“A nation free of Shariah”
Wouldn’t you like to see every GOP candidate sign a pledge agreeing to uphold and defend “a nation free of Shariah?”
PeaceThroughStrength.com has published a 10-point platform of fundamental national security principles and is asking public officials and candidates to sign.
You can add your name and pass it around, too.
The platform:
Renewed adherence to the national security philosophy of President Ronald Reagan: “Peace Through Strength.” American security is most reliably assured by having military forces that are fully trained, equipped and ready to deter or defeat the nation’s adversaries.
A robust defense posture including: A safe, reliable effective nuclear deterrent, which requires its modernization and testing; the deployment of comprehensive defenses against missile attack; and national protection against unconventional forms of warfare – including biological, electro-magnetic pulse (EMP) and cyber attacks.
Preservation of U.S. sovereignty against international treaties, judicial rulings and other measures that would have the effect of supplanting or otherwise diminishing the U.S. Constitution and the representative, accountable form of government it guarantees.
A nation free of Shariah, the brutally repressive and anti-Constitutional totalitarian program that governs in Saudi Arabia, Iran and other Islamic states and that terrorists are fighting to impose worldwide.
Protection from unlawful enemy combatants. Enemies who refuse to wear uniforms, use civilians as shields and employ terrorism as weapons are not entitled to U.S. constitutional rights or trials in our civilian courts. Those captured overseas should be incarcerated at Guantanamo Bay, which should remain open, or in other prisons outside the United States.
Energy security, realized by exploiting to the fullest the natural resources and technologies available in this country. We Americans must reduce our dependence for energy upon – and transfers of national wealth to – enemies of this country.
Borders secure against penetration by terrorists, narco-traffickers or others seeking to enter the United States illegally. Aliens who have violated immigration laws should not be rewarded with the privileges of citizenship.
High standards that protect the military culture essential to the All-Volunteer Force. The Pentagon should implement sound priorities, policies and laws that strengthen recruiting, retention, and readiness.
A foreign policy that supports our allies and opposes our adversaries. It should be clearly preferable to be a friend of the United States, not its enemy.
Judicial and educational institutions that uphold the constitutional responsibility of elected officials to make policy for our military and convey to future generations accurate portrayals of American history, including the necessity of defending freedom.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Obama’s latest campaign angle: I’ve been saving America from wild Republican debts
May 24, 2012 04:33 PM by Doug Powers
45 Comments
Senate finally passes a budget approves bill striking word ‘lunatic’ from federal law
May 24, 2012 11:22 AM by Doug Powers
191 CommentsStammertime: Jay Carney asked if Chicago protests have soured Obama’s support for OWS
May 23, 2012 07:44 PM by Doug Powers
54 Comments
S.E. Cupp, Hustler, and the four stages of conservative female abuse
May 23, 2012 02:13 PM by Michelle Malkin
142 CommentsPig Maher’s boy Bill Burton mocks my support of Hatch challenger Dan Liljenquist
May 23, 2012 11:37 AM by Michelle Malkin
32 CommentsFree speech blogburst: Show solidarity for targeted conservative bloggers; Update: It’s Everybody Blog About Brett Kimberlin Day; Donation fund for targets
May 23, 2012 05:59 AM by Michelle Malkin
81 Comments
Jaczko the Jerk: Harry Reid’s sexist crony gets the boot
May 23, 2012 05:15 AM by Michelle Malkin
31 CommentsPalin officially endorses desperate, clingy Orrin Hatch; time to rally around Dan Liljenquist
May 22, 2012 11:32 PM by Michelle Malkin
83 CommentsGOP Senators question upcoming $1 million Hawaiian conference for Ninth Circuit Court
May 21, 2012 03:12 PM by Doug Powers
152 Comments
JustOneMinute
» Mama Also Said There Be Days Like ThisPundit & Pundette
» Patterico's chilling account of harassment
All this is common and Constitutional sense. You know Obowmao will not sign it.
This is a given. I can’t believe we are so far down that we have to ask our nation’s leaders to sign this. Of course, BHO is no leader…
Yeah! Our military personnel deserve the best training, the best equipment, the best family support, and the right to work in a queer-free environment.
(Sorry, I am taking the word gay back from the homos.)
