Archive for the ‘ISNA’ category

« WarSclerotic home page

Muslim Appreciation Month and “Islamapalooza” Come to the University of Florida

October 27, 2016

Muslim Appreciation Month and “Islamapalooza” Come to the University of Florida, Counter Jihad, Bruce Cornibe, October 27, 2016

There’s no doubt Islam enjoys a favored status in much of the West. Because of this Islamists can penetrate ‘educational’ and ‘cultural’ events with the message of Islam in attempts to push their political agenda as well as dawah (evangelism). This seems to be the underlying objective of a group named Islam on Campus-UF (University of Florida), who are commencing Muslim Appreciation Month by sponsoring a two-day event called “Islamapalooza[.]” The Alligator describes the event by stating:

The monthlong celebration is starting with Islamapalooza, formerly named Islam Fair, on the Plaza of the Americas today from 10 a.m. until 3 p.m., and it will continue Wednesday from 10 a.m. until 3 p.m. The event will feature booths where students can get henna tattoos, play trivia about Islam and eat falafels, pita and samosas.

The festivities seem harmless as the event is under the guise of education (“learn about Islam”) and cultural experience. For the president of Islam On Campus, Maria Ilyas, the event was more of a way for people to better understand Muslims and their beliefs saying, “We’re trying to bring an awareness and appreciation to who Muslims are and what Islam is really about[.]” Okay, so we’re just talking about some misperceptions that lead to miscommunication between Muslims and non-Muslims right? Despite the deceptive language, Islam on Campus’ website reveals a mission that includes more than just education. An excerpt from the website’s “About Us” page reads:

Islam on Campus is an organization devoted to strengthening the Muslim community through service and activism as well as to educating Muslims and non-Muslims alike about the religion of Islam. We also seek to be a source of unity for Muslim students here at the University of Florida. We contribute to the development of the Muslim community here in America and try to remove any barriers to the growth of Islam and the lasting prosperity of Muslims. We struggle for positive social change in all aspects of life and try to provide an atmosphere conducive to the development of future Muslim leaders. All so that we may be of those who are in a constant struggle to perfect their submission to the will of Allah.

It sounds like the organization wants to also spread the message of Islam and Sharia campus wide. Their duplicity shouldn’t come as a surprise considering how they invite speakers from Muslim Brotherhood front organizations to promote their message of ‘understanding’ and ‘dialogue’ better. One such speaker is Zahra Billoo, the executive director of the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) – California, the San Francisco Chapter. Billoo spoke at an event part of Islam Appreciation Month called Coexisting in Faith with Zahra Billoo – which she apparently discussed “the different issues faced by people of different faiths in the United States.” Of course, the language used such as “coexisting” captures the attention of liberals, but Billoo’s ideology represents nothing of the sort. Billoo praises terrorist sympathizers and supporters like “the HLF convicts and Al-Arian” (tweet below). Billoo also is an unashamed anti-American that frequently bashes our U.S. military and law enforcement – comparing them to ISIS (tweets below). That kind of equivalence is not only radical but it is essentially inciting revolutionary actions against our government, which is probably the reason why she supports anti-government groups like Black Lives Matter.

picture1

picture21
picture31

Islam on Campus also appears to have connections with other Muslim Brotherhood front groups such as the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and Muslim Students Association (MSA) National – snippets from Islam on Campus’ Facebook posts are below.

picture41-768x357
picture51-768x439

 

If the University of Florida wants to truly get into the multiculturalist spirit maybe they should host Christianity and Judaism appreciation months. Yet, even though multiculturalists should give different cultures and religions equal treatment, in reality that is rarely the case – in fact, Muslims oftentimes receive preferential treatment. For example, “a Dirty Dozen jihadists” have been linked to the Islamic Society of Boston. Instead of the mosque being shut down for good, “the Islamic Society of Boston, was singled out by President Obama as an example of how his Countering Violent Extremism program is keeping us all safe.” Could one imagine the kind a treatment a church would receive if just one of its congregants was involved in terrorism? Let’s just say that church wouldn’t be in operation too long.

