No Quarter

Ten years after September 11, 2001, when islamic jihadis murdered nearly 3000 innocent people, it is appalling how little Americans have learned about the ideology that fueled those attacks and the nearly EIGHTEEN THOUSAND deadly islamic jihad terrorist attacks that have transpired since then.

Immediately after islamic terrorists came and murdered us by the thousands on our own soil, our "leaders", including President George W. Bush, disgracefully went out of their way to proselytize for the people who KILLED US, repeating the mantra "islam is a religion of peace" as if saying it enough times would make it so. George W. Bush appears to have been doing it out of naivete or wishful thinking, but the results were disastrous. Bush's "muslim outreach" was facilitated by the notorious stealth jihad enabler "Republican" Grover Norquist and helped islamic supremacist infiltrators to reach the highest levels of our government. One such infiltrator was Anwar Al Awaki who Congress is only now wanting investigated for his role in the very 9/11 jihad attacks that insanely resulted in our government's kissing the raised asses of the mohamadeens. Via Atlas Shrugs:

“Jihad is becoming as American as apple pie and as British as afternoon tea”  Anwar al-Alwaki, Imam

Not only was Anwar Awlaki the imam to the 911 Muslim terrorists, he was the go-to imam whom the media went to for all things Islam, having dinner at the Pentagon, he was lunching there as well. Devout Muslim Awlaki also provided succor and Islamic spiritual guidance to the Fort Hood jihadi, the Christmas balls bomber, and the Times Square deadly car bomber -- and that's what we know of.
The media shills and the political cowards we elect blur the line between respected Islamic authority and inciter of violence. The line itself is not blurry, it's very clear. The intellectual acrobats these clowns go through to excuse and confuse the inexcusable, the savage, the inhumane.
I am not surprised by this latest development: an imam, beloved by the NY Times and the Washington Post, is directly tied to the 911 muslim attacks, and his role may have been bigger than originally thought. The idea that Peter King is asking Obama's DoJ to investigate borders on comical. That's like asking Goebbels to investigate Himmler.
EXCLUSIVE: Congress to Probe Suspected Connection Between Anwar al-Awlaki and 9/11 FOX:

The House Homeland Security Committee “has initiated an investigation” into the radical Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awlaki and whether he was an overlooked key player in the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, a letter from the committee chairman to Attorney General Eric Holder says.

The three-page letter, obtained exclusively by Fox News, makes the case that a decade after the worst terrorist attack on U.S. soil, the full story of 9/11 has not been told.

“This congressional investigation will seek to determine:

"1. To what extent Anwar al-Awlaki wittingly or unwittingly facilitated the plot of the 9/11 hijackers; and

