Breaking The Nuclear Monopoly

[Flanders]

US membership in the United Nations was sold as a nuclear scare tactic. The sales pitch said the UN was going to prevent atomic bombs from being used ever again. American Communists took the scare tactic and theorized: If everybody has nuclear bombs nobody will use them. The theory justified helping Stalin get the bomb as much as 10 years ahead of time when America had a nuclear monopoly —— AND THE MILITARY STRENGTH TO PROTECT IT —— 25 years ahead of time according to some knowledgeable experts.

In order to break America’s monopoly, never using atomic bombs again meant arming enemies. Arming was followed by disarmament treaties. In short: America-haters first gave the Soviet Communists the bomb, then they tuned around and screamed “Sign a disarmament treaty with them.”

Disarmament “theory” encompassed two goals:

1. America must disarm.

2. Trust Soviet Communists.

NOTE: Communist China, and North Korea never signed a disarmament treaty à la New START. Question: Would anybody in their right mind trust them had they signed a disarmament treaty?

The UN-loving traitor in the White House is now saying “Iran can be trusted with nuclear bombs.” There is no doubt in my mind that Taqiyya the Liar is betraying this country every way he can. A nuclear Iran is an extension of the treason that drove American Communists to arm the Soviet Union. On top of it all, the global government crowd is asking Americans to put their trust in United Nations inspections.

Incidentally, when Taqiyya the Liar pulled out of Iraq after the war was won, he effectively armed ISIS with military vehicles, tanks, small arms, and so on. He can no more be trusted to disarm ISIS than he will disarm Iran after he gives them nuclear weapons. I am waiting for him to say trust ISIS, too.

Finally, I have said this a thousand times: Every domestic and foreign policy decision must not harm the United Nations in any way. It matters not which party is in power. The New World Order crowd must approve of every final decision. It just so happens that every Democrat, and some Republicans, too, agree with every decision that protects the United Nations before it protects the United States.

Sierra Rayne’s fabulous analysis, without ever mentioning the United Nations, shows where the United Nations has been taking Americans:

Polling Data Doesn’t Support the Nuclear Abolitionists
By Sierra Rayne
June 3, 2015

Polling Data Doesn t Support the Nuclear Abolitionists​

 

[Hamlet091765]

US membership in the United Nations was sold as a nuclear scare tactic. The sales pitch said the UN was going to prevent atomic bombs from being used ever again. American Communists took the scare tactic and theorized: If everybody has nuclear bombs nobody will use them. The theory justified helping Stalin get the bomb as much as 10 years ahead of time when America had a nuclear monopoly —— AND THE MILITARY STRENGTH TO PROTECT IT —— 25 years ahead of time according to some knowledgeable experts.

In order to break America’s monopoly, never using atomic bombs again meant arming enemies. Arming was followed by disarmament treaties. In short: America-haters first gave the Soviet Communists the bomb, then they tuned around and screamed “Sign a disarmament treaty with them.”

Disarmament “theory” encompassed two goals:

1. America must disarm.

2. Trust Soviet Communists.

NOTE: Communist China, and North Korea never signed a disarmament treaty à la New START. Question: Would anybody in their right mind trust them had they signed a disarmament treaty?

The UN-loving traitor in the White House is now saying “Iran can be trusted with nuclear bombs.” There is no doubt in my mind that Taqiyya the Liar is betraying this country every way he can. A nuclear Iran is an extension of the treason that drove American Communists to arm the Soviet Union. On top of it all, the global government crowd is asking Americans to put their trust in United Nations inspections.

Incidentally, when Taqiyya the Liar pulled out of Iraq after the war was won, he effectively armed ISIS with military vehicles, tanks, small arms, and so on. He can no more be trusted to disarm ISIS than he will disarm Iran after he gives them nuclear weapons. I am waiting for him to say trust ISIS, too.

Finally, I have said this a thousand times: Every domestic and foreign policy decision must not harm the United Nations in any way. It matters not which party is in power. The New World Order crowd must approve of every final decision. It just so happens that every Democrat, and some Republicans, too, agree with every decision that protects the United Nations before it protects the United States.

