The Failure of Secular and Liberal Egyptians

By Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi on 12.16.11 @ 6:09AM

Before this is over, they’ll wish they still had Mubarak to kick around again.

Contrary to the expectations of many analysts, both the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party and the Salafist al-Nour coalition trounced the secular Egyptian Bloc and the Wafd Party in the first stage of voting for the parliamentary elections. Indeed, whereas Wafd received 7.1% of the vote and the Egyptian Bloc 13.4%, al-Nour alone took 24.4% of votes and the Brotherhood’s party 36.6%.

Even more discouraging, this round of voting took place in areas where Egyptian liberals and secularists can most count on support. One can only wonder how much wider the margin will be as the second round of voting commenced on Wednesday.

That said, it should not necessarily be thought that the Brotherhood will form some sort of an alliance with Salafist parties. Deep tensions between the two Islamist factions have already become apparent with reports of attacks by members of Gamaa Islamiyya on Brotherhood campaign workers in the southern province of Assiut, where there was a local run-off election as part of the first round of voting.

The animosity exists not because the Brotherhood is somehow actually more moderate, but rather because the Salafists are against the idea of forming coalitions and being pragmatic in trying to implement Sharia. For the Brotherhood, unlike the al-Nour coalition, believes that it is better to apply Islamic law in gradual stages. The rivalry will almost certainly become more evident in the next stages of voting that will take place in the more rural areas of Upper Egypt, where the popularity of Salafists could well outstrip support for the Brotherhood.

Yet the more urgent question arises of why the secularists and liberals have fared so poorly in these elections. After all, were they not dominant in the mass demonstrations in Tahrir Square back in January and February that culminated in the resignation of Hosni Mubarak? Did not numerous pundits speak of the “Twitter and Facebook” generation of secularists and liberals — primarily youth activists — that would supposedly prevent the Islamists from gaining ascendancy in the post-Mubarak political scene?

Before turning to recent developments for explanation, it is worth pointing out that the military regime that overthrew the constitutional monarchy in 1952 and has been ruling Egypt since has always had a love-hate relationship with the Islamists.

While Islamists were formally snubbed in the upper ranks of government and those who openly came out in opposition to the regime were subject to brutal crackdowns (particularly during Gamal Abdel Nasser’s rule), they were granted numerous concessions at the ground level and tolerated in the promotion of Islamist ideals. This de facto arrangement included, for example, the teaching and glorification of jihad in school textbooks, and the promotion of Islamist discourse on Egyptian TV channels. That Islamism consequently has a significant degree of appeal should not come as a surprise.

Coming back to the present day, it is of course true that the Islamists were in general conspicuously absent from the initial protests against Mubarak’s regime, but many pundits made the mistake of assuming that mass demonstrations expressing a particular opinion or ideology are representative of the population at large. Indeed, as the intelligence group STRATFOR estimated, the protests in Tahrir Square probably never exceeded 300,000 people. Given that Egypt has a population of over 80 million, it would be absurd to extrapolate the liberal and secular sentiments of the protesters in those anti-Mubarak demonstrations to the people at large.

In the protests last month where the military attacked and killed numerous demonstrators, the Islamists’ absence was again notable. Yet this observation easily links to an inherent problem with the performance of liberals and secularists in Egypt. The Islamists’ decision not to attend the more recent demonstrations was a very clever move on their part.

The Islamists and the military realize that the continuing anarchy produced by these protests and clashes is only aggravating the disastrous situation for Egypt’s economy, which was improving significantly under Mubarak’s reforms in the ex-president’s last few years in power.

As the Wall Street Journal notes, foreign exchange reserves at Egypt’s central bank have halved to around $22 billion, while the projected deficit for the current fiscal year is thought to be around 9% of GDP, which “would not be sustainable even if Egypt’s economy were growing at robust rates.” The Brotherhood has some idea that a key problem here is the subsidy system, even as the group does not offer specific policy initiatives on the issue, but the liberals and secularists seem to be completely oblivious to the economic problems at hand.

Meanwhile, tourism revenues have decreased by a third this year, and it is likely that many tourists will be deterred from traveling to Egypt over the coming years in light of prominent calls from Islamists for a ban on alcohol and segregation on beaches. Given that sexual harassment is already a problem widely noted by tourists, the feeling of intimidation is only likely to increase.

