Americans, Take Notes: Ban Islam, Save The Nation! ‘Lesson Plans’ Included. Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

IN the main, one must fully internalize that Shariah Law is the underpinning of Islam, without which Islam would be dead in its tracks. מת…mort… 

CONSEQUENTIALLY, its underbelly must be dissected by Americans and westerners at large – as distasteful as it is – due to its barbarism. Buck up.

AS always, to this end, this site houses a continuous reservoir of materials; lesson plans. Admittedly, most are gory in the extreme, yes, sorry for that. Nevertheless, consider “Shariah Law Must Be Eliminated To Save America And The West: Its Cancerous Scourge” as your primary source and gift.

America is doing everything to usher in Shariah law and all its destructive permutations. Yet, with absolute certainty, Islam without Shariah law is like a bird without its wings. It would simply die. Crash and burn.
Ominously, consider what has transpired under Obama Inc. and you decide where America is headed:
On the legal front there are plans afoot to silence all criticism of Islam, so much so that the First Amendment is in its cross hairs. Moreover, Shariah financing has gained a sandal-hold into America, and Bloomberg Finance is leading the charge.
Now it is not as if (most) westerners begrudge capitalist entities from chasing after future business, but it is decidedly the case that Shariah law financing, in absolute terms, adds to Islamic jihad coffers all over the world.

Reports by Islamic banking scholars, the IMF, or the Congressional Research Service do not mention that Islamic banking was first concocted by Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna in the 1920s. The stated goal was to penetrate the Western finance system, corrupting it from within in hopes of creating a parallel system to re-establish a global Islamic empire governed by Islamic law (shariah). Islamic rules of commerce (fiqh al-muamalat) forbid interest (riba) and investing in a prohibited (hara’am) enterprise. They also mandate tithes on wealth (zakat). However, the Koran fails to precisely define these concepts. Imams and ayatollahs differ, for example, on whether riba prohibits all interest or only usurious interest.

The first successful Islamic banking experiment was the Mit Ghamr Savings Bank in Egypt in 1963. But five years later, the Egyptian government, which subsidized the bank, shut it down after Muslim-Brotherhood-led demonstrations swamped the country.

In 1963, Malaysia also introduced a limited form of Islamic banking, with establishment of Tabung Haji (Pilgrim’s Fund) that served only as a savings institution, to help Muslims save towards their pilgrimage to Mecca (Hajj).

Ten yerrs later, growing oil fortunes in the Middle East, lead the Organization of the Islamic Conference’s (OIC) to establish the Islamic Development Bank (IDB) “in accordance with the principles of the shariah,” as prescribed by the MB-and to launch the fast-growing petrodollar-based Islamic financing market. The IDB, more a development than a commercial bank, was established largely “to promote Islamic banking worldwide.”  Consequently, the IDB founded the Bahrain-registered and -based Accounting and Auditing Organization for Islamic Financial Institutions (AAOIFI). Other regulatory organizations followed.

Finally, the most crucial element that helped persuade reluctant Muslims to use Islamic banks, the invention of “Islamic banking windows,” is never noted in reports documenting the development of  Islamic banking. This happened in 1993, when Anwar Ibrahim, then Malaysia’s finance minister, helped to introduce the newly invented “Islamic Banking windows” into conventional banks. This measure, which familiarized clientele with and built confidence in the unknown Islamic banking system, proved central to the development of the global Islamic finance industry.

So the questions become: since Islam is underpinned by Shariah law, and Shariah law finance funds global terror, what precisely must be done to save the west? Cut off its oxygen…the head of the snake…continue reading


MIND you, at the same time that too few are revealing the true face of Islam via Shariah Law, countless apologists (Islamists and leftist enablers) are hawking Shariah Law through financial instruments. Inherently, they are smokescreens marketed under an umbrella of ‘pure’ investment vehicles. In actuality, its basis houses money jihad! 

STILL yet, as depressing as things appear, readers should pay strict attention to two recent developments, those which are practical and forceful in nature: outright BANS against Islam!

