ARE WE SURRENDERING?

After much detailed research, I have come to believe, as I had not previously believed, that there is no moderate Islam. There is only Islam, and that is the Islam of the Qur'an. The Qur'an is considered by Muslims to be the word of God, which must be followed to the letter, and the word of God can never be criticized. There is no interpretation of Islam. Reform or reinterpret the Qur'an and you are a "hypocrite", and must die with the "infidels". All hypocrites must repent if they are to live, and all "infidels" must convert to Islam, die, or accept slavery. Why have I altered my position? There are so many Muslim "radical extremists" (Latest figures say over 20% of the world's 1 billion Muslims are "radical".), and so few other Muslims speaking out or trying to stop them. Maybe the following videos will explain this in better detail, and also part of my decision.

Is there any reason to believe, in light of the repeated attacks against the U.S. over the last 25 years and culminating with 9-11, that these events won't soon begin here? CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations), along with the ACLU, has continued to attempt to force their agenda on us by fostering ill feelings toward anyone who disagrees with them, and now has the ear of AG Eric Holder in their fight to keep anyone from criticizing Islam, all while they and other Islamic groups criticize Christian, Jewish and other beliefs. Merge that with the study and conference on Shariah banking by our own U.S. Treasury Department, the growing number of "honor killings" by Muslims here, and the refusal of out MSM to cover or report these stories, and the recipe for the destruction of America from within is being prepared as we sit back and watch.

Now considering, among other things, the current attitude emanating from our White House, I am even more concerned about the direction our nation is being led. But let me explain that a bit more. To do so, one must determine the total number of Muslims living in the U.S., not an easy task. Most figures are outdated, and are no more than estimates. The World Almanac 2001 states that there are about 5.8 million Muslims in the U.S. Even our State Department doesn't have an accurate detail, nor does our Census. But the State Department does say this, "Islam is one of the fastest-growing religions in the U.S. By the year 2010, America's Muslim population is expected to surpass the Jewish population, making Islam the country's second-largest faith after Christianity."

It continues with the following: "The American Muslim community is a mosaic of cultures, its members having come from all of the five major continents. In fact, a recent survey showed that most Muslims are immigrants - 77.6% versus 22.4% U.S. born; While there are no official population figures for religious affiliation in the United States, experts estimate that there are approximately six million American Muslims. Other estimates range from four to eight million."

Taking these "facts" into consideration, along with the fact that Muslims are among the smallest population bases in the U.S., why did our President make sure to mention Muslims before Jews, especially as our nation was founded on Judeo-Christian values, in his inaugural speech, "We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus - and non-believers."? And why is he continuing to reach out to Muslims? He studied Islam as a youth; surely he knows what it contains. And he has continually made references to Islam, almost as much he has about his "race", even though unprompted.

Let's analyze his continuing efforts to "reach out" to Islam, and shutting off of our allies who are not considered "friendly" to Islam. First, he pledged to "engage the Muslim world in a substantive way within his first 100 days in office." He has made overtures toward Iran, and most likely will use his visit to Syria to launch his plan to "engage the Muslim world". Next, the statement in his book, "The Audacity of hope", "In the wake of 9/11, my meetings with Arab and Pakistani Americans … have a more urgent quality, for the stories of detentions and FBI questioning and hard stares from neighbors have shaken their sense of security and belonging," he laments. "I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction."

Remember how Obama pledged to leave Iraq and send the troops to Afghanistan because the real terrorists where in Afghanistan? Well, he just announced that we are losing in Afghanistan so we are going to make a deal with the "Moderate" Taliban (Moderate Taliban? Who's next, moderate al Qaeda?). He didn't bother to tell us if the "Moderate" Taliban will continue to prohibit women/girls from getting and education or medical treatment, will sanction (encourage) honor killings, will live under the boot of Shariah law. After saying we would withdraw from Iraq in 16 months, he is taking out much of our forces by September. That would be 8 months. Now that al Qaeda knows his plan, they can wait and then invade Iraq the day after we leave. Obama will not feel any responsibility for abandoning Iraqis and letting them get killed. In the meantime, he appears to have made concessions to the New Russia (Putin) while getting nothing in return. He has started putting restrictions on Israeli self defense. He has insulted the British, giving back a statue of Churchill and giving Brown a pathetic gift of 25 DVD's. He is giving combat helicopters to the Government of Lebanon - which is now Hezbollah. He is legitimizing Hamas by supporting a unity government of Hamas and Fatah, and giving that government $900 million in "aid".

And now this from across the pond, an article on the blog of the Telegraph, regarding the apparent move by the Obama White House toward involving us in the ICC (International Criminal Court).

"But the people who should be feeling really nervous about this development are the citizens of the United States and more especially their armed forces. The signs are that the grandstanding Barack Obama is preparing to subject the United States to the jurisdiction of the ICC. In May, 2002 President Bush withdrew the United States from the Rome Statute which established the ICC. With America heading into global conflict, he had no wish to see US troops arraigned for alleged war crimes before a kangaroo court."

