By: Jewish Press News Briefs Published: June 8th, 2016 Latest update: June 9th, 2016
Source: The Jewish Press » » Arabs Celebrate Sarona Terror Attack
Arabs cheering at Damascus Gate in Jerusalem
Photo Credit: Screenshot
Upon hearing of the attack at the Sarona Mall in Tel Aviv, Arabs at the Damascus Gate in Jerusalem began breaking out in chants and cheers.
There are reports of celebratory Arab gunfire throughout Judea and Samaria.
UPDATE: Four Dead, 4 in Critical Condition from Tel Aviv Sarona Mall Terror Attack
By: David Israel Published: June 8th, 2016
Kaplan Street shooting
Photo Credit: Screenshot
Four people are dead and 4 more are in critical condition and are being treated at Ichilov Hospital on Wednesday night, in a “Ramadan” terror attack in the Sarona Mall area, on Kaplan Street in the heart of Tel Aviv. There are additional wounded. The attack happened just before 9:30 PM
According to eyewitnesses, the two Arab terrorists were sitting inside a restaurant dressed in their Ramadan finest clothing. They ordered food and then they got up and at least one began shooting a Carl Gustav submachine gun at the other restaurant guests, until he emptied his gun. He threw it down and they started running.
Both terrorists have been neutralized. One was captured alive but seriously wounded and is undergoing surgery at Ichilov Hospital. The second one is now undergoing interrogation.
Police sappers are dealing with suspected bombs in the area.
Police issued a statement that the situation is under control, as both terrorists have been neutralized. A possible third suspect was seen fleeing the scene.
Arab sources claim the terrorists are from the village of Dura in the Har Hebron region.
Hamas terror chief Ismail Haniyeh praised the attack on his Twitter feed
MORE :
http://www.timesofisrael.com/shooting-reported-in-central-tel-aviv-several-said-injured/
http://www.timesofisrael.com/the-gunmen-ordered-dessert-then-opened-fire/
http://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog-june-8-2016/
http://www.jerusalemonline.com/news/in-israel/local/shots-fired-at-tel-avivs-sarona-market-21585
Escalation In Political – And Perhaps Also Physical – Threats To Iranian Expediency Council Head Rafsanjani, MEMRI, June 8, 2016
In recent weeks, Iran’s ideological camp has stepped up its threats against pragmatic camp leader and Expediency Council chairman Hashemi Rafsanjani. The threats have included calls for prosecuting him – as it is, relatives of his are frequently imprisoned – and for defining him as a deviant, a traitor, and an accessory to, and torch-bearer today of, what the ideological camp terms “the 2009 fitna,” that is, the civil unrest following the presidential elections. It will be recalled that the leaders of this movement – former prime minister Mir-Hossein Mousavi and his wife, and former Majlis speaker Mehdi Karroubi – have been under house arrest since 2011.
When discussing Rafsanjani, ideological camp members’ statements are harsh, even violent.[1] This tone attests to the escalation in the regime’s antipathy towards the man considered to be the leader of the move towards openness vis-à-vis the U.S. and the West, which brought about the JCPOA – in contrast to the position of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who considers the U.S. to be an enemy that Iran must not come to terms with it. It should be mentioned that the ideological camp considers the JCPOA a tool used by the pragmatic camp and by the U.S. to remove it from power.
Rafsanjani is perceived by the ideological camp as an existential threat to its regime and as constantly undermining the foundation of its control of the country’s institutions.[2] The current struggle between the ideological and pragmatic camps, and particularly the personal struggle between these camps’ respective leaders, has been ongoing for at least three years, and is currently at a high point (see MEMRI Inquiry & Analysis No. 1137, The Power Struggle Between Khamenei And His Camp And Rafsanjani And His Camp – Part XIV, January 21, 2015, and MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 5794, The Rafsanjani-Khamenei Struggle Escalates Into Open, Direct Confrontation, July 13, 2014).
Recently, Rafsanjani’s daughter Faezeh Hashemi was photographed meeting with a Baha’i activist with whom she had previously shared a prison cell. The meeting between the two women prompted the ideological camp to take immediate legal measures against Rafsanjani himself. The regime considers Bahaism to be a deviant and illegitimate cult, and its practitioners are persecuted and are denied civil and religious rights. It also considers Baha’is to be collaborators with Israel and the U.S. Although Rafsanjani distanced himself from his daughter’s actions, the ideological camp still considers them valid proof of his own treason.[3]
Due to the tremendous pressure on him, and the threats against him,[4] it appears that Rafsanjani had to relinquish his candidacy for head of the Assembly of Experts, even though he won the general elections for the assembly in February 2016.[5]
Even after his rival, Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati, was chosen to head the assembly, the attacks on Rafsanjani did not stop. The Tasnim news agency, which is affiliated with the IRGC, published an article predicting the death of Rafsanjani, describing him as the pawn of the British and of the BBC. It added that since he was not chosen assembly head and can no longer serve the British, they no longer need him, and he would be more useful to them dead.[6]
In light of these developments, MEMRI assesses that the Iranian regime may no longer stop at harassing Rafsanjani’s relatives and associates,[7] and that there is a possibility that it will now move to harming Rafsanjani directly.
Following are threatening comments and actual threats made against Rafsanjani in recent days:
IRGC Commander Threatens Rafsanjani
On May 24, 2016, at a cadet graduation ceremony attended by Supreme Leader Khamenei, Mohammad Ali Jafari, commander of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), said: “Thanks to the Islamic Revolution and the awakening of mankind, monotheistic beliefs have spread in the region and in the world in this new age, and the garbage dump of Western culture has been set on the path of assured destruction. Nevertheless, some in the country who think a certain way are stealing glances at foreigners and speaking [highly] of the rotting values of Western cultures, in comparison with Iran’s noble religious values and culture.
