In a new best-selling book connecting Islam and Obama-style socialism, a former top terrorism prosecutor chides the national media for failing to investigate Barack Obama’s “borderline criminal” activities in Kenya as a U.S. senator.

Andrew C. McCarthy, the former U.S. attorney who investigated the American embassy bombing in Nairobi, Kenya, charges that Obama interfered in Kenya’s internal politics possibly in violation of the Logan Act.

The centuries-old law bars Americans who are “without authority of the United States” from conducting relations “with any foreign government … in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States.”

In The Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotage America McCarthy says Obama undermined U.S. relations with a strong anti-terrorism ally in an African region where al-Qaida operates. In 2006, he details in the book how Obama campaigned for a pro-communist candidate running against Nairobi’s pro-American government – “in outrageous contravention of U.S. policy and, probably, federal law.”

Obama spent six days barnstorming the Kenyan countryside in support of Raila Odinga, the socialist Luo who was seeking the presidency. Appearing with Odinga at campaign stops, Obama gave speeches accusing the sitting Kenyan president of being corrupt and oppressive, leaving the masses in poverty.

Obama’s interference “was more than reckless,” McCarthy writes. “It was borderline criminal (and that’s being generous).”

Earlier, Odinga had visited Obama in the U.S. – in 2004, 2005 and 2006 – and Obama had sent an adviser, Mark Lippert, to Kenya in early 2006 to plan a trip by the senator timed to coincide with Odinga’s campaign.

McCarthy notes that Obama and Odinga, who named one of his children after Fidel Castro, are “leftist soulmates” whose families go way back. Their fathers belonged to the same Luo tribe – and both Barack Hussein Obama Sr. and the elder Oginga Odinga worked inside the Kenyan government as communist agitators.

There is also an Islamist connection.

On Aug. 29, 2007, Raila Odinga signed a secret Memorandum of Understanding with Sheikh Abdullahi Abdi, chairman of the National Muslim Leaders Forum of Kenya. In exchange for Muslim support, Odinga agreed, among other things, to:

• Rewrite the national constitution to install shariah as the law in all “Muslim declared regions.”
• Elevate Islam as “the only true religion” and give Islamic leaders an “oversight role to monitor activities of ALL other religions.”
• Establish shariah courts in every Kenyan divisional headquarters.
• Ban Christian proselytism.
• Fire the police commissioner for “allow[ing] himself to be used by heathens and Zionists” to oppress Muslims.
• Adopt Islamic dress codes for women.
• Ban alcohol and pork.

Even with strong Muslim backing, Odinga (who does business with a wealthy Saudi donor to Osama bin Laden) was defeated in the December 2007 election. But he accused the incumbent president of rigging the vote and incited his supporters to riot in protest.

Over the next month, some 1,500 Kenyans were killed and more than 500,000 displaced – with most of the violence led by Muslims, who set churches ablaze and hacked Christians to death with machetes.

All the while, Odinga was in regular communications with Obama, who publicly called for an end to the violence.

“Odinga’s strategy, the extortion strategy of Islamist intimidation, worked to a fare-thee-well,” McCarthy notes in his book. To appease his angry mob of supporters, he was named prime minister and allowed to share power with the president.

“With Obama’s helping hand, leftists and Islamists had combined forces to overwhelm a constitutional democracy,” McCarthy says, while decrying the national media’s “stubborn disinterest” in the “stunning” chain of events.

The same alliance can be seen in the U.S., he says, as the Obama administration reaches out to the radical Muslim Brotherhood, which according to the FBI, has a plan to infiltrate and sabotage the U.S. from within. Obama and other Alinsky “revolutionaries” are carrying out a similar plan, he maintains.

McCarthy says that while there’s no evidence Obama is a practicing Muslim, he shares Muslim Brotherhood hatred for America and “the Muslim Brotherhood’s sabotage strategy.”

McCarthy says the administration ignores incontrovertible evidence tying Muslim Brotherhood front groups in America to Hamas and other terrorist groups. One of them, he notes, is the Council on American-Islamic Relations, which claims to be a benign civil-rights organization.

