THE NEW GATE KEEPERS 6.0

The war on terror is being lost. It is not being lost because we are being defeated. It is being lost because our traitorous leaders are choosing not to win.

Ronald Reagan was not a genius and yet he possessed a wisdom and foresight far beyond the realm of most mortal men. In his greatest speech, "A Time For Choosing" he spoke of dangers to liberty, of values that must not be sacrificed, and risks that must be taken if we are to remain a free people. He also told us that we could have peace tomorrow if we so choose; all that is required is for us to surrender. That it seems, is the path our leaders have chosen to travel.


Another great leader of free men, Abraham Lincoln, spoke of a house divided and warned that such a house cannot stand. Recalling his wisdom we can look about and see that the house is crumbling around us, as divided we stand and divided we are falling. We need not continue that fall, but if our downward descent is to be stopped we must remove our blinders and realize that Saudi Arabia is the second greatest danger that we face and they are already invading our homeland. The greatest threat before us are those people who hold the reins of power in our nation's capitol.

The invasion of America began in 1952 when Saudi Arabia founded an Islamic group known as the Muslim World League(MWL), which was to become the brain child of Islamic expansion. The Arab nations have a flair for distorting or redefining the meaning of a word, and that talent is what is allowing them to phrase documents and treaties that sound totally benign while assaulting our freedoms. They used this same tactic to define the MWL as a Non-Government Organization(NGO) thus disallowing any tracking of the group's expansionist activities back the the King of Saudi Arabia. Meanwhile the MWL is funded and controlled by the Saudi Government.

The fact that the U.S. is the primary target of the MWL is evidenced by something most odd. The MWL was originally host to twenty two Arab nations; today that number has grown to fifty six plus the Palestinians. There is an Arabic word "Ummah" which translates as "community" or "nation" and the MWL is the accepted voice of the Ummah. The oddity I mentioned is that the chosen language of the MWL is not Arabic, it is English. For sixty years a gathering of Arab nations have presented all of their legal documents and their communications in our language, not theirs.

This, at first glance, might appear that they are accommodating us. That first glance would be quite deceptive for Islam accommodates no infidel nation. They are a very devious people by nature and the proficient use of our language while we do not understand theirs gives them a great advantage. They have a unique talent for tweaking a word so that it sounds acceptable to us while in truth it has had its meaning redefined in a previous treaty or transaction where the slightly altered definition seemed insignificant to the unwary.

I shall shortly demonstrate the methods they use to out maneuver us in our own language, but first I must briefly describe the group that does it best. The Organization of Islamic Conferences(OIC). Notice in subsequent essays that whenever I bring a new group into the scenario that their title will always contain "Islam", "Islamic", or "Muslim". To them they are the Ummah, and we are only the mere infidels, outsiders and enemies. We bend to their demands. They bend not at all.

Other than the U.N. the OIC is the largest international organization of any kind, speaking for 1.5 billion people. One of its primary goals is to outlaw any and all criticism of Islam. This is the group that created the term "Islamophobia" and applies the term to any negative portrayal of Islam. The idea that gave birth to the word came from observations of the effect of calling someone "Homophobic". Without fail, the word put someone on the defensive. They have also used "Racist" and "Bigot" in the same context yielding the same defensive results. Muslims like it when non Muslims are on the defensive, and so we have accepted "Islamophobia" as a new word, created by a hostile Arab nation, and added it to the English lexicon. As mentioned earlier, they are masters of our language, and they are outpacing us in the use of it. This is but one example of the tactics that Islam employs so well.

Meeting of the OIC in  Mecca 2005, drawing up their ten year plan
They are ahead of schedule

Both the MWL and the OIC have permanent observer status in the United Nations. That is another interesting maneuver by the Arab States. These groups, like the Palestinians, are basically recognized as being countries, with the ability to influence U.N. decisions, lacking only the right to vote in the General Assembly. Their observer status allows them to draw up treaties and lobby voting nations for signatures, and that is how they are taking America and the West apart one brick at a time.

I must confess that I have had a difficult time writing this essay as the source documents I have researched simply do not make any sense, but then, they were not supposed to, as they were written in Orwellian terminology. They were designed to conceal the true agenda that is being promoted and those double think words present an illusion that Hillary Clinton can put before the public as "mutual understanding" and "tolerance" ... nice words with their meanings reversed.

Zuhdi Jasser commented "Anyone who believes that resolution 16/18 is some kind of a breakthrough is sadly being duped by the most obvious Islamist double discourse." I agree with him and add this: Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama are supporting this resolution and they are not duped, therefore they are complicit in the Islamic deception.  

Most Americans have never heard of Resolution 16/18 and few of those who have heard the term grasp its full implications. It was conceived by the OIC and put before the U.N. with but one purpose: To destroy the freedom of speech in Western nations and make it illegal to criticize Islam.

To take a page from history: What if in 1941 the American people were not allowed to mention the evils of the Nazi regime and the Japanese empire? What if they were barred from saying anything disparaging about Adolph Hitler and Mussolini? What if laws were passed protecting those who were threatening the world and Americans were criminalized if these laws were broken? Changing names and nations, all of the above is taking place around us. Ask a dozen people what they know about 16/18. I'm betting that you will get twelve blank stares. 

 There is an agenda that is being quietly implemented under the auspices of our federal government and 16/18 is but part of it. That is why the words "Islamist terrorist", "Jihad", and "Radical Muslims" are being  deleted from our FBI, CIA, Secret Service, and military training manuals. If there is no way you can define a threat, there is no way you can oppose it.

The scourging of the truth began in December of 2011 when our State Department hosted a three day session with foreign governments, the OIC and other international organizations. The topic under discussion was Resolution 16/18. It had already been adopted "by consensus" i.e.: without a vote at the U.N. Human Rights Council. The tactic of adoption by concensus without a vote gives the representatives involved plausible deniability so that when things go south they can say quite truthfully, "I didn't vote for it."

The OIC has been engaged in a long term effort to have earlier versions of 16/18 implemented, always failing due to the fact that the previous administration rejected it on the grounds that it tried to criminalize the "defamation of Islam". Always wearing us down the OIC edited their plan to call for a criminalization of "defamation of religion" and "blasphemy". This is some of the dual meaning of our language I referred to above. When the OIC uses the phrase "defamation of religion" they do not mean defamation of religion; they mean defamation of Islam. The followers of Islam recognize no religion but theirs. If you are not a Muslim then you are an infidel, therefore you have no religion. The same holds true for their use of the word "blasphemy". Blasphemy is blasphemy only if it being directed at Islam. Again ... there is no other religion to consider.

With Hillary Clinton at the helm as Secretary of State a new phrase was added to the old rejected treaty to make this one more palatable. The code phrase "incitement to imminent violence" and that codified that any derogatory comment about Islam could result in violence. Preventing violence is always desirable and that paved the way toward preventing us from saying anything that could anger a Muslim and lead to one of their violent outbursts. Voila, they found the magic pixie dust that could nullify our First Amendment ... fanatical Muslims.

Another word stressed in 16/18 is "tolerance". That too is codified with dual meanings. Under the terms of the now accepted treaty we are now required to be tolerant of an intolerant people. They are not expected to practice any form of tolerance as their Qur'an allows for nothing but the ways of Islam, and they must be permitted to observe their religious teaching. Since there is only one true religion they reserve the right to practice it to its fullest, including the teaching their young a hatred of Jews in particular and all non Muslims in general.

 So the whole purpose of 16/18 is to destroy our ability to speak openly about their beliefs and the atrocities in which they indulge. Enacting the terms of the treaty begins immediately within the realm of the federal government, thus the silencing of our intelligence gathering organizations. In time the full weight of the plan will filter down to the American public and we will be in violation of a U.N. mandate if we discuss female genital mutilation, stoning, beheading, mass murder, or public hangings in the town square.  These issues, along with pedophilia, necrophilia, crucifixion, gang rapes, and slavery are all sanctioned in the Qur'an so in the name of a better mutual understanding we must accept Muslims as they are for they are only obeying the dictates of their "Holy Qur'an". 

Since they cannot change it is we who must be more tolerant.

Suggested Reading
The New Gate Keeper Compilation
The Gates Of Hell ... This is not for the faint of heart nor for minors. The images contained within are of Islamic atrocities and they are extremely graphic.
The Muslim Brotherhood In America ... A ten part free course by Frank Gaffney. This was the course that Michelle Bachman took that prompted her reveal of Islam within our government