Perhaps most importantly, instead of trying to offer comprehensive alternative policy programs to voters, prominent, Western-educated Egyptians like Mona Eltahawy have become enthralled with spectacles like that of an Egyptian female blogger’s stripping completely naked (this was a problem first drawn to my attention by the owner of the “Happy Arab News Service” blog).

Writing in the Guardian‘s “Comment is Free” site, Eltahawy hailed Aliaa Mahdy for posing nude on her blog site, claiming that she is “the Molotov cocktail thrown at the Mubaraks in our heads — the dictators of our mind.”

The idea that baring one’s breasts and genitalia will somehow reduce support for the Brotherhood, Salafists, and other Egyptian misogynists is misguided, to put it mildly. In fact, given the high prevalence of female genital mutilation in Egypt (because the prominent Shafi’i school of Islamic jurisprudence in Egypt affirms that the practice is mandatory in accordance with Muslim tradition), it is hardly as though the Islamists in particular are going to be scared away by a blogger’s posing nude. No, they have probably seen much worse than that.

Far from aiding the cause of secular liberalism in Egypt, Eltahawy and her ilk have done it more harm than any Salafist could have hoped to achieve. If, in the midst of an Islamist upsurge in Egypt, they can find nothing better to do than to express delight over someone exposing her entire body on a public forum, then sadly one can only recognize their disconnect from Egyptian society.

If the secularists and liberals do not wish to become a completely marginalized force, they must overcome the problem of disorganization, abandon incoherent leftist populism, and wake up to the dire reality of the economic situation.

The army probably desires to continue managing things behind the scenes and is certainly aiming to remain independent. However, the army may come to feel that it has no other option but to rely on the Muslim Brotherhood, or perhaps even the Salafists. Ironically, the liberals and secularists may soon discover — if they are able to get their act together — that the military they have so vigorously opposed could also be the last institution that can prevent an Islamist takeover.

About the Author

Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi is a student at Brasenose College, Oxford University, and an intern at the Middle East Forum.

http://spectator.org/archives/2011/12/16/the-failure-of-secular-and-lib

World’s Biggest Aircraft Will Ferry Passengers to Space in Stratolaunch Vision

Published December 13, 2011

| FoxNews.com

Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen announced Tuesday his plan to create a company that will bring “airport-like operations” to private spaceflight –thanks to the world’s biggest aircraft.

The business magnate is teaming up with Burt Rutan, the aerospace engineer that developed the original SpaceShipOne — the first privately funded, manned rocket ship to fly beyond Earth’s atmosphere. Looking to build on that success, Stratolaunch Systems promises to bring greater safety, cost-effectiveness, and flexibility to space travel.

“For the first time since John Glenn, America can not fly its own astronauts into space,” Allen said, noting the recent final flight by the space shuttle and the elimination of the Constellation program, which would have built a successor craft. “By the end of this decade, Stratolaunch will be putting spacecraft into orbit.”

“We will keep America at the forefront of space exploration,” he said.

The new space system will be focused on carrying commercial and government cargo into space, but Rutan and Allen hope it will eventually carry human cargo as well. The company’s motto: Any orbit, any time.

“I have long dreamed about taking the next big step in private space flight after the success of SpaceShipOne — to offer a flexible, orbital space delivery system,” Allen said. “We are at the dawn of radical change in the space launch industry. Stratolaunch Systems is pioneering an innovative solution that will revolutionize space travel.”

The idea between Stratolaunch’s “mobile-launch” system isn’t new. In fact, it’s similar to the one used for Rutan’s earlier craft SpaceShipOne, which requires a “mothership” to carry it into the air before it is released for air-launch.

This time around, Stratolaunch Systems will be using a custom carrier aircraft developed by Scaled Composites, Rutan’s aerospace engineering company. Powered by six 747 engines, it will be the largest aircraft ever flown, weighing more than 1.2 million pounds with a wingspan of 380 ft. — longer than a football field.

The carrier aircraft will operate from a large airport/spaceport, such as Kennedy Space Center, and it will be able to fly up to 1,300 nautical miles to the payload’s launch point. The plane will be built in a Stratolaunch hangar that will soon be under construction at the Mojave Air and Space Port.

“We believe this technology has the potential to someday make spaceflight routine by removing many of the constraints associated with ground launched rockets,” said board member Mike Griffin, a former NASA administrator. “Our system will also provide the flexibility to launch from a large variety of locations.”

The biggest advantages of the air-launch-to-orbit system will be Stratolaunch’s quick turnaround between launches. This means lower costs and more potential flights.