"2. to what extent al-Awlaki was an al Qaeda operative, offering support to acts of terrorism prior to 9/11.”
The letter to Holder, sent by Republican Rep. Peter King of New York on May 26, confirms that investigators believe the American cleric's contacts with three of the five hijackers on Flight 77, which slammed into the Pentagon, were more than a series of coincidences, but rather evidence of a purposeful relationship.
“Given the greater collection of intelligence and integration of pertinent data since the attacks of 9/11, I believe that al-Awlaki may have played greater roles in the terrorist attacks of 9/11, as well as other terrorist plots, than those of which we have been previously aware," King writes. "Accordingly, I request the full assistance of the Department of Justice in carrying out this inquiry.”
The hijackers Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi were the first two hijackers into the U.S. – arriving in January 2000 at Los Angeles International Airport. One question always puzzled investigators: Why would the self-described architect of 9/11, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, send two of his most experienced operatives, who spoke virtually no English, to the ghetto of San Diego unless there was someone there to meet them.
As part of the Fox News Specials Unit's ongoing investigation of the cleric, the executive director of the 9/11 commission Philip Zelikow confirmed that his investigators were highly suspicious of al-Awlaki and his relationship with the hijackers in San Diego.
“We put the spotlight on Awlaki about as brightly as we could, and as brightly as any government agency could,” Zelikow said, adding that he was always surprised the media did not immediately pick up on their suspicions about al-Awlaki’s role when the final 9/11 report was issued in 2004.
In “The American Terrorist,” which profiled the cleric’s life in Colorado, Southern California and Virginia before 9/11, Fox News confirmed through documents and interviews that al-Awlaki met on a regular basis with the two hijackers al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar in San Diego in 2000. It was in a small anteroom above al-Awlaki's mosque with a single entryway. One of al-Awlaki’s closest associates, a Yemeni, Mohdar Abdullah helped the hijackers find a place to live and find jobs in San Diego.
By early 2001, al-Awlaki moved to a new mosque in Falls Church, Va., where hijacker al-Hazmi seemed to follow him. After they finished their flight training in Arizona, al-Hazmi and pilot Hani Hanjour attended services at al-Awlaki’s mosque.
In Virginia, as seen in Fox News' "The Secrets of 9/11," the same pattern seen in San Diego was repeated. Al-Awlaki’s Virginia associate, this time a Jordanian, Eyad al-Rababah, helped the hijackers settle in Alexandria before driving the men to Paterson, N.J., where they rented an apartment and connected with three other hijackers.
By May 2002, the New Jersey landlord reported six men were living in a one room apartment, according to the 9/11 Commission report. All of them were hijackers. Soon, a seventh hijacker would join them, Khalid al-Mihdhar, who also knew al-Awlaki from the San Diego mosque.
MUCH MORE HERE

The American left has long been in bed with islamonazis, as the ideologies of the leftists and jihadis reflect two sides of the same totalitarian coin. The influence of islamoleftism on our nation's governance has increased exponentially with the presidency of the MSM's moonbat messiah Barack Hussein Obama who has spared no expense in American security to aid and abet his "muslim brothers" who he admittedly "stands with". Obama has taken the side of  the Taliban, the Muslim Brotherhood, and even Al Qaeda, against America, Israel, and freedom loving people around the world at every opportunity - heedless of the human cost.

Obama's treasonous administration has turned the White House into a defacto agent of Muslim Brotherhood whose self described goal for America is to destroy it from within for islamic jihad. Obama recently held a dinner for radical islamic supremacists in which he spoke of the glorious sacrifices of muslims on September 11, 2001 and islamic supremacists know that he butters their bread, so they felt confident when they recently lobbied him to use the government to silence critics of islam.

Islamic sharia law is increasingly being pushed onto Americans and those who voice opposition to it or seek to have American laws retain their status as the law for ALL people in our country are slandered, defamed, and even subject to legal action. Those who deny that sharia is holding any sway in our courtrooms are sorely mistaken, or lying. Here is a list of just ten of the many cases which have used or attempted to use islamic, rather than American, laws (via Atlas Shrugs):

Critics, such as CAIR, not only ignore the dozens of published legal cases involving the application of shariah law in American courts, but also misinform Americans regarding easily verifiable facts, such as the actual content of this protective legislation. Rather than acknowledging the relevant jurisprudence, and accurately describing the curative legislation, CAIR impugns their fellow Americans who seek to ensure constitutional equal protection, due process and civil liberties for all Americans, especially American Muslims who are denied their rights through courts imposing foreign laws contrary to our Constitution.
Below are ten cases (excerpted from “Shariah Law and American State Courts“).
In cases 1-3, the Appellate Courts upheld Shariah law; in cases 4-7, the  Trial Courts upheld Shariah, but the Appellate Courts reversed (protecting the litigant’s Constitutional rights); in cases 8-10, both Trial and Appellate Courts rejected the attempts to enforce Shariah law.

