Crime in the U.K.

Despite the British tyrannical gun ban and the tens of thousands of big brother spy cameras eighty percent of the crime in the U.K goes unsolved

By de Andréa

Most images are not as helpful as this one of a pickpocket on Oxford Street

Most CCTV cameras are 'illegal', watchdog claims

London has over 10,000 crime-fighting CCTV cameras that cost over £200 million.

However, an analysis of the private and publicly funded spy network, which is owned and controlled by local authorities and Transport for London, has cast doubt on its ability to help solve crime.

A comparison of the number of cameras in each London borough with the proportion of crimes solved, they found that police are no more likely to catch offenders in areas with hundreds of cameras than in those with hardly any.

In fact, four out of five of the boroughs with the most cameras have a record of solving crime that is below average.

Sounds like more big brother, more crime. I think it is fairly obvious that the U.K., like the U.S. District of Columbia, has a police problem, not a gun problem.

The Liberal Democrats on the London Assembly obtained the following figures using the Freedom of Information Act.

The figures show:
• There are now 10,524 CCTV cameras in 32 London boroughs funded with Home Office grants totaling about £200 million.

• Hackney has the most cameras - 1,484 - and has a better-than-average clearup rate of 22.2 per cent.

• Wandsworth has 993 cameras, Tower Hamlets, 824, Greenwich, 747 and Lewisham 730, but police in all four boroughs fail to reach the average 21 per cent crime clear-up rate for London.

• By contrast, boroughs such as Kensington and Chelsea, Sutton and Waltham Forest have fewer than 100 cameras each yet they still have clear-up rates of around 20 per cent.

• Police in Sutton have one of the highest clear-ups with 25 per cent.

• Brent police have the highest clear-up rate, with 25.9 per cent of crimes solved in 2006-07, even though the borough has only 164 cameras.

The figures appear to confirm earlier studies, which have thrown doubt on the effectiveness of CCTV cameras.

A report by the criminal justice charity Nacro in 2002 concluded that the money spent on cameras would be better used on street lighting, which has been shown to cut crime by up to 20 per cent.

Scotland Yard is trying to improve its track record on the use of CCTV and has set up a special unit which collects and circulates CCTV images of criminals.

It looks as though the bureaucracy has this inherent problem of; "if a lot doesn’t work, maybe we should get a lot more." It seems to apply to gun laws as well. I think law enforcement is just trying to take the easy road that leads nowhere, it may even be counterproductive.

THE BOTTOM LINE: It would seem a little more appropriate to me, if law enforcement agencies would spend just a little more time doing some old fashion detective work and caching the bad guys, then playing with these high tech toys as well as disarming the public leaving them defenseless.

But then, what do I know…
I live in a county in the U.S. where everybody can carry a gun and there are no cameras, as a result, we have the lowest violent crime rate in the state and as a CCW permit holder myself, I am always armed. We are what is called personally responsible citizens.

Oh! I forgot, responsible is a bad politically incorrect word, I am so pre-sixties, Sorry…

de Andréa

Another Nail In The Sovereighty Coffin

A Back Room U.N. Treaty, Critics Charge, Threatens Yet Another Attack On U.S. Sovereignty

The U.S. is poised to turn much of its authority on the high seas over to international arbiters by secretly ratifying a long-controversial United Nations sea treaty originally conceived over seventy years ago.

By de Andréa

U.S. scientists aboard the Coast Guard icebreaker Healy are mapping the ocean floor in an effort to claim territory that holds an estimated 400 billion barrels of untapped undersea oil and gas.

The US Government has for over seventy years stayed away from this Marxist document, that is… until now. In keeping with the globalistic one-world government plans of the liberal socialists in our congress, and in the White House, we may soon, among other things, be giving away our ability to defend this country’s independence, sovereignty and freedom.

Even though the Globalist Bush Family is backing this attack on our independence I cannot yet connect the dots to Bush’s new country called the North American Union created by a half dozen underground shadow governments including the Council on Foreign Relations, not to mention the U N.

Approval of the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), a 25-year-old international treaty regulating use of the world’s oceans that took approximately 50 years to hail anyone’s interest, is steaming full speed ahead in the U.S. Senate, where committee hearings are set to begin Sept. 27
.
The full Senate is likely to ratify the treaty -- which would link U.S. naval actions to those of 155 other member nations by year's end. For over seventy years, critics have derided the 182-page Law of the Sea pact as a threat to U.S. sovereignty and naval independence.

They add that it would create a massive new U.N. bureaucracy (the International Seabed Authority); this would give environmentalists a back door to greater regulation and a bigger and more powerful bureaucracy; moreover, it would hinder the U.S. military's efforts to capture terrorists on the high seas, something we did not have seventy years ago.

“This is nothing less than a raid on our sovereignty,” Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., warns. “I objected to it when it resurfaced in 2004, and I object to it now as I see it sneaking up on us again. What is this vile obsession we have for surrendering our jurisdiction to this international body? Nobody can give me a reasonable answer.”

Despite those concerns, however, support for the measure has never been stronger.
The treaty has garnered a letter of support from at least a dozen oil, gas, and environmental groups as well as President Bush, a Globalist and along time advocate of the new world order.

Originally conceived in the 1930s, UNCLOS was crafted to supersede largely unwritten rules that limited coastal nations’ rights to just three miles of ocean.
Although U.N. discussions continued for over four decades without much progress, President Truman in 1945 pioneered the extension of territorial waters to include the continental shelf extending from the coast.

As a result, a number of nations, including the United States, set 200-mile territorial-water limits -- some 30 years before UNLCOS was finalized with similar provisions in 1982.

The United States contributed heavily to UNCLOS, taking part in negotiations throughout the Nixon and Carter administrations. However, disagreements over technology sharing and deep-seabed mining provisions kept the United States from signing on under President Reagan.

The Clinton administration added an appendix in the 1990s that simplified the administration of seabed mining, after which it declared the treaty "fixed."

Frank Gaffney, the former Reagan defense official who now heads the Center for Security Policy in Washington, says that treaty advocates don't realize what UNCLOS really entails. “I doubt any of these new supporters have actually read the entire treaty," he says. "If they had read this Marxist document, the issue would be dead.”

Critics like Inhofe and Gaffney are up against a formidable alliance of treaty supporters: senior administration officials, environmentalists, and legislators from both sides of the aisle who all favor it.

Proponents say the Law of the Sea actually guarantees U.S. ships and planes the right to traverse certain regions where they currently need permission from other governments; protects U.S. fishing interests from foreign poachers; opens up new undersea mineral and energy resources; and adds thousands of miles of seabed to America's territory
.
UNCLOS comes up for ratification at a time when melting polar ice is opening new shipping lanes. Countries such as Russia, Canada, and Denmark are racing to lay claim to resource-rich areas under the Arctic Ocean.

Both Lugar and Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., have indicated they will try to move UNCLOS ratification out of committee and bring it to a floor vote as quickly as possible.

Opponents say the restrictions would jeopardize U.S. counterterrorism efforts by limiting the boarding of vessels to only those suspected of drug trafficking, piracy, slave trading, and illegal radio broadcasting. They fear provisions stating that “the high seas shall be reserved for peaceful purposes” and that signatories must refrain from “any threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state” could be used to thwart U.S. naval operations
.
“If we had info that some terrorist threat was heading our way on a ship, we would be restricted in what we could do in terms of search and seizure,” says Inhofe. “We would have to go through this international body to do that.”

David Ridenour, vice president of the National Center for Public Policy in Washington, D.C., says, “The treaty could complicate our efforts to apprehend terrorists or ships our intelligence believes are carrying WMDs by subjecting our actions to review by an international tribunal, a body that is unlikely to be favorable to the United States.”