The first test flight is planned for the beginning of 2016.

Allen and Rutan first collaborated together on SpaceShipOne, a suborital air-launched spaceplane.

SpaceShipOne made history in 2004 when it successfully reached space and pilot Mike Melville became the first civilian to fly a spaceship out of the Earth’s atmosphere. Four months later, SpaceShipOne became the first private manned spacecraft to exceed 328,000 feet twice in 14 days, earning it the prestigious $10 million Ansari X-Prize, created in 1996 to kick-start the development of privately built rocket ships.

“This is the true frontier of transportation,” Marion C. Blakey, head of the Federal Aviation Administration said at the time. “It feels a little bit like Kitty Hawk must have.”
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/12/13/microsoft-founder-announces-spaceflight-company-promises-airport-like/#ixzz1gjD9irN2

Why Would Obama Veto Job Creation?

Today, the U.S. House of Representatives is set to vote on a bill that would, among other things, open the door for the creation of thousands of new jobs, prevent a tax hike on American workers, and help reduce the crippling deficit. However, President Barack Obama has promised that he would bring the legislation to a halt with a veto—all because of his opposition the single measure in the bill that would create jobs. What’s so offensive that would cause the President to level a veto threat? A provision in H.R. 3630, the “Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2011,” that would provide for the approval of the Keystone XL pipeline project that would bring oil from Canada. Heritage’s Nicolas Loris explains that it would mean “access to easy imports from our northern neighbor, the creation of thousands of jobs, and the generation of revenue for the states where the pipeline passes. Montana, South Dakota, Kansas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, and Texas are collectively projected to collect $5.2 billion in property tax revenue as a result of building the pipeline.” The Keystone XL measure is just one piece of the bill introduced by Representative Dave Camp (R-MI), along with several cosponsors. Though not perfect, it includes some positive measures that could bring comfort to the millions of Americans who are struggling under the Obama economy and are looking for hope this holiday season. Camp said of the bill, “With its passage, Americans can be confident that these programs and provisions will be available next year, that they will not result in decades of debt and that they will be paid for with fiscally responsible reforms, not job-killing tax hikes.” Heritage Vice President David S. Addington has analyzed the legislation and explains that it would:   Extend for a year the employee payroll tax reduction, which “prevents a tax hike, leaving more of the people’s hard-earned money in their own pockets, and therefore does not give rise to a budgetary need to ‘pay for’ money that is simply left where it originates”;   Extend the unemployment compensation program, but with appropriate reforms to help the unemployed find jobs and to begin to tailor the overall program to changes in the economy;   Extend for two years the forestalling of sudden automatic cuts in Medicare payments to physicians that would otherwise occur under the law (often called the “doc fix”);   Extend for a year the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families program, one of the 70 federal welfare programs in need of integrated reform;   Take some actions to reduce the increase in the federal deficit, with fees on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, additional means tests to Medicare, increasing the amount federal employees and Members of Congress must pay in to their retirement plans, and eliminating 2013 cost-of-living adjustments for federal employees and Members of Congress.   Last week, President Obama announced his intention to veto the bill when he warned, ”Any effort to try to tie Keystone to the payroll tax cut I will reject.” To be perfectly clear, the only part of this bill that will significantly create jobs is the only part President Obama is threatening to veto. And this at a time when 13.3 million Americans are out of work, the unemployment rate is hovering near 9 percent as it has throughout this Presidency, and job creation is at a record low. President Obama does not appear interested in taking real action to put Americans back to work. In an interview with 60 Minutes, the President revealed to CBS’s Steve Kroft what he believes his role to be: It is my job to put forward a vision of the country that benefits the vast majority of Americans. It is my job to make sure that my party is behind those initiatives, even if sometimes it’s breaking some china and going against some of the dogmas of our party in the past. We’ve done that on things like education reform. And it’s my job to rally the American people around that vision. Americans, though, aren’t looking for a rally, and they’re not seeking out a vision—especially if it’s one where the economy continues its meandering path, job creation stays stagnant, and Washington keeps erecting walls to prosperity.

Meet Time‘s ’Person of the Year’…‘The Protester’

• Posted on December 14, 2011 at 8:58am by Jonathon M. Seidl

NEW YORK (The Blaze/AP) — “The Protester” has been named Time’s “Person of the Year” for 2011.

The selection was announced Wednesday on NBC’s “Today” show.