None of the dillweeds that are in charge now will give this the time of day.
I would be amazed if 1 Democrat signed it and I imagine most of the jellyfish repubics would get no where near it either.
What does it say that so many politicians find having to sign a pledge to defend the constitution and provide for national security so difficult? Anyone who refuses to sign this should resign.
How bad could ShariA-mor be?
Do we have any leaders in D.C.? Sure none in the pitiful state of CA
This is excellent.
Of course Obama won’t sign it. Even if he did, it would just be another lie.
But every person who is considered for a DoD position requiring Senate confirmation should be required to.
MM,
I appreciate the sentiment, but I don’t think it’s a good idea. Why even put out there the concept that sharia might be a possibility.
Compare this with something like . . . gay marriage. It’s stupid and pointless and nobody really wants to talk about it. It’s never ever happened and so it’s not as though people are being punished some new oppressive way. BUT because gay people talk about it and people protest about it, there is a ridiculous discussion of something that is essentially irrelevant except to lawyers.
No, I don’t want sharia law in America. But that should be given. You shouldn’t have to pledge that all water be wet. . . it just is. By pledging that it is indeed wet, you are inviting someone to argue that no, water is not wet – as absurd as it is (although it’s no more absurd than the concept of gay marriage).
We fight for freedom. Sharia doesn’t allow for freedom. Anything against freedom is bad when it comes from the government.
That said, you looked great on Hannity tonight. Great outfit! I have no idea why you don’t post all your appearances on your blog, facebook, twitter stuff. It would promote you and the show you are on. It makes too much sense but maybe you aren’t allowed to use your own spots.
It would be good on the new mobile app too. Just a thought.
*It’s just common sense; The GOP would be light years ahead of the Democrat(Death to America) Party by just inserting the platform as a plank in their party; I am especially well pleased with the no sharia and no amnesty planks, both of which would be country killers.
in germany in the 30′s they were blind are we now?????????
Frank Gaffney is my kind of guy. No surprised he is one ofthe founders.
A very good man.
*How about a world free of Shariah?; Believe you me, we are in for some dark days ahead until enough people get their heads out of their rectal orafice and begin to see through the fog of political correctness as to what we are up against; The truth hurts, but political correctness kills, and it kills in great numbers daily in the name of Allah!
The sentiment is appreciated though the devil is in the details.
There has never been a greater opportunity to use nuclear weapons then after 9/11. And, we did not.
A true change would move us from using smart bombs to using big dumb bombs. To accepting that war involves killing people, breaking things and making others succumb to our will.
Treaties are what sovereign Nations do. Are we to leave NATO? Recall, they are helping us in Afghanistan. ANZUS? Yep, so are they.
Sharia? Who cares about that? I am glad we are not subject to the laws of the Old Testament.
Yep, unlawful enemy combatants should be dealt with using extreme prejudice. However, we should avoid accepting their identification by one of their countrymen who may have a grudge against them.
Our resources are not ‘our’ resources. They belong to the companies that bring them out of the ground because they purchase the leases to do so. We can not force them to sell those resources to us, unless you believe in a command economy. Those companies first loyalties belong to their shareholders and not the Country’s citizens.
Just follow the existing law on immigration.
The Pentagon is doing what it needs to do, and yes, continue to do so.
How do we have allies without treaties?
Defending freedom is a wonderful idea, but we are not the world’s police and should not have to defend freedom everywhere and all the time.
Much of the screed are platitudes that amount to apple pie and motherhood. Absolutely, nothing wrong with that.
But, signing this it amounts to just wearing a flag pin on your lapel and calling yourself a great American when being an American is so much more. We are more nuanced than a 10 point platform.
I have been hoping something like this would come out with enough time before the election. Yeah it may not be much, but with the Tea Party activities over the past year, politicians signing this might think twice about going against it.
…but then, will those seeking election have the bag to sign it with Saudi Arabia mentioned? You know the leftist media will be screaming racism.
Ah Z……… Leave the choice of ordanance to the people hitting the targets.
Your comments are indicative of your ignorance on these issues.
