 Sarah Palin will visit Fort Hood during her book tour, the Wall Street Journal reports. Palin will visit the base on December 4, just after a book signing in Dallas.
The former Alaska Governor will also stop by Fort Bragg, North Carolina. As WSJ notes, Palin is picking her tour stop carefully: The Fort Hood stop will coincide with a visit to Dallas as part of a tour designed to take Palin to parts of the country where she is most popular. There are no scheduled stops in New York City or Los Angeles, for example, but she will sign books in places like Noblesville, Ind., and Roanoke, Va.
Though "Going Rogue" won't be officially released until Tuesday, leaked excerpts in which Palin goes after McCain's top aides have caused a stir.
 Sen. John McCain said any added military deployment in Afghanistan smaller than the 40,000 troops reportedly requested by the top U.S. commander there "would be an error of historic proportions." Asked whether he thought the war in Afghanistan could be won with fewer troops than Gen. Stanley McChrystal has reportedly requested, McCain said, "I do not." The Arizona Republican, who was defeated by President Obama in the 2008 presidential election, spoke in a wide-ranging interview that aired Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union." "I think the great danger now is a half-measure, sort of a -- you know, try to please all ends of the political spectrum," McCain told CNN chief national correspondent John King. "And, again, I have great sympathy for the president, making the toughest decisions that presidents have to make, but I think he needs to use deliberate speed." Disregarding requirements that have been "laid out and agreed to" by Central Command head Gen. David Petraeus and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Michael Mullen "would be an error of historic proportions," McCain said when asked whether 10,000 or 20,000 additional troops in Afghanistan would suffice. Also Sunday, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said U.S. troops would be put in "jeopardy" if Obama does not listen to McChrystal. Read more here,,,, Source: CNN 
* There is no such statement on John McCain's website. The reason for second poll is to show that equating belonging to any religion with smear is offensive regardless of religion or candidate.
 By Supna Zaidi
Many liberals are voting as I speak in hopes of ending what they perceive as an illegitimate "war on terror." To liberals, McCain is the old white guy who is one missing heart-beat away from a Palin red-neck presidency. The only difference between the last eight years and the next four, then, would be a skirt and caribou on the White House menu.
Barack Obama on the other hand, is Mr. International. For liberals he is the embodiment of post-colonial multiculturalism in JFK packaging. If elected, all nations that "crusader" George W. alienated will be friends with us again.
But the problem is that neither 9//11, nor the bombings in London or Madrid happened because of President Bush. The enemy has a clear strategy because it has a clear enemy, western democracy, which bin Laden has called the "principles of heresy" against Islam.
The war on terror began with the hostage crisis in Tehran, Iran in 1979 which positioned America as "the Great Satan" for subsequent decades and inaugurated the American presence abroad as a legitimate target for all Islamists who seek to divide the world into Muslim versus non-Muslim. The hostage crisis was followed by:
1. April 1983: 17 dead at the U.S. embassy in Beirut;
2. October 1983: 241 dead at the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut;
3. December 1983: five dead at the U.S. embassy in Kuwait;
4. January 1984: the president of the American University of Beirut killed;
5. April 1984: 18 dead near a U.S. airbase in Spain;
6. September 1984: 16 dead at the U.S. embassy in Beirut (again);
7. December 1984: Two dead on a plane hijacked to Tehran;
8. June 1985: One dead on a plane hijacked to Beirut;
9. 1993 World Trade Center bombing;
10. 1996: Khobar Towers attack;
11. 1998 U.S. East African embassies attack;
12. 2000 U.S.S. Cole attack in Yemen.
Stopping before 9/11 leaves many terrorist attacks from this list, but should be a clear reminder to readers in 2008 that whether one supported or hated the Bush administration, it did not create the war on terror.
It is very likely that now liberals will have to sit and absorb these violent attacks and create policy to defend the US against the "terror" that remains undefined 7 years after 9/11. Any promises of timelines, dreams of isolationism, or tea parties with Islamists like Ahmedinijad will go out the window when the above reality sets in.
If you didn't like the "war on terror", clean it up. Here are a few suggestions:
1. Pick an enemy and label it.
Islamism is the clearest term that distinguishes apolitical Muslims from Islamists. Let analysts in government call the war on terror - Islamist, jihadi, etc., so they can finally do their job. Acknowledging Islamism's origins from Islam forces Muslim governments abroad and even the Muslim American community here, to counter Islamist interpretations of the Quran, and offer Muslims a non-violent, democratically compatible interpretation of their faith. Moreover, it will finally allow an educational campaign to teach the western world what Islamism is.
