Rabbi Eric H. Yoffie, President Union for Reform Judaism and other ignoramuses who spew complete fiction about Islam.
- There exists in this country among all Americans – whether Jews, Christians, or non-believers – a huge and profound ignorance about Islam.
That much is beyond dispute. But a few of us are trying to do something about it. We have listened to Islam’s spokesmen, and we have read Allah’s word and Muhammad’s traditions. We have even delved into Islamic law to see what Islam is all about. Everyone should do the same instead of pontificating from the ivory tower of ignorance.
- …there is no shortage of voices prepared to tell us that fanaticism and intolerance are fundamental to Islamic religion, and that violence and even suicide bombing have deep Koranic roots…
Rabbi Yoffie implies that:
- fanaticism is not fundamental to Islam
- intolerance is not fundamental to Islam
- Islam is a religion
- violence does not have deep Koranic roots.
- Muhammad, the founder of Islam, was a fanatic.
Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 54:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
The Prophet said, “By Him in Whose Hands my life is! Were it not for some men amongst the believers who dislike to be left behind me and whom I cannot provide with means of conveyance, I would certainly never remain behind any Sariya’ (army-unit) setting out in Allah’s Cause. By Him in Whose Hands my life is! I would love to be martyred in Al1ah’s Cause and then get resurrected and then get martyred, and then get resurrected again and then get martyred and then get resurrected again and then get martyred.
Whom do Muslims emulate?
By the declaration of the second part of the Muslim shahada (witness), which is “ash-hadu anna Muhammad rasool Allah” (Muhammad is the messenger of Allah), a Muslim vows to accept Muhammad (pbuh) as his role model in life. If the Qur’an is the Word of God, the model life led by Muhammad is its practical expression. That means a Muslim has to actualize the commands and prohibitions of God given in the Qur’an by following in all the areas of life, Allah’s Messenger, Muhammad (pbuh).
3:85 And whoever seeks a religion other than Islâm, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers. 98:6. Verily, those who disbelieve (in the religion of Islâm, the Qur’ân and Prophet Muhammad ) from among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) and Al-Mushrikûn will abide in the Fire of Hell. They are the worst of creatures.
9:30 And the Jews say: ‘Uzair (Ezra) is the son of Allâh, and the Christians say: Messiah is the son of Allâh. That is a saying from their mouths. They imitate the saying of the disbelievers of old. Allâh’s Curse be on them, how they are deluded away from the truth!
- Islam is not a religion. Islam is a war machine camouflaged with a thin veil of false faith fabricated for the purpose of motivating murderers and camouflaging their intent. This fact is fully documented in Has Islam Been Hijacked?
- 2:216 makes Jihad mandatory, not optional. “Jihad is ordained for you.” 2:190…193 give us a few hints. …”fight in the Way of Allâh those who fight you”…”kill them wherever you find them”…”fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allâh) and (all and every kind of) worship is for Allâh (Alone).”… Read the translator’s note on 2:190 at the bottom of the page. 8:39 and 9:29 are fight until loops, declaring unremitting war upon pagans, Jews & Christians respectively. Unfortunately, they are also the basis of Islamic law, which I quote from The Reliance of The Traveler, a widely accepted handbook of Fiqh.
The caliph (o-25) makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians (N: provided he has first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya, def: o-11.4) -which is the significance of their paying it, not the money itself-while remaining in their ancestral religions) (O: and the war continues) until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax (O: in accordance with the word of Allah Most High,
“Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day and who forbid not what Allah and His messenger have forbidden-who do not practice the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book-until they pay the poll tax out of hand and are humbled” (Koran 9.29)…
Jews & Christians are the worst of creatures, to be burned; Allah curses them. <sarcasm> No sign of intolerance at all! </sarcasm>
- How did it happen that Christian fundamentalists, such as Pat Robertson and Franklin Graham, make vicious and public attacks against your religious tradition?
It happened this way: Robertson & Graham accurately described Islam’s tradition! I refer you to Sahih Bukhari’s books of Jihad & Khumus. Those books describe Islam’s traditions: what Muhammad did and said on and about the battlefield.
- How did it happen that a member of Congress, Tom Tancredo, now running for President, calls for the bombing of Mecca and Medina?
It happened this way: Congressman Tancredo was briefed on the terrorist threats and decided that we need a deterrent. He called for targeting Mecca if we are nuked because no other deterrent is possible against those who seek martyrdom.