George Mason University law professor Jeremy Rabkin, writing in The Weekly Standard, cites several historical examples of U.S. naval actions that he suggests would be compromised by the Law of the Sea treaty.

Among them: The October 1962 Cuban missile crisis, when President Kennedy ordered the Navy to blockade vessels coming in and out of Cuba.

The U.S. response to the 1975 Cambodian seizure of the American vessel USS Mayaguez. President Ford declared the seizure an act of piracy and dispatched Marines to force the ship's release.

In the 1980s, Libya's Moammar Gadhafi demanded that foreign vessels obtain his permission before entering the 300-mile-wide Gulf of Sidra. Reagan directed that a carrier task force enter the waters in 1986. Two Libyan patrol boats tried to resist, and were destroyed.

"The Senate should think long and hard before making the U.S. Navy answer to the U.N. version of the Law of the Sea," Rabkin writes.

One reason for the differing perspectives on the treaty is the way disputes are determined. Disagreements among UNCLOS parties are decided by a tribunal based in Hamburg, Germany.

Rabkin concedes that "the treaty can be acceptable if interpreted as we want it to be interpreted.” But U.S. interpretations, he says, are up to the international tribunal, adding, "The treaty stipulates that decisions of international arbitration must be treated as 'final' and 'binding.'"

Bush has issued a statement urging the Senate to ratify UNCLOS, claiming the international pact “will serve national security interests [and] secure U.S. sovereign rights over extensive marine areas, including the valuable natural resources they contain. And it will give the United States a seat at the table when the rights that are vital to our interests are debated and interpreted.” What Bush does not mention however is that we already retain the right to protect our interests, we don’t need permission from the international community to protect this Nation.

“George W. Bush is no Ronald Reagan, choosing to follow rather than lead,” says Ridenour. “When Reagan assumed office, about 150 nations were backing the treaty.

"He instantly recognized that the treaty wasn’t in the U.S.’s interest and launched an intensive lobbying campaign to get other nations to follow his lead. As a result of these efforts, 46 nations rejected the treaty,” Ridenour says.

THE BOTTOM LINE: Why is this government so obsessed with destroying this country? It seems as though every time I look into what Congress or the administration is up to lately, they are passing yet another destructive law. In this case it seems as if they ran out of mischievous ideas so they have dredged up this seventy-year-old treaty that no body alive today has read. Moreover, if that is not enough reason to study it a little closer, every congress and president since its inception has turned it down. That is until now; think about it…

de Andréa

U.S. Airports now come with footbaths

What’s next, disposable prayer rugs?

Islam is taking over our schools. Islam is taking over our airports. Islam is taking over our culture. Islam is taking over our politics. Moreover, just as Islam did in Christian Lebanon, while we are distracted with political correctness and multiculturalism, Islam will take over our Country as well as our lives…

By de Andrae

"The Indianapolis Star reports that the Indianapolis Airport is installing Muslim foot-washing basins following a trend in the new American religious culture of Islam. The paper said that Muslim foot washing basins are already installed at Kamas City International...

KCI admitted installing foot-washing benches in a restroom at the airport, but also denied that they are intended for Muslim cab drivers. Kevin Peterson who is the union steward for the air traffic controllers union is in denial as to the purpose of the KCI basins.Wash areas, they said are used for any wash purpose by any of the users, including filling car wash buckets.” I have news for you Kevin that is what a $6.95 exterior green garden hose is for, not a $23.000 miniature shower.

Despite the fact that no other religion was demanding foot washing facilities he insisted the wash benches were not "built for the exclusive use of any ethnic group or culture”. Then in a contradictory statement Mark VanLoh, director of the Kansas City Aviation Department said, “The majority of our drivers are Muslim, so preventing them from praying at all was not an option, especially in our public terminal restrooms. This was the best solution, and those facilities were added without public money."

He added that cab drivers paid for construction through a one-dollar per-trip fee.
In October 2005, the KCI Airport Police first solicited advice from other law enforcement regarding "wash bench facilities for those of Islamic faith," according to internal e-mails. In one e-mail sent to members of the Airport Law Enforcement Agencies Network, or ALEAN, KCI Airport Police brass asked, "If you do have such an area, do you refer to this location as a place for those of Islamic faith to [go to] prepare themselves for worship?"

The KCI Airport Police are responsible for the taxicab drivers and the building they use at the airport to wait on fares. The building contains the restroom with the four new foot-washing benches.

Peterson said he had asked about the issue in May, and never got a response. Then when he followed up after the recent Indianapolis report, he got the note from McBride.

Some 250-taxicab drivers operate at KCI Airport in Missouri, one of the largest airports in the U.S., linking some 10 million passengers between mid-America and other U.S. cities. One internal KCI Airport Police email said, "approximately 70% of the drivers are [of] Middle Eastern heritage and practice the Islamic faith."

Muslims are required to wash their feet and other body parts before praying to Allah five times a day. They often complain that public restroom sinks do not accommodate their needs. Floor-level basins and benches make it easier for them to perform their foot-washing ritual.

Other major airports have dealt with increased demands from Muslim cab drivers. Cabbies at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, for instance, recently caused a stir when they refused to carry passengers possessing alcoholic beverages or accompanied by seeing-eye dogs. Alcohol is forbidden, and dogs are considered unclean in Islam. What I have trouble understanding is why we just don’t tell the Muslims that they are in America, not in Islam… Well…on second thought, maybe they are.

THE BOTTOM LINE: I find it interesting that this has been a Christian Nation for better than 200 years and yet Christians have not to my knowledge ever demanded public foot-washing facilities at schools, newspaper stands or airports. Oh, yes! Christians have a foot washing ceremony as well, dating back farther than Islam’s Muhammad. Approximately 2000 years ago, where Christians wash each other’s feet in honor of Jesus Christ who out of love, washed the feet of His disciples.

Moreover, Muslims consider dogs unclean? Well, I have to take exception to that; more importantly, my dog Sir John Cooper takes exception to that, Sir John who is running for U.S. Senate in 08 against the other dogs, considers Muslims unclean. He says, “they must be, if they have to wash five times a day”.

I spend a considerable amount of time at the hardware store in town, I wonder what would be the response if I demanded Christian foot-washing basins be installed so if I felt the need to wash someone’s feet, we would not have to inconvenience ourselves and use the garden hose outside.

Moreover, as a Christian, I outgrew the need for prayer rugs when I stopped living in tents, now I just use the one attached to my floor…

de Andréa

Haditha

Evidence Doctored…



A video taped from a Scan Eagle unmanned aerial vehicle, has shown that the action that took place in Haditha when 24 Iraqi civilians and insurgents were killed, was heavily edited by government investigators

By de Andréa

The reason, according to an inside source, was to avoid showing anything that exonerates the Marines who were accused of murdering innocent Iraqis, all this to appease local Iraqis and the biased hate America media.

Four Marines originally faced murder charges stemming from the so-called Haditha incident. Charges against three of these American heroes have since been dropped, but Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich is still facing a court martial for doing what he was trained to do, fight the enemy.

The video, which was broadcast by CNN, was a small, carefully edited part of what the Scan Eagle transmitted during its daylong surveillance flight over the battle scene on Nov. 19, 2005. Shockingly, the approximately one hour of edited footage was the only Scan Eagle footage provided to the Marines’ defense teams by the prosecution.

According to CNN, “The video appears to show that, throughout that day, Marines engaged in fierce firefights and called in air strikes to level buildings, with no definitive idea of who was inside."

