Sunday, July 29, 2007

The law, Philosophy and Psychology of Guns.

If you are among those who hate guns and believe that they are at the root of all evil, then this is a must read for you…

By de Andréa

The Second Amendment is probably one of the most misunderstood parts of the entire Constitution. This article covers the legal, the philosophical, the Biblical, the psychological, and the practical aspects of bearing arms, or even being anywhere near one.

As many Op Ed articles as I have written about guns, and even a book about the subject, I have never come closer to packing as many different facets of this controversial subject into such a small space.

If you are afraid of guns, have you ever wondered why? You might not like the answer any better that you like guns. But if you are interested in truthful probabilities about the right to keep and bear arms, then this is a must read.

God, Guns, and the devil

"Why don't you pick up that gun and blow your brains out?"

"You could kill a whole lot of people with that gun."

"Why not shoot her right now? That would shut her up!"

These are the sorts of vile mental suggestions that many people experience from within their own minds when they see a gun.

That's right. Dark thoughts and impulses, which are too horrible to dwell upon or even acknowledge, but they nevertheless occur to many of us at the mere sight of a firearm or a naked blade.

When we see a firearm, we sense the presence of evil – so naturally we assume the gun is its source, when actually the gun's close proximity caused our own buried, angry, violent tendencies to surface for a moment.

Thus, many people who "dislike" or "are afraid of" guns are actually afraid of what they might do if they had a loaded firearm in their hand. And I'm not talking about criminal types here. I'm talking about regular law abiding people – nice on the outside, and lots of buried and perhaps unrecognized rage inside. Again, the presence of the gun simply causes ones own dark, angry propensities to "stir a little" deep down inside.

But the reality of all this, is too heavy and "negative" for many of us to face, so we instantly and unconsciously project our own buried violence or anger onto the gun – as though this inanimate mechanical devise could somehow absorb all the culpable guilt feelings one carries around like excess baggage. Moreover the gun is incapable of defending itself, so it is an easy target on which to place blame.

Obviously, a loaded handgun has great potential for destruction and havoc. At the mere squeeze of a trigger there can be murder, suicide, terrorism. Even without pulling the trigger, the gun represents the magic ticket to armed robbery, forcible rape and every other form of coercion. For a person with lots of anger, albeit buried, a gun represents the shortest distance between two points – between the suppressed violent nature within one and the maximum expression of that nature. Therefore, the mere sight of a gun excites that dark side of us, causing it to beckon wordlessly; it says "Use me!"

Let's examine this admittedly scary subject a little more closely.
Have you ever stood close to the edge of a cliff, or out on a balcony of a high building? Did you notice that some "force" almost seemed to want to pull you over the edge? Most of us have experienced something like this phenomenon – a momentary loss of balance, an unexplainable fear, some mysterious pull toward the edge. We have a moment of disorientation and fear, and then we pull back to safety.

I've experienced it. After checking into a hotel room, unpacking, and checking over the room, then stepping out onto the balcony I approached the railing and looked out at the cityscape and then gazed down several stories to the ground. I noticed a distinct pull, along with a slight disorientation, as though I was losing my balance. I recovered right away and realized I was so tired and frazzled from a long day that my mind was vulnerable to the "pull" of dark forces. So I took the hint and rested a bit, until I had recovered my strength and mental focus.

In this life, the malevolent intelligence we call "evil" is constantly scanning each of us for opportunities to tempt or even destroy us. As the Bible puts it, "Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour" (1 Peter 5:8 KJV). In critical moments of the sort I am describing, evil seizes the opportunity to give us a mental "shove.” Unfortunately, for some people that "shove" is strong enough – especially after a lifetime of giving in to anger, judgment and despair – to pull them over the edge.

We'll never know how many "suicides," in which people fell off a cliff or a balcony, occurred this way – not because of a premeditated suicide plan, but because they were vulnerable to the opportunistic impulse of evil.

Similarly, how many head-on auto accidents occur every year because someone inexplicably crosses the center line to crash at high speed into another car, having succumbed to a wordless, instantaneous mental suggestion from hell? All in a timeless fraction of a second the message impresses itself on your mind: "Crash your car into that one coming your way. Life sucks. Go out with a major bang! Everyone will be shocked! You have the power! Just do it! Do it now!"

Does this scare you? If so – if this description resonates with you even a little bit – it's only because you have the same problem to some degree. Don't fret. We're all in the same boat. We're all subject to the "dark side" of the force. It's called being "born in sin.” But some of us honestly face it, and quietly call out to God for help, and His help comes. Others live in denial – until tragedy and death end it all.

In any event, this same phenomenon is at work with firearms, because of the potential guns provide for immediate and ultimate destruction. Guns literally bring to the surface of the mind the suppressed potential for violence that exists inside every angry person.

Again, there is more than one way this discomfort around guns can be experienced. A sincere person who is uncomfortable around guns will probably be able to deduce that the problem is within him and not with the inanimate firearm. He's already on the path to getting better.

Unfortunately, many people who hate/fear guns never allow themselves to come face-to-face with the real problem – themselves. No sooner does their own suppressed anger react to the sight or even the thought of a gun, than they turn that angry emotional response into something more "acceptable" – like fear. After all, on the "niceness" scale, fear is a lot nicer than hatred.

The problem is, after our buried anger is effortlessly transformed into "fear of guns," that fear easily turns into false righteousness: "I don't like guns and have no need for them. I'm a peaceful, non-violent person and wouldn't ever shoot anyone for any reason."

Some take this "righteousness" even further: "God protects me; I don't need guns. I have faith he'll never put me in a position where I need to shoot someone.” Good thing none of the Bible's Old Testament heroes like David or Joshua thought like that. They were required by God to kill many people. Who can say what will be required of us in this journey called life – whether or not we may be called on to defend ourselves or our families from a dangerous enemy?

Of course, there are many angry people who love guns. The world seems to be full of pumped-up jihadists who crave weapons, the bigger and more lethal the better; drug lords who use guns to murder judges and mayors and anyone else who gets in their way; gang bangers who pack heat so they can kill members of rival gangs; and every variety of criminal who, of course, take pains to illegally procure the tools of their illegal trade – guns.

Unlike those who hate/fear guns as a result of unconsciously projecting their own inner violence onto them, angry people who love guns are in love with their own hatred, which they see as righteousness! The Islamic jihadist believes he's serving Allah by murdering innocents. And predators and psychopaths of every sort love their guns because that's where they get the means to overcome their intended victims.

The God side of guns
Obviously, guns allow evil to be expressed in a multitude of ways, just as any weapon does. Everybody understands this, so there's no need to say much more about it – except that these people need to be stopped.

But what does need to be said, and shouted from the rooftops, is that in the right hands firearms also enable real goodness and virtue to be manifested – right here, right now – by opposing evil and protecting the innocent.

I'm talking now about what I'll call true Americans – not those who criminally prey on others, but also not those whose cowardice or shallowness cause them to appease bullies and to blame inanimate objects for the evil in the world and within themselves.

Whether individually, or in a war, the moral imperative to defend ourselves and others is the same. And just as we all share this fundamental and undeniable right to self-defense, it follows that we also share the right to the means of self-defense, or else that supposed right is just a bad joke.

Fortunately for us, the Constitution and Bill of Rights were written and adopted by strong, right-thinking people. And the Second Amendment spells out for all to see the right of Americans to "keep and bear arms," a fundamental right that "shall not be infringed."

Today, according to the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, there are close to 250 million privately owned firearms in the U.S, including more than 65-70 million handguns. Approximately 45 percent of American households have firearms. That means we have approximately 135 million American gun-owners that includes 30-35 million owners of handguns.

This is a very, very good thing – most of us don't even realize how good it is. For just as it was true in our founders' day, it is true today that Americans need guns for self-defense and as the Constitution documents, to continue the security of a Free State.
If you don't believe me, just consider the Virginia Tech disaster. Imagine Cho Seung-Hui walking into a classroom, threatening people with his guns, making them line up, preparing to shoot them. Now freeze-frame that scene and think for a moment: There isn't anyone or anything in this world that could have stopped Cho in his tracks at that point and averted the hellish slaughter that followed – [except] a single student or professor with a firearm, and trained to use it.

At the time of this nation's birth, people understood the importance of the armed citizen.
James Madison, who wrote the Second Amendment, said Americans had "the advantage of being armed," whereas in other nations "the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.” Thomas Jefferson said, “No free man shall be debarred the use of arms.” Patrick Henry said the "great object is that every man should be armed… Everyone who is able should have a gun.” And Thomas Paine said, "Arms … discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property."

