpegs) printed on Wright's "Pastor Page," as well as some background in previous posts, Who and What are the Palestinians, which documents the history of Palestinian migration, and another post printing enlightening portions of the Hamas Charter.

WARNING: As you read the manifesto as it was printed in Trinity United Church of Christ's bulletin, you may feel ambivalent about it...or not see what all the fuss is about.

What's the "fuss?" The "fuss" is about the right of the Jewish people to live freely on the land that (1) God led them to and (2) the land granted to the State of Israel, by the United Nations (a large parcel of which Israel did not gain possession of, due to the shenanigans of the British bowing to Arab concerns - illegally). It is about the right of the Jews to exist on their own tiny plot of land. It is about the refusal of Palestinians and Hamas to recognize the right of Israel to exist. When you read the manifesto, note that Marzook says he doesn't "trouble" himself with "recognizing Israel." The Hamas Charter is in tenacious control of the citizens of Palestine and there is no plan to ever recognize Israel - in fact, the Hamas Charters says:

The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews),...

The "fuss" also must consider that the facts prove that Palestinians are migrants, not refugees. History backs this up, no matter how diligently the world tries to revise history.

The Connection: Musa Abu Marzook is connected to CAIR and the founding of CAIR, to Hamas, and to Hamas leadership, and through that connection, to Dr. Wright, who chose to support the Hamas agenda and present it to his parishioners as a "Fresh View."

The Los Angeles Times first printed Marzook-Hamas manifesto on July 10, 2007. It was titled "Hamas stand." Twelve days later, Jeremiah Wright changed the title to "A Fresh View of the Palestinian Struggle" and published it on his Pastor Page.

A hat/tip to Lamplighter, who posted a speech given by Marzook (Marqouq - one and the same person) a mere month before the LA Times piece, AND Jeremiah Wright's reprint." Marzook (using alias Marzouq), while in Egypt representing Hamas, countered a criticism of the drop in numbers of Hamas terrorist attacks:

During the meeting, Hamas was criticized for the drop in the number of its terrorist attacks (“resistance”) since its coming to power and the Hamas government's lack of contribution to the resistance.

Abu Marzouq retorted that, in reality, the situation was just the opposite: “It is the first time since the Oslo Accords that a Palestinian government supports the resistance [i.e., terrorism], does not go after the resistance operatives, does not arrest them, and does not hinder their activity”. Abu Marzouq even boasted of “quality” terrorist attacks perpetrated in Israel (“the Zionist entity”) during the Hamas government's term, including the attack which led to the capture of a “Zionist soldier” (Gilad Shalit).

More:
1. Marzook has numerous aliases . This site documents them and prints this profile:

U.S. Treasury Designation

Musa Abu Marzouk is the Deputy Chief of HAMAS's Political Bureau based in Damascus, Syria. His activities include directing and coordinating terrorist acts by HAMAS against soldiers and civilians in Israel and the West Bank and Gaza. Marzouk maintains relationships with other terrorist organizations.

The Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, designated as an SDGT under EO 13224 in December 2001 based on its support of HAMAS, received start-up funding and instructions from Marzouk. Marzouk is implicated in receiving financing for HAMAS terrorist attacks, funds that have been used to mobilize military activity inside Israel and the West Bank/Gaza.

2. Marzook is the founder of The Council on American-Islamic Relations' (CAIR) parent organization - a total of three Hamas organizations. As one organization was shutdown, another was born - shutdown, and then a third. According to CAIR Watch, first came the:

Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP), which was dissolved in 2005 after being found liable for the murder of an American boy in Israel

Second came the infamous:

Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), which was shut down and had its fund frozen by the U.S. government in December 2001 for raising millions of dollars for Hamas

and thirdly, the founder of:

a Hamas command center called the United Association for Studies and Research (UASR).

The above No. 2 is reported at CAIRwatch with this headline: "Mousa Abu Marzook (Marzouk, Marzouq, Marzuq) - "CAIR's Grandfather" and Deputy Chief of the Hamas Political Bureau."