Had the entire video been shown it would have revealed that the Marines knew exactly “who was inside”, insurgents were clearly shown entering the buildings before the structures were bombed. If CNN had been able “to review the whole video, they would see that we did indeed have a definitive idea of who was inside,’" an intelligence officer said. The insurgents’ car parked outside the buildings “was packed to the gills with weapons, and we had just witnessed them ambush our ambulance,” the officer said. “We saw them enter the house, slapping each other on the back and congratulating themselves.”

The Marine intelligence officer who monitored the Scan Eagle’s video transmissions throughout the day said that there was continuous video feed from the Scan Eagle for 8 to 10 hours. Yet barely an hour of it was provided to the Marines' defense teams by the prosecution or the Naval Criminal Investigation Service.

“Someone, under the supervision of NCIS, screened this video feed, and made the conscious decision to preserve only four segments of approximately 15 minutes each, according to the defense attorneys who received it from an intelligence source.

“This 8 to 10 hours, viewed in its entirety, shows men in black, with weapons, fleeing the neighborhood of houses 1, 2, 3 and 4 [the area where the civilians and eight of the insurgents were killed]. It follows their route as they meet up with other insurgents throughout the city. It clearly demonstrates the magnitude of the insurgents’ organization, skill, and timing in attacking the Marines.”

The video, he recalled, “shows them parking, exiting the vehicle, and entering the housing complex. It shows Marines assaulting the building, insurgents fleeing out the back of the building, and Marines falling back from the assault as the insurgents defend the house.”

Finally, the intelligence officer revealed, the full, un-doctored Scan Eagle video “shows an insurgent, at the end of the day, under continuous observation from the air and under continuous pursuit and fire, emerge from a family's home holding their children hostage, in order to protect himself from further air strikes.”

“The deliberate editing of the video was to show the defendants in the worst possible light”, the Marine intelligence expert said. “This should have the defense screaming prosecutorial and NCIS misconduct.”

The media has focused on the killing of five young men who arrived in the midst of the insurgent ambush in a white car, usually described as a taxi, and were gunned down by Wuterich and/or Sgt. Sanick P. Dela Cruz. Dela Cruz was one of the Marines originally accused of murdering civilians before charges were dropped when he agreed to testify against his fellow Marines.

The biased media has generally sought to portray the Haditha ambush as a massacre by Marines on a rampage, and the media’s bias has been on display as recently as Friday when major newspapers largely ignored a key development in Frank Wuterich’s Article 32 hearing. The prosecution’s star witness all but collapsed on the witness stand after a withering cross-examination.

THE BOTTOM LINE: Our government has spared no expense in seeking to find wrongdoing on the part of our hard-fighting Marines. It is my opinion that all investigations by NCIS and prosecutions by JAG going clear back to the so-called Mei Li massacre in Vietnam should come under scrutiny. It seems typical for certain Government officials to put pressure on the military to throw a sacrificial bone to the enemy and the hate America media that supports them. What we should do is throw the bones of these liberal socialist hate America government officials to the wolves of Islam.

I am charging the “Brass” in the military with becoming an enemy enabler, this is next to treason. To send soldiers into combat and then condemn them when they do their job, is providing aid to the enemy, especially in this case of tampering with evidence. It is unconscionable and inconceivable.

Right or wrong, most of these armchair brass-hats have never fought an ambiguous enemy that is too cowardly to wear a uniform which would make his identity obvious. This was the same problem in Vietnam, where a child could be a walking bomb, or an old mamasan pushing a baby buggy could be V.C. carrying a bomb instead of a baby. Mei Li incidentally was just such a case where GI’s were tired of being taken by surprise and blown up by children and old people so they leveled a village of children and old people. This by the way is why they say war is hell.

Today, just as in Nam, the brass will gladly throw a sacrificial lamb to the media rather than to defend or try to explain what I just attempted to explain.

After all one hand washes the other, doesn’t it…???

de Andréa

Israelis ‘bomb a North Korean nuclear cache...

Israelis ‘bomb a North Korean nuclear cache in Syria ’

Secret raid on Korean nuke shipment
It was just after midnight Saturday 15 September when the 69th Squadron of Israeli F15I’s crossed the Syrian coastline.

By de Andréa


On the ground, Syria’s formidable air defences went dead. An audacious raid on a Syrian target 50 miles from the Iraqi border was under way.

At a rendezvous point on the ground, a Shaldag air force commando team was waiting to direct their laser beams at the target for the approaching jets. The team had arrived a day earlier, taking up position near a large underground depot. Soon the bunkers were in flames.

This past weekend Israel believes it destroyed a cache of nuclear materials from North Korea.

Andrew Semmes, a senior US State Department official, said Syria might have obtained nuclear equipment from “secret suppliers”, and added that there were a “number of foreign technicians” in the country. Asked if they could be North Korean, he replied: “There are North Korean people there. There’s no question about that.” He said a network run by AQ Khan, the disgraced creator of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons, could be involved.

According to Israeli sources in Jerusalem, preparations for the attack had been going on since late spring, when Meir Dagan, the head of Mossad, presented Olmert with evidence that Syria was seeking to buy a nuclear device from North Korea.

The Israeli spy chief apparently feared such a device could eventually be installed on North-Korean-made Scud-C missiles. It has been known for a long time that Syria has had deadly chemical warheads on its Scuds, but Israel can’t live with a nuclear warhead.

It looks to me like we ought to turn Israel loose on Iran and give them all the support and material that they need to take out the Iranian nuclear sites. It appears that Israel’s Massad is more capable of planning a nuclear air raid than we would be.

What really concerns me is why we allow Pakistan to remain a nuclear power. I recognize that they are afraid of India’s nuclear capability but I would feel much better if Pakistan was nuclear free and then let India know that if they threaten to nuke Pakistan we would defend them. Any Muslim with a nuke is a dangerous combination. Moreover, one can trace Korea and Iran’s nuclear program to Pakistan.

An expert on the Middle East, who has spoken to Israeli participants in the raid, said that the timing of the raid on September 6 appeared to be linked to the arrival three days earlier of a ship carrying North Korean material labeled as cement but suspected of concealing nuclear equipment.

The target was identified as a northern Syrian facility that purported to be an agricultural research centre on the Euphrates River. Israel had been monitoring it for some time, concerned that it was being used to extract uranium from phosphates.

Sergei Kirpichenko, the Russian ambassador to Syria, warned President Bashar al-Assad last month that Israel was planning an attack, but suggested the target was the Golan Heights.

Only three Israeli cabinet ministers are said to have been aware, Olmert, Barak and Tzipi Livni, the foreign minister. America was also consulted. According to Israeli sources, American air force codes were given to the Israeli air force attaché in Washington to ensure Israel’s F15Is would not mistakenly attack their US counterparts.

There is no doubt, however, that North Korea is accused of nuclear cooperation with Syria, helped by AQ Khan’s network. John Bolton, who was undersecretary for arms control at the State Department, told the United Nations in 2004 the Pakistani nuclear scientist had “several other” customers besides Iran, Libya and North Korea.
Some of his evidence came from the CIA, which had reported to Congress that it viewed “Syrian nuclear intentions with growing concern”
.
“I’ve been worried for some time about North Korea and Iran outsourcing their nuclear programs,” Bolton said last week. Syria, he added, was a member of a “junior axis of evil”, with a well-established ambition to develop weapons of mass destruction.

The links between Syria and North Korea date back to the rule of Kim Il-sung and President Hafez al-Assad in the last century. In recent months, their sons have quietly ordered an increase in military and technical cooperation.

On August 14, Rim Kyong Man, the North Korean foreign trade minister, was in Syria to sign a protocol on “cooperation in trade and science and technology”. No details were released, but it caught Israel’s attention.