The magazine cited dissent across the Middle East that has spread to Europe and the United States, and says these protesters are reshaping global politics.

“From the Arab Spring to Athens, from Occupy Wall Street to Athens,” the cover says.

Last year, Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg got the honor.

Time’s “Person of the Year” is the person or thing that has most influenced the culture and the news during the past year for good or for ill. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke received the honor in 2009. The 2008 winner was then-President-elect Barack Obama. Other previous winners have included Bono, President George W. Bush, and Amazon.com CEO and founder Jeff Bezos.

Time said it is recognizing protesters because they are “redefining people power” around the world. On its website, it even includes profiles of protesters, including multiple Occupy Wall Street occupiers.

However, it does seem odd that the magazine would honor such a “person.” Consider that thousands have been arrested in the Occupy movement, Arab Spring protesters in Egypt have raped several female journalists, UK youths screamed “Off with their heads!” at Prince Charles, and Greek rioters have been filmed firebombing police.

HISTORY OF THE GREAT DEPRESSION – DICK MORRIS TV: HISTORY VIDEO!

Dear Friend,

In this video commentary, I discuss the history of the Great Depression. We need to know what really happened. How taxes killed recovery, stimulus failed, and social engineering renewed the slump.

Constitutional expert: Here’s what ‘natural born citizen’ means

Those who wonder about Obama need to watch this explanation

---

Posted: December 11, 2011
6:26 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2011 WND

 

New Obama campaign image

There are those who dislike Obama’s policies and just want him out of office. There are those who like the socialism he’s been working to install in the U.S. and probably will vote for him again. And there are those who have done some research and say the simple logic of the facts regarding Obama confirms he’s not eligible under the Constitution’s requirements for a person to be president.

But the concept of a constitionally qualified “natural born citizen,” when it’s been used interchangeably with so many other words like “citizen” and “native-born citizen,” remains an enigma to some.

Now comes a constitutional scholar to put it in simple phrases and make it clear.

Freshly updated! Find out what Obama’s story truly is, in “Where’s the REAL Birth Certificate?” by Jerome Corsi.

The evaluation of the meaning of “natural born citizen” in the Constitution comes from Dr. Herbert W. Titus, of counsel to the law firm William J. Olson.

He previously taught constitutional law, common law and other subjects for 30 years at five different American Bar Association-approved law schools. From 1986 to 1993 he was the founding dean of the College of Law and Government at Regent University.

And before that, he was a trial attorney and special assistant U.S. attorney with the Department of Justice.

His degrees are from Harvard and the University of Oregon, and he’s admitted to practice before the U.S. Supreme Court, appellate courts in the 6th, 7th, 9th, 10th and other districts. His practice has taken him into courts more than a dozen different states.

His perspective:

He explains that much of the discussion of citizenship, and the 14th Amendment, essentially can be ignored in this argument, in a video from TheAmericanView.com.

“‘Natural born citizen’ in relation to the office of president, and whether someone is eligible, was in the Constitution from the very beginning,” he said. “Another way of putting it: There is a law of the nature of citizenship. If you are a natural born citizen, you are a citizen according to the law of nature, not according to any positive statement in a Constitution or in a statute, but because of the very nature of your birth and the very nature of nations.”

If you “go back and look at what the law of nature would be or would require … that’s precisely what a natural born citizen is …. is one who is born to a father and mother each of whom is a citizen of the U.S. or whatever other country…”

“Now what we’ve learned from the Hawaii birth certificate is that Mr. Obama’s father was not a citizen of the United States. His mother was, but he doesn’t qualify as a natural born citizen for the office of president.”

There have been allegations since long before Obama’s election in 2008 that he is not a “natural-born citizen,” a requirement imposed by the Constitution on no other official.

Obama’s critics believe that at the time the Constitution was written, the founders agree with Titus, and understood “natural-born citizen” to mean the offspring of two citizens.

Obama has claimed he was born in Hawaii, but birth documentation he’s released has been judged by a number of document, imaging and graphics experts to be fake.

Others believe he would fail to qualify no matter his place of birth, because his father, Barack Obama Sr., was a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of Obama Jr.’s birth. They allege the founders precluded dual citizens by specifically demanding a “natural-born citizen.”

