Geopolitically, there could now be a game called “Search for Soros” because we know that whenever there is something BIG happening which affects the U.S. Soros will be found.
Wait! No big deal, just Eric Ciaramella getting regular Ukraine policy updates from Soros’ Open Society Foundation
So many (too many) questions keep popping up about the Ukraine investigation, like this nugget about whistleblower Eric Ciaramella and Steele-dossier connected Victoria Nunland getting regular Ukraine policy updates from Soros’ Open Society Foundations.
Why?
From our sister site, RedState:
Emails obtained via a Freedom of Information Act request by conservative group Citizens United show that Jeff Goldstein, a senior policy analyst for Eurasia at George Soros’ Open Society Foundations, kept CIA officer Eric Ciaramella and former Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs at the State Department, Victoria Nuland, regularly informed on Ukraine policy.
So many sneaky, dirty little connections here, right?
These emails were obtained in 2018 by Citizens United as part of an investigation into Victoria Nuland. But, lo and behold, it turns out the alleged whistleblower, Eric Ciaramella, was also included in the communications loop between Soros’ organization and the State Department. I am aware that Ciaramella has not been formally confirmed to be the whistleblower, but if he does turn out to be the one who filed the complaint, here is some pretty devastating evidence of his involvement with the deep state.
Has there been any doubt?
From Breitbart:
Eric Ciaramella, whom Real Clear Investigations suggests is the likely so-called whistleblower, received emails about Ukraine policy from a top director at George Soros’s Open Society Foundations.The emails informed Ciaramella and a handful of other Obama administration foreign policy officials about Soros’s whereabouts, the contents of Soros’s private meetings about Ukraine and a future meeting the billionaire activist was holding with the prime minister of Ukraine.A primary recipient of the Open Society emails along with Ciaramella was then-Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland, who played a central role in the anti-Trump dossier affair. Nuland, with whom Ciaramella worked closely, received updates on Ukraine issues from dossier author Christopher Steele in addition to her direct role in facilitating the dossier within the Obama administration.
Have you noticed, just in the last year, the many stories about UFO sightings and people being “taken?” These kind of stories used to be scoffed at and certainly not taken seriously.
I believe that there is a very good reason for this new-found interest and credibility of these stories. It used to be when we would hear about sightings and people who claim that they were actually taken and then returned to earth; most of us would chuckle and dismiss these people as crackpots.
The UAPs are just a fraction of the incursions Navy training ranges see, Navy spokesperson Joe Gradisher told CNN. Which, of course, begs the question: Are we actually alone?
The belief in alien encounters has long been a prominent feature of American life. A 1997 poll from CNN/Time on the 50th anniversary of the Roswell incident found that 80% of Americans think the government is hiding knowledge of the existence of extraterrestrial life forms.
There are thousands and thousands of reported UFO sightings, but in light of the US Navy’s recent acknowledgment of UAPs, here’s a look back at some of America’s closest encounters of the third kind. Read rest of story HERE
UFOs: Where your state ranks for unexplained sightings
The truth is out there. Extraterrestrials are more likely to visit from the North.
That’s one way, anyway, to interpret the results from a new report on the states with the most unidentified flying object sightings per capita. Washington state topped that list, followed in order by Montana, Vermont, Alaska and Maine.
Or maybe Northerners just believe more.
So much for Roswell, New Mexico, or the lonely Nevada desert. New Mexico came in 8th on the list; Nevada, 13th.
Meanwhile, the states with the fewest UFO sightings per capita — Texas, Louisiana, Georgia, Mississippi and Alabama — are all down South.
The list was put together by the analysts and space nerds at internet provider SatelliteInternet.com, which culled data from the National UFO Reporting Center and the U.S. Census, to attract attention in time for World UFO Day on July 2. (Yep, there is such a day.). read rest of story HERE
In 2004, two Navy pilots near San Diego encountered what they said was a strange aircraft: “whitish” in color, oval in shape, and capable of accelerating “like nothing I’ve ever seen,” one of the pilots would later tell the New York Times.