- As a Jew I know that our sacred texts, including the Hebrew Bible, are filled with contradictory propositions, and these include passages that appear to promote violence and thus offend our ethical sensibilities. Such texts are to be found in all religions, including Christianity and Islam.
Only Islamic scripture sanctifies & mandates Jihad, genocide & terrorism with clear, direct, open ended outcome based commands.
I previously cited Reliance of The Traveler. Now I will cite Al-Shafii, a prominent Islamic Jurist.
Al-Shafi’i (God have mercy on him) said: “The least that the imam must do is that he allow no year to pass without having organised a military expedition by himself, or by his raiding parties, according to the Muslims’ interest, so that the jihad will only be stopped in a year for a (reasonable) excuse.” He said: “If he did not undertake the sending of enough troops to fight, those who are absent (must) go out, and consider as an obligation that which God (who is praised) said.”
Do not take my word for this! Do not believe anyone who claims to be an expert! Go to the sources; hear it from the ass’s mouth! Click the hyper links in this article and read the source documents. Above all, never believe any damn fool Dhimmi who assures you that “Islam is a religion of peace.”!
And they are many. They call themselves Patriots but I question that which they are Patriotic to. CBS News is one of those questionable groups that have questionable if not outright dubious associations with the socialist influences within our own borders.
Given the atrocities performed daily by U.S. soldiers against innocent Iraqi citizens, as well as the lies upon which the Iraq War was sparked, U.S. troops should be withdrawn from Iraq, says The Nation.
And where are these “daily atrocities”? If it is the “Haditha Massacre”, that whole Murtha wet dream is unraveling and unraveling hard. And what are the lies, exactly, other than the emotional twists and turns of opinions held by pathetic mental patients?
The alleged and highly acclaimed and suspect exhaustive investigation by The Nation, of all entities of the Hate America and Blame America First crowds, is incredulously flawed. Where are the substantiations to the claim of “daily” wrong doings? Last I knew, hearsay was and is to be discounted for what it is…doubtful.
To date, on this New Media Blog, I have 155 CENTCOM releases, each of which average 12 stories. CENTCOM reports everything and leaves not a thing out. If there were “daily atrocities” as alleged by the wanting-of-proven-content of the dead-beat rag called The Nation, I would be joining their efforts.
Along with the CENTCOM releases that I post and publish, I have RSS feeds to CENTCOM, DefenseLink (that I also post and publish) and MilNews. All of them publish everything, the good with the bad. One can also tune into Pentagon TV where all sorts of news is available and everyone (with .01 microns worth of brain matter) knows that the Pentagon isn’t always in favor of the military, strange as that may be.
Unlike organizations such as mentioned above, we in The New Media, of which I am proud to associate with, produce facts and figures and provide substantiations to our allegations and claims. Traitorous and seditious groups such as The Nation and their low-intelligence level followers do not and cannot. They rely solely on the uneducated, the emotional and the easily beguiled.
The ‘Benchmark’ Excuse
Crocker and Petraeus speak some truths, if Senators are listening.
Thursday, July 12, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT
Ryan Crocker, the U.S. Ambassador in Iraq, is a 36-year career diplomat who has served under seven administrations in Iran, Syria, Kuwait, Afghanistan, Lebanon and Pakistan. He’s no partisan gunslinger. So it’s worth listening to his views as Congressional Democrats and a growing number of Republicans press for a precipitous withdrawal from Iraq on the excuse that the Iraqi government hasn’t met a set of political “benchmarks.”
“The longer I’m here, the more I’m persuaded that Iraq cannot be analyzed by these kinds of discrete benchmarks,” Mr. Crocker told the New York Times’s John Burns in an interview on Saturday, referring to pending Iraqi legislation on an oil-sharing agreement and a relaxation of de-Baathification laws. “You could not achieve any of them, and still have a situation where arguably the country is moving in the right direction. And conversely, I think you could achieve them all and still not be heading towards stability, security and overall success in Iraq.”
