Set Your Watch Alarm For 10:03 AM

I RECEIVED the following article from a British citizen warrior and thought it was worthy of reprinting, which I am doing with permission. I think the idea has merit. It has an intelligent, potentially viral quality to it. What do you think?

INTRODUCTION

The idea in the following text is being set forth for consideration by all who mourn the deaths of those who died at the hands of Islamic Supremacists on September 11th, 2001 on United Airlines Flight 93. I must emphasize at the outset that the approach is intended solely as a form of memorial and an aid in the healing process and is not meant to be interpreted as any form of political or religious communication. As many are aware, actions of a political or religious nature are forbidden in most workplaces. When others pick up this approach and hopefully disseminate it through blogs, websites and other media, it is hoped that they would keep this important point regarding the nature of the activity in mind.

BACKGROUND

United Airlines Flight 93 crashed into the ground in a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania on September 11th, 2001 at 10:03:11 AM. Substantial evidence exists that the crash was preceded by a revolt among the passengers and crew against the Islamic Supremacist hijackers who had earlier taken over the airliner. This was the first time in recent history in which the intended victims of an Islamic Supremacist assault have been able to resist and thwart their plans.

PROPOSED ACTION

The people who took part in this act of resistance and died deserve to be memorialized. Therefore, we encourage everyone to set their watches to alarm at 10:03 AM, on a daily basis, as an audible form of memorial. This alarm can also serve as a reminder, at that time, to reflect upon the sacrifice which was made by the Flight 93 crew members and passengers.

Of course, we realize that the crash took place at 10:03 AM (Eastern Standard Time), meaning that some people in other time zones might view a more appropriate time to memorialize would be in their own respective times which would correspond with 10:03 AM EST. However, a pursuit of such an option would significantly confuse things. Therefore, we urge that you honor the time of 10:03 AM, irrespective of the time zone.

EFFECT OF THE ACTION

In presenting this idea for implementation, it is important that we examine the potential effect of a watch alarm going off at 10:03 AM in various settings. First and foremost, on Mondays through Fridays, most people at this time would be out in the “real world”. Most likely they would be at work. Other options include being in a bus, subway, train or airliner. On weekends, they could possibly be at a movie, sports event or religious activity. The possibilities are numerous. In each of these instances it is highly probable that the person wearing the alarming watch will be accompanied by someone whom they already know. It is also reasonable to presume that this nearby person will ask the wearer of the watch why the alarm went off. This would, in turn, give the watch wearer the perfect opportunity to explain the memorial purpose of the alarm. If the explanation inspires the listener, they, too, may begin to set their own watch at 10:03 AM. And so on.

It is conceivable that many people who hear the alarm (as in a work meeting) and are unaware of its meaning may quickly view it as an insignificant interruption. Two alarms from two different people going off at the same time in the same setting changes the picture entirely. This will cause everyone to realize that something is going on. It will also show each respective wearer of the alarming watches that they are not alone in their state of mourning. Depending on the type of setting, such a situation may lead to an exponential increase in the number of watches alarming at 10:03 AM.

HANDLING POTENTIAL OBJECTIONS

Multiple watches simultaneously alarming in most non-work settings would not seem to pose a problem. If some people object, so be it. This now brings us to the thorny question of work environments which are "politically correct" (quite prevalent in Europe). Supervisors or Human Resources personnel may (incorrectly) say that the watch alarm is "offensive" political or religious speech and cannot be tolerated. As stated above (and hopefully in any distributions by others of this concept), this activity was intended at the very outset as a way in which a person can cope with their grieving over this specific incident on September 11th, 2001 and assist in healing. As such, an employee in such a situation could argue that a company in such a situation is trying to interfere with their psychological and spiritual health and well being. They could point out that no employer would be disrespectful of the coping mechanisms of an employee who recently lost a family member. With this in mind, we could ask on what basis would they have to interfere here? Who defines the time limits of mourning? Who can say how long it takes to recover? In fact, it is possible that some of those who alarm their watches will actually be personal friends or family members (distant or close) of the non-Islamic Supremacist individuals on Flight 93. A quick internet search can reveal details regarding their respective lives.

