By: Fern Sidman

In an elaborate sting operation, four African American Muslim men were arrested Wednesday night in New York City for attempting to bomb two synagogues in the Bronx and for conspiring to shoot down military planes at an Air National Guard base in Newburgh, NY. James Cromitie, David Williams, Onta Williams and Laguerre Payen were friends who had met while serving time in prison and it was there that they converted to Islam.

The bombs in their possession were fake; supplied to them by an FBI informant who had been cooperating with authorities since 2002, when he pleaded guilty to taking part in an unrelated fraud scheme. The four men attended the Masjid al-Ikhlas mosque in Newburgh, New York, where they first met the informant. In April, Mr. Cromitie, 53 and the other men in their 20s and 30s selected the Riverdale Temple, the Riverdale Jewish Center and the National Guard base as their targets. On May 6, they obtained the bogus surface to air missiles and explosive devices that they were to use in the attack from a Connecticut warehouse.

Eric Snyder, an assistant United States attorney, said at their arraignment, “It’s hard to envision a more chilling plot. These are extremely violent men. These are men who eagerly embraced an opportunity to “bring death to Jews”. Addressing the fact that all four men were born in the United States, New York City Police Commissioner Ray Kelly said, “It speaks to our concern about homegrown terrorism.” He added that, “They stated that they wanted to commit jihad. They were disturbed about what was happening in Afghanistan and Pakistan, that Muslims were being killed”. He also said that the defendants also said that if Jews were killed in this attack that would be all right with them.

When queried as to whether the four men acted in concert or received support from any known terrorist organizations, Mr. Kelly said they acted alone.

In an article written for the Pajamas Media web site that appeared on May 22 entitled, “Homegrown Islamic Jihad in the Bronx: Now We Are All Israelis”, Dr. Phyllis Chesler, an emerita professor of psychology and women’s studies at the City University of New York states:

“Onta Williams of the Bronx Four is quoted as saying: “They (the United States military) are killing Muslim brothers and sisters in Muslim countries, so if we kill them here (in the United States) with IEDs (improved explosive devices) and Stingers, it is equal.” James Cromitie, a.k.a. Abdul Rahman, stated that he was part of a Pakistani-based terror group and wanted to kill Jews and Americans. According to the New York Post, “Cromitie pointed to people walking on the street in the vicinity of a Jewish community center and said that if he had a gun, he would shoot each one in the head.”

This raises some serious questions about Commissioner Kelly’s assertion that these men acted independently, sans the backing from radical Islamic terrorist organizations.

This is certainly not the first time that the authorities have hastened to declare that terrorists were tantamount to common criminals. On the evening of November 5, 1990 the far reaching tentacles of global jihad ominously pervaded the United States, yet it would many years to come before anyone made the connection. On that evening, Egyptian born terrorist El Said Nosair, a Brooklyn resident and city employee walked into a conference room at the Marriott Hotel on New York’s east side. He then brandished a .357 magnum revolver and assassinated Rabbi Meir Kahane, founder of the Jewish Defense League and member of the Israeli parliament. Within hours after the murder the New York City police spokesman said that the defendant did not have ties to terror organizations and labeled the shooting as a homicide. Joseph Borelli, then chief of New York City detectives, said the shooting of Rabbi Kahane killing was the work of a lone gunman and the search of his apartment had turned up nothing.

According to an article written by investigative journalist, Seamus McGraw entitled, “The Killing of Rabbi Kahane: Jihad in America”, he states:

“As authorities would later discover, the bullets fired from Nosairs gun were the opening salvo in a war, a war waged by Islamic extremists against America and its interests. Within three years of the Kahane shooting, a group of men closely linked to Nosair, men led by the blind Sheik Omar Ahmad Abdul Rahman, would launch the first attack on the World Trade Center, setting off a deadly bomb in the basement of the towering building. Later, members of the cabal would be accused of planning a reign of terror against New York, plans that included attacks on the citys bridges and tunnels. And a few years after that, a handful of terrorists, under orders from Osama bin Laden and his Al Qaeda network, a network that counted some of Nosair’s allies among its members, would ultimately topple those towers, and attack the Pentagon.