Ten American Families and Shariah in American State Courts

• Joohi Q. Hosain (FKA Malik) V. Anwar Malik, (http://shariahinamericancourts.com/?p=124 ), Shariah law of Pakistan, Maryland, 1996: Trial and Appellate Courts upheld foreign Shariah law and denied mother custody.  She lost custody because going to custody hearing in Pakistan would have risked prison, torture or execution.
• Laila Adeeb Sawaya Malak v. Abdul Latif Malak (http://shariahinamericancourts.com/?p=77 ), Shariah law of Lebanon/UAE, California, 1986: Appellate Court upheld foreign Shariah law and denied mother custody, reversing Trial Court.
• Parveen Chaudry v. M. Hanif Chaudry, M.D., (http://shariahinamericancourts.com/?p=155 ), Shariah law of Pakistan, New Jersey, 1978: Appellate Court upheld foreign Shariah law, overturned Trial Court.  Wife denied support and child support and division of property; prenuptial agreement signed by parents giving her only $1,500 from marriage upheld by Appellate Court.
• In re the Custody Of R., minor child. Dato Paduka Noordin v. Datin Laila Abdulla, (http://shariahinamericancourts.com/?p=228 , Shariah law of Philippines, Washington, 1997: Trial Court upheld foreign Shariah law of Philippines (which has parallel Shariah court system) granting father custody; Appellate Court reverses, allowing mother to contest Philippines Shariah court custody decision.
• S.D., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. M.J.R., (http://shariahinamericancourts.com/?p=197 ), Shariah law of Morocco, New Jersey, 2010: Pregnant mother is beaten and raped by her husband, Trial Court refuses restraining order citing foreign Shariah law, Appellate court reverses and  grants restraining order.
• Pamela Tazziz VS. Ismail Tazziz (http://shariahinamericancourts.com/?p=133 ), Shariah law of Israel, Massachusetts, 1988: Trial Court upheld foreign Shariah law of Israel (which has parallel Shariah court system ) requiring mother of four  children to bring family to Shariah hearing; Appellate Court reversed.
• Saida Banu Tarikonda, , v. Bade Saheb Pinjari (http://shariahinamericancourts.com/?p=139 ), Shariah law of India, Michigan, 2009: The Trial Court accepted a Talaq divorce (the husband says “I divorce you” three times, no prior notice to wife required). The Appellate Court reversed.
• Irfan Aleem v. Farah Aleem  (http://shariahinamericancourts.com/?p=126 ), Shariah law of Pakistan, Maryland, 2007: Trial Court rejected argument permitting a foreign Shariah law Talaq divorce to prevent community division of property; Appellate Court upheld.
• Magda Sobhy Ahmed Amin v. Abdelrahman Sayed Bakhaty (http://shariahinamericancourts.com/?p=114 ), Shariah law of Egypt and Lebanon, Louisiana, 2001: Mother convicted under foreign Shariah law of Egypt for leaving Egypt with child for U.S. without husband’s permission;  Under Egyptian Shariah law, father files for divorce and custody; Trial Court and Appellate court do not grant comity.
• Bita Donboli, Respondent, and Nader Donboli (http://shariahinamericancourts.com/?p=236 ),Shariah law of Iran, Washington, 2005: Mother is dual citizen of U.S. and Iran, alleges beatings, not allowed to leave Iran with son without husband permission, and refuses to comply with foreign Iranian Shariah law custody decree.  Trial and Appellate Courts uphold her position.

Mr. Pinko at iOwnTheWorld has added a new word to the counter-jihad lexicon for the people who scream "islamophobe!" whenever legitimate criticism of violent supremacist genocidal islam is voiced:

Islamoblow – a person, who is not Muslim, that blindly, enthusiastically supports all Muslims.
An idiot that supports a Mosque next to Ground Zero.
Mayor Bloomberg – Islamoblow
Chris Christie – Islamoblow
Orrin Hatch – Islamoblow
Ron Paul – Islamoblow
Bill Clinton – Islamoblow
David Letterman – Islamoblow w/ a Fatwa on his head – Islamoblows never learn!   RTR

And yes, so called "Conservative" Governor Chris Christie is, indeed, an islamoblow, as I have explained HERE and HERE. Unfortunately, Chris Christie is but one big example in a sadly growing list of islamoblows on the right, people who adhere to "Conservative" Dhimmitude. Texas Governor Rick Perry, who is now vying to be the GOP nominee for President in 2012, is another.

