Islamists in America | WarSclerotic | Page 20

Archive for the ‘Islamists in America’ category

Muslim DHS Advisor Called Israel A ‘Suspect’ In September 11 Attacks

June 16, 2016

Muslim DHS Advisor Called Israel A ‘Suspect’ In September 11 Attacks, Daily Caller, Peter Hasson, June 16, 2016

A current adviser to the Department of Homeland Security is a Muslim leader who has accused America of doing Israel’s “dirty work,” named Israel as a “suspect” in the September 11 terror attacks and has been criticized as an apologist for terrorists.

Salam Al-Marayati is the president of the Muslim Public Affairs Council. He currently serves on the Homeland Security Advisory Committee’s (HSAC) Foreign Fighter Task Force, as well as the HSAC Subcommittee on Faith Based Security and Communications. (Note: this is not the Muslim DHS advisor The Daily Caller wrote about on Monday.)

In 2001, Al-Marayati suggested that Israel — not Islamic extremists — was ultimately behind the September 11 terror attacks.

“If we’re going to look at suspects, we should look to the groups that benefit the most from these kinds of incidents, and I think we should put the state of Israel on the suspect list because I think this diverts attention from what’s happening in the Palestinian territories so that they can go on with their aggression and occupation and apartheid policies,” he said.

In 2013, Judicial Watch noted that Al-Marayati told attendees at a 2005 conference for the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) that “Counter-terrorism and counter-violence should be defined by us. We should define how an effective counter-terrorism policy should be pursued in this country. So, number one, we reject any effort, notion, suggestion that Muslims should start spying on one another.”

In 2012, in a debate on RT, Al-Marayati accused the United States of doing Israel’s “dirty work” for them.

“The other point here, which is very important historically, the United States has done a lot of dirty work that has served the interests of Israel,” he said. “It destroyed Iraq. It supported the destruction and crippling of Egypt. It has crippled the Gulf.”

In 2015, the Obama administration was sharply criticized for inviting Al-Marayati to a three-day summit on fighting extremism — a fact the White House initially tried to conceal from reporters.

Investor’s Business Daily took an editorial stand against the invite, arguing that: “Al-Marayati has a long record of defending terrorists and justifying violence against non-Muslims — an easy one for the White House to vet for extremism.”

According to White House visitor records, Al-Marayati has visited the White House 11 times since 2009.

The IBD editors went on to note that “In a 1999 PBS interview, moreover, he called Hezbollah terrorist attacks ‘legitimate resistance,’ doubling down on his months-earlier claim that Hezbollah’s 1983 suicide bombing of more than 240 Marines in Lebanon was not terrorism but a ‘military operation — exactly the kind of attack that Americans might have lauded had it been directed against Washington’s enemies.’”

Kyle Shideler, the director of the Center for Security Policy’s Threat Information Office, told The Daily Caller that “Al-Marayati’s association with the HSAC underlines what an unfortunate farce the entire [Combatting Violent Extremism] program is. Al-Marayati’s only notable counter-terrorism contribution is having suggested Israel be included as a suspect on 9/11.”

“His very organization, MPAC has historically co-sponsored events in support of the very kinds of extremists he’s been appointed to help oppose, which is no surprise given that the organizations roots lay with men who literally studied at the foot of Muslim Brotherhood leader Hassan Al-Banna,” Shideler said.

“As long as the Obama Administration is more concerned with keeping groups like Al-Marayati’s happy with them instead of investigating actually terrorism, we will never have a sane counter-terror policy.”

The Daily Caller previously reported on Monday that a current sitting member on the HSAC Subcommittee on Countering Violent Extremism, Laila Alawa, is a 25-year-old immigrant of Syrian heritage who said that the 9/11 attacks “changed the world for good” and has consistently disparaged America, free speech, and white people on social media.

The Department of Homeland Security has not replied to multiple requests for comment regarding Alawa and Al-Marayati’s advising roles.

Categories: 9/11, Countering violent extremism, Islam and Israel, Islam and Jews, Islamic terrorism, Islamisation, Islamism, Islamist moral values, Islamists in America, Law enforcement, Obama and Islam, Obama and Islamic terrorism
Tags: Countering violent extremism, Islam and Israel, Islam and Jews, Islamic terrorism, Islamisation, Islamism, Islamist moral values, Islamists in America, Law enforcement, Obama and Islam, Obama and Islamic terrorism

Comments: Be the first to comment

Muslim Privilege Killed 49 People in Orlando

June 16, 2016

Muslim Privilege Killed 49 People in Orlando, Front Page Magazine, Daniel Greenfield, June 16, 2016

Flowers in Orlando

The deadliest mass shooting in American history happened because of Islamophobia.

Islamophobia killed 49 people in Orlando. It didn’t kill 49 Muslims. Instead it allowed Omar Mateen, a Muslim terrorist, to kill 49 people in the name of his Islamic ideology and the Islamic State.

Omar, like so many other Muslim killers, could have been stopped. He talked about killing people when he worked at G4S Security, a Federal contractor that provided services to the Department of Homeland Security and the State Department. But, according to one of the co-workers he stalked, a former police officer, his employers refused to do anything about it because he was a Muslim.

The FBI conducted an investigation of Omar Mateen. They put him on a watch list and sent informants. They interviewed him and concluded that his claims of Al Qaeda ties and terrorist threats were reactions to “being marginalized because of his Muslim faith.” Omar told the agents that he said those things because “his co-workers were discriminating against him and teasing him because he was Muslim.”

And they believed him.

Poor Omar wasn’t a potential terrorist. He was just a victim of Islamophobia.

Omar got away with homophobic comments that would have gotten Americans fired because he was Muslim. He weathered an “extensive” FBI investigation because he was Muslim.

Anyone who says that there is no such thing as Muslim Privilege ought to look at Omar Mateen.

There is a direct line between Omar’s Muslim privilege and the Pulse massacre. Omar Mateen’s Muslim privilege protected him from consequences. While the media studiously paints the image of a beleaguered population of American Muslims suffering the stigma of constant suspicion, Omar’s Muslim background actually served as a shield and excused behavior that would have been unacceptable for anyone else. Omar Mateen’s Muslim privilege shielded him until he was actually murdering non-Muslims.