All of it, authorities would later say, was foreshadowed within three days of Nosairs arrest when investigators poring through his Cliffside Park, N.J., apartment would find a diary in his handwriting that would later seem almost prophetic. In it, Nosair called for jihad against the enemies of Islam and urged his comrades to bring America to its knees by destroying the structure of their civilized pillars; their high world buildings which they are proud of; their statues and the buildings in which their leaders gather. But all of that was missed in the days immediately after the Kahane killing.”

All about The Killing of Rabbi Kahane: Jihad in America – Crime Library on truTV.com

Before the authorities can promulgate with complete certitude that these would be assassins are devoid of any substantive terrorist ties, an extensive investigation must be conducted and all evidence must be made public. There is no question that the pernicious and baneful agenda of radical Islam continues to proliferate in the Western world and as such, the theology of global jihad has taken root in the Middle East, Europe and the United States. And for those who cherish the freedoms that our democratic system affords us; to those who are concerned about the future of Western civilization as we know it, let us raise our collective voices in protest against jihadists of all stripes. Let us shuffle our priorities and let out elected officials and our president know that the threat of jihad on our shores is our number one domestic and foreign policy issue. Before it is too late, we must mobilize expeditiously.


Blogger Offers ‘Definitive Guide’ to Environmental Lawsuit on Eve of Chevron Shareholders Meeting

By: Bob McCarty
Bob McCarty Writes

If you’re like most Americans, you’ve probably heard little about an environmental lawsuit that has potential to produce the largest settlement in the history of the world. In the space below, I offer for free information that might best be described as “The Definitive Guide to the Chevron Ecuador Lawsuit (hereinafter referred to as “The Guide“).”

Before I introduce the contents of The Guide, however, let me offer a brief overview of the lawsuit:

The case pits the Amazon Defense Coalition, led by a Philadelphia-based lawyer, who claims to represent tens of thousands of indigenous people damaged by the reckless actions of Texaco Oil Company as it operated in a partnership with state-owned PetroEcuador from 1964 to 1990. Because Chevron Corporation purchased Texaco in 2001, the United States’ third-largest company became the target of — or defendant in — the class-action lawsuit that’s now in its 16th year and is expected to be decided upon in an Ecuadoran court within months.

In addition, I’ll ask you to view a handful of videos.

The first, shown in Part One and Part Two below, aired on the CBS program, “60 Minutes,” May 3, and functions much like a free advertisement for the plaintiff:

The second video (below), produced by Chevron with help from former CNN newsman Gene Randall, makes a solid paid-for argument:

Now that you’re up to speed, you’re probably asking, “What makes you such an expert that you can produce The Guide?” My answer: “Nothing, that is, other than the fact that I’ve collected a treasure trove of documents and links to documents since becoming the target of a serious “spin” campaign that started soon after I began investigating the $27 billion lawsuit.”

During the past 31 days, I’ve had more than three-dozen separate e-mail conversations with representatives of both ADC and Chevron.

On the plaintiff side, I’ve received most — but not nearly all — of the information I requested from Karen Hinton, the hired-gun public relations person overseeing the ADC’s “infosuasion” efforts. In addition, I interviewed Andrew Woods, a Huffington Post blogger and Harvard Law School graduate who serves as one of the plaintiff attorneys.

On the defense side, I’ve discussed the case with Justin Higgs and Kent Robertson, both of whom serve on Chevron’s media relations team. I was even invited to travel to Ecuador at Chevron’s expense to get a close-up look at the facts of the case. Unfortunately, the trip was postponed and then rescheduled on a date that made my participation impossible.