“I have no idea what I saw,” the pilot said to a colleague afterward.
That alleged encounter was among the incidents examined by a secret Pentagon program investigating unidentified flying objects, which was established in 2007 at the behest of then-Senator Harry Reid and revealed in a bombshell Timesreport ten years later. The revelation of a $22 million intelligence program aimed at investigating UFOs was stunning enough. But interest among lawmakers has only seemed to grow since the now-shuttered Pentagon program was revealed, suggesting that the possibility of alien encounters is something the United States government is taking seriously.
According to Politico, an increasing number of legislators have been requesting Pentagon briefings on UFOs—a sign, officials told the publication, of “growing congressional interest” in the topic. “There are people coming out of the woodwork,” a government official told the outlet. Three senators, including Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Intelligence committee, were reportedly briefed on Wednesday about encounters members of the Navy have described with unidentified aircraft. “If naval pilots are running into unexplained interference in the air,” Warner’s spokesperson said, “that’s a safety concern Senator Warner believes we need to get to the bottom of.” Other lawmakers apparently agree: “More requests for briefings are coming in,” an intelligence official told Politico.
What exactly those briefings have consisted of is unclear, but the mounting interest lends those with a belief in, or a curiosity about, the possibility of extraterrestrial life more fuel for speculation. The notion that the government knows more than it’s telling us has often figured into theories about alien life and claims of UFO sightings. Government actions in the last two years, including the briefings and steps by the Navy to formalize UFO reporting processes, would seem to feed into that dynamic.
Of course, none of this necessarily means we’re not alone, and U.S. officials and agencies have avoided putting on the tin-foil hats, casting procedural changes as national security concerns. “For safety and security concerns, the Navy and the [U.S. Air Force] takes these reports very seriously and investigates each and every report,” the Navy told Politico in a statement in April. “As part of this effort, the Navy is updating and formalizing the process by which reports of any such suspected incursions can be made to the cognizant authorities.” Still, the interest suggests that the government views such reports as credible enough to warrant attention. Reid, the retired senator who secured the $22 million in funding for the Pentagon study program, called for congressional hearings into the government’s UFO knowledge as recently as this month. “They would be surprised how the American public would accept it,” Reid said in an interview with Nevada Public Radio. “People from their individual states would accept it.”
Of course, not everybody has been swept up in the growing intrigue. Speaking to George Stephanopoulos in an extended ABC News interview last week, Donald Trump acknowledged having been briefed on the subject, but said he didn’t buy into it. “I want them to think whatever they think,” Trump said of Navy pilots who have reported seeing strange aircraft recently. “I’ve seen and I’ve read and I’ve heard, and I did have one very brief meeting on it. But people are saying they’re seeing UFOs. Do I believe it? Not particularly.” Still, in true Trumpian fashion, he didn’t shut the door on the possibility completely. “We’ll watch it,” he told Stephanopoulos. “You’ll be the first to know.” source
Lucifer Instrument Helps Astronomers See Through Darkness to Most Distant Observable Objects
Courtesy of Lucifer
This image depicts a stellar nursery in the Milky Way about 8,000 light years from Earth. Such clouds are typically opaque to visible light, but infrared light can penetrate them. The Lucifer instrument helps telescopes see that light. The E and N signify east and north.Anna Pasquali/via University of Arizona
A new instrument with an evil-sounding name is helping scientists see how stars are born. Lucifer, which stands for (deep breath) “Large Binocular Telescope Near-infrared Utility with Camera and Integral Field Unit for Extragalactic Research,” is a chilled instrument attached to a telescope in Arizona. And yes, it’s named for the Devil, whose name itself means “morning star.” But it wasn’t meant to evoke him, according to a spokesman for the University of Arizona, where it is housed.