Read more: Constitutional expert: Here’s what ‘natural born citizen’ means http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=375625#ixzz1gMVXqay5

Presidential Candidate: Meeting with Sheriff Joe Arpaio Yielded “Devastating” Information

LAWSUIT FILED AGAINST THE DNC AND WITH VARIOUS STATE COURTS ON OBAMA ELIGIBLIITY

by Sharon Rondeau

Presidential Candidate John Dummett and Van Irion, founder of Liberty Legal Foundation, met with Maricopa County, AZ Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his staff on December 5, 2011, during which the eligibility of Barack Obama was discussed. From left to right are Dummett’s wife Karmi; John Dummett, Presidential Candidate (R); Sheriff Joe Arpaio; Dummett Campaign Manager William Odom; and Van Irion, Founder and Attorney for Liberty Legal Foundation

(Dec. 9, 2011) — On December 5, 2011, Presidential Candidate John Dummett of California recently traveled 789 miles to Maricopa County, AZ and back to meet with Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who has been conducting an investigation into questions surrounding the presidential eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama.

Dummett and Van Irion, founder of Liberty Legal Foundation, have partnered in filing a lawsuit against the Democrat National Committee to stay the nomination of Obama as its candidate for the presidential election.

“Our meeting with Sheriff Arpaio was scheduled for 1:30 in the afternoon, and the Tea Party meeting was at 6:30 that evening.  We got to Joe Arpaio’s office, and his secretary met us at the door.  She said, ‘Ladies and gentlemen, I’m sorry to tell you, but the sheriff can give you only 20 minutes of his time.’  We were more than  happy with that.  Well, we got to his office, and he had the lead investigator of his 300-man posse there.  It’s called the Cold Case Posse.  Several other investigators assigned to the case were there as well.  Arpaio was intrigued by Van Irion’s and my approach of going after the DNC and not attacking Barack Obama or asking any court to decide Obama’s eligibility.  The idea blew them away.  It went over so well that he got several other members in there.  He took copies of everything, including the complaint , and we discussed all of the issues.  He told us things that I still have to hold in confidentiality.  I can say, because it has already been released to the press and I can verify it, that he will produce a report in February, and it will be devastating.  I can’t say what it is, but I know what it is.”

When we asked Dummett if the “devastating” part of Arpaio’s future report was communicated in written or verbal form, he was not at liberty to answer.

Instead of being there for only 20 minutes, we were there speaking with him for an hour and a half.  I was then asked to be an expert witness on the birth certificate issue, and I agreed to do that.”

The Post & Email asked, “Is that because you have a background in document analysis or something similar?” and Mr. Dummett replied, “I’m a computer programmer staff analyst for the California Department of Fish & Game.  I’m an expert at the staff level at building databases and dealing with computer-generated documents.  I figured out that the birth certificate Obama presented was a phony right after I saw it, because I understand how Adobe works because I have to use that and the applications which I built for the state of California.  I would have laughed except that I wanted to cry more because people were actually accepting it as real. It was an insult to anyone’s intelligence.  They were relying on people not knowing how applications are built of how documents are stored electronically or put together.

“So we’ll be working with him on a continuing basis.  There is no doubt in my mind that we will be successful.  I believe that Sheriff Joe is doing this for the people of Maricopa County, which he represents, as he should be.  He is the only law enforcement official who has actually stood up and done something about the eligibility issue.  He told me, ‘I owe the people of Maricopa County the truth.  Where there’s smoke, there’s fire.’  If it benefits the rest of the United States, fine, but his primary concern was with the people of Maricopa County.  Who wouldn’t want a sheriff like that?

“After that, we left for the Tea Party meeting.  There were a couple of speakers, and then Van got up and spoke about the Liberty Legal Foundation and what we’re doing.  Then I got to speak with the group.  There will be a video coming out of the event soon.  Joe Arpaio actually ended up at the Tea Party meeting unannounced.  The meeting was supposed to go from 6:30 to 8:30; we were there until 10:30 or 11:00 p.m., and then Joe showed up!  In the meantime, I explained what we were going to do:  going after the DNC and not Obama.

We were talking about impeachment and why that is not something we want to do with Barack Obama, and here’s the reason why:  I’m a scholar, but not in constitutional law; my degree is in archaeology and history.  However, my attorney is an expert in that area.  The reason is that impeachment is redress only for a legally- elected president.