Thack – there might be usage issues, but there’s also some amount of work in editing down a clip from a program, converting it into a digital format and uploading it. (actually, uploading is the easy part)
Individuals do it on their own and upload such clips to YouTube or whereever and hope the copyright holder doesn’t haven’t it taken down the next day.
…and reading your posts is like having a conversation with a bowl of jello and expecting an intelligent response.
Perhaps you should read what you termed a “screed” again, it would help you pick out the mistakes you made in your post.
You started out great there, Hangfire, but then you slipped into what probably wasn’t a shining moment in commenting.
It is a ten point statement on national security; nothing more. Z, don’t succumb to scope creep.
But maybe the point was more toward if that’s all a politician does solely to get some votes, Flyman. Signing something is easier than “walking the walk”.
But signing this statement is a good starting/reference point, though.
I would like to see ALL candidates sign a pledge to make the entire world free of sharia.
Certainly not popular opinion, but heartfelt. Just an old grouch.
Where’s the pledge that we don’t want Communism or Socialism?
That’s the thing about Van Jones that struck me. People got upset when he was outed as a truther (obviously a partisan position for a guy like him).
The problem is he was a COMMUNIST! HE SAID he was a communist! HELLO!! Every war from 1945-1990 was against the spread of communism.
It seems like a new American value is Communism since it failed after the cold war.
No, I don’t want sharia. But I don’t want socialism, I don’t want communism. Is there no outrage in America that our country that stands for freedom is controlled by people who think the government needs more control over your life? A president that thinks the government is to be used as a weapon against Americans (that he conveniently demonizes – while praising and lifting the self esteem of non-Americans).
Seriously. . . the government just needs to get out of the way. It doesn’t need to ‘do’ that much. We need to adopt a common sense rule that the rest of the world uses. That rule is that people on government assistance shouldn’t be allowed to vote. You have a choice. . . vote or take government assistance. If we do that, we’ll have a more fiscally responsible government.
A fiscally responsible government is key to a limited government of a free people. the one thing that makes us a country is our debt. That’s what Alexander Hamilton knew. Most of the states didn’t want to join a Federal Union. Hamilton created a way to consolidate all of the debt from all the individual states so that each state DEPENDED on the federal government. When the dependence was created through debt, the country couldn’t break up.
The crisis is going to come around October. California is going to run out of money then. We’ll see how the government responds and how other states in the hole respond. Without stimulus, states are going to start defaulting soon – teachers, cops are going to lose their jobs and add to unemployment.
Be ready everyone. Sharia isn’t our problem. Debt is. . . just like it is with all communist countries.
I understand, Hangfire, and, if anything, I may likely feel stronger on the issue than you. But there are certain terms I avoid since instead of just plain ol’ grouchiness they might tend to bring dueling banjos into some folk’s minds.
Problems aren’t either/or mutually exclusive, Thack – a nation can have more than just one with which to deal.
Why does it annoy me so much when WyZziWyg says “Yep”??
So annoying!!
/vent
And sometimes it is the confluence of more than one vexing issue that finally brings the entire enterprise to a dead stop.
Between our debt, weakening defense (e.g., closing space program and cessation of airborne laser programs), and handing out our technological advances to our enemies (e.g., chinese nationals at our top universities and companies) PLUS balkanization of the people in the US–these things, while not perhaps individually fatal to the USA, could, in combination, be the “perfect storm.”
Let me rephrase that. Being concerned about Sharia at this moment in our nation’s history is like Kramer getting revenge by taking the desiccate packets out of the clothing.
Europe with Greece is experiencing something we will soon. Germany is on the hook for Greece because of the currency.
California is going to be America’s Greece VERY SOON. I can’t tell you the exact date. . . I said October, it could happen before or after that, but without stimulus, they and many other states don’t have the money to meet their budgets. So if the country defaults and we have a lot of little states instead of a big country, we don’t have to worry about a national sharia crisis.
The only way this doesn’t become a crisis is if you somehow believe that the people in the Whitehouse have been 100% right about everything and smarter than anyone in history (I actually hope this to be the case). Absent that, you have to believe that the California legislation will undergo DRASTIC measures (note that they say they won’t lower state worker pay to minimum wage because they don’t have a system that can calculate and print checks with the lower rate).
That means they can’t keep their system from cutting checks the way they were structured. . . they’ll just bounce. THAT is their ‘solution’ as it stands now.
