BETRAYAL Starts at the TOP

January 30, 2016
EndCulturalJihad 2016cd

Message by Civilus Defendus. Art by Thumbprint. 2016


Liberty vs Sharia, One is Better

October 7, 2012

https://vimeo.com/52810122

(Video courtesy of LibertyLSA at vimeo.)

The theo-political doctrine of Islam is defined by the koran (Allah) and sunnah (all things Mohammed) and implemented under “sacred” Islamic sharia law (see the ROTT*). Islam is as much a political ideology as a theological creed, concerning itself largely with the treatment of non-believers, rather than with good deeds and the salvation of believers. And its ‘good deeds’ often involve the maltreatment of non-believers. Islam, as a political manifesto, should be labeled a threat doctrine, its true believers a threat.

Islam makes the attainment of political objectives a religious duty. What is Islam striving to attain? Its ultimate imperial and supremacist aim is to replace or subjugate anything non-Islamic. First, a gentle invitation to Islam; accept and join the “ummah,” the global Islamic community. Second, a not so gentle offer to live in subjugation under sharia as a third-class non-Muslim, paying the jizya (non-Muslim tax) and feeling subdued, humiliated and weak. Or third, all manner of jihad upon you until you do the first, the second or die.

Nearly 1400 years of history are witness to Islam’s expansion and progress toward ‘sharia uber alles.’ Wherever Islam establishes itself, a state within a state develops and the existing form of government and unbelieving (kafir, infidel) culture is rejected. The ummah grows, first weakening the host culture by social pressure, political means or violence, then imposing sharia through intimidation or actual codification in law.

Sharia denies freedom of speech, religion, expression and action and rejects equality between men and women, thereby violating human rights. Sharia has no “Golden Rule” to treat individuals equally. Instead Sharia segregates people into classes: Muslims and non-Muslims. Muslims are supreme and non-Muslims are inferior, holding no equal rights under Islam. Muslim-Muslim relations are completely separate from Muslim-kafir relations, where deceit is sanctioned and mistreatment largely unpunished.

No matter the temperament of individual Muslims, the Islamic community as a whole, the ummah, drives the process of Islamization—situating Islam as a superior “special class”—in every country where Islam thrives. Islam and the sharia. Mosques teach it, Muslims demand it and all else falls before it. Across the globe intimidation, violence and political upheaval are associated with increasing Muslim populations.

The US is a representative democracy thoughtfully crafted by our founders, with the Declaration of Independence proclaiming that humans are created equal and have unalienable rights, and the US Constitution protecting these rights through law. Sharia is irreconcilably in conflict with our founding principles and law—its objectives are indeed to overturn our law and replace it with their sharia. We cannot extend our welcome to Islam’s supremacism and intolerance for to do so is cultural suicide.

President Thomas Jefferson rejected the payment of tribute to Islamic Ottoman provinces and their pirates in 1801. We should similarly reject any monetary homage today or tolerate the growth of a threat doctrine or its body of believers within our borders. The Islamic ummah and its law, the sharia, are grave dangers to the United States of America and should be acknowledged as such and treated as such.

Liberty vs Sharia pdf

*Reliance of the Traveller: The Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law at Amazon


IS A MORAL ASSESSMENT OF EVIL… BIGOTRY?

October 3, 2012

In any threat situation fear exists. Fear of death and manner of death, of pain, of confrontation, of shouting bearded men from an alien culture. Fear exists and is useful. Fear of islam/sharia/jihad is not a phobia. The reaction is the key… cowardice, appeasement and submission are common responses, however courage, action, insight, leadership are also possible responses to fear.

The other part of response is our lack of belief in ourselves, perhaps even an understanding of why we are not Afghanistan or Somalia or Zimbabwe or North Korea. PC – not speaking in facts, truths, data, history, nor asking difficult questions – is disarming us mentally and physically.