But today, many people would like to get rid of the Second Amendment – either by expunging it from the Bill of Rights or, more likely, by the continual judicial legislation of redefining its meaning as they have with the First Amendment regarding the invention of the mythological “separation of church an State”.

As you see in today's America, the self-reliant, responsible, independent-minded man or woman who carries a gun – the kind of person who is aware, thinks for himself, is skeptical of government, the press and all of society's "experts" – the person not content to be a victim, but willing to take charge of a situation, "get involved," even fight back and stand up for what is right – in other words, a true American – is a threat to society's elitists, experts and politicians who are addicted to power.

As a general rule, it is liberals who tend to oppose private citizens carrying guns around with them. As I said, this is mostly because they're full of suppressed anger and therefore project their own – and others' – evil onto inanimate objects so as to maintain the denial of the world in which they live. After all, you can't possibly believe the illogical and immoral things liberals and leftists espouse unless you're full of trauma and repressed hatred. It takes lots of inner rage to distort reality sufficiently to believe it's OK to kill beautiful little babies in their mothers' wombs or to believe a malevolent chameleon like Hillary Clinton should be elected president of the United States and commander-in-chief of the most powerful military in world history.

This same emotional confusion leads liberals to think guns are the problem, rather than being – in the right hands – the protection from tyranny and predation they truly are.

Do you know what happens when good people carry lethal weapons? They mentality change from passive to active, vulnerable to protective, powerless to empowered, dependent to independent. Quite simply, they become more responsible – and more capable of doing good. In fact, they make up the very fabric of a free America. This is the whole concept of the unregulated militia.

Check the U.S. Code Title 10>Subtitle A> Part 1>Chapter 13
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b) The classes of the militia are—

(1) The organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and…

(2) The unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

When neighbor stands with neighbor:
There have always been two parts to the "militia" mentioned in the Second Amendment – the regulated and the unregulated (or the organized and the unorganized) militia.

Various laws throughout U.S. history have defined the organized or regulated militia, for instance the Militia Act of 1792, which specified that males 18 through 44 years of age "shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia …"

However, much more important was the founders' and framers' concept of the unorganized or unregulated militia, which they regarded as the ultimate defense of the new nation. This larger and more organic militia consisted of all able-bodied citizens. As Richard Henry Lee, a key founder during the Revolutionary period, explained in 1788: "A militia when properly formed [is] in fact the people themselves ... and include[s] all men capable of bearing arms. ... To preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms.” Or as George Mason famously and cryptically put it: "I ask sir, what is a militia? It is the whole of the people, except for a few public officials."

We must also stand together.
In reality, the responsible armed citizen is the strength of America. But there will always be a tension between him and his government – especially today, when the armed citizen is the antithesis of everything our culture, experts, politicians and other "leaders" teach us. In their minds, we're supposed to be helpless victims or incompetent, irresponsible, out-of-control children. We're supposed to need them to provide for us and protect us. If they could have their way, nobody would have guns except the police. But then, that is what is known as a "police state."

THE BOTTOM LINE: What we need is a rebirth of the true American spirit. We need people to take up arms in the spirit of responsibly protecting their family and other innocents, just like in the old days when everyone carried a sword. Every man had to be willing to put his life on the line to protect his loved ones. But you can't do that without your sword – which in today's world is a firearm.

One quote from Jesus we almost never hear cited these days is what He said shortly before being taken into captivity by Roman soldiers to be crucified. It was a dangerous time, and as He spoke to His disciples, He told them to arm themselves.

And he said unto them, when I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing? And they said, – Nothing. Then said he unto them, but now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. For I say unto you, that this, that is written, must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end. And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, it is enough. (Luke 22:35-38 KJV)

The police cannot protect you, nor are they required to protect you. Very simply, they are never there when the crime against you and your loved ones is being committed.

Do you want God to protect you? Of course, then don't tempt Him by saying, "The Lord will protect me, I don’t need to protect myself, I don't need a gun.” That's like the man who says, "A storm is coming, but I don't need to leave; God will protect me," all the while ignoring the real protection God has provided for him – the common sense to get an umbrella or come in out of the storm. [Take a lesson from Katrina]

In dangerous times such as those in which we live today, God clearly speaks to us – both in Scripture and through good old fashioned common sense – about being prepared to protect and defend ourselves, our families and our neighbors.

As Jesus Himself said: "He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one."

de Andréa

Tuesday, July 24, 2007


Intellectual Think Tank Analysts Advise Repealing the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment guarantees the right of an individual to own guns and for that reason it should be repealed, according to a legal affairs analyst who opposes gun ownership.

By de Andréa

"The Second Amendment is one of the clearest statements of citizen rights in the Constitution;" Benjamin Wittes, a guest scholar at the center-left Brookings Institution, acknowledged this in a recent liberal think tank discussion

"We've had decades of intellectual gymnastics to try to make those words not mean what they say."Wittes, who said he has "no particular enthusiasm for the idea of a gun culture," but rather than try to limit gun ownership through regulation that potentially violates the Second Amendment, opponents of gun ownership should set their sights on repealing the amendment altogether.
"Rather than debating the meaning of the Second Amendment, I think the appropriate debate is whether we want a Second Amendment at all," Wittes said. He conceded, however, that the political likelihood of getting the amendment repealed is "pretty limited.

"Wittes said the Second Amendment guarantee of the right to bear arms meant more when it was crafted more than 200 years ago than it does today. Modern society is "much more ambivalent than they [the founders] were about whether gun ownership really is fundamental to liberty," he said."One of the things that they [the Founders] believed was that the right of states to organize militias, and therefore individuals to be armed, was necessary to protect the liberty of those states against the federal government," Wittes said. "This is something we don't really believe as a society anymore.

"But challenging the Second Amendment on the basis that society's circumstances have changed since the drafting would similarly open up to question all other constitutional rights, according to Georgetown University law professor Randy Barnett, who also participated in the discussion.
"The techniques that are used to show that the Second Amendment really doesn't have any contemporary relevance are available to anybody who wants to show that aspects of the First Amendment and the Fourth Amendment and the Fifth Amendment also have no contemporary relevance," he said.

Citing the Fourth Amendment, which protects "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures," Barnett argued, "Sure it was fine that persons should be secure in their papers and effects back in the old days when there wasn't a danger of terrorism and mass murder."But advocates of warrantless searches could make an "appeal to changing circumstances," on the basis that the Fourth Amendment is "archaic [and] we don't need it anymore."

THE BOTTOM LINE: What I find extremely interesting about this discussion is first; the acknowledgement of Wittes (an anti-gun advocate) that the Second Amendment actually says that individual citizens have the right to keep a bear arms. Next he admits to the ambivalence of the American public to understand that the Amendment was to protect the future security of liberty, which is usually caused by the lack of knowledge about a given subject. This ignorance propels the idea that we do not need that security anymore, as if our Government officials have outgrown the natural tendency to want absolute control, and therefore rendering physical power in the hands of the people no longer necessary.

Randy Barnett law professor of Georgetown University brings up a very valid point as to the relevance of all the Amendments should the Second be reversed. If we have actually outgrown the Second Amendment then one could call in to question the need for the documentation of any of our rights, or even the entire Constitution.

This of course is naive and absurd. Moreover it is the very point of Second Amendment. As I have so often said, if in fact the Second would be either totally ignored as is surreptitiously being done, or repealed, we would eventually lose all the rest of our inalienable rights protected by the Bill. The most fundamental truth that these Godless, self-appointed social elitists fail to recognize is that the Constitution only documents our rights, it doesn’t give them or take them away. Our rights as the Declaration documents; are inalienable, and thus given to us by our Creator. So even the repeal of our rights would be irrelevant, they would simply be undocumented rights. What Wittes also fails to recognize is that the reason we still have a free liberated Democratic Republic yet today, is because of the Second Amendment which has the potential to protect all the others.

de Andréa

Monday, July 23, 2007


College student starts a movement to allow guns on college campuses
By de Andréa
July 17, 2007

While efforts to allow students and faculty with concealed permits to carry their fire arms on campus is not new, the tragedy at Virginia Tech has inspired an organized movement for the Second Amendment rights among students.

The curious thing about this issue is; that one already has the right to defend oneself against the loss of life or great bodily harm. The schools however have decided to take away the means to exercise that right by denying yet another right, the Constitutional right to bear arms. They have done this by exercising the ignorant, dangerous and unconstitutional practice of Gun free zones.

The irony of this ignorant practice is that Virginia Tech and every single one of the schools where similar massacres have taken place in the last couple of decades were designated as “GUN FREE ZONES”.