Illustration by Bosch Fawstin: Praying that "Islam means peace" 5 x's a day

Here is what Bosch Fawstin said in his blog post about the above picture:

Rick Perry prays that Islam "preaches peace, love and tolerance." (I don't think he has Literally prayed about this, I'm just playing up his penchant for praying) Last thing we need is a 3rd Islamophile in the white house, post 9/11.

Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer, and Daniel Greenfield (Sultan Knish) have all written about Rick Perry's troubling alliances with islamic supremacists and stealth jihad enablers, namely, the Aga Khan, and Grover Norquist. These writers have been vilified for exposing the truth, and they are suffering the worst of the vitriol from fellow conservatives; even losing long standing friendships over it. Apparently, Perry supporters are as rabid and blind as Obamazombies and Ron Paulists. Do you know who else supports Rick Perry? Terror tied CAIR does supports Rick Perry - that alone should tell you all that you need to know, but there is more, much, much more...

Rick Perry's dangerous Muslim compromise by Joel Richardson is a must read in it's entirety, but here is an excerpt from his piece about two disturbing compromises that Perry has made as governor of Texas that should not be overlooked:

Apparently, the Christian community is not the only religious group that Perry has courted with success.
While courting a voter block may be forgivable, what should concern conservatives are two cooperative agreements that Perry spearheaded between the state of Texas and Ismaili Nizari organizations in 2008 and 2009.
The first agreement in 2008 was a "wide-ranging" program designed to indoctrinate Texas children about Islam and Islamic culture. According to Salon.com, "Perry brokered a partnership between the University of Texas and Al-Husayni's Aga Khan University in Pakistan for the purpose of expanding cooperation on programs including the Muslim Histories and Culture Project," or MHCP. The purpose of the MHCP is to train high-school teachers on the positive aspects of Muslim history and culture.
Perry's naive support for this program is disturbing, to say the least. At the signing ceremony, Perry stated, "I have supported this program from the very beginning, because we must bridge the gap of understanding between East and West if we ever hope to experience a future of peace and prosperity."
In conjunction with the signing, Perry even requested the Texas A&M Aggie Corps of Cadets Ross Volunteer Company to do a sabre arch salute as part of a special ceremony for Al-Husayni arrival at the ceremony.
The glaring problem of course with this sentiment is that "bridges" normally go two ways. While Perry is expanding programs to teach American children about Islam, what is Al-Husayni doing about teaching Pakistani children about the glories of Christianity? Why is it that whenever these fabulously wealthy Muslim "philanthropists" ride into town to build bridges of understanding, it is always one-sided, always extolling the beauties of Islam?
The fact that Perry didn't see right through, and even supported, this facade does not speak well to his ability to lead this nation forward.
Perry's second agreement was made in 2009, which provided for cooperation between Texas and Al-Husayni's organizations in the "fields of education, health sciences, natural disaster preparedness and recovery, culture and the environment."
On the official Nizari Ismaili website, Perry was quoted as speaking glowingly of the need for Texas children to learn about the positive influence of Islam to Western culture.
Perry stated, "traditional Western education speaks little of the influence of Muslim scientists, scholars, throughout history, and for that matter the cultural treasures that stand today in testament to their wisdom."
It should also be mentioned that one of the doctrines espoused by Ismaili Muslims is the doctrine of Taqiyya. In simple terms, the doctrine of Taqiyya allows Muslims to purposefully hide or lie about their true religious beliefs to "unbelievers" or even Muslims of different sects. Of course, it is doubtful that the children of Texas will learn anything of Taqiyya in their Perry-sponsored education concerning Islam.
Of course, while lying in the name of religion may seem like a foreign concept to most, it is the principle of "the ends justify the means" that underscores many aspects of the Islamic approach to win the West.
One can only hope that such is not the principle driving Gov. Perry's campaign for the presidency.  RTWT

Pamela Geller also writes about those compromises, and goes on to tell us even more in Perry's Problematic Pals at American Thinker. Here is an excerpt:

It gets worse. Last March, Perry gave a speech in Dallas in the company of Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform. Norquist was close to George W. Bush, and Perry's anti-tax, anti-Big Government rhetoric sounds like it's right out of Norquist's playbook.  But there is a dark side to Norquist as well: Norquist's ties to Islamic supremacists and jihadists have been known for years.  He and his Palestinian wife, Samah Alrayyes -- who was director of communications for his Islamic Free Market Institute until they married in 2005 -- are very active in "Muslim outreach." Six weeks after 9/11, The New Republic ran an exposé explaining how Norquist arranged for George W. Bush to meet with fifteen Islamic supremacists at the White House on September 26, 2001 -- to show how Muslims rejected terrorism.

The only problem was that the ones with Bush didn't.  To Bush's left sat Dr. Yahya Basha, president of the American Muslim Council, an organization whose leaders have repeatedly called Hamas "freedom fighters."  Also in attendance was Salam Al-Marayati, executive director of the Muslim Public Affairs Council, who on the afternoon of September 11 told a Los Angeles public radio audience that "we should put the State of Israel on the suspect list." And sitting right next to President Bush was Muzammil Siddiqi, president of the Hamas-linked Islamic Society of North America, who once told a Muslim crowd chanting pro-Hezbollah slogans that "America has to learn if you remain on the side of injustice, the wrath of God will come."

It was Norquist who ushered these silver-tongued jihadists into the Oval Office of an incurious president after the worst attack ever on American soil. Yet in December 2003, David Horowitz wrote that Norquist "has formed alliances with prominent Islamic radicals who have ties to the Saudis and to Libya and to Palestine Islamic Jihad, and who are now under indictment by U.S. authorities. Equally troubling is that the arrests of these individuals and their exposure as agents of terrorism have not resulted in noticeable second thoughts on Grover's part or any meaningful effort to dissociate himself from his unsavory friends." Nor has Norquist changed course since then.

Grover Norquist was on the Islamic payroll before and after the carnage of September 11. Gaffney revealed Norquist's close ties to Abdurahman Alamoudi, who is now serving time in prison for financing jihad activity. In 2000, Alamoudi said at a rally, "I have been labeled by the media in New York to be a supporter of Hamas. Anybody support Hamas here? ... Hear that, Bill Clinton? We are all supporters of Hamas. I wished they added that I am also a supporter of Hezb'allah." Alamoudi was at that time head of the now-defunct "moderate" group known as American Muslim Council (AMC), and he was active in other Muslim groups in the U.S. that showed sympathy to or support for jihadists. And Alamoudi gave $50,000 to the lobbying group Janus-Merritt Strategies, which Norquist co-founded. Alamoudi also helped found Norquist's Islamic Institute with a $10,000 loan and a gift of another $10,000.

It was bad enough that Bush was close to Norquist. There is no way the GOP can again nominate anyone who is so completely and utterly clueless about the fifth column within.  RTWT

Yes, Rick Perry is the 5th column candidate is Pamela Geller's followup to the above AT article which she published at WorldNetDaily after the immediate attacks on her from Perry's rabid supporters and fellow islamoblows started to rain down upon her. It is an important article and you need to read the whole thing, but here is an excerpt:

Grover Norquist's background is no secret. His tax mask has worn thin. It was old five years ago. Grover Norquist is toxic and should be persona non grata in the Republican Party. He is a front for the Muslim Brotherhood. And has been exposed as the recipient of huge donations from a Brotherhood figure who is now in jail for financing terror activity. I don't want to see a GOP presidential candidate palling around with Grover and his thugs. I want a presidential candidate to declare that he will appoint an attorney general at the Department of Justice who will press forward immediately with the prosecutions of the co-conspirators named in the Holy Land Foundation trial, the largest terror funding trial in our nation's history. I want a presidential candidate who is unafraid of the stealth jihadists in our midst, and who will vow that he will clean out the infiltrators.

