Hillary Clinton's U.S. State Department is Building .. Mosques?

Once again the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is wasting our tax dollars. This time it is on building or refurbishing Islamic Mosques which is actually against Section 205.1(d) of title 22 of the Code of Federal Regulations which prohibits using USAID funds for “inherently religious activities." We would expect that an Islamic Mosque would fall in the "inherently religious activity" category but that doesn't seem to have stopped the State Department.

Has anyone seen an accounting of how our taxpayer dollars are being spent by Ms. Clinton at the State Department? Would bet a fairly high amount is spent on her pet projects like the Clintons did when they were in the White House. Trip to Africa comes to mind with the vast number of 'close' friends they took with them or their trip to China. Now that she is Secretary of State she can fund all kinds of projects like it is coming out of her checkbook, but it is our tax dollars. The Clintons have no more regard for our taxpayer dollars than the Obamas who are bankrupting this Country.

The next time you see a billboard with President Bush's face asking "Do you miss me yet?" feel free to say "YES!" We didn't always agree with some things he did like his plan for immigration, but we found him to be an honest man who believed in the inherent good of people. Problem is he extended that to Bill Clinton and Barack Obama who like nothing better than to trash Pres Bush. Also missing former Secretary of State Condi Rice who understood foreign affairs versus the current SoS Clinton who just wants to pass out money and play up to our enemies.

Guess we shouldn't be shocked that the good friend of Arafat's wife, Hillary, is using State Department money to help build and refurbish mosques. Something to remember if Hillary decides to run for President again.

U.S. State Department is Building… Mosques
Posted by Candace de Russy Aug 12th 2010 at 2:24 am

What else is the State Department larding out, at hard-pressed taxpayers’ expense, to facilitate “understanding” with the Muslim world?


What else, that is, in addition to Ground-Zero-Mega-Mosque Imam Rauf’s likely fund-raising gig in five, oil rich countries?

Just as it has greatly, very greatly, disturbed 68% of you registered voters to learn of plans to build a $100 million dollar mosque financed perhaps by the very ones who underwrote the 9/11 slaughter, it will likely disturb you to learn that the State Department has been hard at work – on your dime – rebuilding of mosques in foreign countries.

The Washington Times reports:

In April, U.S. Ambassador to Tanzania Alfonso E. Lenhardt helped cut the ribbon at the 12th-century Kizimkazi Mosque, which was refurbished with assistance from the United States under a program to preserve culturally significant buildings. The U.S. government also helped save the Amr Ebn El Aas Mosque in Cairo, which dates back to 642. The mosque’s namesake was the Muslim conqueror of Christian Egypt, who built the structure on the site where he had pitched his tent before doing battle with the country’s Byzantine rulers.

For those who think the Ground Zero Mosque is an example of “Muslim triumphalism” glorifying conquest, the Amr Ebn El Aas Mosque is an example of such a monument – and one paid for with U.S. taxpayer funds.

By what lights is U.S. citizens’ money being used to preserve and advance Islam? What of First Amendment considerations about the use of public moneys for religious worship? Our government claims murkiness on these issues but nonetheless forges ahead in constructing mosque abroad:

In July 2009, the Office of the Inspector General published an audit of U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) faith-based and community initiatives that examined whether government funds were being used for religious activities. The auditors found that while USAID was funding some religious activities, officials were “uncertain of whether such uses of Agency funding violate Agency regulations or the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution” when balanced against foreign-policy objectives.

Casting uncertainty to the winds, our government proceeded to rebuild the Al Shuhada Mosque in Fallujah, Iraq, in the anticipation of such benefits as “stimulating the economy, enhancing a sense of pride in the community, reducing opposition to international relief organizations operating in Fallujah, and reducing incentives among young men to participate in violence or insurgent groups.”

But here’s the rub:

Section 205.1(d) of title 22 of the Code of Federal Regulations prohibits USAID funds from being used for the rehabilitation of structures to the extent that those structures are used for “inherently religious activities.”

The Times is right: “It is impossible to separate religion from a mosque; any such projects will necessarily support Islam.”

Our taxpayer money should not be used to preserve and promulgate Islam. Nor should it be spent on a tour for Rauf that endows him with both access and the U.S. stamp of approval.