2. Only after articulating who the enemy is, can the US create policy beyond military strategy.
Free speech is under attack every day through litigation and lobbying by Islamists. The Islamist goal to spread Sharia or Islamic law in the west challenges basic tenets of secularism, democracy and, specifically the separation of church and state doctrines in each case. Asking questions, debating each incident locally, or at the national level leaves critics at the mercy of Islamists, who accuse them of Islamophobia, defamation, or even racism. But, if the Islamic nature of the enemy is accepted in policy, the term "Islamophobia" will finally lose its viability. The word will no longer have its chilling effect on free speech.
Let's not forget that at a global level, 57 countries that make up the Organization of the Islamic Conference realize the value of throwing the word Islamophobia around. It is the OIC that continues to lobby for a Resolution Against Defamation of Religon," though most signatories are notorious for their ill-treatment of minorities in their own nations.
3. Muslim Nations Will Be Empowered to Fight the Enemy At Home.
The majority of victims in the war on terror are Muslims. Its time Muslims realized this and fought back. Just by example, consider Pakistan. Currently, Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari calls the fighting against radical Islamists in Pakistan "our war" in interviews, almost defensively. It is as if the Pakistani people still need convincing that they are under attack. This is very odd, considering the dramatic bombings at the Lal Masjid Bombing and Marriot hotel this year in Islamabad, which were just two from over fifty attacks Pakistan in 2008 alone.
Yet, Zardari may have a point in focusing on reminding his citizenry of the point when one considers the rampant anti-American sentiment the various English, Urdu and Punjabi papers throughout the country. Islamism hurts Pakistan even more than the United States. If the US fought for a clear articulation of the enemy, then real coalition building would finally be possible. No matter how pious Pakistanis are, I guarantee the majority do not want Pakistan to become Talibanized in any way.
The US has to fight the war of ideas abroad by re-connecting this war on terror to the attacks from 1979, to 9/11 and the Marriot bombings in Islamabad to the same enemy, who see the west and non-Islamist Muslims as equal enemies. The US is merely the poster child of western cultural hegemony that Islamists hate because it is the sole superpower today. If the US disappeared today, the war on terror would continue because France or Britain would be in its place, with its freedom of speech, gender equality, defense of all faiths and minorities.
It is the liberals turn to fight this war. (Most likely since election results are still pending at the time of this writing). It won't go away by ignoring it or appeasing it. But liberals addressing it might finally bring the country together against it and allow us to win sooner than later. Source: Muslim World Today
 Despite the fact that the film Obsession contains no political content and was made well before the 2008 election cycle began, CAIR, those paragons of Islamic moderation and honesty, would now have you believe that the national distribution of the DVD was an Israeli plot to elect John McCain. This is a very revealing action for CAIR to take. It reveals in particular two key aspects of CAIR's mindset: 1. It shows that CAIR is fully aware that the jihad against Israel is an integral part of the global jihad, and is not just a struggle to recover Palestinian "stolen land." Thus a film that reveals the nature and goals of that global jihad -- Obsession -- benefits Israel. 2. It also shows that CAIR believes that John McCain will fight against the global jihad in a way that Barack Obama will not -- and that it believes therefore the distribution of an anti-jihad film, which in a sane world would be welcomed by both the Left and the Right since the global jihad wishes to destroy and remake the West utterly, must be some partisan plot. Read more ...Source: MarketWireH/T: Jihad Watch
 By SANA ABDALLAH
Published: September 05, 2008
AMMAN -- With the U.S. presidential elections just two months away, many Arabs and Muslims are increasingly worried that a victory for another conservative Republican administration will exacerbate the tensions and turbulence that have followed the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on the United States.
The events and speeches at the Republican Party convention in Minnesota, which endorsed the candidacy of Arizona Senator John McCain and his running mate, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, were given special attention in the Arab media, as commentators voiced fears that a McCain administration would pursue, perhaps more belligerently, the path of the current government.
As a rule, Arab governments in the region prefer to refrain from showing their preferences in U.S. elections, but the media, including the state-controlled TV and press, have made no secret of their desire to see a new leadership in Washington that is run by Democratic presidential candidate Illinois Senator Barack Obama.