But he says the recent Holy Land Foundation trial – “and the eye-popping publication of ‘Muslim Mafia’” – have exposed CAIR “as a farce.” Quoting from “Muslim Mafia” – which he adds is an “important book” – the former top terrorism prosecutor further litigates the case against CAIR’s “Hamas-tainted leaders.”

In another bombshell, McCarthy reveals that he was dropped from the White House Christmas card list following his criticism of the Bush administration’s purging of the words “jihad” and “Islamic terrorism” from the official military and homeland security lexicon.

Like President Bush before him, he says President Obama fails to grasp that Islam is not a “religion of peace” but “a huge part of the problem in combating ‘violent extremism,’” which is the new euphemism for Islamic terrorism.

“To be sure, the same ground was staked out by his predecessor, President Bush,” McCarthy argues. “They are (both) wrong.”

“The need to deal with Islam is unavoidable,” he adds, “not because it’s an asset, but because it’s a liability that can’t be written off.”

WHAT if the president of the United States is not constitutionally eligible to serve? Is it possible that a straightforward criterion was overlooked during a long, grueling, expensive campaign? Why are so many questions about something so simple still going unanswered? “A Question Of Eligibility” goes where no other documentary has dared to go in seeking the answers to those questions, including one that millions of Americans are asking: “Why won’t Barack Obama release publicly the long-form birth certificate he claims to have from the state of Hawaii?”

In this video, you will hear from four experts on the subject: Dr. Jerome Corsi, author of the New York Times No. 1 bestseller “The Obama Nation”; Orly Taitz, the Southern California lawyer who has led the legal fight to secure the evidence of Barack Obama’s eligibility; Alan Keyes, a third-party presidential candidate in 2008 and the man who challenged Obama for the Illinois U.S. Senate seat that served as a springboard to his presidential ambitions; and Janet Porter, radio talk-show host and political activist who has championed the constitutional issue.

Interviewees: Dr. Jerome Corsi, Orly Taitz, Alan Keyes and Janet Porter.
Approximate Time: 60 Minutes

CLICK HERE TO READ ALL WORLDNETDAILY’S RESEARCH AND REPORTING ON THE OBAMA ELIGIBILITY ISSUE..

And here is the full 20-minute video from HowObamaGotElected.com:

John went to USC to witness and ask questions about Katie Couric getting the Walter Cronkite journalism award for her interview of Sarah Palin. He intended to also give away copies of his film but was literally prevented from doing so. He did not go there hoping for or expecting any sort of confrontation, especially with law enforcement. He was simply shocked and horrified by what happened there, as should every freedom loving American. He did absolutely nothing wrong and was handcuffed, detained and literally abused by law enforcement at the event. The video speaks for itself, John will have plenty to say about this very disturbing episode. This video was shot and edited by Orange County Films. John Ziegler was not involved the the production or editing of this video in any way.

Ziegler tells the truth about his arrest in this article:

I have had a rather bizarre career in media, but what happened last week on the campus of USC here in Los Angeles may end up marking one of the strangest and most disturbing episodes yet. I went to USC intending to simply let as many people as possible know that the award for “journalism excellence” they were giving Katie Couric for her Sarah Palin interview was a complete farce. To prove my point, I wanted to give away copies of my film “Media Malpractice,” which has my own Sarah Palin interview as a special feature. Instead, I ended up getting handcuffed, “arrested,” roughed up, detained, threatened, and forced off the premises…

While [the FOX] report provided a good overview of what happened, there is a lot more to say about this situation, largely because there has been so much misinformation, so many irresponsible accusations, and so much blatant hypocrisy in the general reaction to the remarkable videotape.

Now, one would think that there wouldn’t be much confusion about a situation that was videotaped in its entirety by not one but two cameras who were acting largely independently of the primary actors (we have posted a nearly real-time version of the entire affair at www.HowObamaGotElected.com), but unfortunately that is clearly the case. I would like to try to address some of these issues here.