The Post & Email said, “There’s been a lot of controversy about that, as you may know,” and Dummett responded:

There shouldn’t be any controversy, because the law is clear.  Impeachment isn’t a conviction; impeachment is when they have a trial for the sitting president, and the Senate decides whether or not he’s guilty.  If he’s found guilty, he’s thrown out of office, and he can’t hold office anymore; that’s it.  If we impeach him and he gets off – and we know he will because he’s appointed two people to the Supreme Court – it will go to the Supreme Court, and those women will not recuse themselves.  They haven’t recused themselves from the Obamacare lawsuits, and they should be.  So they’re most certainly not going to recuse themselves over the impeachment of Obama.  So if he gets off scot-free, then everything he’s done is set in stone; we’ve set precedent, and that means that anybody who was born outside of this country can come over here and be president.  He could say he was born on Mars, and we’d be stuck with it because precedence has already been set. For some silly reason, this country abides by precedent just about every time.  So we don’t want to do that.

We then discussed whether or not Obama is guilty of treason and the possible penalties.  I have not accused Barack Obama of treason, although others have.  That doesn’t mean that I don’t have my suspicions.  Everyone is entitled to due process of law.  Regarding his birth certificate, he hasn’t shown anyone any certification, so I feel quite confident being able to say that he’s a usurper.  I’m sure he’s hiding something, but I’m not going to accuse him of treason at this time.

Historically, treason has been punishable by death.  One person was upset and thought I was being “too aggressive in defending the Constitution.”  I don’t think that is being overly aggressive, because what these people are doing to us now is going to affect our grandchildren and their children, and they’re going to be paying for it.  They’re trying to destroy the United States.  If you look up the definition of treason, although I’m not accusing Obama of treason, if you wanted to make the case for it, there’s be a pretty good case.

The mainstream press was at the meeting, including the largest newspaper in Maricopa County, The Sonoran News.  Joe Arpaio got a standing ovation after he spoke about the investigation he is doing.

The next morning, we headed over to the DNC at around 9:00.  We walked into the office; there was an older guy playing video games.  There was a bearded individual whom we approached and asked if he worked for the organization, and he said “yes.”  So we served him the papers.  My wife was filming the whole time, and he said, “Well, she’s filming.”  And the guy asked, “Well, am I being served?” and we said, “We’re serving the Democrat Party.  Make sure you get this to your superiors.”  And he said, “What’s entailed in the suit?” and we said, “Please read it; everything is in there; make sure to get it to your superiors.”

A lot of people don’t understand that the server doesn’t have to put it in your hand.  You don’t have to take exact possession of it.  A lot of people think that if they refuse to touch it or they throw it on the ground, they haven’t been served.  That is not the law.  Once an officer of the court, which Van is, handed it to them, they had been served.

So we walked out, got into my car and were getting ready to head to the airport when I saw out of the corner of my eye three people approach the car.  A tall lady started beating on my window and almost broke it, saying, “You can’t serve us.  You handed that paper to a volunteer, and that wasn’t legal service!”  Van was in the back and he said, “Ma’am, you have been served.”  So she took the paper, flopped it on the ground, and walked away.

“Did you get her name?”

No, but we have her on videotape (laughs).  They were quite violent about it.  It’s a lawsuit; it wasn’t against them; it’s enjoining the DNC not to certify anybody until they come up with the proof.  That means anybody, not just Barack Obama, although we know Barack Obama can’t come up with any certification.

Dummett stated that he has appeared on several radio shows since the meeting with Arpaio and will be appearing on Dr. James David Manning’s radio show and many others in the near future.  “People have to know that I’m a viable alternative, fighting as hard as I can for their constitutional rights.  People have to get off the kick that if someone hasn’t been elected to something else, they’re unfit for the presidency.  You will never know…it doesn’t say in the Constitution ‘You shall be a senator first…’ They wanted citizen legislators.”

Dummett believes that his team can obtain an expedited hearing because Obama has already filed to be on the ballot in the state of New Hampshire, whose presidential primary is January 10, 2012.  Dummett and Irion have filed suit in that state as well as with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals asking for the criteria the DNC is using to define “natural born Citizen.”

“From what I understand, they have 30-45 days to answer our complaint, which includes Pelosi, Wasserman-Schultz, Reid, the DNC and the courts in Washington, DC and Tennessee.  We filed suit in New Hampshire and in Arizona with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which in dicta said that a presidential candidate would have standing to bring forth a suit in court.”

We asked Dummett if, because he has not yet received his party’s nomination, he has standing to sue, and he responded:

The incumbent president is always the person you run against.  I’m not the nominee, but I’m a candidate.  The court didn’t say that the nominee had standing; it said that a candidate did.  No one should have to waste any resources trying to figure out how to defend against Barack Obama, because he’s not eligible to be there.

