Geller: Yes, Rick Perry is the 5th column candidate

And it's beyond time to bring the Birchers back.

They never were guilty of any of the indiscretions of which Buckley accused them in the first place.

What's more, any group that supports the US withdrawal from the UN (HR 1146, American Sovereignty Restoration Act, is a Ron Paul perennial) and the ouster of the UN from NYC, as well as strict obedience to the written Constitution, should be seen by anyone who desires Freedom From Government as significant.

Ron Paul's foreign policy ideals are lunacy.

But isn't that like saying former President Bush was unaware he was keeping company, praying with, etc., dangerous men and women with ties to extremism and terrorism, or that he was unaware that Islam is not a religion of peace? At what point do we hold our leaders accountable for their lack of awareness?

You could be right. Stability within the ME may be heavily dependent on dictators keeping a firm grasp on the power they wield. That is why Bush's democracy scheme was perplexing. Nonetheless, at some point or another, all out war against Israel will ensue. Obama, whether in intentional or not, appears to be furthering the most extreme interpretation of Islam in the region. He had sympathy for the uprising against Mubarak in Egypt, but no sympathy for the uprising in Iran; one of the world's preeminent state sponsors of terrorism. Obama gives aid to al Qaeda of North Africa in Libya against Gaddafi but is all but silent about Syria, a state sponsor of terrorism. Be careful what you wish for might be sage advice. I see much inconsistency in this president's policies.

WJ, the answer is immediately. However, I'm not convinced that Perry is as aware as you and I are. Awareness is highly subjective. You can be aware of something but lack the requisite informaton to do something about it.

At one point, Perry will have to answer some hard questions concerning Islam and it's US agenda. Answers that will hopefully reflect our mutual knowledge, but more importantly, what he plans to do about it.

Citizen K, thanks for the link.

Ruth concludes: "Blogger Pam Geller published a column on Perry’s "problematic pals" at the American Thinker just this morning. But unless the leading anti-Sharia groups get on board with this criticism, it’s hard to see it gaining much traction with the conservative base."

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Pam Geller is doing what she should be doing; vetting these candidates for the highest office in the land. Unfortunately this kind of research was not done on then Texas Governor / candidate for U.S. president George W. Bush, though to be fair, that was months before the 9/11 attacks. I could find no research on Bush's troubling ties with the Saudis post 9/11 except from leftist writers and bloggers. No conservative would touch Bush on Islam. Do you think that served us well? I see little distance between Perry and Bush on Islam, on jihad, etc. Do you see any?

Dot - Of course everyone here knows you're a few ants short of a picnic. That said, what in the heck does "Citizen K" have to do with the "KKK?" Just because his initial is K? You remind me of the morons who post on Leonard Pitts' column in the Miami Herald. And truly there are no greater morons.

Oh and you know what, Dot? I think you're really an Islamist and posing under multiple identities! How ya like them apples?

I believe that Citizen K is the true patriot and you're the suck-up, to idiocy.

I voted for Reagan both times. In many respects, Reagan was a great president. Like other American presidents, he fell short on the Middle East, Islam, Iran, etc.

In 1981, Israel bombed the Osirak Iraqi reactor. Reagan ordered UN ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick to condemn Israel via resolution in the United Nations Security Council. Secretary of State Alexander Haig was the only Cabinet member to stand up for the Israelis telling Reagan Israel did the U.S. a favor. G. H. W. Bush, Casper Weinberger, James Baker demanded Reagan punish Israel.

In 1982 Israel launched Operation Peace for Galilee in order to uproot PLO terrorist-gangsters from Lebanon. As time went on - Israel had the PLO and Yasser Arafat under siege in Beirut - Reagan became impatient, angry even, ordering Israelis to withdraw its forces from Beirut. President Reagan sent in the U.S. Marines to help remove the PLO, with their side arms intact, to Tunis. During the occupation an Iranian / Hezbollah suicide bomber blew up the U.S. Marine barracks, killing some 241 Marines. Osama bin Laden cited Reagan's quick retreat from Lebanon as an example of American weakness and pusillanimity. Reagan provided arms to the Iranian Mullahs in exchange for American hostages held in Beirut. Reagan vowed he would not deal with terrorists.

CK, let me ask you a question. Were you a consistent and strong supporter of former President G. W. Bush's Mideast policies? If so, why? If not, why?

I've got no argument with you info or logic regarding Reagan.

However, as Anushrivan has stated this is geostrategic politics and not so cut and dried as just supporting Israel. Reagan definitely wanted to take the USSR down and its economy was only kept afloat by its sales of crude oil. You'll have to trust that it was in far worse shape than even Greece's economy is today as coming directly from a Russian oil refinery manager who I met in Carson, CA in 1992 while liquidating one for Shell.

As an aside, that refinery manager did speak a little English which mostly amounted an occasional, "Thank you, Mr. Roosevelt."

Foolster, Ben Shapiro was a supporter of President Bush's policies in the Middle East (on Islam, etc.), why wouldn't he support Perry?

Yes and no.

I'll start with NO because he was naive regarding several moslem sects.

Yes because there really were WMD's and there were also VERY credible threats here in the lower 48 from Sadam. I personally know of 1 (in two parts) in California that is unreported but info was not silenced. It was regarding TWO R&D labs for pesticide/herbicide operated by a major chemical company. While I was liquidating a "silicon valley" subsidiary's equipment, they asked me to assess this equipment, which is more in my line anyway.

As far as the Sauds, that is a ticklish situation because while the U.S. is NOT dependent on their oil, Europe and the Far East IS. Not only that they are at least in the top 3 of petrochemical producers and that means just about everything you see, feel, touch, or ingest could be affected by loss of access to that production. Clinton painted us into a corner with his energy policy as we lost significant portions of our ability to make nitrogenous fertilizer, all of our ability to make methanol, and lots of other products based on natural gas as feedstock and as fuel for furnaces. Clinton's policy caused the natural gas prices to artificially climb and aid companies like Enron to stay afloat.

BTW, the Keystone XL pipeline will not affect any imports of Middle East oil at all. It is a quite different type more akin to Venezuelan crude and Mexican Mayan grade of crude which it would displace from the 11 Gulf Coast Refineries (only ones in the world) which utilize them as majority feedstock.

So as you can see there is a lot going on and leaning one direction slowly and gradually actually does have great effect. However, too hard in one direction can cause a the World's economy to get a deathly case of the DT's (the real ones cause death in 25% of the time in alcoholics).

You wrote: "As far as the Sauds, that is a ticklish situation because while the U.S. is NOT dependent on their oil, Europe and the Far East IS. Not only that they are at least in the top 3 of petrochemical producers and that means just about everything you see, feel, touch, or ingest could be affected by loss of access to that production."

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

That ticklish situation is what I am interested in exploring with you. Late August 2011, then Crown Prince (now king) Abullah bin Abdul Aziz engaged in a little brinkmanship with Bush. He sent Bush one of those, "you go your way, (we the Saudis will) go our way" kind of letters unless you lean on Israel to establish a Muslim-enemy state, which will be dedicated to Israel's destruction. Bush immediately folded. He sent Abdullah a two page letter, vowing he would soon unveil a "vision" according to Abdullah's demands. Of course we now know, Abdullah's (Saudi Arabia's) proxy was planning a massive attack on American cities which was skillfully executed on 9/11/01. Those attacks put off Bush's announcement until early October. Before he was pressured by Colin Powell to back down, then Prime Minister Sharon said the following:

"I call on the western democracy, and primarily the leader of the free world, the United States, do not repeat the dreadful mistake of 1938, when enlightened European democracies decided to sacrifice Czechoslovakia for a convenient, temporary solution."

You say this is a "ticklish" situation. Did Bush do the right thing? Did he show himself a man of courage and integrity in your view?

"It really hurts me to beo [sico] against Geller..."

But you have to because your nose is up the machinery's backside, which is in turn up Rick Perry's because you all think you will benefit (not America) and you will be above the law -- immune to it even -- at least as long as you are convenient.

I will await the arrival of the rest of the choir and address you all as a unit.

You say "NO because he was naive regarding several moslem sects."

Was he (and is Perry) naive about several Muslim sects, or are the two naive about Islam?

What is your problem???

You will not drown out my voice, no matter how many of you show up. Give it a rest.

As far as Perry, we have a number of months to see what is REALLY revealed rather than these dubious, at best, sources. We really do need to ask these same questions of all candidates. I have no problem with that. What I do have a problem with is the plethora of nefarious unfounded smears against Perry AND any other candidate. All the smearing just came right out of the woodwork since the end of last week, though the Ron Paul camp has been trying smear Perry for some time now, with patently false statements via its mouthpiece, Lew Rockwell.