The most-recent volley of the spin battle landed in my inbox today in the form of a four-page letter (below) Chevron sent to its shareholders May 20.

Dated May 20 and signed by Lydia L. Beebe, corporate secretary and chief governance officer, the letter uses four pages of well-worded prose before concluding with an urgent plea:

We urge our stockholders to visit the website we have constructed about this case and to assess the facts for themselves. We also urge you to reject the trial lawyers’ stockholder proposal

Because Chevron shareholders are meeting May 27 at the company’s headquarters in San Ramon, Calif., I decided to publish The Guide below to help them see the facts in the case and, hopefully, make the right decision (i.e., the one that supports Chevron).

Below is a list of documents and links that form The Guide:


Primary Web Site = TexacoToxico.org/eng (English)

Secondary Web Site = TexacoToxico.org (Spanish)

Primary Document = Cabrera Report (pdf)

Primary Video = CBS “60 Minutes” — “Amazon Crude”

Primary Photo Site = ADC Public Photo Gallery

Primary Law Firm Web Site = Kohn Swift & Graf, P.C.

Best Pro-Plaintiff Media Coverage = CBS “60 Minutes” — “Amazon Crude”


Primary Web Site = ChevronEcuador.com

Secondary Web Site = Texaco in Ecuador (English)/Texaco in Ecuador (Spanish)

Primary Document = Key Points About the Case (pdf)

Secondary Document = Cabrera Report Flaws

Primary Video = Chevron Texaco Ecuador Lawsuit — Behind the Scenes

Related Photo Site = Flickr Stream

Best Pro-Defendant Media Coverage = Investors.com: ‘More Banana Justice’


Cheney Stands Tough on Terror, Obama Whines

By: Bob McCarty
Bob McCarty Writes

Dick Cheney unleashed a barrage of common sense this morning in a speech to counter President Barack Obama’s defensive, namby-pamby approach for dealing with terrorism and terrorists.

Two videos — Part One (above) and Part Two (immediately below) capture the former vice president waging a staunch defense of actions taken by President George W. Bush’s administration during the past eight years.

Conversely, the video that appears at the bottom of this post shows a defiant President Obama either unable to comprehend the gravity of the situation or simply unwilling to take the right side in the debate.


Financial News Update – 05/21/09


The incredible shrinking dollar

Waxman-Markey Admits Waxman-Markey is a Jobs Destroyer

Cap and Trading Your Job In for Unemployment Insurance

The TARP Bailout Parade: Is California Next?

Tit for Tat, “Buy American” Starts Backfiring

The Obama Administration’s $2 Trillion Health Care Fantasy

Morning Bell: California’s High Tax, High Spending Disaster

U.S. Rescue Aid Entrenches Itself

‘Regulatory czar’ nomination clears Senate panel

Jobless Claims Set Another Record

CBO: Unemployment will keep rising through 2010

Michigan rate reaches 12.9%

Feds give $50M in aid to towns hit by auto layoffs

Dems to introduce ‘Paid Vacation Act’

Britain’s debt outlook lowered to negative

Day of reckoning for US dollar

GMAC to Get $7 Billion From Gov’t, Surrender Control

Greenspan: Crisis Yet to End

Walesa: no global crisis, only faulty banking

PAPER: Stimulus Spending transparency not what promised

Budgeters Predict 10.5 Percent Unemployment Rate

From SurvivalBlog:

The Economy’s Search for a “New Normal”

Europe in deepest recession since War

Japan – Major banking groups report massive losses

When The World Steps Out Of A 60-Year-Old Referential Framework

As Detroit Crumbles, China Emerges as the Auto Epicenter

Don’t Count On China to Rescue the World Economy

Was The Bank Bailout Even Necessary?

