I saw an article this week that I first thought was a joke … until I realized it was serious.

The article linked to an InfoWars headline entitled “Homeland Security Funded Exercise Portrayed Homeschoolers as Terrorists.” Normally I don’t read InfoWars because it’s a bit too conspiracy-laden for my taste, but once in a while they break amazing stories. As a homeschooling mom, this one made my jaw drop.

“In 2004,” notes the article, “cops in Muskegon, Mich., conducted a ‘mock attack’ on a school bus as part of a terrorism response exercise. The terrorists portrayed in the exercise were not fanatical Muslims or even phantom right-wing extremists – they were said to be fanatical homeschoolers. … According to the Muskegon Chronicle, the exercise was a simulated ‘attack by a fictitious radical group called Wackos Against Schools and Education who believe everyone should be homeschooled,’ Homeschool World reported in September 2004. The simulated attack was funded by the Department of Homeland Security.”

Um, what? Fanatical homeschoolers? What next, drills against radical Chess Club members? Extremist patrons of the New York Philharmonic?

Look, I’m the first one to admit that I’m rather zealous about the subject of homeschooling. I firmly believe it’s the best educational option available today, followed closely by private schools. I genuinely wish everyone could homeschool or privately school, and thus shut down the unconstitutional Department of Education whose refusal to allow educational competition is one of the biggest reasons for America’s academic decline.

But homeschoolers attacking a school bus? C’mon. That’s about as believable as zealous Chess Club members kidnapping cheerleaders off the football field in order to force them to master the Ruy Lopez Steinitz Defense. Or as believable as obsessive patrons of the New York Philharmonic kidnapping some Garth Brooks fans and forcing them to attend a performance of Beethoven’s Sixth Symphony.

In other words, what a STUPID drill. Pointless. Absurd. Unrealistic. Above all, frightening.

This exercise was conducted in 2004; I don’t know why it was mentioned again this week, except to illustrate a growing trend to conduct many DHS terrorist drills and exercises to acclimate Americans to martial law. (Boston home invasions, anyone? Pregnant women gun silhouettes?)

I have no problem with running drills for terrorism. It is, indeed, quite conceivable that a school bus could be attacked, hence the need for emergency personnel to understand logistics and techniques. As the Sandy Hook shootings tragically demonstrated, soft unarmed targets such as schools and school buses are at risk from deranged groups or individuals. And I clearly remember the Chowchilla kidnappings from 1976, so I understand the necessity of training for such a scenario.

But as hundreds of offended parents protested in the aftermath of this drill, it was the choice of mock terrorists that was insulting. How many homeschooling parents have knocked over school buses and shot children? Zero. “It has not been homeschooled children who have walked in public schools shooting everyone and anyone,” noted Homeschool World Magazine, “but rather public school children.”

It’s no secret that most (not all, but most) homeschoolers are conservative. Homeschooling parents have values we want to pass on to our children, values we don’t want watered down with revisionist history or moral relativism. We homeschoolers love our children so much that we’re willing to sacrifice our time, our resources and often a second income to keep them from being indoctrinated with the progressive propaganda rampant in government schools. And for that, we’re ridiculed, mocked and called everything from child abusers to (apparently) potential terrorists.

Gee, who else should we classify as terrorists? Wheelchair-bound grannies in airports? Kindergartners who nibble their Pop-Tarts into guns? Injured vets with colostomy bags?

Homeschooling has been steadily increasing over the last two decades (we only have to look at the quality of public education to understand why), and I acknowledge that the government reaction to this trend has ranged from barely tolerant to outright hostility; but the very notion that “fanatical” homeschoolers would murder children on a school bus is vile to the point of evil.

The significance of this drill isn’t lost on many people. You see, it’s part of a larger DHS plan to treat anyone and everyone on the right as a potential terrorist.

