Why Chris Christie wil NOT be President of the U.S.

Chris Christie, the New Jersey governor since 2010, has qualities and achievements that appeal to mainstream conservatives, from his direct style to his impressive budget cutting. As a result, he has won strong support to run as a Republican candidate for president of the United States.

But he has an Achilles heel. Christie has a strange relationship with Radical Islam. Christie's nomination of Sohail Mohammed to be a state judge shows the governor's tin ear for radical Islam. Not only did he appoint a longtime mouthpiece for radical Islamists to be a judge, but Christie has also turned a blind eye to the activities of one of Mohammed's clients – radical imam Mohammed Qatanani, head of one of New Jersey's largest mosques.

Qatanani has a history of Hamas support and was related by marriage to a leading Hamas operative in the West Bank. This fall, Qatanani will return to a New Jersey immigration court, where the Department of Homeland Security is fighting to have him deported. In his initial application for a green card filed in 1999, government lawyers say Qatanani failed to disclose a conviction in an Israeli military court for being a Hamas member and providing support to the terrorist group.


Oddly, Christie – who was then the U.S. Attorney for New Jersey – sided with Qatanani against DHS, allowing a top lieutenant, Assistant U.S. Attorney Charles McKenna, to testify as a character witness at Qatanani's first immigration trial, and publicly embracing the imam at a Ramadan breakfast at his mosque. Christie later appointed McKenna as New Jersey's head of homeland security.

Cristie came under heavy criticism from fellow conservatives for nominating Sohail Mohammed, an Islamist who aspires to apply Islamic law, the Shari'a, as a state superior court judge. In response, Christie delivered a tirade on July 26, 2011, on the topic of Shari'a:

Sharia law has nothing to do with this [i.e., the appointment of Sohail Mohammed] at all. It's crazy. It's crazy. … So, this Sharia law business is crap. It's just crazy. And I'm tired of dealing with the crazies. I mean, you know, it's just unnecessary to be accusing this guy of things just because of his religious background.

Calling critics of Mohammed "crazies" who are "accusing this guy of things just because of his religious background" reveals Christie to be a headstrong ignoramus; the IPT report on Mohammed is not about religious background but political activities.

For a substantial reply to Christie's rant, answering him point by point, see the excellent 2,500-word analysis by Andrew C. McCarthy, a senior fellow at the National Review Institute.

Below is an excerpt from his article, "Christie's 'Crazies': Sharia is not a figment of our imagination":

The questions about Governor Christie's appointment of Sohail Mohammed and his exertions on behalf of Mohammed's client, Mohammed Qatanani, have nothing to do with either sharia or the all-purpose smear of Islamophobia. They are about the governor's judgment. They are about a U.S. attorney with political ambitions pandering to a politically active constituency at the expense of national security and enforcement of the immigration laws. They are about his decision to award a state judgeship to an attorney who was an active and vocal board member of a very troubling Islamist organization — and who has a penchant for presuming that perfectly valid anti-terror prosecutions are, instead, anti-Muslim persecutions. Those questions are not answered by bluster.

Although still a small issue in the U.S., Shari'a has grown very fast since 9/11 as a concern to Americans and should continue to do so for many years to come.

It is possible that Christie could apologize for his remarks and undo much of the damage he has done to his public image, but given his persona, that's not likely to happen. Therefore, Christie's strange, and unremitting friendly attitude toward Islamists will turn conservatives against him and sink his possible candidacy of his for higher office.

Read more here : Gov. Christie's Strange Relationship with Radical Islam

Has the Muslim Brotherhood infiltrated the White House

From The Blaze

Maybe not exactly a shocking revelation considering Obama has spent three years protecting and defending Muslim rights in America, it comes as no surprise that this White House would be "Islam" friendly, maybe too friendly ?

You‘ll never guess who’s now warning about a Muslim Brotherhood influence at the White House. Newt Gingrich? Nope. John Bolton? Not exactly.

Instead, it’s Canadian political activist, devout Muslim and self-described liberal Marxist, Tarek Fatah. Surprised?

Fatah is the founder of the Muslim Canadian Congress. Fatah's advocates gay rights, a separation of religion and state, opposition to sharia law, and advocacy for a "liberal, progressive form" of Islam.

Back in June, Fatah appeared at Ideacity, Canada’s “Premier meeting of the minds” to share his shocking viewpoints on both mainstream and radical Islam (including the Muslim Brotherhood). During his fascinating talk, Fatah said that “the religion of Islam is being used as a tool by a fascist force.” It is important to note that Fatah is also a Muslim. Perhaps most shocking, though, were his words about the Muslim Brotherhood and its relation to the American presidency. He said:

“Instead of bringing victory over the fascist forces of the Muslim Brotherhood, we now recognize that their infiltration is right up to the American White House, but we can’t say that.”

So, considering these statements, the question still remains — Has the Muslim Brotherhood truly infiltrated the Obama White House? Fatah certainly seems to think so. His accusations, particularly those that focus on U.S. government infiltration, are worth exploring further.

After all, how better to take down an opponent than to infiltrate U.S. leadership ranks? That, in fact, has been one of the Brotherhood’s plans for years. Cal Thomas writes:

In 1991, a memo written by Mohamed Akram for the Shura Council of the Muslim Brotherhood spelled out the objective of the organization. Akram said the Muslim Brotherhood “must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”

Considering these bold calls to action and warnings (particularly the charge that the Muslim Brotherhood has worked its way into the White House) one wonders if there is legitimate evidence to backup these claims. And if so, then who, in particular, has infiltrated the U.S. government?

Trevor Loudon has a post on his web site that asks these same questions, while providing two potential names of individuals some say have ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. Here, we will examine these individuals to see if they do, indeed, have any connection to the radical political group.

Obama’s embrace of those who hate America and actively pursue the destruction of our country from within and externally has been on display for quite awhile and it’s time we see, speak and hear the truth.

Obama brought the Muslim Brotherhood into our White House; no one but Obama did this. He brought George Soros into our White House, an anti-Semite who aided the Nazi’s and a financial terrorist who is making billions off the economic misery Obama has purposely caused in our country. Many Americans fail to understand this while the media hides the truth. From corrupt dictators (e.g. inviting President Ali Bongo of Gabon to the White House) to domestic terrorists (e.g. Bill Ayers) to self-proclaimed Communist/Marxist (e.g. Van Jones), these, and many more like them, are the people Obama brings into our White House… these are his friends and associates.

Do you know people like this? Do you work with people like this? Would you appoint three Muslim Brotherhood members to the White House if you were President?

The Muslim Brotherhood creed:

Fatah stated that "most of the Islamic radicalism that you see today stems from the empowering of Saudi based Jihadi groups that were funded and backed by the U.S. and the CIA throughout the Afghan war against the Soviet Union."

Which is a convenient short sighted view of history, that follows the theory that we caused this mess, when the truth is that radical Muslims first appeared on the scene 13 centuries ago, we are just the latest victims to step into their world of violence, murder, and Jihad all in the name of Allah