Coin Toss's Blog

The Democratic Party is sanctioning a Muslim prayer event in conjunction with its nominating convention in Charlotte that will feature a radical Islamic leader who has called for the overthrow of the “filthy” U.S. government and establishment of Islamic law.

“Jumah at the DNC” is being presented by the Bureau of Indigenous Muslim Affairs, or BIMA, from Aug. 31 to Sept. 1. A brochure for the event says the group has “been authorized by the Democratic National Convention (DNC) to conduct Jumah prayer as well as host festivities and Islamically related functions.”

The Washington Times reported the DNC lists the Muslim event as an “official function” and claims that the Islamic leaders of the program are typical of the DNC community.

The event is expected to draw up to 20,000 Muslims and will include a Friday Jumah prayer ritual and an issues conference. A letter posted on BIMA’s website says its purpose is to “address the concerns and issues that are challenging to the American Muslim Community in the 21st century.” The letter calls on Muslims to stand up and “repel the outright injustices being perpetuated against the American Muslim Community.”

BIMA spokesman Jibril Hough told the Charlotte Observer that among the grievances are the Patriot Act, National Defense Authorization Act and the New York Police Department’s wiretapping program that Hough says was used to spy on Muslims.

Islam expert Robert Spencer, director of Jihad Watch.org, said it is apparent the group plans to use the event as a platform to claim Muslims are being persecuted in America.

“A reading of its agenda makes it clear that the conference will be used to portray Muslims as the innocent victims of a bigoted, racist, ‘Islamophobic’ government and law enforcement establishment that unfairly scapegoats Muslims for the misguided deeds of a few misunderstanders of Islam on Sept. 11,” he said.

Spencer noted that Hough’s mosque, the Islamic Center of Charlotte, is owned by a Muslim Brotherhood front group. The North American Islamic Trust, or NAIT, which owns the mosque, was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terrorist funding case. The largest terrorist funding case in American history, it resulted in multiple convictions.

When confronted about the Muslim Brotherhood connection on a radio show, Hough refused to denounce NAIT, saying he was “not necessarily” a member of the group.

Hough has also stated in a video that Muslims have been living in America since before the first Christians arrived.

The Grand Imam for the Jumah at the DNC is Siraj Wahhaj, one of the most sought-after speakers by Muslim organizations.

WND reported Wahhaj urged the violent overthrow of the “filthy” U.S. government and the establishment of Islamic law. Additionally, Wahhaj was listed as a “potential unindicted co-conspirator” in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and testified as a character witness for “blind sheikh” Omar Abdel-Rahman, a convicted WTC terrorist mastermind.

He has also is on record saying Islam is a militant religion.

“We don’t have a turn-the-other-cheek philosophy” like the Christians, he said. “Allah has given us permission to fight them” so that “the word of Allah can be uppermost.”

Another speaker at the DNC event will be Capt. James Yee, who is listed in a promotional video as the BIMA national representative for the DNC. The brochure lists Yee as a “chaplain in the U.S. military” who was an “eyewitness to the unjust treatment of military detainees and prisoners of Guantanamo Bay” and was himself “detained” when he took steps to “prevent this injustice.”

Yee was charged by the government with possessing classified information after being discovered with detailed maps of the detention facility along with other classified materials.

The charges against Yee were eventually dropped over national security concerns about evidence in the case.

http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/democrats-host-radical-muslims-at-charlotte/

Red states and religious people more charitable, study shows

Of course, we’ve known this since Arthur Brooks’ 2006 book, Who Really Cares?

Fox News reports,

Residents in Republican-leaning states give more of their money to charity than those in Democrat-leaning states, according to a new study.

The Chronicle of Philanthropy’s study released this week found the eight states with residents who gave the highest percentage of their income to charity in 2008 also voted that year for Republican presidential nominee John McCain. And the seven states in which residents donated the lowest percentage of their income that year voted for President Obama, based on 2008 IRS information.

But it had little to do with McCain or Obama. It was the religious values in the respective areas:

And don’t assume the biggest givers were the wealthier states. Mississippi and Idaho rank among the lowest in the country in per-capita income.