Syria possesses between 60 and 120 Scud-C missiles, which it has bought from North Korea over the past 15 years. Diplomats believe North Korean engineers have been working on extending their 300-mile range. It means they can be used in the deserts of northeastern Syria, the area of the Israeli strike.

The triangular relationship between North Korea, Syria and Iran continues to perplex intelligence analysts. Syria served as a conduit for the transport to Iran of an estimated £50m of missile components and technology sent by sea from North Korea. The same route may be in use for nuclear equipment.

North Korea is at a sensitive stage of negotiations to end its nuclear program in exchange for security guarantees and aid, leading some diplomats to cast doubt on the likelihood that Kim would cross America’s “red line” forbidding the proliferation of nuclear materials.

Christopher Hill, the State Department official representing America in the talks, said on Friday he could not confirm “intelligence-type things”, but the reports underscored the need “to make sure the North Koreans get out of the nuclear business”.

By its actions, Israel showed it is not interested in waiting for diplomacy to work where nuclear weapons are at stake.

As a bonus, the Israelis proved they could penetrate the Syrian air defence system, which is stronger than the one protecting Iranian nuclear sites.

This weekend President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran sent Ali Akbar Mehrabian, his nephew, to Syria to assess the damage. Thanks to Israel, the new “axis of evil” may have lost one of its spokes in its wheel.

Dinnerjacket you are next…

de Andréa

GOD IS IN CONTROL…

Christians believe that God is in control of everything. While that may be true, does that mean that we should be so passive as to sit back and let everything happen?

A little personal…
By de Andréa

On January 11, 2007, I published an article titled Islam Through Christian Eyes. We as a people, and especially we as westerners, some of us as Christians, tend to absorb information filtered through whatever type of culture that we were exposed to as we grew up and matured. This is assuming of course, that we did in fact mature, to the extent that we have at least achieved the ability to develop some sort of original thought.

I am continually confronted with the Biblical truth that God is in control. While I think I do know what this means, it doesn’t always seem to fit the issue at hand, which in my mind should result in some sort of action. This is usually when I am reminded that GOD IS IN CONTROL.

What does one say at this point, NO HE ISN’T? Of course He is, but does that really mean that because God is in control that we have no responsibility to at least attempt to intervene in the face of the enemy? Politics is not a spectator sport, especially these days.

Let us say that while reading a magazine on a lazy Saturday afternoon the silence is suddenly interrupted with a child screaming in the front yard next door. You look out of the front window to see a bigger kid kicking the tar out of a small child writhing in pain on the ground. Is this really the time that we should introduce the fact that God has the whole world in his hands?

While I totally believe that God is in control of whatever it is that he wants to be in control of, I don’t believe that this means that we should just sit passively by and allow anything and everything to happen just because well…God is in control.

I have found this arrogant smug attitude mostly coming from Christians, or at least people that call themselves Christian. I believe, for a lack of any other reason, it ironically comes mostly from fear. If one is seen for example, as being concerned, about something, one might question ones faith or worse yet think others might question their faith. I mean after all, you do trust that God is in control don’t you?

So to what extent to we use this arrogant hammer that God has the whole world in has hands to beat the people over the head with, that are trying to do something about the fact that Americans are surreptitiously loosing their freedom. If God is in control, will we loose the Country and the liberty that He gave us? Now I am writing this slowly because I know that some of you cannot read fast…YES!

I can say that God has given us this Country and this freedom while looking at the big picture of history. However, there are specifics that show that the early Americans made an extraordinary effort, even shed their blood and lost their lives in achieving independence from an oppressive government. Moreover, if my memory serves me well, since the 1700’s we have on occasion fought a war attempting to preserve this hard earned freedom. Was God in control???

Do you think for one moment that a few farmers with flintlocks could have intimidated the most powerful military in the world if God was not in control? Of course, I am reminded that we had a little help from the French that would rather switch that fight, nevertheless people got up from off of their couches and did something.

So what is the point of this whole article? I am going to write this slowly again, because I know that you may not be able to read this fast… RESPONSIBILITY!!!

Yes just as a parent might hopefully be in control, he will expect some responsibility from his children. Not that the parent needs the help but the child needs the involvement and the experience. A person needs to be responsible, and become a part of his or her own future.

I recognize that the majority of us may have lost our responsibility somewhere back there in the sixties. But personally I am sick and tired of being hit over the head with the self-righteous attitude of... don’t you know that God is in control, while, as in Europe we are enabling our enemy to surreptitiously and incrementally take over the control of this country.

I have news for you; God is not going to control anything while we are too busy and irresponsible to even make ourselves aware of the fact that Sharia Law is slowly taking the place of our Constitution. By doing nothing, like ignoring the bullyboy kicking the little child we are enabling the enemy to violate everything we hold dear.

God, instead of being in control will say, we deserve what we get…

de Andréa

The Children Of Allah

The Children Of Allah
The anti-god

This child may never grow up, but if he does, he will want nothing more out of life than to kill you and die! He may not even know why, except that his parents said he must do it for Allah…

By de Andréa

What kind of god is it that would want his children to worship death, to kill, not only others but also to kill each other and themselves? Certainly not a god of love or a god of reason; what would be the point of being born just to kill yourself in the act of killing others?

What kind of a god is it that would want his children to hate, to hate not only others but also to hate each other and themselves? Certainly not a god of love or a god of reason; what would be the point of being born just to hate, yourself, your children, and your neighbors enough to kill them.

What kind of god does all this deception, hate, death, and destruction, come from?
What kind of god would want to watch what he had created, destroy itself?

One should understand that hate, death, destruction, and deception are all things contrary to God. In other words, these things come from an anti-god; moreover, all of these things come from the Quran.

Everyone knows that there is a right and a left, an up and a down, an east and a west, matter and anti-matter, right and wrong, good and bad, and there is a God and an anti-god.

Allah the god of Islam is not a god at all but an anti-god, of deception. This anti-god deceived Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, and now nearly 1400 years after his death, Muhammad and his god still deceives a Nation.

One can easily discover that Allah is anti-god by simply reading the Quran the word of Allah. Example: the Quran does not even contain the word love. It does not teach forgiveness, benevolence, charity, kindness, virtue, or righteousness. One will only find these things in the Bible, the word of the true God, not in the Quran the word of Allah, the anti-god.

This is what the child will look like next year with a bomb strapped to him, he will run into your restaurant or your barbershop, and he will pull the cord that detonates the bomb.

Why does he do this? Because he too has been deceived. Allah is the great deceiver, he cannot tell the truth because he is anti-god. While the God of love wants you to know the truth and have eternal life, Allah the anti-god of hate, wants to deceive you and wants you dead, moreover, he uses the Nation of Islam to carry out this death and destruction.

What kind of god demands human sacrifices of his people and of his children so that he may be satisfied? Moreover, what kind of parent would strap a bomb on their child just to kill them and others? The answer is simple, one who is so totally deceived and possessed by a demonic anti-god of hate and death that he may no longer have a rational mind of his own.

What kind of god would need the help of a deceived people to be able take control of this world? Certainly, it would have to be a god that did not already have control of the world. What kind of a god is that?

The God of love, the God of Abraham already has control of this world, but the anti-god must use deception and a nation of people to carry out his agenda of death, hate, oppression and control.

Who could this anti-god be, that could so totally control a people enough to cause them to commit such heinous acts as cutting the heads off innocent babies or killing people just because they hate them?

Who is the only entity powerful enough to control a people but so weak that he would need to deceive and pervert a people in order to control the world?

The anti-god Allah, is Satan, the god of deception, hate, and of death, who created demonic spirits, who deceives the world, and controls the nation of Islam to send their sons to die that we might also die
.
The God, who created the world and everything in it, is the God of love, who sent his son to die that we might live.