“These [people] should know that the religious public in Iran, which is revolutionary and which nurtures martyrs, will not tolerate these thoughts, or those who have them, in Iran’s politics and culture. They must know that if they persist in their deviant path, they will meet with the same catastrophe as did those who preceded them in deviating from the straight path of the leader [Khamenei] and the Imam [Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini] and who remain infamous in the memory of the Iranian nation.
“The IRGC and the Basij accompany the spirit of revolution and values of the great Iranian nation, and will never allow some of the infiltration camps that are influenced by the West, that can be found within the apparatuses of the regime, to carry out deceptions or to force their foolish view on, and tarnish, the blessed life of the Islamic Revolution.”[8]
Kayhan Editorial: “The Baha’i And The New Infiltrators”
The May 18, 2016 editorial of the daily Kayhan, titled “The Baha’i and the New Infiltrators,” stated: “Ms. What’s-her-name [Rafsanjani’s daughter] travels with ease to America and England. While a BBC Persia reporter encounters visa problems with America, this lady does not. A few days before the election, she travels to America. Why? Do not assume the worst. Maybe she simply craved a McDonald’s sandwich.
“In July 2012, she pops over to England, saying that she is going to the Olympic Games, but her lawyer says that she went to visit her son, who was studying there… Something happens and her brother also arrives in London, remaining for several years on the pretext of visiting a certain university. Later, there come reports that he was involved in stepping up the sanctions [on Iran] as fuel for the green fitna…
“After her recent visit with one of the leaders of the Zionist-Baha’i channel, Mr. Hashemi Rafsanjani expressed – in three lines, no more – that Faezeh had made a mistake and must rectify it. She said that she had made no mistake, and that she had no regrets… [and Rafsanjani] distanced himself from the Baha’i cult… [that is] crooked and colonialist and that joined the leaders of the fitna in a collective project…
“Is it now time for you [addressing Rafsanjani] to renounce Baha’ism… or is it time for you to renounce those who are an organic part of the Baha’i [i.e. your daughter]… They [the Baha’i] denied [the existence of] the Mahdi [the Hidden Imam]… and, in London, they operated a computer room for the Green Movement…
“What should be done about a camp lacking in all cultural, political, and economic honor, which engages in forming [spy] rings and [political] parties, and in amassing capital? …
“We are currently in all-out cultural, political, and economic war with the historic enemies of the Iranian nation… The enemy came to the arena without fear… We must understand what operation is being planned by the enemy, and come to the arena without delay and without pleasantries.”[9]
Basij Commander Attacks Rafsanjani
On May 16, 2016, Basij commander Mohammad Reza Naqdi said: “Infiltration elements [meaning Rafsanjani] are amassing a fortune and creating [socioeconomic] classes, increasing poverty, and then pop up to express concern for the poor. These people are behind the unnecessary large-scale imports, and when [Iranian] companies go bankrupt and when national production grinds to a halt, they say we must facilitate relations with the foreigners and compromise with America so that our problems will be solved.
“They meet with Sunnis [referring to Rafsanjani’s past good relations with the Saudis] and create many expectations for them, and then approach a camp that has does not believe in Sunni-Shi’ite unity and collaborate with it against the regime.
“This group of infiltration elements sits down with the Baha’i at the expense of Islam, while at the same time asking, ‘What has the [Islamic] Revolution done for Islam?’ …
“This group calls Basij members extremists because they zealously defended Islam or because they shouted their criticism. Yet it recognizes America as good despite its evil, interprets its crimes favorably, and says that we must compromise and make friends with [the Americans].
“This group of infiltration elements is attempting to blur the difference between truth and lies, and to present someone else as the main enemy. For example, it has a plan to paint Saudi Arabia as the main enemy, while compromising with America and maintaining relations with it.”[10]
Judiciary Spokesman And Prosecutor General Criticizes Rafsanjani’s Daughter
On May 18, 2016, Judiciary spokesman and prosecutor-general Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Eje’i said: “Faezeh Hashemi’s meeting with a member of the Baha’i cult is an ugly and condemnable act. We will deal with her in accordance with the law. As per my understanding, many people, including senior clerics and other known figures, have condemned this act. Even uglier was that her father spoke about this but that she did not apologize.”[11]
Assembly Of Experts Member And Tehran Friday Prayer Leader Criticizes Rafsanjani’s Daughter
In an interview with the Tasnim news agency, which is close to the IRGC, Assembly of Experts member and Tehran Friday prayer leader Ayatollah Ahmad Khatami said: “In fact, Baha’i is not a religion, but an espionage party. The world of arrogance has completely supported this espionage cult, and still does. A fatwa by all the ayatollahs regarding Baha’ism is clear and unequivocal – [according to this fatwa,] it is a deviant cult that is outside the Shi’a and must be treated as foreign.
“Recently, a certain political figure met one of the leaders of this cult. We must condemn any behavior that will cause a break in the barrier against relations with this devious cult. In the Islamic regime [of Iran], no one must bring about the revival of this hated cult, neither on the pretext of human rights or on any other [pretext]. Certainly, meeting with a member of this cult is complete deviation and cannot be acknowledged as just a mistake.”[12]
Endnotes:
[1] See, for example, statements by Combatant Clergy Assembly member Jafar Shajuni, who said that Rafsanjani and his relatives are “anti-revolutionary and burned.” Entekhab (Iran), May 18, 2016.
[2] See, for example, statements by Assembly of Experts member Ayatollah Heshmatzadeh Harisi, who, defending Rafsanjani prior to the assembly’s election of a new chairman, said he was not a traitor and that he did not seek to harm the Islamic Revolution. He added that even if Rafsanjani were to be elected Assembly of Experts head, he would not have the authority to enact constitutional changes regarding the status of the supreme leader. Entekhab (Iran), May 18, 2016.
