Get PJ Media on your Apple

Belmont Club

The Mansourian Candidate

September 26th, 2012 - 3:59 pm

A single skein runs through a number of recent articles. It starts with an extraordinary piece by Frank Miele, who rummaging through the newspaper morgue, came across an piece that shed light on who put Barack Obama on the fast track back in 1979.  The old article described a $20 million dollar fund from OPEC and Saudi Prince Alwaleed to place promising ‘blacks, Arabs, Hispanics, Asians and native Americans’ into elite colleges. The conduit was a lawyer named Khalid al-Mansour. The article’s author was Vernon Jarrett.

For some reason, al-Mansour had used Jarrett as the messenger to get out the word about his efforts to funnel Arab oil money to black students and minority colleges at about the same time that Barack Obama began his college career. That doesn’t mean either Jarrett or al-Mansour knew Obama at that time, but eight years later when Obama was a rising star in Chicago, a friend of Bill Ayers and Valerie Jarrett, it is much more likely that he did indeed have the assistance of very important people in his meteoric rise. The words of Percy Sutton about what al-Mansour told him regarding Obama certainly have the ring of truth:

“His introduction was there is a young man that has applied to Harvard. I know that you have a few friends back there… Would you please write a letter in support of him? (That’s before Obama decided to run.) … and he interjected the advice that Obama had passed the requirements, had taken and passed the requirements necessary to get into Harvard and become president of the Law Review. That’s before he ever ran for anything. And I wrote a letter in support of him to my friends at Harvard, saying to them that I thought there was a genius that was going to be available and I certainly hoped they would treat him kindly…”

YouTube Preview Image

It appeared to be a strategic initiative begun 33 years ago to connect black American politics to the Middle East.  It’s not clear what became of this program beyond the details described in the article. What is manifest, however, is that similar efforts continue. Three decades have borne fruit. There is now a network in place where access can be expanded to get even more access. Michelle Malkin writes about visitors to the White House.

On Friday, March 30, 2012, Hisham Y. Altalib visited the White House. According to visitor logs, Altalib was received by Joshua DuBois, the director of President Obama’s Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. Four days later, White House officials welcomed a foreign delegation of the radical Sharia-enforcing Muslim Brotherhood from Egypt.

The White House meeting with overseas Muslim Brotherhood leaders was reported in April by a few mainstream journalists and questioned loudly by conservative media. But the White House confab in March with U.S.-based Altalib — which appears to be a prep session with the global Muslim Brotherhood’s American advance team — has received no attention until now.

So, who is Hisham Yahya Altalib? What is his agenda?…

Altalib is an Iraqi-born Muslim identified by the FBI as a Muslim Brotherhood operative before he moved to America in the 1970s to earn an advanced electrical engineering degree from Purdue University in Indiana. By his own account, Altalib “soon became active in Islamic work in North America, which continues to this day.”

He was the “first full-time director of the Leadership Training Department of the Muslim Students Association of the United States and Canada (MSA)” — a longtime Muslim Brotherhood front group whose explicit goal is to “conquer” America through Islamic propagandizing.

Just what agenda is the advance man for the Muslim Brotherhood smoothing the way for? Who can say. But if appearances are any indicator, the Muslim Brotherhood is part of a bidding war for influence in black American Democratic circles. The Brotherhood’s chief rival, the Iranians, are making their play for Louis Farrakhan, also of Chicago.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad met with the Nation of Islam Minister Louis Farrakhan and other religious leaders Tuesday, according to an English translation of the Iranian president’s Web page posted Wednesday.

In a picture of the Tuesday evening meeting, Farrakhan — known for making brutally anti-Semitic assertions, and calling President Obama a “murderer” for the death of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi — is seen smiling as he sits at a table with the Iranian president.

Farrakhan, it may be recalled, was the recipient of an $8 million dollar loan from the former Duck of Death Muhammar Khadaffy. Fortunately for the Reverend now that the Duck is Dead, no repayments are probably required. But since Farrakhan is still alive and his need for money is ongoing he still has to make a buck. Recently he sent a “letter to the leaders of 16 major Jewish organizations demanding reparations for alleged crimes Jews have perpetrated against African Americans.” In the Nation of Islam’s view the Jews masterminded the slave trade.

Along with the letter, Farrakhan sent two books, “The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews” and “Jews Selling Blacks: Slave Trade by American Jews,” written by unidentified members of the Nation of Islam’s Historical Research Team. Elijah Muhammad’s National Representative claims that the books contain evidence of Jewish crimes against the black community.