There’s no doubt Islam on Campus is using its religious minority status to subtlety advocate for Islam and Sharia at these ‘educational’ and ‘cultural’ type events. This activism is going to continue to occur and get even worse unless if our public officials and the media call these groups out. Our government leaders must also decide to break off all ties with Islamist mosques and other entities as well as shut down organizations with terrorism ties. The prevalence of events like “Islamapalooza” throughout the West reveals how are leaders are willing to sacrifice the minds of our kids in order for political expedience. Sharia doesn’t respect freedom and dignity for all human life so why should we respect it?

Categories: CAIR, Islam - submission, Islamic indoctrination, Islamisation, Islamists in America, ISNA
Tags: , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

5 Ways Islamists Set the Stage for the Orlando Attack

June 13, 2016

5 Ways Islamists Set the Stage for the Orlando Attack, Clarion Project, Ryan Mauro, June 13, 2016

(This video is pertinent to the discussion.

— DM)

Orlando-Attack-HP

The stage was set for the types of attacks we saw in Orlando a long time before the Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL) showed up. Gays, just like Jews, are commonly scapegoated as vile, sin-bearing creatures whose mere presence decays societies.

The stigmatizing of homosexuals inevitably leads to mistreatment and violence towards them, and we should not make the mistake of assuming this problem begins and ends with ISIS.

Here are five ways that Islamists created the conditions for the Orlando attacks to happen even before ISIS was born:

    1. Supporting the Execution of Gays by Sharia Authorities. All of the significant Muslim organizations in the West will condemn the attacks in Orlando, but it is simply not enough. Mainstream Islamic texts and preachers may not call for individuals to execute and punish suspected gays, but they do support having an Islamic state based on sharia doing it. Their issue isn’t with killing gays; it’s with who gets to kill gays.If you believe that a sharia-based government should execute gays, then it doesn’t take much for you to harm gays. All you need is an excuse to match that instilled hatred with action. At the very least, if you are convinced violent jihad is permissible, you’ll make them one of your top targets.This viral video has footage of a visiting imam speaking at the Husseini Islamic Center in Sanford, Florida arguing that it is “compassionate” to execute homosexuals, saying, “Let’s get rid of them now.”Another example is Muzammil Siddiqi, the chairman of the executive council of the Fiqh Council of North America, which is a section of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity as identified by the Justice Department. ISNA is the Obama Administration’s top Muslim outreach partner.Siddiqi said in 2001 that he opposes attacking homosexuals but supports sharia states that execute them. He said it is impossible to be Muslim and gay, which means that any gay person identifying as a Muslim is an apostate. That is a death sentence according to the top sharia authorities.
    2. Promoting Incendiary Texts. Muslims trust that their mosque’s library and the reference page in studies are full of credible sources. If a text supports killing gays, it does not belong. It should only be used in a class with the purpose of refuting the author.For example, an authoritative manual on sharia titled Reliance of the Traveler endorses killing or brutality towards homosexuals (such as stoning, exile and whippings) at least three times. It is certified by Al-Azhar University, the most prominent Sunni school of learning and endorsed by the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), a Muslim Brotherhood entity based in Virginia.Those who give authority to Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader and suspected Hamas financier Yousef al-Qaradawi also bear responsibility. He preaches in favor of executing homosexuals and said that a gay prince in Qatar should be stoned.It isn’t hard to search a website’s content for extremist content. There have been many occasions where I’ve seen Muslim organizations and mosques link to the now-defunct OnIslam website, whose purpose is to act as a database for answers to tough questions.In 2014, OnIslam answered a question about homosexuality by affirming that “the punishment for men or women who are unwilling to give up homosexuality and therefore are rejecting the guidance ofAllah Most High is in fact death according to Islam.”
    3. Giving a Platform to Radical Clerics. Islamists who do not directly endorse laws that punish homosexuals but put Islamist radicals on a pedestal are not free from blame.A radical Syrian cleric was granted entry into the U.S. in 2014 with a known history of supporting the execution of gays, among other extremist beliefs like supporting suicide bombings. He went on a speaking tour across the country that was co-sponsored by the Syrian American Council.His extremism is easily searchable on the Internet. There’s no excuse for putting him in front of audiences as someone whose preaching should be learned from. If you want to raise money for victims of the Syrian civil war, find someone else.
    4. Presenting Homosexuals as Vermin. Islamists who do not endorse violence or punishments of homosexuals but dehumanize them bear responsibility for the inevitable fruits of that dehumanization. If you preach that a group of people are rodents responsible for the worst problems in the world, then obviously listeners will treat them like rodents.There are religious communities who disapprove of homosexuality and same-sex marriage. Members of these communities can believe someone’s lifestyle is not ideal, but love them regardless without supremacism.  After all, none of us lead an ideal life.Then there’s bigoted scapegoating by Islamists who seem to talk about homosexuality more than actual homosexuals. An example is Warith Deen Umar, a radical cleric, who once oversaw Muslims chaplains in New York’s prison system. Umar blamed gays for Hurricane Katrina at an Islamic Society of North America conference.Here’s another example: Pakistan-based Sheikh Gillani (who is the spiritual leader of a U.S.-based group named Muslims of the Americas) declared that the Supreme Court ruling legalizing same-sex marriage is “the blackest day in the history of mankind” that will result in Allah’s destruction of Western society. He also called for a “social boycott” of all those who do not oppose the Supreme Court ruling.How would you treat a group of people that you believe are responsible for “the blackest day in the history of mankind?”
    5. Blocking Islamic Reform. As soon as news of Islamist responsibility for the attacks broke, the American-Islamic Forum for Democracy unequivocally stood against bigotry towards homosexuals in any form and thanked the LGBTQ community for standing by Muslims who face discrimination and hatred.And the anti-Islamist Muslim group went further, saying, “We Muslims must triple down on acknowledging the deep reforms necessary and the responsibility of every Muslim in countering the ideologies that inspire these Islamist savages.”The fact is that anti-gay hatred is in the mainstream of the Muslim world. It’s endorsed by top religious authorities. It’s in the media and mosques without backlashes happening.It’s popular–which is why a glory-seeking jihadist like Omar Mateen would pick a gay club as a target. Or, for that matter, Ali Muhammad Brown (who murdered two gays in Seattle in 2014) or Musab Muhammad Masmari (who tried to burn down a gay club on New Year’s Eve that same year).One 2009 survey found that 61% of British Muslims want homosexuality to be illegal.Again, it is not enough for Muslim leaders to condemn the attacks. That does nothing to address the underlying ideology that says homosexuals are evil and worth of death.In the wake of the attacks in Orlando, they must not only condemn that line of thinking—they must attack it ideologically and aggressively promote alternative interpretations in the Muslim community in the West and around the world.

And until that happens, attacks like what we saw in Orlando will continue to happen. The only question will be who takes credit.

Categories: American-Islamic Forum for Democracy, CAIR, Islam and homosexuals, Islam and human rights, Islam and the Islamic State, Islamic reformation, Islamists in America, ISNA, Obama and Islam, Orlando massacre, Political Islam, Sharia law
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Muslims in US Rebrand Polygamy as “Cultural Wives”

May 21, 2016

Muslims in US Rebrand Polygamy as “Cultural Wives” Front Page Magazine, Daniel Greenfield, May 21, 2016

byb-poligamy-no-worse-than-adultery-300px-polygamy_in_islam

I wrote a while back about the “race, religion, culture” shell game that Muslims play to extract every possible advantage.

What is Islam? The obvious dictionary definition answer is that it’s a religion, but legally speaking it actually enjoys all of the advantages of race, religion and culture with none of the disadvantages.

Islam is a religion when mandating that employers accommodate the hijab, but when it comes time to bring it into the schools, places that are legally hostile to religion, American students are taught about Islam, visit mosques and even wear burkas and recite Islamic prayers to learn about another culture. Criticism of Islam is denounced as racist even though the one thing that Islam clearly isn’t is a race.