[3] Many regime clerics have issued fatwas against the Baha’i.
[4] Combatant Clergy Assembly member Jafar Shajuni said on May 18, 2016: “The chairmanship of the Assembly of Experts should not fall into the hands of anti-revolutionists. Rest assured that it will not fall into the hands of Rafsanjani.” Entekhab(Iran), May 18, 2016.
[5] The Assembly of Experts chairmanship was ultimately given to Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati, who also heads the Guardian Council, even though he received the fewest votes in the Tehran constituency in the general elections for the assembly.
[6] Tasnim (Iran), June 6, 2016.
[7] See Rafsanjani’s harsh response following negative reports by Iran’s broadcast authority on him and the Islamic Azad University, which he owns. ILNA (Iran), May 19, 2016.
[8] ILNA (Iran), May 24 2016.
[9] Kayhan (Iran), May 18, 2016.
[10] Mehr (Iran), May 16, 2016.
[11] ISNA (Iran), May 18, 2016.
[12] Tasnim (Iran), May 18, 2016.
Trump Announces Major Speech on Clinton Scandals Next Week via YouTube, June 7, 2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7HuqODuPw0
Here’s a link to an article at Jonathan Turley’s blog. It notes the Trump University “scandal,” widely covered by the media, and then segues to a far worse scandal involving the Clintons and the Laureate Education for-profit college. Here’s a quote:
The respected Inside Higher Education reported that Laureate Education paid Bill Clinton an obscene $16.5 million between 2010 and 2014 to serve as an honorary chancellor for Laureate International Universities. While Bill Clinton worked as the group’s pitchman, the State Department funneled $55 million to Laureate when Hillary Clinton was secretary of state. That would seem a pretty major story but virtually no mainstream media outlet has reported it while running hundreds of stories on the Trump University scandal. [Emphasis added.}
There was even a class action — like the Trump University scandal. Travis et al v. Walden University LLC, was filed in U.S. District Court in the District of Maryland but dismissed in 2015. It is not clear why it was dismissed. However, the size of the contract to Clinton, the payment from State and the widespread complaints over alleged fraud should warrant a modicum of attention to the controversy. The controversy has many of the familiar complaints over fraudulent online programs that take advantage of hard working people.
I found the video posted above in one of the comments appended to the Turley article. Will Trump deal with the Clinton schools scam?
Muslim Leader Advertises that 9/11 was ‘Israeli-Jewish Job’, Front Page Magazine, Joe Kaufman, June 8, 2016
(Just another tolerant, peaceful bunch of warm and fuzzy American Islamists. Obviously, the more the merrier. — DM)
Sofian Zakkout, President of the American Muslim Association of North America (AMANA), is always looking for new ways to promote hatred of Jews. Recently, he advertised on his Facebook page an article about how the Nazi Holocaust was “faked.” Now, he is targeting Jews by posting onto social media a claim that they perpetrated the September 11th attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon. Will any of the hate he is peddling do harm to the relationships he and his group have made, both financial and otherwise, with organizations associated with fighting crime?
Usually, anti-Semites — those rabid ones who are violently opposed to Jews — attach themselves to one of two categories, white supremacists or Muslim terrorists. Sofian Abdelaziz Zakkout, who is Muslim himself, strongly supports both.
When it comes to white supremacy, Zakkout is a fervent follower of former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke. Zakkout has described Duke as “David Duke, a man to believe in!” and Zakkout has said of Duke, “I respect him for his honesty!” Zakkout’s Facebook page and the websites of his organization AMANA each have been used to promote Duke and his bigoted videos. The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) has previously cited Zakkout and his group for posting what the ADL described as a “venomous” anti-Semitic Duke video onto AMANA’s official site.
This past February, Zakkout advertised on social media a report claiming that the horrors committed by Nazi Germany during the 1930s and 1940s were fabricated. Aptly titled ‘How the Holocaust was faked,’ it begins: “The alleged ‘Holocaust’ of ‘6 million Jews’ at the hands of Adolf Hitler and National Socialist Germany during WWII is the biggest lie ever foisted upon humanity.” It was produced by The Realist Report, an anti-Jew, anti-black, anti-gay independent media outlet, which describes Hitler as “the greatest leader in modern Western history.”
Zakkout is also very open about his strong support for the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas. In August 2015, he wrote in Arabic on Facebook, “Hamas is in my heart and on my head.” In July 2014, Zakkout organized a pro-Hamas rally held outside the Israeli Consulate in downtown Miami. On video, Zakkout is shown smiling, as event goers repeatedly shout, “We are Hamas.” Following the rally, Zakkout wrote the following in Arabic, above photos from the event: “Thank God, every day we conquer the American Jews like our conquests over the Jews of Israel!”
On April 21st, Zakkout took to Facebook to promote a report discussing Jewish involvement in the September 11th attacks. Attached to the report was a graphic depicting an Israeli flag next to the burning World Trade Center towers, one tower totally engulfed in flames, with the caption, ‘Israeli CONNECTION to 9/11.’ Another photo from the report shows the burning towers with a Jewish Star affixed to one. The report begins, “It ain’t debatable! Soup to nuts, top to bottom, the 9/11/01 terrorist attacks on New York City and Washington D.C. were an ‘Israeli’-Jewish job.”
The report names twelve Jews, who it calls the “REAL planners and executors of 9/11.” According to the report, they include former and current Israeli Prime Ministers Benjamin Netanyahu, Ehud Barak and Ehud Olmert; then-soon-to-be Mayor of New York City Michael Bloomberg; and then-head of the criminal division of the Justice Department Michael Chertoff. It labels them “chosenite brethren.”
