Saturday, November 21, 2009

Obama, a Terrorist Operative?

If he is not, the question is; what would he do different if he was?
We have film.

By de Andréa

I can think of a dozen ways that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed could get off scott free and I am not a lawyer.

CSI New York was not immediately on scene at what was left of the twin towers after 9/11 so there is no forensic evidence for show and tell. Then there is that nasty stickity wicket of Miranda. Oh! And just how can Khalid get a jury of his peers without putting some terrorist Muslims on the jury. The Defense attorney is most certainly going to ask for a chance of menu. Then we can’t forget that we have defined water-boarding as torture, so Khalid can bring brutality charges against the U.S. military. And of course everything that Khalid might have said was obtained under duress and without his lawyer present

Moreover reminiscent of the Manson trial when President Nixon said that Charles Manson was guilty before the trial, his lawyers nearly got him off because of prejudice. Do you think that Obama just accidentally made the same Mistake when he said that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed would be found guilty and executed?

Holder lied when he said that he alone decided to try Khalid in a civilian Federal Court. He doesn’t have the authority to do that. You see this gives Obama deniability, which he has already done, so he lied as well.

As I said, what would the administration do different if it was purposely trying to pull an O.J. ? Nothing!

There are countless reasons to oppose Holder’s illegal decision, not the least of which is the potential for compromising our intelligence assets in a public, criminal trial where Mohammed’s attorneys will demand release of such classified information.

As I have so often said “there is nothing new under the sun” every mistake that is made has already been made at least once, including this one, read on.

The trial of Omar Abdel-Rahman comes to mind, the perpetrator of the 1993 New York trade center terrorist bombing, exactly the same mistake was made. In a civilian court Rahman’s attorneys among other things forced the release of the list of unindicted co-conspirators developed by the prosecution. One of the names on the list was Osama bin Laden. Soon after, bin Laden fled Sudan. More over, he reputed history again on 9/11. One gets caught in the loop of stupidity of one ignores history no matter how ancient or resent.

Some Americans are justifiably outraged by Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks, in a civilian criminal court in New York. The perversity of this defies description. This is just one more in a long line of decisions by the Obama administration that is putting America—and our lives—at greater risk.

The question is; was this done purposely by our Muslim president, or is this just another stupid decision in a long line of stupid decisions? Do you really think that Obama is that stupid? Could be!

You may be one of those Americans who are asleep, and no matter what King Barrack Hussein Obammah does it is fine with you, because after all, you are asleep and have no Idea what is going on in Washington anyway. Obama says we are not a war with Islam. Well of course, if this was 1943 and he was a Nazi, he would say we are not at war with Nazis.

Obama is a Muslim, Muslims are terrorists, and so Obama is a terrorist. If you have any doubt that your president is the deceptive enemy that threatens America, then watch and listen to him tell you in his own words. Oh! But first wake up, so you can at least hear the truth, believing it is up to you. Click and Watch Notice how he lies about the Muslim accomplishments of the Iranian Muslim culture. If you know your history, (which he is betting that you don’t) you will know the Muslim cultural accomplishments of Iran he mentions, were actually done by the Persian Empire long before the existence of Iran and Islam. The truth is that Islam has not contributed anything good to the world.
Nothing good has ever come out of Islam.

When it comes to terrorists, you would think that an al Qaeda terrorist who targets an American mom sitting in her office or a child in a school is many degrees worse than a Taliban terrorist picked up after a roadside bombing in Iraq.

Your instinct would be correct, because at the heart of this demonic terrorism is the monstrous idea that the former is as legitimate a target as the latter. Unfortunately, by dispatching Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and other al Qaeda leaders to federal criminal court for trial, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder will be undermining this distinction. And the perverse message that this decision will send to Allah’s demonic terrorists all over this world is this: If you kill civilians on American soil you will have greater protections than if you attack our military overseas.

The fundamental purpose of rules such as the Geneva Convention is to give those at war an incentive for more civilized behavior—and not targeting civilians is arguably the most sacred of these principles, It demolishes this principle to give Khalid Sheikh Mohammed even more legal protections than the Geneva Conventions provide a uniformed soldier fighting in a recognized war zone.

We don't often speak of incentives in war. That's a loss, because the whole idea of, say, Geneva rights is based on the idea of providing combatants with incentives to do things that help limit the bloodiness of battle. These include wearing a uniform, carrying arms openly, not targeting civilians, and so on.