There are legitimate questions about the Aga Khan, also. The Ismailis are peaceful, yes, and the Aga Khan Foundation is an established Islamic charity. But the Aga Khan Fund for Economic Development is also part-owner of the Pakistan-based Bank al-Habib, which Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl's widow Mariane sued in 2007 for damages relating to its funding of al-Qaida and involvement in the murder of her husband by Islamic jihad terrorists. She dropped the suit later that year without explanation, except to note that the Habib Bank had never answered her charges.
And then on Aug. 26, 2008, the Aga Khan Development Network made a proud announcement: "The Syrian Government and the Aga Khan Development Network (AKDN) yesterday signed three landmark agreements designed to strengthen collaboration in the areas of microfinance, healthcare, and cultural tourism." Syria's Prime Minister, Mohamed Naji Al-Otri, and the Aga Khan signed the agreements. The agreements involved recognition of the First Microfinance Institution, or FMFI, part of the Aga Khan Agency for Microfinance, "as the first microfinance institution to operate in the country." Between 2003 and 2008, it spent $40 million to develop business in Syria.
Investigative reporter Mark Mitchell observes that "the Aga Khan Foundation's membership and supporters also include top military officers in Syria, such as General Moustapha Sharba, who had a hand in the early stages of the covert nuclear weapons program that Syria was developing with help from North Korea (and probably Iran)." Sharba is in this photo with Ismaili leaders; the full identification of the people pictured is on this page under "82001971."
The Aga Khan Development Network is doing all this in partnership with the Syrian government that is now firing on its citizens, and for years has allowed the jihad terror groups Hamas and Hezbollah to operate with impunity out of Damascus. Sure, the Ismailis are peaceful. But why shouldn't there be questions about a candidate's friendship with the owner of a bank accused of funding al-Qaida (and never exonerated), a man who also does business with the terror-supporting government of Syria?
The fact that Hamas-tied CAIR, one of the top five groups named in AFDI's Threats to Freedom Index, immediately praised Perry, speaks volumes. All this speaks to a pattern. And the pattern is not good. It speaks to a pattern of going along with our civilization path to suicide. No matter who wins the nomination, I will support him or her with every breath of my body. But I am going to fight like a cat to get the right cat there. Of course, a candidate should make nice with Muslims who oppose jihad. But introducing the Islamic whitewash into our public schools and universities is the most dangerous thing you can do. It is not my intention to damn all Muslims, but we need a president who will call out the Islamic supremacist groups on stealth jihad. That is real political courage, not calling for tax cuts.  RTWT

In Rick Perry and Islam at Sultan Knish, Daniel Greenfield also touches on Perry's friends Grover Norquist and he Aga Khan, and also discusses Perry's involvement in legislation promoting islamic halal food (halal meat comes from animals that have been ritually tortured to death while the animal's butcher prays to allah):

Then there's the Texas Halal Law, which makes it a criminal offense to sell Halal and non-Halal meat in the same store, without specifically labeling the two, and of misrepresenting non-Halal meat as being Halal. In theory that's not such a big deal. Similar laws are on the books for Kosher meat. But the problem comes with the definition of what Halal is.

"Halal," as applied to food, means food prepared and served in conformity with Islamic religious requirements according to a recognized Islamic authority.

That comes from the bill's definition. And it raises the question of who is recognized as an Islamic authority. HB 470 leaves that question open. But in a dispute over which Islamic definition of Halal to use, the State of Texas would be forced to rule on a question of Islamic law. And to enforce that law. Texas would become an enforcer of Sharia.

The Texas Halal Law was lobbied for by Mohamed Elibiary and his Freedom and Justice Foundation and is quoted in a recent article about their positive relationship with Perry. Elibiary has spoken at an event honoring the Ayatollah Khomeini and recommends the writings of the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood. Last year he wrote an op-ed warning against assassinating Al-Qaeda leaders. And of course he's busy educating Americans about Sharia.

At the signing, Perry made a point of thanking Imam Bakhash for all that he does. Bakhash also appears to be one of the judges on the Texas Islamic Court, whose decisions have been upheld as binding by Texas appellate courts.