The website which published the report and which Zakkout linked to is Mouqawamah Music, a site that openly calls for “Death to Israel” and curses the Jewish religion. The site states, “[A]fter 132 some odd years of Jewish colonization in the Holy Land, there are only three words that properly encapsulate our pain, our sadness and our rage: DEATH TO ‘ISRAEL.’” And “What is today called Judaism is NOT a nice religion. It is and has always been a conspiracy against humanity, more of a domination strategy than a religion… [I]t is clearly wicked and filth-ridden…”
Sofian Zakkout has, once again, found a way to target Jews. Whether it is organizing pro-Hamas rallies, promoting David Duke videos, advertising Holocaust denial reports, or helping to push the absurd notion that Jews were behind 9/11, if it is a way to spread hatred of the Jewish people, Zakkout will gladly embrace it.
Unfortunately, Zakkout and his group’s anti-Semitic actions have had little effect on how he is viewed by some organizations associated with fighting crime. Zakkout’s name is still found on the official website of Citizens’ Crime Watch of Miami-Dade County as a Member at Large on the group’s Executive Committee. Miami-Dade Crime Stoppers has also been reluctant about removing Zakkout from its Board, and Zakkout’s AMANA previously received a $70 thousand grant from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) — for counter-terrorism purposes, yet!
Nothing affiliated with Sofian Abdelaziz Zakkout should receive any legitimacy or funding from any organization, especially those organizations associated with fighting crime. To do so would be a crime in itself.
Swedish Politicians: “Islam is Definitely Compatible with Democracy!” Gatestone Institute, Ingrid Carlqvist, June 8, 2016 — Part II of a series.
♦ With their goodhearted eagerness to be inclusive, not to discriminate and to defend freedom of religion, Swedish politicians are easy prey for Islamists with an anti-democratic agenda.
♦ “The presumption is that Muslims want nothing more than to adapt to a Western way of life and Western values. … the presumption is also that Islam can be tamed…” — Jimmie Åkesson, Sweden Democrats party leader.
♦ “Democracy is a man-made system, meaning by the people for the people. Thus it is contrary to Islam, because rule is for Allaah… it is not permissible to give legislative rights to any human being…” — Sheik Muhammad Saalih al-Munajjid, in fatwa number 07166.
♦ Everyone knows what happens to anyone who criticizes Islam — first, you get labeled an “Islamophobe racist,” then, like the artist Lars Vilks, you might get afatwa of death on your head.
♦ The question is where the democratic Muslims will be when Islam has gained even more influence in Sweden — will they stand up for Swedish democracy if that means openly going against the tenets of Islam?
It should not be a mystery whether Islam is compatible with democracy or not. All you have to do is look at the Islamic sources or call any imam and pretend to be impressed that Islam does not separate religion and politics.
Yet, when Gatestone Institute called Swedish politicians at all levels to ask if Islam and democracy were compatible, they gave assurances that there were no problems whatsoever with Islam’s capacity for democracy — or they hung up.
The two most common answers given were:
The question cuts through all parties; apparently no one dares to face the facts. So far, throughout history, and now in the world’s 57 Muslim countries in the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), nowhere has Islam been compatible with democracy, freedom of speech, human rights and legal certainty. These Muslim states have not signed the UN’s Declaration of Human Rights, a document Swedish politicians seem to cherish. Instead, those countries have joined the Cairo Declaration, which stipulates that sharia is the only foundation for human rights. In short, human rights are all well and good so long as they do not conflict with sharia — if they do, sharia wins. In practice, this means that in the Islamic world, there are, in the Western sense, no human rights.
Then why do Swedish politicians believe they will be able to democratize Islam? Do they know something the rest of the world does not? Or, as the alternative is so terrifying, are they just pretending?
In 1985, Sweden was still a homogenous country. There was no doubt that Sweden belonged to the Swedes. We were proud of the country that our forefathers created, and the welfare state given to us by the Social Democrats. Women in veils and men in Middle Eastern clothes did not walk the streets, and Islam was still considered exotic. It was, as the analyst Ronie Berggren recently put it, “Arabian nights, or [the children’s book] Tam Sventon with his manservant, Mr. Omar, and the flying carpet. Olof Palme was still alive and Sweden thought itself a safe and functioning nation.”
But in 1985, the Swedish History Museum published an anthology, “Islam: religion, culture, society,” in which a diplomat, Dag Sebastian Ahlander, expressed concerns:
“Islamic immigration to Sweden can also lead to new conflicts within Swedish society. The Swedish perception is that there is freedom of religion in Sweden, but that perception is built on a private view of religion. To a Muslim, a large part of the rules regarding everyday activities is based on Islam; co-education of boys and girls, sex education, the view on the status of women, the demand that the slaughter of animals should be performed according to certain rituals, the demand that Friday should be a public holiday — all of these things are potential sources of conflict to Muslim immigrants in Swedish society, and they are all ultimately founded on religion.”
Sadly, the anthology fell into oblivion. All at once, while the Swedes were busy tending their gardens or repainting their summer houses, and feeling safe in the knowledge that our politicians surely were not lying to us, Islam was everywhere. The problems sketched out by Dag Sebastian Ahlander are now affecting all of us — but still the politicians refuse to address the most basic question.
In calls to politicians, Gatestone also encountered an incantation: Islam is democratic because it has to be democratic, because what will happen to Sweden otherwise?
Many politicians are, evidently, frightened to death to talk about Islam. They seem to do everything in their power to avoid giving an answer. They claim they are the wrong person to talk to; they hang up the phone — anything to skirt a discussion.
The reason may well be that no matter what they say, everyone knows what happens to anyone who criticizes Islam — first, you get labeled an “Islamophobe racist,” then, like the artist Lars Vilks, you might get a fatwa of death on your head.