Muslim terrorists recognize none of these things. They are best understood as associations of people plotting and carrying out war crimes, whether that means sowing fear with direct and indiscriminate attacks on marketplaces, offices and airlines—or by engaging enemy troops without distinguishing uniforms, so that the surrounding civilians essentially become used as human shields. Muslim terrorists reject both the laws of war and the laws of any civil society. To put it another way, they reject both the authority and the obligations their legal rights imply.

None of this seems to bother Mr. Holder. Since he dropped his bombshell last Friday, much commentary has focused on the possibility that KSM might be found not guilty. The perversity here is that the overwhelming evidence of their war crimes gain them protections denied a soldier fighting in accord with the rules of war.

Andrew McCarthy has a unique perspective on the move to criminal trials. As an assistant U.S. attorney in 1993, he successfully prosecuted Omar Abdel Rahman (the "blind sheikh") for the first bombing of the World Trade Center. Even though the cases were somewhat different—that plot was conceived, plotted and carried out on U.S. soil—Mr. McCarthy says the experience persuaded him that federal trials are a bad way of handling terrorists.

"At first, I was of the mind that a criminal prosecution would uphold all our high-falutin' rhetoric about the constitution and majesty of the law," says Mr. McCarthy. "But when you get down to the nitty gritty of a trial, you see one huge problem: The criminal justice system imposes limits on the government and gives the defendant all sorts of access to information, because we'd rather have the government lose than unfairly convict a man. You can't take that position with an enemy who is at war with you and trying to bring that government down."

By going down this road, says Mr. McCarthy, Mr. Holder has invited any number of dangers: making the Manhattan courtroom a target for terrorist attack, inviting the disclosure of sensitive intelligence, and opening the possibility that some al Qaeda operatives will be acquitted and released within the U.S., etc. It is foolish to think that al Qaeda does not train to our system and look for our vulnerabilities.

THE BOTTOM LINE: As I said this move was done either to carry out the Muslim agenda to make a mockery of our justice system and our military, or it has been done out of pure ignorance and stupidity.

Remember what Khalid Sheikh Mohammed told his captors when we got him, “I'll see you in New York with my lawyers”

It seems he knows our weaknesses better than our government does…

de Andréa

Thursday, November 19, 2009

The Lies of CAIR

While secretly rejoicing with all of Islam, the U.S. government protected tax exempt terrorist organization; CAIR, the Council on American Islamic Relations deceptively condemns the Fort Hood attack. The terrorists group is treated by the deceived U.S. government as a voice of a peaceful Islamic Nation despite more and more fresh evidence of terrorist connections

By de Andréa

Despite recent reports of new evidence of its ties to terrorism, the Council on American-Islamic Relations is boasting of its success in the wake of the so-called Fort Hood massacre or man made disaster. As a spokesman in numerous major media outlets for the Muslim community, CAIR claims it is “shocked" by the attack and incensed that anyone would dare associate them with it.

In a fundraising letter, CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad told potential donors that within hours of the attack by a Muslim Army major, the Washington, D.C.-based group issued a statement of condemnation to thousands of local, national, and international media outlets.

Perhaps you saw CAIR spokespeople interviewed on MSNBC's Hardball or on PBS's NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, CNN, MSNBC, or the BBC. Or maybe you read CAIR quotes in the Washington Post, New York Times, Christian Science Monitor, or USA Today."

Awad said the staff at CAIR – which was designated by the U.S. Justice Department as an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorism-finance case in U.S. history last year – has been "working nonstop in dealing with this crises." The Muslim group, he said, "provided advice and support for Islamic centers nationwide on how to handle the crisis, including ensuring your safety in case of an anti-Muslim backlash."

The author of “The Muslim Mafia”, a former Air Force special agent P. David Gaubatz, and "Infiltration" author Paul Sperry, present firsthand evidence that CAIR is acting as a front for a well-funded conspiracy of the Muslim Brotherhood. The Muslim Brotherhood is the parent of al-Qaida and Hamas in the U.S. with the agenda to infiltrate the American system and help pave the way for Saudi-style Wahhabist Islamic law to rule the U.S.

The FBI, after years of partnership, finally cut off ties to CAIR in January 09 after the group was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation case in Texas. Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer of New York and other lawmakers have called for a government-wide ban on CAIR and loss of tax exempt status. This has yet to take place.