While talking heads have said they did not expect either administration to be more sympathetic to the Arab and Muslim causes, many are now saying that Obama would be the "lesser of two evils," after having endured a George W. Bush administration that has launched an undefined and indefinite "war on terror" that is raging in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere.
Particularly highlighted in the media Friday were remarks made by Palin in June that the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the American troops there were "on a task from God."
"Our national leaders are sending soldiers out on a task that is from God," Palin told ministry students at her former church in a video that spread like wildfire across the Internet.
She asked her audience to pray for the troops in Iraq. "That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that plan is God's plan," she said.
Analysts here commented that these sound bites, the first publicizing her foreign policy positions, were eerily similar to Bush's rhetoric when he embarked on the war on terror that started in Afghanistan and was redirected into a massive invasion and subsequent occupation of oil-rich Iraq.
Bush had irked millions of Muslims around the world when he called the war a "crusade," the term that denotes for Muslims a Christian battle against Islam.
Later, Bush was reported as telling leaders at a Middle East summit in Egypt's Sharm el-Sheikh that he was "driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, 'George, go and fight these terrorists in Afghanistan.' And I did. And then God would tell me, 'George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq.' And I did."
Although the "crusade" concept was later retracted, the military policy that the outgoing administration had pursued since the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon remains to be seen as a Christian crusade against the Muslims, particularly among many Arabs.
McCain has also been public about keeping Iraq -- an Arab and predominantly Muslim country -- under U.S. occupation indefinitely, despite growing Iraqi demands to regain their sovereignty and for a clear deadline for a full withdrawal of American troops.
Independent Iraqi analysts say the political and religious ideology of the McCain-Palin ticket is not being viewed in a positive light in Iraq, where conservative Muslim Shiites dominate the population and the post-Saddam Hussein government institutions.
Some Iraqi and Arab politicians and pundits have privately ridiculed as ironic the fact that Palin is regarded in the United States as socially conservative while her unwed teenage daughter is pregnant.
Commentators warn that the vast social and religious gaps dividing the Muslim and U.S. Christian beliefs, particularly Evangelical ones, would be further widened if a McCain-Palin administration took office, because it could further politicize and militarize U.S. policy in the region.
Specific attention has been given to the fact that the 72-year-old McCain, if he wins the election, would become the oldest U.S. president to win the race, raising the odds for his demise in office resulting in the vice president taking over the running of a country that has spread its political and military power across the Middle East.
During his speech accepting the Republican Party's candidacy for the White House on Thursday, McCain vowed to bring change and that Palin was the right person to help him bring that change to Washington.
As far as those Arabs and Muslims, who are looking forward to the end of the Bush era are concerned, that change may very well be for the worse. Some have indeed expressed that the prospect of a McCain-Palin victory is nothing less than chilling. Source: Middle east Times
 A leading John McCain surrogate stirred controversy Friday after defending the Iraq war in particularly stark terms, telling reporters " the Muslims have said either we kneel, or they're going to kill us." Bud Day, who was a prisoner of war with McCain in Vietnam and often advocates for the Arizona senator's presidential bid, made the comments during a conference call with Florida reporters organized by the Florida Republican Party. The Miami Herald has posted audio of the call "I don't intend to kneel, and I don't advocate to anybody that we kneel, and John doesn't advocate to anybody that we kneel," he also said. Asked to respond to Day's comments, the McCain campaign issued a short statement from spokesman Michael Goldfarb. "The threat we face is from radical Islamic extremism," he said. Read more ...Source: CNNMuslims Against Sharia call on Senator McCain to explain to Col. Day the difference between Muslims and Islamists. If in the seventh year of the War on Terror, someone is to ignorant to understand that difference, presidential campaign is the last place he should be.