Is PC about not offending someone else, or not believing in yourself? Are we as a society so hollow, so empty? As Evan Sayet put it, for liberals “A moral thought is an act of bigotry.” Is a moral assessment of evil… bigotry? Can I not say that rape, murder and paedophilia are bad and wrong? That totalitarian government and intrusive, oppressive, discriminatory overlords are bad for humanity? That islam is not just different, but WRONG. Wrong on liberty, wrong on equality before the law, wrong on nuturing childhood development, wrong in its restriction of art, music, human expression? Are my thoughts a crime against humanity? Or an assessment of a theo-political doctrine that is the antithesis of Western Culture and the American Constitution that I cherish?


Imagine the Implications… Slanderous

August 30, 2012

In an American courtroom, the proof of slander must include both a false statement by the speaker and demonstration of damage to the subject slandered. Under Islamic sharia law, it is up to the SUBJECT to decide what he or she does not want to hear.  Turns free speech on its head. Especially if the Emperor really is naked.

Civilus Defendus

August 2012


USC Title 8, Chapter 12: Immigration and Nationality

November 15, 2011

§ 1182. Inadmissible aliens

(a) Classes of aliens ineligible for visas or admission

Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, aliens who are inadmissible under the following paragraphs are ineligible to receive visas and ineligible to be admitted to the United States:

(D) Immigrant membership in totalitarian party

(i) In general Any immigrant who is or has been a member of or affiliated with the Communist or any other totalitarian party (or subdivision or affiliate thereof), domestic or foreign, is inadmissible. [CD’s Note – if we designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a totalitarian party or organization and/or sharia (ref: ROTT) a totalitarian ideology, that work toward or require, respectively, the overthrow of the US Constitution (man-made law) and its replacement with “divine” sharia perhaps we could secure the nation. All it takes is knowledge and will. (Emphasis added throughout.)]

(F) Association with terrorist organizations

Any alien who the Secretary of State, after consultation with the Attorney General, or the Attorney General, after consultation with the Secretary of State, determines has been associated with a terrorist organization and intends while in the United States to engage solely, principally, or incidentally in activities that could endanger the welfare, safety, or security of the United States is inadmissible. [Note – Executive Order 12947 (Clinton) lists terrorist organizations and has been/can be amended to expand the list.]

(G) Student visa abusers

An alien who obtains the status of a nonimmigrant under section 1101 (a)(15)(F)(i) of this title and who violates a term or condition of such status under section 1184 (l) [2] of this title is inadmissible until the alien has been outside the United States for a continuous period of 5 years after the date of the violation.

(f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President

Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate… [Note – if the 2011 islamophile in the WH could be persuaded, he could immediately address numerous threats with the stroke of a pen. The next occupant of the WH must swiftly act in America’s self-interest.]

See: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001182—-000-.html


Why have you forsaken me?

June 23, 2011
Shorn JFK Flag

Why have you forsaken me?

I am the Declaration of Independence.

I affirm liberty as the right and proper state of mankind.

Why have you forsaken me?

I am the United States Constitution.

I declare the people as sovereign and ensure representative governance.

Why have you forsaken me?

I am a Citizen.

I have been endowed by my Creator, by my very humanity with inalienable rights that no man nor government may confiscate nor hold hostage, that I may cultivate the greatest of human ingenuity, live with passion and have no boundaries save just law.

Why have you forsaken me?

I am the Idea that men are created equal and should be thus before the law.

I am the unrivaled ideal that individuals matter, that governments are formed among men to protect those individuals and defend to the greatest degree freedom of conscience and action for the few and the many.

Forsake me not…

O accumulated powers and sightless masses think not that there is no consequence to forsaking the good, the uplifting, the virtuous. For an unearned position held through artifice and devoid of honor can never for long be what you seek – a privileged life of iron rule apart from those betrayed and removed from justice. For most assuredly a bold new world will spring forth.

Any man is liable to err; only a fool persists in error.

~ Marcus Tullius Cicero


The Obama List

December 31, 2010

Article II, Section 4: The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors. In Federalist No. 65, Alexander Hamilton described impeachable conduct as “those offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust.