In the aftermath of the Virginia Tech massacre, the anti-gun lobby believes that they have renewed strength for there misguided philosophy of less guns less crime. The obvious flaw in this belief is that only law abiding people obey laws, so the result of fewer guns is that there are fewer guns in the hands of the law abiding/the good guys. The criminals on the other hand have this nasty habit of not obeying laws, something the extreme left freedom haters have a difficult time getting their puny minds around.

Twenty-five-year-old Andrew Dysart spent four years in the Marine Corps. He is now studying criminal justice at George Mason University. After April 16th, Dysart, and as a concealed gun permit holder, he started wondering how he would defend himself on his campus. His curiosity led him to start the “Students for Concealed Carry”.

"We believe that students with concealed handgun permits should be allowed to carry their handguns on campus, just like they're allowed to anywhere else in the state," says Dysart.

Many students carry concealed weapons off-campus without incident every day. Dysart does not believe they should be forced to disarm at school. He has also heard from students at other schools, including Virginia Tech, interested in starting their own movements. His group now has nearly a hundred members.

No one can know for sure if a concealed permit holder could have saved all the lives at Virginia Tech. But I can say being a concealed carry permit holder myself that most of the slaughter would have been avoided.

"…I do think those students should have had a chance. If they've been through the training, they should have had that chance on campus. That's a chance that Virginia Tech didn't give them. That's a chance that George Mason doesn't give me," says Dysart.

THE BOTTOM LINE: Efforts to allow concealed carry on campuses have been swiftly killed by a House of Delegates Committee for over two years now. Many college administrators are blind elitists, and think they know better what is good for everybody else. I find It very interesting that these superior elite academics haven’t got the horse sense that God gave a mule, they obviously think that it is better to let the students and faculty to be totally at the mercy of any criminal nut brain that decides to use students as live targets in our schools, than to allow a trained individual, legal to carry a weapon to defend themselves and other innocent would be victims.

If there were actually any Justice left in this country, the people that deny the constitutional right of people to defend themselves should suffer the same consequences that the murdering monster that comes into a so-called “Gun Free Zone” and kills helpless people. They should be charged under the RICO Statutes with conspiracy to commit murder. Let’s not forget these murdering maniacs were enabled by the very people that created the so-called “GUN FREE ZONES”…

de Andréa

Saturday, July 21, 2007


July 18, 2007 at 11:40 am The District Of Columbia, moved so by an appellate court decision in Parker vs. The District of Colombia, against its thirty-year-long gun ban, has elected to file with the U.S. Supreme Court

By de Andréa

This could be the single most important national domestic issue to have ever been brought before the Federal Supreme Court since the founding of this Constitutional Republic. The stated issue is whether or not the Second Amendment is a collective or an individual right. I said, “Stated Issue” because this is really not the issue at all; since the collective is made up of individuals the collative is nothing but a collection of individuals. This is just one of the ignorant ways for the anti-gun demagogs to create a diversion of senseless argument so that the fundamental purpose of the right is avoided.

I also said that this could be the single most important issue to be brought before the Supreme Court; “ever”. The reason for the elevated significance of this subject is that if the people, who are the ultimate authority in a Democratic Republic, are totally disarmed by the very governmental that answers to the people then the government no longer answers to the people but it is the people who have become helpless subjects of the government. Anyone who does not understand that this threat of the abolition of citizen’s right to arms as the very foundation of tyranny, has never cracked a history book.

If I could address the Supreme Court:

The argument that weapons apply only to militias, fails to address that Militia as defined by United States Code applies to civilians as well as it does military. Historically, civilians were the first Militia. See U.S. Code Title 10 here where we still are the Militia.

It is also important to note they did not mean National Guard in those days: National Guard was not even conceived of or organized for another 130 years.

But that’s only the beginning:

If it pleases the Court:
I would like to cite several authorities emanating from writings of the Founders Original Intent and decisions since the nation’s inception. I have many other authorities, but since the time before the Court is limited, I would like to cite just a few.

The Founders had revolted against, above all else, abuses of the law, and in writings, in debate and ratifications, they wrote words that abuse of due process be forbidden.

This is especially evident in the second amendment, the modern question of whether the right is collective or individual is without meaning, because the second amendment was not written for citizens, but written for government – that is, written directly to government, like the whole of the Constitution is.

Also the second amendment was not written about guns, per se, but more importantly about abuse of the law. The Founders did not need to imagine weapons of the future; they did not view weapons as a threat to the new nation, but an asset. They had just defeated the Crown and its cruelty in abuse of its own law; the second amendment was written to forbid future self-dealing abuses of due process as an ever-present threat in any age, any era, and any government. (Any government does not mean sovereign states outside the U.S., but all levels of government within the U.S., including the federal government, states, counties, and cities.)

In a Constitutional republic, it declares the citizen as supreme authority; the Founders knew that citizen authority must be backed by lethal force, and forever. To perfect the concept that any regulation, interference, or infringement of this force is unreasonable, the amendment which protects that force is made absolute in the words ‘shall not be infringed’.

But rather than any Government Troops versus Citizens shoot-outs, violent crime as an instrument of demagoguery is used to sway the public to disarm, and in so doing, to surrender the force which backs its authority. The net effect of this is, of course, is higher numbers of injured victims of crime where constituents fear a fate of prosecution more than thuggery and this becomes self-fulfilling for the demagogue who claims that crime is intractable. It is not. For those communities, gun control is the ultimate abuse of state or local government power, as has been made self-evident in recent school shootings, as well as the kind foreseen and forbidden by the Founders.

The second amendment also lifts burdens of government, always a worthwhile endeavor, as opposed to the ever-increasing official desire for the taking up of burdens in demagoguery. Unanswered with citizen authority, crime creates a vicious cycle of more work, more unreasonable law, more hiring’s, more purchases, restricting reasonable resistance in order to grow crime in order to grow government, and an ever increasing government oppression.

Since the inception of an organized police force in the United States, it has never been a duty of law enforcement to protect individuals. From the earliest rulings to the most recent – Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 2005, U.S. Supreme Court – the rulings have been the same: no constitutional right to police protection.

This leaves a tremendous void in the logic of disarming citizens who face grave danger alone by the hundreds of thousands each year left up to the mercy of criminals who may or may not possess a gun.

What about 300 million guns in the hands of 80 million citizens? In America, about 29,000 persons are shot to death each year according to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report (mostly crime-on-crime shootings), and that same report demonstrates that armed citizens in fact de-escalate violent crime on the order of more than 2.5 million times each year.

Why such a disparity? It is 86 to 1.

Guns are not the major commonality among all the violence. By the numbers of all violent crime, violence in grave danger or great boldly harm is easily perpetrated without a gun – in beatings, multiple assailants, knifings, strong-arm assaults, rapes, robberies gone bad, and abductions.

Regulation, or the banning of guns does not foil crime, it enhances it. 2.5 million gun defenses each year to de-escalate violence is not guns against guns, but armed citizens on the record 2.5 million times a year of de-escalating all manner of violent acts from completion.

Public policy and interest:

EMS teaches CPR, First-aid, and the Heimlich maneuver to citizens because Advanced Life Support cannot always arrive within a life-saving response time. This is also true of law enforcement. Citizen intervention has been held to be in established public policy and interest. Our system recognizes the average reasonable person doctrine, the presumption of intent in reasonable apprehension of grave danger, the doctrine of standing in the shoes of the victim, citizen authority, citizen arrest, assisting law enforcement, volunteerism and other doctrines, reflecting a spirit of helpfulness and self-rule which in a democracy must not be discouraged or punished. In time of violence, no one – no police or policy – can take the place of the citizen as the first line of defense. Armed citizens have been proven to be the most reasonable and responsible of all.

It is this marriage of liberty and personal responsibility which together outshine the hysterical forecasts and hyperbole of gun control and intentional interference by even the slightest gun regulation. The genius of Original Intent Independence and its responsibility are together illegally obscured and frustrated purely because of Liberty’s ability to shine as the ultimate authority as it was intended in a nation of self-rule. Crime cannot any longer be used as a tool for the ambitious that cite violence as a cause to disarm that ultimate authority.

THE BOTTOM LINE: No body of Government at any level has any legal authority to interfere with the force which backs citizen supreme authority, but it can affirm it, in respecting the Original Intent by the Founders who knew the history of abuse of due process in any time, any era, and of any government. This outrageous attack on our basic Constitutional rights is indicative of the ignorant mentality of some of our elected officials.

The Second Amendment as it is written: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a Free State, The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”. It is a documented reminder, that it is the Peoples Militia, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms, that secures the freedom of this Republic.

Conversely, without that armed security, government will do what governments do, and liberty will eventually fail…

de Andréa

Thursday, July 19, 2007


Islamberg is one of the more the 30 Islamic Terrorist Training Camps in the Continental United States.