Islamist organizations have figured out how lock in every advantage of race, religion and culture, while expeditiously shifting from one to the other to avoid any of the disadvantages.

Now they’re trying it out with polygamy. Suddenly second wives are not religious, they’re cultural. And you can’t criticize culture.

The federal government says a man considered by Somali immigrants as the most important Muslim cleric does not have the “good moral character” to remain a U.S. citizen.

The U.S. attorney’s office wants the citizenship granted to Mohamed Idris Ahmed in 2003 revoked. Prosecutors say he lied on his naturalization application by not mentioning that he had two wives and had traveled outside the United States.

Ahmed, 38, testified that he has a “legal” wife from a civil marriage living with their children in Kenya and a “religious or cultural” wife and family in Saudi Arabia. He said a U.S. consulate official in Saudi Arabia advised him to bring only the legal wife and children to the United States. Because of that, he believed he did not need to mention the religious marriage.

This distinction is purely imaginary. Polygamy is fully legal and approved in Saudi Arabia. There are no cultural or religious wives.

Ahmed is well-respected at the Islamic Association of North America, according to Executive Director Hassan Jama. The association is based in Minneapolis, Minneapolis, which has the largest population of Somali immigrants in the United States. Columbus is second.

I’m sure he is. Considering what ISNA is, that’s hardly a recommendation.

The organization grew out of the Muslim Students Association (MSA), which also was founded by Brotherhood members.

Federal prosecutors included ISNA on a list of unindicted co-conspirators in the Hamas-financing prosecution of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF). ISNA is listed among “individuals/entities who are and/or were members of the US Muslim Brotherhood.” The trial ended with guilty verdicts on 108 counts in November 2008.

Its conferences have featured rhetoric in support of terrorist groups and other radicalism. This continued at the 2009 convention, where panelists expressed extreme anti-Semitism and support for the terrorist group Hizballah.

Having ISNA come to your defense is like being accused of armed robbery and then having Charles Manson defend you by explaining that you’re one of his serial killers.

Categories: Islam and child brides, Islam and women, Islamic culture, Islamic integration, Islamisation, Islamists in America, ISNA
Tags: , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Only Islam Can Save Us From Islam

May 18, 2016

Only Islam Can Save Us From Islam, Front Page Magazine, Daniel Greenfield, May 18, 2016

Quran and Islam

In the Washington Post, Petraeus complained about the “inflammatory political discourse that has become far too common both at home and abroad against Muslims and Islam.” The former general warned that restricting Muslim immigration would “undermine our ability to defeat Islamist extremists by alienating and undermining the allies whose help we most need to win this fight: namely, Muslims.”

At Rutgers, Obama claimed that restricting Muslim immigration “would alienate the very communities at home and abroad who are our most important partners in the fight against violent extremism.”

If we alienate Muslims, who is going to help us fight Muslim terrorism?

You can see why Obama doesn’t mention Islamic terrorism in any way, shape or form. Once you drop the “I” word, then the argument is that you need Islam to fight Islam. And Muslims to fight Muslims.

This is bad enough in the Muslim world where we are told that we have to ally with the “moderate” Muslim governments of Saudi Arabia and Pakistan to fight the Muslim terrorists whom they sponsor.

Petraeus has troublingly close ties to the Saudis. He defended their oil dumping program, praised the role of Islamic law in fighting Islamic terrorism and endorsed their Syria plans. While defending the Saudis as allies, he blamed Israel for America’s problems with the Muslim world. The narrative he was using there was the traditional Saudi one in which Israel, not Islam, is the source of the friction.

He defended Pakistan as an ally and claimed to believe the Pakistani excuses that they did not know Osama bin Laden was living right in their military center and that they really wanted to fight the Taliban.

Obama’s “partners” against “violent extremism” have included Muslim Brotherhood terror supporters at home and abroad. He backed Al Qaeda’s LIFG in Libya, Iran’s Shiite terror militias in Iraq, Al Qaeda allies in Syria and those are just a few of the worst examples of his partners against extremism.