The instrument is chilled to -213 Celsius, about -351 F, to allow for near-infrared observations. That wavelength is important for understanding star and planet formation, as well as observing very distant and very young galaxies. Lucifer has three interchangeable cameras for imaging and spectroscopy in different resolutions. It has a large field of view and high-res capabilities, which allow a wide range of observations.
Lucifer is part of the Large Binocular Telescope, which happens to be right next to the Vatican Observatory on Mt. Graham in Tucson. That’s right, the Vatican has an observatory in Arizona, manned by Jesuit astronomers. Now its next-door neighbor is named for the Devil. Read rest of article HERE
Read about the Vatican Observatory in Arizona, and how it is entrusted to the JESUITS HERE
Brethren, I’m quite certain that you did not miss the attempt at humor and sarcasm in these articles. And the sarcasm is NOT in reference to the belief in extra-terrestrial life. It was directed at Christians and Conservatives.
The vast majority of scientists are atheists. They mock us for our belief in a personal God. And also our belief in Satan.
“And yes, it’s named for the Devil, whose name itself means “morning star.” But it wasn’t meant to evoke him, according to a spokesman for the University of Arizona, where it is housed.”
“Lucifer is part of the Large Binocular Telescope, which happens to be right next to the Vatican Observatory on Mt. Graham in Tucson. That’s right, the Vatican has an observatory in Arizona, manned by Jesuit astronomers. Now its next-door neighbor is named for the Devil.”
Many of the scientists working with giant telescopes believe there is “life” in outer space. But they just will NOT even entertain the thought that the Universe was created by GOD, who is also “Father God” to born again believers.
The article from Vanity Fair began with:
“Is the Truth out there?”
How sad that they are looking for TRUTH in outer space! We know that TRUTH is found in Jesus Christ our Lord. And by the way – He created everything in the Universe!
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it” (John 1:1-5).
And the One who created everything is also the TRUTH:
“Jesus said to him, “I amthe way,the truth, andthe life.No one comes to the Fatherexcept through Me”. (John 14:6).
Why I believe that our disappearance in the Rapture will be explained away by scientists and the United Nations:
Conservative Christians as a whole, have not been deceived by the “Climate Change” crowd. We know from reading about the earth that our planet goes through changes in temperature and it is not a man-made phenomenon.
Nonetheless, we are hated for not jumping onto the Climate Change bandwagon. We didn’t even blink when Greta Thunberg scolded those who do not agree about Climate Change with her “HOW DARE YOU!”
We also know that Climate Change is a ruse to take over the economies of the world, and eventually their governments.
Can you say ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT?
And we must NEVER forget that Satan is capable of signs and wonders:
“Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders” (2 Thessalonians 2:9).
So brethren, is it so hard to believe that the U.N. will one day say this:
“Though the world is in shock at the disappearance of millions of people, take heart – because we believe that intelligent life in outer space knew that these individuals had to be removed from planet earth for our own safety. Now those who are left will comply with the regulations set forth for all nations to deal with Climate Change.”
Ever since the night of November 8th, 2016 – the Left has been in melt down mode over Trump’s victorious run for the presidency.
Do you remember watching the reactions from CNN and other Leftist fake news websites? Shock is not even strong enough a word.
But soon, shock morphed into rage. And then rage became determination to smash our president with false allegations. How long did we endure the “Russian collusion” mantra?
It became a “throw anything against the wall and see what sticks” circus. And guess what? NOTHING stuck.
The Practice Run for Impeachment was the Attempted take down of Kavanaugh
The Left brought in Liars to try to smear Brett Kavanaugh. The testimonies of the take-down team fell apart – as most lies do. It was a despicable display of the moral degeneracy of the Marxist/Socialist Democratic Party.
We are witnessing constitutional government dissipating before our very eyes. —
Tweets from Mark Zaid, current attorney for the “whistleblower”
Here are at least ten reasons why the Democratic impeachment “inquiry” is a euphemism for an ongoing coup attempt.