DEPOSIT New York — Hidden in a remote area off a primitive dirt road lays a mysterious 70-acre compound in which more than 100 Muslims live in seclusion, following the teachings of its founder, a radical cleric with ties to terrorism.

The following publication is an introduction to a series of articles. This article is not complete. The purpose of this tasty morsel is to cause awareness that 911 is not and wasn’t, as one may have been led to believe, the last attack on U.S. soil.

This is the first in a series of small clips of articles produced mostly by Doug Hagmann Director of the North Eastern Intelligence Network and Military Affairs that show that the Nation of Islam has been for the last 30 years, surreptitiously and incrementally infiltrating America, building a network of trained terrorist cells that will ultimately be unleashed on a sleeping, ignorant and unsuspecting America.

Declassified information assembled by Bottom line Publishing
July 5, 2007

It is neither a Taliban stronghold outside Jalalabad, nor an Islamic madrassa on the outskirts of Karachi. It's a place called Islamberg, a closed and seemingly quiet community at the foot of the Catskill Mountains in upstate New York, about three hours north of Manhattan. It's also a compound shrouded in local rumors, mystery, and fear; sitting near the huge reservoir system that provides New York City with most of its drinking water.

Quietly nestled in the woods, Islamberg remained unnoticed for the two decades leading up to Sept. 11, 2001, when the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were attacked by a determined band of Islamic terrorests. That’s when people started questioning ties of the community called Islamberg to a Pakistani cleric that was at that time known to be connected to worldwide terrorism. They also started talking about the unusual sounds of gunfire and explosions some said they heard emanating from the compound.

But before you leap to conclusions and head to the Catskills to personally fight the war on terror; you need to know the entire story. The truth, as is often the case, is a lot more complicated than the headlines suggest. Islamberg is one of many such Muslim camps all throughout the United States. Islamberg got its start about 20 years ago, when inspired by the words of the Sufi cleric Sheikh Syed Mubarik Ali Shah Gilani, a group of primarily black Muslims from Brooklyn left New York City to escape crime, poverty and racism. Aiming to lead what they believed was a peaceful and holy Muslim life; they built a community of some 40 family houses, their own grocery store, and a bookstore.

And they weren't alone:
Other groups, also inspired by Gilani, have set up similiar communities in 19 other states. According to the group's own Web site, the Islamberg community is still "struggling," and is asking for donations to complete its mosque. According to locals, the land previously belonged to a Deposit, N.Y., woman who opened up her home in the in the late 1970s or early '80s to disadvantaged youths from the city so that they could avoid being led astray by a financially and morally bankrupt urban environment. Those boys, according to locals who were friendly with some of the group, eventually went on to form Islamberg, and at some point they were joined by another group of more militant Muslims, who created something of a rival faction within the community.

And then Sept. 11, 2001 happened. Anti-Muslim sentiment soared throughout the United States, and in the case of the Islamberg compound, concern grew among their neighbors.

Sheikh Syed Mubarik Ali Shah Gilani, the Pakistani Sufi cleric whom the Islamberg residents call their spiritual leader, has long been suspected of being one of the founders of a group called Jamaat al-Fuqra, a group that the U.S. and Pakistan say is responsible for a long list of terrorist activities around the world, including murders of rival religious figures in the U.S.

Gilani also was the man American reporter Daniel Pearl was going to see when he was abducted and beheaded/murdered. Gilani has denied any connection with either Pearl's death or with Jamaat al-Fuqra.

The possible connection between Islamberg and extremist Islamic terrorism wasn't lost on authorities. "We've had files on them for years," said Sgt. William Vymislicky of the New York State Police. FBI Special Agent Richard Kolko said that he could neither confirm nor deny any current investigations, but that the bureau follows up on every reported case of possible terrorist activities.

According to some locals, the Islamberg community has given them plenty of reason to be wary. If you visit the compound's entry gate, you will be stopped at a guard shack by men armed with guns. And some say that you sometimes can hear gunfire or even explosions coming from the area. "You'd better be careful if you go up there," several locals said. "They have guns."

Plenty of questions remain:
How close is Islamberg to Gilani?
How does it accept, reject or interpret the portions of his writings that espouse violence? Does the community send people overseas or to other camps for training? And, if it does, exacly what kind of training? How does the group see its relationship to the local community, and does it plan to do anything to improve it?

Islamberg's elders refused a request to visit with them and tour the compound, citing a recent spate of negative publicity. For now, it remains an enigma in the mountains.

11 June 2007: The headline on reads: "Islamberg: A Terror Compound in New York ... or Misunderstood Neighbors?" and is a comprehensive and well-balanced article written by reporter Michael Y. Park about the Islamic compound we have been investigating for quite some time. The article quotes some nearby residents who describe the enclave as an innocuous, but asks some important questions.

In 1980, a Pakistani cleric named Sheikh Mubarak Ali Gilani began preaching against Western culture at a Muslim mosque in Brooklyn, NY. He promoted Islam as the path to a better life and called for fighters to join his holy war against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. With his new American recruits, Gilani established Islamberg, a 70-acre commune west of the Catskill Mountains near Hancock, NY.

Today, Jamaat ul-Fuqra has more than 35 communes and more than 3,000 members spread across the United States, all in support of one goal: the purification of Islam and conquest through violence.

Gilani outright denies any ties to the terrorist organization Jamaat ul Fuqra. Our undercover investigation, however, captured admissions by residents of Islamberg who have pledged their complete allegiance and support to the terrorist Sheikh.

Notably, Gilani was a participant in a “terrorist summit” In Khartoum, in December 1993, at which time he rubbed elbows with Osama bin Laden, Ayman al Zawahiri, and other well-known and still sought Islamic terrorists. According to one government report, the Canadian Broadcasting Company filmed Gilani and the others shouting anti-U.S. and anti-Semitic chants such as “Death to the Jews, Death to America, and Death to the CIA!”

"Now, here comes the latest aggressor said Douglas J Hagmann. In one breath he concocts so many lies that one wonders how a person with common sense can do such a thing. His statements themselves are self-contradictory, identical to his predecessor, Yusuf Bodenski." Sheikh Syed Mubarik 'Ali Gilani, pictured below.

Government unveils evidence linking Columbus, Ohio men in Islamic terror plots

An in-depth investigative report by Douglas J. Hagmann, Director

“There are acts of terror being planned against the citizens of America, in America, by Islamic extremists who live, work, and play among us. Most people don’t realize how serious the threat is, and they feel insulated against terror attacks since 9/11 has become not much more than a distant memory.” --Federal source

10 June 2007: Last week, the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southeastern District of Ohio filed an exhibit list with the court of 102 individual items that connects three-(3) Muslim men in a Columbus, Ohio Islamic terrorist cell. The evidence connects the three terror defendants pictured above (from left to right) Nuradin ABDI, Christopher PAUL (a/k/a Abdul MALEK), and Iyman FARIS (a/k/a Mohammad RAUF) to each other and to separate acts of planned terrorism inside the U.S. According to one federal law enforcement source speaking to this investigator on the condition of anonymity, the unsealed indictments, previous testimony in the case against Iyman FARIS, and the planned acts of terror is:
“paints a disturbing picture of what is taking place in the U.S. today among radical Muslims in American mosques.” According to this source, “there are acts of terror being planned against the citizens of America, in America, by Islamic extremists who live, work and play among us. Most people don’t realize how serious the threat is, and they feel insulated against terror attacks since 9/11 has become not much more than a distant memory.”

Trilogy of Terror: al Qaeda, Jihad and Islam
Until the so called “religion” of Islam gets its act together and reels in the “ones that supposedly hijacked the religion” it needs to be placed on hold from developing any further in this non-Islamic country of the United States.
By Randy Taylor, Independent Analyst

de Andréa

Edited and published by BOTTOM LINE PUBLISHING

Wednesday, July 18, 2007


The American Nuclear Holocaust

A book report by de Andrea

Several news reports indicate that al-Qaida is planning a "spectacular" terror attack, of 9/11 proportions or greater this summer.

In the wake of recent terror activity, including the attempt to blow up JFK airport using a fuel line, and the news out of Britain of car bombs, it appears al-Qaida may be significantly ramping up their activities.

A little noticed book tells the remarkable story of how al-Qaida is acquiring, and plans to detonate nuclear weapons on U.S. soil.

The book is called The Day of Islam. It is one of the most important books to be written so far about the Islamic Agenda of dominating the world.

Though the Day of Islam reads like a thriller, it gives tremendous insight into what al-Qaida has really been doing, and their future diabolical plans.

