[aka Brett]

Obama and Appoint Devout Muslim to Homeland Security Post
Arif Alikhan as Assistant Secretary for Policy Development
Source for announcement:

The Islamic loving Obama has appointed Arif Alikhan a devout Sunni Muslim to assistant secretary for the Office of Policy Department of Homeland Security. Mr. Alikhan was instrumental in taking down the LA Police Department's plan to monitor it's Muslim community.

Alikhan is affiliated with MPAC, the "Muslim Public Affairs Council".

From its inception, MPAC presented itself as more inclusive, and more open to peaceful coexistence with Jews and Christians, than other Arab and Muslim groups, and sought to make Americans comfortable with Islam by showing how much the religion embraced core American values.

However, looking deeper into this group:

MPAC's Senior Advisor, Maher Hathout, who has close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and espouses the radical brand of Islam known as Wahhabism, was invited to address the Democratic Convention in Los Angeles in 2000.

MPAC's centrist public image unraveled after the September 2000 launching of the Second Palestinian Intifada, when the Council severed its ties to the Jewish community and issued one-sided condemnations of Israel's response to the Arab violence.

This group actively opposed Bush's military incursions into Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as his "excesses" in the war on terror. In February 2003, MPAC joined the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the American Muslim Council, and the American Muslim Alliance in forming a coalition to repeal and amend the Patriot Act, which these organizations depicted as an assault on the civil liberties of Americans, particularly Muslims.

MPAC claims that Islam is a religion of peace and moderation, and contends that Muslim extremists are no more numerous or dangerous than fundamentalists in any other faith.


In a 1999 position paper, MPAC justified Hezbollah's deadly 1983 bombing of the American Marine barracks in Lebanon as a "military operation" rather than a terrorist attack. 1983 Beirutbarracks bombing, which killed 299 servicemen, including 220 U.S. Marines. As Maher Hathout puts it: "Hezbollah is fighting for freedom, an organized army, limiting its operations against military people, this is a legitimate target against occupation. … this is legitimate, this is an American value -- freedom and liberty."

http://www.adc.org/index.php?id=3458
The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) is proud to announce that earlier today at a ceremony held in Albuquerque, New Mexico, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano swore-in ADC National Executive Director Kareem Shora as a member of the Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC).

Aaron Klein, wrote about this at wnd
Napolitano adds adviser with ties to terror backers
Swears in leader of Arab group that hailed jihadists as 'heroes'
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano swore in to her official advisory council the head of an Arab American organization whose officials have labeled deadly anti-U.S. jihadists as "heroes" and opposed referring to Hamas as a terrorist organization.

The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, or ADC, also has close ties to anti-Israel professor Rashid Khalidi, whose association with President Obama – first exposed by WND – stirred controversy during last year's presidential campaign.

The ADC takes an openly anti-Israel line.

The ADC also leads the opposition to domestic anti-terrorism measures taken after the 9-11 attacks, such as watch lists, background check delays for visas and an initiative meant to more comprehensively screen visitors from select < style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: red; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Mideast countries or specific individuals labeled as possible national security threats.

In 1994, during one of the main peaks of Hamas suicide bombings against Israeli civilians, then-ADC President Hamzi Moghrabi said, "I will not call [Hamas] a terrorist organization. I mean, I know many people in Hamas. They are very respectable. … I don't believe Hamas, as an organization, is a violent organization."

When Israel released Hezbollah prisoners in early 2004, Imad Hamad, ADC's Midwest Regional Director, openly celebrated the freedom of "the heroes."

Besides its deadly terrorism against Israel, Hezbollah distinguishes itself as second only to al-Qaida among terror groups responsib le for killing the most Americans. It's responsible for such deadly attacks as the 1983 Beirut barracks bombing, which killed 299 servicemen, including 220 U.S. Marines.

ADC linked to Khalidi

The ADC also has collaborated on numerous projects with the Arab American Action Network, or AAAN, an organization founded by Khalidi's wife Mona, and which WND first reported received start-up funds from a nonprofit, the Woods Fund, on which Obama served as a paid director.

The AAAN, headquartered in the heart of Chicago's Palestinian immigrant community, worked on projects sup porting open boarders and education for illegal aliens. Speakers at AAAN dinners and events routinely have taken an anti-Isra el line. The organization co-sponsored anti-Israel projects and exhibits.

ADC opposes anti-terrorism screening
According to the ADC charter, the organization seeks to "empower Arab Americans; defend the civil rights of all people of Arab heritage in the U.S.; pr omote civic participation; and encourage a balanced U.S.foreign policy in the Middle East."

The organization has actively lobbied against the Patriot Act and was reportedly instrumental i n scaling back some of the restrictions of the National Security Entry-Exit Registration System program, or NSEERS. Shora was personally involved in those efforts.