3. According to Palestine History, Musa Abu Marzuq (Marzook)

Gained his Ph.D. in the United State[s] (1981-1991), where he gained residency rights.

This explains, perhaps, the easy and fluent use of English in his writing. Palestine History confirms Marzook's (Marzuq) explulsion from the U.S., as well as from Jordan.

4. The Middle East Journal, as early as 1996, says this about Musa Abu Marzuq (Marzook):

Musa Abu Marzuq was arrested at Kennedy Airport in July 1995 on charges of murder and attempted murder for Hamas,2 the other fundamentalist Islamic group that repeatedly engages in terrorist acts against Israel. At the time of his arrest, Abu Marzuq--a permanent resident of the United States for five years--headed a Washington-area think tank called the United Association for Studies and Research.

From FrontPageMag, which has extensive reporting on Marzook:

Mousa Abu Marzook – Grandfather of CAIR

The Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development was founded by HAMAS leader Mousa Abu Marzook, a man who was deported by the United States to Jordan in 1997. Marzook, who may very well be, today, second in command of HAMAS, also founded, in 1981, CAIR’s parent organization, the Islamic Association for Palestine.

This is important, when considering the previous questions asked, but – but – there is a much bigger connection to CAIR, with respect to the Holy Land Foundation.

What is the Holy Land Foundation? FrontPageMag.com writes:

In September of 2001, just following the worst terrorist attack ever suffered in modern history, CAIR placed on its website, under a picture of the World Trade Center in flames, a plea for donations. It read, “Donate to the NY/DC Emergency Relief Fund.”

Yet, when people clicked on the link, it did not take them to any NY/DC Emergency Relief Fund. No, it took them straight to the website of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, an Islamic ‘charity’ that was soon to be shut down by the United States for “raising millions of dollars annually for HAMAS.”

This piece goes on to say that the Holy Land Foundation was soon to be shut down by the U.S. government on terrorism related charges.

6. From WorldNetDaily, dated April 14, 2005:

CAIR leader convicted on terror charges
Founding board member of Texas chapter funded Hamas - Ghassan Elashi, along with two brothers, was convicted in Dallas yesterday of channeling funds to a high-ranking official of the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas, Mousa Abu Marzook.

Former FBI counterterrorism chief Oliver Revell has called the IAF "a front organization for Hamas that engages in propaganda for Islamic militants."

The fact that Trinity United Church of Christ printed anything penned by Mousa Abu Marzook, and presented it in a Christian church sanctuary as a positive opinion and a "fresh" view, is in my opinion, traitorous and heretical.

Related Links:
Transcription of "Hamas' stand" on Jeremiah Wright's "Pastor's Page"
Jeremiah Wright Connects with the Hamas Charter
Who and What are the Palestinians?

The Communists are Coming

By Jim Simpson

The November elections were a disaster of epic proportions. America’s fundamental conservatism hasn’t changed, but our faith in the Republican Party to deliver on its conservative promises has been shattered. Simultaneously, the Left’s competence in deluding voters has increased exponentially. Now I will issue a dire warning: unless we get our heads on straight now, and fight to win, the Democrats will, with the 2008 election of Hillary Clinton as President, finally succeed in their long-term goal of bringing real, live communism permanently, irrevocably, to our shores.

Whoa! Wait a minute! What are you saying, Simpson? Are you out of your mind???

I don’t care anymore. We have to shed the scales from our eyes. It has to be said. Yes, Hillary Clinton is a diehard, unrepentant communist. Not the annoying but harmless Marxist intellectual kind. Not the ignorant, lefty environut kind, nor even the Euro-socialist kind. She is the genuine article. Her vision is to visit upon the United States the same “socialism” that has murdered millions in Russia, China, Vietnam, Cambodia, North Korea and elsewhere, and consigned countless millions more to a life of unprecedented misery.

How do I know this? You want evidence? Search your heart deeply – you know it's true! But I also know something else: I know how communists operate. And when you know how they operate, identifying them is simple. Let me explain.