And Omar’s case is not unique. The Fort Hood killer, Nidal Hasan, handed out business cards announcing that he was a Jihadist. He delivered a presentation justifying suicide bombings, but no action was taken. Like Omar, the FBI was aware of Hasan. It knew that he was talking to Al Qaeda bigwig Anwar Al-Awlaki, yet nothing was done. Instead of worrying about his future victims, the FBI was concerned that investigating him and interviewing him would “harm Hasan’s career”.

One of his classmates later said that the military authorities, “Don’t want to say anything because it would be considered questioning somebody’s religious belief, or they’re afraid of an equal opportunity lawsuit.”

Would the FBI have been as sensitive if Nidal Hasan had been named Frank Wright? No more than Omar Mateen would have kept his security job if his name had been Joe Johnson.

It’s an increasingly familiar story.

The neighbors of San Bernardino killers Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik noticed that something strange was going on, but they were afraid of profiling Muslims. If they had done the right thing, the 14 victims of the two Muslim killers would still be alive. If the FBI had done the right thing with Nidal Hasan, the Fort Hood victims would still be alive and whole. If the FBI had done the right thing with Omar Mateen, his 49 victims would still be alive and those he wounded would still be whole.

We have some basic choices to make. We can empathize with Muslims or with their victims.

We cannot however do both.

After 9/11, Muslims somehow became the biggest victim group in America. And even if you contend that most Muslims are not responsible for the actions of Islamic fundamentalist groups, even if you believe that most Muslims are being wrongly blamed for the actions of a smaller group of radicals, the pernicious myth of Muslim victimhood has become a distorting force that protects terrorists.

Muslim victimhood has elevated Islamist groups such as CAIR to the front row of political discourse alongside legitimate civil rights organizations, despite their terror links and history of obstructing law enforcement efforts to fight Islamic terrorism, while mainstreaming their Islamist agendas.

Muslim victimhood has silenced the victims of Muslim terrorism. Every Muslim terror attack is swiftly diverted to the inevitable “backlash” narrative in which the media turns away from the bodies in the latest terror attack to bring us the stories of the real Muslim victims who fear being blamed for it.

This obscene act of media distraction silences the victims of Muslim terrorism and rewards the enablers and accomplices of Muslim terrorism instead. It is every bit as terrible as claiming that the real victims of a serial killer are his family members who are being blamed for not turning him in, instead of the people he killed and the loved ones they left behind.

Muslim victimhood protects Muslim terrorists like Omar Mateen. It shields them from scrutiny. It invents excuses for them. While Omar made his preparations, while the FBI investigation of him was botched, the media leaped nimbly from a thousand petty claims of Muslim victimhood. And the worst of them may have been Tahera Ahmad, a Muslim woman who claimed she was discriminated against when a flight attendant poured her soda in a cup instead of being given a can. This insane nonsense received days of media coverage. That’s more airtime than any American victim of Islamic terrorism has received.

The media will wait as short a period as it can and turn away from Orlando to some manufactured viral media claim of Muslim discrimination that will be unbearably petty. Meanwhile the next Omar Mateen will be plotting his next act of terror.

It’s time to tell the truth.

Islamic terrorism is caused by Muslim privilege. These acts of violence are motivated by racism and supremacism in Islam. Allahu Akbar, the Islamic battle cry often associated with acts of terror and ethnic cleansing since its origin in Mohammed’s persecution of the Jews, is a statement of Muslim superiority to non-Muslims.

Muslim terrorism is not the groan of an oppressed minority. Its roots run back to racist and supremacist Islamic societies in Saudi Arabia and Egypt where non-Muslims have few if any civil rights. Muslims are a global majority. Islamic terrorism is their way of imposing their religious system on everyone.

Standing in solidarity with Muslims after Orlando makes as much sense as standing in solidarity with Klansmen after the Charleston massacre. No one should be standing in solidarity with hate groups.

Omar wasn’t radicalized by the “internet”. He got his ideas from Islamic clerics who got their ideas from Islam. He was “radicalized” by the holiest texts of Islam. Just like every other Muslim terrorist. His actions weren’t “senseless” or “nihilistic”, he was acting out the Muslim privilege of a bigoted ideology.

Even in this country, the majority of hate crimes are not directed at Muslims. Instead Muslims have disproportionately contributed to persecuting various minority groups. Orlando is only the latest example of this trend. In Europe, Jews are fleeing Sweden and France because of Muslim persecution. In Germany, gay refugees have to be housed separately from Muslim migrants. So do Christian refugees.

This isn’t the behavior of victims. These are the actions of oppressors.

Muslims are not part of the coalition of the oppressed, but of the oppressors. The sooner we recognize that, the sooner we can deal stop Islamic terrorism and protect the victims of Muslim terrorists.

Muslim privilege killed 49 people in Orlando. How many people will it kill next week or next month? How many will it kill in the next decade or the next century?

The Muslim genocide of non-Muslims is already happening in Syria and Iraq. Islam has a long genocidal history. And if we continue to confuse the oppressors and the oppressed, the next genocide we fail to stop may be our own.

Categories: CAIR, Homeland Security, Islamic immigration, Islamic radicalization, Islamic terrorism, Islamisation, Islamism, Islamists, Islamists in America, Islamophobia, Law enforcement, Muslim privilege, Obama and Islam, Orlando massacre, Supporting terrorism
Tags: CAIR, Homeland Security, Islamic immigration, Islamic radicalization, Islamic terrorism, Islamisation, Islamism, Islamists, Islamists in America, Islamophobia, Law enforcement, Muslim privilege, Obama and Islam, Orlando massacre, Supporting terrorism

Comments: Be the first to comment

Humor |Phrases about Islamist Terrorism that won’t Offend Anyone Important

June 15, 2016

Phrases about Islamist Terrorism that won’t Offend Anyone Important, Dan Miller’s Blog, June 15, 2016

(The views expressed in this post are mine and do not necessarily reflect those of Warsclerotic or its other editors. — DM)

Obama, His Department of Homeland Security, CAIR and His many other ~~collaborators~~ colleagues have tried really hard not to offend Islamists when talking about Islamist terror. Ditto the ~~lamebrain~~ mainstream media. They need more variety, so here are just a few politically correct suggestions for appropriate phrases guaranteed not to offend anyone important.