Of course, a politically correct employer who provides time for fellow Islamic Supremacist employees (if any) to take time out of the work day for multiple prayers would seem to stand on flimsy grounds in objecting to the watch alarms. The watch wearer could invoke similar claims of religious rights, if a company makes religious concessions to others. After all, the border between mourning and religious beliefs can be quite porous in some individuals. However, this action is specifically intended to be of a “mourning” nature and does not have a religious emphasis. Whether an individual goes that extra step into the religious realm, in the face of various pre-existing religious practices in the workplace being practiced and tolerated is up to them.

There is also the possibility that, quite coincidentally, some people at work who have their watches set at 10:03 AM could be doing so to remind them to perform some medically necessary task, such as taking a vitamin or checking their pulse. The performance of this task could have actually been prescribed by an understanding physician or even an itinerant natural healer. An employer's interference in this, or any other health matter, could be viewed as highly questionable.

Regarding an employer's objection to alarms based on their "interfering with work", the question could be raised to them as to whether they are willing to stop an even worse interference: the ringing of employee cell phones. It would be interesting to see how employees would react to a cell phone prohibition, particularly when considering that so many people are dependent on them for making family arrangements and so forth.

The key thing to do when considering potential employer resistance to watch alarms is to check your employee handbook first. Then, consider the above text and contemplate a suitable response in advance of being questioned. Effective mourning need not require that an alarm run continuously; even one or two "beeps" could have the same effect.

FURTHER ELABORATION ON THE EFFECT OF THIS ACTION

The ultimate effect of all of this is that individual members of the general public will gradually become aware of a considerable amount of sympathy among their fellow citizens for the passengers and crew of United Airlines Flight 93; people who successfully thwarted the heinous plans of Islamic Supremacist hijackers. At some point, this level of sympathy being expressed in daily life will be impressed upon the media and government officials who control much of our public discourse. Effectively, us mourners will finally break out of the limiting internet realm and become visible in the outside world on a daily basis. This is exceedingly important. We need a way for others to outwardly perceive, or at least deduce, our feelings. When people actually "see" that others in the outside world share their own perspective, they will become emboldened and more likely to speak up regarding their own mourning. But as it stands with this writing, people are afraid to "stand out".

It is regrettable that some would view the watch alarms as a political or religious tactic. Again, it must be emphasized that the intent is solely to memorialize and assist in the healing process. If this idea is incorrectly promulgated as any form of political or religious action, employers would have ammunition to ban it.

Read more...

Is It Possible For Islam To Take Over The World?

SOMETIMES I TELL people Islam is a political doctrine and its purpose is to make every country on earth, including this one, follow Shari'a law.

Of course, most people think, "Yeah right. Good luck with that one."

In other words: Okay, so they want to take over the world. So what? It ain't gonna happen, not now, not ever. Completely impossible.

But the truth is, it doesn't matter whether it's possible or not. What matters is that a growing number of already-numerous people hold that as their most important goal. They consider it their holy duty. They consider it their ticket into heaven and the only assurance they can get that they will not burn in the fires of hell for eternity. They are motivated.

So we have one group that says, "Yeah, right," and goes on about their business, watching their sitcoms and buying stuff on eBay. And we have another group that feels strongly that the Almighty has given them a clear mission to take over the world by every means available to them, including recruiting new soldiers, having lots of children, protesting against any criticism of Islam, working to change laws, giving money to organizations that sue people for criticizing Islam, putting political pressure on politicians to alter laws, immigrating to infidel countries to help build an Islamic political presence there, going on web sites and arguing with people who try to criticize Islam, complaining to YouTube (and getting all their Islamic friends to complain to YouTube) about any video that criticizes Islam until YouTube removes the offending video, going to schools in democracies and speaking to the infidel children about how loving and peaceful and wonderful Islam is, reading about nothing else and thinking about nothing else.