BofE Makes 1 Billion Pound Profit Off of Financial Crisis

Companies Face Higher Derivatives Hedging Costs

Time to Get Out the Wheelbarrows? Another Look at the Weimar Hyperinflation

Goldfingers Wonder When to Switch to Assets

Japan’s Economy in Record Plunge


I Want To Be A Liberal

By: Nancy Morgan

This article was originally published in AmericanThinker, May 19, 2009

I want to be a liberal, because then everyone will like me. My family will start talking to me again, and chances are, my ex-husband will want to renew the marriage vows he broke when I started spouting conservative opinions.

I’d like to be a liberal because its ever so much easier to allow others to form my opinions for me instead of researching an issue myself. That always gets me in trouble, especially when the facts I discover diverge from the latest politically correct consensus.

I’d like to be a liberal because then I’d be rewarded for all my shortcomings and nothing would ever be my fault. I’d be an important cog in the wheel of social justice, and a cherished warrior in the current fight for equality.

If I were a liberal, I would be free to have sex whenever and with whomever I want – and be considered ’empowered’ to boot. I could abort any inconvenience with nary a thought because my rights to my body trump the life I would have suctioned out of me.

I’d like to be a liberal because any guilt I would normally feel for what used to be considered deviant, irresponsible behavior may be assuaged by merely advocating the expenditure of other people’s money on whatever the cause du jour is. Very cool. Especially since my stock portfolio has been pretty much decimated.

I want to be a liberal because they care so much. They have a lock on all the fashionable emotions, like tolerance, diversity, equality and patriotism. And as long as my intentions are pure and I ‘care’, I won’t have to accept responsibility for any negative consequences that my actions might cause.

I’d like to be a liberal because everyone knows that conservatives are racist, homophobic, stupid and, well, beneath contempt. Conservatives are motivated by gasp, profit, instead of being nice. Enough said.

I’d like to be a liberal because I’d be able to redefine reality to my own specifications. I could turn failure into success, murder into choice, lies into ‘misstatements’, and theft into investment. I would automatically be considered wise, instead of opinionated. Best of all, I could make up the rules as I go along, change them in midstream and then demonize anyone who doesn’t agree with me.

I want to be a liberal because everyone knows they hold the moral high ground. They don’t lie, cheat or steal. Oh, and they don’t condone torture. The media says so, so it must be true.

Before I am able to join this community of man, however, there are a few ground rules:

I have to acknowledge that government is the best and only solution for any problems America has. Despite the fact that pretty much every government solution to date has been a disaster.

I must agree that America is bad and white Christian males are responsible for all that is wrong with the world. Further, I must agree that terrorists and third world dictators are either freedom fighters or misunderstood men of good will. Oh, and I must acknowledge that dialogue is better than war. Even though decades of dialogue haven’t worked, things are different, now that Obama is president. I must have faith. After all, the times, they are a changin’.

I’d, of course, be expected to not only condone, but happily embrace gay marriage and the long list of newly minted sexual behaviors, and swear to never mention the adverse health risks or the proven harm they do to traditional families.

I’d also have to quit judging people (except for conservatives). After all, liberals will allow me to do whatever I want, free from moral censure, and its only fair I do the same for them.

I’d have to immediately quit smoking, in public at least. I’d be required to agree that global warming is real and man is the cause. Even though the earth has cooled in the last decade, everyone knows its still getting warmer. I’d also have to renounce Christianity in favor of Mother Earth and believe that the Constitution is a ‘living instrument’.

I’d have to agree that victimhood trumps merit and that liberals know best. Always. And lastly, I’d have to support the notion that racism is still rampant, even if it is the silent ‘institutional’ type.

In return, I’ll be accepted, popular, and invited to the best parties. I’ll be eligible for the right to housing, health care, a living wage (even if I don’t work) and happiness. And as long as I remain a liberal, no-one is allowed to insult me. How cool is that?

I’ll finally get my columns published in my own hometown paper and will have a good chance of getting face time on MSNBC. Best of all, I’ll be able to atone for my sins by merely paying Algore for a few carbon credits. Then, I will live happily ever after. Isn’t that worth sacrificing such ethereal and frivolous notions like freedom, individualism and principles?

Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina


GQ Slams Rumsfeld for Relying Upon Scripture

By: Bob McCarty
Bob McCarty Writes

Published under the GQ headline, “AND HE WILL BE JUDGED,” Robert Draper’s lengthy feature article about Donald Rumsfeld is chock full of criticism about the former secretary of defense and his boss in the Oval Office. What I found more worthwhile about the article, however, were details about Scripture verses that began appearing on Pentagon documents delivered to President George W. Bush.

The documents bearing the Scripture verses were cover sheets for the Worldwide Intelligence Briefings delivered daily to the Oval Office during a two-month period in 2003. Reportedly the brainchild of Air Force Maj. Gen. Glen Shaffer, a director for intelligence serving both the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the secretary of defense, they began appearing March 17, 2003, along with photos relevant to the war effort in Iraq.

March 17, 2003, was the date when President Bush issued an ultimatum to Saddam Hussein, demanding that he and his sons leave Iraq within 48 or face the consequences. Two days later, after Hussein and his sons failed to leave, the U.S. and its allies — nearly 200,000 troops under the command of Army Gen. Tommy Franks — launched Operation Iraqi Freedom.

History.com sums up the success of the effort in one sentence: On April 15, President Bush declared that the Hussein regime was “no more,” and on May 1 he proclaimed that “major combat operations” had ended.

Did Scripture verses — or, more specifically, reverence for the Holy Word — have something to do with the lightning-quick victory? I think so. That leads me to believe that the current administration might do well to follow the lead of Bush, Rumsfeld and General Shaffer.

Below are the Scripture verses, shown word for word as they appeared on the cover sheets, followed by the Bible translation and the dates on which they appeared in parentheses:

  • “Whom shall I send, and who will go for us? Here I am Lord, Send Me!” — Isaiah 6:8 (March 17, 2003);
  • “If I rise on the wings of the dawn, if I settle on the far side of the sea, even there your hand will guide me, your right hand will hold me fast, O LORD” — Psalm 139:9-10 (March 19, 2003);
  • “Their arrows are sharp, all their bows are strung; their horses’ hoofs seem like flint, their chariot wheels are like a whirlwind.” — Isaiah 5:28 (March 20, 2003);
  • “Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand.” — Ephesians 6:13 (March 31, 2003);
  • “Commit to the LORD whatever you do, and your plans will succeed.” — Proverbs 16:3 (April 1, 2003);
  • “Have I not commanded you? Be strong and courageous. Do not be terrified; do not be discouraged, for the LORD your God will be with you wherever you go.” — Joshua 1:9 (April 3, 2003);
  • “It is God’s will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men.” — 1 Peter 2:15 (April 7, 2003);
  • “Open the gates that the righteous nation may enter, The nation that keeps faith.” — Isaiah 26:2 (April 8, 2003);
  • “Suddenly the fingers of a human hand appeared and wrote on the plaster of the wall, near the lampstand in the royal palace. The king watched the hand as it wrote…This is what these words mean: Mene: God has numbered the days of your reign and brought it to an end. Tekel: You have been weighed on the scales and found wanting. Peres: Your kingdom is divided…” — Daniel 5:5-28 (April 9, 2003);
  • “The king is not saved by a mighty army; A warrior is not delivered by great strength. A horse is a false hope for victory; Nor does it deliver anyone by its great strength. Behold, the eye of the LORD is on those who fear Him, On those who hope for His loving kindness, To deliver their soul from death.” — Psalm 33:16-19 (April 10, 2003); and
  • “Seek the Lord and His strength; seek His face continually” — 1 Chronicles 16:11 (April 11, 2003).

NOTE: The Defense Department photos above are not the ones that appeared on the briefing cover sheets. To see those, as the appear in a slideshow on the GQ web site, click here.