First, one of the ways that those on the left have used to try to avoid having to hold their nose and support the free speech rights of a rabble-rousing “conservative,” is that USC is a “private” school and therefore they had the right to kick me out for no purpose. I even saw one prominent blog with the headline “Ziegler Arrested for Trespassing on Private Property,” which is just laughably false.

While USC is indeed a “private” school, this does not in any way legally make their property like that of a private residence. First, they take federal tax money, and second it has a very “open” campus and the area I was in has direct access from a public street without even a gate blocking the way. At any given moment there are many people walking on the sidewalks where I was arrested who are neither students, faculty nor invited guests of the University. I had every right to be there (outside the building where the award ceremony took place) and I did nothing to provoke or warrant being handcuffed, arrested or removed from the property. It is very clear the only reason that happened was because of my previously expressed political opinion on what was going on that day. In short, I was targeted for different treatment because of my beliefs.

The next tactic many have tried, in order to avoid facing their own politically induced hypocrisy on free speech, is to minimize the incident by saying that I was not “arrested” and that what happened was not a big deal.

While in the end I was not charged (I was told that I would indeed be booked at LAPD headquarters), that was only because higher authorities saw that the campus police “arrest” was clearly problematic if not completely bogus. After I was already “arrested,” they shifted gears and told me that I basically had two choices: leave the premises or be charged along with the two photographers who did not work for me and who in no way bargained for such a situation. Not wanting to put them in jeopardy and seeing that I could not possibly do anything further to achieve my original goal of educating those attending the awards, I decided, under threat of prosecution, to leave the grounds.

But make no mistake, I was arrested. I was handcuffed and detained against my will for an extended period of time with my microphone and blackberry taken from me. The photographers were also told to stop shooting under threat of arrest themselves. And, as the video clearly shows, my wrists were significantly bruised by the handcuffs that I had rightly complained were put on way too tight.

All of this happened obviously not because of my actions but because of my political view on the proceedings. In effect, I was being punished, repressed, and physically harmed as a form of prior restraint because they anticipated that I might do something to disrupt the proceedings based on my prior writings and commentary on the event (in which I never claimed I would do anything more than exactly what I tried to; give away copies of my film as an educational exercise). No matter how hard liberals try to rationalize it, this makes this a very obvious case of a blatant free speech violation.

Another way that commentators (including some on the right) have attempted to ignore the very serious First Amendment implications of this case, is to say that I set this up as some sort of publicity stunt to promote my film.

First of all, this could not be more irrelevant to the constitutional issues involved here. Second of all, I ask you to consider how the media would have reacted if the exact same events had happened to Michael Moore (which of course it wouldn’t because as a liberal he would never have anything to get upset about at a major academic institution and, even if he did, he would automatically get far more leeway from the authorities). I don’t think anyone could possibly argue that vast portions of the new media would ignore the episode despite the amazing video and the fact that it was up on Drudge for well over 24 hours.

Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, while obviously I welcome anything that raises awareness of my film and its truth, THIS WAS NOT A PUBLICITY STUNT and I had absolutely zero intention or expectation of anything like this happening. I honestly thought that I would go, ask a few embarrassing questions of the authorities, give away my film, and hopefully be able to speak to some of those who were going to the event so that I could share with them the real truth of the matter.

For those cynics out there (I am one, by the way) who still don’t believe me, I ask you to answer the following questions.

If this was a publicity stunt, why didn’t I force the authorities to book me so that I would get a mug shot and face formal charges which would exponentially increase the media coverage of the event?

If I anticipated anything like what occurred, why did I park my car in a metered parking space where if I was gone for more than an hour the chances of my car being towed would be extremely high?

If I wanted this to occur, why did I not have any scripted lines ready to go or any sort of publicity machine mobilized to take advantage of the news potential of the incident? Why did I have to call my lawyer after I got kicked off the property to see if what the law said about what one could do at a “private” university.