Not one of the politicians or officials was able to name a single Muslim–majority country that has a decent democracy with legal certainty and freedom of speech. Not one could see any danger coming from an increasing Islamization of Sweden. Typical answers were:
“Yes, Islam is definitely compatible with democracy. At least, that is my interpretation.” — Beatrice Ask, Conservative (Moderaterna), former Minister of Justice.
“Of course if you read the words in the Quran, and the movements and schools that are leading around the world, then Islam is difficult to merge with the Swedish version of democracy. But I try to avoid talking categorically about Islam as a whole. Many people have Islam as their personal faith.” — Paula Bieler, Sweden Democrats.
“I have nothing against that. People can believe what they want in a democracy.” — Nooshi Dadgostar, Left Party (Vänsterpartiet).
“Islam as a religion is compatible with democracy, why wouldn’t it be? I don’t think there is any religion not compatible with democracy. As long as you don’t use religion to hurt each other, Christianity, Islam and Judaism are all democratic in their basic perspective.” — Jamal Mouneimne, Social Democrats (Socialdemokraterna).
“[Mehmet] Kaplan is a practicing Muslim in a democratically elected government, so of course both he and I believe Islam is compatible with democracy. He is also an anti-racist, a feminist and he stands up for human rights.” — Mikaela Kotschack, Green Party (Miljöpartiet), Press Secretary for the recently resigned Mehmet Kaplan.
“I cannot answer that I’m afraid. This calls for a longer discussion, you cannot just answer yes or no to that question. … No, the question does not make me nervous, but it demands knowledge and a longer discussion.” — Larry Söder, Christian Democrats (Kristdemokraterna).
The civil servants, who are supposed to give the politicians more insight into current political issues, seem no more knowledgeable than the politicians. Deputy Assistant Göran Ternbo, the Government Offices’ expert on democracy and human rights, was also asked if Islam is compatible with democracy:
“Eh, ah … that’s a controversial issue, it is. I don’t know. You cannot be that categorical answering one way or the other. Why are you asking these questions? It feels … where are you going with this?”
Gatestone: We just want to know what the government’s view on Islam is. Are you aware of the Islamic agenda?
Ternbo: “We have freedom of religion in Sweden.”
Gatestone: Can you say that Islam fits into democratic Sweden?
Ternbo: “Yes, if they follow our laws.”
Gatestone: But many say they want sharia?
Ternbo: “I have never heard that.”
Gatestone: Can you mention one democratic Muslim country?
Ternbo: “I do not understand where this is going. If you want to discuss Islam, I advise you to contact the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, they have experts on Islam.”
Gatestone: But the politicians are filling the country with Islam right now, how does that affect Sweden’s future?
Ternbo: “My job is to deal with completely different issues, so I cannot answer that. Right now, I’m working on the Nordic Sami Convention.”
Gatestone: You work with human rights, have the Muslim countries accepted the UN Declaration on Human Rights?
Ternbo: “Yes, they’ve accepted a number of declarations, including the Cairo Declaration.”
Gatestone: Does the Cairo Declaration view human rights the same way we do?
Ternbo: “I don’t want to continue this discussion, it feels like an interrogation. We have freedom of religion in Sweden.”
Gatestone: Is it possible to use Swedish democracy to abolish democracy?
Ternbo: “This is going too far. I have a meeting now. Goodbye.”
The Swedes are highly secularized. They have never asked to be invaded by fierce religious rules. However, the huge immigration of asylum seekers, mainly from Muslim-majority countries, has turned everything the Swedes take for granted upside down — such as the idea that people mind their religious business in private, and that you can trust what other people tell you.
Can you trust what Muslim politicians are saying? In the Nordic culture, telling the truth is a virtue. The Aesir clan of the gods in Norse mythology listed nine noble virtues: courage, love of the truth, honorable living, fidelity, discipline, hospitality, confidence, diligence and endurance. In Islam, however, love of the truth does not seem to be a prominent virtue — in some circumstances, not only is lying allowed, it is compulsory to lie if it benefits Islam.
The question of whether Islam and democracy are compatible is probably the most important one that Sweden has faced in modern times. If Islam is not compatible with democracy, while the number of Muslims in Sweden grows week by week, then Sweden as a democratic country may soon be but a memory.
With their goodhearted eagerness to be inclusive, to defend freedom of religion, and not to discriminate against any group, Swedish politicians are easy prey for Islamists with an anti-democratic agenda.
Islam has its own system of justice, built on divine law (sharia); a ban on any and all criticism of Islam, and laws regulating virtually everything in everyone’s life. Moreover, there seems to be no interest on the part of the newcomers in abandoning these traditions in favor of the traditions of the West.
The fact that all political parties apart from the Sweden Democrats (who are critical of immigration) have Muslim representatives might lead people to think that if there are Muslims working within our democratic system, they must be democrats.
Yet Swedish imams make no secret that in Islam, politics and religion are branches on the same tree. If you phone an imam, and say you are a Swede who has grown tired of the Swedish Church’s compliance on political issues, and that you have thought about converting to Islam, you might hear, as imam Ali at the Islamic Cultural Center in Lund, said, “No, you cannot take politics out of Islam, it is a part of our religion. Islam is a complete system, which people need.”
Of course, if you are critical of Islam mixing politics and religion, you will not get answers like that — the imams evidently know that such answers are not popular in Sweden — anyway, not yet.
Anyone who thinks that these candid imams might be mistaken can study the official pronouncements on the subject. In fatwa number 07166, for instance, entitled, “Ruling on democracy and elections and participating in that system,” Sheik Muhammad Saalih al-Munajjid, one of the most respected scholars in Sunni Islam, writes:
“Praise be to Allaah. Firstly: Democracy is a man-made system, meaning rule by the people for the people. Thus it is contrary to Islam, because rule is for Allaah, the Most High, the Almighty, and it is not permissible to give legislative rights to any human being, no matter who he is.”