Regarding the size and scope of the current federal government, Dummett commented:

There are 100 senators and 435 congressmen, the Supreme Court, and around 160,000,000 people who are available to vote in this country.  Why are they in charge?  Because we can’t all decide just to get up there and say, “Enough is enough” and put our foot down.  And they know we won’t.  Because everybody thinks that their congressman is a good guy because in the past he’s done something good for them.  We live in a world where people think they are entitled from womb to tomb.

I don’t want anything from the federal government.  There are 18 things the federal government can do; the rest belongs to the states.  Many people seem to look at it as “What’s in it for me?” instead of thinking about what are we going to give the generations that come after us.  What are we leaving them?  What are we bequeathing to our posterity?  What we’re bequeathing is a shattered, destroyed state which should last at least 1,000 years; Rome did.  Rome was a republic.

As Cicero said, the enemy is not outside the gates.  The real enemy is the one who walks among us.  He speaks our language and knows everything about us.  That’s the real enemy.  That’s our own government.  It’s not the people outside such as the Chinese or the terrorists.  It’s the tyrannical government.

I’m  running as a Republican, but I’m a constitutionalist.  I’m going to stick with this.  I’m going to keep working at it, but if it ever comes down to the point where we all realize that we no longer live in a representative republic, then we will have to look at other methods to restore our country.

 

Hillary Email Points to New White House Bid?

A new fundraising email from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign has “revived speculation” that she is still interested in winning the White House, according to Paul Bedard of U.S. News & World Report.

“While her campaign has in the past dispatched fundraising emails in a bid to finish paying her 2008 campaign debt, the timing of the latest blast raised some eyebrows,” Bedard writes in his Washington Whispers column.

The mail comes amid denials from the Obama administration that the president is considering replacing Vice President Joe Biden with Clinton on the 2012 ticket, Bedard observes.

It also comes as a new poll by Washington Whispers shows Hillary as the clear favorite of voters seeking a third-party candidate. In the survey, 39 percent of respondents chose Clinton as their choice for an independent candidate, well ahead of Mike Huckabee at 20 percent.

The email from Clinton’s campaign reads in part:

Together, we made history in the last presidential election.

From Hillary’s speech at the Democratic National Convention, to the work and support that each of us brought to the campaign, that story lives on — in the history books, in our memories, and in the mementos that commemorate that time . . .

As we all know, campaigns are tough, but having loyal supporters like you helped make Hillary’s campaign one that will never be forgotten.

All contributions will go to paying the last of the expenses the campaign incurred while making our historic stand.

Contribute today to receive one of the last commemorative campaign DVDs or another one of our last few items.

The email was signed: “Hillary Clinton for President.”

Asked about Hillary’s political aspirations during a recent appearance on “The View,” Bill Clinton responded: “I don’t know what the future holds.”

Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Prepare for War

Iran’s Revolutionary Guards have been placed on a war footing amid signs that the United States and its allies are taking action to cripple the country’s nuclear weapons development program.

Ayatollah Khamenei, Iran’s spiritual leader, ordered the heads of the nation’s military, intelligence and security organization to “take all necessary measures to protect the regime,” The Telegraph reported.

In response, Gen. Mohammad Ali Jafari, commander of the Revolutionary Guards, ordered units to move Iran’s arsenal of long-range missiles to secret sites where they would be safe from attack and could launch retaliatory strikes.

The Iranian air force has also formed “rapid reaction units” that are practicing a response to an enemy airstrike, according to The Telegraph.

Khamenei’s order came in response to growing pressure on the Islamic Republic over its nuclear program, and mounting evidence that Iran is being targeted by Western forces seeking to destroy key elements of the program.

An explosion at a Revolutionary Guard Corps base 30 miles west of Tehran on Nov. 12 leveled buildings and killed 17 people, including a founder of Iran’s ballistic missile program, Gen. Hassan Tehrani Moghaddam.

Iranian officials called the explosion an accident.

“However, many former U.S. intelligence officials and Iran experts believe that the explosion — the most destructive of at least two dozen unexplained blasts in the last two years — was part of a covert effort by the U.S., Israel, and others to disable Iran’s nuclear and missile programs,” the Los Angeles Times reported.

American and Israeli engineers are suspected of feeding the Stuxnet computer worm into Iran’s nuclear program in 2010. The virus caused centrifuges used to enrich uranium to shatter.