Last week, Napolitano swore in Damascus-born Kareem Shora, the ADC's national executive director, to a position on the Homeland Security Advisory Council, an outside-the-department group of national security experts that advises the secretary. Shora is the first Arab rights advocate on the panel.

At the ceremony in Albequrque, Shora reportedly recounted how he watched with his immigrant father Obama's address last week to the Muslim world. Shora said his father cried when he heard Obama's message of reconciliation.
Source:

http://www.theodoresworld.net/

source


----------------------------------------------------------------------

There it is with links supplied in the article to back up the claims. To many its not really news but just a reminder. The lefts just seem to blow off information like this. The rights realize the lefts resort to 4th grade tactics while dealing with matters such as this. It started with the doubts of the mans integrity before the election,the lefts support the Obama the underdog totally disregarding any red flags and dismissing these much in the fashion that any euphoric liberal would....The stimulus package..the same..the appointing of crooks in cabinet...has he appointed anyone who is right for any job? Every major pick has red flags.

Anyway this article deals with national security and the obvious strong effort by Obama to get Muslims into the last place they need to be..There is also discussion of Obama being a paid director of an organization that is also of concern.

Am I the only one that feels any of this is of any significance?
Why is he jeopardizing our country?....It is one red flag after another...How many do we need?

Sure Bush had some dealings with one,but now that we unfold what is going on it appears as if the matter is getting worse as they have higher appointments.....Was Bush also bowing to the Muslims?but at a lesser degree....What is really going on?

[ekim68]

It is one red flag after another...How many do we need?

Ooh, I know, 42, right?

[iltos]

Originally Posted by aka Brett

Am I the only one that feels any of this is of any significance?

obviously not.....this nail biting hysteria is making the rounds on blogs that -in one way or another- are fighting "the Good Fight"

Why is he jeopardizing our country?....It is one red flag after another...How many do we need?

as many as possible, it seems .....where's the new joe mccarthy when you need him, anyway.....?
this muslim dude was good enough for the bush administration brett.....but at that time, his "history" and alleged scumbagginess was apparently not important

not to mention he is.......canadian

EDIT: i forgot....you mention there were two
two...count 'em.....TWO
the other served in the bush administration, as well

Heyman comes to the department from the Center for Strategic and International Studies, where he founded and directed the homeland-security program. He was recruited for that effort by the Defense Department following the September 11, 2001, attacks.http://www.nationaljournal.com/decisionmakers/dm/281/

i'm thinking it musta been working under bush that made 'em terrorist sympathizers

[aka Brett]

Originally Posted by ekim68

Ooh, I know, 42, right?

I think if we were to add them up we can come up with that many

[aka Brett]

Originally Posted by iltos

obviously not.....this nail biting hysteria is making the rounds on blogs that -in one way or another- are fighting "the Good Fight"

as many as possible, it seems .....where's the new joe mccarthy when you need him, anyway.....?
this muslim dude was good enough for the bush administration brett.....but at that time, his "history" and alleged scumbagginess was apparently not important

not to mention he is.......canadian

EDIT: i forgot....you mention there were two
two...count 'em.....TWO
the other served in the bush administration, as well


i'm thinking it musta been working under bush that made 'em terrorist sympathizers

It is all very interesting,no matter which party one belongs to this should be a great concern to all...its not good to have such people in any position that can do us great harm

[iltos]

Originally Posted by aka Brett

It is all very interesting,no matter which party one belongs to this should be a great concern to all...its not good to have such people in any position that can do us great harm

i've nothing against paying attention, brett....
but if you put all those quotes in their original context, they point to muslim groups that disagree with the thrust of american foreign policy wrt the middle east....something that many in america question as well.....

even to the point of supporting the actions of hezbolla

by extension then, the circle of "such people" extends deeply into the white, anglo-saxon american citizenry

so it's ab-so-rootly fair to have the same concern for these appointees as you do for other americans who fail to acknowledge the insanity on both sides of this

but wnd and the other blog sources i'm lookin at it take a step further...or perhaps stop short of that final step....by pointing the finger JUST at the "muslimness" of these appointees, and attempting to make a case that their affiliation with muslim/american organizations somehow suggests a conspiracy within the obama administration wrt to the security of america.

all i see is an administration who's not afraid to have both sides represented in its discussions of american security....to wit

Last week, Napolitano swore in Damascus-born Kareem Shora, the ADC's national executive director, to a position on the Homeland Security Advisory Council, an outside-the-department group of national security experts that advises the secretary. Shora is the first Arab rights advocate on the panel.http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=100486

not exactly a premier policy position

but for those who oppose the appointment, whatever happened to the wisdom of "keeping your friends close, and your enemies closer"?