Has there ever been a president so inadequately prepared – or vetted – for office, whose contempt for American history and Constitution is visceral, vocal and apparent; who promotes collectivist ideology so readily; who demonizes his political rivals and who glorifies the historically hostile doctrine of Islam? This “President” dismisses American Exceptionalism as readily as he does her Constitution.

“The Obama List” is a series of questions that could be (were they answered) used to review his fitness for office, to see if he has trod upon the public trust. These questions are based on some scrap (or mound) of available information and should be asked of Mr. Obama and pondered by Americans. Taken individually, the potential ramifications are disturbing, taken collectively one should ask if this man should be in a position of power in America.

  1. Was an original birth certificate issued to you and if so, where is it, and what does it say?
  2. Was Executive Order 13489 intended to conceal personal information relevant to your eligibility or citizenship, and/or our national security?
  3. How did you obtain your current Social Security number?
  4. Why are multiple Social Security numbers associated with your name?
  5. Did you receive any illegal foreign campaign funding or commit fraud in resolving same?
  6. What can citizens draw from your views that conflict with the US Constitution (spreading the wealth, collective salvation)?
  7. Did you orchestrate theft and violate contract law by taking a private company from shareholders and giving it to union(s)?
  8. Is it your intention to promote theft and/or coercion by forcing citizens to pay for their neighbor’s health care?
  9. Why did you have the Inspector General Walpin fired without just cause (Kevin Johnson case)?
  10. Have you signed any treaties without Congressional advice and consent, and if so, why?
  11. What was your intention in meddling in Supreme Court affairs re Saudi Arabia/9-11 case?
  12. Have you directly or indirectly intimidated the media and to what end?
  13. Are you informed by foreign law rather than adhering to the US Constitution in decision making?
  14. What was the purpose for your factually inaccurate and ill-advised apology tour in Egypt, Turkey?
  15. Why have you appointed Islamic apologists to positions of power (Koh)?
  16. Why have you appointed Muslims and Islamists to positions of influence in government, including DHS?
  17. Why have you appointed incompetent power mongers (Clinton, Napolitano) to positions of responsibility?
  18. Does tax evasion not register to you as a negative when deciding appointees (Geitner)?
  19. Are you attempting to by-pass Congressional oversight by appointing more than 30 Czars and Czarinas (Commissars?) without Congressional advice and consent?
  20. Are you bypassing the Congress or exceeding presidential powers by issuing scores of Executive Orders?
  21. Is appointing a race-emphasizing justice (Sotomayor) indicative of your supposed post-racial nature?
  22. Is appointing an unethical and potentially anti-American justice (Kagan) reflective of your values?
  23. Was government “transparency” enhanced by repeatedly truncating or eliminating time lines to review federal legislation?
  24. Do you consider 1,000; 2,000; or 3,000 page bills to be about moral governance or simply control?
  25. Was the content of the health care bill a result of collusion with select non-profits and/or unions?
  26. Was the manner of the health care bill passage a source of pride to you or shame?
  27. Do you think stating that you knew nothing about an incident, but that “the police acted stupidly” to be a stupid statement on your behalf?
  28. Was handing money to “Palestinians” essentially aiding terrorists or in violation EO 12947 regarding HAMAS?
  29. Has handing money to Pakistan resulting in funding terrorists?
  30. By playing soft on Iran are you allowing or accelerating the process whereby nuclear weapons will be in the hands of despots and/or Islamic terrorists?
  31. Do you think your kowtowing and bow-bow-bowing to foreign dictators and other heads of state has enhanced or detracted from our prestige and national security?
  32. Why did you dither so on actions relating to our efforts in Afghanistan?
  33. Can you define success for the soldier operating under your contemptible rules of engagement?
  34. Do you believe your fantasies about Islam (Justice? Good will? Contribution? Largest Islamic nation? Shared values?), or are you just pandering… are you complicit in social jihad?
