Sunday, September 23, 2012


Let me make a broad disclosure: I am not Jewish nor an Israeli BUT I am nevertheless infuriated when in the current state of global affairs and destruction of my American environment by a fervently biased, pro-islam usurper of the Oval Office, who encourages and foments death and destruction by willing Moslems, mostly through the Moslem Brotherhood for his own narcissistic, megalomaniac power grabs and cannot care less for our well-being, I am being dragged into certain perdition.

Obama is the American Ayatollah Khomeini, including using the same Marxist-Islamic mix used to destroy Iran by Khomeini and now by Obama to destroy America!

He is intentionally derelict in his duty  to protect America and American interests as he plans and implements his dream of a Moslem 
caliphate ruling the world with himself  as a prominent part or even pinnacle of the leadership.

Below are links to Israeli articles that should be read to achieve an understanding of what has transpired and is happening to America's only regional ally. Though as far as Obama is concerned with his tunnel vision of self interest, he prefers to meet with comedians like David Letterman, go to Las Vegas and reject a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, though he did schedule a meeting with the Egyptian leader, Mohammad Morsi,who is an fervent leader of the Moslem Brotherhood and outspoken enemy of Israel.

He may have to  cancel Morsi, too, to try to lose fewer Jewish votes in November

A spontaneous thought for Bernice Lipkin.

Read the last few days of articles at AntiMullah and see where we can complement each others' efforts on a regular basis

As thousands of loyal visitors to our site already know has a similar DAILY post of multiple links (with an occasional skipped day) and interesting graphics, which THINK-ISRAEL  readers can peruse selectively to get insights into American and often Iranian happenings. 

I wonder if adding an ANTIMULLAH link/button on the THINK- ISRAEL web page, would serve to achieve the reverse of what was done here, and may expand the readership for both sites and continue on a reciprocal basis. 

With this caution:  as a strict policy Anti-Mullah accepts NO ADVERTISING and will not publish any commercial, what we post is purely our opinion and for educational purposes.

As you can see we can be very outspoken and do not pull our punches  nor dilute our opinions. As a non-profit, non-commercial site we can retain such freedoms,


Fatah And Hamas. Islam And Islamist. They're All Under Sharia
Founding National Myths: Fabricating Palestinian Historyby David Bukay
The Rhetoric Of Nonsense: Fabricating Palestinian Historyby Alexander H. Joffe
A Case Of Myth-Taken Identityby Tabitha Korol
Understanding Egypt's Sexual Intercourse Lawby James G. Zumwalt
Dangerous Illusions About Islamismby Robert R. Reilly
Is There Any Valid Space For Jihad In The Modern World?by Babu Suseelan
Sharia's Stealth Invasion
Swing Low Sweet Shariaby Nidra Poller
Studying Antisemitism On Campusby Phyllis Chesler
Dr. Jasser's Panglossian Koranic Glossby Andrew G. Bostom
Muslim Brotherhood
The Brotherhood's Useful Idiotsby Caroline B. Glick
The Muslim Brotherhood In The Arab World And Islamic Communities In Western Europeby Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center
Osama Bin Laden On The Muslim Brotherhoodby Thomas Joscelyn
The Muslim Brotherhood In America: A Video Courseby Mark Tapson
Middle East Dissolution
The Horror And The Pitaby Spengler
Egypt Gaza Powderkegby Yaakov Lappin
Iran And Obama's Syria Hesitation by John Bolton
Forget Syria - Neutralize Iranby David P. Goldman
Winds Of War?by David Meir-Levi
New Beginning by Al Skudsi Bin Hookah
Jew-Hatred In Norwayby Bruce Bawer
The Last Days Of Jews In The Islamicized Europe by Giulio Meotti
German Cartoon Riots: Clubs, Bottles And Stones"by Soeren Kern
Don't Let America Imitate A Burning European Unionby Bruce Thornton
The Dark Side Of Paradiseby Fjordman
Muslim Voters Change Europeby Soeren Kern
It Is Time For The European Multiculturalism Worm To Turn At Lastby Babs Barron
Some Of Israel's Acute Problems Aside From Iran
'Haaretz' Versus The Jewsby Martin Sherman
How To Write About Israelby Daniel Greenfield
Before We Lose Controlby Guy Bechor
Israel's Peace Diseaseby Daniel Greenfield
Stupidity — On Steroidsby Martin Sherman
The Rule Of Lawby Paul Eidelberg
Israel @ 100 -- A Look Ahead BY Brandon Marlon
Pr-Ti: Plain Rotten To Israel
Can Left-Wing Journalists Really Be Fair? by Fjordman
'Political Correctness' Is Totalitarian Mind Controlby David Kupelian
Whitewash Of Sharia Climbs The Bestseller Listsby Bruce Bawer
More Shameful BBC Propaganda Against Israelby Robin Shepherd
History Section
FDR Used The Jewsby Rafael Medoff
Passengers On A Ship Turned Back From Its Journey: 64 Years Later, Exodus Survivors Meet For Lunchby Sherry Gavanditti
The "Iasi" Pogrom: A Solemn Jewish Anniversaryby Jerrold L. Sobel
The Truth About The Nakbaby Robert Werdine
A Different History Of Displacement And Lossby Matti Friedman
The Blog-Ed pages for May and June are not yet available.
We provide direct links to websites that supply accurate background information and news relating to Israel.