“We can now present to our people and the world a true, undeniable record of the relationship between Blacks and Jews from their own mouths and pens,” the letter reads. “These scholars, Rabbis and historians have given to us an undeniable record of Jewish anti-Black behavior, starting with the horror of the trans-Atlantic slave trade, plantation slavery, Jim Crow, sharecropping, the labor movement of the North and South, the unions and the misuse of our people that continues to this very moment.”

Whether they will collect anything on that front depends. But the Reverend must surely want for friends and allies and Iran is a good place to look. In the the comments section of the last post I remarked on the blurring line between religion and politics in the age of political correctness.

One of the problems that the Founders tried to solve was how to create an environment in which creeds could coexist without the most the ruthless and militant wiping out the others. Can you design a society where Coptic Christianity can live side by side with Islam and where Buddhism can rub elbows with Marxism.

…  a mutual coexistence can only be possible if two things are prevented. No creed can wage Lawfare against another; and no creed can wage physical warfare against another. The separation of church and state should guarantee that lawfare is not waged by the system on behalf of one creed vs another. The existence of the People’s justice means that private warfare, the second danger, is similarly prevented.

By fudging the line between political and religious activities or co-mingling them both these protections are failing. The Left is waging Lawfare against Christianity. Islam is waging actual intimidation against other creeds (witness the demand to censor videos) and is sheltering behind its status as a faith.

This cannot long continue. Carried on indefinitely it must mean the systematic extinction of the nonmilitant and nonviolent creeds. You can’t bring a knife to a gunfight.

… Put it this way. Suppose the Necromonger cult invaded the earth. Could they claim to be a political party? Could they claim ‘religious freedom’. How do you deal with the Necromongers?

Donald Thornton, writing in the Thy Black Man asks the same question. What happens when you put militant ideologies in civil society and protect them as you would the Kiwanis or the Rotary? What happens when the piranha swim with the goldfish? Well, the goldfish get et.

The eerie similarities between radical Islamist all over the world and radical Leftist that reside right here in America. Because their ultimate goals are synonymic. A nation; dare I say a world, under submission to their will.

I believe these two ideologies are clear and present dangers to America and the world at large. Because both; at their core seek to suppress any speech or expression that is contrary to their worldview. Free speech has to be the first and most protected foundational pillar of any new nation.  And it must be re-enforced perpetually in any existing nation that has adopted it.

The ideology of radical Islam has no place for dissent, compromise, freedom of expression or speech. It seeks to rule by the sheer force of fear, intimidation, criminalization and tyranny. Terrorism is its dominant mode of operations. It will not tolerate any opposing views or critiques. To say or do anything that it deems insulting of its worldview is worthy of imprisonment or even death. Its influence is so strong that it persuades the emotionally unstable to commit horrific acts terrorism. Its desire is total submission to its will.

Likewise in the same way contemporary liberalism/progressivism uses the same M.O. The ideology of the radical Left has no place for dissent or freedoms that do not comport to their worldview. It seeks to intimidate via boycotts, petitions, protests’ and lawsuits.

Dare to speak ill about or challenge any of its holy doctrines, which include:

Abortion on demand, Gay Rights/Marriage, Evolution, Unions/Collective Bargaining Rights, Open-ended Civil Rights, Global Warming, Reducing  Social Programs, just to name a few.

How much longer can traditional ‘religions’ hold out against ideologies whose methods include de facto political subversion and perhaps even outright intimidation is an open question. The secular West long believed that religion was doomed to extinction. If by that they meant the extermination of Buddhism, Christianity and Judaism, they might be right.

But newer religions have arisen in their place, like militant quasi-religious Marxism and a resurgent Islam in several varieties. Against these contestants, perhaps it is the secular West that is itself doomed. Interestingly the fictional Necromonger creed sounds like it might be a fusion between the two most militant ideologies of our time. If these fictional cultists actually existed they might find the earth of the future the precursor to themselves.

They are literally a death cult. They practice what they preach by sterilizing themselves when they become Necromongers to prevent themselves from adding to the problem. Consequently, they increase only by conversion, which is easier than it sounds since the only other choice is to be murdered. Sound familiar? This is their only function. They travel from place to place, planet to planet, and destroy everything the find. Those that will convert are converted into killing machines themselves. Everyone that won’t is killed. Then the process is repeated somewhere else. They are relentless and are too far gone to be reasoned with. They know that their cause is righteous and the only way; they will brook no disagreement.

At least they Necromongers are no bigots and they definitely won’t vote Republican.


Belmont Commenters
How to Publish on Amazon’s Kindle for $2.99
The Three Conjectures at Amazon Kindle for $1.99
Storming the Castle at Amazon Kindle for $3.99
No Way In at Amazon Kindle $8.95, print $9.99

Tip Jar or Subscribe for $5

Click here to view the 68 legacy comments

Comments are closed.