Sierra Rayne’s fabulous analysis, without ever mentioning the United Nations, shows where the United Nations has been taking Americans:

Polling Data Doesn’t Support the Nuclear Abolitionists
By Sierra Rayne
June 3, 2015

Polling Data Doesn t Support the Nuclear Abolitionists​

"The UN-loving traitor in the White House is now saying “Iran can be trusted with nuclear bombs"

Why does Iran need nuclear bombs, did Bozo ever think of that? I think Iran wants nukes to keep Israel
at bay while she supports terrorist groups like Hezbollah and maybe Hamas. A nuclear umbrella, so to speak.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

US membership in the United Nations was sold as a nuclear scare tactic. The sales pitch said the UN was going to prevent atomic bombs from being used ever again. American Communists took the scare tactic and theorized: If everybody has nuclear bombs nobody will use them. The theory justified helping Stalin get the bomb as much as 10 years ahead of time when America had a nuclear monopoly —— AND THE MILITARY STRENGTH TO PROTECT IT —— 25 years ahead of time according to some knowledgeable experts.

In order to break America’s monopoly, never using atomic bombs again meant arming enemies. Arming was followed by disarmament treaties. In short: America-haters first gave the Soviet Communists the bomb, then they tuned around and screamed “Sign a disarmament treaty with them.”

Disarmament “theory” encompassed two goals:

1. America must disarm.

2. Trust Soviet Communists.

NOTE: Communist China, and North Korea never signed a disarmament treaty à la New START. Question: Would anybody in their right mind trust them had they signed a disarmament treaty?

The UN-loving traitor in the White House is now saying “Iran can be trusted with nuclear bombs.” There is no doubt in my mind that Taqiyya the Liar is betraying this country every way he can. A nuclear Iran is an extension of the treason that drove American Communists to arm the Soviet Union. On top of it all, the global government crowd is asking Americans to put their trust in United Nations inspections.

Incidentally, when Taqiyya the Liar pulled out of Iraq after the war was won, he effectively armed ISIS with military vehicles, tanks, small arms, and so on. He can no more be trusted to disarm ISIS than he will disarm Iran after he gives them nuclear weapons. I am waiting for him to say trust ISIS, too.

Finally, I have said this a thousand times: Every domestic and foreign policy decision must not harm the United Nations in any way. It matters not which party is in power. The New World Order crowd must approve of every final decision. It just so happens that every Democrat, and some Republicans, too, agree with every decision that protects the United Nations before it protects the United States.

Sierra Rayne’s fabulous analysis, without ever mentioning the United Nations, shows where the United Nations has been taking Americans:

Polling Data Doesn’t Support the Nuclear Abolitionists
By Sierra Rayne
June 3, 2015

Polling Data Doesn t Support the Nuclear Abolitionists​

(looks around) Seems the 'American Communists' were right huh? Everybody has nukes - no one's used them.

 

[Flanders]

(looks around) Seems the 'American Communists' were right huh? Everybody has nukes - no one's used them.

To Delta4Embassey: Not yet.

One fact about weapons is indisputable. Every weapon that was ever invented was used.

Instead of always trying to show how clever you are make an effort to grasp reality. America’s overwhelming retaliation superiority was the only thing that prevented a nuclear war. The minute a nuclear enemy thinks the odds are in their favor they will attack; hence, disarmament treaties.

This is in Sierra Rayne’s article that you probably did not read:

WWII would look like an easy time for the West compared to what a conventional warfare WWIII would be. In WWII, the West essentially just faced Germany and Japan, two relatively small but highly militarized societies. Imagine simultaneously facing down China and other hostile states in Asia, Russia, much of the Middle East, a good portion of South and Central America, an unknown fraction of Africa, and probably portions of Europe in a nuclear weapons free world with only conventional weaponry, our much smaller population base, their much more rapidly growing economies, and the fairly level conventional technology playing field? It would not be pretty for us.​

Assuming WWIII begins as a non-nuclear war it will become nuclear as soon as the enemy realize that nuclear is the last chance to avoid defeat.