Mr. Crocker’s comments are a useful reminder of the irrelevance–and disingenuousness–of much Washington commentary on Iraq. For proponents of early withdrawal, the “benchmarking” issue has provided a handy excuse to make the Iraqi government rather than al Qaeda the main culprit in the violence engulfing their country. A forthcoming Administration report indicating lagging political progress is certain to be seized on by Congress as it takes up a defense spending bill and debates an amendment ordering troop withdrawals by the fall. A proposal to mandate extended times between deployments (and thus force withdrawal) failed narrowly in the Senate yesterday, though not before winning the support of seven Republicans.
Nobody claims the Iraqi government is a model of democratic perfection, or that Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is the second coming of Lincoln. We advised the White House not to lobby against his predecessor. But Mr. Maliki’s government is democratic and more inclusive than most reporting suggests, and it is fighting for its life against an enemy that uses car bombs and suicide bombers as its policy instruments. In an interview this week in the New York Post, General David Petraeus noted that while the performance of the Iraqi Army has been mixed, “their losses in June were three times ours.” To suggest that Iraqis aren’t willing to fight for their freedom is an insult to their families.
General Petraeus also noted that “the level of sectarian deaths in Baghdad in June was the lowest in about a year,” evidence that in this key battlefield the surge is making progress. As a result, al Qaeda is being forced to pick its targets in more remote areas, as it did last week in the village of Amirli near Kirkuk, where more than 100 civilians were murdered. More U.S. troops and the revolt of Sunni tribal leaders against al Qaeda are the most hopeful indicators in many months that the insurgency can be defeated.
But that isn’t going to happen under the timetable now contemplated by Congress. “I can think of few commanders in history who wouldn’t have wanted more troops, more time or more unity among their partners,” General Petraeus told the Post. “However, if I could only have one at this point in Iraq, it would be more time.”
It’s also not going to happen if Congress insists on using troop withdrawals to punish Iraqis for their supposed political delinquency. The central issue is whether the Iraqis can make those decisions without having to fear assassination as the consequence of political compromise. The more insistent Congress becomes about troop withdrawals, the more unlikely political reconciliation in Iraq becomes.
That said, it’s becoming increasingly clear that the issue of reconciliation has become a smokescreen for American politicians who care for their own political fortunes far more than they do about the future of Iraq or the consequences of Iraq’s collapse for U.S. interests in the Middle East. Here again, they could stand to listen to Mr. Crocker.
“You can’t build a whole policy on a fear of a negative, but, boy, you’ve really got to account for it,” he said. “In the States, it’s like we’re in the last half of the third reel of a three-reel movie, and all we have to do is decide we’re done here . . . and we leave the theater and go on to something else. Whereas out here, you’re just getting into the first reel of five reels, and ugly as the first reel has been, the other four and a half are going to be way, way worse.”
Mr. Crocker is referring, of course, to the possibility of far nastier violence if the U.S. departs before Iraqi security forces can maintain order. Some will denounce this as a parade of horribles designed to intimidate Congress, but we also recall some of the same people who predicted that a Communist triumph in Southeast Asia would yield only peace, not the “boat people” and genocide. Those Americans demanding a U.S. retreat in Iraq will be directly responsible for whatever happens next.
Al Qaeda is stepping up its efforts to sneak terror operatives into the United States and has acquired most of the capabilities it needs to strike here, according to a draft U.S. intelligence assessment, The Associated Press has learned.
The draft National Intelligence Estimate is expected to paint an increasingly worrisome portrait of al Qaeda’s ability to use its base along the Pakistan-Afghan border to launch and inspire attacks, even as Bush administration officials say the U.S. is safer nearly six years into the war on terror.
Naturally, we should withdraw.
President Bush vetoed a war-spending bill with a similar withdrawal date in May and has threatened to spike any new effort to set a timetable for a U.S. pullout. His Republican allies in the House said the new measure has no chance of passage.
But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a California Democrat, said Thursday’s mixed report on the progress of the war shows it’s time for American troops to come home.
“President Bush continues to urge patience, but what is needed — and what the American people are demanding — is a new direction,” she said.
Earlier Thursday, Bush said a report on U.S.-set benchmarks for Iraq shows “satisfactory progress” in eight areas. He admitted that there is “more work to be done.”
Naturally, we should withdraw. Sounds like a broken record.
President Bush will veto a defense appropriations bill being debated in the Senate if it includes an amendment setting a timetable for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq, the White House said Tuesday.
Senate Democratic leaders have said they plan to bring forward an amendment from Sens. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, and Carl Levin, D-Michigan, that calls for beginning a redeployment of U.S. troops in as little as four months, to be completed by next spring. House Democratic leaders announced late Tuesday that they would bring a similar proposal to a vote by the end of the week.