Now over a period of time, who will gain more ground: A totally committed group, or the ones watching sitcoms and buying stuff on eBay?

And the more ground they gain politically, the more ground they can gain because they are gaining more political clout. Already in Europe, the politicians are very careful about not offending their Muslim constituents because the Muslims are very organized and politically active, and most of the rest of the voters are lackadaisical and not really paying attention. So Muslims are gaining power quickly in European countries. (Read more about the removal of freedom and Shariatization of Europe.)

The same has begun to happen elsewhere: Canada, the U.S., Australia, Africa, Eastern Europe, and of course India has been dealing with this issue for a very long time.

Remember this when you're talking to someone and you can see them thinking, "Impossible. There is no way the Muslims are going to take over the world."

It doesn't matter if it's impossible. With all that commitment they can make our times very troubled, they can make the fight more difficult, they can take away freedoms one by one, and in fact, they really can take over the world. It is not technically impossible. It doesn't seem likely, but only if you don't know much about what they're already doing, which most people don't (partly because of what they're already doing).

What this means is that if you'd like to do something about this, if you'd like to help preserve the freedoms we enjoy, then your most important task is to simply share this information with your fellow countrymen. Learn about jihad, and share what you're learning with others.

Here's what you can do about it: What Can a Civilian Really Do?

Here is an ongoing list of concessions Islam is pushing for and winning from democracies around the world: Concessions to Islam.

Read more...

An Op-Ed by Representative Sue Myrick

Editor's Note: The following is an article by PinkNeck. You can check out her blog at PinkNeck.com.


I WANT TO SHARE this op-ed. I think it's important.

C.A.I.R., the Council on American Islamic Relations, is one of the largest and most well-funded Muslim organizations in our country. But they're not the moderate Muslim group they say they are. They're actually a front for the terrorist group HAMAS.

C.A.I.R. attacks those that try to speak the truth about what they are up to, like how they're placing C.A.I.R. interns in our government offices. Few people have the courage to go up against any terrorist organization, but Representative Sue Myrick is speaking out. C.A.I.R., of course, is doing everything they can to stop her. But she's standing her ground.

I know you're busy. And I know this isn't a pleasant topic, but it's a real threat. The goal of C.A.I.R. is to destroy our democracy by infiltrating our government and eventually replacing our government with Shari'a law. Europe looked the other way for far too long and now they are having terrible problems. We can't afford to look the other way. We can't afford to believe what they say and ignore what they do.

I'll get off my soap box. Myrick says it much better than I do, and with a great deal more authority.

Here's what she said:

Last week, I held a press conference on Capitol Hill attended by three of my colleagues in the House of Representatives to call for a federal investigation (s) into a non-profit group called the Council on American Islamic Relations (C.A.I.R.)

Here are the facts:

1. CAIR has documented ties to the terrorist organization HAMAS. This is stated fact by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

In an April 28, 2009 letter to US Senator Jon Kyl, the FBI wrote the following:

“As you know, CAIR was named as an unindicted co-conspirator of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development in the United States v. Holy Land Foundation et al. (Cr. No. 3:04-240-P (N.D.TX.). During that trial, evidence was introduced that demonstrated a relationship among CAIR, individual CAIR founders (including its current President Emeritus and its Executive Director) and the Palestinian Committee. Evidence was also introduced that demonstrated a relationship between the Palestinian Committee and HAMAS, which was designated a terrorist organization in 1995. In light of that evidence, the FBI suspended all formal contacts between CAIR and the FBI.”

In case you are not familiar with the Holy Land trial referenced above, it was a Dallas, Texas trial that ended with guilty verdicts on 108 counts of funneling money ($12 million) to HAMAS.

2. The purpose of our press conference was to make public an internal CAIR memo that documented CAIR's stated goal of placing CAIR interns in the offices of members of Congress, especially the members who serve on the Homeland Security, Judiciary and Intelligence Committees. Let me be clear here, CAIR, a group whom the FBI says is affiliated with the terrorist group HAMAS, is trying to place their interns in the offices of those members who serve on the three committees that handle national security related issues. National Security is the first responsibility of the federal government.