[TooBad]

Originally Posted by iltos

i've nothing against paying attention, brett....
but if you put all those quotes in their original context, they point to muslim groups that disagree with the thrust of american foreign policy wrt the middle east....something that many in america question as well.....

even to the point of supporting the actions of hezbolla

by extension then, the circle of "such people" extends deeply into the white, anglo-saxon american citizenry

so it's ab-so-rootly fair to have the same concern for these appointees as you do for other americans who fail to acknowledge the insanity on both sides of this

but wnd and the other blog sources i'm lookin at it take a step further...or perhaps stop short of that final step....by pointing the finger JUST at the "muslimness" of these appointees, and attempting to make a case that their affiliation with muslim/american organizations somehow suggests a conspiracy within the obama administration wrt to the security of america.

all i see is an administration who's not afraid to have both sides represented in its discussions of american security....to wit



not exactly a premier policy position

but for those who oppose the appointment, whatever happened to the wisdom of "keeping your friends close, and your enemies closer"?

Iltos, yes many Americans question our policies in the middle east, but why do they question? Are they fully informed? I seriously doubt it. It is easy to be led by the nose in this country, all you have to do is be lazy and as we can see from the obesity epidemic there are many lazy Americans.

At this point, I question all of our foreign policies as the One in the WH does not seem to know his behind from a hole in the ground, as it were. All I do know is that if he were, as accused, trying to destroy America, he is doing about as well as is possible.

[Fidelista]

My question would be --- should we allow a "devout Muslim " to hold any office ?.
Should anyone but a Christian believer hold office of any kind ?.
I noticed that some people use the word Moslem not as a description of a belief system --but more as a accusation ?.
Is it seen as impossible to support this country if any religion other than Christianity is followed ?--or maybe no professed religion claimed ?.
If this is so , then maybe non-Christians should lose other rights as well ?.
Its a scary thought --one I would never have thought would come up until OBL & gang .
My position is clear ,, all religion is non-sense {IMO} but I am minority .
I do not see however , the simple fact of being Muslim as some sort of crime .
I am interested only in one thing --can a non -Christian be a good citizen , and office holder in the eyes of members here . I am curious . >f

[valis]

what's the big deal?

I work with several dozen devout muslims. I also work with several dozen devout catholics, and am related to a roman catholic YEC'er. Can't get much worse than that.

What you are missing, brettman, is the extremist factor. Timothy McVeigh was Catholic, but he was an extremist.

The extremist is the wild card; no telling what the hell is going to happen.

[Fidelista]

Originally Posted by valis

what's the big deal?

I work with several dozen devout muslims. I also work with several dozen devout catholics, and am related to a roman catholic YEC'er. Can't get much worse than that.

What you are missing, brettman, is the extremist factor. Timothy McVeigh was Catholic, but he was an extremist.

The extremist is the wild card; no telling what the hell is going to happen.

My take exactly valis , and I am not surprised at your response . >f

[aka Brett]

I am talking about real muslims not wanna be muslims
------------------------------------------------------------

Can a devout Muslim be an American patriot and loyal citizen?

1. Theologically, no. Because his allegiance is to Allah, the moon god of Arabia, turned monothistic.
2. Scripturally, no. Because his allegiance is to the five pillars of Islam and the Quran.
3. Geographically, no. Because his allegiance is to Mecca to which he turns in prayer five times a day.
4. Socially, no. Because his allegiance to Islam demands that he make no friends of Christians and Jews (Q. 5:51)
5. Politically, no. Because he must submit to the mullah, who teaches annihilation of Israel and destruction of America, the great Satan.
6. Domestically, no. Because he is instructed to marry four women and beat and scourge his wife when she disobeys him (Q. 4:34).
7. Religiously, no. Because no other religion is accepted by his Allah except Islam—intolerance (Q. 2:256).
8. Intellectually, no. Because he cannot accept the American Constitution since it is established on Biblical principles, and he believes the Bible to be corrupt.
9. Philosophically, no. Because Islam, Muhammad, and the Quran do not allow freedom of religion and expression. Democracy and Islam cannot co-exist. Every Muslim government is dictatorial or autocratic except Turkey.
10. Spiritually, no. Because when we declare "one nation under God," the Christian’s God is a triune God, while the Muslim’s is one entity called "Allah," who is never a heavenly Father, nor is he ever called "Love" in the 99 excellent names.

http://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-kills-oxymoron.htm

Sure its not the casual muslim who are the terrorists who beat women in the street and chop off heads in the sand...its the real muslims.
Sure we have had some extreme nuts who have claimed to do their deed in the name of Christianity.

