Here, you are urged and encouraged to run your mouths about something important.

Monday, March 5, 2012

Mormons Baptized 9/11 Hijacker, Attempted to Baptize Mohammed

Helen Radkey is a very important person to the mainstream media. To this point, both MSNBC and CNN have used her expertise to dip their toes in the water about how best to attack Mitt Romney over the issue of his religion (if he becomes the nominee). Radkey has a treasure trove of opposition research waiting for the left to dump on the American people at the right time. It consists of the names of Holocaust victims, serial killers, notorious tyrants and dictators, fictitious characters, and mass murderers who have all been posthumously baptized into the Mormon religion.

I reached out to Radkey and asked her if she knew of any instances in which deceased Muslims have been baptized into the Mormon faith.

Here is what she said:
“To date, I have a handful of Mormon records that show attempts to baptize Mohammed, and I also have a baptism for a 9/11 hijacker, and copies of entries for 14 others, that show these names were submitted for proxy rites.”
If we've learned anything since 9/11, it's that Muslims are more than just a little hypersensitive about their religion. Seemingly any show of disrespect for either Islam or its prophet Mohammed can be met with deadly violence. Most recently, in Afghanistan, when the U.S. Military was involved in the burning of Islamic materials, to include defaced Qur'ans, deaths have resulted.

How would the Muslim world react if it found out that the Republican nominee for President practices a religion that has baptized its Jihadist martyrs? Is the Mormon religion showing disrespect for Islam when it attempts to baptize Mohammed multiple times and successfully baptizes a 9/11 hijacker? Is that not akin to ignoring a “Do not disturb” sign before knocking on the door of a room occupied by a deceased Jihadist and multiple virgins in order to ask them if they'd like to change religions?

Of course, the response from the Mormon leadership is that they don't condone the baptisms of Anne Frank, Adolf Hitler, Mao Tse-Tung, Benito Mussolini, Josef Stalin, Ted Bundy, Muslim terrorists, and countless Jewish Holocaust victims even though all of those individuals have been baptized into the Mormon religion. These are the acts of rebels – they say – within their churches all over the world whom they can't control. The church issued an edict in 1995 that forbade anyone from baptizing such people, Holocaust victims specifically.

In a recent appearance on MSNBC with Lawrence O'Donnell, Radkey elaborated:
“I've been tracking records for Holocaust Jews in Mormon databases since around August, 1999. That was roughly four years after the '95 agreement and I have never seen records that did not reflect Jewish Holocaust victims. In other words, the practice never stopped.”
How about repurcussions? If the Mormon church laid down strict orders not to baptize Jewish Holocaust victims, would those who disobeyed such an edict be excommunicated or otherwise punished?

Here is what Radkey had to say to O'Donnell on the matter:
“I have seen thousands of names for Jewish Holocaust victims in Mormon databases and the submitters, you know there was no indication or no word from the Church that they had disciplined these people who broke the rules.”
Both Adolf Hitler and Ted Bundy were baptized at Mormonism's ground zero – Utah – in 1993 and 2008 respectively. In fact, Radkey reported that the Mormon Church attempted to conceal the Hitler baptism.

Why are all of these names still in the Mormon databases? Why haven't they been purged? Why would Mormon leaders attempt to say that the database is so large that it can't possibly police all submissions, especially when we live in such a digital age? Couldn't names like Adolf Hitler, Anne Frank, and Mohammed – as well as the names of Mormons who submitted them – be red flagged instead of ignored?

Republicans, be prepared to lose if Mitt Romney is your nominee. The mainstream media is preparing to do to him with Mormonism what it didn't do to Obama with Black Liberation Theology and his ties to Jeremiah Wright.

I covered this extensively on the March 4th show.

Entire piece - with hyperlinks - is up at Red County.

More information on Obama's Transgender Nanny in Indonesia

The fact that Barack Obama had a transgender nanny when he was a child in Indonesia is not a new revelation; it was reported by the New York Times back in 2010. However, the Daily Mail has uncovered some new information:
Barack Obama's former nanny has been revealed as a gay transgender man who made the future president laugh by trying on his mother's lipstick.

'Evie' cared for the boy she called Barry when his mother Ann Dunham moved to the Indonesian capital of Jakarta in the late 1960s.

Openly gay, she would leave the house dressed in full drag - but was very careful that Barack never saw her.

'He was so young and I never let him see me wearing women's clothes,' Evie said. 'But he did see me trying on his mother's lipstick, sometimes. That used to really crack him up.'
Evie apparently entered the prostitution business after being Obama's nanny:
The nanny, who turned to prostitution after the family left and now lives in a slum, met the future commander-in-chief's mother at a cocktail party in 1969.

Dunham, who had moved to the country two years earlier with her second husband Lolo Soetoro, sampled Evie's beef steak and fried rice and was so impressed that she offered her a job.

It did not take long before she was also eight-year-old Barack's carer, playing with him and bringing him to and from school.
Of course, being exposed to a gay, transgender authority figure was not Obama's fault but that doesn't mean it didn't influence him. Perhaps it had something to do with creating Obama's worldview that prompted his calling Sandra Fluke to her that her parents should be proud of her.

h/t Free Republic

Breitbart's Vetting of Obama starts... Today

When he appeared at CPAC last month, Andrew Breitbart pledged that he would vet Barack Obama this election year. That vetting process is going to include the political version of Chinese water torture. The first drip was penned by Andrew before his death and it includes a poster from 1998 that promoted a play about Saul Alinsky. Guess whose name appeared on that poster.