That suggests other factors are involved, and the study’s authors said the reasons for the differences were in part a function of religion and a region’s political philosophy about “the role of government versus charity.”

“Regions of the country that are deeply religious are more generous than those that are not,” the study’s authors said.

NEW YORK – During a time of escalating world tensions, it is generally considered unwise to reduce U.S. military preparedness.

With Iran racing toward nuclear-weapons capability, Syria on the brink of all-out civil war and Russia rebuilding its Cold War-era bases in the Middle East, now would be the time for any president to push for increased funding for U.S. forces.

A handful of key progressive organizations behind much of Obama’s first-term agenda have now submitted even more radical proposals to the White House to “transform” the U.S. military.

If these progressive groups have their way, U.S. armed forces will be reduced to a social work-style organization designed to combat “global warming,” fight global poverty, remedy “injustice,” bolster the United Nations and increase “peacekeeping” forces worldwide. The massive, second-term slashes to the military budget are to be used, shockingly, to invest in a defense posture based on “sustainable energy” and fighting worldwide climate change. There is also a plan to wrest control of the military budget from Congress.

This progressive wish list matters because Obama’s first-term agenda did not materialize out of thin air. The president’s signature policies – including his first-term defense cutbacks, the $800 billion “stimulus” and even Obamacare – were crafted over years by the same major progressive organizations and activists now hard at work planning Obama’s second-term strategy on jobs, wages, health care, immigration, electoral “reform” – and national defense.

Two of the progressive think tanks – the Center for American Progress, or CAP, and the Institute for Policy Studies, or IPS – have produced a 96-page blueprint called “A Report of the Task Force on a Unified Security Budget for the United States” (or 2012 Unified Security Budget). Previous recommendations from the CAP-IPS annual Unified Security Budget have been adopted by the Obama administration.

CAP – which is run by John Podesta, a former aide to Bill Clinton and co-chairman of President Obama’s 2008 White House transition team – has had such heavy influence on the crafting of White House policy that Time magazine dubbed it the “idea factory” of the Obama administration.

In fact, the 2011 Unified Security Budget openly boasts that the group’s policy recommendations from its recent defense papers were utilized by Obama’s Sustainable Defense Taskforce, which has notoriously recommended $1 trillion in cuts over 10 years.

The 2012 USB opposes the use of forces on the ground to secure or influence the longer-term strategic position of other nations. It recommends scaling back all U.S. ground forces by 20 percent; reducing the Navy’s surface fleet by 20 percent – including two carriers and carrier combat air wings; and reducing the Air Force by two combat air wings. At the same time, it would cut standing peacetime overseas deployments in Europe and East Asia by up to 50,000 troops.

The Unified Security Budget authors strongly argue for the reduction of the U.S. nuclear arsenal to no more than 292 deployed nuclear weapons and the complete elimination of the Trident II nuclear missile. Obama has already initiated this process by signing a deal with Russia in April 2010 reducing stocks of weapons-grade plutonium.

The accord with Russia was signed at a nuclear summit in Washington arranged by Obama at which leaders of 47 nations (not including Iran or North Korea, the two biggest nuclear proliferators) committed to reducing the world’s nuclear stockpiles. One week earlier, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and Obama signed the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, or START, committing both countries to reducing their deployed nuclear arsenals.

Obama had broadly proclaimed his disarmament intentions during a 2007 campaign speech.

“Here’s what I’ll say as president: America seeks a world in which there are no nuclear weapons,” he said.

By 2010, as president, he argued, “We need to change our nuclear policy and our posture, which is still focused on deterring the Soviet Union – a country that doesn’t exist.”

The joint CAP and IPS report, meanwhile, recommends the U.S. cease all further development of missile defenses. The report goes through a list of current missile defense programs, including Ground-based Midcourse Defense, Airborne Laser and Kinetic Energy Interceptors– pushing for all programs to be cut.

The military’s vital Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation program is to be cut by $10 billion across the board.