1) Impeachment 24/7. The impeachment “inquiry,” supposedly prompted by the president’s Ukrainian call, is simply the most recent in a long series of “coups” that sought to overturn the 2016 election and thus preclude a 2020 reelection bid. The pattern gives away the game.
Usually the serial futile attempts to abort the Trump presidency — with the exception of the Mueller Dream-Team debacle — were each characterized by about a month of media-driven hysteria. We remember the voting-machines-fraud hoax, the initial 2017 impeachment effort, the attempt to warp the Electoral College voting, the Logan Act, the emoluments clause, the 25th Amendment, the McCabe-Rosenstein faux coup, and various Michael Avenatti–Stormy Daniels–Michael Cohen psychodramas.
Ukraine then is not unique, but simply another mini-coup attempt that follows the last failed coup and that will presage another coup to take its place when it too fails to remove Trump.
All of these efforts reflect a desperate effort both to reverse the 2016 election and to preclude a 2020 reelection effort, and, barring that, to drive down the Trump polls to the point of making him delegitimized. A week after Trump was elected, the Wall Street Journal reported that intelligence agencies were withholding information from their president. “Anonymous,” in a September 5, 2018, New York Times op-ed, bragged of an ongoing “resistance” of high-ranking government officials seeking to stonewall Trump. As soon as Trump was inaugurated, Washington lawyer and former Obama official Rosa Brooks was publicly raising the possibility of a military coup to remove him. Retired admiral William McRaven recently called for Trump to be gone — “the sooner, the better.”
All of these efforts reflect a desperate effort both to reverse the 2016 election and to preclude a 2020 reelection effort, and, barring that, to drive down the Trump polls to the point of making him delegitimized. A week after Trump was elected, the Wall Street Journal reported that intelligence agencies were withholding information from their president. “Anonymous,” in a September 5, 2018, New York Times op-ed, bragged of an ongoing “resistance” of high-ranking government officials seeking to stonewall Trump. As soon as Trump was inaugurated, Washington lawyer and former Obama official Rosa Brooks was publicly raising the possibility of a military coup to remove him. Retired admiral William McRaven recently called for Trump to be gone — “the sooner, the better.”
2) Whistleblowers Who Are Not Whistleblowers. The “whistleblower” who prompted this most recent iteration of attempted Trump removal is no whistleblower by any common definition of the noun (i.e., “an individual who, without authorization, reveals private or classified information about an organization usually related to wrongdoing or misconduct. Whistleblowers generally state that such actions are motivated by a commitment to the public interest.” — Encyclopaedia Britannica). He has no incriminating documents, no information at all. He does not even have firsthand evidence of wrongdoing, much less proof of suspect conduct within intelligence agencies that alone would prompt a legitimate appeal to the Office of the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community.
Instead, the whistleblower relied on secondhand water-cooler gossip about an illegally leaked presidential call. Even his mangled version of the call did not match that of official transcribers. He was not disinterested but had a long history of partisanship in general, and concerning Ukraine in particular. He was a protégé of many of Trump’s most adamant opponents, including Susan Rice, John Brennan, and Joe Biden. He did not follow protocol by going first to the inspector general but instead caucused with the staff of Adam Schiff’s impeachment inquiry. Neither the whistleblower nor his doppelgänger Lieutenant Colonel Vindman, who both professed strong pro-Ukrainian sympathies during their past tenures associated with the Obama administration, were bothered by the activities of the Bidens or by the Obama decision to stop arms deliveries to Ukraine. Their outrage, in other words, was not about Ukraine but over Trump.
It is highly unlikely that there are any plans to call the whistleblower or recall Vindman in person before any committee, because their usefulness as instigators of “impeachment” has already passed, and both are now rank liabilities. Their inconsistencies and past partisan affiliations offer only vulnerabilities.