While I completely understand the skepticism, any objective look at the facts or at who I am as a person will force you to conclude that my motives were actually rather pure here.

The last bastion of scoundrels looking to distract from the real issues in this case is to focus on me as an individual and transparently distort some of the more colorful stories of my past as a way of destroying me personally. Not only is this a deceitful and clearly politically motivated scheme, but in many ways it is also the most dangerous tactic. For if we do not protect the free speech rights of the most unpopular or misunderstood among us, then we allow the free speech rights of everyone to be precariously weakened.

As you can see in the videotape, I am essentially laughing through most of the ordeal. I think this was out of shock more than anything else.  Since this happened, my emotions have turned much more towards anger and sadness for what this means for the state of our freedoms in this rapidly changing country.

One of the things that has infuriated me most since the arrest has been USC’s e-mail response to the many people who have complained on my behalf over what they saw on the videotape.

Here is the e-mail that the Dean of the USC journalism school is sending out. In bold is where I have commented on the parts that are lies, distortions, or nonsensical statements.

Thank you for your communication about the recent incident that took place at the Cronkite Awards ceremony involving an individual named John Ziegler. I want you to know the background of the situation.

In the days before his appearance on our campus, Mr. Ziegler publicly stated an intention to “demonstrate” (not true. I used the word ”protest” and later sent out a private e-mail to my website’s mailing list telling my “followers” NOT to come or protest, my op-ed and press release on the matter said only that I would be giving out copies of my film) against the presentation of a journalism award to Katie Couric. USC was happy to accommodate Ziegler and provided him with a designated area where he could register his protest (not true. that was not offered until after I was handcuffed and was irrelevant because I was not “protesting” but rather asking questions), be seen by attendees at the event, as well as students, and pass out whatever materials he wished.

On the day of the award ceremony, Mr. Ziegler arrived on campus with two cameramen (not true. we arrived separately and they did not work for me), not as a demonstrator, but as a journalist (really?? that’s very interesting and certainly not how they treated me), and demanded (false, I asked and never even pursued entering, only asking for a rationale for why I was not allowed to) that he and his cameramen be allowed to enter the Davidson Center to cover the event. There was in fact, pool coverage set up because the room was not large enough to accommodate multiple camera crews. He was told he could have that feed, which he refused (not true, I would have been happy to have the feed and inquired as to how to get it). After being told repeatedly that the event was by invitation only, he contended he had a right to roam up and down the entryway with his cameramen (I didn’t have the right to be on an “open” campus that takes federal money??!), and he persisted in refusing to comply with the University’s request that he stay within a designated area (not true, that was after I was handcuffed) . After repeated requests for compliance, Mr. Ziegler was given the choice of either being arrested or leaving campus. He chose to leave campus (false, after being handcuffed. I was told I was under arrest and would be booked, then the LAPD and some higher ups arrived and I was told to leave or I would be booked and the camera people would be as well).

The University both respects and facilitates freedom of speech and expression on campus (just not for conservative filmmakers asking about bogus awards given to liberal media members), but also reserves the right to set reasonable ground-rules to avoid disruption to its operations and protect the rights of others (which was in no way endangered in this situation). We at the Annenberg School have a powerful and evident commitment to protecting and promoting freedom of expression and the rights of the press (really??). I respect your feelings about how this incident was handled (gee, I wonder why!).

Sincerely,

Ernest J. Wilson III

Dean and Walter H. Annenberg Chair in Communication

Wow. If that that e-mail is any indication of the type of journalism Dean Wilson is teaching future journalists at USC, things are far worse than even I thought! What is most amazing to me is that the whole thing is on videotape and they are still blatantly lying about how things transpired!

The bottom line here is that what happened to me was a grave injustice that should concern every freedom-loving American regardless of their political persuasion.

Just like I will not be intimidated in my crusade to correct the historical record about what really happened with regard to the media coverage of Barack Obama and Sarah Palin in the 2008 Presidential election, I will not allow media hypocrisy, apathy and hatred of conservatives to stop me from making sure the free speech rights of all Americans are as fully protected as possible.