A French mayor, Robert Chardon, is calling for governmental legislation that will ban Islam. He said in a recent statement:

We must ban the Muslim faith in France.

He also stated, “It’s the only solution for most of France’s problems,” and, “We also need a Marshall Plan to send Muslims to countries where the religion is practiced.” This man is the mayor of Venelles, a French town with a population of about 8,000 people, and he is more righteous than any of the politicians in Paris. It is amazing how small town people have a better understanding of how to deal with evil than do metropolitan people. Chardon also said (and this is what makes his statements even better):

The Republic should promote the practice of the Christian faith.

continue reading….whoopee!!

WE are not done yet, let’s hop over to Australia:

They want to ban burqas, freeze Muslim immigration and end Australia’s “failed experiment” with multiculturalism.

The proudly anti-Islam Australian Liberty Alliance — the nation’s newest political party — also claims that a growing number of Australians want exactly those same things.

“I do believe that people are waking up to the dangers and the problems that will come from increased (Muslim) immigration,” ALA co-founder and political candidate Debbie Robinson said.

“Islam is a problem and if we don’t take steps to put laws in place to protect our culture and our society, then we are going to lose our freedom.”

It is a message that many Australians who have watched the rise of radicalism at home and abroad with a growing sense of unease are likely to identify with.

But many more will also find those same views confronting and offensive — none more so than members of Australia’s Muslim community who have described the emergence of the ALA as “alarming”.

Not since the rise of Pauline Hanson’s One Nation 20 years ago has a political party sought to win the hearts and minds of voters by demonising a minority.

For Ms Hanson, it was “Asianisation” that was threatening to destroy Australia’s national identity.

It is the so-called threat of “Islamisation” that the ALA is hoping will help propel its candidates into Federal Parliament at next year’s election.

Party members stood shoulder-to-shoulder in Perth this week alongside controversial Dutch anti-Islam MP Geert Wilders as it unveiled its first crop of Senate hopefuls.

Mrs Robinson will stand in WA, while anti-halal campaigner Kirralie Smith will represent NSW and former Katter’s Australia Party candidate Bernard Gaynor will run in Queensland.

The party hopes to field candidates in every State and claims to already enjoy a strong following.

Mrs Robinson believes most Australians are ready to have a sensible conversation about the nation’s future cultural direction.

“It (Islam) is a taboo subject but we cannot continue to be paralysed by political correctness,” she said.

“People are afraid to talk about it because they are afraid to offend or afraid to call a spade a spade.

“They have a level of concern about what is happening around the world and in Australia but the politicians are not paying attention. They are not facing up to what is really going on.”

Mrs Robinson is a former nurse from well-heeled City Beach who claims to be neither racist nor religious.

She believes in the Judaeo-Christian values that Australia was founded on.

She is also a mother and the wife of well-known orthopaedic surgeon Anthony Robinson who helped co-found the party with her.

But Mrs Robinson was unwilling to discuss her family during a long interview with The Weekend West this week.

Like her party, she is clearly mistrustful of the media, believing that “left-leaning” journalists are hostile to her far-right policies.

She also had another reason for wanting to protect her privacy, claiming she risked becoming a target for violence just like Mr Wilders.

His party enjoys strong support in the Netherlands, but he lives under 24-hour armed guard after many death threats.

Candidate Kirralie Smith claims to have also felt that same fear, having recently been forced to move house in Sydney after receiving threats.

“Why is it that we have to spend a fortune on security,” Mrs Robinson said.

“Why is Mr Wilders surrounded by 24-hour security? It is because the Islamic community have placed fatwas on his head because you cannot speak out against Islam.

“We have a problem with the Islamic community that we do not have with any other group.”

WA Islamic Council president Rateb Jneid said Mrs Robinson’s comments were highly offensive to Australian Muslims who loved their country and wished only to live in peace.

“The Muslim community is very concerned that a virulently Islamophobic political party was launched in Western Australia — a single issue political party based on promoting fear and hate of Islam,” he said.