FBI evidence shows that Awad himself has direct ties to Hamas and terrorism. He was at a Philadelphia meeting of Hamas leaders in 1993 that hatched a plot to disguise payments to Hamas terrorists as charitable giving, according to wiretap evidence from the Holy Land case.

Just as a side note, and as a matter of documented fact, there is no charity in Islam. Charity derives its foundation in benevolence, and benevolence derives its basis in unconditional love, the word love does not appear in the Quran, therefore an Islamic charity is a contradiction in terms. If only our congress would read the enemies handbook.

An April 28, a letter from FBI assistant director Richard C. Powers to Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz. – which singles out Awad for suspicion – explains how the group's many Hamas connections caused the FBI to sever ties with CAIR.

Awad's contact information was listed in a Muslim Brotherhood document seized by federal investigators revealing "important phone numbers" for the "Palestine Section" of the Brotherhood in America. The court exhibit shows Hamas fugitive Mousa Abu Marzook listed in the same context with Awad.

Awad told donors in the fundraising appeal, that CAIR needs their "financial help to meet this crises and push back against those who seek to score political points off the Muslim community in the wake of the Fort Hood tragedy."

Fort Hood killer 'not devout'?
The deception.
One day after the Nov. 5 shooting at the Texas Army post, the Fox News Channel invited Awad to appear with host Martha MacCallum, who asked the CAIR leader what his reaction was when he heard the suspect was a devout Muslim from Virginia.

Awad, agreeing with the initial FBI statement that this was not a Muslim terrorist attack said "the American Muslim community is shocked by this vicious attack on innocent people," noting that as soon as CAIR heard the news it issued a statement of condemnation "on behalf of American Muslims. Absolutely no justification can be found in the ideology or any religion for this horrific crime," he said. "I am really disturbed when I hear they are referring to him as a devout Muslim. There is no link between being devout and committing heinous crime like this," he emphasized.

He shouted Allah Achbar
As I mentioned in my previous article titled Our Muslim Military that there was and is, such an enormous amount of evidence showing his connection with Islamic terrorists as well has his devout practice of his Muslim religion, that his neighbors in his own neighborhood in town didn’t even know he was in the military. Why? Because they only ever saw him in his Muslim garb. He was Quoted as saying that he was a “Muslim Jihadist first and a U.S. soldier second, “obviously…

THE BOTTOM LINE: If you still don’t believe that Muslims are our enemy and a threat to our national security and other living things, then try this on for size. Recently Homeland Security shut down five Mosques across the U.S. for ties to, and the promotion of terrorism. Ties to Allah V, and the Jihadists Quba Center. These Mosques are located in the States of California, Maryland, New York, Texas, and Virginia.

Two years ago an independent organization made up of ex-CIA, special forces, and counter terrorists agents working undercover collected proof that ninety percent of mosques in the U.S. promote Militant Jihad and Islamic conquest of America.

IMPORTANT To NOTE: The Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR, is suing "Muslim Mafia" co-author P. David Gaubatz and his son Chris over the evidentiary documents they obtained during Chris' six-month undercover penetration of the organization, which both the FBI and Justice Department have branded as a terror co-conspirator. Because of revelations in the book titled "Muslim Mafia," the bipartisan Congressional Anti-Terrorism Caucus is calling for new, wide-ranging federal probes of CAIR.

It’s about @#$%^&*+! time boss…
Last minute addition IRS to invesigate CAIR
de Andréa

Wednesday, November 18, 2009

U.S. Sanctions Against Israel ?

Obama supports Muslim land grab, but Israel threatens retaliation if U.N. approves Palestinian state. Will the Obama regime support Islam in a war against Israel?

By de Andréa

According to the Jerusalem Post, a top Palestinian Authority official said that the PA reached an understanding with the Obama administration regarding a Palestinian threat to unilaterally ask the United Nations to recognize a Palestinian state outside of negotiations with Israel.

Ahmed Qurei, the former PA prime minister, and member of the Palestinian Liberation Organization executive committee, said in an interview that the PA "reached an understanding with important elements within the administration" to bring a resolution to the U.N. Security Council which would unilaterally and behind the back of Israel, create a Palestinian state..

Asked to which "elements" he was referring, Qurei would only say they were from the Obama administration.