Do look at the web site.

And please, if you have a blog-ed piece or a comment or commentary, contact us. Write to or to

Pieces for THINK-ISRAEL should be informative and accurate. Fortunately, those of us who are pro-Israel can show our love of Israel without distorting the truth. We don't need to play by the rules laid down by the Arab-favoring media, which distort the news and omit important items of information.

Bernice Lipkin
Editor, Think-Israel

Saturday, September 15, 2012


Breaking news: Obama challenge with a perfect standing and the most comprehensive challenge with 14 causes of action, 30 defendants (among them representatives of the media) 109 pp of pleadings and 154 pages of exhibits were filed today

Posted on | September 10, 2012 |

A challenger with the most perfect standing is represented by Attorney Orly Taitz. Keith Judd ran against Barack Obama in W.V. and got 40% in the Democratic party primary. 

Today Attorney Orly Taitz filed a legal challenge to Obama on behalf of Keith Judd, who has a perfect standing, as do a number of other parties.

This is the most comprehensive elections challenge to date with 109 pages of pleadings and 154 exhibits, 30 defendants, 14 causes of action

A number of media networks and news men were named as defendants as well in causes of action for defamation and Racketeering scheme to defraud the Plaintiffs and to defraud the nation and aid and abet Obama to get on the ballot with forged IDs and a stolen SSN. 

Among media networks (defendants) are: CNN, MSNBC, Clear Channel and others.

Monday, September 03, 2012


August 22, 2012

What if, during the gathering-storm decade of the 1930s, a senior White House aide in the Franklin D. Roosevelt administration had been found to have taken big money from a company dealing closely with the Nazis? Would it would have been a huge scandal? Of course it would.

And what if, during the Cold War '40s, a top White House aide to President Harry Truman had been caught taking cash from a company dealing with the Soviets? The question answers itself.

But now, in 2012, a White House aide in the Obama administration is revealed to have received a six-figure amount from a company connected to Iran, and nothing happens. 

The press doesn’t seem to care; the establishment is unruffled; even opposition Republicans have hardly noticed. 

If we, as a nation, had been this un-vigilant back during '30s or the '40s, America might not have survived.

More than two weeks after it ran, we can see now what should have been a big bang of a news story -- the August 5 report in the Washington Post that David Plouffe, White House senior adviser, had accepted $100,000 from MTN, a South Africa-based mobile-phone company--a company that does multi-billion dollar business with Iran. Yet the story has, in fact, turned out to be a whimper.

At Monday’s White House press conference -- the first such Q and A session in eight weeks -- the press found time to ask questions about Syria, Afghanistan, and, of course, Mitt Romney’s taxes and Todd Akins’s idiotic words. 

Legitimate questions all, but the juiciest potential news story was Plouffe and his money; after all, here was the chance for a brave reporter to ask the President, face to face, why one of his closest aides had taken money, indirectly, from Iran. And yet none of the questioners seized the moment. 

So who, exactly, is David Plouffe? 

He is a longtime Democratic political operative, perhaps second only to David Axelrod in the Obama political world; Plouffe was campaign manager for the 2008 Obama campaign, while Axelrod was chief strategist.

Remaining in the private sector after Obama’s victory, Plouffe published in 2010 a partisan and hallowing book about Obama, The Audacity to Win: How Obama Won and How We Can Beat the Party of Limbaugh, Beck, and Palin.

In addition, Plouffe did what many others, in both parties, have done after a big political win; he cashed in on the speaking circuit. One of those speeches caused him quick grief; it was reported in February 2009 that he had taken $50,000 to speak in the repressive ex-Soviet state of Azerbaijan; the backlash from human rights activists forced him to donate the money to a pro-democracy group.

Given that precedent, it’s all the more remarkable that nobody in the media has made a stink about Plouffe taking twice as much money from MTN, a $15 billion-a-year mobile phone company, for a speaking gig to MTN executives in Lagos, Nigeria in December 2010. 

One of the firm’s assets is MTN Irancell, which is Iran’s second-largest mobile operator. Indeed, according to the Wall Street Journal, MTN Irancell accounts for more than a fifth of MTN subscribers worldwide.

For its part, an MTN spokesman told the Post in its August 5 story that Plouffe was engaged “because of his expertise and his knowledge of the U.S. political scene.” But importantly, the speaking gig came three weeks after it was announced that Plouffe would be joining the White House staff. 

In other words, MTN wasn’t just paying to schmooze with a well-connected political insider; it was paying to schmooze with a future senior White House aide, someone who would have close access to the President and to national security secrets.

And while the same Post article added that the White House assured that Plouffe held no private meetings with MTN executives on his speaking trip, the questions of how one defines “private meeting” and whether or not Plouffe held meetings with MTN executives elsewhere seem not to have come up.