His fatwa number 98134, “Concept of democracy in Islam,” states:
“Democracy is a system that is contrary to Islam, because it gives the power of legislation to the people or to those who represent them (such as members of Parliament). Based on that, in democracy legislative authority is given to someone other than Allah, may He be exalted; rather it is given to the people and their deputies, and what matters is not their consensus but the majority. Thus what the majority agree upon becomes laws that are binding on the nation, even if it is contrary to common sense, religious teaching or reason. In these systems legislation has been promulgated allowing abortion, same-sex marriage and usurious interest (riba); the rulings of sharee’ah have been abolished; and fornication/adultery and the drinking of alcohol are permitted. In fact this system is at war with Islam and its followers.”
In fatwa number 111898, he answers a question on whether it is permissible to participate in non-Muslim, democratic elections:
“The Muslim participants should intend thereby to serve the interests of the Muslims and ward off evil and harm from them. The Muslim participants should think it most likely that their participation will have positive effects that will benefit the Muslims in that country, such as supporting their position, conveying their requests to the decision makers and those who are in charge of the country, and protecting their religious and worldly interests. The Muslim’s participation in these elections should not lead to him neglecting his religious duties.”
In fatwa number 178354, the Sheik is asked, “What is the ruling on one who reviles the Muslims and praises the kuffaar [infidels], and even wishes to be one of them?” He replies:
“Allah, may He be exalted, has instructed His believing slaves to love one another and to take one other as friends, and He has instructed them to hate His enemies and regard them with enmity for the sake of Allah. He has stated that friendship can only be among the believers and enmity is to be between them and the kaafirs; disavowing them is one of the basic principles of their faith and is part of perfecting their religious commitment. There are very many verses, hadeeths and comments of the early generation to that effect.”
That Islam combines religion and politics, with a view to using politics to advance the religion, and further these views, which are clearly stated, appears a totally foreign concept to Swedish politicians. Perhaps this is the reason that a Turkish-born Muslim, Mehmet Kaplan, could become Minister for Housing and Urban Development, all the while rubbing shoulders with the Islamists of Turkish groups Milli Görüs and the neo-fascists of the Grey Wolves — he was convinced no one would ever question him or his agenda, as questioning him about such alliances would be considered “Islamophobic.”
When pictures of him consorting with these groups were leaked to the media, a video clip also emerged in which Kaplan compared Israel’s actions with the Palestinians to Nazi Germany’s treatment of the Jews. That remark, in 2016, crossed the line for what an Islamist may say and do in Sweden. In Sweden, it is incredibly important not to question the Holocaust. Disapproval may possibly have come as a surprise to many, who perceive Sweden’s Israel policy under Minister for Foreign Affairs Margot Wallström as extremely critical of Israel. Wallström and the government’s criticism of Israel stems mainly from a view of Israel as the stronger party in the conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians, and from not recognizing that the Muslims and Arabs in the larger conflict perpetually threaten genocide against Israel and the Jews.
Mehmet Kaplan’s remark forced him to resign. Alas, anyone thinking that the Kaplan affair would lead to a discussion of the role of Islam in Swedish politics, is mistaken. Nothing in the public debate so far suggests that Swedish politicians will seriously start looking into a possible underlying agenda among Muslim politicians, such as that they might in fact be working to spread Islam in Sweden, as Sheik Muhammad Saalih al-Munajjid encourages. Such fatwas can be found in his IslamQA.info, one of the world’s most popular websites on Islam.
Mehmet Kaplan, a Turkish-born Muslim, became Sweden’s Minister for Housing and Urban Development, all the while rubbing shoulders with the Islamists of Turkish groups Milli Görüs and the neo-fascists of the Grey Wolves — he was convinced no one would ever question him or his agenda, for fear that doing so would be considered “Islamophobic.” Kaplan was only forced to resign in April after revelations that he compared Israel’s treatment of Palestinians to Nazi Germany’s treatment of Jews. (Image source: Wikimedia Commons/Jan Ainali)
Mehmet Kaplan had only just resigned, when, within the Green Party, the next scandal broke. Yasri Khan, chairman of Swedish Muslims for Peace and Justice (Svenska muslimer för fred och rättvisa), was also a would-be member of the Green Party executive committee. In a news report on Sweden’s TV4, viewers watched in amazement as Khan refused to shake the female reporter’s hand. Was a man who did this really a good representative for the “feminist” Green Party?
When the Green Party’s spokesman, Gustav Fridolin, tried to explain Khan’s actions and why he had been recommended for the party’s executive, he only made matters worse. On a morning television show, Fridolin said that he “did not understand that women could feel so offended by someone refusing to shake hands.” The same evening, Fridolin apologized for the apology.
The Green Party may be the easiest party in which Islamists can act as entryists. The party appears particularly fond of physical diversity and seems willing to accept just about anybody who appears to be not an ethnic Swede. Possibly the Green Party never counted on the Swedish people, including their own constituents, having a completely different view of religion, politics, gender equality and handshakes.
After these scandals, the scholar Lars Nicander of the Swedish Defense University warned inAftonbladet that the Green Party might have been infiltrated by Islamists:
“I see a resemblance with how the Soviet Union acted during the Cold War, when it tried to infiltrate various democratic parties, and these methods are similar to what we see today, when people close to the Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist party, apparently have gotten a strong foothold within the Green Party.”
A few days later, the Social Democratic politician Nalin Pekgul, a Kurdish Muslim, told the public-service Sveriges Television that she believes the Green Party is rife with Islamists: “The Green Party has for a long time become an arena for many Islamists to involve themselves in. That is the party where they have been strongest and most successful.”