Naturally, we should withdraw.
Webb amendment vote
Senators on Wednesday refused to bring to a vote an amendment written by Sen. Jim Webb, D-Virginia, that would set time limits between U.S. troop rotations in Iraq and Afghanistan, to give troops more time at home.
The tally was 56 to 41, failing to receive the 60 votes required to cut off debate on the amendment so a vote could be held.
Republicans voting for cloture:
• Sen. Norm Coleman, Minnesota
• Sen. Susan Collins, Maine
• Sen. Chuck Hagel, Nebraska
• Sen. Gordon Smith, Oregon
• Sen. Olympia Snowe, Maine
• Sen. John Sununu, New Hampshire
• Sen. John Warner, Virginia
Indepdents voting against cloture:
• Sen. Joseph Lieberman, Connecticut
Senators not voting:
• Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kansas
• Sen. Tim Johnson, D-South Dakota
• Sen. David Vitter, R-Louisiana
Naturally, we should withdraw.
CBS News has the same sort of stories here…
I agree with this statement:
Quote: “I don’t think Congress ought to be running the war. I think they ought to be funding the troops.”-President Bush
Left’s Cries Of Support Ring Hollow
“…Which brings me to Iraq, the American soldiers involved, the antiwar crowd which condemns their efforts — yet contend they support the troops — and the feverish waving of the interim assessment of progress — or the lack thereof — being made on the ground (which began days before the assessment’s release, and two months before Gen. David Petraeus is to formally report on the status of operations and progress in Iraq)…”
Quote: “I believe the Left’s approach to supporting the troops is utterly disingenuous and condescending.”
Naturally, we should withdraw.
Naturally, we should withdraw.
As Wake Up Americans posted this morning:
Initial Benchmark Assessment Report : Iraq-UPDATE Congress cowards are back on the merry-go-round, VETO time again.
And then this afternoon…
And Miss Beth has this to say:
Iran begins executions for adultery and other violations
By Nazila Fathi
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
TEHRAN: The Iranian government confirmed Tuesday that a man was executed by stoning last week for committing adultery, and said that 20 more men would be executed in the coming days on morality violations.
A judiciary spokesman, Alireza Jamshidi, told reporters on Tuesday that a death sentence by stoning had been carried out last week near the city of Takestan, west of Tehran, despite an order by the chief of the judiciary, Ayatollah Mahmoud Shahroudi, not to permit such executions.
“The verdict was final, and so it was carried out for the man but not for the woman,” the ISNA news agency quoted Jamshidi as saying.
He said the 20 additional executions were for such things as “rape, insulting religious sanctities and laws, and homosexuality.” Most executions in Iran are hangings, often in public and at the scenes of the alleged crimes.
The police arrested about 1,000 people in May during a so-called morality crackdown. Jamshidi said 15 more men were being tried on similar charges and could receive death sentences.
The daily newspaper Etemad Melli reported Monday that Jaffar Kiani, 47, who had been convicted of adultery, was executed by stoning on Thursday in the cemetery of a small village near Takestan. “Villagers said the sentence was carried out by the local judge and authorities,” the newspaper reported.
Kiani and his partner, Mokarameh Ebrahimi, 43, who has two children, were scheduled to die on June 21, but the execution was put off by Ayatollah Shahroudi.
The liberal left in this country should take note. Gay Pride Parades and the decadent lifestyles of homosexuals are not tolerated by Islam.
NATURALLY, WE SHOULD WITHDRAW.
“…U.S. intelligence analysts have concluded al Qaeda has rebuilt its operating capability to a level not seen since just before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, The Associated Press has learned…”
“…A counterterrorism official familiar with a five-page summary of the new government threat assessment called it a stark appraisal that will be discussed at the White House on Thursday as part of a broader meeting on an upcoming National Intelligence Estimate…”
“…The official and others spoke on condition of anonymity because the secret report remains classified…”
“…A conservative watchdog group has issued a report claiming that religious freedom is deteriorating worldwide and that radical Islam is the largest threat to people’s ability to worship according to their beliefs.
The findings by the Center for Religious Freedom were presented on Monday and come in advance of the publication of the book, “Religious Freedom in the World 2007,” to be released next year.