3. Following our press conference, CAIR, immediately labeled we four members as bigots and started their public relations campaign to discredit us by claiming that we were against Muslims working on Capitol Hill. We never said that. At no time during our press conference did we even insinuate that we were investigating Muslims being interns on Capitol Hill. Go to http://www.youtube.com/suemyricknc09 and watch the press conference yourself.

Our focus was and is on CAIR and CAIR alone, not Muslims.

Likewise CAIR tried to make this a Republican vs. Democrat thing, because the four members at the press conference happened to be Republican.

How then does CAIR explain Democrat Senator Charles Schumer’s call earlier this year for a government-wide ban on CAIR in the federal government due to their ties to HAMAS? Democrat Senator Barbara Boxer has likewise made public her opinions of CAIR and any Google search will find her remarks.

4. CAIR is spending time, money and energy to position themselves as the spokespeople for the moderate Muslim community. Problem is CAIR is not a moderate Muslim organization. It is a radical front group for HAMAS. So who is CAIR competing with for this designation? The real moderate Muslim groups/individuals in America. Groups and individuals like the following who are committed to countering Islamist extremism:

Dr. Hedieh Mirahmadi – President World Organization for Resource Development and Education (WORDE)

Zeyno Baran – Director for the Center for Eurasian Policy at the Hudson Institute

Farid Ghadry – President of the Reform Party of Syria

Manda Zand Ervin – Founder and director of the Alliance of Iranian Women

Omran Salman – Arab Reformists Project, 'Aafaq (Arabic for “horizons”).

Dr. Zuhdi Jasser – American Islamic Forum for Democracy

Karim Bromund – Director of Inter-Religious Affairs for the Islamic Supreme Council of America

I SUPPORT the Muslim individuals and groups mentioned above. These groups renounce terrorists and their radical ideology. They are trying their hardest to be heard and recognized in America, but are being overshadowed and out-funded by CAIR. Today, when something happens that impacts the Muslim community, the media calls CAIR (an unindicted co-conspirator to terrorism and a HAMAS front group) for comment on behalf of American Muslims. What an insult the media is performing on the Muslim community. Instead they should be calling Muslim groups/individuals like those named above. This is part of the reason we are focusing our attention on CAIR and exposing them for who they are. For one they pose a threat to our national security, and two, they deny the ability of legitimate Muslim groups to gain credibility.

5. In July of this year I held a summit on Capitol Hill where I introduced the leaders of eight moderate Muslim organizations to the heads of several US Agencies, Members of Congress and congressional staff. For example, they met with representatives from the State Department, USAID, Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Defense. How can I be against Muslims working on Capitol Hill and hold such an event? Go to http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.3881/pub_detail.asp and read for yourself about this summit.

See through the lies and realize what is really going on here.

We are trying to expose a HAMAS Front Group (CAIR) for who they are, and they are crying we are anti-Muslim hoping that media outlets will ignore the terrorist claim and instead pick it up as a race/religion story. When those claims don’t work, they claim it’s a Republican political thing.

Americans, on this subject we need to stop the Republican vs. Democrat, Conservative vs. Liberal, Christian vs. Muslim division and unite on one simple point…. CAIR is a front group for HAMAS. It was named as an un-indicted co-conspirator in a terrorism case that lead to 108 convictions of funneling $12 million to HAMAS. Because of the evidence produced in that case, the FBI severed all ties with them. This same CAIR, by their own admission, is trying to place people inside the offices of members of Congress who deal with national security issues (judiciary, homeland security and intelligence committees). I serve on one of those committees, Intelligence, am the co-chairwoman of the House Anti-Terrorism Caucus, and have spent the better part of the last four years working every day on terrorism related issues.

If we Americans fail to set aside our political, religious and ideological differences and unite when we encounter the enemy in such stark and plain terms, then God help us.

Read more...