THE BOTTOM LINE: The purpose of this article is to clear up any misunderstanding that Allah/Satan the god of the Muslims--and Jehovah/God, the God of the Jews and of the Christians might be one in the same. As one can clearly see they are not only, not the same, but they are the opposite. They are clearly the definition of good and evil, opposed in everyway.

Satan/Allah, this same anti-god is the snake that deceived Eve and then Adam, the first deception of Gods creation. And when God took away this control of death because of sin from Satan, and made a way for the redemption of man from the sin of that deception by sending His Son Jesus Christ to pay the price of death for all mankind. He unraveled the doom of death, and Allah was put out of the business of eternal death to all humanity.

580 years after Allah was defeated by the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ the Son of the God of love, Allah had to get back into the business of death, hate, and destruction. So, in the year AD 610 he paid a visit to Muhammad just as he had to Eve more than 4500 years earlier, moreover, he used his same weapon of “deception”

After scouring the earth for someone nearly as evil as himself, Allah appeared to Muhammad, a known pedophile, killer and robber, not as the snake he is, as he appeared to Eve, but this time impersonating someone he knew Muhammad would have knowledge of, the Angel Gabriel. Allah deceived Muhammad with the lie that he was Gabriel, sent by the God of Israel Moreover, the deception of a people who later became the Nation of Islam, and the agenda of world conquest and control by the anti-god Allah, AKA Satan, had begun.

Don’t you be deceived by Allah/Satan the anti-god …

de Andréa

Islamic America

Proof That Muslim Infiltrators Plan To “Conquer” the U.S.

By de Andréa

The Ongoing Federal Holyland Foundation Trial in Dallas Texas Unearthed The Formerly Classified Muslim Brotherhood Plan To “Conquer” the U.S. and Turn It Into the Twelfth Caliphate, the headquarters of “The Nation Of Islam”

For the past several years, I have been writing about the mounting evidence regarding the efforts by Satanic Islam to infiltrate America in order to pave the way for an American Jihad. Unfortunately, now and as in the days before (9/11) the people of America, most of the media, and far too many in our government have ignored the “Hue And Cry” as well as the evidence. And as a result, most Americans are unaware of the insidious threat of terrorism that is growing within our nonexistent open borders.

One might priggishly say, well we have not had an attack since (9/11)! While that would not be true, we have just not had one as severe as (9/11). What we need to remember is, that while we have not have an attack as austere as (9/11) it was not the first time we were attacked, moreover it will not be the last. So before you settle down to drink your cool-aid of complacency please take the time to become aware of what is actually going on in your own front yard.

Another terrorists strike within the U.S. in the very near future is a very real threat.
The CIA director, Michael Hayden warns of new al-Qaida attacks in the U.S.
On September 9, 2007 Rod Dreher, editorial writer and columnist for the Dallas Morning News, who has been following the Holyland Foundation trial in Dallas Texas, penned a column focusing on a revealing, shocking memorandum, which was entered into evidence by the Justice Department.

The document, described as an “explanatory memorandum,” was seized during a federal raid of a Muslim terrorist’s home in Virginia – in 1991. This previously confidential document details a plan by the Muslim Brotherhood to “conquer the U.S.” from within, overturning what is left of our Constitution, and replacing it with Islamic Sharia law.

If you think this is rightwing extremists paranoia, then read Dreher’s column. Here are some excerpts from his riveting commentary, which can be read in its entirety.

Once you have read this article with all of the links to my past articles and articles written by others as well as Dreher’s column. If you are sufficiently concerned and outraged, please contact your U.S. Representative here-(write your Representative) or your U.S. Senators here-(write your Senator) and demand a congressional and Justice Department investigation of terrorist organizations such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) which has successfully infiltrated strategic U.S. Government departments as well as security agencies.

Below is an excerpt from this memorandum:
This 'explanatory memorandum,’ as it is titled, outlines the 'strategic goal’ for the North American operation of the Muslim Brotherhood (the Ikhwan). Here is one of the key paragraphs. Bear in mind this is from a 1991-captured declassified document:

The process of settlement [of Islam in the United States] is a "Civilization-Jihadist" process with all the word means. The Ikhwan must understand that all their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" their miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim's destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is no escape from that destiny except for those who choose to slack.

The entire 18-page document outlines a plan for the long haul. It prescribes the Muslim Brotherhood's comprehensive plan to infiltrate and set down roots in both government and civil society. It begins by both founding and taking control of American Muslim organizations, for the sake of unifying and educating the U.S. Muslim community – this to prepare it for the establishment of a global Islamic state governed by Islamic Sharia Law…

The HLF trial is exposing for the first time how the international Muslim Brotherhood – whose Palestinian division is Hamas – operates as a self-conscious revolutionary vanguard in the United States. The court documents indicate that many leading Muslim-American organizations – including the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the Muslim American Society – are an integral part of the Brotherhood's efforts to surreptitiously infiltrate until it is time to wage jihad against America by forceful means.

The Muslim Brotherhood is an affiliation of at least 70 Islamic terrorist organizations around the world, all tracing their heritage to the single original cell, founded in Egypt in 1928. Its credo: “Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Quran is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope…”

According to a 2004 Chicago Tribune investigation, establishing the Brotherhood in the United States has been a 40-year project that has worked mostly underground – even beneath the notice of many Muslims.

Is this just alarmist paranoia? Not at all. The real question should be—What if it’s true? The Answer must be—It would be disastrous, making (9/11) look like a child’s prank.

Bear in mind this Islamic infiltration has been for approximately 40 years surreptitiously quiet. However, like a cancer it has been incrementally growing until the September 11 attack. Now that we know that this malignant cancer of Islam is growing within us, one would think we would want to cut it out and expel it. This far exceeds the scenario before the Second World War, when we were asleep until we were attacked. Now after being attacked by Islam, this sleeping giant is still asleep, and as the cancer grows and grows, we are blindly distracted with a defensive war in the Middle East.

High-profile organizations with roots explicitly in the Muslim Brotherhood have successfully established themselves in paramount positions to define Islam in America according to a radical politicized model. Moreover, they have done so without the American public having the slightest idea about their real agenda. Indeed, more proof of this is that the Bush administration is unwittingly helping the Islamist cause by including their leaders in public events, thus conferring their legitimacy. On Labor Day weekend for example, the same Department of Justice that is presenting evidence of the ISNA's involvement with radical Islam at the Dallas trial has sponsored a booth at ISNA’s national convention in suburban Chicago and thereby promoting the Islamic agenda in this country.

A few so- called moderate Muslims like Dr. Zuhdi Jasser of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, are helping to sound the alarm about the terrorist surreptitious takeover of U.S. Muslim institutions, and the Islamic infiltration into U.S. Government institutions as well as the educational system. The news media is ignoring this for fear of being called Islamophobic, and that after all, would be politically incorrect.

THE BOTTOM LINE: This must be stopped. Six years after 9/11, we are still drinking the cool-aid of the deceived liberal tolerant multiculturalists and falling asleep. Islam has declared war on us, the American Jihad . Many are training and fighting right here in America in what looks like a fifth column. There are 132 Islamic terrorists training camps in 41 states right here in the U.S.A.

Again if you want to read the full story of this memorandum, Read their strategy document. It is there in black and white, for those that are not yet too blind and deceived by this self-described religion of peace.

If we continue to bury our heads in the sand of deception, and the multicultural tolerance of political correctness, then just as a malignant cancer, the Nation of Islam will consume this country just as it has been doing all over this planet for nearly 1400 years. A good example is Lebanon, Indonesia, most African nations, all of the Middle East and most recently most of Europe. It is also making inroads into Asia, Canada, Mexico and America. A cancer does what a cancer does; sometimes by the time one becomes cognizant and recognizes it for what it is, it is already too late.