Authored by former FBI consultant Paul Williams, who is now being sued by a Canadian University for exposing their lack of security at their experimental nuclear reactor and the subsequent theft of nuclear material by the FBI’s most wanted terrorist Adnan el-Shukrijumah; the book was published before several events took place that seems to confirm the book's predictions.

First, FBI Director Robert Mueller has warned that al-Qaida is racing to detonate a nuclear device here in the U.S. Mueller has stated that among the likely targets are New York and Washington.

Second, the JFK fuel plot was uncovered after the book's release. The New York Post revealed in the wake of that terrorist plot that the hidden mastermind behind the plot has not been caught. His name is Adnan el-Shukrijumah.

He is one of the FBI's most wanted. Adnan has also been called the "fixer" behind 9/11. Captured al-Qaida operatives have revealed that bin Laden has tapped Adnan to lead the next major attack against the U.S.

Interestingly, "Day of Islam" is the first book since the declassification of documents now available from the freedom of information act, to detail Adnan's role and his shadowy activities.

Al-Qaida Plans NuclearAttacks on 7 U.S. Cities

The newly released book "The Day of Islam: The Annihilation of America and the Western World,” paints a frightening picture of al-Qaida's nuclear ambitions; one every American should be but is not aware of.

Seasoned investigative reporter and former FBI consultant Paul Williams reveals the alarming potential for nuclear terrorism on U.S. soil and the sinister connections among organized crime, illegal immigrants, and al-Qaida in the U.S.

Recently, FBI Director Robert Mueller, confirmed Williams' main claim. Mueller said al-Qaida's paramount goal is clear: to detonate a nuclear device that would kill hundreds of thousands of Americans.

Mueller said that at times, the threat feels so real he lies awake at night thinking about the prospect.

Williams maintains that al-Qaida is not content on blowing up one nuclear device or a "dirty" nuke; al-Qaida wants to explode real nuclear devices in seven U.S. cities simultaneously.

Williams says these cities are New York, Washington, D.C., Las Vegas, Miami, Boston, Houston, and Los Angeles.

Mueller seems to confirm this claim of multiple attacks, saying both New York and Washington would be likely targets. Already Williams says the U.S. government has Washington webbed by "choke" points to detect nuclear material.

For many Americans, the threat of al-Qaida's nuclear ambitions begins in the time after the horrific 9/11 attacks.

But as Williams shows so clearly, al-Qaida has been devising its nuclear plan since the early 1990s — and the U.S. government and other intelligence services have been well aware of al-Qaida's plan.

For example, Williams quotes Michael Scheuer, a senior CIA official who headed the agency's bin Laden unit. Scheuer admitted the CIA "found that bin Laden and al-Qaida were involved in an extraordinarily sophisticated and professional effort to acquire nuclear weapons; so, by the end of 1996, it was clear that this was an organization unlike any other one we had ever seen."

Remember, Scheuer is describing the period before 9/11, proving again that bin Laden had been investing enormous time, resources, and money into getting nuclear weapons for more than 10 years. Bin Laden and his adherents believe this nuclear cataclysm will usher in "The Day of Islam," the dream of radical Muslims to see all of humankind fall in submission before the throne of Allah as the "Great Satan," America, is brought to her knees.

Williams is not surprised at all, that bin Laden has planned to launch such nuclear attacks, suggesting his delay is consistent with his past pattern of activities. For sure, it is a plan that has been long in its hatching.

Based on the "forgotten testimony" of the FBI's "Confidential Source One," as well as other sources; Williams first presents evidence of bin Laden's purchase of highly enriched uranium in Sudan and nuclear devices from the Chechens and the Russian Mafia; he then offers further information on the workings of Pakistani scientists and technicians from the A.Q. Khan Research Facility to maintain and upgrade al-Qaida's " nukes" (with explosive yields in excess of 10 kilotons) for the "American Nuclear Holocaust."

Williams explosive revelations are even more worrisome because they are not simply backed up by speculation and anonymous sources, they are sourced with government reports and comments made "on the record" by top officials.

Among the explosive revelations in "The Day of Islam”: are the following.

In 1996, al-Qaida's "paymaster" and a top lieutenant for bin Laden walked into a U.S. embassy in Africa and spilled the beans on the terror group's activities, including that al-Qaida had purchased nuclear material in the Sudan

The incredible story of a Brooklyn, N.Y., mosque that was receiving "periodic funds" from Uncle Sam for more than $2 million a year up until 1993, when it was discovered the mosque was the nerve center for the first attack on the World Trade Center.

The fact that despite the hoopla about the war on terror, only one member of bin Laden's shura, or high command, has been killed
The case of a Chicago charity that raised millions for bin Laden and even paid for one of his operatives whose sole job was to acquire nuclear weapons.

Evidence the Saudi intelligence service claims bin Laden has an arsenal of between 40 and 70 tactical nuclear weapons.

Russian sources that claim bin Laden bought 12 to 15 fully assembled nuclear weapons.

Ties between al-Qaida and the Chechen rebels who have acquired nuclear suitcase devices.

Bin Laden's claim to a Pakistani journalist two months before 9/11 that acquiring nuclear bombs was "not difficult", claiming they were available from Russia for between $10 million and $20 million.

Fictional author Tom Clancy's revelations that he was "first bemused, then stunned" to find how easy it is for a wealthy person to develop a nuclear device equal to that dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

How atomic blueprints are available from!

Evidence bin Laden spent between $60 and $100 million to build nuclear devices with the help of scientists from Pakistan, Russia, and China

The damage even a low yield "junk" nuclear device would do to New York, with an estimated 250,000 dead over several days.

The remarkable story of two British secret agents who penetrated al-Qaida's camps in Afghanistan, and reported to Britain that the terror group was finishing work on radiological weapons.

The stunning admission of the head of Britain's MI5 who confirmed that "renegade" scientists had provided al-Qaida with the knowledge they needed to build a nuclear device.

New Jersey: the strange case of a Pakistani who died of radiological poisoning soon after 9/11, a man who had apparently served as a "mule" to transport the deadly material into the U.S.

Axis of Evil: the secret alliance between al-Qaida and Iran that brings together two religious groups with one common goal: destroying the U.S.

In "The Day of Islam," Williams takes you on a virtual tour of al-Qaida and its global operations.
You will discover their operations not only cross through Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, and other Muslim countries — but through Latin America, Mexico, and even our neighbor Canada!

What emerges is a harrowing picture of international terrorist activities, all aimed at the destruction of the United States and the collapse of the Western world.

The picture is of the “Fixer” Adnan el-Shukrijumah

Williams also reveals the man who has been tapped by bin Laden to lead the "Day of Islam" attack in the U.S. — a man who served as the "fixer" of 9/11 and yet has never been caught. He travels in and out of the United States at will. This dangerous man has wormed his way into American culture: He speaks perfect English and passes himself off as an Italian American. He is "the most dangerous man in the world." FBI Director Mueller has called this man "the next Mohamed Atta", but most Americans have never heard of him or seen his image. Williams expresses dismay that the FBI, well aware of this terrorist's threat, has not fully alerted the American public.

Indeed, al-Qaida reportedly had 42 operatives as part of its 9/11 attacks, and some 23 remain as "sleepers" in the United States. Williams also reveals that al-Qaida's operations continue here in the United States, supported by supplies and personnel who simply slip through Mexico and across our porous border.

Williams names, names, including top al-Qaida operatives that have admitted that Mexico remains the main conduit point for al-Qaida penetration into the United States. This includes the smuggling of nuclear materials.

"The Day of Islam" also offers a full translation of the "fatwa”, the religious order bin laden received in 2003 which "grants al-Qaida permission to kill 10 or more million Americans by way of nuclear weapons."

THE BOTTOM LINE: For those who think that al-Qaida has been disabled, dismembered, or neutralized, the "Day of Islam" will provide a wake up call like never before.

“Whether one is priggish enough to remain asleep in the face of great peril, will eventually be the determining factor of one’s fate”…

de Andrea

Sunday, July 15, 2007

The Solution

One might want to just roll the dice to find the solution to winning the war but there is only one way to win the wars in the Middle East.