Petraeus and Obama view terrorists and state sponsors of terror as important allies. Their policies have led to multiple terrorist attacks against Americans. And they still insist that we need Islamic terrorists as allies to protect us from Islamic terrorists. We need moderate theocrats to protect us from extremist theocrats. We need the Saudis and Pakistanis to save us from the terrorists whom they arm and fund.

But it’s Muslim immigration where their argument really shines.

The United States faces a terror threat because a certain percentage of the Muslim population will kill Americans. Every increase in the Muslim population also increases the number of potential terrorists. Muslim immigration increases the terrorism risk to Americans every single year.

These are undeniable facts.

When you’re in a hole, stop digging. Muslim populations are a hole. Immigration is the shovel. Dig deep enough and you’re six feet under.

Even if the mainstream narrative about a moderate majority and extremist minority were true, how could the cost of Islamic terrorism justify the expansion of even moderate Muslim communities?

9/11 cost us $3.3 trillion, over 10,000 dead, a national loss of privacy and traumas inflicted on millions. What could any number of moderate Muslims possibly contribute to outweigh all that? If it were a debt, it would take a thousand years to even begin balancing out those scales. And instead of trying to make amends, Muslim groups like CAIR and ISNA have waged a relentless campaign to undermine national security and defame Americans. They have refused to cooperate with law enforcement, defended terrorists and denounced America. These are our “moderate” partners.

But the Obama/Petraeus narrative about needing partners in Muslim communities in America implicitly concedes that Muslim communities at home, like the Saudis and Pakistanis abroad, create environments in which Islamic terrorists can safely operate. They admit the existence of Islamic no-go zones where the FBI and local law enforcement are ineffective so that we have to treat parts of Michigan or New Jersey like Pakistan or Iraq, trying to work with untrustworthy allies to gain intelligence on enemy territory.

We have to work with CAIR or ISNA, the way we do with the Saudis or Pakistanis, even though they’re untrustworthy, because they’re all we have in parts of America that have become enemy territory.

This argument is terrible enough in the Middle East. But it’s horrifying in the Midwest.

It’s bad enough that we sign off on “partners” who finance terrorists and then pretend to fight them in Syria or Afghanistan, do we really want to be doing this in Illinois or California?

The real problem, as Obama and Petraeus indirectly concede, is that Muslim communities create an ideal environment for Muslim terrorists. The last thing that we should be doing is building them up.

Even if Muslim communities were an asset, the Obama/Petraeus narrative is that they benefit us by helping us deal with the problems that they cause. The obvious question would be to wonder why we need them in the first place to help us cope with a problem that wouldn’t exist without them.

Obama insists that we need Muslim immigration so that Muslims will help us fight Muslim terror. But if we didn’t have Muslim immigration, we wouldn’t need Muslims to help us fight Muslim terrorism.

Muslim immigration isn’t a solution. It’s a problem posing as a solution. And we are told that we need to make the problem bigger in order to solve it. Muslim immigration has yet to reduce terrorism in any country. The increase in Muslim populations has not made Europe any safer. On the contrary, it has increased the risk of terrorism. The same is also true in Africa, Asia and across the Middle East.

The plan to reduce the risk of terrorism by increasing the Muslim population has failed around the world. Nor has it ever worked in the United States. What are the odds that it suddenly will now?

Building a counterterrorism strategy around creating more terrorism is not a strategy, it’s a suicide mission. Using Muslim immigration to fix a terrorism problem caused by Muslim immigration is like drilling a hole in a boat and then trying to plug it with water. Europe is sinking and if we don’t stop importing hundreds of thousands of Muslims, we’ll be facing the same problems that Europe does.

“It is precisely because the danger of Islamist extremism is so great that politicians here and abroad who toy with anti-Muslim bigotry must consider the effects of their rhetoric,” Petraeus insists. It’s a compelling argument, but not in the way that he thinks it is.

If Muslims can’t handle the full spectrum of argument, debate and namecalling that is a part of life in a free country without turning homicidal, then something has to go. According to Petraeus, it’s freedom of speech. According to others, it’s Muslim migration. Americans will have to decide whether they would rather have freedom of speech or Muslim immigration. Because even the advocates for Muslim migration are increasingly willing to admit that we can’t have both. The choice is ours.