Church violence — for use when Islamists burn or otherwise attack a church.

Synagogue violence — as above, but when they burn or otherwise attack a synagogue.

Christian violence – broader than church violence, but otherwise about the same.

Jewish violence — Broader than synagogue violence, but otherwise about the same.

Homosexual violence — for use when Islamists kill homosexuals.

Gun violence — for use when Muslims use guns to attack homosexuals, Christians, Jews or other non-Muslims.

Knife violence — same as for gun violence, except it applies only when knives are used.

Violent rhetoric — applies only to whatever Donald Trump says.

Hate speech — applies to anything linking the Quran, the Hadith, Sharia Law, other Islamic texts, CAIR or other Muslim Brotherhood-linked groups to violence.

Great speech! –applies to anything about Islamism said by Obama, Hillary or a CAIR spokesperson.

Peaceful Muslims — applies to all Muslims who haven’t yet behaved violently toward non-Muslims personally.

Racist incitement — Any derogatory remarks about Islamists, even though Islam is not a race.

Racism — see Racist incitement.

Men of God — Imams.

Not Islamic — applies to any violent, criminal or otherwise antisocial act committed by a Muslim.

That’s just a sample. Any sane person could suggest more.

Now, for your further entertainment, here’s a beautiful vocal rendition by the Muslim Brotherhood Trio:

Categories: CAIR, Christians, Democrats, Donald Trump, Hate speech, Hillary Clinton, Humor, Islamic terrorism, Islamism, Islamist moral values, Islamists in America, Jews, Media, Muslim Brotherhood, Obama and Islamic terrorism, Obama's America, Political correctness, U.S. politics
Tags: CAIR, Christians, Democrats, Donald Trump, Hate speech, Humor, Islamic terrorism, Islamism, Islamist moral values, Islamists in America, Jews, Media, Muslim Brotherhood, Obama and Islamic terrorism, Obama's America, Political correctness, U.S. politics

Comments: 2 Comments

Making America unsafe

June 15, 2016

Making America unsafe, Israel Hayom, Judith Bergman, June 15, 2016

When Obama claims, as he did on Tuesday, that “there’s no magic to the phrase ‘radical Islam.’ If someone seriously thinks we don’t know who we’re fighting, if there’s anyone out there who thinks we’re confused about who our enemies are, that would come as a surprise to the thousands of terrorists we’ve taken off the battlefield,” he is simply dissembling. You cannot know an enemy when you prohibit your law enforcement and intelligence personnel from studying or even mentioning them.

***************************

There is a deep and unacknowledged irony to the fact that U.S. President Barack Obama, of all people, has opined in the days since the terror attack in Orlando that how you term things makes no difference.

“What exactly would using this label [‘radical Islam’] accomplish? … Calling a threat by a different name does not make it go away. This is a political distraction,” Obama said on Tuesday in response to the heavy criticism poured on him after he, once more, refused to use the term in connection with the mass shooting. Islamic State quickly claimed responsibility for the attack, perhaps frustrated that no one in the U.S. administration, nor the Democratic presidential candidate, will give it credit for it.

Positing that calling something or someone a particular name makes no difference is the very epitome of hypocritical dissembling, especially coming from the person at the very top of the Democratic echelons.

These are the same people who for decades fought to entrench political correctness into American society, making it impossible to call certain things by their rightful names without facing a barrage of vilification and personal smears. The American Left has fought ceaselessly to shape language according to its ideas and has succeeded so tremendously that Americans are now afraid to report suspicious activity out of fear of coming across as “Islamophobic.” This has already cost lives. Before the attack, the security company that Omar Mateen worked for was afraid of reporting him, despite his suspicious behavior, exactly because it feared being castigated as “Islamophobic.”

The U.S. has much to learn from Israel in this regard. Israel is so efficient at fighting terrorism precisely because it cannot afford the luxury of integrating political correctness into its security doctrines. The very idea is preposterous. Nevertheless, this is exactly what Obama has done.

Five years ago, Obama erased all references to Islam in the educational materials used to train the American law enforcement and national security communities. In 2011, U.S. Deputy Attorney General James Cole confirmed that the Obama administration was recalling all its training materials to eliminate references to Islam that some Muslim groups had claimed were offensive.

In 2013, The Washington Times also reported that countless experts on Islamic terrorism had been banned from speaking to any U.S. government counterterrorism conferences, including those of the FBI and CIA. Government agencies were instead ordered to invite Muslim Brotherhood front groups.

If it is only a matter of labels, then why has Obama endangered American lives by deliberately blindsiding law enforcement and national security communities on the nature of Islamic terrorism? How are they supposed to grapple with the urgent issue of jihad if they are prohibited from learning about the nature of jihad?

When Obama claims, as he did on Tuesday, that “there’s no magic to the phrase ‘radical Islam.’ If someone seriously thinks we don’t know who we’re fighting, if there’s anyone out there who thinks we’re confused about who our enemies are, that would come as a surprise to the thousands of terrorists we’ve taken off the battlefield,” he is simply dissembling. You cannot know an enemy when you prohibit your law enforcement and intelligence personnel from studying or even mentioning them.

These are all relevant questions that the mainstream media has consistently refused to ask the administration — instead, dangerously dismissing them as conspiracy theories. The price is now being paid by innocent Americans, from a Christmas party in San Bernardino to a gay nightclub in Orlando.

Words matter tremendously, and you cannot fight an enemy that you are forbidden to name. Imagine Churchill telling the British that there was “no magic” in calling out the Nazi ideology and prohibiting his intelligence community from studying Nazi Germany’s strategy and tactics.

Hillary Clinton, feeling the backlash after publishing identical statements to those of Obama, has now opportunistically declared that she is ready to say those “magical words.”

But this is meaningless pandering, especially when you know she was part of the administration that purged training materials of all things Islam.

“In my perspective, it matters what we do, not what we say,” Clinton said. “To me, radical jihadism, radical Islamism, I think they mean the same thing. I’m happy to say either, but that’s not the point.”