“This is very reminiscent of 1930s nazi Germany. The acts of Muslim extremists do not represent the great religion of Islam in any way or form.”

Geert Wilders (Photo by Sean Gallup/Getty Images)

Multiculturalism advocate Suresh Rajan has been cautiously watching the ALA’s rise and believes the party will garner some support and may even get some candidates elected.

But he does not believe they will become a force to be reckoned with.

“All our research shows that there are about 10 per cent of Australians who harbour very racist views and there is the potential that they (the ALA) will tap into their concerns about Islam,” Mr Rajan said.

“But the majority of Australians support multiculturalism and want to live in harmony,” he said.

AS to the blah, blah from WA Islamic Council president Rateb Jneid, it mirrors all the Islamic propaganda from the Muslim Brotherhood’s front-arm in America via CAIR. Just close your ears….


STIPULATED, while it may appear to be a fantastical and Herculean task to purge Islam from America (the west), this is far from the truth. In reality, once the underpinnings of its poisonous ideology are exposed and its instruments of jihad are revealed as force-multipliers, citizens will have amassed targeted focal points. Not only that, Islam’s mask as a ‘religion’ – according to western norms – will slip, thus, allowing for the shuttering of mosques, Islam’s barracks

INTRINSICALLY, once Shariah Law’s barbarism becomes widely known, indeed, Islam’s undercarriage will crumble. In practical terms, a targeted pyramid has to be identified post haste.



TARGET ONE: Shariah Law

TARGET TWO: Dismantling Mosques

TARGET THREE: Enact laws on the local level to BAN Islam


DON’T waste precious time attempting to convince Congress (led by RINO’S) of Shariah Law’s encroachment, it will fall on (mostly) deaf ears. 

DO head straight to state legislatures and local officials, they will likely be more receptive.

REGARDLESS of all else, citizens still have a ‘contractual’ obligation to save the nation, despite any obstacles placed by the leaders. Indisputably, the fact that the Constitution commences with “we the people”, well, that’s all the legal imprimatur required.

FORWARD MARCH (no pun intended). Get busy!


The Preamble showing, written larger than the rest, We the People


Bernhard Pudewell's photo.

{re-blogged at Joe For America}

{re-blogged at The Homeland Security Network}

{re-blogged at Islam Exposed}


The Constitutional Convention Of 1787: A Comprehensive Encyclopedia of America's Founding


EVEN as an expat (but clearly a highly involved U.S. citizen) the words “We the People” still resonates, eliciting goose bumps. And those who understand its subtext likely feel the same. In effect, this is what separates patriots from the socialist, Marxist, communist leaning riff raff who support the Radical-in-Chief’s “transformation” designs. Words do matter. Actions matter even more.

That being said, it is impossible not to recognize the grave danger America is in, the heretofore “guard dog” of liberty and freedom. Assuredly, once its leaders go astray, it is not a matter of if, but when its pillars will fall. And while this is the longed for dream of radical leftist revolutionaries (and their Islamist helpmates), it is the stuff of nightmares for many millions of patriots – this one included.

Nightmare One:

From the onset of the reign of Barack HUSSEIN Obama, the nightmare has gone from moderately high to RED HOT. Most recognize that their revolutionary train was set in motion decades ago by no less than the POTUS’s helpmate, Billy boy Ayers, head of the radical domestic terror group, the Weathermen! Talk about full circle. Of course, the bag man has always been George-the-devil-incarnate Soros.

Nightmare Two:

Those who doubt said full circle connections would do well to reconsider: DOMESTIC TERRORIST,BILL AYERS,ENTERS THROUGH OBAMA’s “BACK DOOR”:DEBORAH LEFF VETS PRESIDENTIAL CLEMENCIES! 

Nightmare Three:

And isn’t it patently obvious why a 2nd Constitutional Convention is an absolute necessity, especially when Obama Inc. terms patriots “domestic terrorists”? How much clearer can the hooligans in charge be? Consequentially, the nation-saving need for redress is long overdue!