The report cited Burma, Eritrea, Iran, Iraq, the Maldives, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Tibet, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan as nations with the worst religious freedom records of the 100 countries surveyed…”
AQI is on the run
“…Before the tape was running, I asked Abu Ali why he and the 1920s turned against al Qaeda in Buhriz. Speaking through LT David Wallach, a native Arabic speaker, Abu Ali said that “al Qaeda is an abomination of Islam: cutting off heads, stealing people’s money, kidnapping . . . every type of torture they have done.”
The recent stories of baked children came to mind. I asked if Abu Ali had heard about children being baked. Ali said no, he had not heard such a story, but he would not be surprised if it were true because al Qaeda had done so many crimes, such as cutting off a man’s head, putting it up on a stick and parading it around town.
Ali said people had been afraid in their own homes because of al Qaeda. I asked if he had fought Americans and Ali laughed and said through Wallach, “What kind of question is that?” I chuckled. Unfortunately, we had to go to other meetings, so the time for taping was short. In closing, I asked Abu Ali if there was something he would like to say to Americans. The markets that had been closed under al Qaeda were bustling around us…”
Al Qaeda Cell in the U.S. Or On Its Way, According to New Intel
Senior U.S. intelligence officials tell ABC News new intelligence suggests a small al Qaeda cell is on its way to the United States, or may already be here.
The White House has convened an urgent multi-agency meeting for Thursday afternoon to deal with the new threat.
The FBI is investigating anonymous threats against Goldman Sachs contained in handwritten letters to the investment firm warning that “hundreds will die.”
It’s “logical to watch anything that happens in the UK as a potential precursor to future threats against U.S.,” says Thomas P.M. Barnett and I agree with him completely. We need to always be on watch, ever evaluating our procedures, watching what the terrorists are saying in ‘chatter’, on websites, and in videos.
Canon Andrew White, a senior Anglican priest who works in Baghdad, was talking to an al-Qaeda leader, and he was told “Those who cure you are going to kill you.”
“It was an established fact from Day 1 that al Qaeda was behind this and it was planned by its followers in Great Britain with bin Laden’s blessing,” a senior foreign intelligence source told The Times of London.
UPDATE!! Remember this?
Teams of al Qaeda-trained suicide bombers were dispatched to the United States and Europe from an Afghan camp 10 days ago, ABC News reported last night.
About 300 would-be bombers – including boys as young as 12 – were ordered to carry out attacks in Britain, Canada, Germany and the United States, the report said.
A Pakistani journalist invited to attend the camp took pictures of a Taliban commander congratulating graduates on June 9, ABC News said.
No. The United States has nothing to fear from the members of the religion of peace.
Ladies and Gentlemen, it appears some public servants don’t understand the concept of working for the American People. I sent out the letter Congress to about half of the list yesterday. Below is a response I received from Teresa McCollum, John Duncan Jr.’s staff assistant. I suggest the bloggers blog it and we show Duncan’s staff for what they are–purposely obtuse and out and out ignoring–INDEED BLOCKING–the American constituency. BTW, he’s from Tennessee.
Here’s the response:
Whoever you are, this email does not pertain to me and you have been reported and also blocked and sent to junk mail.
Teresa E. McCollum
Congressman John J. Duncan, Jr.
Knoxville , Tennessee 37902
My letter to Duncan read like this:
I have emailed the following to my google group, Patriots for Conservative Values.
Perhaps you need to educate your staff when they receive email concerning issues of the day, such as the Surrender Date Certain timeline discussion regarding Iraq, this is not the way to respond to the American taxpayer and constituent paying your–and your staff member’s–salary. Never forget YOU serve at the pleasure of the people.
This is what I’ve mailed to my group:
[FOLLOWED BY THIS LETTER]
and closed like this:
Mr. Duncan, I suggest you educate your staff. This will be blogged everywhere.
[Miss Beth], PLS, PNPA
blogging at Miss Beth’s Victory Dance
Let’s get the word out!
Such a grand title for an article, yes? Ralph Peters of the NY Post says it very well.
EVEN as our troops make serious progress against al-Qaeda-in-Iraq and other extremists, Congress – including Republican members – is sending the terrorists a message: “Don’t lose heart, we’ll save you!” Iraq’s a mess. Got it. The Bush administration has made so many mistakes I stopped counting a year ago. But we’ve finally got a general in Baghdad – Dave Petraeus – who’s doing things right. Iraqi politicians are still disgracing themselves, but our troops are killing America’s enemies – with the help of our former enemies.