So you can concern yourself with whatever you want. Unprecedented is going to be a word you will use to describe it. But if your personal finances aren’t on solid ground, you are going to be in trouble too. I’m just trying to help. Get out of debt and raise cash because when it does happen it will be the buy of the century. America won’t stay down long but the up is going to involve a LOT of inflation.
Right now we are in a deflationary period. When interest rates go up, our nations debt will consume ever penny that everyone in America makes.
Let me reiterate. . . I don’t want sharia for our bankrupt country.
Yup, I been around long enough to know life is a vale of troubles. If life just tosses only one problem our way to tackle, we are indeed the most blessed people in all of recorded history.
As Major O alluded above – when it rains, it pours and a good perfect storm can be helpful when all is said and done.
Shouldn’t this also say “nor do such persons have any rights under the Geneva Convention” or words to that effect?
You’re kidding, right?
My comment addresses what was said. The term ‘nuclear deterrant’ was used. Well, what good are nuclear weapons if they aren’t going to be used? Are they just another lapel Flag pin? As long as it can be prominently displayed and proudly pointed to, you’re OK.
Horse hockey, if you got it, use it. Flashy and shiny is good for showy flag pins, but flashy and shiny when it goes boom and leaves a mushroom cloud over the heads of the perpetraitors of 9/11, that is even better.
Apples and oranges.
Sharia is far more deadly and irreversible in the long run. Communists tend to take themselves out of the game by failing to breed. Promoters of sharia do just the opposite. Communism can still be kept in check to some degree even after it has become quite advanced in a society. Sharia cannot.
Also, unlike communists the vanguard of the followers of sharia will use nukes.
Really? So, why haven’t you asked me a specific question in this thread, about my actual post? Are you the actual jello or are you projecting?
If you want converstion, as a freakin’ question.
Perhaps you should point out the mistakes. They are my words and my comments. You are welcome to view them as mistakes.
However, making an assertion requires backing it up. When you suggest there are mistakes, it is incumbent upon you to point them out.
I asked you a question. Are you jello? Do you want a conversation? Or, are you just going sit there and wiggle?
Shoot, just having all candidates say the “Pledge Of Allegiance” would make my day.
After yesterday’s riveting article, I think MM should consider penning a new best seller chronicling the NAACP’s decline and fall into being little more than a third arm of the Democrat party.
First you might want to look up the term “deterrence.”
I am school trained in nuclear weapons and their effects, and served two years with the best nuclear weapons war tacticians on the planet. So I think my base line of knowledge on the subject is better than average.
You might start by reading the book, “Hiroshima.” Two nuclear detonations should be enough to make everyone realize that if the world has half a brain they will never be used again. Iran and anyone planning on using a nuclear weapon should tred lightly. They have no clue the horror they will unleash on them and everything they love.
In terms of smart and dumb bombs, I will give you one historical example. From 1965 until 1971 we sent scores of missions containing dozens of aircraft in trying to knock out the Thanh Hoa bridge. It was never destroyed. On May 13, 1972 four USAF F4′s knocked the bridge out. The difference was laser guided preceision weapons.
Smart bombs do not make you less of a power, they make you a more deadly and efficient killer, while exposing fewer of your people to hostile fire. Less weapons, less fuel, less aircraft, less everything.
Stalingrad and many other urban fights taught us that the more you bomb, the more you shell, the more rubble you create. Rubble is a force multiplier FOR THE DEFENSE. Also, every civilian you wound you need to care for.
You want to discuss world level policies, fine. Leave the tactics and weapons to the people skilled in their use. They deserve your thanks not your snarky comments.
A nation free of Sharia? I’m all for it, but we need to keep the following in line (From Andrew McCarthy):
Why? Because Orthodox Jewish people are always going around blowing up stuff & stoning women?
Signed the petition and forwarded it too all the politicians that will be on my ballot to see how many will actually sign it. Of course signing it might just be a vote getter and they wont follow through. That is where internet cached pages come into play during the next election cycle! I told the politicians I sent it to, dont sign it if you dont mean it because if you do sign it and do not follow through the information will resurface during the next election cycle.