Let’s face it, it’s getting to the point where government officials are attempting to classify anyone who disagrees with them, no matter how law-abiding and innocent, as potential terrorists. Worse, they’re preparing to fight that enemy, even when the “enemy” has done nothing wrong. It is frighteningly reminiscent of the USSR’s psychological warfare tactics in which anyone who disagreed with the Communist government was, by definition, insane and could be locked up in a psych ward. Can no one see these parallels?

The attitude toward conservatives, libertarians and constitutionalists has turned vicious in the last few years. I don’t see Homeland Security proposing drills with militant vegans attacking a McDonald’s to force everyone to eat tofu, yet DHS is consistently profiling anyone who hails from the right as an unparalleled threat. As one commenter noted, “Those homeschoolers are dangerous people. They are forcing their children to learn to read, do simple math, and think for themselves. All of that makes their children potential terrorists.”

I suppose I must accept the fact that the America of today is no longer the America that exemplified the concept of liberty. In this new Amerika, the non-brainwashed are a threat to the socialist paradigm. The elites need subjects who will not question either their motives or their morality. The Patricians want drones who will acquiesce to IRS profiling, Obamacare and government stockpiling of ammo. They want Stepford citizens who shrug their shoulders and ask “what difference does it make?” with regards to Benghazi, Fast and Furious and wholesale tapped phone lines.

No wonder homeschoolers are a threat.

So as a homeschooling mom and a constitutional conservative, I offer greetings from your friendly neighborhood terrorist. We homeschoolers are all over the place, frightening our politicians by winning spelling bees and whupping test scores. My rebel kids are doing things like putting on writer’s workshops and music recitals, writing 90,000 word novels in a month and watching calves being born.

Care to join us? Or are you too busy watching your children learn to put condoms on bananas?

Viva la revolution.

© Copyright 1997-2013. All Rights Reserved. WND.com

Iran has given the go-ahead to operatives of three terrorist groups that have infiltrated the United States to carry out missions, including what is expected to be a Mumbai-style attack on a hotel where innocent bystanders would be killed, WND has learned.

A full report with many details of the missions has been passed on to U.S. officials and to a congressional intelligence committee.

Three targets have been chosen within America for imminent attack, and the terror teams have now cut communications with the operational center in Iran, a sign that they are moving ahead with the attacks, according to a high-level intelligence officer within the Islamic regime.

If only one of the attacks occurs, the regime will consider the operation a success, the source said. Tehran believes, he said, an attack would not be traced back to Iran due to the nationalities of the operators.

One of the planned attacks resemble the Mumbai attack in 2008, the source added, in which a hotel was targeted, hostages were taken and 164 people were killed over several days. India alleges Pakistan used proxies to carry out the Mumbai attack so it wouldn’t be traced back to Pakistan, just as Iran now is using proxies to hide its current terrorism. The information provided by the source provides details of a new jihadist coalition with a focus on creating instability in the U.S.

The source said the regime views the Boston bombing as a successful terrorist attack in which fear was created, U.S. intelligence questioned and a sense of security diminished. There has yet to be any link to a specific group or country.

As WND reported exclusively April 22, the regime’s Quds Forces have done extensive planning on gatherings, events and high-value targets in the U.S., but for two years have focused on events such as the Boston Marathon. The Quds Forces run an extensive network of terrorists out of South Asia.

A Feb. 14, 2010, meeting in Iran either set up the new jihadist coalition or continued the coalition among the Quds Forces, Hezbollah and al-Qaida. The latter coalition was formed years ago by Imad Mugniyeh, the dead mastermind terrorist from Hezbollah, under the direction of Ahmad Vahidi, then the head of the Quds Forces and the current Iranian defense minister, to collaborate on their fight against the U.S.

At the 2010 meeting, Qasem Soleimani, the head of the Quds Forces; Seif Adel, the operational head of al-Qaida; and Mustafa Badr al-Din, the operational head of Hezbollah; devised a plan for operations against the U.S. under a new coalition, dubbed the “Coalition of Muslim Soldiers.” The coalition includes al-Shabaab, an al-Qaida offshoot based in Somalia, and has its central command in the Iranian city of Kerman. Command and control centers are located in the Iranian provinces of Kerman, Khorasan, Khuzestan, Kurdistan, and Sistan and Baluchistan, the source said.