Next on the chopping block: the complete cancellation of the second SSN-744 Virginia Class submarine. Similarly targeted for cancellation are the V-22 Osprey helicopter and the Navy and Marine Corps versions of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

The 2012 Unified report does advocate a massive increase in one area – any spending that funds “alternative energy” or that focuses Defense Department resources on combating “climate change as a security threat.” The report’s authors recommend investing “the lion’s share” of the few allotted military increases in addressing the “threat” of so-called climate change. The progressive groups are also pushing Obama to take billions of dollars from the U.S. military and instead use the funds for a “green stimulus.”

These groups envision the military as a tool to fight so-called global warming. In 2011, the IPS released a 40-page CAP-endorsed report titled “The Green Dividend,” a term the IPS defines as “a major shift of resources from the military budget to sustainable energy.”

The IPS paper identifies the Pentagon as the “largest institutional energy user – and greenhouse gas emitter – on the planet,” arguing that if it undertook a “crash program” to convert to renewable energy sources and clean vehicles, it could make a significant impact on global emissions.

The IPS calls on the Pentagon to contribute to a green world “by simply getting out of the way, by handing over unneeded military installations to be converted into green job incubators.”

For now, congressional oversight serves as a check to some of Obama’s most drastic calls for defense reductions. Some would even give Congress more power in this realm. But the progressive groups have concocted a plan to wrest budgetary control from Congress altogether – where it is vested by the U.S. Constitution – and instead place the military’s purse strings in the hands of an “independent panel.”

Would American voters support Obama if they knew what he has in store should he win a second term?

Apparently the president himself doesn’t think so. As he told Russian Prime Minister Medvedev when he thought no one was listening: “Tell Vladimir (Putin) after I’m re-elected I’ll have more flexibility.”

http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/obamas-2nd-term-assault-on-u-s-military/

Obama edits official State Department documents to tout himself

The Heritage Foundation’s Amy Payne posts,

The State Department has recently ended its long-running series of Background Notes, which were analytical, objective histories of other countries. In their place, new “Fact Sheets” now tout Obama’s policies and actions toward each nation. No more historical context, no recounting of complex and long-standing issues in the country. Just cut to the chase—that is, the time when the current Administration came to power.

Heritage’s Jim Roberts, one of the editors of Heritage’s Index of Economic Freedom, was struck by the disproportionate change in emphasis while doing some research recently.  Roberts, who worked at the State Department from 1982 to 2007 and used to write these country profiles, said he had never seen edits like these under either previous Republican or Democratic Administrations.

Roberts noted that “They seem to be not ‘fact sheets’ but brag sheets,” adding that the edits appear to treat countries more favorably when the Obama Administration agrees with their leaders.

Roberts writes,

Compare the nearly 1,200-word “Fact Sheet” published this week by the U.S. embassy in Brazil with the last Background Note on Brazil written during the George W. Bush Administration.

The 4,100-word Bush document, chock full of facts and figures helpful in analyzing the country and its importance to the U.S., never once mentions the name of any U.S. President. The 300-word section on U.S.–Brazil relations takes up about 7 percent of the document.

Conversely, fully 70 percent (830 words) of the Brazil Fact Sheet, which is focused exclusively on U.S. relations with Brazil, discusses President Obama either directly by name (twice!) or in the context of the plethora of programs his Administration has launched with Brazil, including a shared “commitment to combat discrimination based on race, gender, ethnicity, or lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) status; to advance gender equality; a bilateral instrument that targets racism; support for HIV/AIDS prevention, promotion of clean energy technologies in Brazil, and mitigation of climate change.”

...presidential biographies

History rewritten: Obama inserts himself into past presidential biographies

Commentary Magazine reported last May:

[I]t turns out Obama has added bullet points bragging about his own accomplishments to the biographical sketches of every single U.S. president since Calvin Coolidge (except, for some reason, Gerald Ford). Here are a few examples:

http://americanvisionnews.com/4360/history-rewritten-obama-inserts-himself-into-past-presidential-biographies

911  FB  posts

The entire obama camp has reached a new level of desperation.

Read on:

'2016 – Obama's America' Succeeds at Box Office; Reports of Missing Listings?

