Comment by Jim Campbell
Please listen to this video very carefully. Frank is an acknowledged expert in his field.. Frank Gaffney is the founder and president of the Center for Security Policy in Washington, D.C. The Center is a not-for-profit, non-partisan educational corporation established in 1988. Under Mr. Gaffney’s leadership, the Center has been nationally and internationally recognized as a resource for timely, informed and penetrating analyses of foreign and defense policy matters.
Frank Gaffney sees the Obama Administration as being overly sympathetic to a group which is fighting for a UN Resolution that would clearly defy the First Amendment.
Let’s take out the Sharia, Muslim and Islam groups. WE can you know. Your PUNK president will kiss their butts. Frankly, I’m tired of All of these clowns. Let’s just take them on and rid the world of them ALL.
Concerned American, LV
DUMP THE PUNK TOO
Where the Hell is the share button??? I want to share this on Facebook.
Frank Gaffney is a credible expert, he knows his subject better than most. Everything he said in that video is objectively factually true. His is a vital message which must be heard and acted upon: we must dump the chumps, beginning in the current primary election cycle. We can not wait until November 6, the choices will be made by then.
Accept no candidate who lifts Satan’s tail and inserts his tongue. If they will not condemn Islam, do not vote for them!!!
When Frank spoke of Shari’ah & jihad, he spoke of this:
http://www.islamicbulletin.com/free_downloads/resources/reliance_complete.pdf#page=617
That chapter of Book O of Reliance of the Traveller defines jihad, the obligation to perform it, and the caliph’s fulfillment of that obligation. Read it and curse Isdamn!!!
When Frank spoke of silencing critics of Islam, he spoke of this:
http://www.islamicbulletin.com/free_downloads/resources/reliance_complete.pdf#page=627
Book O11.10 reads as follows:
(5) or mentions something impermissible
about Allah, the Prophet (Allah bless him and
give him peace), or Islam.
011.11 When a subject’s agreement with the state
has been viOlated, the caliph chooses between the
four alternatives mentioned above in connection
with prisoners of war (09.14).
What do Muslims do to a Dhimmi who “mentions something impermissible”?
http://www.islamicbulletin.com/free_downloads/resources/reliance_complete.pdf#page=621
09.14 When an adult male is taken captive, the
caliph (def: 025) considers the interests (0: of
Islam and the Muslims) and decides between the
prisoner’s death, slavery, release without paying
anything, or ransoming himself in exchange for
money or for a Muslim captive held by the enemy.
If the prisoner becomes a Muslim (0: before
the caliph chooses any of the four alternatives)
then he may not be killed, and one of the other
three alternatives is chosen.
What is “impermissible” to mention?
http://www.islamicbulletin.com/free_downloads/resources/reliance_complete.pdf#page=614
(4) to revile Allah or His messenger (Allah
bless him and give him peace);
(5) to deny the existence of Allah, His beginningless
eternality, His endless eternaIity, or to
deny any of His attributes which the consensus of
Muslims ascribes to Him (dis: vI);
(6) to be sarcastic about Allah’s name, His
command, His interdiction, His promise, or His
threat;
(7) to deny any verse of the Koran or anything
which by scholarly consensus (def: b7)
belongs to it, or to add a verse that does not belong
to it;
(14) to deny the obligatory character of
something which by the consensus of Muslims
(ijma’, def: b7) is part of Islam, when it is well
known as such, like the prayer (salat) or even one
rak’a from one of the five obligatory prayers, if
there is no excuse (def: u2.4);
(15) to hold that any of Allah’s messengers
or prophets are liars, or to deny their bcing sent;
(n: ‘Ala’ ai-Din ‘Abidin adds the following:
(16) to revile the religion of Islam;
(17) to believe that things in themselves or
by their own nature have any causal influence
independent of the will of Allah;
(18) to deny the existence of angels or jinn
(def: w22), or the heavens;
(19) to be sarcastic about any ruling of the
Sacred Law;
(20) or to deny that Allah intended the
Prophet’s message (Allah bless him and give him
peace) to be the religion followed by the entire
world (dis: w4.3–4) (al-Hadiyya al-’Ala’iyya (y4),
423-24).)
In the matter of HRC 16/18 an d the Istanbul Process to implement it:
http://snooper.wordpress.com/2011/12/21/big-lie-un-drops-call-to-outlaw-defamation-of-religions/
http://snooper.wordpress.com/2011/12/16/istanbul-process-censorship-through-subterfuge/
http://snooper.wordpress.com/2011/11/27/combating-intolerance-negative-stereotyping/
Truly, this is a nation run by Goddamned Traitors. Let all who doubt and dissent from this fatal fact read the June-August edition of the OIC Journal and see what our Secretary of State and an Ambassador said and what they consented to by silence.
http://issuu.com/oic-journal/docs/journal_issue18_english?mode=window&pageNumber=7
Ishanoglu is demanding passage and enforcement of laws:
…alternatives and policy options to
be subjected to the inter-governmental process – preferably
at the UN Human Rights Council – to further the consensus
with emphasis on implementation in a result-oriented
fashion; …
Listen to Shrillery:
…false divide that pits
religious sensitivities against freedom of expression, and we
are pursuing a new approach based on concrete steps to fight
intolerance wherever it occurs. …
Muslims demand that our criticism be squelched. They demanded prohibition of the publication of The Prophet of Doom, Submission, Fitna and the Motoons. If that does not violate free speech, what in Hell would?
With reference to the joint statement:
…They urged States to take effective measures, as set forth
in Resolution 16 /18, consistent with their obligations under
international human rights law, to address and combat
intolerance, discrimination, and violence based on religion
or belief….
that means laws, damnit!!!
Pay close attention to the words of Ambassador Eileen
Chamberlain Donahoe, US Representative to the Human
Rights Council:
A positive aspect of Resolution 16 /18 is that it did not
pit the principle of freedom of religion against freedom of
expression, said Ambassador Donahoe, rather it combined
them. “We believe that through free expression we are better
able to combat intolerance.”
In response to OIC Journal query on defining what would
constitute incitement to hate, she clarified that in the US there
is a single case where freedom of expression can be restricted
or prohibited by the State, and that is when “incitement to
eminent violence”.
This next paragraph bears close scrutiny:
In this context, she pointed out that the President, the
Secretary of State and several public officials went out on a
limb to publically condemn ‘Burn the Quran Day’ to show
that such abominable acts are not accepted. “When you have
the President, the Secretary of State and public figures jointly
condemning that, it will be more effective than throwing
that pastor in jail. I believe the same is true for the hateful
cartoons (of the Prophet). We should all be joining together
in conveying our disgust with such intolerance.”
Our Ambassador to the hRC declared that Qur’an burning & the Motoons are intolerance to be condemned. Ban Ki-moon called them hate speech and incitement. Will you for Chrissake get a God blessed clue???
Hi Dajjal, on my page I see it, I posted it on FB at Media Coverups and Government Lies with the false flag, sorry you are having a problem it should be at the bottom of the article before you click continue reading. J.C. Have a great one in MI..