The coalition, led by Soleimani, with Iran the main source of funding, is based on a strategic collaboration and devoid of ideological differences and opinions of Shiite and Sunni Marjas. The main operational commanders, mostly well-known terrorists, are:

1. Gen. Soleimani, the head of the Quds Forces with full power given to him by Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
2. Brig. Gen. Abdolreza Shahlabi of the Quds Forces.
3. Brig. Gen. Hamed Abdollahi of the Quds Forces.
4. Brig. Gen. Hossein Movahedian of the Quds Forces.
5. Maj. Gen. Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr of the Quds Forces.
6. Seif Adel, the operational head of al-Qaida.
7. Abdul Rahman Yasin of al-Qaida operations.
8. Abu Saeed al-Mesri of al-Qaida in Latin America.
9. Adnan ShokriJuma of al-Qaida in America.
10. Hakimalah Masoud of al-Qaida operations.
11. Mustafa Badr al-Din, the operations head of Hezbollah and the brother-in-law and cousin of the dead terrorist Imad Mugniyah, who now serves as Mugnyiah’s replacement as the military leader of Hezbollah and the deputy to the Quds’ Soliemani.
12. Talal Hamieh, the head of the External Security Organization, strategic planning and funding for Hezbollah in Venezuela. He commutes directly from Venezuela to Damascus, Syria, then to Lebanon and back.
13. Fozi Mohammad Mostafa of Hezbollah operations.
14. Mohammad Ali Hamdi of Hezbollah operations in Toronto, Canada. He targets nuclear power plants and other sites in Canada.
15. Ebrahim Saleh Mohammad al-Yaghoub of Hezbollah operations.
16. Mohammad Ahmad al-Monavar, the operations commander for Abu Nidal.
17. Jahad Servan Mostafa, the operations commander for al-Shabaab in Somalia.

Based on intelligence and infiltration by Western intelligence agencies into institutions, operations and cultural centers of radical Arab Islamists after 9/11, the new coalition recruits non-Arab Islamists from many other nationalities and Arabs from countries not on the hot list for American agencies.

Iran believes that the perception of security in America that has helped empower its actions in the Middle East must be turned 180 degrees, not only to defeat and derail all U.S. calculations based on gathered intelligence but to destabilize the political, economic and social conditions in America, the source said.

Based on that understanding, he said, the U.S. through its military might has kept the fight in the Islamic region and away from its homeland and its allies’ turf. Now continuous operations must be conducted in the U.S. homeland to change that equation, they believe.

More than 2,600 targets, including public places, government buildings and military installations, have been chosen for attack, and reconnaissance has been done. Information about some of the targets, based on direct knowledge of the source, has been given to U.S. officials to neutralize the threat and confront the terrorists. They include specific government buildings, news networks, malls and sports events.

This new coalition has also prepared for a major attack to avenge al-Qaida leader Osama Bin Laden’s killing to satisfy Seif Adel, the operational head of al-Qaida, for his collaboration with the Iranian regime.

The radical regime ruling Iran has set up several channels for financial support of the new coalition with its terrorist activities. Multiple commerce, cultural and financial institutions in the U.S. are part of that network. The connection includes individuals running businesses in Damascus and its connections to al-Qaida operatives in America.

Since 2001, more than $270 million has been invested in the expansion of mosques and Islamic centers in America by institutions in the Iranian city of Qom. As part of the coalition’s plan, some 27 mosques and Islamic centers in America are their target for collaboration, infiltration and recruitment of sympathizers for various missions, including reconnaissance and terrorist acts.

The source said the new coalition, due to its composition of different people in Central Asia, is a very complex organization.

The publication of a limited version of the full report is an intention to put the Islamic regime on notice that should it go ahead with its planned attacks in the U.S. homeland, it will be held responsible, the source said.