She also said that while other parties have been exposed to Islamists, the Green Party has been affected the most:
“The Islamists in the Green Party are members of the party executive, they are in City Halls around the country, in the District Councils, and they have friends in the Government Offices who push their issues and make sure their organizations get lots of money.”
The key issue is what, if any, lesson Swedish politicians have learned from the Islamist revelations this spring. If Sweden is to survive as a secular democracy, then all politicians need to understand what Islam actually is. The fact that there are democratic Muslims does not mean that Islam itself is compatible with democracy. Individual Muslims may make a distinction between politics and religion, but this does not mean that Islam accepts this division. The question is where the democratic Muslims will be when Islam has gained even more influence in Sweden: Will they stand up for Swedish democracy if that means openly going against the tenets of Islam?
In 2009, the year before the Sweden Democrats party entered parliament, party leader Jimmie Åkesson published an opinion piece, headlined “The Muslims are our greatest foreign threat,” in the newspaper Aftonbladet:
“This is the reason today’s multicultural Swedish power elite is so totally blind to the dangers of Islam and Islamization. The presumption is that Muslims want nothing more than to adapt to a Western way of life and Western values, and that Islam is essentially the same as Christianity, the only difference being that Muslims have another name for God. Thus, the presumption is also that Islam can be tamed, the same way secular forces have tamed European Christianity and relegated it to the private sphere.”
Åkesson further wrote that Islam has affected the Swedish society to a much higher degree than Swedish society has affected Islam. He listed several areas where Islam has made an impact. People who have made fun of Islam are forced to live under constant police protection; Muslim terrorist organizations are growing stronger; Muslim representatives are demanding sharia laws; taxpayer money is being spent on circumcising baby boys; public swimming pools separate men and women; demands for halal meat at supermarkets while schools should no longer serve pork, and so on.
Not even the Sweden Democrats seem to have focused on Islam’s demands for political influence. Party leader Jimmie Åkesson asked what things will look like in another few decades, when the Muslim population has increased several times over, and cities such as Malmö most likely have a Muslim majority. He concluded the article with a promise:
“The multicultural societal elites may see this future as a colorful, interesting change for a Sweden and a Europe one usually denies has ever been ‘Swedish’ or ‘European’. As a Sweden Democrat, I see this as our greatest foreign threat since World War II, and I promise to do everything in my power to reverse this trend when we go to the polls next year.”
Åkesson’s article ignited a firestorm. Members of the “establishment” swore they had never read anything so vile, and the article was reported to the Chancellor of Justice as suspected “hate speech.” However, the Chancellor at the time, Göran Lambertz, did not open an investigation into the case. He noted that the law allows for “criticism of ethnic groups or circumstances pertaining to those groups.”
“There is no doubt whatsoever that this does not cross the line for criminal behavior. You are allowed to say a lot of things that can be considered offensive and annoying and in many ways unpopular. That goes with freedom of speech.”
Seven years have passed. The Muslim population of Sweden is approaching one million (out of 9.8 million inhabitants), but even the Sweden Democrats do not mention a threat from Islam.
But whether the politicians’ unwillingness to discuss a threat stems from ignorance or fear, to answer a question by hanging up the phone is simply not good enough. It is the politicians who have filled the country with Islam, and the Swedish people have a right to know the result. Above all, they have a right to demand that the politicians know the consequences of their decisions for the Swedes, who are secular and who love their democracy.
Trump and Democratic Political Incorrectness, Front Page Magazine, Daniel Greenfield, June 8,2016
Remember the time a presidential candidate suggested that Gandhi used to run “a gas station down in St. Louis.” No it wasn’t Trump. That was Hillary Clinton. Had Trump said it, we would still be hearing about it. But since Hillary Clinton was responsible for it, it went down the memory hole.
Along with her more recent “Colored People Time” gag.
And who can forget the time that Trump said, “You cannot go to a 7-Eleven or a Dunkin’ Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent.” But that wasn’t Trump. It was actually Vice President Joe Biden.
But still it was indisputably offensive when Trump told the Asian Chamber of Commerce, “I don’t think you’re smarter than anybody else, but you’ve convinced a lot of us you are.”
Then he followed that up by joking, “One problem that I’ve had today is keeping my Wongs straight.”
You would have to be ridiculously politically incorrect or an outright buffoon to say something like that to the Asian Chamber of Commerce. And this is exactly why Trump is… but wait, those lines actually came from Democratic Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid.
Reid recently popped up to call Trump’s comments racist. And he ought to know. Harry Reid believed that Obama was electable because he was “light-skinned” with ”no Negro dialect”.
Memories are short when it comes to Democratic racial and ethnic stereotypes. Not to mention slurs.
Trump is certainly not the only prominent politician who says wildly politically incorrect things. Democrats do it all the time. And they do it in more pointed ways.
Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez is running for the Senate. Sanchez is a racist who accused the “Vietnamese” of “trying to take this seat” when running against a Vietnamese-American candidate. Last year she managed to ridicule both Hindus and Native Americans with one slur.
There was the time that Bill Clinton suggested that, Obama “would have been getting us coffee”. Or when Biden described his future boss as the, “first sort of mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and nice-looking guy.” Despite two terms in which Republicans were accused of racially stereotyping Obama with secret dog whistles, nothing any major Republican figure said was anywhere as bad as what Obama’s Democratic predecessor and his own Senate ally had said about him.
Democrats actually say politically incorrect things all the time. Trump has become famous because he’s one of the few Republicans who talks like a Democrat and says the sort of things that Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton and Harry Reid have no problem saying in private and even in public speeches.