3) First-term impeachment. The Clinton and Nixon inquiries were directed at second-term presidencies in which there were no more electoral remedies for alleged wrongdoing. In contrast, Trump is up for election in less than a year. Impeachment then seems a partisan exercise in either circumventing a referendum election or in damaging a president seeking reelection.
4) No Special Counsel Finding. In the past, special counsels have found felonious presidential behavior, such as cited in Leon Jaworski’s and Ken Starr’s investigations.
In contrast, Special Counsel Robert Mueller spent 22 months and $35 million, and yet his largely partisan law and investigative team found no collusion and no actionable presidential obstruction of that non-crime. We are not just proceeding with impeachment without a special counsel’s finding of wrongdoing, but after a special counsel’s finding of no actionable wrongdoing.
5) No Bipartisanship. There was broad bipartisan support for the Nixon impeachment inquiry and even some for the Clinton impeachment. There is none at all for the Schiff impeachment effort, given its overtly partisan nature.
6) Impeachment without High Crimes or Misdemeanors. There is no proof of any actual Trump crime.
No longer is Nancy Pelosi describing the whistleblower as central to the impeachment inquiry. Asking a corrupt foreign head of state to look into past corruption is pro forma. That Joe Biden is now a candidate for president and Trump’s potential rival does not ensure him exemption from his possible wrongdoing in the past as vice president when his son used the Biden name for lucrative advantage in leveraging Ukrainian money for assumed preferential Obama-administration treatment.
In other words, it is certainly not a crime for a president to adopt his own foreign policy to fit particular countries nor to request of a foreign government seeking U.S. aid, with a long history of corruption, that it ensure it has not in the past colluded with prior U.S. officials in suspicious activity. A president can appoint or fire any ambassador he chooses, all the more so when one has a known record of partisanship. It is not a crime to disagree with House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff when he says that White House officials must testify when he so summons them.
The irony is that while the House politicizes impeachment, the IG of the Justice Department, Michael Horowitz, and lifelong civil servant and federal attorney John Durham are likely to show concrete evidence that the now-exempt Obama administration used the powers of the FBI, CIA, and DOJ, unethically if not illegally, to attempt to destroy the candidacy, transition, and presidency of Donald Trump — still the current object of yet another political coup.
7) Thought Crimes? Even if there were ever a quid, there is no quo: Unlike the case of the Obama administration, the Trump administration did supply arms to Ukraine, and the Ukrainians apparently did not reinvestigate the Bidens. As a matter of general policy, Trump has been far harder on Russia and far more concretely supportive of Ukraine than was the Obama administration. That stubborn fact is ipso facto evidence that if there was any quid pro quo, it was more likely a matter of Biden rather than Trump pressuring the Ukrainians, given the actual quite different results: Again, the Trump administration armed the Ukrainians; Obama and his administration did not. Thought crimes are still not impeachable offenses.
8) Different Standards of Justice. There is now no standard of equality under the law. Instead, we are entering the jurisprudence of junta politics. If an alleged quid pro quo is an impeachable offense, should Vice President Joe Biden have been impeached or indicted for clearly leveraging the firing of a Ukrainian prosecutor for dubious reasons by threats of withholding U.S. aid?
Should Barack Obama have been investigated for getting caught on a hot mic offering to be flexible after his reelection on missile defense if Vladimir Putin would give him some space? In fact, Russia did not embarrass Obama during the subsequent 2012 successful Obama reelection effort, and Obama did shelve joint Eastern European missile-defense plans.
So there is no consistency in presidential audits. Would the Obama administration have welcomed or even tolerated congressional requests to turn over all its emails, private phone conversations, and memos concerning covert meetings of U.S. and Iranian officials that surrounded the nocturnal transfer of $400 million in cash for the release of American hostages — with much of such money ending up in the hands of Hezbollah terrorists? Would the Obama administration have complied with requests for texts and transcripts surrounding its decisions to halt Eastern European missile defense?