Michigan Marks the 34th State Necessary to Commence a Constitutional Convention

By Michael Thomas | Storyleak

The following news alert conveys what is perhaps the most important development in these United States of America this year … this decade … this millennium.  Truly, it does not get any bigger when the appropriate legal mechanisms have been triggered to initiate a Constitutional Convention.  The upshot of this extremely profound and unparalleled initiative implemented by 34 states is as nation-transforming as it is highly consequential for every American citizen.

Regardless of where this US Federal Government-altering procedure goes regarding the proposed Balanced Budget Amendment, the message that it sends cannot be misunderstood: We the People are fed up with business-as-usual in Washington DC!  That said, the Obama Administration has so operated as a lawless tyranny that the ultimate outcome from this state-driven process was rapidly advanced perhaps by several years.  Thank you, President Obama.  It appears that he has unwittingly become the ‘change agent’ that he promised to be … only not quite in the way that he planned.

Whereas Barack Obama did promise the USA ‘Hope and Change‘, the real change that he is likely to experience in his lifetime has no historical precedence in US history. The inevitable revolution being waged by the states — at the insistence of their citizens — does not ignore the impelling influences by the previous Bush Administration. Back-to-back despotic and rogue administrations served to show the American people just how far the political class has fallen.  It is now quite clear, to virtually everyone concerned, that there is no hope for their ‘brand’ of leadership, and therefore no lasting and much-needed change can be expected under their watch.

For those who comprehend the defining moment at hand, it is still premature to celebrate.  The politicos and powerbrokers, corporate titans and business magnates, financiers and bankers, lawyers and lobbyists, will do everything in their power to subvert the upcoming process of realignment.  They will do everything in their power to sabotage the originally conceived Constitutional Republic from taking shape.  They will seek to disempower both the states and people, as they have always done.  Therefore —>


From TRN News:

The most important political development in 200 years was triggered last week, when the state legislature of Michigan became the 34 th state to demand a “Constitutional Convention” in the United States. Under Article 5 of the US Constitution, if 2/3rds of the states call for such a convention, (meaning 34 states) it MUST take place. During such a convention, the ENTIRE Constitution can be changed; nothing is off-limits. This would even allow the States to dismantle the federal government without its consent, and repudiate the debt which that government has incurred! When it voted for the convention last week, Michigan became the 34 th state, thus meeting the requirement.

A goal has been reached behind what would be an unprecedented effort to amend the U.S. Constitution, through a little-known provision that gives states rather than Congress the power to initiate changes. This [may be] the most significant political development in the entire world in the last 200 years.

At issue is what’s known as a “constitutional convention,” a scenario tucked into Article V of the U.S. Constitution. At its core, Article V provides two ways for amendments to be proposed. The first – which has been used for all 27 amendments to date – requires two-thirds of both the House and Senate to approve a resolution, before sending it to the states for ratification. The Founding Fathers, though, devised an alternative way which says if two-thirds of state legislatures demand a meeting, Congress “shall call a convention for proposing amendments.”

The idea has gained popularity among constitutional scholars in recent years — but got a big boost last week when Michigan lawmakers endorsed it.

Michigan matters, because by some counts it was the 34th state to do so. That makes two-thirds.

In the wake of the vote, California Republican Rep. Duncan Hunter pressed House Speaker John Boehner on today to determine whether the states just crossed the threshold for this kind of convention. Like Michigan lawmakers, Hunter’s interest in the matter stems from a desire to push a balanced-budget amendment — something that could be done at a constitutional convention.

“Based on several reports and opinions, Michigan is the 34th state to issue such a call and therefore presents the constitutionally-required number of states to begin the process of achieving a balanced budget amendment,” Hunter wrote.

“With the recent decision by Michigan lawmakers, it is important that the House – and those of us who support a balanced budget amendment — determine whether the necessary number of states have acted and the appropriate role of Congress should this be the case.”

If two-thirds of the states have indeed applied, the ball is presumably in Congress’ court to call the convention.

But Article V is rather vague, and it’s ultimately unclear whether 34 states have technically applied. In the past, states like Oregon, Utah and Arizona have quietly voted to approve the provision in their legislature.