Just a side note:
Don’t forget, my dog Sir John Cooper is running for the U.S. Senate in 2008. And even though he is an admitted left wing socialist dependent because of his ancestry, he is still cognizant of world affairs. Well…, maybe not world affairs, possibly just the affairs of the neighborhood, this of course would make him more qualified than most of the dogs now in office. They have no idea what is going on anywhere, especially in Washington. Besides Sir John Cooper, is a good runner…
This was a paid political announcement, approved by Sir John Cooper Ltd.

de Andréa

Brigitte Gabriel

If you have never taken the time to read any of my other articles, you must sacrifice some of your valuable time to read this…
A Powerful Breakthrough on Capitol Hill !!

September 13, 2007
de Andréa

If you have not had the opportunity to meet, hear, read or see Brigitte Gabriel you need to take advantage of this occasion to experience all four these educational events. Brigitte was born in Christian Lebanon to Christian parents, and then raised under Islamic Palestinian occupation and Sharia law. [Read Brigitte’s Bio]

Making sure that you have an evening to watch videos that will profoundly change the way you view and understand Islam, in the next paragraph please take time to click on the hyperlink and prepare to get an education that you will never forget. I suggest that you watch the second video first; it is about her incredible childhood.

Please watch a Duke University interview of Brigitte telling her incredible story of growing up to age 17 in Muslim occupied Lebanon. The incredible story of living for seven years in a hole in the ground, eating weeds and flowers gathered at night to survive, and crawling under a shower of bullets just to get water. And how she was wounded and later escaped to Israel with her wounded mother, then two an a half months later returning to the hell of Lebanon to take care of her aging parents. After her mother died, she escaped once again to Israel, this time with her father and how she later returned to dig up her dead mothers body and bring her to Israel to be buried next to her father on Mount Zion.

Now living in America and with intense and enormous energy, she fights an up hill battle against America’s blindness of the relentless and deceptive evil agenda of Islam. Having grown up in Islam, she provides a unique and chilling view of what it means to be Muslim, with a frighting look inside the evil Nation. Now attempting to share her understanding with a deceived America, she founded an organization called the American Congress For Truth.

Below, please find a letter written by Brigitte and e-mailed to me, telling about her experience speaking to a group of Congressional leaders and their response to what she had to share. She says that she may get the chance to speak to the full congress both the house and the senate. Please pray that she does get this opportunity.

If the full Congress has the opportunity to hear Brigitte, it could have a profound effect on the future of this country, if not the future of the world.

Please read her letter…
Thank you, de Andrea

Members of Congress listened in stunned silence to her message

From Brigitte Gabriel
September 11, 2007

Dear de Andréa,

Being on Capitol Hill yesterday was a remarkable experience. As Stephanie, my assistant, and I pulled into the Capitol under heavy security, we looked around in utter amazement as heavily armed SWAT teams with their fully loaded M16’s stood with hands on triggers ready to fire, covering the Capitol and its surrounding streets. You would expect to see this in Israel — but not in the United States. It is a chilling sign of the times we live in and a harsh reminder that we are at war with Islamofascists who are bent on killing us.

My presentation on Capitol Hill was one of the most important presentations I have ever given. The room filled quickly after the 9-11 ceremony on the steps of the Capitol. I began speaking at 7:30 PM. You could hear a pin drop as Members of Congress sat there stunned, listening to the details I was sharing.

There were no journalists, no cameras, and no CSPAN. With the doors shut I let the truth fly. I was more candid than I have ever been in any public presentation. I knew I had only one chance to drive the point home to these influential representatives who head up and sit on committees making decisions about our country that impact our safety and our future. I spoke as if my life hung in the balance. By the time I was done speaking and finished another hour answering questions, I was standing in the company of brothers and sisters who share the same concerns for the welfare of our nation, our children and our grandchildren.

It was obvious my message was like a breath of fresh air. Our representatives hear from CAIR, Moveon.org and similar organizations, but as many of them told me, there is no one, there is no other organization on the Hill with the message I brought to them on your behalf. One Congressman told me he’s been trying, since 1987, to convey the kind of information I covered, but, in his words, “I have never come close to the level of success you achieve.” To hear the message I delivered and to know there are all of you in their districts with these concerns energized these representatives more than ever to do the job they were sent to Congress to do.The members who attended were so moved and so motivated that they want to organize a major meeting to have me present to the entire body of Congress, House and Senate, Republicans and Democrats. They are going to reach out to their colleagues who were not at yesterday’s briefing and urge them to get involved as well.

Yesterday’s presentation was the beginning of a partnership between ACT and our elected officials — those who are interested and are listening. They welcomed us to bring issues to their attention, to become more involved in writing bills and resolutions to protect our country and its citizens. This was the beginning of many meetings to come. We are no longer working on the outside and hoping they hear us. We are working with them, hand in hand on the inside.

One of the highlights of last night was meeting Congressman Steve Pearce of New Mexico (http://pearce.house.gov/) who introduced the John Doe bill which we helped pass. He sends every one of you his thanks and appreciation for the calls and emails you made to Congress to help pass his bill. I thanked him for being a vigilant and courageous representative protecting the American people. I promised him and everyone in the room, that we at ACT and ACT for America will work with them and support them in writing and presenting bills that will protect our country and our freedoms.

As I reflect on the success of our meeting I am convinced we can tackle not one issue, but many issues. We are now organizing the same type of meeting on the Senate side. Senators could not attend yesterday’s presentation because of congressional protocol. This is why General Petraeus today is repeating his same speech to the Senate.

Please write and thank Congressman McCotter (http://mccotter.house.gov/) and Congressman Saxton (http://www.house.gov/saxton) for facilitating this meeting and organizing it. These two people are some of our nation’s best and brightest serving our country and “we the people.”
I especially want to thank you, our members, for standing with me and supporting our team financially. You are the ones who made it possible for us to mail copies of my book BECAUSE THEY HATE to every elected official in our government. It was this effort that opened their eyes. Many members yesterday said that my book is sitting on their night stand or sitting on their desks. Thank you, thank you, thank you, for playing your part in making our efforts possible.

I will be emailing you the list of names of the attendees at yesterday’s briefing and the committees they serve on so you may write them and thank them for attending. Thanking them is as important as your calls urging them to attend. They told me they hear from people on many issues – taxes, immigration, health care – but NOT on national security. Our elected officials need to hear from you.

To continue supporting our efforts and enabling us to do the important work we do, please if you can, make a financial contribution today. Click here to donate.

Thank you from the bottom of my heart.

Brigitte Gabriel

To Win the War

On October 11, 2000, George W. Bush said, "I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation-building. I think our troops ought to be used to fight and win a war."

By de Andréa

Regarding the war in Iraq, George Bush has gone from one end of the spectrum to the other. From an aggressive gang busters shock and awe attack on the Iraqi Republican Guard, to the other end of fear of being accused of injuring or killing so-called Islamic innocents. Even to the point of giving credence to an enemy whose Nation of Islam murdered more that 3000 innocent Americans, in the charging of our own soldiers with murder while fighting a war, this is incredible! Moreover, we seldom hear anything about Afghanistan; it is, as if we are not even there.

In January 2003, President Bush was presented with two post-invasion plans for Iraq. One, authored by the Defense Department, called for a hard and fast invasion, using overwhelming odds to win the war, then the establishment of a provisional government in Baghdad, and an exit from Iraq in a very few months, to enable our forces to deal with the neighboring state sponsors of terrorism, Iran and Syria. The other, authored by the State Department and the CIA, was for the extended occupation and nation building in Iraq. Either way we should have finished winning the war before setting up any kind of a government.