9) The Schiff Factor. Representative Adam Schiff is now de facto chief impeachment prosecutor. He has repeatedly lied about the certainty of impending Mueller indictments or bombshells. He flat-out lied that he and his staff had no prior contact with the whistleblower. He made up a version of the Trump call that did not represent the actual transcript, and when called out, he begged off by claiming he was offering a “parody.” He has an unsavory reputation as a chronic selective leaker of classified information in the House Intelligence Committee. For weeks he has not allowed Republican members of his House Intelligence Committee to have the same freedom to call and cross-examine witnesses as was extended to the then-minority Democrats during the committee’s 2016–07 investigation of FISA, unmasking, and surveillance abuses.
Tradition and protocol argue that the proper place for impeachment inquiries and investigations is the House Judiciary Committee. Schiff successfully hijacked that committee’s historic role for two reasons: 1) His reputation as a brawling hyper-partisan meant that he would turn the investigation into a proverbial witch hunt and wet the lunatic beak of the progressive base; and 2) he has the ability so far as intelligence chair to selectively block rapid dissemination of transcripts of cross-examinations of witnesses and to use secrecy to massage the conduct of the committee and to selectively release information to the media.
10) Precedent. The indiscriminate efforts to remove Trump over the past three years, when coupled with the latest impeachment gambit, have now set a precedent in which the out party can use impeachment as a tool to embarrass, threaten, leverage, or seek to remove a sitting president for political purposes to reverse an election.
At best, we have turned a uniquely constitutional republic into a European parliamentary system in which heads of states can be removed from power without national elections. At worst, we are now a rank banana republic in which coups are an accepted model of political opposition.
The next Democratic president should be prepared, in his first term, for the real chance of facing the same, and apparently now institutionalized, tactics used against Trump.
We are witnessing constitutional government dissipating before our very eyes. source
Do you know why? It really is quite simple. Islam teaches them that when they go to another country, their goal is to take over that country, and to implement sharia law.
I have said before that when my people came to America from Ukraine, they were so excited at the thought of becoming Americans. They couldn’t wait to learn English and study about America’s history and her Constitution. They were in the best country on the planet, and they knew it.
They came through Ellis Island, NY and were so thrilled when they saw the Statue of Liberty.
Not so with Muslims. They create there own territories which become what is known as “No-go Zones.” In NYC they even have their own police force and squad cars for these areas.
And my family never referred to themselves as Jewish Americans or Ukrainian Americans. We were AMERICANS and we were proud to be!
The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) recently held its 25th Annual Gala in Washington, D.C, in which CAIR’s executive director announced a goal of pushing more Islamists into Congress.
As the Investigative Project on Terrorism reports, CAIR’s executive director Nihad Awad shares the “formula” he believes will secure Islamists greater political power:
“A strong CAIR equals a strong community. A strong community will produce a strong and confident and successful Muslim … “So I’m telling you tonight we are going to work in the next years, inshallah (God willing], to elect at least 30 Muslims in the Congress. This number is equivalent to our size and our potential as American Muslims. Including at least two U.S. senator Muslims.”
In 2008, I heard this message echoed at a southern California mosque by Imam Siraj Wahhaj at an event sponsored by the Muslim Alliance in North America (MANA), where Wahhaj said:
“There is no America. There is only Islam.”
None of these views have been clandestine. Over the years the message has been consistent. What has changed is that the Islamist candidates they produce are more vocal about exactly which interests they represent.
Congresswoman Ilhan Omar’s support of the Hamas terror group and the anti-Semitic BDS movement against Israel is the most recent demonstration of that.
I hope and pray that President Trump understands how Muslims operate. It’s hard to believe that not one of his advisors educated him on the ways of Islam.
When Trump was running in the primaries, one of his promises was to declare the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization. This was not done. But also, along with Muslim Brotherhood, CAIR is considered a Terror-linked organization.