You guessed it.

Via Big Government:
In 1998, a small Chicago theater company staged a play titled The Love Song of Saul Alinsky, dedicated to the life and politics of the radical community organizer whose methods Obama had practiced and taught on Chicago’s South Side.

Obama was not only in the audience, but also took the stage after one performance, participating in a panel discussion that was advertised in the poster for the play.
Aside from having an image of the press release promoting the play, BG has also provided a copy of the flyer.


Here is some of what Breitbart wrote about the play:
So, what’s in the play? It truly is a love song to Alinsky. In the first few minutes of the play, Alinsky plays Moses – yes, the Biblical Moses – talking to God. The play glorifies Alinsky stealing food from restaurants and organizing others to do the same, explaining, “I saw it as a practical use of social ecology: you had members of the intellectual community, the hope of the future, eating regularly for six months, staying alive till they could make their contributions to society.”
Interestingly, although the play began with Alinsky playing Moses, it ended with Obama's ideological mentor explaining that he preferred going to hell than to heaven:
The play finishes with Alinsky announcing he’d rather go to Hell than Heaven. Why? “More comfortable there. You see, all my life I’ve been with the Have-Nots: here you’re a Have-Not if you’re short of money, there you’re a Have-Not if you’re short of virtue. I’d be asking more questions, organizing them. They’re my kind of people – Hell would be Heaven for me.”

That’s The Love Song of Saul Alinsky. It’s radical leftist stuff, and it revels in its radical leftism.
Fits right in line with Alinsky's dedication in his book, Rules for Radicals:
“Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history... the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom — Lucifer.”
If this is merely the opening salvo in an all-out offensive against Obama, it's a big one.

Read it all.

Video: Al-Qaeda Defense Attorney Promoted to number 3 at Justice Department

Yesterday, it was learned that a man named Tony West was promoted to the number 3 spot at the Justice Department behind Attorney General Eric Holder and Deputy Attorney General James Cole. The problem with West is that he has represented members of America's enemies, including the notorious John Walker Lindh, also known as the "American Taliban."

While appearing on Fox News to discuss the appointment, former Justice Department voting rights attorney, J. Christian Adams was visibly disturbed by it. When asked the expected question about why representing someone like Lindh should be a reflection on West, Adams raised two very key points. One, West didn't just represent Lindh as well as other individuals who represented America's enemies but he continued to speak glowingly of Lindh after the conviction.

The other point raised by Adams was more about conflict of interest. West used to represent Gitmo detainees and is now responsible for setting policy at Gitmo.

This is very, very disturbing.

Via Fox News:

Grassley asking why DOJ IG report on Fast and Furious taking so long

Senator Chuck Grassley is rightfully demanding to know where the DOJ IG's report on Fast and Furious is. It's been well over a year since Cynthia Schnedar was allegedly asked to investigate the operation. Considering that Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer's deputy, Jason Weinstein, referred to the drafting of the now infamous February 4, 2011 letter as being more difficult than the "Magna Carta," perhaps we already know the answer to Grassley's question. If the two page letter was so difficult to draft - and was later proven to have been demonstrably false - perhaps the IG's report is more difficult than calculating Einstein's theory of relativity.

Anyway, via the Washington Times:
The ranking Republican on the SenateJudiciary Committee says a Justice Department investigation into the botched “Fast and Furious” gunrunning operation has taken “an awfully long time to finish” and, as a result, “should meet the highest standards of accuracy and independence.”

“Operation Fast and Furious failed to live up to the standards set by the American people, and we need to know how that could ever happen,” said Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, who first questioned the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) operation more than a year ago.

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. asked the inspector general’s office at the Justice Department in February 2011 to investigate the operation after Mr. Grassley and Rep. Darrell Issa, California Republican and chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, discovered that ATF had allowed more than 2,000 weapons - including AK-47 assault rifles - to be “walked” across the border to drug smugglers in Mexico.
The origins of this operation have been narrowed down to a group of people that is not all that large so there's really no logical explanation for why it's taking so long. Then again, as the Times points out, the acting IG is not only a Holder lackey but she hasn't even been confirmed by the Senate yet:
Jay Lerner, spokesman for the inspector general’s office, said “the review is ongoing,” but declined to elaborate.

Mr. Grassley initially expressed concern that the investigation was being conducted without an independent Senate-confirmed inspector general running the office. Acting Inspector General Cynthia A. Schnedar has not been through the Senate confirmation process and Mr. Grassley questioned whether she could “challenge senior officials with tough questions.”

President Obama’s nominee as inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz, is awaiting Senate confirmation.

Rep. Ted Poe, Texas Republican and a member of the House Judiciary Committee, said the inspector general’s review has “taken longer than the Warren Commission report on the Kennedy assassination.” He said the inquiry “comes across that it is being stonewalled until after the election.”
I don't think Holder will be able to wait that long to release the report. In fact, I seem to remember him saying it would only be a couple of months or so when he testified back on February 2nd.

One month down.

Accuracy in Media
American Spectator
American Thinker
Big Government
Big Journalism
Doug Ross
Flopping Aces
Fox Nation
Fox News
Free Republic
The Hill
Hope for America
Hot Air
Hot Air Pundit
Jawa Report
Jihad Watch
Michelle Malkin
Naked Emperor News
National Review
New Zeal Blog
News Real
Pajamas Media
Red State
Right Wing News
Say Anything
Stop Islamization of America
Verum Serum
Wall Street Journal
Washington Times
Watts Up With That
Web Today
Weekly Standard
World Net Daily

Blog Archive