Even if you consider population in a nuclear war between the US and Islam, there are well over one billion Muslims compared to approximately 60 percent of Americans. The other forty percent want to surrender right now. They will surrender much faster in an actual war. Before defeat, they will advocate defeat as they did in Vietnam, and in the war against Islam. The hard fact is that there is no comparable percentage of Muslims who would surrender.

And you might think about the true reason the Chicago sewer rat is working with the United Nations to bring millions of Muslim “refugees” into this country. To me, it is obvious that his motive is to have a fifth column in place in the event of an all-out war against Islam.

 

[TheOldSchool]

US membership in the United Nations was sold as a nuclear scare tactic. The sales pitch said the UN was going to prevent atomic bombs from being used ever again. American Communists took the scare tactic and theorized: If everybody has nuclear bombs nobody will use them. The theory justified helping Stalin get the bomb as much as 10 years ahead of time when America had a nuclear monopoly —— AND THE MILITARY STRENGTH TO PROTECT IT —— 25 years ahead of time according to some knowledgeable experts.

In order to break America’s monopoly, never using atomic bombs again meant arming enemies. Arming was followed by disarmament treaties. In short: America-haters first gave the Soviet Communists the bomb, then they tuned around and screamed “Sign a disarmament treaty with them.”

Disarmament “theory” encompassed two goals:

1. America must disarm.

2. Trust Soviet Communists.

NOTE: Communist China, and North Korea never signed a disarmament treaty à la New START. Question: Would anybody in their right mind trust them had they signed a disarmament treaty?

The UN-loving traitor in the White House is now saying “Iran can be trusted with nuclear bombs.” There is no doubt in my mind that Taqiyya the Liar is betraying this country every way he can. A nuclear Iran is an extension of the treason that drove American Communists to arm the Soviet Union. On top of it all, the global government crowd is asking Americans to put their trust in United Nations inspections.

Incidentally, when Taqiyya the Liar pulled out of Iraq after the war was won, he effectively armed ISIS with military vehicles, tanks, small arms, and so on. He can no more be trusted to disarm ISIS than he will disarm Iran after he gives them nuclear weapons. I am waiting for him to say trust ISIS, too.

Finally, I have said this a thousand times: Every domestic and foreign policy decision must not harm the United Nations in any way. It matters not which party is in power. The New World Order crowd must approve of every final decision. It just so happens that every Democrat, and some Republicans, too, agree with every decision that protects the United Nations before it protects the United States.

Sierra Rayne’s fabulous analysis, without ever mentioning the United Nations, shows where the United Nations has been taking Americans:

Polling Data Doesn’t Support the Nuclear Abolitionists
By Sierra Rayne
June 3, 2015

Polling Data Doesn t Support the Nuclear Abolitionists​

You're a lunatic.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

(looks around) Seems the 'American Communists' were right huh? Everybody has nukes - no one's used them.

To Delta4Embassey: Not yet.

One fact about weapons is indisputable. Every weapon that was ever invented was used.

Instead of always trying to show how clever you are make an effort to grasp reality. America’s overwhelming retaliation superiority was the only thing that prevented a nuclear war. The minute a nuclear enemy thinks the odds are in their favor they will attack; hence, disarmament treaties.

This is in Sierra Rayne’s article that you probably did not read:

WWII would look like an easy time for the West compared to what a conventional warfare WWIII would be. In WWII, the West essentially just faced Germany and Japan, two relatively small but highly militarized societies. Imagine simultaneously facing down China and other hostile states in Asia, Russia, much of the Middle East, a good portion of South and Central America, an unknown fraction of Africa, and probably portions of Europe in a nuclear weapons free world with only conventional weaponry, our much smaller population base, their much more rapidly growing economies, and the fairly level conventional technology playing field? It would not be pretty for us.​

Assuming WWIII begins as a non-nuclear war it will become nuclear as soon as the enemy realize that nuclear is the last chance to avoid defeat.