  35. What is your aim in surrounding yourself with communists and leftists of every sort (Van Jones, Anita Dunn, John Holdren, Cass Sunstein, others)?
  36. Have your connections to ACORN ever violated statutes related to bribery, conspiracy or kick-backs?
  37. What role have you played in the wholly inadequate response to Hasan jihad murders at Ft. Hood?
  38. Have you directly or indirectly interfered with the Congressional investigation of Ft. Hood Hasan terrorist murders, and if so, to what end?
  39. Can you possibly believe that trying terrorists in civil courts is superior to military courts?
  40. Do you think justice would be served to America if terrorists were judged by a “jury of their peers”?
  41. Do you think civilian trials for terrorists would provide a macabre platform for domestic and international terrorist propaganda?
  42. Are you attempting to extend Constitutional protections to enemy combatants (Miranda), and, if so, for what purpose?
  43. Were you involved in suppression of freedom of the press (Brenda Lee case)?
  44. Why are you thinking of creating (or even suggesting) a brown shirt-esque “civilian corps.”
  45. By your lack of interest in investigating CAIR and other HLF trail unindicted co-conspirators, are you indicating support for them?
  46. Are you willfully ignorant or are you practicing deception in your support of zakat (only goes to Muslims, supports jihad, is tax deductable?).
  47. Did you bear false witness or swear a false oath to the American people regarding your citizenship status, name or anything else?
  48. What is the objective in your constant criticism of and demanding concessions from Israel?
  49. By partnering with Egypt to support the OIC resolution on blasphemy are you indicating support for UN limits on free speech?
  50. Regarding Honduras, why did you side with the anti-Constitutionalist, Zaleya?
  51. Did you consider that using the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) for propaganda purposes to be acceptable or an illicit and nefarious act?
  52. Have you intentions, through Executive Orders, to yield American sovereignty (to Interpol)?
  53. By labeling US citizens “extremists” (for support of US Constitution, owning firearms, being Christian, having served in the US Military), did you mean to vilify them and prepare to take action against them?
  54. By what right did you presume to side with the UN in an investigation against the sovereign State of Arizona for human rights abuses?
  55. In whose interest is it to pressure the European Union to accept Turkey?
  56. Can you explain your lies (specifically the ones with video and/or audio documentation)?
  57. Can you justify the WHITEWASHING of national security documents and case files of any factual connections to Islam and jihad (i.e. deliberate deception)?
  58. Was your dismissal of the “Black Panther” voter intimidation case (AFTER it was won!) a sign of your brand of “justice” to come?
  59. Since you apparently campaigned for your pro-Islam relative Odinga in Kenya, can we expect you to support Islam eventually governing in America through sharia or other mechanism?
  60. Does your bumbling and utter failure to secure the nation’s borders have as its objective a non-secure America?
  61. Were your dealings with Tony Rezko lawful or dubious in nature?
  62. What is your objective in abandoning US allies (Israel in general; removing defense shield program from Poland)?
  63. By what right are you using the US Treasury as a selective purse-de jour (Pigford, banks, nations)?
  64. Did you exert political pressure with respect to seating or not seating persons elected or appointed?
  65. Did you mean to insult the Queen or the UK by returning the bust of Winston Churchill?
  66. Were the forced closings of auto dealerships partisan, and if so, how did you justify that?
  67. Do you find it disconcerting that your lack of economic acumen is obvious and your actions in this arena devastating to Americas of all income levels?
  68. Are your collective actions intended to weaken us militarily? economically? morally?
  69. Have you intentionally and knowingly acting against America’s interests?
  70. Are you seeking a post-American world?

The list could easily go on. No candidate or elected representative can be all things to all people. However, one should certainly expect a president that is by and large free of corruption, fraud and deception and that does not harbor disdain for the supreme law of the land or the nation itself.

Additional resources:
The Obama File
The Post American Presidency, Pamela Geller with Robert Spencer
Discover the Networks – President Obama
Obama Administration’s Scandals List