As to Bush, he sure seemed a bit naive to think that a "Western Style" democracy would actually take place in Iraq. His working with Mubarak to democratize Egypt sure got short circuited by the Palestinians and in Lebanon.

BTW, all of that pilot plant equipment to make "cides" can be sold to Israel without a problem. It cannot be sold to ANY Middle Eastern or Far East country. At least it could in 2002/3. As for any changes, I am not sure whether or not it can be today.

Do you think Bush was right to pressure Israel to establish a Muslim-enemy state in Israel's heartland, in Judea, Samaria, Jerusalem, Gaza? Do you think Obama is right to follow Bush's example and then some? Do you think Perry - reputedly a good friend of Israel's - will follow the Bush and the Obama example because of the ticklish Saudi situation? Will you support Perry if he does?

You wrote: "As far as Perry, we have a number of months to see what is REALLY revealed rather than these dubious, at best, sources."

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

These are Governor Perry's own words (post 9/11) on his official state website:

"I ask that all Texans be mindful that the attacks on New York City and Washington are not the work of the Islamic faithful, but the work of terrorists – of fanatics – who have hijacked the name of religion for their campaign of hatred.....Like most of the world’s major religions, the Islamic faith preaches peace, love and tolerance. Indeed, terrorism is the antithesis of the basic tenet to which the one billion Islamic followers all over the world adhere."

This is what what is REALLY revealed rather than these dubious, at best, sources. How do these reflections on Islam differ from those of President Bush?

It was the way people were thinking after Bush's statement and before the vast majority of us woke up. What percentage of Jihad Watchers were among that number? Likely a very high percentage.

His action was expedient and also based on logistical needs for that part of the world.

Who knows what was going on behind closed doors? Even the Sauds on occasion cooperate with Israel.

He could be well aware of Norquist but not complicit. Grover is the anti-taxation man and ANY GOP candidate in the South who wants ANY votes has to be allied with and signed the No Tax Pledge.

Isn't politics fun! ;)

Citizen K: "His (Bush's) action was expedient and also based on logistical needs for that part of the world."

What do you mean by logistical needs for that part of the world?

Citizen K: "It was the way people were thinking after Bush's statement and before the vast majority of us woke up. What percentage of Jihad Watchers were among that number? Likely a very high percentage."

I question your assertion that the "vast majority of us woke up." Those who woke up are a tiny minority. I don't know what I was thinking immediately after Bush's statement before the joint session of Congress and the American people, September 20, 2001. It was a consistent theme Bush promulgated until the end of his second term. Is there anything to indicate Perry has since re-evaluated or re-visited his own misleading statements about Islam to Texans?

I can say this, I was scrambling to find honest answers after the attacks. Weren't you? A few weeks or months after the attacks, I "stumbled" across one of Spencer's earlier books, "Islam Unveiled: Disturbing Questions About the World's Fastest-Growing Faith." It rang true at the time. It still rings true. If I could find honest authors and scholars on Islam, why couldn't Bush? Why couldn't Perry?

"He could be well aware of Norquist but not complicit. Grover is the anti-taxation man and ANY GOP candidate in the South who wants ANY votes has to be allied with and signed the No Tax Pledge."

___________________________________________________________

A couple or so year back, Grover Norquist was invited to speak at our annual (GOP) Lincoln Day Dinner. After a spontaneous outcry, Republican leaders / officers summarily disinvited Norquist. Do you honestly believe Texas officials are not apprised of Norquist's troubling associations and his activism in behalf of America's enemies?

Wildjew, if Perry is still touting the same line now as in that post-9/11 statement...then I can't dismiss that as just "politics." That's a LIE--and it's a dangerous, indefensible lie from anyone who would be POTUS. As soon as I see the word "hijacked" my olfactory goes off like I've tripped over a skunk. "Peace, love and tolerance?"
That's beyond the pale.

We've had a decade of mind-numbing Dhimmitude since 9/11. I'm way beyond sick of it. I'll write in the name Allen West before I vote for another lying "friend-of-islam,"
irrespective of party label.
More than ever before, we need an unapologetic Friend-of-AMERICA running this outfit...

"As I see it now, Perry will be the next president, unless he stumbles badly."