Lenin exhorted his followers: “Organize, organize, organize.” Communist economics is a disaster, but underground communist parties are among the most efficient organizations in the world. Communists have very specific goals, and very specific, tried and true methods for achieving those goals. They share these amongst only their most loyal and dedicated followers. The nature of communist conspiracy requires this discretion.

Young Hillary Clinton associated herself with a who’s who of the American Communist Party. She worked for Robert Borosage, founder of the subversive Institute for Policy Studies, Charles Garry, lawyer for Black Panther Bobby Seale, and interned for Jessica Mitford’s husband, Robert Truehaft, a lifelong member of the American Communist Party and chief attorney for same.

To have benefited from the tutelage of these notorious communists, Hillary would have to have been one herself. Why? Because communists don’t mentor non-communists. Why? 1. It is a waste of time. Communists, as mentioned above, have very specific goals. People who don’t share those goals can’t help. 2. It poses a security risk. Both communist goals and tactics are subversive and sometimes outright illegal. Revealing them to a non-communist runs the risk of exposure, and few non-communists have the necessary level of commitment, even if they are in sympathy with the goals. If they did, they would have joined the party.

Much like the Mob, the communist party demands absolute loyalty and committment to the cause, and candidate members are subject to repeated loyalty tests. Hillary had to already have been a committed communist when these guys hired her, and they were well aware of it.

Later in her career, Hillary chaired the Board of the Legal Services Corporation, investigated during the Reagan Administration for illegally using tax dollars to fund radical leftist political activities. After that, she joined the New World Foundation, which has funded communist insurgencies around the globe. According to Joseph Farah of WorldNetDaily: “Those who know her said Hillary was a true revolutionary who disguised her militancy through her commitment to subvert the system from within. There is absolutely no reason to believe she has changed her stripes.” (See: The Re-emergence of Hillary Rodham Clinton.)

And this is just the beginning. The things she has done since becoming Senator should be setting off alarm bells across the country. You can read about some of it here. It will make the hair on your neck stand on end. But because she enjoys so much support among a sympathetic mass media, we hear nary a peep.

Okay, so maybe it’s true, you say, but not to worry. With all her scandals, radicalism, and nasty persona, Hillary will never get majority American support.

Never mind for a minute the fact that she easily overcame these obstacles to become Senator from a state where she didn't even live. That’s also what they said about Bill. And the fact is he never did get a majority. He got elected President with a plurality. Both times, Ross Perot’s third-party candidacy drained enough votes away from the Republican candidate that Clinton won. It is alleged that Clinton convinced Perot to rejoin the race in 1992 after initially quitting, solely to defeat George H.W. Bush, who Perot hated. In 1992, Clinton won with only 43% of the vote. In 1996, despite his alleged popularity, Clinton still didn’t win with a majority. It again took Perot to put him on top.

Well, brace yourself, for Hillary is planning the same thing! Earlier this year, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg made a big deal of promising he wouldn’t run for president. But nobody had asked him. In fact, few people had even heard of him. Now he is apparently reconsidering running on a third party ticket, just like Perot did. Be sure, Hillary put him up to it from the beginning.

Bloomberg is not to be trusted. He is a lifelong liberal Democrat but ran for Mayor of New York as a Republican, switching parties both to capitalize on Rudy Giuliani’s successful record and to avoid a competitive Democrat primary with a crowded field of candidates. His liberal democrat views have not changed and he doesn’t stand a snowball’s chance in Hell of being elected President! But he would certainly steal the votes of liberal republicans, loathe to elect another conservative. Don’t believe the propaganda coming from Hillary’s camp that he would take Democrat votes either. That is deliberate misinformation. Democrats stick together. But Republicans have proven themselves to be perennial suckers.

We may yet be tricked again. God save us if we are!

Freelance writer Jim Simpson is a former White House staff economist and budget analyst (1987-1993). His writings have been published in the Washington Times, FrontPage Magazine, DefenseWatch, Soldier of Fortune and others.