McCain, Obama both clueless on gihad  By Michelle Malkin In all the brouhaha over the New Yorker’s satirical cover cartoon of Barack and Michelle Obama, a truly “tasteless and offensive” passage in the magazine’s feature article got lost. The magazine piece quotes Obama’s recommendations for how to stop jihad, which he had previously published in a local Chicago newspaper eight days after 9/11. It’s a self-parody of blind, deaf, and dumb Kumbaya liberalism: We must also engage, however, in the more difficult task of understanding the sources of such madness. The essence of this tragedy, it seems to me, derives from a fundamental absence of empathy on the part of the attackers: an inability to imagine, or connect with, the humanity and suffering of others. Such a failure of empathy, such numbness to the pain of a child or the desperation of a parent, is not innate; nor, history tells us, is it unique to a particular culture, religion, or ethnicity. It may find expression in a particular brand of violence, and may be channeled by particular demagogues or fanatics. Most often, though, it grows out of a climate of poverty and ignorance, helplessness and despair. Is this man for real? Osama bin Laden’s murderous legions are plenty able to “imagine” the “suffering of others.” Go watch an al-Qaeda beheading snuff video. Just Google it or surf YouTube. Imagining the suffering of infidels is covered amply in basic Jihadi Training 101. Read more ...Source: NRO
 "What you won't hear from this campaign or this party is the kind of politics that uses religion as a wedge," says Mr. Obama, while denouncing statements of him being a Muslim as a smear. Why is the presidential candidate who claims to be religiously inclusive is treating the word "Muslim" as an insult? Apparently, it is OK for Mr. Obama to be associated with terrorists like William Ayers or racists like Jeremiah Wright, but God forbid somebody would call him a Muslim! No, he won't stand for that kind of smear! We admit that most terrorists are Muslims, but most Muslims are not terrorists and the statement on Mr. Obama's website is insulting to hundreds of millions of people. How could a man who discards his family heritage in favor of political expediency be even considered for presidency of the United States? Where are all the so-called "Islamic civil rights groups" like CAIR, MPAC, ISNA, MAS, etc. who are quick to defend every Islamic terrorist, but are silent when Muslims in general are being denigrated? Would Mr. Obama have the same reaction if someone claimed that he was raised as a Jew? We sincerely doubt that. "In the wake of 9/11, my meetings with Arab and Pakistani Americans, for example, 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. They have been reminded that the history of immigration in this country has a dark underbelly; they need specific reassurances that their citizenship really means something, that America has learned the right lessons from the Japanese internments during World War II, and that I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction." Barack Obama, "The Audacity of Hope", page 261. Well, the political winds did shift in an ugly direction. Is equating "Muslim" with "smear" Obama's idea of "stand[ing] with [Muslims]? Muslims Against Sharia demand immediate removal of "SMEAR: Barack Obama is a Muslim" statement from the official Barack Obama's website as well as an apology for giving the word "Muslim" a negative connotation.Source: Fight The SmearsUpdates: Muslim Barack Obama fans told to hide from television camerasMuslims barred from picture at Obama eventMuslim Women Receive Apology From Obama Staff - Not Good EnoughIn Michigan, Obama Meets Privately with Yet Another Hezbollah Agent; But Publicly Excludes Muslims @ RallyPro-Muslim Discussion Is Not Welcome on Sean Hannity ForumMajor update:Obama changes "SMEAR: Barack Obama is a Muslim" to "SMEAR: Barack Obama is secretly a Muslim" as well as removes his pledge not to use religion as a wedge from site's header. Update for dummies: Do we think Obama is a Muslim? - No Do we think Obama was a Muslim? - Highly unlikely Do we care one way or the other? - No Update for real dummies: Please do keep "others do it too" arguments out. For the purpose of this discussion, we concede that Muslims Against Sharia and all their affiliates may be the "worst people in the world." However, it doesn't change the fact that "SMEAR: Barack Obama is a Muslim" statement is a manifestation of anti-Muslim bigotry.
* There is no such statement on John McCain's website. The reason for second poll is to show that equating belonging to any religion with smear is offensive regardless of religion or candidate.