I plan to aggressively pursue my legal rights in this matter (already, USC has stupidly rejected an incredibly generous settlement offer that included no money, but rather only an apology and a full page in the school newspaper) and intend to formally announce those plans soon.

When you look at this event in light of the recent DHS report targeting any individuals with certain conservative beliefs as “potentially dangerous right-wing extremists,” you will realize the true danger that we face as a nation. As long as Obama is untouchable behind the protection of the mega-media and his critics (e.g. Palin and Zeigler) are targeted and persecuted simlpy for disagreeing with him, democracy is dead. We cannot overlook the seemingly small events like this.

Now that Obama and his New World Order crew are pushing through the banker agenda — from a dictatorial power grab at the Federal Reserve to passing mandatory servitude programs in Congress — local grassroots activism is more important than ever. Patriot activists need effective tools designed to get the message out about Obama and his banker one-world government agenda.

Alex Jones’ The Obama Deception is an ideal educational tool. Soon after the film was released it became the number one most viewed video on the internet.

However, this remarkable fact is not enough — we need to spread the message far and wide, not simply over the internet but into living rooms and theaters across the nation.

In order to effectively fight against Obama’s agenda — an agenda of slavery engineered by the ruling elite — activists need to buy the DVD, make copies, hand them out to family, friends and strangers, and organize and present local screenings.

The Obama Deception is perfect for waking people up from their corporate media induced slumber so they can take action and resist the coming tyranny. Obama’s minions are now going door-to-door to sell the banker plan to turn the country into a third world nightmare. If we wake people up with this educational film it will be increasingly difficult for the bankers and corporatists who stand behind Obama the front man to implement their draconian plan for a one-world dictatorship.

Get the DVD today and make copies.

Watch the full-length documentary here:

The Obama Deception is a hard-hitting film that completely destroys the myth that Barack Obama is working for the best interests of the American people.

The Obama phenomenon is a hoax carefully crafted by the captains of the New World Order. He is being pushed as savior in an attempt to con the American people into accepting global slavery.

We have reached a critical juncture in the New World Order’s plans. It’s not about Left or Right: it’s about a One World Government. The international banks plan to loot the people of the United States and turn them into slaves on a Global Plantation.

Covered in this film: who Obama works for, what lies he has told, and his real agenda. If you want to know the facts and cut through all the hype, this is the film for you.

Watch the Obama Deception and learn how:

• Obama is continuing the process of transforming America into something that resembles Nazi Germany, with forced National Service, domestic civilian spies, warrantless wiretaps, the destruction of the Second Amendment, FEMA camps and Martial Law.
• Obama’s handlers are openly announcing the creation of a new Bank of the World that will dominate every nation on earth through carbon taxes and military force.
• International bankers purposefully engineered the worldwide financial meltdown to bankrupt the nations of the planet and bring in World Government.
• Obama plans to loot the middle class, destroy pensions and federalize the states so that the population is completely dependent on the Central Government.
• The Elite are using Obama to pacify the public so they can usher in the North American Union by stealth, launch a new Cold War and continue the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan.

The information contained in this film is vital to the future of the Republic and to freedom worldwide. President Barack Obama is only the tool of a larger agenda. Until all are made aware, humanity will remain captive to the masters of the New World Order.

Conservative talk radio’s fastest-growing superstar is also a New York Times bestselling phenomenon: the author of the groundbreaking critique of the Supreme Court, Men in Black, and the deeply personal dog lover’s memoir Rescuing Sprite, Mark R. Levin now delivers the book that characterizes both his devotion to his more than 5 million listeners and his love of our country and the legacy of our Founding Fathers: Liberty and Tyranny is Mark R. Levin’s clarion call to conservative America, a new manifesto for the conservative movement for the 21st century.