Al-Qaeda-in-Iraq is suffering a humiliating defeat, as fellow Sunni Muslims turn against the fanatics and help them find the martyrdom they advertise. Yet for purely political reasons – next year’s elections – cowards on Capitol Hill are spurning the courage of our troops on the ground.
The frantic political gamesmanship in Congress would nauseate a ghoul. Pols desperate for any cover and concealment they can get have dragged the Iraq Study Group plan from the grave.
Masterminded by former Secretary of State Jim “Have Your Hugged Your Saudi Prince Today?” Baker, the report is a blueprint for a return to yesteryear’s dictator-smooching policy (which helped create al Qaeda – thanks, Jimbo!).
That Baker report reminds me of cheap horror films where the zombies just keep coming back – except that zombies retain a measure of integrity.
But if Republicans are rushing to desert our troops and spit on the graves of heroes, the Democratic Party at least has been consistent – they’ve supported our enemies from the start, undercutting our troops and refusing to explain in detail what happens if we flee Iraq.
So I’ll tell you what happens: massacres. And while I have nothing against Shia militiamen and Sunni insurgents killing each other 24/7, the overwhelming number of victims will be innocent women, children and the elderly.
Why anyone with any kind of intelligence levels are listening to a group of people whose approval ratings is HALF of GWB’s is a odious concept.
BlandlyUrbane of DeMediacratic Nation has some things to say as well.
Perhaps bringing up the laws which are being violated by the “Quit Iraq” caucus is in order.
Expulsion, Censure, Reprimand, and Fine: Legislative Discipline in the House of Representatives
The House of Representatives is expressly authorized within the United States Constitution (Article I, Section 5, clause 2) to discipline or “punish” its own Members. This authority of the institution of the House to discipline a Member for “disorderly Behaviour” is in addition to any criminal or civil liability that a Member of the House may incur for particular misconduct, and is a device or procedure designed not so much as merely a punishment of the individual Member, but rather ultimately as a measure to protect the institutional integrity of the House of Representatives, its proceedings and its reputation.
Congressional discipline of a Member by the House of Representatives is done by the House itself, without the necessity of Senate concurrence, and may take several forms. The most common forms of discipline in the House are now “expulsion,” “censure,” or “reprimand,” although the House may also discipline its Members in others ways, including fine or monetary restitution, loss of seniority, and suspension or loss of certain privileges. In addition to such sanctions imposed by the full House of Representatives, the standing committee in the House dealing with ethics and official conduct matters, the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, is authorized by House Rules to issue a formal Committee reproach in the form of a “Letter of Reproval” for misconduct which does not rise to the level of consideration or sanction by the entire House of Representatives. Additionally, such Committee has also expressed its disapproval of conduct in informal letters and communications to Members.
The House may generally discipline its Members for violations of statutory law, including crimes; for violations of internal congressional rules; or for any conduct which the House of Representatives finds has reflected discredit upon the institution. Thus, each House of Congress has disciplined its own Members for conduct which has not necessarily violated any specific rule or law, but which was found to breach its privileges, demonstrate contempt for the institution, or which was found to discredit the House or Senate. When the most severe sanction of expulsion has been employed in the House, however, the conduct has historically involved either disloyalty to the United States Government, or the violation of a criminal law involving the abuse of one’s official position, such as bribery.
United States Code
TITLE 18 – CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I – CRIMES
CHAPTER 115 – TREASON, SEDITION, AND SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES
Section 2382. Misprision of treason
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the same to the President or to some judge of the United States, or to the governor or to some judge or justice of a particular State, is guilty of misprision of treason and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than seven years, or both.
Section 2388. Activities affecting armed forces during war
(a) Whoever, when the United States is at war, willfully makes or conveys false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States or to promote the success of its enemies; or Whoever, when the United States is at war, willfully causes or attempts to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States, or willfully obstructs the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States, to the injury of the service or the United States, or attempts to do so – Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
(b) If two or more persons conspire to violate subsection (a) of this section and one or more such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be punished as provided in said subsection (a).
(c) Whoever harbors or conceals any person who he knows, or has reasonable grounds to believe or suspect, has committed, or is about to commit, an offense under this section, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
(d) This section shall apply within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States, and on the high seas, as well as within the United States.