Yet one activist group, United Against Nuclear Iran, (UANI) doesn’t seem to buy these attempted soothings. UANI has been campaigning for sanctions against MTN for three years. The group issued a statement on August 6, the day after the Post story, noting MTN Irancell’s subservience to the Iranian government, adding that it was especially egregious when Irancell shut down phone service to dissidents during the 2009-10 “Green Revolution.” 

Declared UANI: “MTN has blood on its hands.”

Pointing its finger at the White House aide, UANI's statement continued, “We hope Mr. Plouffe will use his considerable influences to urge President Obama to sanction MTN and most important enact a full economic blockade on Iran, so that companies will no longer be able to operate there.” 

And UANI offered model language for sanctions which would prohibit the sort of speeches-for-hire that Plouffe had delivered.

That same day, August 6, the Washington Post’s rogue conservative blogger, Jennifer Rubin, got right down to it when she asked why Plouffe still had a job:

Why hasn’t the president fired David Plouffe who “accepted a $100,000 speaking fee in 2010 from an affiliate of a company doing business with Iran’s government”? How can the president tell other countries not to do business with the regime if a senior adviser has?

Yes, those are good questions, going right to the heart of not only ethics in the White House, but also US national security policy around the world. But nobody else asked them.

Instead, the following day, August 7, the New York Times ran a complicated story on the Plouffe matter, in which White House aides managed to work Mitt Romney into the narrative, arguing that he was an investor in a rival phone company, Turkcell, that competed against MTN for the Iran business -- so Romney stood to gain if MTN were sanctioned. 

In other words, the White House was saying, whatever an Obama aide might have done indirectly with Iran, Romney could be doing it even worse.
In fact, it appears that the Times story, including the Turkcell pushback, was enough to convince the Romney campaign not to engage on the Plouffe issue. 

And perhaps the Romney campaign’s non-engagement was enough, also, to wave away most of the conservative media. And for its part, the MSM wasn’t much interested.

But the rest of us should be interested -- a lot. No matter where the chips fall.

Iran has been a sworn enemy of the United States since 1979

The Islamic Republic was held legally responsible by a US court for the deaths of 17 Americans at the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia. And US officials have accused Iran of supplying weapons to anti-American forces in both Iraq and Afghanistan

Moreover, Iran has been credibly linked to various anti-Israeli terrorist attacks from Argentina to India -- which should be no surprise, since Iranian leaders, long before Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, have long called for the annihilation of Israel. From an American strategic point of view, it’s hard to get much worse than that. 

And in fact, according to a 2012 Gallup survey, Americans agree that Iran is America’s number one enemy.

In the Plouffe case, the press has had a huge opportunity to speak some strong truth to corrupt, reckless -- and, yes, dangerous -- power. 

That is, reporters could now be connecting the dots from Washington, DC to Johannesburg to Lagos -- and maybe from there to Tehran. Some enterprising journo could be sleuthing out the paymasters and the interlocutors, threshing out witnesses, documents, and maybe even a Deep Throat. 

And he or she could be revealing a huge international scandal -- far bigger than the domestic Watergate -- that would not only be disrupting US politics but also reverberate through history, like the XYZ Affair, the Alger Hiss spy case, or the Iran-Contra fiasco.

Promotions, Pulitzers, and publishing contracts await whoever cracks this story -- maybe even a big Hollywood movie deal. Or maybe not. Because, after all, such scandal-sleuthing would come at the expense of a Democratic President. The One. So which reporter -- among all the reporters whom Politico once called “Obama’s secret weapon” -- wants to have that on his or her conscience? So far, none -- and certainly none of the reporters who asked questions of the President on Monday. 

They all seem more interested in protecting their access to the White House and their special relationships with staffers than in doing their jobs.

Yet because the stakes are so high, we must regard them not just as lapdogs but as enablers of a significant national security risk to the nation.

But can it really be that simple? Can it really be that reporters will forgo a great story for partisan purposes? Or for ideological affinity? Or for personal adulation?

Well, we have seen the same pro-Obama lack of curiosity before. Earlier this year, as a cascade of leaks about sensitive topics -- the use of the Stuxnet virus against Iran and anti-terror tactics in Pakistan and Yemen, including the death of Bin Laden, among others -- came gushing from the White House. 

The reason for these leaks was plainly to help burnish Obama’s national security credentials in time for his re-election campaign -- a campaign that seems to have a second campaign manager in the form of national security adviser Tom Donilon.

To Donilon, and perhaps others around the Oval Office, the safety of our troops seems to be less important than four more years for their man. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), the chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, was blunt about the whole business: The leaking, she declared on June 6, has been “very, very disturbing… 

It’s dismayed our allies. It puts American lives in jeopardy. It puts our nation’s security in jeopardy.” A few weeks later, she added, “I think the White House has to understand that some of this is coming from their ranks.” After a fierce reaction inside the Democratic Party, Feinstein recanted her charge against the White House, although not the assertion that the leaks were harmful.

For its part, the press has not been particularly interested in this story, either. A few favored reporters got their hot scoops while the rest of the press corps looked on coolly, getting more excited over Mitt Romney’s old taxes than over the future safety of the nation.

This media-disinterest phenomenon is so staggering -- and so dangerous -- that it requires further examination. We’ll take up this issue further in the next installment.