Even if you consider population in a nuclear war between the US and Islam, there are well over one billion Muslims compared to approximately 60 percent of Americans. The other forty percent want to surrender right now. They will surrender much faster in an actual war. Before defeat, they will advocate defeat as they did in Vietnam, and in the war against Islam. The hard fact is that there is no comparable percentage of Muslims who would surrender.

And you might think about the true reason the Chicago sewer rat is working with the United Nations to bring millions of Muslim “refugees” into this country. To me, it is obvious that his motive is to have a fifth column in place in the event of an all-out war against Islam.

Sorry, are there actually policy-makers following this site that 'being clever' isn't all we have?

 

[whitehall]

What does the term "nuclear monopoly" really mean in a political sense? Does it mean that emerging nations and radical Islam are short changed in the MAD (mutually assured destruction) concept that the U.N. seems to control?

 

[Flanders]

What does the term "nuclear monopoly" really mean in a political sense?

To whitehall: I thought it was obvious.

The theory justified helping Stalin get the bomb as much as 10 years ahead of time when America had a nuclear monopoly —— AND THE MILITARY STRENGTH TO PROTECT IT —— 25 years ahead of time according to some knowledgeable experts.

Does it mean that emerging nations and radical Islam are short changed in the MAD (mutually assured destruction) concept that the U.N. seems to control?

To whitehall: You seem to be saying that America’s enemies should not be short changed! The fact is that giving enemies nuclear weapons created MAD. There would have been no need for the strategy of Mutually Assured Destruction had America maintained its nuclear weapons monopoly. MAD became necessary because of American traitors like FDR’s fair-haired boy Alger Hiss. Now it is happening with Iran. This time it will be worse.

And you might think about the true reason the Chicago sewer rat is working with the United Nations to bring millions of Muslim “refugees” into this country. To me, it is obvious that his motive is to have a fifth column in place in the event of an all-out war against Islam.

Imagine if Nazi Germany had a fifth column with nuclear weapons on its side:

Bill Gertz, top Pentagon reporter for the Washington Times has just reported that "Obama secretly backed Muslim Brotherhood." The Brotherhood is literally a fascist Muslim radical group from the Nazi period.

XXXXX​

The Muslim Brotherhood is called the "Ikhwan" in Arabic, meaning "brotherhood." (Like German "ich" and "won.") It took that name in 1928, when fascist and Nazi "brotherhoods" were spreading all over Europe.​

Understand this in relation to setting up a fifth column —— Hillary Clinton is Taqiyya the Liar in a pants suit:

Hillary Clinton's closest personal aide as SecState was Huma Abedin – an Ikhwan insider. Abedin was one of the few people who had access to Hillary's illegal personal e-mail account on the night of Benghazi. Nothing has changed – Abedin is still at the top of the Hillary campaign. Probably for the first time in U.S. history, presidential candidate Hillary has stonewalled any media questions, period.

June 5, 2015
Gertz Expose: Pentagon docs show Obama supports Muslim Brotherhood
By James Lewis

Blog Gertz Expose Pentagon docs show Obama supports Muslim Brotherhood​

 

[Flanders]

Krauthammer is on the ball 99 out of a 100 times. Whenever he is wrong he blows it big time:

. . . administration officials are “almost willing to admit” that they don’t have a strategy and are just hoping things don’t collapse before Obama leaves office.

“We’re in for 17 months of a fake strategy in which the administration is just hoping that nothing catastrophic happens,” Krauthammer said.​

Listen to C. K.’s take in the video:

Charles Krauthammer We re in for 17 Months of a Fake ISIS Strategy Fox News Insider​

Krauthammer: 'We're in for 17 Months of a Fake ISIS Strategy'
Jun 5 2015 // 7:58pm
As seen on On the Record with Greta Van Susteren​

Krauthammer is right about Administration officials being “. . . ‘almost willing to admit’ that they don’t have a strategy . . .”. Administration officials are as happy as rats in a cheeses factory admitting to no strategy so long as the public never learns Taqiyya the Liar’s hidden strategy:

. . . it is obvious that his motive is to have a fifth column in place in the event of an all-out war against Islam.