Madame Traitor Pelosi has also violated The Logan Act:
Did Nancy Pelosi Violate the Logan Act?
Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply himself, or his agent, to any foreign government, or the agents thereof, for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.
That is the complete text of the Logan Act, passed by the U.S. Congress on January 30, 1799, and in force to this day.
Did Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (and others) violate that act during a much-publicized, self-authorized trip to Syria?
The answer, like the law itself, is simple and straightforward: Yes.
Nancy Pelosi qualifies as “any citizen of the United States,” with no exemption as Speaker of the House.
Nancy Pelosi acted “without authority of the United States,” which, in matters of foreign policy, resides solely and exclusively in the executive branch of the U.S. Government, meaning the President of the United States and his designees. The President of the United States specifically disapproved of the Pelosi trip to Syria, asked her not to go and criticized her thereafter.
Nancy Pelosi directly commenced “correspondence or intercourse” with officers and agents of a foreign government.
Nancy Pelosi, by her own statements, intended and attempted to influence the “measures or conduct” of that foreign government. Those measures and that conduct directly relate to disputes or controversies with the United States (and its allies).
That the measures and conduct of Syria are among the worst of nations is of considerable concern from the standpoint of U.S. foreign policy, but is irrelevant from the standpoint of the Logan Act, which does not grade the behavior of countries or delineate among them for the purposes of its strictures.
That Speaker Pelosi says she said nothing on her trip that differs from the positions of the President is also irrelevant, from the standpoint of the law, and either woefully ignorant or ignorant and spiteful, from the standpoint of international relations.
The current policy of the U.S., as made by the executive branch, is to isolate Syria. That may be right; it may be wrong; it may not even matter. It is not, however, anywhere within Speaker Pelosi’s prerogative to tangibly interfere or even interpose herself by meeting directly with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for the purposes of any “diplomacy.”
Pelosi’s defenders make much of the fact that she is Speaker of the House of Representatives and only behind the Vice President in order of succession to the Presidency. That may get heads nodding on television talk shows, but falls with a thud against the words of the U.S. Supreme Court, recognizing the “exclusive power of the President as the sole organ of the federal government in the field of international relations” or “the decision of the executive is conclusive.”
(Contrary to the mistaken assertions of some, presidential succession is not specified in the Constitution, but in statutory law made by Congress, subject to change, as it has changed in the past. No Speaker has ever succeeded to the Presidency. Even if one ever does, that will never make the legislative branch the executive branch or allow anyone in the legislative branch to adventure past the separation of powers that is one of the cornerstones of our government.)
It is far more pertinent to ask another question regarding Pelosi’s role as Speaker of the House. What does it say to this country that she openly violates a law made by the very legislative body of which she is the putative leader? If she disagrees with the law, for any reason, it is her job to try to change it, not to violate it, no matter how much she may disagree with the foreign policy positions of a duly-elected President.
The Logan Act may be old and no one ever before prosecuted for violating it. But it is neither ill-founded nor archaic, particularly in a time of world unrest and significant domestic tension regarding U.S. policy toward that unrest. The law does not preclude all legislators’ discussions with foreign leaders, such as fact-finding, but only those which have the unauthorized intent to influence those leaders.
As recently as September 2006, the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct of the House issued a memo to all members and officers that cautioned against activities that implicate the Logan Act, albeit intended as a warning to outgoing members. Similarly, in February 2006, the Congressional Research Service prepared a survey of the Logan Act for Congress. While neither document is particularly respectful of the law, there should at least be no one in Congress claiming not to understand it (including Speaker Pelosi’s Republican fellow travelers).
There is no question that many Americans and many in Congress disagree strenuously with foreign policy positions of the Bush Administration. Any and all, including Speaker Pelosi, may say so, loudly and often, in Congress, in the public square. But none of us, including Speaker Pelosi, has the right to conduct any foreign policy, without specific authorization of the President.
Now, Speaker Pelosi and Congressman Tom Lantos, Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, are openly discussing a diplomatic trip to “dialogue” with Iran. In the Byzantine world of foreign relations, that’s like trying to dismantle a nuke wearing only a head scarf for protection.