Either we can hope that Islam will save us from Islam. And that Muslims will protect us from other Muslims. Or we can try to protect ourselves and save our lives and our freedoms from Islam.

Categories: CAIR, Foreign policy, Islamic immigration, Islamic integration, Islamic terrorism, Islamisation, Islamists in America, ISNA, Muslim Brotherhood, Obama and Islam, Pakistan, Petraeus, Saudi Arabia
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: 2 Comments

Muslim Brotherhood 101: Why the State Dept Should Ban Them

April 7, 2016

Muslim Brotherhood 101: Why the State Dept Should Ban Them, Clarion Project, Elliot Friedland, April 7, 2016

Egypt-Muslim-Brotherhood-Supporters-Flags-HP_2Muslim Brotherhood supporters. (Photo: © Reuters)

Clarion Project launches a new campaign to demand the Muslim Brotherhood be designated a terrorist entity in the United States.

Muslim Brotherhood_NL

Who is the Muslim Brotherhood?

The Muslim Brotherhood (Al-Ihkwan al-Muslimun) is a Sunni, pan-Islamic organization based in Cairo, Egypt whose ultimate aim is the re-establishment of the global Islamic caliphate and the implementation of sharia as state law. Founded in Egypt in 1928 it is the oldest Islamist group in the world and along with Jamaat e-Islami in Pakistan and India, the most influential.

During World War II they backed the Nazis against the British. They were provided with a printing press by the Third Reich to print Arabic copies of Hitler’s book Mein Kampf and the notorious anti-Semitic forgery Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

They see Islam as a holistic system of life that must be implemented at every level. This includes the brutal hudud punishments such as amputations and the death penalty for adultery and blasphemy. However, they are aware that such ideas are unpopular so they seek first to Islamize the society through education. Although the group officially renounced violence in 1971, that seems to have been a practical decision. The group still believes that armed jihad is a legitimate way to achieve its goals when the time is right.

Following that they would implement their policies step-by-step, under their doctrine of gradualism. After the Egyptian revolution the group came to power in an election which attempted to implement this vision. It was deposed after one year because of their tyrannical policies.

They have branches in approximately 80 countries worldwide including the United States.

Is the Muslim Brotherhood Involved in Terrorism?

They have been the leading source of inspiration behind terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda and its offshoot the Islamic State. Founder Hassan al-Banna and ideologue Sayyid Qutb wrote extensively on the importance of armed jihad. Qutb is also credited with the idea of modern political understanding of jahilliya, which holds that any government which does not implement sharia as state law is in a state of un-Islamic ignorance and should be opposed.

Osama bin Laden’s mentor, Abdullah Azzam, and the mastermind of 9/11, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, were both members of the Muslim Brotherhood before they joined al-Qaeda.

The Muslim Brotherhood branch in Gaza, Hamas, is a terrorist organization which glorifies attacks on civilians and seeks to violently eradicate the state of Israel and commit massacres against the Jews living there.

Muslim-Brotherhood-linked entities in America and other countries have raised money for Hamas. The most famous case of this was the Holy Land Foundation Trial in 2007.

What are other governments doing about the Muslim Brotherhood?

The Muslim Brotherhood has been banned in Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates as a terrorist organization. The UAE ban included U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entities the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Muslim American Society (MAS) as well as Islamic Relief Worldwide, which has sent money to Hamas.

Israel has also banned Islamic Relief Worldwide for funding Hamas.

The UK commissioned a report into the Muslim Brotherhood. While it stopped short of banning it as a terrorist organization, the British government rejected the myth that the Brotherhood is “moderate” along with the patently false notion that it is “non-violent.” The UK will keep the Muslim Brotherhood under review.

Which US Organizations Are Included in This Bill

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR); the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT).

Read our profiles of each group’s extremism by clicking on the links

 

Categories: CAIR, ISNA, Muslim Brotherhood, NAIT, Obama and Muslim Brotherhood, Obama's America, State Department
Tags: , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment