RUTHFULLY YOURS

http://www.bikyamasr.com/73546/kuwait-police-arrest-detain-man-for-drinking-in-public-during-ramadan/
Kuwait police arrest, detain man for drinking in public during Ramadan

DUBAI: It is illegal to drink or eat in public in Kuwait during the holy month of Ramadan, where Muslims fast from sunrise to sunset.

Over the weekend, Kuwaiti police said they made the first arrest of someone who failed to abide by their strict conditions during the holy month.

Police have indicated that a police patrol saw an “Asian drinking water from a bottle during the day.”

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/
2012.07.24 (Parwan, Afghanistan) – Two Afghans and an American engineer are machine-gunned by Sunni fundamentalists.
2012.07.23 (Baghdad, Iraq) – Six Shiites are blown to bits by Sunni bombers while relaxing at a cafe.
2012.07.23 (Bauchi, Nigeria) – Sharia advocates set off a bomb near a local bar, killing a 6-year-old boy.
2012.07.23 (Sadr City, Iraq) – Sunni bombers strike at the heart of a Shiite slum, slaughtering at least twenty-one with two car bombs.
2012.07.23 (Taji, Iraq) – Forty-two people are killed in a series of al-Qaeda bombings outside a housing complex.
2012.07.22 (Hyderabad, Pakistan) – Two Christians are shot to death by Muslim radicals.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/07/24/Romney-attacks-Obama-foreign-policy-VFW

“Obama does not have any ground on which to stand on his domestic policy. It’s now becoming clear that his record on foreign policy is, if possible, even worse. And Mitt Romney is beginning to go on the offensive.”

Today, Mitt Romney spoke at the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) National Convention in Reno, Nevada. For one of the first times in the campaign – certainly the first time since his brilliant and straightforward speech at the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) – Romney came out swinging. And he hit the mark.

He went right at Obama from the outset:

[H]as the American economy recovered?

Has our ability to shape world events been enhanced, or diminished?

Have we gained greater confidence among our allies, and greater respect from our adversaries?

And, perhaps most importantly, has the most severe security threat facing America and our friends, a nuclear-armed Iran, become more or less likely?

These clear measures are the ultimate tests of American leadership. And, by these standards, we haven’t seen much in the President’s first term that inspires confidence in a second.

These are the questions upon which Romney can realistically stake his re-election bid. And Romney didn’t stop there. He delivered body-shot after body-shot:

The President’s policies have made it harder to recover from the deepest recession in seventy years … exposed the military to cuts that no one can justify … compromised our national-security secrets … and in dealings with other nations, given trust where it is not earned, insult where it is not deserved, and apology where it is not due.

And he posed the contrast between his own vision of American exceptionalism and Obama’s, largely by focusing on the concept that this must be an “American Century”:

Like a watchman in the night, we must remain at our post – and keep guard of the freedom that defines and ennobles us, and our friends. In an American Century, we have the strongest economy and the strongest military in the world. In an American Century, we secure peace through our strength. And if by absolute necessity we must employ it, we must wield our strength with resolve. In an American Century, we lead the free world and the free world leads the entire world.

If we do not have the strength or vision to lead, then other powers will take our place, pulling history in a very different direction. A just and peaceful world depends on a strong and confident America. I pledge to you that if I become commander-in-chief, the United States of America will fulfill its duty, and its destiny.

Romney had especially harsh words for Obama’s planned military cuts:

Today, we are just months away from an arbitrary, across-the-board budget reduction that would saddle the military with a trillion dollars in cuts, severely shrink our force structure, and impair our ability to meet and deter threats. Don’t bother trying to find a serious military rationale behind any of this, unless that rationale is wishful thinking. Strategy is not driving President Obama’s massive defense cuts. In fact, his own Secretary of Defense warned that these reductions would be “devastating.” And he is right.

http://news.yahoo.com/al-qaida-claims-responsibility-iraq-killings-085958176.html BAGHDAD (AP) — An al-Qaida affiliate group in Iraq has claimed responsibility for Monday’s wave of attacks that killed 115 people across the country and wounded hundreds others. In a statement posted Wednesday on a militant website, the Islamic State of Iraq said the “blessed foray” marked the beginning of a campaign it calls […]

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/07/24/is-huma-abedin-the-new-alger-h/print

Washington GOP Establishment hits Bachmann for fighting Muslim Brotherhood.

Is Huma Abedin the new Alger Hiss?

Is Huma Abedin to the Muslim Brotherhood what Alger Hiss was to the Soviet Union?

Why are Republican Senator John McCain, Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rodgers (R-MI) acting in the growing Abedin controversy as Washington Establishment Democrats of the 1940s did in the Hiss episode? Which is to say, writing off the dangers of a foreign enemy whose goal is to infiltrate the U.S. government — because, well, the people in question are part of the Washington Establishment?

And last but certainly not least, why is the Republican Establishment pursuing a losing strategy in the war against Islamic radicalism? Is it returning to the losing strategy it pursued during the Cold War — a strategy that was overturned over Establishment opposition by Ronald Reagan’s victorious “we win, they lose” strategy?

These questions arise because of McCain’s vehement attack on Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann. Bachmann, along with four other conservative House members (Louis Gohmert of Texas, Trent Franks of Arizona, Thomas Rooney of Florida and Lynn Westmoreland of Georgia), has written a series of hotly controversial letters.

What did Bachmann and the others do to infuriate McCain? And draw a rebuke from Boehner and Rodgers?

http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/jewish-world-news/austria-province-to-join-growing-ban-on-religious-circumcisions-1.453361

Austria province to join growing ban on religious circumcisions. Governor of Vorarlberg state-run hospitals to suspend circumcisions motivated by religious custom, a week after a similar decisions was made by two Swiss hospitals.
The governor of Vorarlberg has told hospitals run by Austria’s westernmost province to suspend circumcisions motivated by religious custom, citing a German regional court ruling that the practice amounted to causing criminal bodily harm.

Markus Wallner says he sees the German decision last month, arising from the case of a child whose circumcision led to medical complications, as “precedence-setting judgment.”

He told provincial hospitals Tuesday not to perform the procedure except for health reasons until the legal situation is clarified in Austria.

The decision does not affect religiously motivated circumcisions performed outside hospitals run by the Vorarlberg government, and comes a week after two Swiss hospitals announced that they would temporarily stop performing circumcisions.

On Thursday, the Zurich children’s hospital announced that it was temporarily halting circumcision operations. “We are in the process of evaluating the legal and ethical stance in Switzerland,” said Marco Stuecheli, a spokesman for the hospital.

“There can be complicated cases where the mother of a child wants a circumcision but the father is opposed to it,” he added.

Powerful personal testimony.

The speaker in this video is a young, black, female, who is a liberal democrat who worked for ACORN until 2008. She voted for Barack Obama in 2008. Anita is is eminently believable, highly intelligent and is hopefully the first of many who are waking up to the fraud being perpetrated on the black community in its lock step acceptance of the President.

While working at ACORN she learned that she was part of a team that was colluding with the Obama campaign to commit fraud. First she tried to reform ACORN from the inside. But they began to ostracize her when it became apparent that she wanted to reform the organization,. So eventually she ended up going to the media in July 2008 (during the last few months of the presidential campaign). They avoided her and the well documented facts that she brought them.

Every major media outlet refused to air the story because they knew how badly it would damage Obama before the election.

Here is her story in two parts……it is riveting…

Part I: http://www.youtube.com/embed/3CmkbShVqNA?feature=player_embedded

Part II: http://www.youtube.com/embed/gy6odnqyLeU?feature=player_embedded

White Girl Bleed a Lot by Jamie Glazov Author Colin Flaherty discusses the return of racial violence and how the media ignores it. http://frontpagemag.com/2012/jamie-glazov/white-girl-bleed-a-lot/

URL to article: http://pjmedia.com/andrewmccarthy/2012/07/24/huma-abedin-and-the-muslim-brotherhood-closely-connected/

Senator John McCain ought to be embarrassed. So should House Speaker John Boehner and Congressman Mike Rogers, the former FBI agent who chairs the Select Committee on Intelligence.

These pillars of the Republican establishment have been championing the cause of Huma Abedin, the deputy chief of staff to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Ms. Abedin’s name arose, along with several others, in connection with questions pressed by five conservative House Republicans regarding Muslim Brotherhood infiltration of the United States government. The GOP establishment, led by McCain, Boehner, and Rogers, has been slamming Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, one of the five House conservatives, over her refusal to back down from concerns over Ms. Abedin.

Here are four things, among many, that we now know:

1. Huma Abedin’s mother, Dr. Saleha S. Mahmood Abedin (hereafter, Saleha Abedin), is an influential member of the Muslim Brotherhood’s division for women, the Muslim Sisterhood. She is also a zealous advocate of sharia law’s oppression of women — which McCain himself condemned in a 2011 interview with Der Spiegel.

2. Not only that: Saleha Abedin is a board member of the International Islamic Council for Dawa and Relief. The IICDR has been long banned in Israel for supporting Hamas. It is also part of the Union for Good, which is a formally designated international terrorist organization under federal law. The Union for Good is led by Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the chief sharia jurist of the Muslim Brotherhood. He is the world’s most influential Islamic cleric, and has issued fatwas endorsing suicide bombings against Israel and terrorist attacks against American forces in Iraq.

3. Moreover, it turns out that Huma Abedin herself was, until late 2008, a member of another of her mother’s Islamist organizations, the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs.

The Center for Security Policy has reviewed past mastheads of the IMMA’s journal. Huma Abedin is listed as an assistant editor (to her mother, the editor-in-chief) as far back as 1996, the year she began interning at the Clinton White House. The IMMA was started in Saudi Arabia in the 1970s by Huma Abedin’s parents, with the backing of Abdullah Omar Naseef. Naseef is a former secretary-general of the Muslim World League, which, as I’ve previously explained, has long been the Muslim Brotherhood’s principal vehicle for the international propagation of Islamic supremacist ideology.

http://www.andrewbostom.org/blog/2012/07/24/why-has-a-muslim-man-threatened-huma-abedin/

Why Has A Muslim Man Threatened Huma Abedin?

Yesterday (7/23/12) the New York Post [2] reported that Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin had been placed under round the clock security protection by NY police and federal officials, following an “unspecified threat” by a Muslim man from New Jersey.

New York Post reporter Larry Celona chose [2] to link the threat to the controversy surrounding Michelle Bachmann’s reasonable call for an investigation of the background security clearance procedures Huma Abedin underwent given her family ties—especially her mother, Saleyah Abedin’s [3]—overt connections to the Muslim Brotherhood, and its Sharia supremacist ideology.

But there is another more plausible avenue of inquiry the New York Post and other media investigators should pursue: Muslim anger at what, at least on the surface, barring any overriding Islamic purpose, is a clear violation of mainstream, Sharia-based Islamic rulings on the marriage of a Muslim woman to a non-Muslim man.

Indeed, the pre-eminent, mainstream consortium of Muslim legists in North America, the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America (AMJA [4]), issued a definitive fatwa [5] (ruling) in 2007 specifically prohibiting such marriages. AMJA stalwart [4], Salah al-Sawy’s ruling [5] invoking Koran 2:221 [6] (“And give not (your daughters) in marriage to Al-Mushrikun till they believe (in Allah Alone) and verily, a believing slave is better than a (free) Mushrik (idolater, etc.), even though he pleases you.”), and Koran 24:33 [7] (“And let those who find not the financial means for marriage keep themselves chaste, until Allah enriches them of His Bounty.”), stated explicitly [5],

Marriage between a Muslim woman and a non-Muslim [man] is forbidden and invalid – that is a consensus among Muslims. A [Muslim] woman who has taken the liberty [of marrying a non-Muslim man] has removed herself from the fold of the Muslim community – and one who has done so knowing that it is wrong, has done something strictly forbidden, and has committed an open [act of] abomination that may hurl her into the abyss of heresy and apostasy.

Some clerics hold that [a Muslim woman who marries a non-Muslim man] is considered a heretic from the very beginning [i.e. from the moment she marries], since the bond of marriage allows her to have sexual relations and intercourse [with her husband], and to take pleasure [in this], and it is inconceivable that she should commit the crime [of having intercourse] without the sanction [of a valid marriage].

The wisdom of the religious ban [against the marriage of a Muslim woman to a non-Muslim man lies in] its preventing [the woman] from being tempted away from her faith. The Koran justifies this ban by saying that these marriages ‘beckon [the believer] to the Fire [of Hell; Koran 2:221].’ In other words, they lead to sins that doom [the sinner] to Hell… since [the woman] may be tempted to renounce [Islam], to doubt [the truth of] Islam, and to disparage its religious rituals.