Olmert reportedly offered the PA not only 95 percent of the West Bank and peripheral eastern Jerusalem neighborhoods but also other territories never before offered by any Israeli leader, including parts of the Israeli Negev desert bordering Gaza as well as sections of the Jordan Valley, it was rejected, they want it all. Moreover it looks as if Obama will try to get is for them.

"We understand from the U.S. that the Netanyahu government is not in a position to go against creating a state within two years," the PA official said.

The official claimed the Obama administration was ready to ultimately consider "sanctions" against Israel if the Netanyahu government rejected negotiations leading to a Palestinian state. The official refused to clarify which sanctions he was referring to or whether he was specifically told by the U.S. government it would consider sanctions.
The PA official claimed Obama could make a "headache" for Netanyahu if the Israeli leader does not conduct negotiations leading within two years to a Palestinian state.

While Obama is opposed to the expansion of Israel, overriding a bush agreement of building on outlying Israeli land, he is obviously not opposed to Islam taking over most if not all of Israel including the Israeli city of Jerusalem. This advancement of Islam is reminiscent and is what began the Crusades in European history.

A top PA negotiator, speaking on condition of anonymity, named the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., Susan Rice, and National Security Council member Samantha Power as among the Obama administration officials who were involved with the Palestinians' U.N. threat.

Despite widespread assumptions the U.S. would veto any such U.N. Security Council resolution, the PA negotiator said that in initial discussions, the Obama administration did not threaten to veto their conceptual unilateral resolution.

"The U.S. has a history of never before vetoing any U.N. move to create a new state," the negotiator pointed out.

Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said yesterday the Palestinians had decided to turn to the U.N. Security Council to unilaterally declare a Palestinian state in the Gaza Strip, West Bank and eastern Jerusalem.

Separately, the negotiator, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said that the Obama administration is "totally on board" with a plan by Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad to create a state on the pre-1967 borders within two years.

THE BOTTOM LINE: The question is, will Obama support America’s enemy against its closest ally, and only the ally we have in the Middle East. Moreover will he get away with it without a mutiny?

I guess that will depend on how much power we have given this Muslim Dictator.

No! I mean King-Imam-Barrack Hussein Obammah…

de Andréa

Monday, November 16, 2009

Sarah, Going Rogue

Who Would You Rather Have as President?
Come on guys, really… who would you really rather have as commander and chief?

By de Andréa

I say… no contest.

56 % of American voters today, say that Sarah Palin represents their core beliefs.

Who would your rather have to defend this nation against a foreign invasion? While Sarah was mayor of Wasilla Alaska, no foreign nationals invaded her town. While she was governor of Alaska, the neighboring country of Russia did not invade her State. Moreover there has not been a Muslim terrorist attack in the State of Alaska.

On the other hand President Barrack Hussein Obammah can’t even decide whether or not, or how, to defend the tiny nothing country of Afghanistan from the very, very, few Muslim radical insurgents that have hijacked that very, very, peaceful Nation of Islam.

During his Presidency the lower 48 has been illegally invaded by hundreds of thousands of foreign nationals some of them dangerous enemy’s. Moreover, we have had multiple Muslim terrorist attacks including the recent denial of the Fort Hood enemy terrorist attack.

In her new best seller book “Going Rogue” subtitled “An American Life” coming out tomorrow, Sarah imparts her vision of a way forward for America --- and her unfailing hope in the greatest nation on Gods green earth. In her ‘aw shucks’ small town way, she tells her story of growing up in the wilds of Alaska; the importance of faith and family, and her unique joys and trials of life as a high profile wife and mother.

True to form, the alphabet soup media has attempted to shred Palin’s book, by scrutinizing the facts. The A.P. (Associated Press) has assigned eleven of their best investigative journalists to check the truth of facts outlined in her book.

Did they find any errors?
Yes…Six of them. Between eleven expert scrutinizers they found six errors. I will give you an example of one of those errors. In her book she stated that most of the time in her political career she traveled coach class and stayed in less than four star hotels. One of the six errors the eleven expert investigative scrutinizers found was that Sarah traveled in a privately chartered jet and stayed in a $700.00 a day four-star AAA approved hotel. Once! And that was during the presidential campaign and she did not have a choice, the arrangements were made for her. She did after all say… most of the time.
Did the media scrutinize at all, over Obama's book? No!