Why did the Obama administration not prepare for a likely attack on the Libyan mission in Benghazi on 9-11-12 in light of the direct, video threat from al-Qaida leader Ayman al-Zawahiri released 24 hours earlier?

Why did the Obama administration not respond in any way to the attacks on the Benghazi mission as they were unfolding?

Why was no rescue effort initiated?

Why were no contingencies in place to deal with such attacks?

Why did the Obama administration’s talking points on the Benghazi massacre change 12 times?

And why did former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in her sworn testimony to congressional investigators show such contempt for accountability, such indifference to human suffering and such arrogance of leadership by asking the reprehensible and insulting question “What difference does it make?”

It’s been eight months since those terror attacks in Benghazi – and the Obama administration is still stonewalling the truth.

But, as Rep. Trey Gowdy noted this week, “There’s no statute of limitations on the truth.”

Neither is there any statute of limitations on coldblooded murder.

Nor is there any statute of limitations on accessory to coldblooded murder.

Nor is there any statute of limitations to negligence that leads to coldblooded murder.

That’s why Benghazi matters.

That’s before we even get to the question of what the Obama administration has done or is doing to ensure there is not a repeat of Benghazi next Sept. 11 or even tomorrow.

There is no doubt among the sane, rational, objective, informed American public that a monumental and systematic cover-up of the Benghazi scandal has been conducted by the Obama administration.

That’s why this congressional investigation must continue and must be expanded. Perhaps an independent counsel needs to be appointed, because culpability now points directly to the top – not just to Hillary Clinton but to Barack Obama, who literally slept through the slaughter of a U.S. ambassador, other civilian personnel and U.S. military personnel.

Americans need to hear the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth about Benghazi. No more lies and half-truths can be acceptable. No more spin can be acceptable. No more stalling can be acceptable.

Americans don’t want to hear members of Congress tell them that people just die, that those involved understood the risks they were taking. That kind of suggestion is as insulting to our intelligence and demeaning to the memory of the victims of the terrorist attack as anything I’ve ever heard.

It’s obvious the Obama administration was thinking about one thing as the Benghazi attack took place and in its aftermath – the November election results.

To paraphrase a refrain familiar during the previous administration, when it was inappropriately used by those who supported Obama: “Obama lied, people died.”

In this case, it’s the absolute, unvarnished truth.

The American people need to turn up the pressure on their elected officials for closure on this scandal. Too often, in Washington, members of Congress get distracted by other matters. Too often, in Washington, members of Congress get cold feet and timid in pursuing the truth – even on the gravest matters of national security and matters of life and death. Too often, in Washington, elected officials put election cycles and personal political interests ahead of ensuring that government doesn’t make the same mistakes over and over again.

It’s time to demand the truth – and let the chips fall where they may.

What was the Obama administration up to in Benghazi?

What possessed the Obama administration to make such bad choices?

What secrets was the Obama administration keeping that cost the lives of those brave Americans?

It now appears that Benghazi was another “Fast and Furious” scandal on the international stage.

Somebody or somebodies – and not some sacrificial lamb – need to be held to account for the human carnage and the damage inflicted on America’s honor.

• We’ve had active-duty jihadist members of the U.S. military, including a high-ranking officer, slaughtertheir fellow soldiers in the name of Allah.
• We also now have a military that considers open homosexual activity, including solicitations, fair game.

But, just a week ago, we learned that Christian evangelism within the U.S. military is forbidden, with some Department of Defense activists calling for courts-martial of offenders.

The Air Force has created a document with the directive that leaders of all levels (including chaplains) may not “promote their personal religious beliefs to their subordinates or to extend preferential treatment for any religion.”

Several years ago, a U.S. Navy chaplain was removed from the service for disobeying a “lawful” order banning prayer “in Jesus’ name.”

It’s now considered an act of “real courage” when a Coast Guard rear admiral gives a Bible to a hurting soldier, according to retired Gen. Jerry Boykin.

Meanwhile, it’s clear that this rise in official atheism curiously doesn’t apply to the one religion that actually imposes itself by force and intimidation on others and the one that represents an existential threat to the U.S.