The Washington Post called Speaker Pelosi’s mission to Syria “foolish.” Vice President Cheney called it “bad behavior.” We call it felony
Here we go again with the Double Standards. Michelle Malkin has a piece at RCP and she is asking why the Lame Stream Media isn’t screeching their usual screeching yakkity-yak.
Read the piece and afterwards, send a get-well wish to the Airman.
When Peaceniks Attack, Journalists Snooze
A young Air Force airman is fighting for his life in Camden, N.J. He was shot on Independence Day by a crazed gunman who reportedly had a beef with the military and the U.S. government and “wanted to make a statement” on the Fourth of July. Have you heard about the plight of 22-year-old McGuire Air Force Base loadmaster Jonathan Schrieken? Probably not.
The shooting got no mention in The New York Times — not even a squib in a back section (though the paper did see fit to put the shooting of a 7-year-old girl in Trenton on the front page).
“Turns out the guy left a couple of suicide notes stating how much he hated the military and he wanted to go out making a statement, so he chose to make his statement on Independence Day trying to kill a soldier. We are very worried about our Airman . . . he’s like a son to me. He’s been to Iraq and Afghanistan on our behalf and then gets shot in his own driveway here in the U.S. by an anti-war, anti-American lunatic. This is gut wrenching.”
Now, imagine the scenario flipped: What if a soldier had attempted to murder a peace activist over the holidays in order to “make a statement”? The Times would be holding front-page vigil, and Katie Couric’s brow would be furrowed for a week. The yakkity yaks on “The View” would be clucking their tongues about the culture of violence bred by the military — and who knows what Rosie O’Donnell would be dressing her poor child in to exploit the story on her website.
The above are samples of the whole article but I am sure you get the gist.
Join the Patriot’s Group
Here we go again. We rallied to defeat this once before and we almost didn’t make it. GWB vetoed the treasonous mess and the Lame Duck CONgress could not override the veto.
This time around, let’s rally to the point that the measure of defeat won’t even pass.
Visit Miss Beth’s blog and register to join the group. The below is her post:Stop the Withdrawal Timelines/Date Certain for Surrender!
I have a post up at my group spot that lists the email addresses of all the staffers of the original 24 White Flag Republicans with the additions of Pete Domenici, Richard Lugar, Lamar Alexander, Rodney Alexander and John Sununu.
You have to be an approved member of my group to get to this list; however, I’ve made it easy for you…the subscription information is at the top of the blog. I’ll be notified when you subscribe and can approve you right away.
WARNING: Trolls will not be allowed to subscribe and will have their subscription denied.
I’m also listing the link to Congress.org where you can tell your elected representatives to vote NO on this withdrawal nonsense. That link is here:
This link is SPECIFICALLY for TELLING THE SENATE: “The Senate SHOULD NOT Vote to Start Withdrawing Troops from Iraq”
If the United States Senate passes a resolution, non-binding or otherwise, that criticizes the commitment of additional troops to Iraq that General Petraeus has asked for and that the president has pledged, and if the Senate does so after the testimony of General Petraeus on January 23 that such a resolution will be an encouragement to the enemy, I will not contribute to any Republican senator who voted for the resolution. Further, if any Republican senator who votes for such a resolution is a candidate for re-election in 2008, I will not contribute to the National Republican Senatorial Committee unless the Chairman of that Committee, Senator Ensign, commits in writing that none of the funds of the NRSC will go to support the re-election of any senator supporting the non-binding resolution
This pledge can be modified to bring it up to date, letting these WFR’s know their political careers are over should they continue to undermine the troops, embolden the enemy and signal a date certain for surrender to the enemy. Join Victory Caucus, take the pledge, modify it and then email (as often as possible, preferably every 1/2 hour) the staffers your displeasure at this issue being brought up yet again and the possibility of their bosses crossing the line yet again. Let them know no matter how many times it’s brought up, you don’t intend to stand still for it and will work to have them removed from office each and every time they show even the least inkling of working with Harry Reid and those vested in our defeat.
It’s time once again to ramp up a grassroots effort to stop this nonsense once and for all. We did it with immigration; let’s get it done with this travesty of congress trying to fight a war from their cushy seats and trying to override the military and the officers who know the real story. Let the military do its job and quit trying to tie their hands! Let us win this war so the troops CAN come home!
Sign the petition, sign the pledge, get the emails going.
Miss Beth will have to approve your membership
|Subscribe to Patriots for Conservative Values|
|Visit this group|