In between, 9-11 and today, was George Bush's conversion to the compromising politically correct "strategy" in fighting a war? According to Sun Tzu and his philosophy in the Art of War, when fighting a war, one must remain on the offence position. Shortly after rolling into Baghdad for some unknown reason, we stopped fighting the war; we went on the defensive and have been there ever since, attempting to create a new government before we win the war.

In April 2002, Jed Baddin of the American Spectator wrote that the president's thinking was dangerously garbled, and that our British allies were very uneasy about it. In September, he wrote that the president needed -- before we took military action against Iraq -- to make very clear that Iraq was only part of the problem and that a war president was obligated to lead us and the free world to defeat the enemy in its entirety. However, between October 2000 and January 2003, President Bush became a neocon, meaning in this case, a new kind of conservative.

Since the fall of Baghdad in April 2003, President Bush has focused our war effort not on winning the war, but on building a new democracy in Iraq. We have not been either decisive or forceful with Iran or Syria. Last week, the President invoked the memory of Vietnam as the reason we should not abandon Iraq before the job is done. However, his definition of the job, is incorrect, and so is the lesson he learned from Vietnam.

The debate about Iraq is essential, but is focused on the wrong issues. The question is not how best to withdraw from Iraq. The issue is how to win the war against the terrorist nations. Do you remember—If you harbor terrorists you are our enemy, you are either for us or against us?

Gen. Petraeus is operating the surge magnificently, and it may -- by March or April -- have established I hope a sustainable success against the terrorists. At the same time, the Maliki government is -- as the new National Intelligence Estimate says -- dysfunctional and not able to govern.

The President has said our goal in Iraq is to create a nation that can defend and govern itself and will be an ally in the war on terror. That definition of our endgame puts America on the strategic defensive.

We did not go to war with Iraq because it was lacking the democratic philosophy. If that was our motive for war, we would be at war with more than two thirds of the nations of the world. We went to war because -- relying on all the intelligence we had -- the President in good faith judged Iraq to be a clear and present danger to the United States.

Our forces swept through Iraq and entered Baghdad in a combat crouch, very aware of the equal -- or bigger -- threats posed by Iraq's neighbors. And there we stopped, as the anti-war, anti-Americans wanted us to, spending soldiers' lives to build a democracy in Iraq before the war was clearly over.

Let's be very clear: whether Iraq becomes a democracy is not determinative of our success or defeat in this war. Iraq is only one campaign in the war against the nations that sponsor terrorism. Victory is not an Iraq that can defend and govern itself; it is the defeat of a terrorist regime.

Victory is defined as the end of state sponsorship of Islamic terrorism, which means forcing Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and others out of that business. Nothing more is needed and nothing less will defeat an existential threat to America. Conservatives -- people such as you and me, and most of our military leaders -- believe that the lesson of Vietnam is not how to manage our withdrawal of Iraq. Wars, as Churchill said about Dunkirk, are not won by evacuations.

Those who believe we have a moral obligation to defend defenseless Iraqis have a point. However, that point ended when Nouri al-Maliki said that if America abandoned Iraq, he could "find friends elsewhere.” The Maliki government is much too closely tied with Iran, and the only visible replacement for Maliki -- Iyad Allawi -- is tied as closely to Saudi Arabia as Maliki is to Iran. Neither of those nations is going to allow Iraq to be an ally in the larger war.

We who lived through the Vietnam era understand that the lesson of Vietnam is not that we have to win the "hearts and minds" of the peoples of the Middle East. We know it isn't that we cannot pull out of Iraq prematurely. We know that we can be in Iraq for another sixty days or another sixty years and the situation will not improve especially while Iraq's neighbors continue to operate, fund, and arm the terrorists. The lesson of Vietnam is much different from the one the President apprehends. The lesson is the same as in all wars: if you fail to fight a war in a manner calculated to win it decisively, you will lose it inevitably.

By waiting for the Iraqis to establish democracy and failing to deal with the terrorist nations that surround them, we have enabled our enemies to control the pace and direction of the war. It is time for the President to "Trump" the left and tell them they are fired, and then get on with the business of fighting a war that will end the threat to America.

General Petraeus is literally working wonders in Iraq even though his military hands are tied by multiculturalism and political correctness. When he reported to Congress recently he said that the counter-insurgency is working, but hasn't yet succeeded. And he said that it needs to continue, as the President has planned, at least through March of 2008. Nevertheless, Senator Clinton said that she didn’t believe a word the General said. Now is not a time to second-guess Petraeus. Now is the time to tell Maliki and the Iraqis that our effort in Iraq is divorced from theirs.

As Jed Baddin wrote in March 2006, there is a conservative war plan. It is this:
We as conservatives understand that Islamic terrorism cannot threaten us significantly without the support of nations. We are impatient with Mr. Bush's neo-Wilsonianism because it allows the enemy and its apologists to control the pace and direction of the war. We are unwilling to allow the prosecution of this war against the terrorist nations to be delayed for however long it takes Iraqis to sort themselves out. It is impossible for them to do so while neighboring nations -- Syria, Iran, and Saudi Arabia -- actively interfere. Conservatives do not want to be caught in the web of failed nostrums of Vietnam. We cannot wait for Islam to be reformed or to win the hearts and minds of the mullahs in Tehran.

Fire these do-gooder anti-war America haters Mr. President, and reject their theories. Turn your thinking back to October 2000. Order Gen. Petraeus to do whatever is necessary to win this war now in Iraq, so we can turn our military and intelligence establishments' attention to the nations that surround it.

Stop thinking about how to not lose. Think about how to win, or we will have another Vietnam.

de Andréa

More related articles by de Andréa:

We are at war August 23, 2007
Threaten to nuke Mecca to deter terror August 22, 2007
The Solution July 15, 2007
Was Osama correct??? June 5, 2007

Connecting the Big Dots…

A Little History, the Future of World Globalism and what is Behind the One World Government

By de Andréa

Over the last several years, a picture has been forming in my mind, a big picture, on a grand scale. I have been studying Islam and the Middle East, for the better part of two decades. What really stands out in the Nation of Islam and in their guidebook the Quran, is their agenda of world conquest and domination. Because of modern Globalism, this is a relatively new idea; Islam however, has had this relentless drive for over a thousand years.

A parallel or many parallels are unfolding adjacent to this grand scale agenda of Islam. There has been a similar agenda by the U.N. as well as a European, a Soviet, and a North American agenda to accomplish this same Goal. In fact, it is very apparent that this goal or agenda has been the ambition of many groups over the years, sometimes countries, sometimes an organization, in the case if Islam, a religion, and even sometimes as in the case of Adolf Hitler, just one man. Oh yes, he was willing to share half the world with Japan for a while, but at the time it was just one-step towards One World Government. It just was not to be, maybe Adolf was just a little ahead of his time as well as being greedy and lacking the stealthy patients of Islam.

What I see now however, is not what one could call a grand conspiracy, with many groups and or countries all working together to bring about a one world government, but many organizations working independently at the same time and taking advantage or using each others progress toward this goal. It is anyone’s guess as to who will rise to the top after all the homogenization is completed.

This kind of stealthy incremental philosophy with regard to “The New World Order” or One World Government as I see it, started with what was called the European Economic Community actually beginning right after WWII, on the Q.T. of course. By 1957, the EEC had begun to take shape, and by the 60’s the cat was out of the bag.