Don’t bother, Flyoverman. zyzzyg is still upset that we’re not carpet bombing Saudi Arabia in revenge for 9-11. To say the least, he’s strangely radical.
Ah, the return of wiggy-ziggy. Is he really advocating the use of nuclear weapons in guerrilla war? Classic…
And, if you will check, most of American legal theory was based on Judeo-Christian values founded on Old Testament Law like the 10 Commandments…
And do left-wing nutroots really think that when they finally and totally surrender the nation to Sharia Law that is it going to provide for “equality under the law” to gays? And provide for gay “marriage?” Seriously? Ask any Iranian Homosexual about that it…
Nope. I am commenting on what was said in the posted statement, and have said so. Who ever wrote the statement should look up ‘deterrence’.
OK.
What horror are you referring to will be unleashed on Iran? Do you mean Iran should read “Hiroshima” since I do not possess and have no intention of possessing a nuclear weapon?
One historical example is fine, however a history of war and armaments is more useful. Each generation of weapons has used distance, not only to destroy the enemy, but to protect yourself.
Yep, from rocks and clubs, to spears and arrows, to flintlocks and carbines, to cannons and planes, to on and on, etc.
Weapons development resulted in creating the most devasting way to take out your enemy without risking yourself. ICBMs represent the latest most recent iteration of such weapons.
No one said smart bombs will make you less of a power, but big dumb bombs will change the expectations of the enemy and their supporters. There will be collateral damage and the bystanders (human shields) might take issue with that.
OK, and Hiroshima and Nagasaki brought Japan to its knees. It was done at a distance that put fewer of our troops at risk. Moreover, was was left after each is not what I would call rubble, and was hardly a force multiplier for the defense.
Thank you for the permission to discuss policy. Yet, we had a discussion about using nuclear weapons, or not using them, by this current Administration. And, a majority of posters took Pres Obama to task for his policy of when to go nuclear, or not.
Using nuclear weapons is a policy issue that deserves all of our input. We’ve already had it.
Finally, and most importantly, (at the risk of repeating myself) nuclear deterrence was mentioned in the screed, and I commented on it.
Not to mention do they really believe that under Sharia law that organizations such as NOW would be allowed to exist…just ask any woman in Saudi Arabia.
This is by far one of the most ridiculous statments you have ever made (and that is saying alot).
According to this statement human shields dont take issue with being used as human shields right now, because they are not blown up? Somehow I think a “human shield” would take issue with being used as a human shield regardless of whether or not they are blown up.
If you meant that it by using dumb bombs to obliterate the enemy, with collateral damage of bystanders, would end the use of human shields you are saddly mistaken. Instead the bystander would be changed from “human shield” status to a proganda status used by the enemy to show that the aggesor is killing innocent bystanders.
In either case, I am sure the bystander would object to either being used as a “human shield” in the case of the use of smart bombs or as a propganda prop in the case of the use of dumb bombs.
In the end it doesn’t matter to the leftists. They only believe in power – with them in control. Gays, women, envivronmentalists, minorities, all useful idiot splinter groups who are too blind to see that they are just tools to be used and discarded when the goal has been achieved. Just watch the leftists embrace and convert to Islam if that is what it takes to remain in power.
No. I am advocating the use of nuclear weapons before it became a guerilla war.
Absolutely. However, do we still live and follow the practices of the Old Testament? How many animal sacrifices have you attended lately? Witness many brothers marrying thier siblings wife after they passed? Multiple wives?
We do not live according to the Old Testament. We took and use what works for us and have chucked the rest into the trash can.
Unfortunately, I am not privy to what the left-wing nutroots think.
It is clear that wiggy-ziggy is a unique kind of nutroot…
Well, lemme see–those followers didn’t keep some laws & ‘[chuck] the rest into the trash can’ did they?
xyzzzzzyg: Care to ID a few appropriate targets? Hiroshima and Nagasaki were valid military targets of an easily identified enemy in his homeland.
Give the Pentagon a call and let them know where they should start dropping their nukes, I’m certain they are waiting breathlessly for your input.
Sadly, few GOP candidates have the stones to take a principled stand like this.
Ya’ think? Or, did you did you think at all?
Currently the population in which the Taliban and Al Qaeda circulate are pretty much on the fence. They tolerate the Taliban and Al Qaeda in thier midsts.