The administration pretends there is no Islamist threat. This is what it has firmly projected to its law enforcement and intelligence communities, and Clinton is of course fully aware of the intricate details of this fact. Stating that it matters “what we do” then becomes an empty and even dangerous statement, because it deludes Americans into believing that there is a solid and credible intelligence effort underway to prevent future Islamist terror attacks in the United States, when this cannot logically be the case given that the U.S. law enforcement and intelligence communities are not allowed to study jihad or Islamic extremism.

Categories: CAIR, Hillary Clinton and Islam, Islam, Islamic radicalization, Islamic terrorism, Islamists in America, Islamophobia, Obama and Islam, Obama and Islamic terrorism, Obama's hypocrisy, Political correctness, radical Islam, Violent extremism
Tags: CAIR, Hillary Clinton and Islam, Islam, Islamic radicalization, Islamic terrorism, Islamists in America, Islamophobia, Obama and Islam, Obama and Islamic terrorism, Obama's hypocrisy, Political correctness, radical Islam, Violent extremism

Comments: 2 Comments

Why are 2nd generation Muslim immigrants becoming jihadis?

June 15, 2016

Why are 2nd generation Muslim immigrants becoming jihadis? Brigitte Gabriel via YouTube, June 15, 2016

Categories: 2nd generation Muslims, Europe, Islam in America, Islamic immigration, Islamic indoctrination, Islamic jihad, Islamic radicalization, Islamic refugees, Islamic terror groups, Islamisation, Islamism, Islamists in America, Islamophobia, Mosques in U.S., Obama and Islam, Obama and Islamic terrorism, Sharia law
Tags: Europe, Islam in America, Islamic immigration, Islamic indoctrination, Islamic Jihad, Islamic radicalization, Islamic refugees, Islamic terror groups, Islamisation, Islamism, Islamists in America, Islamophobia, Mosques in U.S., Obama and Islam, Obama and Islamic terrorism, Sharia law

Comments: 1 Comment

RIGHT ANGLE: Political Correctness Kills 49 in Orlando

June 15, 2016

RIGHT ANGLE: Political Correctness Kills 49 in Orlando via YouTube, June 14, 2016

Categories: 2016 elections, Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, Islam and homosexuals, Islamic death cults, Islamic perversions, Islamic State, Islamic terror groups, Islamists in America, Islamophobia, Law enforcement, Obama and Islam, Obama and terrorism, Political correctness
Tags: Donald Trump, Islam and homosexuals, Islamic death cults, Islamic perversions, Islamic State, Islamic terror groups, Islamists in America, Islamophobia, Law enforcement, Obama and Islam, Obama and terrorism, Political correctness

Comments: Be the first to comment

Will CAIR Condemn the Anti-Gay Imams It Associates with and Promotes?

June 15, 2016

Will CAIR Condemn the Anti-Gay Imams It Associates with and Promotes? Counter Jihad Report, Kyle Shideler, June 14, 2016

(The question almost answers itself: No. Yet the Obama administration relies on CAIR and other Muslim Brotherhood linked groups as its representatives to the Muslim community. It shouldn’t. Please see also, From Baghdad to Boston: The moderate Muslims need to be given a prominent space to counter the extremist narrative. — DM)

The Council on American Islamic Relations held a press conference on Sunday following the deadly jihadist terror attack on a gay nightclub in Orlando, where the group attempted to link homophobia with the group’s preferred talking point “Islamophobia,” labeling them, “interconnected systems of oppression.”

If that were so, perhaps it would be time to ask why Hamas-linked CAIR has yet to address the homophobia within the Muslim community, and, perhaps more importantly, among the imams which CAIR routinely works with and honors?

CAIR has repeatedly maintained close and deliberate ties to numerous individuals known for preaching virulently anti-gay themes.

Muzammil Siddiqi: Supporting Suicide Attacks and Death Penalty for Homosexuals

During the last mass casualty attack conducted by a jihadist in San Bernardino, CAIR publicly highlighted its close association with Islamic Shura Council of Southern California leader Muzammil Siddiqi. Siddiqi has publicly supported the death penalty for homosexuals in Muslim countries. Homosexuals face the death penalty or extrajudicial killings in numerous Islamic countries, including Iran which has reportedly killed 4-6,000 homosexuals or suspected homosexuals. Siddiqi has also been caught issuing statements in support of suicide attacks, saying Muslims who died “for justice” receive “the highest position” in Heaven. Police killed Orlando shooter Omar Mateen during his attack against the Pulse Nightclub.

Siraj Wahhaj: Wanted to Storm a Gay-Friendly Mosque in Canada

Frequent CAIR fundraiser Siraj Wahhaj, an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, published an audiotape entitled “Don’t Go Near Zina.” Zina is the Arabic term for types of sexual intercourse forbidden under Shariah law. In the tape Wahhaj condemns homosexuality and references reports of a mosque being opened in Canada for homosexual Muslims. Wahhaj openly calls on the audience to physically go with him to Toronto to shut down the mosque.

Taha Alwani: Issued a Fatwa Calling For“Earthly Punishments” for Homosexuals

Another example is CAIR’s praise upon the passing of Muslim scholar Taha Alwani, a man once raided by the federal law enforcement for suspected terror finance. CAIR issued a press release saying Alwani’s works would “benefit Muslims around the world for generations to come.” Alwani, in his position as member of the Fiqh Council of North America, published a 2003 fatwacondemning a reported mosque for gay Muslims. In his fatwa Alwani refers to the smiting of Sodom and Gomorrah, calls homosexuality “abominable”, and reinforcing Islamic doctrines calling for “earthly punishments” for homosexuals:

It is true that some of the scholars disagreed with these punishments not because of doubt that these actions constitute a crime, but because of a lack of divine textual stipulation for a worldly punishment. But the actions of the Prophet’s Companions do indicate that in fact this crime has a worldly punishment, to be carried out by those in authority among the Muslims.

Alwani goes on to cite for support of his statement a hadith referring to Caliph AbuBakr, who ordered a homosexual to be burned alive. Alwani also ordered Muslims to “take precautions” against homosexual corruption.