Then there's Perry's friendly relationship with Farouk Shami, who has a rather ugly background when it comes to Israel, and who suggested that 9/11 might be a conspiracy. He is the Palestinian in the Perry quote mentioned below.

Believe it or not, all this is the good news. It's a sad commentary on the state of Islamic infiltration that this is business as usual in state politics. The bad news is that this means Perry's as bad on Islam as George W. Bush. Maybe worse.

Like most of the world’s major religions, the Islamic faith preaches peace, love and tolerance. Indeed, terrorism is the antithesis of the basic tenet to which the one billion Islamic followers all over the world adhere.

The Koran teaches that “whoever killed a human being, except as punishment for murder or other villainy in the land, shall be regarded as having killed all mankind; and that whoever saved a human life shall be regarded as having served all mankind.”

The heartfelt condolences and overtures of cooperation that have been offered by Islamic communities in Texas portray the true spirit of Islam.

That's from a post 9/11 editorial. And it's echoed elsewhere. Perry's views haven't changed since. Witness this NPR piece from last year.

The governor of this swiftly changing state works to take a nuanced approach to a minority group that’s been very much at the center of the news. "We have a huge Muslim community in the state of Texas," he says, and many of these Muslims are "great businessmen and women, very good supporters of mine. ... We are an incredibly diverse state. I sell it as part of our strength."

Perry was asked if he was comfortable with the way that some people talk about the problem with terrorism — their concern to say that the real problem is “Muslims" or "Muslim countries."

"The radicalization of Islam is a great concern," Perry said. "Islam of and by itself is one of the great religions, along with Christianity and Judaism." He recalled meeting one of the Democratic candidates for Texas governor in the recent election. "He’s a Palestinian. And he and I were having a conversation about Ground Zero. How do you deal with this? He said, well, it’s pretty easy. He said, 'Build a synagogue, a temple, and a church there.  And bring these people together.'"

How problematic is this? Again this is Bush territory. It's insipid and dangerously ignorant. It's one thing to hear it from the governor of a state with a sizable Muslim population. But it's inappropriate for a president. And yet it's also inevitable.

As some have pointed out, Perry is pro-Israel. So was Bush. It didn't stop him from toadying to Saudi Arabia and Abbas, or from pressuring Israel to make concessions to terrorists during his second term. It's possible to be pro-Israel and pro-Islam. And when the scales are weighed, then Islam comes first. If you doubt that, go look at what happened when Bush was pressured by the Saudis.

But this isn't about Israel. It's about Islam. Specifically it's about addressing the threat of Islamic terrorism.

Perry has pandered on Mexican illegal immigration and on Islamic terrorism, as Bush did before him. Will he keep it up once he gets elected the way that Bush did? Hard to say, but the odds are good that he will.

RTWT

In his Friday Roundup at Sultan Knish, Daniel notes:

Ever since my Rick Perry piece ran, I've gotten hate mail of all sorts. I have been accused of Islamophobia, and bizarrely hatred of Christians, and even more bizarrely anti-Semitism.

As I mentioned earlier, Pamela and Robert Spencer are also in the line of fire for speaking out about Rick Perry. Robert has an article at Human Events about why it is so crucial that GOP Candidates Must Declare Opposition to Sharia. Read it. In Spencer's article, he notes the other GOP candidates both running and undeclared who have been weak on this issue, but it was his legitimate criticism of Rick Perry that netted him all the hatred. Jihad Watch has Spencer's followup in response to that animosity:

Why shouldn’t Rick Perry’s Islamic ties be vetted? (excerpt:)

He has occasioned tremendous excitement among Republicans and conservatives, to the extent that those who dare to ask legitimate questions about his associations and beliefs are being attacked and vilified by people who are ostensibly on their own side. I already know of friendships being broken over this candidacy.