THE BOTTOM LINE: Does Sarah Palin have a political future? Well… I don’t know, but she sure has made her mark on America. As far as her being back woods --- so was Abraham Lincoln. Oh! I know, he was a lawyer. Do you really want another lawyer as president? Remember, Ronald Reagan wasn’t a lawyer...
"Thanks to God and Todd" Sarah Palin

de Andréa

Friday, November 13, 2009

Terrorists On Trial?

Is this a Joke? Was the CSI on scene immediately after 911? No and No…

By de Andréa

The 9/11 terrorists are going to be tried in a civilian court with all the constitutional rules that apply. Were they read their Miranda rights before the truth was coerced and tortured out of them? Oh yes that will come up big time. Did CSI gather all the forensic evidence necessary to bring this case to trial? Remember in a civilian court there is really no defense necessary because the burden of proof is on the prosecutor, moreover it must be according to all the technical laws of evidence and procedures.

For example the U.S. Constitution requires a jury of their peers. Just where are they going to find a jury of terrorists peers, in New York? Or maybe that won’t be as difficult as it seems.

Yep, five 9/11 terrorist master minds are going to be tried in a New York Civilian Federal court. Does this mean that we are going to put Miami’s Horatio Cain/David Caruso and his CSI team on the battle field in Iraq? Can you imagine Calleigh Duquesne/Emily Procter running around in the dessert of Afghanistan collecting blood evidence or making footprint castings? No! You say.

Well this, my friend is what is required in a civilian court of law. So what if the Terrorists are found not guilty? Well Eric Holder says not to worry; we can bring them up on a whole load of other charges. Other charges… Like what… Parking tickets?

It seems to me that his Osama Bin Ladin Lawyers would at least demand a change of menu.

This should be interesting, especially when it turns out to be the U.S. Government on trial instead of the terrorists.

THE BOTTOM LINE: This was a militant terrorist attack on America by the Nation of Islam, not a pick pocket or a purse snatching or even an attack on New York City. Historically these murderers would have been tried in a Military Tribunal and hung…twice.

Remember, we are still in a state of war!

de Andréa

Thursday, November 12, 2009

Our Muslim Military

Who,,, besides the Muslim terrorist who murdered and wounded U.S. military soldiers is to blame for this atrocity at Fort Hood???

By de Andréa

How many of you, especially now, believe that the government pretty much does what it wants to do? That’s what I thought…

So, if one can, with original thought, extrapolate from that, that all the governmental agencies involved, knowingly ignored the fact that Nidal Malik Hasan was a Muslim terrorist and yet left him in his place as an officer in the U.S. military, that it was done with malice of forethought. I mean, who would have forced each independent investigative agency including the military to allow a Muslim terrorist to continue to hold a position of command. Well …no one of course. So it was done purposely, by our own government.

Would our government in 1943 have allowed a known Nazi to hold a position of command in the American military? Well of course, the answer is an obvious no. Then why is it not obvious now? Because in 1943 the Nazis were our enemy, in 2009 Islamic terrorists are our friends. Not mine, and maybe not yours, but they are the friends of our new Communist Muslim government.

The U.S. Federal Government is constitutionally bound with protecting this constitutional republic from any foreign invasion. But instead this government encourages and enables the illegal invasion of our republic even to the point of attack on our own citizens and soldiers.

THE BOTTOM LINE: Major Hasan may have been the trigger-man in this so-called man made disaster, but it is our own government with Barrack Hussein Obammah as the commander and chief, who is the one who knowingly hired him to commit the dastardly deed of unprovoked terrorism on our American military men.

Question is, what are you going to do about it? That’s what I thought, nothing…

Watch a video of Brigitte Gabriel and listen to what she says about Political Correctness

de Andréa

Friday, November 06, 2009

The Fort Hood Massacre


By de Andréa

You shall have no other Gods before me.
You shall have no other Gods before me. This is the first of Ten Commandments given to Moses over three thousand years ago. You shall have no other Gods…

America calls itself a Christian Nation, we are part of the Christian Western Culture, and yet we worship the Enemy of God, the enemy of the Christian God, the God of Salvation and of all Creation.

We do this through what has become the new Multi-Cultural Politically-Correct philosophy of the deceived west. We have become enablers of our own enemy and the “Enemy of God”.

Our military has embraced our enemy
Nidal Malik Hasan, a “Home-Grown” devout Muslim terrorist will become known as “The Fort Hood Shooter” He handed out Korans the morning of his attack” Will the Government controlled “Establishment Media” Report the Truth? Well… it hasn’t so far.