Source: http://bigpeace.com/cderussy/2010/08/12/u-s-state-department-is-building-mosques/

Tax Dollars at Work: US State Department is Building ... Mosques

Once again the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is wasting our tax dollars. This time it is on building or refurbishing Islamic Mosques which is actually against Section 205.1(d) of title 22 of the Code of Federal Regulations which prohibits using USAID funds for “inherently religious activities." We would expect that an Islamic Mosque would fall in the "inherently religious activity" category but that doesn't seem to have stopped the State Department.

Has anyone seen an accounting of how our taxpayer dollars are being spent by Ms. Clinton at the State Department? Would bet a fairly high amount is spent on her pet projects like the Clintons did when they were in the White House. Trip to Africa comes to mind with the vast number of 'close' friends they took with them or their trip to China. Now that she is Secretary of State she can fund all kinds of projects like it is coming out of her checkbook, but it is our tax dollars. The Clintons have no more regard for our taxpayer dollars than the Obamas who are bankrupting this Country.

The next time you see a billboard with President Bush's face asking "Do you miss me yet?" feel free to say "YES!" We didn't always agree with some things he did like his plan for immigration, but we found him to be an honest man who believed in the inherent good of people. Problem is he extended that to Bill Clinton and Barack Obama who like nothing better than to trash Pres Bush. Also missing former Secretary of State Condi Rice who understood foreign affairs versus the current SoS Clinton who just wants to pass out money and play up to our enemies.

Guess we shouldn't be shocked that the good friend of Arafat's wife, Hillary, is using State Department money to help build and refurbish mosques. Something to remember if Hillary decides to run for President again.

U.S. State Department is Building… Mosques
Posted by Candace de Russy Aug 12th 2010 at 2:24 am

What else is the State Department larding out, at hard-pressed taxpayers’ expense, to facilitate “understanding” with the Muslim world?


What else, that is, in addition to Ground-Zero-Mega-Mosque Imam Rauf’s likely fund-raising gig in five, oil rich countries?

Just as it has greatly, very greatly, disturbed 68% of you registered voters to learn of plans to build a $100 million dollar mosque financed perhaps by the very ones who underwrote the 9/11 slaughter, it will likely disturb you to learn that the State Department has been hard at work – on your dime – rebuilding of mosques in foreign countries.

The Washington Times reports:

In April, U.S. Ambassador to Tanzania Alfonso E. Lenhardt helped cut the ribbon at the 12th-century Kizimkazi Mosque, which was refurbished with assistance from the United States under a program to preserve culturally significant buildings. The U.S. government also helped save the Amr Ebn El Aas Mosque in Cairo, which dates back to 642. The mosque’s namesake was the Muslim conqueror of Christian Egypt, who built the structure on the site where he had pitched his tent before doing battle with the country’s Byzantine rulers.

For those who think the Ground Zero Mosque is an example of “Muslim triumphalism” glorifying conquest, the Amr Ebn El Aas Mosque is an example of such a monument – and one paid for with U.S. taxpayer funds.

By what lights is U.S. citizens’ money being used to preserve and advance Islam? What of First Amendment considerations about the use of public moneys for religious worship? Our government claims murkiness on these issues but nonetheless forges ahead in constructing mosque abroad:

In July 2009, the Office of the Inspector General published an audit of U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) faith-based and community initiatives that examined whether government funds were being used for religious activities. The auditors found that while USAID was funding some religious activities, officials were “uncertain of whether such uses of Agency funding violate Agency regulations or the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution” when balanced against foreign-policy objectives.

Casting uncertainty to the winds, our government proceeded to rebuild the Al Shuhada Mosque in Fallujah, Iraq, in the anticipation of such benefits as “stimulating the economy, enhancing a sense of pride in the community, reducing opposition to international relief organizations operating in Fallujah, and reducing incentives among young men to participate in violence or insurgent groups.”

But here’s the rub:

Section 205.1(d) of title 22 of the Code of Federal Regulations prohibits USAID funds from being used for the rehabilitation of structures to the extent that those structures are used for “inherently religious activities.”

The Times is right: “It is impossible to separate religion from a mosque; any such projects will necessarily support Islam.”

Our taxpayer money should not be used to preserve and promulgate Islam. Nor should it be spent on a tour for Rauf that endows him with both access and the U.S. stamp of approval.

Source: http://bigpeace.com/cderussy/2010/08/12/u-s-state-department-is-building-mosques/

How Does Sharia Law Affect Women?