Nonetheless, these questions must be asked. I criticized Bush for his ties to the Saudis, and Obama for his fatuous fawning over the Islamic world. I don't see why Rick Perry should be sacrosanct. The next President of the United States will inherit a responsibility made even more awesome than it usually is by the catastrophic policies of his predecessor, which he will have to move quickly to reverse or else see the nation continue on the path of a prolonged and severe decline from which it may never recover. That is all the more reason not to leap onto the bandwagon of just anyone who looks this week as if he has a chance to defeat Barack Obama, and to rush to demonize those who dare to ask if the emperor’s clothes are really of that good a quality. Now is the time, of all times, to ask of Perry and of every other candidate probing, searching questions, and to investigate their ideas and associations with a critical eye – an operation which, if it had been performed on Barack Obama in 2008, we might not be in this fix. RTWT

Pamela Geller has also followed up after the barrage of slander directed against her for telling the truth about Rick Perry, HERE at Atlas Shrugs, and HERE at American Thinker. Read them both.  Spencer writes another followup at Jihad Watch, too, in response to escalation of the horrible smears being bandied about against both him and Pamela Geller:

I do not understand this unseemly rush to anoint Perry without vetting him. I've never seen anything like this: friends have broken with me, I've been attacked on hitherto friendly websites, I've gotten calls from people I haven't heard from in years, telling me to lay off Perry, and more -- all because I dared to raise some concerns about Rick Perry. Perry may be the greatest thing since microwave popcorn, but I remain concerned about his closeness to Grover Norquist and other matters. And I don't think it's illegitimate to ask Perry to address these concerns.  RTR

I agree. I also faced similar criticism (but to a far less extent than what's being done to Geller, Spencer and Greenfield) from fellow Conservatives after I wrote "Conservative" Dhimmitude, because some people are of a mind that any Republican who considers running against Obama should be fully and blindly embraced simply because they might be running against Obama. I disagree strongly with that sentiment! 

Yes, Conservatives need to be united in fully supporting the GOP nominee to finally rid ourselves of the horrible and seditious governance of Barack Hussein Obama, regardless of who that nominee ultimately is, BUT people need to realize that this fact makes it more important than ever to fully vet ALL candidates and do our damnedest to see the best possible person get that nomination! This is why we have primaries, people! The primary elections are our best chance to put the right person at the top of the GOP ticket so we won't have to hold our noses and choke down bile (again) as we vote for someone who we know may not be good for our country, or worse, won't win!

America cannot afford to have another president handpicked by the agenda driven propagandist media and the "go along to get along" RINO machine that is the RNC. They will not the vet candidates, and we are living the nightmare results of the 2008 election because of their failure to do it last time. No more. It is up to us to vet those who seek our nation's highest office and we mustn't allow ourselves to be blinded - the stakes are too high! We are literally fighting for our lives here, and our actions now will determine whether we, and future generations of Americans, will live as free people or in miserable subservience to tyranny.

We must hold no quarter for those who seek to destroy us, nor those who will enable them to do so.

This post is linked at Blazing Cat Fur. Thank you, BCF!

This post is listed in Larwyn's Linx at Doug Ross. Thanks, Doug!  

This post is linked at The Lonely Conservative. Thank you, LC!  

This post is linked at Common American Journal. Thanks, Dogzilla!  

This post is linked 1389 Blog Counterjihad! Thank you, 1389!  

This post is linked at From the Desk of Lady Liberty. Thanks, LadyLiberty1885!  

This post is linked at iOwnTheWorld. Thank you, Mr. Pinko!  

This post is linked at The Independent Realist. Thanks, Thom!  

This post is linked at Mind Numbed Robot. Thanks, Robot!  

This post is linked at American Power. Thank you, Donald!  

This post is re-blogged at The Patriot Underground. Thanks, Doug! 

This post is linked at Boudica Weblog BPI. Thank you, Bob!

This post is linked at Eye of Polyphemus. Thanks, Jamie!

This post is linked at We the people. Thanks, Wtp!  

This post is linked at Dodo Can Spell. Thank you, Marias! 

This post is linked at Sultan Knish. Thanks, Daniel! 

Tip Jar

Shop at my bookstore here

Shop at my NEW store here

Buy Ad Space

Save on your Gas and Electric bills and learn how you can earn FREE Energy!

.