The massacre at Ft. Hood has stunned and grieved America. Everywhere people are asking questions. How could this happen on a secure military installation? What drove him to do it? He must have been depressed.

What is true to form is the spin the new cultural “Alphabet-Soup media” is putting on this horrific massacre. For instance, Fox News this morning interviewed a “criminal profiler” who asserted definitively that this attack had nothing to do with religion, that the man was “troubled.” (In fairness to Fox News, they are at least raising the questions about jihadist terrorism as a motive.)

Others are suggesting he had some kind of post-traumatic stress syndrome — an insult to all our brave soldiers who have actually served in combat (Hasan did not).

CAIR (the Council on American-Islamic Relations) of course immediately jumped into the fray, arguing that no religion or ideology could justify this, in spite of the hundreds of passages in Islam’s holy books calling for murder and jihad against all non-Muslims.

ACT! for America has launched a petition calling for a government investigation of CAIR, a known Islamic terrorist supporter.

Even the FBI said immediately following the shootings that this was definitely not a terrorist attack.

What is sadly being ignored is that Hasan was a devout Muslim. On an internet post earlier this year he compared suicide bombers to soldiers who throw themselves on a grenade to save their comrades. A former colleague, Col. Terry Lee, recalls Hasan arguing “Muslims have the right to rise up against the U.S. military.” Moreover this man was a Major in the U.S. Armed Forces. How does this happen? Because the Christian West is deceived by the “Enemy of God”.

Hasan passed out Korans the morning of the attack and “donated his furniture to anyone who would take it” (see story below). This certainly appears to be the actions of someone preparing for martyrdom and yet no mention of a suicide massacre, or terrorism. Oh! I almost forgot, according to the deceived U.S. Government, terrorists are now defined as Christian conservatives, those against abortion, high taxes, Constitutionalist’s, and returning military veterans. Muslim terrorism according to Home Land Security has been reduced to “Man Made Disasters”.

The story below also notes that Hasan listed his nationality as “Palestinian” rather than American.

Survivors of the attack said Hasan shouted “Allahu Akbar” before opening fire.

After the succession of Islamist terror plots were recently foiled, many in the media and law enforcement said they could not find any “connection” between the plots — overlooking the obvious Muslim jihadist connection. When a Detroit imam was shot to death last week, law enforcement and many in the media went to great lengths to downplay any connection to basic militant Islam.

And now we see the same pattern taking shape today, in the aftermath of this terrible tragedy.

Should have been a clue
On the morning of the massacre, neighbors said Hasan handed Qurans and donated his furniture to anyone who would take it.

Neighbors described Hasan as a quiet man who wore "Arabic clothing" Edward Windsor, a neighbor, never suspected Hasan was in the Army.

Major Nidal Malik Hasan, a self admitted Palestinian Muslim U.S. Army psychiatrist, murdered twelve people and wounded thirty inside Fort Hood in Texas, while, according to eyewitnesses, "shouting Allah Achbar while he was shooting.” Even so investigators are still scratching their heads and expressing puzzlement about why he did it. Does this indicate the depth and success of the enemies’ deception?

According to NPR "the motive behind the shootings was not immediately clear, officials said.” The Washington Post agreed: "The motive remains unclear they said, although some sources reported the suspect is opposed to U.S. involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq and upset about an imminent deployment.” The Huffington Post spun faster, asserting, “that there is no concrete reporting as to whether Nidal Malik Hasan was in fact a Muslim or even an Arab.” I mean really, with a name like Nidal Malik Hasan do we really think he was Swedish?

Yet there was, and what's more, Major Hasan's motive was perfectly clear -- but it is one that the forces of political correctness and the enabling Islamic advocacy groups in the United States have been working for years to obscure. So it is now that another major jihad terrorist attack has taken place on American soil, authorities and the mainstream media are at a loss to explain why it happened - and the abundant evidence that it was a jihad attack is ignored.

Why is this? Because The West is at the very least deceived and at most has been worshiping the “Enemy of God”

Nidal Malik Hasan was born in Virginia but didn't think of himself as an American: on a form he filled out at the Muslim Community Center in Silver Spring, Maryland, he gave his nationality not as "American" but as a Palestinian.” A mosque official found that curious, saying; “I don't know why he listed Palestinian. He was not born in Palestine."
He is a graduate of Virginia Tech and has a doctorate in psychiatry from the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences. While there, NPR reports, Hasan was "put on probation early in his postgraduate work" and was "disciplined for proselytizing about his Muslim faith with patients and colleagues."