Omar Suleiman: Homosexuality a “Repugnant” “Disease”

Another CAIR associated Imam with a record of anti-gay rhetoric is Omar Suleiman. Suleiman, who has routinely provided videos offering fundraising support for CAIR chapters, including in Florida. Suleiman was noted in the Daily Mail for calling homosexuality “repugnant” “a disease” which will destroy Muslim children if Muslims don’t take action to oppose it.

Jamal Badawi: Homosexuality a Sign of the End Times

Consider CAIR-Canada Board Member Jamal Badawi. On his website Badawi, regarded by many as an accomplished Islamic scholar, refers to the spread of homosexuality as a sign of the “End Times.” In another video presentation Badawi argued that homosexuality cannot be genetic, reasoning that if it was God would not have destroyed the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Suhaib Webb: Slammed Wearers of “Effeminate” Clothing

Popular Imam Suhaib Webb is a frequent keynote speaker for CAIR fundraisers. Webb is also known forattending a fundraiser with Anwar Awlaki, the Al Qaeda cleric whose videos Omar Mateen reportedly watched. Webb also publicly condemned those who wear “effeminate” clothing, including skinny jeans, and told a D.C. metro area Muslim audience to oppose gay marriage, condemned American values, and urged practitioners to spread Islam’s message “by any means necessary…”

Abu Taubah: Railed Against “Fgots,” Non-Muslims and American Society**

Finally, consider Abu Taubah, the anti-gay imam who reportedly was Omar Mateen’s teacher, and who has previously been identified as assisting jihadists joining terror groups abroad. While Abu Taubah was imprisoned he repeatedly sought out CAIR’s assistance, which CAIR provided, arranging a meeting between Abu Taubah and CAIR Florida Director Hassan Shibly, while Taubah was imprisoned.

Homophobic tweet

Upon Abu Taubah’s release, CAIR immediately took a victory lap, holding a press conference with the Imam’s family.

At what point will CAIR be asked about their repeated ties to virulently anti-gay Imams and Islamic preachers, and its support for Muslims scholars who continue to promote a doctrine calling for homosexuals to be killed?

At their recent press conference CAIR was able to cynically take advantage of the slaughter of innocent people, and the media never once asked a critical question about its support for the very people who espouse the doctrine that makes this violence possible. That needs to change.

Categories: CAIR, Islam and homosexuality, Islam and human rights, Islamists, Islamists in America, Islamophobia, Muslim Brotherhood, Obama and Islam, Political Islam, Sharia law
Tags: CAIR, Islam and homosexuality, Islam and human rights, Islamists, Islamists in America, Islamophobia, Muslim Brotherhood, Obama and Islam, Political Islam, Sharia law

Comments: Be the first to comment

From Baghdad to Boston: The moderate Muslims need to be given a prominent space to counter the extremist narrative

June 15, 2016

From Baghdad to Boston: The moderate Muslims need to be given a prominent space to counter the extremist narrative, The Nation, Sam Westrop, June 15, 2016

(Please see also, Muslim reformers vs. Islamists. — DM)

from-baghdad-to-boston-the-moderate-muslims-need-to-be-given-a-prominent-space-to-counter-the-1465986607-1386

When policymakers at the State Department or journalists at the New York Times demand to speak with the Muslim community, it is the Islamist movements and their be-suited press relations officers that step forward.

On a national level, it is Muslim Brotherhood groups such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) that have positioned themselves as gateways to the American Muslim community. These Islamist movements have learned to practice politics and interfaith dialogue by day, but preach hatred and violence at night.

************************

Whether in the Middle East, South Asia, Europe or the United States, the West’s failure to understand the extraordinary diversity of Islam hampers efforts to tackle the threats posed by Islamist extremism and terrorism.

Kenan Makiya’s recent novel, The Rope, examines the violent disorder of Iraq in the years following the 2003 US led invasion. The reader is exposed to a crescendo of internecine, inter-Islamist conflict, the corrupting impact of fundamentalist ideology on Iraq’s youth and the hunger for power and influence sought by Shia and Sunni groups alike.

One of the novel’s most striking features, however, is its illustration of Western ignorance about the composition of Iraq’s population. The Iraqi nation, the author so vividly shows, does not just comprise Sunnis and Shiites, but an impossible array of religious sects and political factions.

From the fighting between the three great Shia Houses to the hundreds of independent Sunni and Shia militias, branches of Lebanese and Iranian terror groups, former Ba’athists, Kurdish independence movements, and religious revivalist cults – in the absence of Saddam’s tyrannical grip, Iraq becomes a land drenched in blood, chaos and ferocious ambition.

The West’s stark inability to deal with the vast range of competing Islamic forces in Iraq is also apparent in its response to domestic terrorism and extremism. Today, America and Europe battle some of same threats at home that they face abroad. Most politicians and media, however, approach the problem of home-grown terrorism as if the turmoil of intervention in Muslim lands never happened. And for radical, violent Islamist movements such as the Muslim Brotherhood, this naivety affords an opportunity to grab power and influence.

In America, Muslims are treated by policymakers as just one community – a homogenous bloc with a single representative voice. It is the very opposite, of course, that is true. The many Sunni religious sects and movements that constitute American Islam, however, have distinctly little say in how their own views are represented.

For Muslims living in Western democracies, the lack of a hierarchical clergy within Sunni Islam produces a natural vacuum for political representation. And as inherently political movements, it is the unrepresentative Islamist groups that are best prepared to fill that void. Traditional moderate Muslim groups, lacking media savvy and political know-how, simply cannot compete.

When policymakers at the State Department or journalists at the New York Times demand to speak with the Muslim community, it is the Islamist movements and their be-suited press relations officers that step forward.

On a national level, it is Muslim Brotherhood groups such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) that have positioned themselves as gateways to the American Muslim community. These Islamist movements have learned to practice politics and interfaith dialogue by day, but preach hatred and violence at night.

Despite warnings by Muslim countries such as Egypt and the United Arab Emirates about Muslim Brotherhood groups like CAIR, its spokespersons are nevertheless quoted as American Muslim spokesmen in American newspapers almost daily. Its officials are invited to events at the White House, and many of its press conferences enjoy prime-time news coverage.