By de Andréa

Pulling our troops out of Iraq/Afghanistan would be a bigger mistake than the attempt to democratize Islam though it is a commendable effort. As I wrote in the last article titled, WHICH TERRORIST ORGANIZATION WOULD YOU LIKE, I said that we cannot create a democracy in an Islamic state because it is a contradiction in terms. Islam is not just a religion as we have come to understand what a religion is. The dictionary definition is an organized system of faith and worship of a god. This pretty well describes all known religions. Islam on the other hand is first of all a Nation of like minded people. It is a system of theocratic government, a culture, a society, a system of laws. Moreover it is a people with one central idea in common, and that my friend. is the ultimate Islamic agenda- to hold the world in oppression and servitude under the power and control of Islam and Allah their god

So is there a solution to stopping once and for all, this agenda of Islam to conquer the world? Answer; no! Nothing short of total annihilation that is. This has been the agenda since Muhammad wrote the Quran beginning in AD 610 and Islam has not been derailed from that goal for nearly 1400 years. I believe it is pretty safe to say that nothing will deter Islam from seeking Allah’s will.

This is what took the Christians Crusaders 300 years to come to terms with. This is why the Crusades were so aggressive and bloody, they were attempting genocide, or as close to it as they could get. They fought the Crusades not for 5 years but for nearly 200 years from AD 1095 to 1291. Although not totally successful it was enough to render Islam helpless for about 600 years until then President Thomas Jefferson launched an attack on the Muslims at Tripoli Libya because as pirates, they were attacking all of our trading ships. (indecently they stopped attacking our ships) Moreover, General Perishing had a similar experience in the Philippines with Muslims; he shot all but one, who watched the Americans pour pig fat over his fellow terrorists dead bodies, it was a long, long time before there was any trouble again.

So again I say, short of annihilation, there is no stopping this Islamic agenda. And that is for the most part out of the realm of consideration. However something short of this may have to be part of the solution. One thing is for sure, the Muslims respect the display and unleashing of raw power and strength.

Conversely showing benevolence or charity is a sign of weakness. For example by using the tactic of urban warfare (house to house searches) in Fallujah for the purpose of protecting innocents or reducing collateral damage was seen as benevolent and week by the so-called insurgents. Fallujah should have been carpet bombed and leveled; in the long run this would have saved more lives because it would have not only devastated the al Qaida militarily, but also sociologically. They would have respected our military, now they see us as weak “girlymen”.

Giving up on this war is not an option, period. Our ignorant representatives in Congress that say that Iraq did not attack us on 911 or any of the previous 8 to 12 times are correct, Islam did. This is part of Islams deception, and also a very good military tactic, to get us arguing about just who attack us and who our enemy is. They know that we don’t understand who Islam is. The important fact is that we don’t know, that we don’t understand who Islam is.

The truth about this war is, that we are not at war with Iraq, or Afghanistan, or Iran or, or, or. We my friend, are at war with the NATION of ISLAM. This is the problem; we continue to look as this enemy through Western eyes, thinking that we must be at war with a country with borders and a conventional central government etc. Actually we are at war with a borderless Nation that doesn’t need borders because it is in the process of infiltrating the entire world. This is the agenda of Islam, to conquer the world and install the last Caliphate, (the successor to Muhammad) to rule this planet. Think about it this way, can a cancer be contained to just one part of the body? No, it will eventually metastasize and take over the entire body. Islam is not unlike a cancer; moreover, it is metastasizing, which makes Islam the enemy of the world.

The other part of the deception is the so-called moderate, middle of the road, peaceful, non-extremist Muslims, (a cancer disguised as a benign tumor) or whatever one prefers to call them. I am sure that there are some people as in any religion who call themselves Muslims that are Muslims in name only. They do not practice Islam and Sharia law; some are Muslims out of fear of death to themselves and or their families. The truth is, as in any other religion if one is a Muslim one will follow the teachings of their faith and their god and in the case of Islam this means that eventually everyone on this earth must be Muslim, or be slaves to it, or be KILLED, there is no other option. A true Muslim is a Wahhabist and is spiritually driven by this very powerful entity they call god “Allah” to carry out this agenda. So the nice peaceful Muslim families living next door are not really Muslims, or, if on the other hand they truly are, they will eventually attempt to convert you, or they will kill you.

As I mentioned before the only way (like a cancer) is to eliminate it by total destruction and like cancer if there are any cells left hiding, it will start all over again. This is exactly what happened after the Crusades, Islam was so badly defeated it took approximately a thousand years for it to fully recover and now it is back again with a vengeance.

So again what is the solution??? Again, short of total annihilation, all we can hope to do is to devastate Islam so fiercely, so as to put them back into remission. This will give the world a period of relief from the symptoms of this evil cancer called the Nation of Islam. We are not however going to do this by going house to house, knocking on their door, and asking them to please stop all this bloody bombing a shooting.

We started this war with what the President referred to as SHOCK and AWE. But then as we rolled into Baghdad we ignorantly made our first mistake, we thought the war was over and proceeded to make our second mistake which was to set up a government. Now, setting up a government in and of itself is not necessarily a mistake, but one must first win the war. (I refer to the history of all wars) However to set up a democracy in an Islamic State, our third mistake, is ignorant and naïve. As I mentioned before, Islam is a theocracy. A democracy in Islam is an Oxymoron. The Muslims would have to give up Islam, while this would be the most ideal process for Islam to undertake for the sake of the rest of the world, it is just that, an idealistic endeavor, it is just not realistic.

We must return to SHOCK and AWE, and like with a cancer, nuclear therapy if necessary. We have the capability of limited nuclear warfare. Israel may be forced to nuke Iran’s nuclear facilities anyway, because if Ahmadinejad gets a nuclear bomb, he for sure, will use it on Israel. This of course in the eyes of the liberal politically correct tolerant anti-war/anti-American folks including most of Europe, would be seen as an escalation of the war. (Be advised that most of Europe is already part of Islam.) Of course it will be an escalation of the war, but only on our part. The Christian Bible says stand up to Satan and he will flee from you… One should remember Col. M al-Gaddafi in Libya, not too long after all the “shock and awe” at the beginning of the War in Iraq. Gaddafi just gave up his WMD. These people respect power and the spine to use it, and conversely they disrespect those that show weakness as we are now doing.

The other problem that needs to be solved is the denominations of Islam in Iraq. Like in any religion there are fine point differences, a distinction in interpretation of documents and doctrine. In Iraq there are three main dividing differences, Sunni’s, Shiites, and Kurds, they always have had a problem getting along with each other. Moreover, like any other belief system they are not going to get along any better just because we have installed a democratic government and told them they have to. The only way to deal with this separation in philosophy is to keep them equally separated. The Kurds have already led the way with this plan by staying in the north and forming an area called Kurdistan. We would be remiss if we disregarded this obvious solution of creating three States with individual governments and a central Iraqi government guaranteeing the equal sharing of all the resources of the country of Iraq. .

An acquaintance of mine once had a very small dog that would chase anything that ran, as well as aggressively attacking ones pant leg or ankle. But if one would just stand ones ground and showed no fear, the little guy would just stand there and bark. Moreover if one would show aggression and stamp ones feet the little monster would run. This is exactly the solution to winning this war, at least for a period of time, that is until Islam can intimidate someone into running again. One must understand this is exactly why Islam became embolden in the first place it is because we did nothing about all the previous attacks on America, we just ran. And like my friends little dog they finely attacked us where it really hurt, right on the ankle on 911, and they drew lots of blood.

Now, that all the demons have escaped from Pandora’s box disguised as butterflies, we must get them all back into the box again, and this my friend may be more than the tolerant politically correct folks have a stomach for.

In addition, now that the little dog has Congress on the run he will chase until he catches them and if we run all the way home he will chase us all the way home as well. Then we would have an aggressive dog after us as well as the cancer cells that have been surreptitiously allowed to germinate right here in our own neighborhoods. Cutting and running would be our forth mistake. Since this is what led to the cause of 911 and the subsequent war on terror in the first place, running would just encourage more of the same.

THE BOTTOM LINE: We absolutely need leadership with the grit to win this war, what ever it takes. We must get back to “shock and awe” until this world wide enemy the Nation of Islam is brought to its knees and every Muslim country is shaking in their robes and is performing Salah (prayer to Allah) asking Allah to please spare them from the hand of the “great Satan” (America) and “the people of the book”. (Jews and Christians)

It is said, that if a Muslim is killed while massacring infidels (non Muslims) then he and his family’s sins are forgiven and they are guaranteed to go to heaven. (Hence suicide bombings.) But if one is just killed by massacre or dies of natural causes or is killed trying to defend himself then they had better already have paid up their sins by anyone of many other means, or they will go to hell.

NOTE, from wikipedia: The earliest surviving written criticisms of Islam are found in the writings of Christians like John of Damascus (born c. 676). In the medieval period, a few Arab philosophers like the poet Al-Ma'arri adopted a critical approach to Islam, and the Jewish philosopher Maimonides contrasted Islamic views of morality to Jewish views that he himself elaborated. Medieval Christian ecclesiastical writers emphatically denied the validity of Islamic beliefs and portrayed Muhammad as possessed by Satan. More recently, in the 19th century, the Orientalist scholar William Muir wrote harshly about the Qur'an.