There is not a chance that an attack will be planned and executed by ISIS or any Muslim military so long as he is president. The Muslim military has every reason to make Taqiyya the Liar & Company look like he is defending the country while between them they put their fifth column in place.

Just consider this if you are not convinced:

1. A Muslim fifth column is much more comprehensive than was the Soviet Union’s sleeper cells and Nazi Germany’s espionage agents.

2. There is not a chance Taqiyya the Liar will be accused of betraying the country after he is out of office. Not getting caught is an important component of his fifth column strategy.

3. Muslims pouring into this country will not be placed in internment camps as were Japanese Americans who were loyal Americans. Taqiyya the Liar's Muslims immigrants, along with UN refugees, will have no loyalty to this country. As a matter of fact, some years ago, a thousand or so Muslims serving in the US military pledged that they would not kill another Muslim in battle. Today, they would desert faster than did Bowe Bergdahl.

4. Administration traitors are not the least bit concerned about lone wolf attacks like the Boston Bombers and Major Nidal Malik Hasan. The Chicago sewer rat will even look good when the intelligence agencies and law enforcement officials thwart an attack. So long as the public accepts lone wolf attacks the fifth column strategy remains hidden.

 

[regent]

Other nations were playing with bomb construction when
America exploded her first in New Mexico. At that explosion the nuclear scientist that had designed our bomb predicted the USSR would have one in four years.

 

[Flanders]

Other nations were playing with bomb construction when
America exploded her first in New Mexico. At that explosion the nuclear scientist that had designed our bomb predicted the USSR would have one in four years.

To regent: Where did you get that nonsense? Germany was the only country that was close to the bomb. When Germany lost the war the Soviet Union could barely built automobiles let alone a delivery system.

 

[Flanders]

. . . it is obvious that his motive is to have a fifth column in place in the event of an all-out war against Islam.

There is not a chance that an attack will be planned and executed by ISIS or any Muslim military so long as he is president. The Muslim military has every reason to make Taqiyya the Liar & Company look like he is defending the country while between them they put their fifth column in place.

Smoking gun hardly covers it. I call it a salvo from 16 inch guns on a battleship:

President Obama meets with Muslim Brotherhood lobbysit Anas Altikriti in the White House in Feb. 2014​

WASHINGTON – The White House isn’t commenting on the exposure of a secret presidential directive, but critics tell WND it confirms what they feared: The Obama administration has an official policy of backing so-called “moderate Islamists,” including the jihadist group the Muslim Brotherhood.

A source familiar with the document told the Washington Times the “policy of backing the Muslim Brotherhood is outlined in a secret directive called Presidential Study Directive-11, or PSD-11.”

Smoking-gun document said to prove Obama-Muslim Brotherhood ties
Posted By Garth Kant On 06/07/2015 @ 5:32 pm

Smoking-gun document said to prove Obama-Muslim Brotherhood ties​

And let’s not forget that in addition to Senator John McCain jumping to Huma Adedin’s defense before he looked into the matter:



two current Republican presidential wannabes also came down on then-Congresswoman Michele Bachmann for the crime of asking questions.

HIllary Clinton and Huma Abedin​

Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, meanwhile, told Politico the attacks were "ridiculous." Abedin, he said, "is about as far away from the Muslim Brotherhood view of women and ideology as you possibly could get. She's a very modern woman in every sense of the word, and people who say these things are really doing her a disservice because they don't know what they're talking about, and I don't know what their motivations are, but clearly it says more about them than it does her."

On Thursday morning on NPR's Diane Rehm show, Republican Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida said, "I don't share the feelings that are in that letter. Obviously, every member of Congress has a right to express their opinion and every member of Congress is held accountable for their opinion, if they're right or if they're wrong... I'm very very careful and cautious about ever making accusations like that about anyone."

ByStephanie CondonCBS NewsJuly 19, 2012, 2:49 PM
Bachmann under fire from more Republicans

Bachmann under fire from more Republicans - CBS News​

NOTE: Considering the Republican cavalry charge —— Hillary Clinton presently stands as the frontrunner for the White House.

 

[Flanders]

I was wrong. He does have a strategy.

 

[Flanders]

Administration officials are as happy as rats in a cheeses factory admitting to no strategy so long as the public never learns Taqiyya the Liar’s hidden strategy:

Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, wrote President Obama warning that the Syrian refugee program could become a ‘back door for jihadists” to enter the U.S.​

A Texas congressman who chairs the House Homeland Security Committee is calling on President Obama to abandon his plan to resettle thousands of Syrians displaced by that country’s civil war, saying the plan is “very dangerous” for America’s security.

The problem is that ISIS has already said it will infiltrate the ranks of the refugees being sent by the United Nations to various Western countries, said Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas.

McCaul wrote a letter to President Obama Thursday expressing concerns over the administration’s announced plans to resettle some 2,000 Syrian refugees in the United States this year. Another 10,000 to 11,000 are in the U.N. pipeline destined for America.

Congressman slams Obama's Syrian refugee program
Posted By Leo Hohmann On 06/15/2015 @ 9:26 pm

Congressman slams Obama s Syrian refugee program
​

Rep. McCaul does not go as far as calling the president’s favorite Muslims a fifth column, while all I can see is sound military planning. An established fifth column can do a lot more harm down the road than random attacks can do before full-scale war does break out. Aside from killing Americans in the attacks on 9-11-2001, Muslim strategists did not accomplish much. A well-placed fifth column will contribute to America’s defeat rather than lose a few battles to United Nations refugees.

 

[Flanders]

3. Muslims pouring into this country will not be placed in internment camps as were Japanese Americans who were loyal Americans. Taqiyya the Liar's Muslims immigrants, along with UN refugees, will have no loyalty to this country. As a matter of fact, some years ago, a thousand or so Muslims serving in the US military pledged that they would not kill another Muslim in battle. Today, they would desert faster than did Bowe Bergdahl.

This comes as no surprise to me:

The Obama administration recently made changes to the Oath of Allegiance to the United States in a manner very conducive to Sharia, or Islamic law.

On July 21, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced some “modifications” to the Oath of Allegiance that immigrants must take before becoming naturalized.

August 6, 2015
Obama Administration Modifies U.S. Oath of Allegiance to Accommodate Muslims
By Raymond Ibrahim

Articles Obama Administration Modifies U.S. Oath of Allegiance to Accommodate Muslims​

On the other side of the coin, Americans cannot kill Muslims who declared war on America and the world in the name of jihad, a worldwide Caliphate, Allah, and whatever else satisfies their bloodlust, while Muslims apparently have a Right to kill every non-Muslim:

The Cato Institute publishes a regular, and regularly interesting, newsletter called Cato at Liberty.

In yesterday’s newsletter, the institute included a piece authored by Doug Bandow, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, specializing in foreign policy and civil liberties, who wrote the article titled: “America Should Say No To War Against Iran: U.S. Has No Right To Kill At Will”.

Have You Demanded a “Right to Kill” Recently?
By Jim Yardley
April 25, 2015

Have You Demanded a Right to Kill Recently ​

 

[Shikica]

I'd like to say that the only nation to use nuclear weaponry on human beings is the United States - twice. Pakistan, India, Israel also all have nuclear bombs. Why would we trust those 3 and not Iran? OP you need to read more about Iran I think because corporate media doesn't really give a good look into the country.