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I think you may be right. Perry might be the next president. But no way did Geller make a huge tactical or strategic error, unless you think Geller longs to be invited to the Perry White House.

Better to maintain ones integrity, don't you think? Or are you one who believes we should suck up to the next president, irrespective?

To carry on something of the conversation from the post on Perry some days ago, I am not opposed to politicians making overtures and connections to the various Islamic communities in the USA. Yes, I am wary and mistrustful of Islam as a religion. Yes, I'm the guy who jokes about how if you tweak a Jewish or Christian conscience, something useful, public-spirited, or philanthropic goes up, while if you tweak a devout Muslim conscience, body parts and shrapnel go up.

But, politics is a matter of coalitions and people weighing and balancing where their interests are, and which other groups have interests that coincide.

We should never forget that there are Muslims in the USA who do integrate to various degrees--and some even to the point of leaving Islam altogether. The issue should be that we make it clear that we are fighting what is criminal and actively hostile to the USA; not someone's holding an opinion.

If the only issues were that Muslims say I'm wrong and Hell-bound because I deny that Muhammad is a prophet, believe Jesus is both God and Man, hold that Jesus really did die on the cross, and doubt that the Qur'an is divinely inspired while fervently holding to the inspiration and authority of the Old and New Testaments, I could live with it. The issue I have is that some Muslims are willing to act on the positive commands to violent jihad in the Qur'an and Hadith.

Further, while Bush was friendly with a wide range of Muslims both foreign and American, he was generally pro-Israel in his policies, if for no other reason he sympathized with their suffering under aggressive terrorism and their political culture which is so similar to our own. Further, many American Muslims who are engaged in business will have a certain sympathy for the politicians who might like less regulation and taxation; and even respect non-Muslims who believe there's a place for "God-talk" in the public square (and I speak as someone who was very critical of Peter Kreeft!).

Yes, we're in a conflict. Yes, our conflict is with a portion of the Ummah. Yes, even those of us looking at Islam from the outside can see that there are profound theological reasons on the other side for why those conflicts happen. Yes, Qaida, Taliban, Sadr, and the like have a much wider resonance with the Islamic street than our leaders would like to admit. But if a Republican candidate can rope in Muslim voters without sacrificing a lot of American interests, I won't be too critical. It's why I fancy that my criticisms of Bush (high spending, bailouts, too optimistic about the Middle East) are respectful and why I'm still willing to give Perry a hearing (with all due respect to Pam Geller).

"If he is what she claims (he is), we will likely never get to see the truth."

________________________________________________________

If Governor Perry is the next president, and he is what he appears to be (with respect to Islam), of course we will see the truth. Why would you think otherwise?

Before election.

That is why we have Pam Geller to make an issue of it "before" the November 2012 election. But you've condemned her for exactly that. Why? Whose side are you on?

Kepha, I cannot believe what I am reading from Spencer's regular contributors. Everyone is selling out. Why? I want President Barack Hussein Obama removed from office as much (nay more!) than the next guy. Why are we compromising our principles?

"the attacks on New York City and Washington are not the work of the Islamic faithful, but the work of terrorists – of fanatics – who have hijacked the name of religion for their campaign of hatred.....Like most of the world’s major religions, the Islamic faith preaches peace, love and tolerance."

Thanks for that. That and his associations with the head-honcho of the historical assassins, the Aga Khan, a man who has a problem with our G-d given right of free speech, a problem with the 'west', our 'ignorance' and much more, is dubious to say the least.

Pamela is doing a stellar job.

Nobody looks good with brown lipstick on, and Perry is no exception. We don't need any more deal-making polit-props, but real leadership who takes a stand against Islam.

Just Google...there's tons of stuff. If he caters to these people, I certainly don't want him for President! I hope someone calls him on it during debate.

http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_display.cfm/blog_id/32618

http://www.voicesempower.com/articles/

Well done.

Excellent letter.

Speaking as an Australian who must watch anxiously from afar while our WWII rescuer and long-time ally and protector the good ship USA flounders perilously from reef to reef under her current Captain, and as the prospects for a replacement Captain appear distinctly lack-lustre, I can only urge all other jihadwatchers here to follow your example.

Flood his in-tray.

And surely there must be some jihadwatchers from his home state who can find ways of tackling him in person at some meet-the-people press-the-flesh kiss-babies publicity session?