Category: The Opposition

Investigative Project on Terrorism demonstrates “acts of staged controversy”

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

I just yesterday reported about how Saul Alinsky’s strategy (Rule 13) in “Rules for Radicals” is being used to whip up a frenzy of anger against Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio.  This effort is not just to ‘get Joe,’ it’s to move the political debate, using Joe, to plant the seeds in peoples’ minds that there is widespread prejudice, and law enforcement abuse, against immigrants.

Indeed one of the over-arching  principles of the Alinsky school of ‘community organizing’ is to create controversy (crisis!) in order to bring about change.   Sound familiar?   I realized as I began writing this today the word we heard so often when I was a kid was “agitator,”  and that is exactly what this is although somehow that word has been exorcized from public use by the political correctness crowd.  Regular folks don’t want to be agitated and when they are they demand political leaders to “change” something to relieve the stress created by the agitators.

So, now to the extremely enlightening report by Madeleine Gruen and Edward Sloan last week at the Investigative Project on Terrorism in which they ask  “Are Acts of Staged Controversy an Islamist Strategic Tactic?”    Think Alinsky and stealth jihad as you read this.

Through careful study of terrorist incidents and investigations and study of the histories of the terrorist groups, U.S. law enforcement officers, security officials, and intelligence analysts have developed an understanding of the tactics, techniques and procedures used by terrorists preparing for and conducting attacks. Professionals can usually distinguish between a truly suspicious incident and benign behavior. However, there is a third category of non-violent activities that is more difficult to identify, which we will refer to as “acts of staged controversy.”

There are some cases where witnesses describe actors’ behavior as “odd” yet very overt—behavior apparently designed to attract attention. Viewed under differing prisms, the behavior could be classified as either benign or as some type of terrorist activity. Decision makers and practitioners should consider the possibility that certain incidents are staged or that they are escalated by manipulation of the media and the legal system to create controversy and to provoke a response to serve strategic purposes.

It is very difficult to prove ulterior intentions behind what we are referring to as “acts of staged controversy.” Perhaps these acts are deliberately provocative. Or, it is possible these are innocent events that may be seized upon by advocacy groups for political gain. We present this hypothesis to provide an alternative way of analyzing these types of incidents.

The authors go on to discuss two cases in which CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations) whipped a couple of incidents into a national political and media frenzy.

Last week I told you about how CAIR has written to Attorney General Holder to demand the Justice Department look into alleged acts of “Muslim bashing.”  Two of those cases are ones we have followed here at RRW.   Go back and check what they said in their letter and consider whether you are witnessing “Rules for Radicals” before your very eyes.   Was the letter an ‘act of staged controversy?’    You bet it was.

So what do Gruen and Sloan say the goal of such agitation is?

For example, acts of staged controversy could be used to:

*Cause Muslims to feel disaffection for the democratic system by promoting feelings of betrayal and abandonment.

*Convince Muslim Americans that they are not accepted as Americans. Acts of staged controversy provoke a response from authorities that can foment an “us vs. them” rift between Muslims and non-Muslims.

*Incite political divides that may ultimately cause political instability.

*Influence legislators to call for laws to outlaw profiling and/or repeal existing laws such as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and the Patriot Act.

*Draw attention from foreign media in an attempt to show that the U.S. rhetoric about acceptance is hollow.

Acts of staged controversy could also be exploited by groups who seek to use violence. For example, acts of staged controversy could be used to:

*Desensitize security personnel by making activity that common sense would deem suspicious instead seem routine and not worth any special effort.

*Intimidate security personnel and citizens by threatening lawsuits; making them reluctant to report suspicious behavior.

Radical Islamists have learned their lessons well from their radical Leftwing compatriots.

All of our discussions on Alinsky’s radical teachings are archived, appropriately, in our community destabilization category.

CAIR wants AG Holder to go after “Muslim-bashers”

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) has written to Attorney General Eric (we are a nation of cowards) Holder to ask that he go after Muslim-bashers and presumably shut them up.    I was interested to see that two cases of so-called bashing listed in their letter to Holder are ones we have written about here recently.

You will remember that CAIR was found to be an unindicted co-conspirator in the government’s HolyLand trial which involved terrorist funding.    Their press statement yesterday begins:

A prominent national Islamic civil rights and advocacy group today called on Attorney General Eric Holder to protect the right of American Muslims to participate fully in the political process and to practice their faith without fear of government intrusion.

The Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) issued that appeal following a number of recent government-related incidents targeting Islam, American Muslim lobbying efforts, American mosques, and Muslim religious practices.

Two of the cases they cite of “bashing” include the story we reported on two weeks ago when a retired FBI agent visited Shelbyville, TN and briefed local law enforcement about radical Islamic activities in the US.

And, of course the missing Somali youth case in Minnesota, as we reported last week, has brought the crybabies out to complain about FBI profiling.   But, what the heck, since Somalis are missing, who better to ask for help in finding them than their fellow Somalis.

I don’t have enough time today to do this justice, so go read the rest of their letter and learn about all the interesting cases of  supposed ‘Islamophobia’ cited by CAIR.