If we fail to defeat Islam now, then we will have failed to preserve freedom for the rest of time. Islam cannot be allowed to win in Iraq or anywhere else or we will be running for our lives for the rest of our lives…

de Andréa

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

Which Terrorist Organization Do You Like,

Which Terrorist Organization Do You Like,
Hamas Or Fatah???

Let’s Roll The Dice

By de Andréa

Does it really make any difference which terrorist group the U.S. Government supports in Gaza? I mean if one is blown up and killed by Hamas or Fatah, does it really matter? The indifference is identifiably apparent, because the U.S. Government supports them both.

This new strategy for fighting a war is somewhat of a mystery to me and makes my brain itch. Now, I am not attempting to convey that I am a combat strategist or even good at playing Chess, but I am somewhat well read in history and philosophy, and I have read the “Art of War”, as well as a tour in the military. That being said, I do not believe that one needs to be a George Patton, a Dwight Eisenhower or even a Doug Macarthur to recognize that it probably isn’t the best idea to support and arm your enemy, especially while one is at war with them. Moreover one would certainly not invite ones enemy to live and train for war in ones own country. But even if one could justify all of that, would it still be prudent of ones government to allow ones enemy to infiltrate ones homeland, and security system and military, or allow ones enemy to raise money in ones own country to be used against us in war??? No, of course it wouldn’t, but nevertheless our blind and ignorant government does all of that, and more …

I am not saying that our President or even Congress, knowingly, or is even purposely trying to undermine this war or jeopardize the safety of this country. It is however doing so out of absolute blind ignorance. We are fighting an enemy that civilized people haven’t fought against, since the Crusades (except for the U.S. Naval war in the harbor of Tripoli 200 years ago) and it took Europe over 300 years from AD 794 to approximately 1095 to learn and understand just who and what Islam was. We are now going through the same painful education that the European Christians went through over a thousand years ago.

It is natural for Western Christians to be tolerant. Moreover it is understandable, especially for America to support freedom of religion and civil rights. But because of the dumbing down of America, and of our government’s benightedness of this part of history and the subsequent failure to recognize that history is simply repeating with the same ignorance; as well as failing to recognize this nearly 1500 year old agenda of Islam to conquer and put the world into the bondage of Allah their god, we will eventually, incrementally and surreptitiously, be set up to lose everything we hold dear.

Hamas has won in a shut-out victory in Gaza with alarming ease. And the reason Hamas won is even more alarming:

The lesson from Gaza is that such wars as this, not unlike Americas own Revolutionary War against England is, that neither were waged nor won by the majority of the population. A tiny fraction of the populace, armed and determined, can destroy a fragile government that hasn’t quite as much resolve or will to fight, and to seize power. It could and will also happen right here, now, against America, and unless we wake up to the obvious, look past the deception, and regain the will to fight for our country and our freedom, then we will be fighting for our very survival.

You may be hearing no end of explanations for the triumph of Hamas in Gaza: such as, Hamas was backed by Iran; or Gaza is Hamas’s base of support; and some Fatah units ran out of ammunition . . All may be true, but totally irrelevant.

Fatah's security forces in Gaza outnumbered the Hamas gunmen. Fatah had stockpiles of weapons and military gear given to them by Israel and the U.S. (now it is in Hamas' arsenal). Fatah had the quiet and the blind ignorant backing of Israel and America. And yet Fatah collapsed like an umbrella in a windstorm.

Hamas won because Fatah gave up, Fatah may not care which terrorist group runs Palestine. Fatah runs an armed employment agency under the banner of Palestinian nationalism. They will after all still have their place in the Jihad war against Israel.

I have repeatedly used the term blind ignorance, because if it were ignorance alone it would be just a matter of educating oneself. But this enemy, like none other in all of our history, is among other things, the master of deception and possesses the ability to use the media effectively. This blindness of the majority of the American people as well as our government who still believe that Islam in general, is a peaceful nation as well as the rhetoric of, “there are just a few bad Muslims in the pot spoiling the soup”. Or it is "just the poor and disenfranchised Muslims that are terrorists", the terrorists doctors of the UK were anything but poor and disenfranchised. This ignorance will eventually get America shot in the back by the rest of the so-called moderate peaceful Muslims just waiting for their turn.

The al-Qaeda terrorists in Iraq are the core members of Muqtada al-Sadr's MahdiArmy and these hard-line Sunni ghazis are willing to die for the victory of their god. They believe they are doing Allah's will. It gives them the strength that we out of blind ignorance rush to explain away, as well as the failure to address something we may have lost, the strength, the reason, and the will to win. Could it possibly be that this is because this once Judeo-Christian nation has lost its unity in God and therefore its real power? A kingdom divided against itself cannot stand…

One needs to ask oneself, how come we never run out of these few bad guys??? And why, anywhere in the world, where there are a significant number of Muslims there is war? Answer because they are Muslims, and their god by way of the Quran, commands them to conquer and dominate the world at any cost…

There are over a billion Muslims on this earth, 22% of the world’s population. The Nation of Islam is growing faster than the population of the earth. No; we will never run out of terrorists, because we will never run out of Muslims. If one is not a terrorist or doesn’t ultimately support terrorist Jihad war in some way, then one is not a Muslim. Wahhabism which is passed off as the fundamental extremism is in fact true Muhammad's Quranic Islam. This is the deception...

It would be similar to say that there are only a few bad Christians. Were all bad, none of us are any good, but if we are in fact Christians we are forgiven. Moreover we aren’t in the habit of making war on the rest of the world and killing people if they don’t convert to Christianity, or do we??? Well, we don’t make war on the rest of the world, but aren’t we trying to make Christians out of the Iraqis.

While I can truly understand the enthusiasm of trying to proselytize the rest of the world with some sort of democracy, we do need to be realistic and discerning about just who can and will accept freedom and liberation. No matter how difficult it may be to understand, we must stop looking at the rest of the world through western and liberated eyes. Trust me, Islam does not want to be liberated, does not want to be free and above all does not want democracy.

Will a constitutional Democracy work in a country full of Muslims whose religion commands them to have a governing Tyrannical Theocracy and to obey Sharia law as well as conquer the world into submission to Allah? No, we would be asking them to give up their religion and convert to Christianity. Now I know that we aren’t doing so with intention, but we are nevertheless doing it out of blind ignorance.

The result in Gaza was predictable. But our government pretended otherwise. Hairs should be standing up on the backs of thousands of necks, from the White House to the Green Zone of Baghdad.

Yes, Iraq is more complex than Gaza. But once you pierce the surface turbulence and look deep, the similarities are chilling: Iraq's security forces do include real Muslim patriots - but most of the troops and cops just want a job, or were ordered to join up by a sheik or a mullah, and are themselves, out of unenthusiastic fear, taking up arms.

The raw numbers suggest that Iraq's fanatics don't stand a chance. The government of Iraq has a far greater numerical advantage than did Fatah over Hamas. But numbers often mislead analysts during wars: Iraq's government wouldn't last a week without U.S. troops.

Polls showing that most Iraqis "want peace" and don't support the extremists only deceive us, because we want to be deceived.

At the height of last week's fighting in Gaza, one Palestinian in 300 carried a weapon in support of Hamas - a third of one percent of the population. Now Hamas rules 1.5 million people.

Numbers still matter, of course. But strength of will, will ultimately overcome hollow numbers. And nothing - nothing - gives men a greater strength of will than religious belief.

We don't want to hear it. But secular virtues were supposed to triumph, and they didn't. But we still can't let go of our dream of a happy-face, godless democratic world where nobody quarrels.

Our refusal to acknowledge the unifying - and terrifying - power of a satanic religion with a historic agenda and deep roots, will lead to our demise.

As academics rejected and derided faith in the last century, even the Thirty Years' War - the horrible climax of Europe's wars of religion - was reinvented as a dynastic struggle, or a fight for hegemony.

But the Thirty Years' War was about faith. All the other factors were in play, but the core issue, from the Protestant coup in Prague in 1618 to the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, was religious identity. And the atrocities committed on both sides make Iraq look like an entertaining amateur hour: Wars of religion always demand a blood sacrifice. It was a compromise of bloody exhaustion that ended the Thirty Years War.

Our problem is that, of those who rise in government, few have witnessed the power of revelation or caught a life-changing glimpse of the divine. They simply can't imagine that others might be willing to die for the passion of their beliefs.

The true believer, especially those with an insidious willingness to die, always beats the fustian or those with just the inclinations of wining. The best one can hope for, is that the enemy will eventually defeat himself.