But some of the 34 or so have rescinded their requests. Others have rescinded, and then re-applied.

Alabama rescinded its request in 1988 but in 2011, lawmakers again applied for a convention related to an amendment requiring that the federal budget be balanced. It was a similar story in Florida in 2010.

Louisiana rescinded in 1990 but lawmakers have tried several times, unsuccessfully, to reinstate the application since then.

It’s unclear whether the applications still count in these scenarios.

Some constitutional scholars like Gregory Watson, an analyst in Texas, say once states ask, there may be no take-backs.

“There is a disagreement among scholars as to whether a state that has approved an application may later rescind that application,” Watson told The Washington Times. “If it is ultimately adjudicated that a state may not rescind a prior application, then Ohio’s 2013 application for a Balanced Budget Amendment convention would be the 33 rd and Michigan’s 2014 application would be the 34th on that topic.”

Others say if a state changes its mind, it can no longer be part of the 34.

Even if the requisite number of states have applied, questions remain about how such a convention would work — and whether, as Michigan wants, such a convention could be limited to only discussing a balanced-budget amendment.

It still may be a long shot, but some analysts are warning about the unintended consequences of such a move.

In Louisiana, Budget Project Policy Analyst Steve Spire argued against the state’s resolution, saying the convention could permanently damage the nation’s political system. What he calls “damage” others call improvement.


The USA now finds itself at a critical moment of the American Experiment. Since the 2000 election of George W. Bush, the divisions between red and blue states have never been so wide and deep. The socio-economic conflicts, political acrimony and philosophical arguments between people of different political persuasions and religious stripes are as intense and reconcile as ever.  Given this volatile state of affairs, there must be a new forum in which to rationally discuss and objectively debate the future of the nation.

To our thinking, a full-blown Constitutional Convention may be the only way out of the current political paralysis. Where such a forum may be exploited by those with selfish and/or narrow interests, the states can act as a gatekeeper to ensure proper and proportionate representation. At the end of the day, the people must be represented in full force, or else such a convention will be an unsuccessful exercise in futility.

Now the challenge will be to determine to hold a conference in an ‘unbiased’ location. Or, through a digital format using all the tools available on the internet to keep the dialogue flowing and open to all US citizens. In this way, the corporate media cannot screen out their own prejudiced problems areas or filter in their favorite biases. They are already guilty of giving very little reporting to such an important and historic opportunity, which has emerged from the constitutional crisis they  shamelessly helped to create.

Perhaps the time has come for the USA to assume the form of constitutional republic that it was designed to be.  Although this nation purports to export ‘freedom and democracy’ around the world, our brand of democracy has become totalitarian in nature vacillating between fascism and communism, relentlessly bogged down in political correctness, and administered by leadership that is perennially addicted to deception.

Clearly, the time has come for a renew form of governance and political economy which truly serve the citizenry; not the other way around.

And even though the main impetus for this 2nd Constitutional Convention arose out of frustration over Washington’s inability to implement a balanced budget – a cornerstone to America’s economic future – the fact of the matter is that patriots understand what is really at stake. The heart of the struggle lies within a runaway, renegade, anti-American regime which protects those who shred the Constitution – on a regular basis – and backs those who desecrate the flag: Americans now “racist” for waving American flag!

And while clearly there are some states which still require to complete their due diligence “paper work” re joining this nation-saving, historical happening, the fact of the matter is that a movement is full steam ahead. It is only a matter of time, before history records the most important occasion of the century. Auspicious.

Caveat: this site claims no expertise in the logistics of the above (unlike in the arena of Islamic jihad and geo-politics), so there may be disagreement, among said experts, how we get from there to here. Nevertheless, there is NO disagreement, among patriots, that the underpinnings for such a momentous occasion are more than in the air! Onward and upward….

Independent Counsel Needed: Investigate ‘High Crimes & Misdemeanors’ In The White House…Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

Whereas this op-ed writer, blogger and investigative journalist holds no claim to being a Constitutional expert (whose expertise lies elsewhere, primarily in geo-politics and the Mid East/Islam), a close associate surely qualifies. Unarguably, he is considered world class.  