What do I mean?

The U.S. Army has punished, for the second time, a highly respected and decorated officer in the wake of Muslim groups complaining about the approved course he taught on radical Islam at National Defense University.

In October, WND reported that Lt. Col. Matthew Dooley was fired from his position at the school for the way he conducted a class on how to respond to a variety of scenarios instigated by radical Muslims. A visitor to the class found the discussions offensive to Muslims and informed some 57 Islamic organizations, which then complained to Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In addition to the firing, Gen. Dempsey promptly orchestrated a negative “officer evaluation report” against Dooley that deeply tarnished a career that had received only sterling reviews from West Point through nearly 20 years in the service. Dempsey never even discussed the incident with Dooley.

Now Dooley has been punished again, this time as he pursued the role of battalion commander. An Army command selection board studied Dooley’s record and candidacy for a command assignment. The five-member panel agreed to keep Dooley under consideration. Shortly thereafter, Gen. Lloyd J. Austin III, who at the time was Army vice chief and subsequently became head of U.S. Central Command, overruled the board in a brief memo. His actions could effectively spell the end of Dooley’s career.

This is “political correctness” gone wild – in the U.S. military!

Christians are being persecuted. Common-sense teachings vitally necessary in the war against global jihad are being censored. And acts of terror by jihadists within the military, like the act of mass murder by Maj. Nidal Hasan, are considered acts of “workplace violence.”

Do we really expect to win a war like this?

Do we really expect Christians to serve in the military willingly under these conditions?

Does the Defense Department want its military services comprised only of atheists, Muslims and homosexuals?

How do you suppose that will work out for national security?

While the Pentagon has backed off its threat to court-martial military personnel for “proselytizing,” the handwriting is so clearly on the wall. It took the filing of a Freedom of Information Act request by Alliance Defending Freedom for all Defense Department statements on the issue to force that action.

“Members of our military should not be denied the very freedoms they fight to defend. Freedom of religion and speech are paramount among those freedoms,” said ADF Legal Counsel Joseph La Rue. “We appreciate the Pentagon’s clarification, but little or no evidence exists of coercive proselytization in the military, so we are still troubled over what motivated the original comments.

The Pentagon’s Lt. Cmdr. Nathan Christensen said in its most recent statement that the Department of Defense “makes reasonable accommodations for all religions and celebrates the religious diversity of our service members.”

Register your commitment to the 9/11 National Day of Prayer and Fasting called by Joseph Farah and supported by Rep. Michele Bachmann, Chuck Norris, David Barton, Jonathan Cahn and thousands of other Americans who recognize America is in need of a major and immediate spiritual course correction.

“Service members can share their faith (evangelize), but must not force unwanted, intrusive attempts to convert others of any faith or no faith to one’s beliefs (proselytization),” he said.

Christensen said that if a service member “harasses another member on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, national origin, age, or disability, then the commander takes action based on the gravity of the occurrence.”

“Likewise, when religious harassment complaints are reported, commanders take action based on the gravity of the occurrence on a case-by-case basis,” he said.

The Department of Defense, Christensen said, places “a high value on the rights of members of the military services to observe the tenets of their respective religions and respects (and supports by its policy) the rights of others to their own religious beliefs, including the right to hold no beliefs.”

He said members are free to exercise their constitutional right to practice their religion “in a manner that is respectful of other individuals’ rights to follow their own belief systems; and in ways that are conducive to good order and discipline; and that do not detract from accomplishing the military mission.”

Suddenly, after 230 years, the practicing of the Christian faith, the predominant religion among military personnel, is a threat to “accomplishing the military mission.”

I wonder what George Washington would have thought about that.

It all started when Mikey (yes, Mikey) Weinstein of the Military Religion Freedom organization met with department officials and then wrote that Christians in the military are “monsters” who must be stopped from talking about their faith.

Weinstein had declared: “We face incredibly well-funded gangs of fundamentalist Christian monsters who terrorize their fellow Americans by forcing their weaponized and twisted version of Christianity upon their helpless subordinates in our nation’s armed forces.”