Consider the Anbar uprising in Iraq. The Sunnis got tired of what the terrorists were causing to happen to thier people, and eventually took sides.
The question I raise, is would the population now tolerating the presence of the terrorists continue to do so knowing that they are certain to perish if they are willing to tolerate the dark side? Would they also have an uprising of sorts.
Force them off the fence.
Live with what the coalition forces are representing, or die with the terrorists (Taliban and Al Qaeda)? Because we are going to use big dumb bombs, and attack like locusts leaving nothing in our wake. You can support us, or you can support the terrorists. Point them out to us, or die with them.
Simple concept.
It may not end the use of human shields but the new policy is a game changer. The ‘Shields’ knowing that we will not have any remorse will have a choice to make.
One of the tactics used in Iraq was to surround a town and invite those who wished to leave to do so. Searched on the way out, the residents were eventually allowed to return after the terrorist and their supporters were dealt with. Yep, not everyone left, but how were those who remained treated by the terrorists? Do you think they enjoyed their treatment by the terrorist and wished they had left when they had the opportunity?
Absolutely. They would have the choice to opt out of what the terrorist were offering, or accept thier fate along with the terrorists.
The only good terorist is a dead terrorist.
Very simple. Very straightforward. No ambiguity. No nuance. War is about killing people, breaking things and making others succumb to our will.
In the words of Pres Bush, ‘You are with us, or against us’. Do you agree, or disagree?
The Swat Valley. Give them fair warning and then make the valley deeper. I suspect they would scatter like roaches when the lights are turned on. Well, that is now.
Hindsight is 20/20 and we lost the opportunity to do so ealier with our surgical approach and concern about limiting collateral damage.
A feeble attempt at humor and I failed to laugh.
It is about policy. We have nukes and should be prepared to use them, not just wave them arround like a lapel flag pin. Nukes stop being a deterrant when you choose not to use when you have every right to do so. 3,000 dead on 9/11 and we don’t go nuclear? If not then, when?
Yep, sometimes you have to walk the walk and drop the talk.
How many nuclear weapons would you have used on Swat? Would you have wanted to kill or displace all 1.3 million people there?
So, on 9/12/01 did you or didn’t you call the Pentagon and tell them exactly where to drop the nukes? If not, why not?
Since you probably didn’t, I’ll tell you what the response would have been, because while there I got to reply to more than a few such naive suggestions from concerned citizens. The proper response was, “Thank you for your interest in national security.” What we really wanted to say was, “Thanks for giving us all a good laugh, BOZO!!”
Our nukes have and continue to serve a useful purpose – deter someone from using nukes against us. Something that is a deterrent (N.B. it is spelled deterrEnt and means: serving to deter) causes one to consider the consequences of taking a certain action prior to doing so. To date, nobody has used a nuke against us because we are the ONLY nation who has employed them in war and they know the price to be paid should they employ them against us. The Soviets had (and the Russians now have) thousands of warheads they could unleash upon us, but they didn’t (and the Russians don’t) because we would reply in kind.
The deterrent formula may change when Iran gets its first nuke. They were stupid enough to fight a pointless 8-year war with Iraq and might be stupid enough to use a nuke against the Great Satan (or the Little one) figuring the sacrifice of a few million of their own people will gain ‘face’ among the true believers.
What a lame analogy — throw a lapel pin at someone assaulting you and see what happens when you wave it at the next assailant who witnessed you throwing it at the last thug. Pull out a .45 and shoot that first thug assaulting you and then wave it at others threatening to do the same and see if you now have deterrent effect.
Using nukes to kill a few hundred or few thousand jihadists would be like swatting flies with a pile driver and would only serve to turn world opinion against us even more than it already is.
Wow! Wiggy-Ziggy has clearly taken “wiggy” to an even more exalted state!
First he wanted to nuke Afghanistan. Now he wants to nuke Pakistan! I assume he knows the Swat valley is in Pakistan…
As loony as he is, I fully expect him to outdo himself later today!
Wiggy and Chappy must be drinking from the same mason jar lately.
He wanted to invade Saudi Arabia, too. I’m not sure if he still feels that way.
here we see the heart of the matter.