Amid reports that some newspapers had been withholding theater locations and times for the movie "2016 – Obama's America," the documentary-style look at Barack Obama's life as it pertains to his worldview is bringing in high box office numbers. The number of theaters in the U.S. showing the movie jumps from 160 to 700 this coming weekend.

"If you live in Los Angeles, you'll have to drive to the suburbs if you want to see '2016 – Obama's America.' And if you search the movie showtimes database on the L.A. Times website you won't even find it listed. (Just a glitch in the system, one supposes.)," wrote National Review Online and Pajamas Media contributor "Jack Dunphy" on Friday.

The film's marketing company reported that someone in the Orange County area of Southern California complained in an email that they "saw nothing on '2016' in the papers despite the fact it was playing at a dozen locations.

According to the email, the Orange County Register's Sunday edition listed this correction: "Due to a wire service error, the film 2016 Obama's America was omitted from this weekend's movie listings for 8 theatres (all over OC and Long Beach)."

The film, which is based on two of conservative author Dinesh D'Souza's books, also projects what the world might look like should Obama be re-elected for a second term. Despite the thought from some observers that the film is only appealing to the conservative niche of the movie viewing public, the revenue reported from theaters may indicate otherwise.

The movie came in at 13th at the box office over the weekend (just behind "Ted" and "Ice Age"), representing a bump of 293 percent from the previous week. The film's per-screen average for Friday through Sunday soared to $7,391, the fifth highest average of any film over the weekend, according to Box Office Mojo.

Now that the film has been out for a few weeks in limited release, more reviews of the movie are trickling out.

Politics writer Scott Paulson wrote: "I'm glad I saw the hyped-film because it was more informative than I had thought it would be and included less propaganda than I had predicted. If anything, it was nearly too informative as there was an enormous amount of information condensed into the nearly one-hour-and-a-half documentary. Fact after fact is put forth which shows that President Obama definitely has many skeletons in the closet that have not been released prior to the nation's trust in him with the Oval Office."

Paulson added: "To watch this movie and realize – or simply be reminded of – all that is unknown about President Obama is of concern. Much of the information has been ignored by the American media totally. When appropriately reminded as to what is still unknown about Obama to date, one has to ask: How can any logical-thinking person give a <snip> about Romney's taxes while not asking any questions regarding our current president's past?"

Stephen Farber is not as sympathetic to the film or its producers. He wrote in the Hollywood Reporter: "The film really goes off the rails in the last half hour, when it veers from biographical data to speculation on how Barack Obama Sr.'s anti-colonialist sentiments turned his son into a radical who aims to dismantle America's traditional values."

Farber continued later in the article: "D'Souza also points out that Obama took a class at Columbia taught by Edward Said, the renowned pro-Palestinian scholar. Do any of these marginal associations prove that Obama aims to introduce socialism to America and undermine the state of Israel?"

Other reviews of the movie point to a strong intellectual case made by its filmmakers that asks viewers to consider whether Obama's dream for America is in line with the majority of U.S. citizens.

The film's website, 2016themovie.com has a list with links to the latest reviews on the movie.

http://www.christianpost.com/news/2016-obamas-america-succeeds-at-box-office-reports-of-missing-listings-80310/

Take Your Guns!

General VoNguyen Giap.
General Giap was a brilliant, highly respected leader of the North Vietnam military. The following quote is from his memoirs currently found in the Vietnam war memorial in  Hanoi :

How to get to Heaven from Ireland : A true story from an Irish Sunday School Teacher.

 

I was testing children in my Dublin Sunday school class to see if they understood the concept of getting to heaven.

 

I asked them, ' If I sold my house and my car, had a big garage sale and gave all my money to the church, would that get me into heaven? '

' NO! ' the children answered.

If I cleaned the church every day, mowed the garden, and kept everything tidy, would that get me into heaven?'

Again, the answer was ' NO! '

If I gave sweets to all the children, and loved my husband, would that get me into heaven?

Again, they all answered ' NO! '

I was just bursting with pride for them.

I continued, ' Then how can I get into heaven? '

A little boy shouted out: "YUV GOTTA BE FOOKN ' DEAD...."

It's a curious race, the Irish