How Obama won — and will continue to get his way

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

The American Thinker has a brilliant article today on Obama’s strategy for winning the election, with a diagram that will blow your mind. “How He Did It: A Diagrammatic Analysis Analysis of the Obama Campaign,” by Paul Shlichta, begins this way:

“All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred, and schizophrenia.” —George Orwell.
The audacity and speed with which Obama railroaded the stimulus bill through Congress took Republicans by surprise. It shouldn’t have; it was a logical extension of his campaign tactics.
.
Like the spear-carrying soldiers of Ethiopia, overwhelmed by Mussolini’s tanks and poison gas in 1936, the Republicans simply don’t know what hit them in last year’s election. Some felt that they had conducted an old-fashioned 20th century campaign while Obama mounted the first truly information-age 21st century political blitzkrieg. Others blame the blatant media bias, the race issue, or the unprecedented scale of fund raising and spending.
.
The first month of Obama’s regime has provoked a similar bewilderment. A dazed Congress hastily authorized a huge document, filled with hidden booby traps like RAT, that none of them had actually read, let alone comprehended. Republicans are now cowering in corners, wondering what atrocity will come next.
.
In order to fight back we need to analyze how he did it, the author says. He explains his diagram, which is very complex because Obama’s strategy is complex. So far, Republicans don’t seem to have a clue how to counteract this strategy, which is understandable. As Schlicta says, it’s spear-carriers versus tanks. I hope the chart and the explanation get circulated far and wide, and some smart conservatives figure out what to do.
.
The alternative is to wait until Obama fails — the economy collapses and/or we undergo major terrorist attacks. But even then, you can just see Obama blaming it on his opposition and positioning himself as the One who will save the country. Obama learned well from Alinsky, but he is miles past him now.
.
In Refugee Resettlement Watch’s little corner of the political world, I predict huge increases in refugee quotas. Whatever is destabilizing and disruptive, that’s the way he will go.
.

Senator Chuck Schumer to head Senate Immigration subcommittee

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

I came across this information just now in a publication called  The Pakistani Newspaper.    It’s a statement by Ali Noorani, executive director of the National Immigration Forum welcoming Schumer as the new chairman of the important Senate subcommittee on immigration.   Check out both the Forum and Noorani to see where this organization stands on immigration issues; I think you can already guess.

Washington, DC – On Wednesday, it was reported that Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) would take over as Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Immigration. He replaces Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) in that role. The following is a statement by Ali Noorani, Executive Director of the National Immigration Forum, a non-partisan pro-immigrant advocacy group in Washington.

[…..]

No human could possibly fill the shoes of Senator Ted Kennedy when it comes to his stewardship of the immigration issue across decades of shifting political winds and economic ebbs and flows, but we have high expectations for Senator Schumer nonetheless.

Schumer’s subcommittee includes all the issues that interest us.

The Immigration Subcommittee has a wide portfolio, including oversight of Department of Homeland Security’s immigration-related entities (ICE ,CBP, USCIS), and Department of Justice immigration functions, and the U.S. refugee program.

For those of us working in the grassroots to secure our borders and reform legal immigration programs like the Refugee Resettlement Program, take a look at this list of directors of the National Immigration Forum that is working to bring amnesty to millions of illegal aliens:  US Chamber of Commerce, National Restaurant Assoc, United Food and Commercial Workers Union, American Nursery and Lanscape Assoc. and the list goes on.

Muslim electorate growing in strength, optimistic about Obama

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

This information is no surprise, go here and check it out.   

What interested me most was this discussion of how Grover Norquist (Americans for Tax Reform) took pride in delivering the Muslim vote for George Bush in 2000.    Then, as we know, Muslims had buyer’s remorse.

According to many, the Muslim American electorate’s “official” coming out party was in 2000 when they emerged as a small but powerful voting bloc. This new group consisted mostly of first- and second-generation South Asian and Arab immigrants, who favored George W. Bush. (In the 2000 election, George W. Bush garnered 42% of the Muslim vote versus 31% for Democrat Al Gore according to Zogby International and Project MAPS, which conducted the first American Muslim Poll in November 2001.)

Upon the advice and counsel of Republican lobbyist extraordinaire Grover Norquist, President Bush actively sought these votes by pledging to repeal the use of “secret evidence” in detaining immigrants, personally reaching out to mosques, imams and Muslim community leaders for their support. A delighted Norquist boasted, “George W. Bush was elected President of the United States of America because of the Muslim vote.”

In hindsight, many Muslim Americans liken that myopic decision to a naïve, well-intentioned prisoner personally polishing and loading a rifle and handing it to his own executioner.

Acting as if they were betrayed by Bush, Muslim Americans seem to forget there was a little event called 9/11 that changed the entire dynamic of Muslim/American relations.   And, despite 9/11 the Bush Administration has bent over backwards (beyond what many of us think is reasonable) to carry out the apparent Norquist strategy of salting the federal government with Islamists whose allegiance is not first and foremost to the United States of America.

How does all this fit into Refugee Resettlement?   What does the Muslim electorate need to move forward?Numbers, of course, and our US State Department and the do-gooder “church” groups are happy to oblige. 

Grover Norquist too has been advocating for larger numbers of Iraqis to be allowed to resettle in the US.  How does that fit with tax reform?  It doesn’t!   Immigrants of all sorts require more government benefits than they return in taxes.