Anyway, in my opinion all countries should be disarmed. I understand that China and North Korea are not cooperating but neither is Israel nor India nor Pakistan (which you didn't mention)

The solution? To do what they are doing with Iran - negotiate. It turns out that Iran never originally had any intentions of even beginning to use nuclear technology. But US harassment of Iran led to ahmadinemjad to have a more extreme viewpoint, or a less calm doctrine (though looking at iran's history with the US we understand why but still condemn). Nonetheless the country's government is once again in the hands of moderates. So while I don't buy the fear of Iran I think the process makes sense - however US should disarm immediately still. If you are worried about india/israel/china/north korea/pakistan holding the world hostage then you should also be concerned with the US doing so.

However I doubt any of them would seriously commit to that stance.

 

[Flanders]

I'd like to say that the only nation to use nuclear weaponry on human beings is the United States - twice.

To Shikica: I’ve discussed Hiroshima and Nagasaki countless time. Research my threads if you want more.

This is the best thing I can say about Iran going nuclear:

 

[Flanders]

Rep. McCaul does not go as far as calling the president’s favorite Muslims a fifth column, while all I can see is sound military planning. An established fifth column can do a lot more harm down the road than random attacks can do before full-scale war does break out. Aside from killing Americans in the attacks on 9-11-2001, Muslim strategists did not accomplish much. A well-placed fifth column will contribute to America’s defeat rather than lose a few battles to United Nations refugees.

The policies that piece of scum in the White House put in place, thanks to 70 years of the United Nations, will not do any physical harm to me. My children are 61 and 56 years old. They are at the age where they might escape Islam’s brutality that I see coming to this country after it is too late to stop Pamela Geller’s “How ugly. How fast.”.

Last week, I reported about the first American city in history to elect a Muslim majority City Council. Well, it didn’t take long for the Islamic supremacist aggression and hostility to surface — did it? It never does. Always conflict and strife.

A cell phone video, taken moments after Muslims received the word that they took over the city council, has surfaced of one of the organizers of the Muslim city council effort saying, “Today we show the Polish and everybody else…” The town has a large but shrinking Polish community.

How ugly. How fast.

XXXXX​

According to a recent poll, 58% of Muslims in the United States reject First Amendment criticism of Islam as a right. Forty-six percent want blasphemy punished, 12% want “blasphemers” killed.

Muslims are the only immigrant group that comes to Western countries with a ready-made model of society and government (sharia) that they believe to be superior to what we have here, and they work to institute it.

New Muslim Majority City Council Member in Michigan Issues Warning
by Pamela Geller
11 Nov 2015

New Muslim Majority City Council Member in Michigan Issues Warning - Breitbart​

United Nations “Economic Refugees” is just the boost the scum needed to give his fifth column the muscle he wanted. Within a few years American Muslims will have nuclear bombs in their hands. That’s when fools and appeasers will retreat step by step from the Muslims in our own government rather than fight a nuclear war.

Bottom line: Muslims do not need a Cold War slogan “Better Red Than Dead” to win. Indeed, there will be no Cold War against Islam. Liberal scum from top to bottom fixed it with Democrats in Congress so a Cold War against Islam is already too late let alone a shooting war.

Finally, if you want to avoid an all-out war against Islam, every Muslim must be driven out of this country and Europe. Muslims restricted to Muslim countries will think long and hard before they start a war they cannot win against the counties they've infiltrated.

 

[Flanders]

And you might think about the true reason the Chicago sewer rat is working with the United Nations to bring millions of Muslim “refugees” into this country. To me, it is obvious that his motive is to have a fifth column in place in the event of an all-out war against Islam.

Raheem Kassam focuses on Europe, but he might just as well include the US:

There is, most certainly, a fifth column in our midst that wants to drastically alter our societies.​

Yes, There is a Muslim Fifth Column in the West
by Raheem Kassam
November 16, 2015

Yes, There is a Muslim Fifth Column in the West​

 

[Delta4Embassy]

DPRK has nukes but hasn't used them; Pakistan has them and hasn't used them, India, Russia, UK, Israel, etc. No one's used them ever. Oh except us. Twice.

Only nation not trustworthy with nukes then is the USA.