Most assuredly, trampling on the Constitution is no small matter, even if one attempts to hide behind the ‘living breathing’ nonsensical mantra, as Obama (a so called Constitutional lawyer…oh please…talk about scraping the bottom of the barrel) and surrogates regularly intone its ‘merits’. And there are so many examples of the administration’s malfeasance it is hard to know where to commence the indictment. Yet, even a few will suffice, starting with their obsessive quest to eviscerate the First Amendment, a hallmark of any free society. Specifically, what more proof is needed than to internalize that the highest law enforcement official in the land, AG Eric Holder, is initiating ‘legal’ actions against Americans who criticize Islam? Are you thinking this blogger has lost it? Think again. Contained within the above link are more than enough exhibits to place Holder, and his boss, in the dock for high crimes and misdemeanors! 

NOT content with violating freedom of religion and speech, the regime in Washington is gunning for the Second Amendment ! How audacious. The right to keep and bear arms, without a scintilla of a doubt, is a bedrock of America’s Constitutional Republic, but not according to Obama’s thugs. Yes, they will grab America’s guns – whatever it takes. And, the UN is their go to address, as they seek to strip Americans of their right to bear arms, yet patriots have other ideas, even as leftists go postal over gun control. It will be out of their cold, dead hands.

EVEN some in Congress are beginning to see that they have Constitutional options to indict this runaway regimeand it is not as if true scholars and patriots aren’t giving them Constitutional legal cover.

Along comes Professor Paul Eidelberg – a more than qualified Constitutional scholar and patriot – to America’s rescue, as he gives ‘We the People’ all the Constitutional muster needed to indict the criminals ruling Washington. Get busy. Start your petitions!

‘Needed: An Independent Counsel to Investigate the Obama Administration’

Paul Eidelberg (Ph.D., University of Chicago)

The failure of Barack Hussein Obama, the President of the United States, to protect American citizens abroad indicates that he may have violated Article Two, Section One, Clause Eight, of the U.S. Constitution which sets forth the presidential oath of office in these words:

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”


Whereas the present writer, a native-born American citizen who served as a Lieutenant in the United States Air Force, and who conducted seminars during the Korean War to inform American soldiers about the totalitarian nature of America’s arch enemy, the Soviet Union;

And whereas this author has written books on the U.S. Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, as well as a book entitled “Beyond Détente: Toward an American Foreign Policy,” a book based on Washington’s “Farewell Address”;

And whereas the principles elaborated in the latter book obliged the present writer to urge President Ronald Reagan to transcend the futile policy of détente with the Soviet Union—indeed, to promote the disintegration of that “Evil Empire”;

And whereas the same author sees that the Barack Administration is pursuing the discredited policy of détente vis-à-vis Islam, an imperialistic ideology which, like that of Communist Russia, does not recognize any international borders or the nation-state system;

And whereas this American, for the previous reasons, is more keenly aware of the perilous course of the United States, as well as more profoundly concerned about the well-being of Americans serving in American embassies and consulates abroad;

Indeed, whereas some of these Americans have perished because of the détente or ideologically neutral mentality of the Obama Administration and its possibly criminal negligence:

I therefore urge Americans to petition the Congress of the United States to reconstitute, in accordance with its Special Prosecutor Act of 1978, an Independent Counsel to investigate and prosecute designated high-ranking Executive Branch officials, including President Barack Obama, who are suspected of possible malfeasance in high office.

For those who are unfamiliar with Professor Paul Eidelberg’s background and groundbreaking scholarship, see within for his latest scholarly contribution.

IF the master Prof gives the heads up, citing the Constitutional underpinnings for said Independent Counsel, then take it to the bank. To heart. And this blog stands shoulder to shoulder with the recommendations herein. No additional ‘proofs’ required (nor footdragging or pussyfooting), other than a basic understanding of High Crimes & Misdemeanors