Two senior nuclear physicists were killed and a third wounded by bombs attached to cars or motorcycles in January and November of last year.

In September, the head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, Fereydoun Abbasi-Davani, accused the U.S., Israel and the U.K. of conducting attacks on him and other scientists. Abbasi-Davani was reportedly wounded in a 2010 car bomb blast, National Journal reported.

There have also been reports of unexplained explosions in Iranian gas pipelines, oil installations, and military facilities. Three such explosions occurred in October in a 24-hour period, and a large blast was reported recently in Iran’s third-largest city, Isfahan.

A senior Western intelligence official told The Telegraph: “There is deep concern within the senior leadership of the Iranian regime that they will be the target of a surprise military strike by either Israel or the U.S. For that reason they are taking all necessary precautions to ensure they can defend themselves properly if an attack happens.”

Iran Conducting Anti-U.S. Operations in Latin America

An attack on the British embassy in Tehran. A desperate pursuit of nuclear weapons. A plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in Washington. Alone, any one of these actions by Iran’s regime would be cause for alarm, but taken together they make it undeniably clear that the Iranian threat cannot be ignored. Now, there is news of another effort by Iran to take aim at the United States, this time coming from Latin America. Heritage’s Israel Ortega and James Phillips explain: Iran is conducting anti-U.S. operations from Latin America, including military training camps in Venezuela, and expanding its reach across the border from the U.S. in Mexico, according to footage unveiled late Thursday by the largest Spanish-language network in the United States, Univision. The documentary showed a former Iran senior official accepting a plan to launch from Mexico a cyber war on the United States, one that would cripple U.S. computer systems, including the White House, the FBI, the CIA and several nuclear plants. The official, former Iranian Ambassador to Mexico Mohammad Hassan Ghadiri, was shown accepting the offer from undercover Mexican university students. A trailer to the documentary can be seen on Foundry.org. Other revelations in the documentary include undercover Mexican students presenting plans for the cyber attack to Venezuelan officials in Mexico. Ortega and Phillips write that the Venezuelan official appeared very receptive to the plot, saying that she was close to Venezuela’s hard-leftist President Hugo Chavez and that she would love to share the information with him as soon as possible. The same happened with Cuban officials in Mexico, who were equally interested in a plot against the United States. The documentary, called “The Iranian Threat,” claims that undercover journalists were also able to infiltrate Iranian military training camps working from mosques in Venezuela, though it showed no actual footage of the camps. Univision alleged there were links between the alleged camps and a radical Muslim implicated in the 1994 Buenos Aires bombing of a synagogue that killed 85 and wounded hundreds. The Iranian lives in Argentina, a country that also has strong ties to Chavez. Ortega and Phillips write that the “ties between the hard line Islamist government in Tehran and the anti-American government of President Hugo Chavez have been growing for years, including a weekly secretive Cairo-Tehran flight that is of grave concerns to U.S. officials.”  They also point out other disturbing findings in the report: Undercover journalists also confirmed Iranian-backed money-laundry and drug-trafficking cartels that are used to back Islamist networks and training camps in Venezuela and elsewhere, which exist to attack U.S. interests and undermine the U.S. in Latin America. Univision said in press release that it had “dozens of hours of secret recordings, conducted extensive interviews with people who participated in the meetings, including a former Iranian ambassador, and examined documents ranging from hand-written notes to internal federal reports and obtained unpublished video of a failed bomb attack against New York’s JFK airport. In Mexico, Univision, uncovered covert recordings of the alleged Iranian plan to cripple the computer systems of the White House, the FBI, the CIA and several nuclear power plants. Unfortunately, the Obama Administration has failed to confront threats like those that Iran poses to the United States. In August, The Heritage Foundation Counterterrorism Task Force wrote, “The President’s strategy pays insufficient attention to state-sponsored terrorism, which will increasingly be a major force to be reckoned with. Iran is one of the most prominent and aggressive state sponsors of terror and its proteges–both Hamas and Hezbollah–represent potentially grave threats. In addition, transnational criminal cartels in Mexico are increasingly taking on the character of terrorist networks.” With this latest report from Univision, we are reminded that those threats need to be identified and investigated, even in our own hemisphere. And the Obama Administration can no longer stand on the sidelines as civil liberties and democratic institutions deteriorate in Latin America, allowing for Iran and other rabid anti-American to enter, grow, and threaten the United States.