In an interview with Fox News, Weinstein said the military needs to begin prosecuting Christians who share their faith.

“Someone needs to be punished for this,” he said. “Until the Air Force or Army or Navy or Marine Corps punishes a member of the military for unconstitutional religious proselytizing and oppression, we will never have the ability to stop this horrible, horrendous, dehumanizing behavior.”

It seemed the military was listening.

After a private meeting between Weinstein and Pentagon officials April 23, a Pentagon spokesman declared, “Religious proselytization is not permitted within the Department of Defense.”

Christensen said at the time that “courts martial and non-judicial punishments are decided on a case-by-case basis, and it would be inappropriate to speculate on the outcome in specific cases.”

Weinstein, according to Fox News’ Todd Starnes, told officials at the meeting that U.S. troops who evangelize are guilty of sedition and treason and should be punished, by the hundreds if necessary.

“Why would military leadership be meeting with one of the most rabid atheists in America to discuss religious freedom in the military,” asked Family Research Council President Tony Perkins in a Fox News interview. “That’s like consulting with China on how to improve human rights.”

Boykin, a vice president at FRC, said such a policy would allow Christians within the military who speak of their faith to be “prosecuted as enemies of the state.”

“This has the potential to destroy military recruiting across the services as Americans realize that their faith will be suppressed by joining the military,” Boykin said. “Our brave troops deserve better. If chaplains and other personnel are censored from offering the full solace of the Gospel, there is no religious freedom in the military.”

Ron Crews of the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty told Starnes: “Saying that a service member cannot speak of his faith is like telling a service member he cannot talk about his spouse or children. I do not think the Air Force wants to ban personnel from protected religious speech.”

Hello! What country am I living in?

Over 237 years ago, Gen. George Washington petitioned the Second Continental Congress to institute the military chaplaincy for the fledgling United States Army. On July 29, 1776, Washington introduced the chaplaincy as follows: “The Hon. Continental Congress having been pleased to allow a Chaplain to each Regiment, with the pay of Thirty-three Dollars and one third per month – The Colonels or commanding officers of each regiment are directed to procure Chaplains accordingly; persons of good Characters and exemplary lives – To see that all inferior officers and soldiers pay them a suitable respect and attend carefully upon religious exercises. The blessing and protection of Heaven are at all times necessary but especially so in times of public distress and danger – The General hopes and trusts, that every officer and man, will endeavour so to live, and act, as becomes a Christian Soldier defending the dearest Rights and Liberties of his country.”

That’s how America won its independence from the greatest empire in the world at the time.

What do you suppose will become of America under today’s leadership?

© Copyright 1997-2013. All Rights Reserved. WND

A “human rights” organization is calling on government authorities to shut down three U.S. mosques it claims are not merely religious centers, but political entities and “breeding grounds for jihad terror.”

The American Freedom Defense Initiative, or AFDI, explains its demands are part of an 18-point plan to protect the nation from Islamic terror in the wake of the Boston Marathon bombings.

AFDI Executive Director Pamela Geller said in a statement, “In accord with those calls for responsible law enforcement regarding subversive activities in U.S. mosques, we are asking that government and law enforcement officials launch immediate investigations into the Islamic Society of Boston, the Dar al-Hijrah Mosque of Fairfax County, Va., and the Noor Center of Columbus, Ohio.”

“Any mosque advocating jihad or any aspects of Shariah that conflict with constitutional freedoms and protections should be closed,” AFDI insists.

AFDI argues shutting down the mosques wouldn’t be a violation of the Constitution’s First Amendment protecting freedom of religion, because Islam is not merely a religion, but a “political system.”