I would like someone to take this opportunity to show me one christian army that bombs buildings, chops off heads, hides in caves,kills american soldiers and citizens......Its not in the news anyway.

Am I thinking to much into this?

Is it actually safe for me to go deep into the land of the Muslims?

[iltos]

Originally Posted by aka Brett

I am talking about real muslims not wanna be muslims
------------------------------------------------------------

Can a devout Muslim be an American patriot and loyal citizen?

1. Theologically, no. Because his allegiance is to Allah, the moon god of Arabia, turned monothistic.
2. Scripturally, no. Because his allegiance is to the five pillars of Islam and the Quran.
3. Geographically, no. Because his allegiance is to Mecca to which he turns in prayer five times a day.
4. Socially, no. Because his allegiance to Islam demands that he make no friends of Christians and Jews (Q. 5:51)
5. Politically, no. Because he must submit to the mullah, who teaches annihilation of Israel and destruction of America, the great Satan.
6. Domestically, no. Because he is instructed to marry four women and beat and scourge his wife when she disobeys him (Q. 4:34).
7. Religiously, no. Because no other religion is accepted by his Allah except Islam—intolerance (Q. 2:256).
8. Intellectually, no. Because he cannot accept the American Constitution since it is established on Biblical principles, and he believes the Bible to be corrupt.
9. Philosophically, no. Because Islam, Muhammad, and the Quran do not allow freedom of religion and expression. Democracy and Islam cannot co-exist. Every Muslim government is dictatorial or autocratic except Turkey.
10. Spiritually, no. Because when we declare "one nation under God," the Christian’s God is a triune God, while the Muslim’s is one entity called "Allah," who is never a heavenly Father, nor is he ever called "Love" in the 99 excellent names.

http://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-kills-oxymoron.htm

Sure its not the casual muslim who are the terrorists who beat women in the street and chop off heads in the sand...its the real muslims.
Sure we have had some extreme nuts who have claimed to do their deed in the name of Christianity.

I would like someone to take this opportunity to show me one christian army that bombs buildings, chops off heads, hides in caves,kills american soldiers and citizens......Its not in the news anyway.

how deep does this hole go, Brett?.....the logical extension of your post is that freedom of religion should not be extended to "real" muslims, and that advocates of christainity should be the ones to determine who is a casual muslim and who is a "real" muslim

this test, i can only assume, would be established and administered by the newly formed Department of True Religion, an arm of Homeland Security charged with assuring that all Americans worship a correct version of god....those who cannot pass the test would be expatriated to....someplace where the determinants of patriotism and loyalty bear witness to one of the many false gods on this hellhole of a planet.

THIS is your vision of a safe and secure america?

[aka Brett]

Originally Posted by iltos

how deep does this hole go, Brett?.....the logical extension of your post is that freedom of religion should not be extended to "real" muslims, and that advocates of christainity should be the ones to determine who is a casual muslim and who is a "real" muslim

this test, i can only assume, would be established and administered by the newly formed Department of True Religion, an arm of Homeland Security charged with assuring that all Americans worship a correct version of god....those who cannot pass the test would be expatriated to....someplace where the determinants of patriotism and loyalty bear witness to one of the many false gods on this hellhole of a planet.

THIS is your vision of a safe and secure america?

Geez you are trying to soften me up arent you,I know how the liberals work

Freedom of religion should not be extended to REAL muslims correct{there is a differance}...as this will interfere with the health and well being of many a citizen in the states.
For you see the real muslims just dont care at all for Christians and it is the desire to kill them,,,therefore I am not for the promption of the muslim faith.....I have no problem with it...however they can keep that stuff over there in the dunes.A true hardcore muslim living by his faith has a major problem with the non muslim faith....wars have been going on for ages and it is based on this religion...Kill the christians....Dont believe it...jump on a jumbo jet and go deep in the middle east...you will be beheaded for you are not a muslim..it will be a real muslim that taketh the knife and sloppily cut ther head off while the rest cheer and dance.....again all muslims.

Now a die hard bible thumping christian, catholic,baptist or what have you do not participate in these rituals of beheadings.

Fact you can probably walk in out of these churches for years...be treated rather nicely and come out a better man.

Now start walking in and out of REAL muslim places of worship...I dont expect it to be that friendly.........I would recommend some good running shoes be purchased before hand

[aka Brett]

Lets say we lived by the old testament we would have some serious problems wouldnt we?
Basically the real muslims are living by the guidance of something that does not coincide with other religions and still has violence and huge sins by our standards which are acceptanced as ok..for you see thier "bible" and law are the same.

Our laws are based on Christian faith,,but we have freedom of religion.

Now how much times passes before it is ok to kill another based off freedom of expression of religion?

[ekim68]

Do you know any Muslims personally, brett?