By LIBBY QUAID STOCKTON, Calif. - Republican John McCain on Thursday rejected endorsements from two influential but controversial televangelists, saying there is no place for their incendiary criticisms of other faiths. McCain rejected the months-old endorsement of Texas preacher John Hagee after an audio recording surfaced in which the preacher said God sent Adolf Hitler to help Jews reach the promised land. McCain called the comment "crazy and unacceptable." He later repudiated the support of Rod Parsley, an Ohio preacher who has sharply criticized Islam and called the religion inherently violent. McCain issued a statement Thursday afternoon announcing his decision about Hagee. Read more ...Source: APMuslims Against Sharia applaud Senator McCains' decision to sever ties with Islamophobic bigots Hagee & Parsley
By Aaron Klein JERUSALEM – Sen. Barack Obama last week claimed Sen. John McCain was trying to "smear" him by repeatedly stating the Hamas terrorist organization supports the Illinois senator for president. Multiple industrious blogs, most openly Obama supporters, attempted to trace the source of the purported smear and somehow arrived at yours truly. Read more ...Source: WND
By Debbie Schlussel Over the past week, I spent far less time writing for this website than planned. Instead, I spent hours on the phone with John McCain staffers and key supporters in Michigan to right a mistake. And, unlike the Barack Obama who clings to anti-Semites and terrorism supporters, John McCain did the right thing: He dumped Ali Jawad--an open Hezbollah supporter and key agent of the terrorist group in the Detroit area. Jawad is also a federal insurance fraud convict. Read more ...Source: DebbieSchlussel.com
 By Cliff Kincaid If the media are on the lookout for gaffes by the presidential campaigns, they missed a big one on Wednesday, when Cindy McCain met with Kosovo Prime Minister Hashim Thaci in Kosovo's capital Pristina, while her husband was giving a major foreign policy speech calling for "new foundations for a stable and enduring peace." Kosovo's declaration of independence, which McCain accepts and was implicitly recognized by Cindy McCain's visit to Pristina, is a major threat to global peace and security. It could spark a U.S. war with Russia. It may be asking too much, however, for the media to cover a gaffe like this. The Kosovo policy is a bipartisan blunder. For the liberal media, Iraq, where McCain differs with Hillary and Obama about the length of stay of the U.S. military, seems to be the only foreign policy issue worth talking about. But the U.S. faces other major problems. We need to recall that the war against the former Yugoslavia was depicted by the liberal media as a worthwhile humanitarian intervention. But it was waged on the basis of Clinton Administration lies of a "genocide" being waged against Albanian Muslims in Kosovo, a province of Serbia. In fact, the Clinton Administration's NATO war against Yugoslavia probably cost more lives than were lost in the civil war in Kosovo. Serbian troops were forced to withdraw in exchange for an international guarantee that Serbia would retain sovereignty over Kosovo but the province would get substantial autonomy. The U.S. agreed to that, but that agreement was violated when the Bush Administration, with backing from McCain and Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, recently recognized Kosovo's declaration of independence from Serbia. Read more ...Source: Accuracy In Media
Sen. John McCain is taking heat for comments made in Jordan Tuesday that Iran was supplying and training Al Qaeda. "Dems seize on McCain's Iran gaffe," reports CNN's Political Ticker. CNN Ticker Producer Alexander Mooney reported, "Iran is predominately a Shiite country and is not aiding the Sunni dominated Al-Qaeda." Michael Cooper, of the New York Times, went into more detail, reporting that McCain said, "Well, it's common knowledge and has been reported in the media that Al Qaeda is going back into Iran and receiving training and are coming back into Iraq from Iran. That's well known. And it's unfortunate." Eventually, Sen. Joe Lieberman, who was standing beside him during the press conference, whispered a correction in his ear, prompting McCain to say, "I'm sorry, the Iranians are training extremists, not Al Qaeda. I am sorry." Read more ...Source: IPT News
 By David Corn Senator John McCain hailed as a spiritual adviser an Ohio megachurch pastor who has called upon Christians to wage a "war" against the "false religion" of Islam with the aim of destroying it. On February 26, McCain appeared at a campaign rally in Cincinnati with the Reverend Rod Parsley of the World Harvest Church of Columbus, a supersize Pentecostal institution that features a 5,200-seat sanctuary, a television studio (where Parsley tapes a weekly show), and a 122,000-square-foot Ministry Activity Center. That day, a week before the Ohio primary, Parsley praised the Republican presidential front-runner as a "strong, true, consistent conservative." The endorsement was important for McCain, who at the time was trying to put an end to the lingering challenge from former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, a favorite among Christian evangelicals. A politically influential figure in Ohio, Parsley could also play a key role in McCain's effort to win this bellwether state in the general election. McCain, with Parsley by his side at the Cincinnati rally, called the evangelical minister a "spiritual guide." Read more ...Source: Mother Jones
 |
|
|
Copyright Muslims Against Sharia 2008. All rights reserved.
E-mail: info AT ReformIslam.org
|
|
|
Sarah Palin will visit Fort Hood during her book tour, the Wall Street Journal reports.
Posts