That is a question Americans should be asking after the August 9th issue of Time Magazine hit the stands. The cover is enough to make you cringe and then you learn that her nose and ears were cut off on the order of the local Taliban Commander. The crime: fleeing the home of her husband after being beaten and enslaved. Her nose and ears were cut off by her husband and brother-in-law.

This is a follow up to yesterday's article on the building of mosques in America and the political correct politicians who see nothing wrong with Sharia law. Too many times we have heard Sharia law does not conflict with the Constitution, but that is a lie. It conflicts big time. In the United States under our Rule of Law, the husband and brother would be charged with a crime for doing this to his wife.

Mutilations like Aisha's are far from the worst that can happen to women under Sharia law; the United Nations estimates that at least 5,000 women are murdered every year in "honor killings" by Muslim family members aggrieved by a wife or daughter thought to have disgraced her kin. As Fox News' recent reporting has made clear, such crimes happen in America, too, and will likely become more frequent occurrences as Muslims here demand, as their co-adherents already are in Britain and on the continent, that they be allowed to live under Sharia separate from the established civil law.

Will Obama agree to them living under Sharia Law in this Country and not prosecture the people who kill or maim woman in the name of Islam? Will Eric Holder at the DOJ turn a blind eye to these kills. We have already had killings in this country. Are we going to have more because a woman didn't do what she was told under Sharia Law?

It is time to stop this nonsense of liberals led by Obama trying to convince the rest of us that we have nothing to fear from the Muslim religion. What other religion advocates mercy killings against woman who disobey and don't want to be treated like slaves or flies planes into buildings to kill people in the name of Allah?

Read this article from Mark Tapscott, Editor of the Examiner, and ask yourself why we are allowing huge Mosques to be built in the United States when Sharia Law advocates mercy killings. It is time to end political correctness as the Muslims who adhere to Sharia Law are the ones who want to kill Jews and Christians. How many Muslims do not follow Sharia Law? That is a question that needs an answer.

Desperate stakes for women under Sharia
Examiner Editorial
August 10, 2010

The cover of the Aug. 9 issue of Time Magazine shows a photo of Aisha, an 18-year-old Afghan woman whose nose and ears were cut off in 2009 under orders from a local Taliban commander as punishment for fleeing her husband’s home. (Jodi Bieber, Institute for Time Magazine/AP)

It is impossible to view Time magazine's cover photograph of Aisha, an 18-year-old Afghan girl whose nose and ears were severed by her husband and brother-in-law on the order of a Taliban commander, without shuddering in recoil. Her "crime" was nothing more than fleeing the hellish home of in-laws who had beaten and enslaved her. That Aisha's only recourse in the face of such abuse was to run and hide is testimony to the reality that, in Afghanistan and elsewhere in the Muslim world that Sharia law prevails, women are at best second-class citizens. Sharia is the vehicle by which the most oppressive tenets of extreme Islamic religion become the civil law of any society on which it is imposed. In many such places, daily life for women and girls remains today much as it was a millennium ago -- the unrelieved tedium, oppression and drudgery of chattel.

It would thus be a terrible mistake to dismiss Aisha as a nightmarish exception to the rule. As Examiner columnist Diana West noted Sunday, "similar scenarios play out beyond the wilds of the Taliban zone wherever Sharia culture flowers, an expanding zone that now includes urban centers of the Western world from Berlin to London to Atlanta to Calgary." ...

It is no coincidence that renewed attention is being paid to the plight of Aisha and other Muslim women, even as we learn that 10 medical missionaries with a Christian charitable organization, including six Americans, were slaughtered last week in a remote area of northeast Afghanistan while returning from a mercy mission giving medical and dental care. The Taliban murdered them for allegedly speaking about Christianity, a charge the sponsoring organization vigorously denied. Such barbarities remind us that no place must be given for moral equivalence on these issues.

If our civil law doesn't permit Mormon polygamy, Fundamentalist snake handling or Christian Scientist denial of medical care for children, even less can it tolerate Muslim mutilation and murder of women. Those who can't -- or won't -- see the difference between a murderous intolerance and the intolerance of murder should be pitied and ignored.

Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/Desperate-stakes-for-women-under-Sharia-1008710-100300154.html#ixzz0wCwlvCEj