Qatar Awareness Campaign – Lockheed Martin @StopQatarNow


Marillyn A. Hewson
Lockheed Martin
6801 Rockledge Drive
Bethesda, MD 20817-1877
Dear Ms. Hewson:

This letter is being sent to you on behalf of the Qatar Awareness Campaign Coalition. The purpose is to inform you and the public of the activities of Qatar. Lockheed Martin, a major American military contractor, has been one of the largest suppliers of sophisticated weapons systems to the terrorist-sponsor State of Qatar for several years.

For the better part of 2014, one of Qatar’s creations – the genocidal Islamic State (aka ISIS/ISIL) – has been on the warpath in Syria and Iraq. The media reports are gruesome and horrifying: beheaded children, entire villages massacred, ancient Christian and Yazidi communities exterminated , and surrendered soldiers murdered in ways reminiscent of the Nazi Einsatzgruppen. This is a genocide, and it is going on right now!

Is Lockheed Martin comfortable supplying this with state modern American weaponry?

Qatar is not only responsible for financing ISIS, but multiple infamous terrorist groups. Indeed, the Qatari modus operandi has been to sow the seeds of various supremacist Islamist groups in the Middle East and North Africa, and use them to extract profit through the smuggling of human beings (i.e. slaves), and narcotics.

Boko Haram was established by a proxy of Qatar, who now resides in Doha, as a money-making venture. This is the same Nigerian Islamist group which earlier this year kidnapped several hundred young Nigerian girls and sold them into sex slavery.

When Hamas launched thousands of rockets into Israel this summer, killing and wounding dozens of innocent Israelis, it was Qatar they looked to as their partner in terror. These actions actually spawned a war, which continues to disrupt regional stability.

Since 2012, Lockheed Martin has been involved with multiple multi-billion dollar deals with this pernicious and violent sponsor of Islamic supremacism:

  • In July 2014, Lockheed Martin (and other companies) was part of an $11 billion arms deal to Qatar for Patriot air defense missiles.
  • In March 2014, Lockheed Martin (and other companies) was part of a $24 billion arms deal to Qatar for Patriot configuration-3 surface to air missiles.
  • In November 2012, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of the sale of $6.5 billion of Lockheed Martin air-defense interceptors, radar, parts, and support to Qatar.

Additionally, Qatar it is involved in Taliban narcotics trafficking through a relationship with the Pakistani National Logistics Cell, and profits from operating a virtual slave state. The only country with an “embassy” for the Taliban, Qatar has leveraged its relationships with violent jihadi groups to its own benefit, and to the detriment of the United States and her allies.

The QAC Coalition and petitioners ask that you consider the attached sourced report on Qatar’s activities. The links cited are vetted and credible sources. We hope you take the time to verify the truth of the statements for yourself.

After doing so, the Coalition of the Qatar Awareness Campaign calls on you to exert due influence on the Qatari government to cease any type of involvement in all forms of Islamic terrorism, slavery, and drug trafficking!


Lt. Col. Allen B. West (US Army, Ret)

Frank J. Gaffney, Jr.
Center for Security Policy

Pamela Geller
Atlas Shrugs

Walid Shoebat

Charles Ortel
Washington Times

Paul E Vallely, US Army (Ret)
Chairman, Stand Up America

Robert Spencer
Jihad Watch

Terresa Monroe-Hamilton
NoisyRoom.net **

& the entire Qatar Awareness Campaign Coalition.

Qatar Research Report: http://www.stopqatarnow.com/p/research-report.html
Sign the Petition! Visit www.stopqatarnow.com
Facebook: Stop Qatar Now
Twitter: @stopqatarnow

** Select signatures as of 9/27. The Qatar Awareness Campaign Coalition is comprised of more than 25 journalists, national security experts, publishers, and independent researchers. To view all Coalition participants, please visit the Campaign’s website.

CC: Jennifer Allen, Corporate Media Inquiries, Lockheed Martin.


The Convention of States (COS) would undermine the Constitution

By: Stephen C. Eldridge

The COS is often marketed and sold with superficial, nice-sounding verbiage like “Wouldn’t you like the States to have the power to rein in the runaway federal government?” No person who believes in our Constitution’s core principle of very limited federal government would answer “No” to that question.

However, the principal purpose heard for a COS, Article V, “Con-Con”, etc, is to adopt a Balanced Budget Amendment (BBA) – how could any Conservative possibly be against balancing the budget? But, BBA is only superficially about balancing the budget – its principal purpose is to undermine our original Constitution’s extreme limitations on the powers of the federal government.

If a BBA is enacted, the original Constitution’s limitations on federal powers (Article I, Section 8 and the 10th Amendment) would become even less relevant than they have already become. Congress could point to the BBA and safely aver that their spending is Constitutional , as long as it is within the BBA’s dollar limitations  – whether that limit be an amount equal to tax revenues, plus all the money that Congress can borrow or print, or an amount equal to (say) 20% of Gross Domestic Product. ALL of these artificial limits are stated in terms of a dollar limit and completely ignore and override Article I, section 8’s limitations to specifically delegated federal powers.  The BBA thus creates a new, more Progressive Constitution in which the federal government may now spend money on (and thereby engage in) any activity it chooses.

COS proponents also try to assuage our fears that Congress would find a way to violate even those (new, more Progressive )spending limits.  They offer us the additional “assurance”, that Congress could not raise those (new, more Progressive) limits or raise taxes, without the prior approval of the States.  While that may sound comforting superficially, it does not comport with real life. Congress would extort the States into raising those (new, more Progressive) limits or into raising taxes by threatening to reduce federal  payments to the States, while leaving all federal mandates on the States in place (or threatening to  increase them).

The core problem is that Congress spends far more money than the original Constitution would permit, and even more than allowed by  later unconstitutional extensions of the Constitution (e.g., SCOTUS’ cowardly approval of Social Security under FDR’s threat to pack the court, and Obamacare), because it spends money on activities not permitted by the original Constitution. Voters need to press their members in Congress to squeeze the giant federal genie back into the little lamp. A BBA does not cure the problem, but would only make it far worse.  To paraphrase activist  Jeff Lewis , a BBA is the wrong solution to the wrong problem..