In the face of the modern liberal assault on Constitution-based values, an attack that has steadily snowballed since President Roosevelt’s New Deal of the 1930s and resulted in a federal government that is a massive, unaccountable conglomerate, the time for re-enforcing the intellectual and practical case for conservatism is now. Conservative beliefs in individual freedoms do in the end stand for liberty for all Americans, while liberal dictates lead to the breakdown of civilized society — in short, tyranny. Looking back to look to the future, Levin writes “conservatism is the antidote to tyranny precisely because its principles are our founding principles.” And in a series of powerful essays, Levin lays out how conservatives can counter the liberal corrosion that has filtered into every timely issue affecting our daily lives, from the economy to health care, global warming, immigration, and more — and illustrates how change, as seen through the conservative lens, is always prudent, and always an enhancement to individual freedom.

As provocative, well-reasoned, robust, and informed as his on-air commentary, Levin’s narrative will galvanize readers to begin a new era in conservative thinking and action. Liberty and Tyranny provides a philosophical, historical, and practical framework for revitalizing the conservative vision and ensuring the preservation of American society.

Buy Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto now!

About the Author

Mark R. Levin is a nationally syndicated talk radio host and president of Landmark Legal Foundation. He has also worked as an attorney in the private sector and as a top adviser and administrator to several members of President Reagan’s cabinet. The author of the New York Times bestselling books Rescuing Sprite and Men in Black: How the Supreme Court Is Destroying America, Mark holds a B.A. from Temple University and a J.D. from Temple University School of Law. Visit Mark Levin on the web at www.marklevinshow.com.

Do the mainstream media have a liberal bias? Sure they do, everyone knows that, says CBS veteran and New York Times bestselling author Bernard Goldberg. But the media crossed an important line in the 2008 presidential race, moving from their usual unthinking liberal bias to crass partisanship of the crudest kind, practically acting as spin doctors for the presidential campaign of Barack Obama. In A Slobbering Love Affair, his most provocative book yet, Goldberg demonstrates how the media launched an unparalleled effort to ensure the election of the man they regarded as The One. From the thrill Obama sent up Chris Matthews’ leg to the outrageously slanted “news” reports of the New York Times, Goldberg shows in exacting detail how the media, abandoning even the pretense of objectivity, moved from media bias to media activism. With his trademark blunt, honest, insider’s perspective, Goldberg reveals:

• How the media ignored, downplayed, or sanitized the rantings of the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s long-standing “spiritual” adviser, and the radicalism of former terrorist (and Obama associate) Bill Ayers
• How the Obama campaign, while claiming to be “post-partisan,” kicked reporters off Obama’s plane after their newspapers endorsed McCain
• Why Obama’s election makes it more likely conservative talk radio will be stifled by a new “Fairness Doctrine” that has nothing to do with fairness at all
• Why the liberal media preferred Obama to Hillary
• What we can expect from the media’s coverage of Obama’s presidency
• BONUS: An exclusive interview with Rush Limbaugh on the unholy alliance between Obama and the mainstream media

A blistering takedown of the media’s slavish support for Obama, A Slobbering Love Affair highlights how the mainstream media has not only surrendered its integrity and objectivity, but could even endanger our democracy.

From the Back Cover
“Never in my memory were so many journalists so intent on effecting change as they were during the campaign of 2008. Sure, mainstream journalists always root for the Democrat. But this time it was different. This time journalists were not satisfied merely being partisan witnesses to history. This time they wanted to be real players and help determine the outcome. This time they were on a mission, a noble, historic mission, as far as they were concerned. In fact, I could not remember a time when so many supposedly objective reporters had acted so blatantly as full-fledged advocates for one side–and without even a hint of embarrassment.

“…Make no mistake: this is not the same old liberal bias we have witnessed for years. In 2008, the mainstream media crossed a line. As a result, their credibility is in tatters. Hardly anyone trusts them anymore. This is not good for them, of course. But it may be even worse for us.”

Get your copy today while we still have our first amendment!

Buy The Obama Nation: Leftist Politics and the Cult of Personality Now.