Yet few American Muslims themselves actually believe CAIR is an authentic voice of American Islam. According to Gallup poll in 2011, about 88% of American Muslims believe CAIR does not best represent their views.

By treating Muslim Brotherhood groups as the representatives of American Islam, politicians and journalists end up legitimizing the extremists and abandoning the moderates. It is this very failure of policymakers to delve deeper – to discern the extremist minority from the voiceless majority – which allows the extremism of the Muslim Brotherhood to exert an ever-growing influence over Muslim youth. Increasingly, these young Muslims become radicalized to the point where they switch their soapbox for a Kalashnikov. Perhaps the most prominent example can be found in the city of Boston in Massachusetts. Its universities and mosques have produced a frightening list of graduates, including – but not limited to –notorious Al Qaeda operatives Abdulrahman Alamoudi, Tarek Mehanna and Aafia Siddqui; the Lashkar-i-Taiba fundraiser Hafiz Masood; the Boston marathon bombers; and Ahmad Abousamra, one of the Islamic State’s chief propagandists. These terrorist operatives shared something in common: they all passed through the doors of the Islamic Society of Boston (ISB), one of the largest mosques on the eastern seaboard, but also one of the Muslim Brotherhood’s flagship institutions in the United States.

The ISB’s Muslim Brotherhood links are clear to see. It was founded by Abdulrahman Alamoudi, a key figure in the American Muslim Brotherhood, whom the Treasury Department would later designate as a prominent Al Qaeda fundraiser. ISB trustees have included Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, the notorious spiritual leader of the global Muslim Brotherhood; Jamal Badawi, a leading member of the Muslim Brotherhood’s international clerical body; and Muhammad Attawia, who was listed as an American Muslim Brotherhood leader in evidence presented by federal prosecutors during the Holy Land Foundation terror financing trial in 2008.

Today, the ISB is managed by the Muslim American Society, another key institution of the American Muslim Brotherhood. It teaches a tarbiya educational program to its young congregants, which includes violent, bigoted texts by Muslim Brotherhood luminaries such as Sayyid Qutb, Hassan al-Banna and Fathi Yakan.

Over the past decade, twelve congregants, supporters, officials and donors of the ISB have been imprisoned, deported, killed or are on the run in connection with terrorism offenses. In spite of this, politicians and media treat the ISB as a credible voice of Massachusetts Muslims – an unpleasant imposition on Boston’s historically moderate Muslim community.

The mayor, the police commissioner, Christian and Jewish community leaders, and various public officials regularly work with the mosque and speak before its congregation. The very land on which the ISB was built was subsidized by the local city government; and the ISB was even invited by Obama’s Justice Department to take part in the federal government’s Countering Violent Extremism program.

Through pure ignorance, Boston is fuelling its own extremism problem.

It is only by understanding American Islam and its constituents that we can refute Muslim Brotherhood claims to leadership, identify and assist the leaders of the moderate Muslim majority, and stop the political legitimization of extremist ideology.

Americans for Peace and Tolerance has joined forces with Muslims Facing Tomorrow, a Canadian Muslim organization, to examine the extremist foundations of Muslim Brotherhood groups posing as ordinary Muslim institutions.

The first dossier we have produced clearly demonstrates that the Islamic Society of Boston is a Muslim Brotherhood institution working to impose its ideology over Massachusetts Muslims. From details of its trustees’ extremist links, to evidence of its financial connections with Al Qaeda fundraisers and its hosting of prominent extremist preachers, this dossier serves to educate politicians, journalists and the public.

Ours is an initiative we hope will be replicated across North America, in cooperation with Muslim organizations working to counteract the extremism and terror-connections of the Muslim Brotherhood network. It is only by working with the moderate Muslim majority, in both the Islamic world, Europe and North America, that this can be achieved. The Muslim Brotherhood is certainly not the only problem with which moderate Muslims and Western democracies must cope. From Iranian-backed Shia Islamism to the puritanism of the Salafists and the asceticism of South Asia’s Deobandis, there are undoubtedly many challenges. But whether it is the violent chaos of Iraq, the murderous bombings of the Boston marathon or the considerable number of Western Muslim youth running away to join the Islamic State, we will only be able to tackle Islamist extremism once we learn to recognize the forces which drive it and understand the communities it exploits.

Categories: CAIR, Islamic indoctrination, Islamic integration, Islamic jihad, Islamic radicalization, Islamic supremacy, Islamism, Islamists in America, Muslim Brotherhood, Political Islam
Tags: CAIR, Islamic indoctrination, Islamic integration, Islamic Jihad, Islamic radicalization, Islamic supremacy, Islamism, Islamists in America, Muslim Brotherhood, Political Islam

Comments: Be the first to comment

Finally: A Realistic Plan for Fighting the Jihad and Protecting Americans

June 14, 2016

Finally: A Realistic Plan for Fighting the Jihad and Protecting Americans, Front Page Magazine, Robert Spencer, June 14, 2016

(Please see also, Donald Trump’s Full Speech on National Security/Hillary Clinton in Manchester, NH (6-13-16) — DM)

Trump on Jihad

Trump’s point was sound. In what way was it not? Combining unrestricted immigration and a massive influx of Muslim migrants, among whom the Islamic State has promised to embed jihadis, with a disarmed American population is simply an invitation to jihad massacres on a frequency never hitherto imagined. Could there be an Orlando-style attack every day? Why not, in the America of the near future that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are busy preparing for us?

***************************

We’ve gotten so used to politically correct obfuscation about Islam being a religion of peace that preaches tolerance and non-violence that Donald Trump’s words in his address Monday were startling: “Many of the principles of radical Islam are incompatible with Western values and institutions. Remember this, radical Islam is anti-woman, anti-gay and anti-American. I refuse to allow America to become a place where gay people, Christian people, Jewish people are targets of persecution and intimation by radical Islamic preachers of hate and violence.”

Trump continued: “This is not just a national security issue. It’s a quality of life issue. If we want to protect the quality of life for all Americans — women and children, gay and straight, Jews and Christians and all people then we need to tell the truth about radical Islam and we need to do it now.”