“AFDI calls for the U.S. and other non-Muslim governments to recognize officially that Islam is a political movement and so not solely religious in the strict sense of the U.S. Constitution,” the organization states on its website. “Islam in its mainstream theological formulations and its dominant form throughout its history – not ‘extremist Islam’ or ‘hijacked Islam’ or ‘Islamism,’ but Islam in the Qur’an and Sunnah as understood by Islamic jurists and theologians – can and should be regarded as an authoritarian and supremacist political system as well as a religion, and thus Muslim groups should be subject to all the scrutiny and legal requirements of political organizations, without being able to shield their political activities behind the protection of religious freedom.”

AFDI, therefore, is calling for “immediate investigation into foreign mosque funding in the West and for new legislation making foreign funding of mosques in non-Muslim nations illegal,” as well as for “surveillance of mosques and regular inspections of mosques in the U.S. and other non-Muslim nations to look for pro-violence materials.”

AFDI explained in a statement why it specifically called for closure of the three mosques in Massachusetts, Virginia and Ohio.

The Islamic Society of Boston, AFDI claims,

• Was founded by Abdulrahman Alamoudi, now in prison for financing al-Qaida;
• Was attended by Aafia Siddiqui, now serving an 86-year-sentence for plotting a jihad attack in New York City;
• Was attended by Tarek Mehanna, now serving 17 years in prison for conspiring to aid al-Qaida;
• Was attended by Ahmad Abousamra, who has fled to Syria and is wanted by the FBI;
• Was attended by Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the accused Boston Marathon bombers.

The Dar Al-Hijrah Islamic Center in Fairfax County, Va., AFDI asserts,

• Was established with funds from a Muslim Brotherhood group;
• Was led by Mohammed al-Hanooti, the mosque’s imam from 1995-1999, who was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing;
• Was led by Anwar al-Awlaki, the mosque’s imam from 2001-2002, who the U.S. government says was involved in al-Qaida terrorist operations and has had extensive contact with three 9/11 hijackers, the Fort Hood jihad murderer and the Christmas underwear bomber;
• Included Ahmed Omar Abu Ali, a camp counselor at the mosque now in prison for plotting to assassinate President George W. Bush;
• Was attended by Nidal Malik Hasan, the Fort Hood jihad mass murderer.

The Noor Mosque in Columbus, Ohio, AFDI asserts,

• Is led by Dr. Hany Saqr, previously an imam for another mosque, which at that time was the base of operations for al-Qaida, including convicted jihadists Iyman Faris, Nuradin Abdi and Christopher Paul;
• Has been directly linked to the Somali Muslims who have gone from the U.S. back to Somali for jihad terror training;
• Has had members who threatened the life of Rifqa Bary, a teenage girl who left Islam for Christianity.

“These mosques are not unique,” Geller claims. “There are many others like them. But they are the tip of the spear. It is time that our officials demand that they obey American laws or be held accountable for not doing so.”

AFDI asserts itself as a “human rights” organization because of its stance against the encroaching tyranny of Islam’s Shariah legal system, claiming it defends the freedom of speech from Islamic “blasphemy” laws, the freedom of conscience from the Islamic death penalty for apostasy and the the equality of rights of all people before the law – as opposed to Shariah’s “institutionalized discrimination against women and non-Muslims.”

 Loading …

In the aftermath of the Boston Marathon killing spree by foreign-born jihadists, see-no-evil bureaucrats in Washington are stubbornly defending America’s lax asylum policies. DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano told the Senate Tuesday that the screening process is rigorous, effective and extensive.

These people can’t handle the truth. Or tell it.

The Tsarnaev brothers reportedly were granted asylum by “derivative” status through their parents. After entering on short-term tourist visas, the mother and father (an ethnic Chechen Muslim) won asylum and acquired U.S. citizenship. Next, younger son Dzhokhar obtained U.S. citizenship. Older son Tamerlan, whose naturalization application was pending, traveled freely between the U.S. and the jihad recruitment zone of Dagestan, Russia, last year before the bombers’ gunfight in Watertown, Mass., last week left the Muslim terrorist dead.

Though they had convinced the U.S. that they faced deadly persecution, the Tsarnaevs’ parents both returned to their native land and were there when their sons launched last week’s terror rampage. Authorities will not reveal any details of the sob stories the Tsarnaevs originally spun to win asylum benefits for the entire family.