And that does leave us some hope: Fanatics inevitably over-reach, as al Qaeda's Islamo-fascists have done in Iraq, alienating those who once saw them as allies. But the road to self-destruction can be a long one: The Persians of Iran want change, but the fanatic Mislims have the guns. And I am sorry folks: Fanatics with guns beat liberals with ideas.

Faith can be the nuclear weapon of the fanatic. And there is not going to be a religious "nuclear freeze.” It doesn't matter how many hearts and minds you win, if you don't defeat the zealots with the muscle.

THE BOTTOM LINE: America needs to pray that God will bring a leader to this country that has the stones to defy all the apologetic, politically correct, multicultural, America hating, godless, and blindly ignorant demagogs that we have allowed to take control of this once proud and liberated Judeo-Christian nation.

In the second letter of John the 10th and 11th verse written to the early fledgling Christian church, he writes: …”If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, (the doctrine of Jesus Christ) do not receive him into your home or give him any greeting; for he who greets him shares his wicked work.” (Emphasis mine)

America is my home and our government has invited this satanic Nation of Islam into my home. Islam is not just another inalienable right to a religious belief that our First Amendment protects. This is a theocracy bent on the destruction and the overthrow, of our culture, society, government and our rights and freedom as well as replacing everything that exists in this country, with Islamic culture, religion, Sharia law and their tyrannical theocratic satanic government.

Matthew 12:29 says…”how can one enter a strongman’s home and plunder his goods; unless he binds the strongman, he cannot plunder his home.”

While we are fighting this enemy in the Middle East, this enemy has deceivingly entered my American Home disguised as a peaceful friend. He has infiltrated my culture and is in the process of replacing it with his own. He has infiltrated my schools and is in the process of replacing academic studies and Judeo-Christian principals with his own. He has infiltrated my government and is in the process of replacing our laws of protecting inalienable rights with Islamic Sharia laws which only creates bondage but protects nothing. This enemy has invaded our homeland and has established terrorist training camps for the purpose of binding the strongman while he sleeps.

This enemy has entered a strongman’s home and if we continue to allow him to pursue his agenda, he will continue in the process of binding the strongman and then he will then plunder our home and our freedom and our very life…

So what is the solution? It is not a simple one, stay tuned as they say…

de Andréa

Friday, July 06, 2007

Christians, 'too Christian' for Christian School

Christians are given the boot on Christian college campus while Islam is promoted.

By de Andréa

The Alliance Defense Fund has written a letter to a "Christian" college asking officials there to reconsider their decision to ban several Christian student organizations because the groups are too evangelical.

Georgetown University in Washington DC, which boasts a tradition of more than 200 years of Jesuit and Catholic teachings, recently sent letters to half a dozen Christian organizations telling them they no longer are welcome.

"Now I've seen derecognizing letters before, but this one takes the cake," David French, the senior legal counsel for the ADF, said of the Georgetown University decision. "Blessings and may God's peace be on you! … Now get off the *+@#^_! campus!"

Although there has been no satisfactory explanation for the sudden change in school policy, but those in a position to know best, say the groups, such as InterVarsity Christian Fellowship, are too Christian.

Or is it just possible that influence from Muslim pressure groups such as CAIR (Counsel on American Islamic Relations) who incidentally have made threats on my life, and MATF (Muslim Accommodations Task Force) with emphasis on the FORCE, have had at least something to do with the university’s decision. Both of these organizations have ties to Wahhabist terrorist groups.
Georgetown tossed these Christian groups out, but left the Muslim Student Alliance intact. I find it at least interesting that this Christian college is giving more religious freedom to Muslims than to Christians. *Refer to my previous article titled MORE ON INDOCTRINATION AND ISLAMIC INFILTRATION April 24 2007

Christian groups say they simply want "to have a place at the table" with other religious groups.

The ADF letter to John DeGioia, the president, and Rev. Timothy S. Godfrey, S.J., a campus ministry leader, and others asked them to correct the "discriminatory decision by the school's Office of Campus Ministries. “ OCM's actions completely betray the goals, ideals, and values that have given Georgetown University the reputation for excellence it enjoys today," the letter said.

They also highlight a disturbing double standard when compared to the way that the University treats Muslim student organizations.

The letter noted that Georgetown advertises that it believes "serious and sustained" discourse among people of differing faiths promotes understanding. However, the difference between its statements and its actions is "a sizeable credibility gap".

That "gap" expands when the university's treatment of Muslim organizations is added. One group is set up to "encourage" and is dedicated to "development and growth of the school's Muslim community," and yet Christian evangelicals are banned.

“The schools action has also violated its own free speech policy and student organization policy”, the letter notes. Ironically, the school recently hosted K. Anthony Appiah in an address sponsored by the Berkley Center for Religion, Peace, and World Affairs. He noted that religious differences are "made easier if there is an ongoing, respectful, cosmopolitan conversation between adherents of different religious traditions."

French said the university, which is private, has the right to dictate who it wants on campus, but essentially it is staging a "bait-and-switch" with students and parents by proclaiming that they will enjoy "full religious freedom" on campus, when they won't, the school pitch is "Come and spend your $120,000 and your child will enjoy the full range of First Amendment rights," However, when the students arrive, the school has "yanked some of those critical rights."

In a commentary at, French said once again, "it appears that a modern liberal university's commitment to diversity, tolerance, and the free exchange of ideas does not extend to evangelical Christians."

The brush-off letter from the university starts: "Blessings and may God's peace be upon you!" but deteriorates shortly thereafter to: "Protestant Ministry has decided to move in another direction.” As a result, Georgetown said, "Your ministries will no longer be allowed to hold any activity or presence (i.e. bible (sic) studies, retreats with Georgetown students, Mid-week (sic) worship services, fellowship events, move-in assistance, SAC Fair, etc.) on campus."

Further, the school told the ministry organizations, "All websites linking your ministries to a presence at Georgetown University will need to be modified to reflect the terminated relationship. Your ministries are not to publicize in any literature, media, advertisement, etc. that Georgetown University is or will be an active ministry site for your religion/ministry/church/denomination."

French said the letter from the ADF's Center for Academic Freedom finishes with a request that the university now live up to the moral values it says it has been teaching.

"ADF recognizes that Georgetown University is a private institution and that it is not bound by the constitutional principles detailed above. It is, however, bound by the moral values it has long proclaimed in its own promises and policies. There is no conceivable harm to the University in granting the Affiliated Ministries the same rights and access given to Muslim organizations."

"The real problem at Georgetown is the same problem that has plagued campuses across the country: an increasing intolerance for religious students and student groups (regardless of whether they are Catholic or Protestant) who take the Bible seriously and seek to live their lives under the authority of Scripture," French said in a blog on the ADF site.

"In the many years I've spent defending Christians on campus, I've never seen a campus, private or public, eject a Christian student group from campus that followed campus orthodoxy on the relevant social and religious issues of the day."

Georgetown's explanation has varied: It told the groups in the letter it was going a "different direction.” Then it told subsequent news reports that there was a failure in "communication.” It also has said, through spokesman Erik Smulson that the chaplaincy recently was reorganized and it wanted more control over ministries on campus.

THE BOTTOM LINE: What the ADF and the Georgetown University staff fails to address is the fact that the Muslim group on campus is by their own philosophy and Quranic Sharia law, totally intolerant of any other religion. As on all other college campuses where there is a significant number of Muslims, they impose their religious beliefs and rituals on the entire campus populous.

(Again refer to a previous article titled MORE ON INDOCTRINATION AND ISLAMIC INFILTRATION April 24, 2007.)

One cannot help but recognize that the intolerant philosophy of Islam has not only had an overwhelming influence on public collages and universities throughout the country, but has now infiltrated into those institutions that identify themselves as “Christian” colleges as well. May God help us.

After 17 years of Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies I knew that this type of infiltrational warfare was part of the Islamic agenda of world Conquest, I just didn’t dream in my worst nightmare, that it would happen in America, and in a so-called “Christian organization”, and then; in my life time.

This is all going to fast for my slow and laidback lifestyle. Because of the deterioration of moral values as well as academic standards in public education/indoctrinational institutions, I have been promoting private/Christian education. And now even a 200 year old Christian university may have given in to Tolerant/Intolerant Political Correct Pressures as well as the demonic pressure of Islam.

The only thing left is to thoroughly check out one’s educational institution, looking for the rats that may lurk just under the veneer ready to pounce on your unsuspecting child. Or another fast growing alternative, especially in the case of primary school and even high school, is to consider home schooling.

Note: Where Islam “is”; there is no room for anyone else, read the Quran, it’s in there…

de Andréa