One may quibble about whether jihad violence and Sharia oppression in Islam are really “radical,” but the fact is that Donald Trump has become the first nominee of either party since 9/11 to reject the usual nonsense about how jihadis believe in and preach a twisted, hijacked version of the religion of peace. Even more importantly, Trump is now the first presidential candidate since maybe John Quincy Adams to recognize that the problem posed by Islam is not just restricted to the specter of violent jihad attacks, but is, given Sharia oppression of women, gays, and non-Muslims, very much, as Trump put it, a “quality of life issue.”

Trump declared his determination to prevent more jihad attacks such as the one in Orlando Saturday night above all by reiterating his proposal temporarily to “suspend immigration from areas of the world where there’s a proven history of terrorism against the United States, Europe or our allies until we fully understand how to end these threats.” CNN huffed: “Critics of Trump’s policies, however, have pointed out that the perpetrator of the Orlando massacre was born in the U.S.”

Those critics are not being honest. What Trump actually said was that the Orlando jihad mass murderer was born “of Afghan parents, who immigrated to the United States.” He noted, quite correctly, that “the bottom line is that the only reason the killer was in America in the first place, was because we allowed his family to come here,” and pointed out, quite rightly, that “we have a dysfunctional immigration system, which does not permit us to know who we let into our country, and it does not permit us to protect our citizens properly….We’re importing radical Islamic terrorism into the West through a failed immigration system and through an intelligence community held back by our president. Even our own FBI director has admitted that we cannot effectively check the backgrounds of people we’re letting into America. ”

Can any truthful person seriously dispute that? Tashfeen Malik, who, along with her husband Syed Rizwan Farook murdered fourteen people at a Christmas party in San Bernardino last December 2, had passed five separate background checks from five different U.S. government agencies. If the U.S. did not have a “dysfunctional immigration system,” she would never have been in the country in the first place. And neither would her husband, about whom Trump noted that he was “the child of immigrants from Pakistan and he brought his wife, the other terrorist from Saudi Arabia through another one of our easily exploited visa programs.”

Trump skewered Hillary Clinton for having “repeatedly refused to even say the words radical Islam until I challenged her yesterday.” He quoted her fatuous words: “Muslims are peaceful and tolerant people, and have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism” and opined “she’s in total denial, and her continuing reluctance to ever name the enemy broadcasts weakness across the entire world — true weakness.” Clinton wants, he said, “to take away American’s guns and then admit the very people who want to slaughter us. Let them come into the country, we don’t have guns. Let them come in, let them have all the fun they want….The bottom line is that Hillary supports policies that bring the threat of radical Islam into American and allow it to grow overseas, and it is growing.”

Trump’s point was sound. In what way was it not? Combining unrestricted immigration and a massive influx of Muslim migrants, among whom the Islamic State has promised to embed jihadis, with a disarmed American population is simply an invitation to jihad massacres on a frequency never hitherto imagined. Could there be an Orlando-style attack every day? Why not, in the America of the near future that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are busy preparing for us?

Trump declared: “The burden is on Hillary Clinton to tell us why she believes immigration from these dangerous countries should be increased without any effective system to really to screen.” Again, his point his sound: all those, including Hillary, who are busy excoriating Trump for the “racism” and “bigotry” of his immigration proposal have not bothered to suggest any alternative plan for preventing jihadis from entering the country. The bottom line, to borrow one of Trump’s pet phrases, is that Hillary and the rest of the political and media elites would rather see Americans subjected to jihad mass murder on a huge scale than do anything that is politically incorrect.

Another foray into political incorrectness in Trump’s speech was his insistence that the Muslim community in the U.S. has “to work with us. They have to cooperate with law enforcement and turn in the people who they know are bad. They know it. And they have to do it, and they have to do it forthwith….The Muslims have to work with us. They have to work with us. They know what’s going on. They know that he was bad. They knew the people in San Bernardino were bad. But you know what? They didn’t turn them in. And you know what? We had death, and destruction.”

The Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) was furious. CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper claimed that “law enforcement authorities have repeatedly stated that they have tremendous cooperation from the Muslim community.” CAIR’s hypocrisy is astounding, as it has more than once advised Muslims not to cooperate with law enforcement. In January 2011, its San Francisco chapter featured on its website a poster that read, “Build A Wall of Resistance / Don’t Talk to the FBI.” In November 2014, CAIR-Florida’s “14th Annual Banquet Rooted in Faith” in Tampa distributed pamphlets entitled “What to do if the FBI comes for you” and featuring a graphic of a person holding a finger to his lips in the “shhh” signal.

Another CAIR pamphlet, entitled “Know Your Rights: Defending Rights, Defeating Intolerance” featured a graphic of the Statue of Liberty likewise making the “shhh” symbol. Cyrus McGoldrick, a former official of Hamas-linked CAIR’s New York chapter, even threatened informants, tweeting with brutal succinctness: “Snitches get stitches.” Zahra Billoo of CAIR-San Francisco regularly tweets that Muslims have no obligation to talk to the FBI, and should contact Hamas-linked CAIR if the FBI asks to talk to them.

This is the group criticizing Trump for noting that Muslim communities have not been any significant help in rooting out jihadis from among them?

Trump’s most revolutionary proposal was for an overhaul of our entire foreign policy establishment and the assumptions upon which it rests – assumptions that have led us into numerous blind alleys and failed initiatives. He said: “The decision to overthrow the regime in Libya, then pushing for the overthrow of the regime in Syria, among other things, without plans for the day after, have created space for ISIS to expand and grow like nobody has ever seen before. These actions, along with our disastrous Iran deal, have also reduced our ability to work in partnership with our Muslim allies in the region. That is why our new goal must be to defeat Islamic terrorism not nation building. No more nation building. It’s never going to work.”

Indeed. It didn’t work in Iraq. It hasn’t worked in Afghanistan. We have poured billions into Pakistan since 9/11 to help them fight al-Qaeda and the Taliban, and the Pakistani government has funneled a good deal of that money to al-Qaeda and the Taliban. Trump said it: “And by the way we’ve spent almost $5 trillion over the years on trying to nation build in the Middle East and it has been complete and total disaster.” Yet despite the fact that its policies have failed again and again and again, the foreign policy establishment keeps reappointing and promoting those responsible for those failures, allowing them to make more mistakes in ever-larger arenas. But no candidate has ever challenged that establishment – until now.