A Republican who told the Asian Chamber of Commerce that he had trouble “keeping my Wongs straight” would have been forced out in disgrace by a combination of media pressure and Republican shame. And having standards of respectable civic discourse is not a bad thing. But standards that are applied unilaterally to one side are not standards, they’re weapons.
Political correctness is a weapon brought out to punish political opponents for statements that run the gamut from offensive to those whose offensiveness is entirely manufactured by the media’s political echo chamber, such as Romney’s comments about having binders of qualified female candidates. Challenging political correctness does more than challenge these standards. It challenges the dishonest ways in which they are applied for political purposes.
Any of the above comments would have disqualified a Republican, but barely rate mention for Democrats. The truth about Trump is that he hasn’t said anything that plenty of Democrats haven’t said.
Long before Trump’s call for a Muslim ban, President Carter responded to the Iran hostage crisis by banning Iranians from America. Harry Reid had also proposed eliminating birthright citizenship long before Trump did. Building a wall with Mexico? Hillary Clinton called for it back in the Senate. Before she was condemning “talking about building walls”, she was talking about building walls. And warning that, “A country that cannot control its borders is failing at one of its fundamental obligations”.
The media has made a game out of pretending that everything Trump says is shocking. When Trump poses with a taco bowl and posts, “I love Hispanics”, the media gets giddy with outrage. But when Hillary Clinton foolishly panders to black voters by claiming to carry around hot sauce in her purse or posts, “7 Things Hillary Clinton has in Common with Your Abuela”, there are shrugs.
All politicians have their cringeworthy pandering moments. But the media chooses which of them it plays up and which of them it plays down.
That’s why Trump is shocking only in contrast to a Republican field that had been trained to carefully avoid even the faintest suggestion of insensitive or politically incorrect remarks. And that training did no good whatsoever with a media establishment that insisted on manufacturing gaffes no matter what.
Trump is often just as unrestrained as Democrats are. He feels the same freedom to speak his mind that is enjoyed by Joe Biden or Bill Clinton. He pays as little attention to political correctness as Harry Reid.
And it’s time that we were honest about that.
Sensitivity is not a bad thing. But what we have is not sensitivity as a value, but as a weapon. When one side is free to be as offensive as it wishes to be with no consequences whatsoever, then eventually the other side will escalate to match it. When oversensitivity becomes used to enforce an agenda that limits basic personal freedoms then the reaction to that will run roughshod over any and all sensitivities.
Political correctness, like all forms of censorship, is about power. Not fairness, sensitivity or decency. Trump is taking the license to be politically incorrect back from Democrats. The ability to determine what may or may not be said is the essence of power in a system where discourse dictates elections.
If Democrats are truly outraged by Trump, they might want to try looking in a mirror.
Netanyahu vows: ‘Syria won’t be a launchpad against Israel’ Talking to Moscow’s Jewish leaders, PM admits Israeli activity in Syria, says he talked with Putin about new regional ‘arrangement.’
By Nitsan Keidar
First Publish: 6/8/2016, 2:57 PM
Source: Netanyahu: ‘No Syrian launchpad against Israel’ – Defense/Security – News – Arutz Sheva
After meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Tuesday, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu on Wednesday held a conference with the leaders of Moscow’s Jewish community where he spoke about Israeli activity in Syria.
The event, which was held during Netanyahu’s official visit to Russia, was attended by around 100 community leaders and businessmen including Russian Chief Rabbi Berel Lazar, Moscow Chief Rabbi Pinchas Goldschmidt and Russian Jewish Federation chief Yuri Kanner.
During the meeting, Netanyahu was asked about Syria and the future of relations with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, whose regime is being propped up primarily by Russian and Iran.
“You ask about the future of (Israel’s) relations with President Assad? I would ask what is the future of President Assad in general?,” replied Netanyahu, noting on the internecine civil war that has raged since 2011.
“We do not interfere in this issue. We’re making sure that Syria won’t become a launchpad for attacks against Israel.”
He clarified that Israel is ensuring it will not be attacked from Syria by taking occasional action, and said the IDF will strike Syrian and Iranian troops or Hezbollah terrorists and members of other Islamist groups in the region if they pose a threat to the Jewish state.
“There are enough enemies. My policy is to take all necessary steps to prevent attacks, and we act from time to time when the need arises,” he acknowledged.
The statement is one of the few times Netanyahu has admitted Israeli activity over the border.
While Arab reports had long alleged that Israeli jets conducted airstrikes on arms transfers for Iran’s Lebanese terror proxy Hezbollah, Israel has remained tight-lipped on the subject. However, last December Netanyahu acknowledged that Israel is active in Syria.
In his remarks on Wednesday regarding Syria, Netanyahu added that, “I also ordered to build a field hospital that helped thousands of Syrians, babies, children, women, and men, with awful wounds. We are treating them there and at our hospitals. Humanitarian aid and a firm stand on our lines for the security of Israel.”
Noting on the fractured nature of Syria, he said, “I don’t know if it is possible to turn the Syrian omelette back into an egg.”
“The countries around us, Syria among them, some of them have already split apart, and therefore a different arrangement is needed. I spoke with President Putin about this at length, and the important thing is that what replaces them (the countries) doesn’t bring more tragedies and does not endanger our countries.”
While Netanyahu did not elaborate what the “different arrangement” in the Middle East that he spoke with Putin about would consist of, he recently has expressed willingness to hold negotiations with the Palestinian Authority (PA) as well as states such as Egypt in working on a regional peace deal. Details of what such a deal might entail remain unclear.
Netanyahu also noted on the growing ties between Israel and Russia during the meeting, and thanked the Jewish leaders for being instrumental in making that happen.
anneinpt
artaxes
danmillerinpanama
davidking1530
Peter Hofman
Joseph Wouk
Peter
Louisiana Steve
WarSclerotic 
Recent Comments