Today we have not just the EEC but is has evolved into the EU, the European Union, 13 nations complete with an encroaching developing government. Everything is in place to become not only the world’s largest economic power, but eventually a world dominating entity. The individual European countries have now become States within the European Union Government.

During the formation of this new European super-nation, Islam as well as the U.N. had been stealthily inching forward with their own agenda for world power. But what was not known by the general population was that there had been for more than 100 years yet another parallel conspiracy to form yet another EU style country complete with its own currency, government, identification, economy, laws and laws and more laws.

Now bear in mind the EU started as the EEC, an economic agreement to benefit several smaller countries, all-working together like good little girls and boys for the benefit of the whole. Nobody then, said anything about giving up ones sovereignty. Nevertheless, here we are 60 years later, and it is no longer just the EEC European Economic Community but the EU European Union. Does anyone remember the Soviet Union?

Like the EEC, North America started its own economic agreement, N.A.F.T.A. the North American Free Trade Agreement, of course, as with EEC, only for the purpose of economics. Now one would think because one had only heard about NAFTA in the early 1990’s that is was born in the 90’s. However, little did we know that this was a twinkle in the eyes of several Globalist organizations as far back as early 1900 and part of an even bigger picture. It however was not called NAFTA, which came out of the Security and Prosperity Partnership, it was called the NAU, the North American Union, the foundation for America’s New World Government.

Take note, the foundation of this brain child is the Security and Prosperity Partnership. Prosperity being the Economic merger part of this agreement, as in the EEC. And the Security being the Government merger part of this behind your back agenda as in the EU.

Now remember what I said about the EEC evolving into the EU. Now that the NAU is out of the bag, we are hearing, “oh no this does not in any way effect the sovereignty of the individual Nations of America/Mexico/Canada”, this is just an economic improvement, its called progress.

So who, where, when, and how, did Americas version of the one world government begin? It is hard to say exactly because these things start of course in the minds of devious and divisive human beings. This seed of grandeur probably began in the late 1800’s with probably as few as one individual then two; by 1900, it evolved into a think tank of several individuals. Two of these individuals were J.P. Morgan and his Lawyer Elihu Root, and so the seed of the CFR, Council on Foreign Relations was planted.

One of the first items on the agenda was to grow the American Government into a powerful entity and how could they do this without great wealth? Something that greatly concerned the Framers, enough to write into the constitution was that the Central Federal Government could not levy internal taxes on the American citizens. However, by 1910, this group had enough influence to get a bill passed in Congress and in violation of the Constitution without the required State ratification, by 1913, it became the 16th Amendment, and the Internal Revenue Service was born.

Now the American Central National Federal Government became wealthy beyond anyone’s imagination, with an unlimited source of income, it would eventually have unlimited power. This new wealthy and powerful government would of course ignore the 10th Amendment, which purposely limits the power of the Federal Government and gives it to the States and or the people.

The idea of course was that this new Shadow Government, the Council on Foreign Relations, could influence and manipulate this newfound power. Working surreptitiously behind the scenes it could begin laying the groundwork for building its utopian ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT. It isn’t wealth alone that creates power it is also shrewd politics and patience. A good example of this is Mr. George Soros, an American billionaire who became rich from the American capitalistic system, and now is trying to use his money to destroy the very system that created his wealth. The problem is, instead of working with the system, and behind the political scene he is an in your face egomaniac and accomplishes little.

This discreet club of New York financiers and international lawyers who had unofficially organized in June 1918 was headed by Elihu Root, JP Morgan's lawyer. They joined other small groups and the CFR was formally established in New York on July 29, 1921, with 108 founding members, including Elihu Root as a leading member and John W. Davis, the chief counsel for J. P. Morgan & Co. and former Solicitor General for President Wilson, as its founding president. Davis was to become Democratic presidential candidate in 1924. Other members included John Foster Dulles, Herbert Lehman, Henry Stimson, Averell Harriman, the Rockefeller family's public relations expert, Ivy Lee, and Paul M. Warburg and Otto H. Kahn of the law firm Kuhn, Loeb, just to name a few.

They knew that there was basically, two ways that this single world power could become a reality. One was by surreptitious incremental manipulation, which is a slow and arduous task, or by military force, and that is such a messy business. After all, these were men of thought, not men of war.

Today the membership of the CFR has grown to nearly 5000. Lest one would think that the CFR is the only secret elite upper-crust organization interested in controlling the world I must throw into the mix the Tri Lateral Commission and the Bilderbergers, some say that even the Freemasons are involved in global affairs.

The Tri Lateral Commission started by David Rockefeller in 1973 is yet another underlying shadow government organization influencing, manipulating and in some cases downright controlling the U.S. Government and America’s future. The Bilderberg club started in a Dutch resort by the same name in 1954 by a group of wealthy European businessmen and has absolutely nothing to do with building burgers and everything to do with building wealth and power on a grand scale.

Some of you may have heard of some of these organizations and were told that they were just the result of the wild imagination of a bunch of conspiracy theorists. I must confess so did I, back in the 60’s and 70’s. There is a conspiracy all right, but it isn’t just a theory.

The North American Free Trade Agreement passed by congress in 1993 was just part of the economic structure of the developing North American Union. The NAU of course is just part of an even bigger plan, a single country encompassing the entire western hemisphere. Yes from the Arctic Circle to Cape Horn, economicly and militarily it could take on the EU and then gobble up the rest of the world.

Well, that is the plan anyway, and as I said, there are several organizations, some working somewhat together, most working independently and just taking advantage of each other’s progress.

Did I mention that President Bush is member of the CFR as well as the TLC, oh yes, going back to Great Grandfather Bush, and Chaney is as well and a great many of the members of congress, as well as a number of the new presidential candidates. Now you understand why these organizations are called secret shadow governments.

Moreover, the government of this new country called the North American Union is unelected. Yep, they are appointed, some self-appointed, Now lets see, don’t we have a name for that. Correct me if I’m wrong but I think it is called a dictatorship.

The North American Free Trade Agreement is the trade bloc in North America created by the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and its two supplements, the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC) and The North American Agreement on Labor Cooperation (NAALC), whose members are Canada, Mexico, and the United States. It came into effect on January 1994.

This has already developed into a “cooperative transport system”, a super highway beginning on the southern coast of Mexico going right through the bread basket of the U.S. and on into southern Canada. Mexican trucks are already rolling totally un-inspected across the boarder to any ware in the U.S. they want to go, carrying anything thing they want to carry.

Have you ever wondered why President Bush does not want to close the borders? It is because there will never be any borders except around the perimeter of North America.

Goodbye the United States of America, Hello [The North American Union]
On July 11, 2006, I broke the story titled The Union Of North American Socialists Republic thinking I had really gone around the bend I nearly lost all my readers. I didn’t know what the name of the new country was at the time, so I just made up a name.

By December 6, 2006 I knew what the name of our new country was and wrote a second article titled (2006)The North American Union by then Lou Dobbs had aired it on CNN and my Congressman had apologized to me for not knowing a thing about it, he is obviously not a member of the CFR.

As you can see, we now have a new flag, such as it is.

Moreover, we are beginning to get National drivers licenses, North Carolina as you can see is the first, complete with the North American Union Logo. If you live in NC, you will soon find this Hologram on the back of your driver’s license. Eventually every State including the Canadian Provinces and the Mexican States will have the same National license with this logo and the two letter State code on the corners. Imbedded in the Holo are all kinds of electronic digital information, I don’t know if we will ever know everything or anything it contains. I suppose only big brother will know.

This whole NAU agreement made between Mexico Canada and the U.S. was made without the general knowledge or oversight of the American Congress as well as the citizens of the respective countries. I hope you realize that this giant step toward a ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT is already definitive of a dictatorship.

de Andréa