"That was a wise decision (by Bush) and probably required in terms of the US Constitution. Already, however, the Obama administration is sending out very different messages. America helped defeat a proposal that the warrant for Bashir should be suspended for 12 months - which would have been a welcome respite for the soup kitchens of Darfur. This is a policy change of considerable significance."

"Nor is it the only straw in the wind. Last month US Ambassador Susan Rice, in a closed meeting of the Security Council, supported the ICC, saying it 'looks to become an important and credible instrument for trying to hold accountable the senior leadership responsible for atrocities committed in the Congo, Uganda and Darfur'. A week later Ben Chang, spokesman for National Security Advisor General James Jones, took a similar line, telling the Washington Times: 'We support the ICC in its pursuit of those who've perpetrated war crimes.'"

"The next logical step is for the United States to sign up to the ICC. That would flatter Obama's ego as the conscience of the world. It would also put US servicemen at the mercy of any American-hating opportunists who might choose to arraign them on trumped-up charges before an alien court whose judges are likely to be ill-disposed towards America too."

"In a joint analysis by David Scheffer (who helped set up the ICC) and John Hutson (former US Navy Judge Advocate General), the authors wrote: 'If the United States were to join the ICC, one would have to accept at least the theoretical possibility that American citizens (particularly political and military leaders) could be prosecuted before the ICC on charges of committing atrocity crimes.'"

"So, vengeful Democrats could facilitate the indictment of President George W Bush and all his senior commanders in Iraq. American troops on active service have been shown in polls to have little confidence in Barack Obama. His overtures to the ICC will hardly reverse that tendency."

I see his current actions as kowtowing to Islam, and a willingness to sell our men and women of the military down the river in an appeasement to Islam and anti-Israel, socialist judges and panels. Along with the attitude of "reaching out" to more of our global opponents, like North Korea, Cuba, the fifty-seven Islamic states of the OIS, Venezuela and Russia, saddling us with a virtually insurmountable National Debt, "distributing our wealth" to those who supported him (Except Jews. The stimulus bill will give about $1 billion to Acorn, the voter fraud community organizers.), his plan for a "National Civilian Security Force" (Yes, it's still alive and well.), and his plans to "socialize" much more of our government and services, his burning our military comes as no big surprise.

Is all this merely a coincidence, an act being committed out of concern for all peoples without knowing the ramifications, a desire to have us ruled under socialism? Or is it a plan that will lead some of us willingly into the folds of a one world government, all run under the strict discipline of Islam and Shariah law? Whatever it is, I don't like it, it looks like an attempt to destroy all that we believe in, even if unintentionally, to ignore the teachings of the Qur'an until it is too late, to have wasted the blood of patriots, to ignore the sacrifice made to keep us free, and to pretend the Constitution and Bill of Rights are only a few words on a piece of paper.

WAKE UP, AMERICA!!

WE'RE BEING SOLD DOWN THE RIVER!!!

I, for one, will not go easily, or quietly into the night. There will be NO SURRENDER here!!

UPDATE This in yesterday afternoon from Reuter’s.

Obama, in an interview with the New York Times, expressed an openness to adapting tactics in Afghanistan that had been used in Iraq to reach out to moderate elements there.

"This does not require any response or reaction for this is illogical," Qari Mohammad Yousuf, a purported spokesman for the insurgent group, told Reuters when asked if its top leader Mullah Mohammad Omar would make any comment about Obama's proposal.

"The Taliban are united, have one leader, one aim, one policy...I do not know why they are talking about moderate Taliban and what it means?"

"If it means those who are not fighting and are sitting in their homes, then talking to them is meaningless. This really is surprising the Taliban."

The number of foreign troops in Afghanistan has risen steadily since Taliban's ouster after they refused to hand over al Qaeda leaders responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks on the United States.

And so it seems our C-i-C really has no idea of what he’s doing when it comes to Middle East “negotiations”. And we also know that his Secretary of State is clueless as well.

ALL PHOTOS, GRAPHICS, CLIPART AND LOGOS USED ON THIS SITE ARE THE PROPERTY OF THEIR SPECIFIC OWNERS AND ARE USED WITH FULL PERMISSION OF THOSE OWNERS. A NUMBER OF PHOTOS USED AS BACKGROUNDS AND CLIPART BELONG TO THE OWNER OF THE CHEROKEE PARKS SITE AND MAY NOT BE COPIED OR USED IN ANY WAY WITHOUT SPECIFIC WRITTEN PERMISSION. PLEASE CLICK THE EMAIL BUTTON ON THE HOME PAGE TO REQUEST PERMISSION FOR USAGE OF PHOTOS, GRAPHICS AND CLIPART DISPLAYED ON THIS SITE, OR GO TO THE LINKS PAGE FOR USAGE REQUESTS REGARDING LOGOS, CLIPART, PHOTOS AND GRAPHICS FROM THEIR RESPECTIVE OWNERS.

Copyright © 2009