Trump offered one more common sense that no establishment politician has thought to or dared to make: he suggested that there needs to be a reconfiguration of our alliances, which are still based on the Cold War. “NATO,” he said, “needs to change its focus and stop terrorism….America must unite the whole civilized world in the fight against Islamic terrorism.”

Indeed. The world is on fire courtesy of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. If America votes in November for more of the same, we will soon be engulfed in those flames as well. On Monday, Donald Trump outlined an unprecedentedly realistic plan for putting out the fire.

Categories: 2016 elections, CAIR, Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, Homeland Security, Homosexuals, Islam and human rights, Islamic immigration, Islamic jihad, Islamic reformation, Islamic terror groups, Islamists in America, Obama and Islam, Obama and Jihad, Orlando massacre, Trump on Islamic jihad
Tags: CAIR, Donald Trump, Homeland Security, Homosexuals, Islam and human rights, Islamic immigration, Islamic Jihad, Islamic reformation, Islamic terror groups, Islamists in America, Obama and Islam, Obama and jihad, Orlando massacre, Trump on Islamic jihad

Comments: Be the first to comment

In Times of Crisis Ignorance Doesn’t Help

June 14, 2016

In Times of Crisis Ignorance Doesn’t Help, Clarion Project, Raheel Raza, June 14, 2016

[W]e Muslims have a huge crisis of a virus within our ranks which we are not accepting. This problem is increased by the lack of acknowledgement by Western leaders. Reform minded Muslims like us can only expose the problems. It’s up to the authorities to take corrective action.

***************************

In the wake of yet another terror attack by jihadists, this time in Orlando, Florida, we are deeply saddened but not shocked. This attack is not the first or the last. It’s just another checkmark in a string of attacks by the extremists as they gleefully cross off the targets they have destroyed while planning for more attacks.

Once again media pundits and experts are using the language of ‘lone wolf’ and ‘mental issues.’ Even Hillary Clinton in her address to the nation, mentioned that it could be a lone-wolf attack.

Is it just naivety on part of our leadership or is it ignorance? It doesn’t take rocket science to deduce that this is not a lone-wolf attack. This is a premeditated attack, ideologically supported by all the extremist groups around the world who want to destroy the West. Connect the dots from Boston to Brussels to Paris to Ottawa to San Bernardino and now Orlando.

As far as mental issues are concerned, it’s obvious the radical jihadist mindset is the result of a mentally-deranged ideology.

There, I said it. Now you repeat after me: It’s-a-war-on-the-west-stupid!

But no. You can’t. Political correctness, fear or appeasement keeps your lips sealed. And while you, holding on to your white liberal guilt complex are unable to articulate the real cause of terrorist attacks, they will continue unabated. Why? Because the radical jihadists know your weakness and fear of being called an Islamophobe, so they play you like a piano pressing all the right keys while you sing their song.

Meanwhile, Muslim organizations are competing about who will snare the first news conference. Great idea if they plan to slam the Radical Jihadists, or name them and acknowledge (perhaps for the first time) that we have a problem within the House of Islam. But that’s not the rhetoric in this case. Muslim organizations and places of worship are not generally inclined to be warm and fuzzy towards the LGBTQ community and regularly slam those of us who support them.

In Florida, an Islamic religious scholar was caught on YouTube gently and firmly suggesting that it’s compassionate to kill gays. Why is he not in jail?

Raheel Raza hosts By The Numbers:

CAIR (The Council on American-Islamic Relations) came on Fox News very soon after the Orlando attack. The CAIR representative said all the right things about not killing people in the name of God. And then he condemned ISIS saying “1.7 billion people (Muslims) are united in rejecting their (ISIS) extremism, their interpretation, their acts and senseless violence.”

How much can one person lie on public television? Sadly many people will believe the CAIR representative and of course Muslims are thrilled because he has now absolved all 1.7 billion from any responsibility whatsoever.

If CAIR was really concerned about the Orlando attacks, they would condemn the comments of the religious scholar from Florida, they would speak about ways in which radicalization of our youth can be stemmed and they would openly and publicly reject the concept of “armed jihad” as a 7^th Century construct, no longer applicable in the 21^st Century. They will never say this because they are part of the problem and not part of the solution.

Herein lies a huge problem which must be addressed. Both Muslims and non-Muslims must understand that while all Muslims are not terrorists, most of the terrorists today are Muslims. The ideology of ISIS is the same as Hamas, al-Qaeda and the Taliban. Are they not represented in the 1.7 billion? After killing four innocent people in Tel Aviv, the Hamas operatives who celebrated the murder are also part of the 1.7 billion Muslims.

According a to Pew Poll shown in the Clarion documentary By the Numbers, there are between 40,000 to 200,00 Muslims who are ‘members’ of ISIS; up to 100,000 al-Qaeda affiliates; 7-9,000 members of Hamas, 15,000 to 100,000 Iranian Revolutionary Guards and about 15,000 members of Hezbollah. All these are terrorist organizations and jihadists who should be included in the 1.7 billion Muslims making ALL Muslims not so peaceful. While these are the overtly violent groups, the mindset of millions of other Muslims (according to the poll) is also skewed towards violence and acceptance of violence against other human beings.

This is all to say that we Muslims have a huge crisis of a virus within our ranks which we are not accepting. This problem is increased by the lack of acknowledgement by Western leaders. Reform minded Muslims like us can only expose the problems. It’s up to the authorities to take corrective action.

It’s taken 15 years for the term ‘Radical’ to become accepted usage. How long more will it take to stop the Radicals from carrying out their nefarious agendas and waging a war on the West?

Categories: CAIR, Homeland Security, Hypocrisy, Islam and homosexuals, Islamic jihad, Islamic perversions, Islamic radicalization, Islamic supremacy, Islamic terror groups, Islamists in America, Islamophobia, Orlando massacre, Political correctness
Tags: CAIR, Homeland Security, Hypocrisy, Islam and homosexuals, Islamic Jihad, Islamic perversions, Islamic radicalization, Islamic supremacy, Islamic terror groups, Islamists in America, Islamophobia, Orlando massacre, Political correctness

Comments: Be the first to comment

Archives