He was a staff psychiatrist at Walter Reed Army Medical Center for six years before transferring to Fort Hood earlier this year. While at Walter Reed, he was a "very devout" member of and daily visitor to the Muslim Community Center in Silver Spring.

So he identified himself as Palestinian and was a devout Muslim - so what? These things, of course, have no significance if one assumes that Islam is a Religion of Peace and that when a devout Muslim reads the Koran's many injunctions to wage war against unbelievers, he knows that they have no force or applicability for today's world.

Unfortunately, all Muslims around the world demonstrate in both their words and their deeds that they take such injunctions quite seriously. And Nidal Hasan gave some indications that he was been among them.

On May 20, 2009, a man giving his name as "Nidal Hasan" posted this defense of suicide bombing (all spelling and grammar as it is in the original):

“There was a grenade thrown amongs a group of American soldiers. One of
the soldiers, feeling that it was to late for everyone to flee jumped on the
grave with the intention of saving his comrades. Indeed he saved
them. He inentionally took his life (suicide) for a noble cause i.e.
saving the lives of his soldier. To say that this soldier committed
suicide is inappropriate. Its more appropriate to say he is a brave hero
that sacrificed his life for a more noble cause. Scholars have paralled
this to suicide bombers whose intention, by sacrificing their lives, is to help
save Muslims by killing enemy soldiers. If one suicide bomber can kill 100
enemy soldiers because they were caught off guard that would be considered a
strategic victory. Their intention is not to die because of some
despair. The same can be said for the Kamikazees in Japan. They died
(via crashing their planes into ships) to kill the enemies for the
homeland. You can call them crazy i you want but their act was not one of
suicide that is despised by Islam. So the scholars main point is that "IT SEEMS

One of his former colleagues, Col. Terry Lee, recalled Hasan saying statements to the effect of "Muslims have the right to rise up against the U.S. military"; "Muslims have a right to stand up against the aggressors"; and even speaking favorably about people who "strap bombs on themselves and go into Times Square."

One could say that he just snapped, perhaps under the pressure of his imminent deployment to Iraq. But one could say the truth, and that is that he was Muslim.

It's noteworthy that if he did just snap, he snapped in exactly the same way that several other Muslims in the U.S. military have snapped in the past. In April 2005, a Muslim serving in the U.S. Army, Hasan Akbar, was convicted of murder for killing two American soldiers and wounding fourteen in a grenade attack in Kuwait. AP reported: "Prosecutors say Akbar told investigators he launched the attack because he was concerned U.S. troops would kill fellow Muslims in Iraq. They said he coolly carried out the attack to achieve 'maximum carnage' on his comrades in the 101st Airborne Division."

Hasan's murderous rampage resembles one that five Muslim men in New Jersey tried to carry out at Fort Dix in New Jersey in 2007, when they plotted to enter the U.S. Army base and murder as many soldiers as they could.

That was a jihad plot. One of the plotters, Serdar Tatar, told an FBI informant late in 2006: "I'm gonna do it...It doesn't matter to me, whether I get locked up, arrested, or get taken away, it doesn't matter. Or I die, it doesn't matter, I'm doing it in the name of Allah.” Another plotter, Mohamad Shnewer, was caught on tape saying, "They are the ones, we are going to put bullets in their heads, Allah willing."

Nidal Hasan's statements about Muslims rising up against the U.S. military aren't too far from that, albeit less graphic.

The effect of ignoring or downplaying the role that Islamic beliefs and assumptions may have played in his murders only ensures that - once again - nothing will be done to prevent the eventual advent of the next Nidal Hasan.

THE BOTTOM LINE: The ignorant enabling of Islam in the West is indicative of the successful deception of Islam. Europe and America has embraced the “Enemy of God”.

Muslims are terrorists or they are not Muslims. At the very root of Islam is deception, murder, oppression, hate, and tyranny.

The Judeao-Christian culture of the West has turned away from their God Jehovah, the Creator of all things. And because of its deception, has turned its worship toward the Enemy of God.

So who is this Enemy of God? Allah is the Enemy of God. And who is Allah?

Allah is…Lucifer, the deceiver.

de Andréa