We who follow the Islamist movement fell off our collective chair on November 15, when the news came that the United Arab Emirates’ministerial cabinet had listed the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) as one of 83 proscribed terrorist organizations, up there with the Taliban, al-Qaeda, and ISIS.
This came as a surprise because the UAE authorities themselves have a record of promoting Islamism; because CAIR has a history of raising funds in the UAE; and because the UAE embassy in Washington had previously praised CAIR.
This last divide concerns us here. After decades of working closely with the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) and its related institutions, the Persian Gulf monarchies (with the single, striking exception of Qatar) have come to see the MB complex of institutions as a threat to their existence. The Saudi, Emirati, Kuwaiti, and Bahraini rulers now view politicians like Mohamed Morsi of Egypt as their enemies, as they do Hamas and its progeny — including CAIR.
While the Gulf monarchs have not become any less Islamist, they have acquired a clear-eyed appreciation of the harm that MB-related groups can do.
CAIR can rightly be so characterized. True, it does not set off bombs, but, as the UAE’s foreign minister explains, “Our threshold is quite low. . . . We cannot accept incitement or funding.” Indeed, CAIR incites, funds, and does much more vis-à-visterrorism:
It apologizes for terrorist groups: Challenged repeatedly to denounce Hamas and Hezbollah as terrorist groups, CAIR denounces the acts of violence but not their sponsors.
It is connected to Hamas: Hamas, designated a terrorist organization by the U.S. and many other governments, indirectly created CAIR and the two groups remain tight. Examples: In 1994, CAIR head Nihad Awad publicly declared his support for Hamas; the Holy Land Foundation (HLF), a Hamas front group, contributed $5,000 to CAIR; in turn, CAIR exploited the 9/11 attacks to raise money for HLF; and, this past August, demonstrators at a CAIR-sponsored rally in Floridaproclaimed “We are Hamas!”
It settled a lawsuit: CAIR initiated a libel lawsuit in 2004 over five statements by a group called Anti-CAIR. But two years later, CAIR settled the suit with prejudice (meaning that it cannot be reopened), implicitly acknowledging the accuracy of Anti-CAIR’s assertions, which included:
“CAIR is a terrorist supporting front organization that is partially funded by terrorists”;
“CAIR . . . is supported by terrorist supporting individuals, groups and countries”;
“CAIR has proven links to, and was founded by, Islamic terrorists”; and
“CAIR actively supports terrorists and terrorist supporting groups and nations.”
It includes individuals accused of terrorism: At least seven board members or staffat CAIR have been arrested, denied entry to the U.S., or were indicted on or pled guilty to (or were convicted of) terrorist charges: Siraj Wahhaj, Bassem Khafagi, Randall (“Ismail”) Royer, Ghassan Elashi, Rabih Haddad, Muthanna Al-Hanooti, and Nabil Sadoun.
It is in trouble with the law: Federal prosecutors in 2007 named CAIR (along with two other Islamic organizations) as “unindicted co-conspirators and/or joint venturers” in a criminal conspiracy to support Hamas financially. In 2008, the FBI ended contacts with CAIR because of concern about its continuing terrorist ties.
On learning of the UAE listing, CAIR called it “shocking and bizarre,” then got to work to have the Department of State protest and undo the ruling. Nothing loath, department spokesperson Jeff Rathke noted that the U.S. government, which “does not consider these organizations to be terrorist organizations,” has asked for more information about the UAE decision. The UAE minister of state for foreign affairs replied that if organizations can show that their “approach has changed,” they are eligible to appeal “to have their names eliminated from the list.”
It’s becoming crystal clear that the Lord is using Islam in bringing about many end times prophecies. I would never have imagined that the inevitable demise of America might come at the hands of Radical Islam.
And even stranger, that Islamists would find a friend in the Left and work together to unravel our once great country.