The whole thing stinks. And it’s an old, familiar stench. Immigration lawyers have been working the system on behalf of asylum con artists for decades. The racketeers coach applicants with phony stories and documents from “chop shops” and game their way through “refugee roulette.”

Asylum and refugee claimants are being rubber-stamped at all-time-high rates. Government data analyzed by the nonpartisan TRAC website show that “the odds of an asylum claim being denied in Immigration Court reached an historic low in FY 2012, with only 44.5 percent being turned down. Ten years ago, almost two out of three (62.6 percent) individuals seeking asylum lost their cases in similar actions. Twenty years ago, fewer than one out of four (24 percent) asylum applicants won their cases, while three out of four (76 percent) lost.”

The game is rigged in favor of identity-group hustlers, who mau-mau adjudicators whose approval rates don’t meet their approval.

Soft-on-enforcement lobbying groups argue that it’s better to err on the side of allowing bogus asylum-seekers and refugees to stay than to get serious about cracking down on fraud and send undeserving foreigners home. It’s not “practical” or worth it, they say.

But what about the “if it saves just one life” standard set by President Obama? Why does it only apply to gun control? Why won’t Washington err on the side of public safety by reexamining and overhauling our fraud-riddled asylum, detention, deportation and visa issuance policies after the Boston jihad?

In case you’d forgotten, the Tsarnaevs were not the first murder-minded jihadists to benefit from ineffective policing of our asylum and refugee policies. As I’ve reported previously:

–Ramzi Yousef landed at New York City’s JFK airport from Pakistan and flashed an Iraqi passport without a visa to inspectors. He was briefly detained for illegal entry and fingerprinted, but was allowed to remain in the country after invoking the magic words “political asylum.” Yousef was released for lack of detention space and headed to Jersey City to plot the deadly 1993 World Trade Center bombing.

–Gazi Ibrahim Abu Mezer, a Palestinian bomb-builder, entered the U.S. illegally through Canada in 1996-97. He claimed political asylum based on phony persecution by Israelis, was released on a reduced $5,000 bond posted by a man who was himself an illegal alien and then skipped his asylum hearing. In June 1997, a federal immigration judge ordered Mezer to leave on a “voluntary departure order.” Mezer ignored him. He joined the New York City bombing plot before being arrested in July 1997 after a roommate tipped off local police.

–Mir Aimal Kansi, convicted in 1997 of capital murder and nine other charges stemming from his January 1993 shooting spree outside the CIA headquarters in McLean, Va., also exploited our insane asylum laxity. Despite his history as a known Pakistani militant who had participated in anti-American protests abroad, Kansi received a business visa in 1991. After arrival, he claimed political asylum based on his ethnic minority status in Pakistan. While his asylum application was pending, he obtained a driver’s license and an AK-47, murdered two CIA agents and wounded three others.

–Somali national Nuradin Abdi, the al-Qaida shopping mall bomb plotter convicted in 2007, first entered the U.S. in 1995 using a false passport. He entered again illegally from Canada in 1997 and secured asylum on false grounds. Abdi then was able to fraudulently obtain a refugee travel document, which he used to fly to Ethiopia and, yes, Chechnya for jihad training.

–Among the convicted Fort Dix (N.J.) jihad plotters were three ethnic Albanian illegal alien brothers, Dritan, Shain and Eljvir Duka, who snuck into the country through Mexico with their parents. In 1984, the father applied for asylum, but the feds ignored them for two decades. In the meantime, as America showed the Dukas’ refugee community unmatched compassion and generosity, the Muslim trio returned the favor by planning to massacre U.S. soldiers.

As always, political correctness and political pandering are the handmaidens of terrorism.

—

Michelle Malkin is the author of “Culture of Corruption: Obama and his Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks and Cronies” (Regnery 2010). Her e-mail address is malkinblog@gmail.com.

COPYRIGHT 2013 CREATORS.COM