Islamic hatred of others | WarSclerotic | Page 2

Posted tagged ‘Islamic hatred of others’

NY, NJ Alleged Bomber’s Path to Terror

September 20, 2016

NY, NJ Alleged Bomber’s Path to Terror, Clarion Project, September 20, 2016

ahmad-rahmani-apprehended-ip

First responders at the scene of the bombing in the Chelsea neighborhood of Manhattan Saturday night (Photo: video screenshot); Inset: the suspected bomber Ahmad Kahn Rahmani (Photo: Twitter/NYPD)

New York City and New Jersey bombing suspect Ahmad Rahami traveled numerous times to his homeland in Afghanistan as well as to Pakistan in recent years, according to Rep. Peter King (R-NY), as reported by the New York Post.

After his last trip to the country of his birth, he became noticeably religious. “He had changed. He dressed differently, more religiously, the robe and everything,” said Flee Jones, 27, a childhood friend of Rahami. “I really never expected it from him. He was always this fun loving guy, but now he was all quiet. He had found religion. It’s mind blowing.”

Rahmani also began posting radical Islamist writings and jihad-related topics on his personal website.

Those who know Rahmani and his relatives said his entire family became devout after their last trip to Afghanistan a number of years ago, replacing their Western-style dress with tradition Islamic clothing. Neighbors also reported after the trip Rahmani became more serious and lost interest in his favorite hobbies, one of which was fixing up Honda Civics for racing.

A woman who was his childhood sweetheart and with whom he had a baby said Rahmani ranted against American culture, the American military and homosexuality. The woman, identified only as Maria, said she hadn’t seen Rahmani in two years and he never paid child support.

On one of his trips abroad, he returned with a wife and child.

Police officers traced the bombing in Chelsea to Rahmani, whose fingerprints were found on a second, unexploded bomb a few blocks away from the first that went off Saturday night. Twenty-nine people were injured in the Chelsea bombing.

Authorities also believe Rahmani was responsible for the bomb that exploded at a charity race for marines in New Jersey the next day. After the initial bomb blast in New Jersey, five more homemade bombs were found later that night. No one was injured in the blast which was timed and placed to occur at the beginning of the race. Police officers discovered a suspicious object, postponed the start of the race and evacuated participants.

The Chelsea bombs were made from pressure cookers similar to those used by the Boston Marathon bombers. Instructions for making such bombs can be found in al-Qaeda’s slick, English-language magazine Inspire.

The New Jersey bomb was made from pipes.

A construction worker who used to frequent the family’s fried-chicken restaurant became concerned three years ago when Rahmani and a number of the restaurant workers stopped speaking to him when they found out about his Israeli heritage.

“The first thing I did after I talked to them is I went to check my car underneath…I went to check for a bomb,” said Miguel, who only gave the press his first name.

A former marine Johnathan Wagner, 26, said Rahmani’s father spoke to him about fighting with the mujahideen in Afghanistan in the 90s against the Russians and showed him pictures of himself.

Rahmani’s family applied for asylum in the U.S. in 1995 when he was seven years old. After graduating from high school, he studied criminal justice for two years in college before dropping out. An altercation in 2014 with his sister resulted in assault charges when Rahmani allegedly tried to stab her. She later dropped the charges.

Categories: Islamic hatred of others, Islamic radicalization, Islamic terrorism, Islamisation, NY-NJ Bomber
Tags: Islamic hatred of others, Islamic radicalization, Islamic terrorism, Islamisation, NY-NJ Bomber

Comments: 1 Comment

Islamic Movement in U.S. Preparing for Battle

September 13, 2016

Islamic Movement in U.S. Preparing for Battle, Understanding the Threat, September 13, 2016

As UTT has continually reported, there exists in the United States a significant jihadi movement led primarily by the Muslim Brotherhood whose organizations include the most prominent and influential Islamic groups in America.

weapons2-300x225

The Islamic Movement in the U.S. continues their daily work of preparing for the coming battle at all levels of the society. From a military standpoint, the leaders of the American Muslim community are coalescing their forces and preparing strategically, operationally, and logistically for war.

Strategic Overlay

Going back to the early 1980’s, the jihadis set up an elaborate network of jihadi centers known in the U.S. as the Al Kifah Refugee Centers to recruit jihadis for the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan. Some of these over three dozen offices were operated by only a couple jihadis with a phone or fax machine, and some had a more sizable presence in the community. Nevertheless, they created nodes across the United States for jihadis in many American cities, and became centers for possible Al Qaeda recruitment in the future.

For the last few decades the Pakistani terrorist organization known as Jamaat al Fuqra has been establishing jihaditraining camps in the United States primarily among black Muslims, many of whom were recruited in prison. Known in the U.S. as “Muslims of America” or “MOA,” approximately two dozen of the three dozen known camps appear to be operational today.

In the early 1990’s the Chief Investigator for the state of Colorado, with support from the Governor and Attorney General, launched a multi-jurisdictional raid of an MOA compound near Buena Vista (CO) and discovered weapons, explosives, lists of people to be assassinated, evidence that military/national guard bases had been under surveillance, and the like.

In one of the gems discovered in the 2004 FBI raid of the Annandale, Virginia home of a senior Muslim Brotherhood/Hamas leader, a recording of a senior Muslim Brotherhood leader speaking to a group of Muslim Brothers in Missouri revealed the MB has numerous training camps inside America and conducted regular firearms training.

To be clear, they are not planning on conducting violent actions in the immediate future, but are planning for “Zero Hour” – their term for when the violent jihad will begin when the time is right. They may wait until an outside influence from a foreign power or a major event initiates conflict, and then the Islamic Movement can begin the jihad and act independently or as an ally for a hostile foreign power such as Iran or China.

In the MB’s 5-Phase “World Underground Movement Plan” – discovered at the 2004 FBI raid in Annandale, Virginia – the Brotherhood states (Phase 2) they must “Establish a government (secret) within the government.” The purpose of this is to have jihadis on the inside of our government who will serve as the leadership for the Islamic Movement when they seize power in the United States. Until then, their role is to (1) gather intelligence and (2) conduct influence operations at all levels of the society, especially within the decision-making process.

As has previously been discussed, this is much more a counterintelligence and espionage issue than it is a “terrorism” matter. The enemy is preparing the battlefield now for the eventual battle to come.

The U.S. Network

The evidence in the largest terrorism financing and Hamas trial ever successfully prosecuted in American history (US v Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, Dallas 2008) reveals the most prominent Islamic organizations in the U.S. are a part of a massive jihadi network whose stated objective is to wage “Civilization Jihad” to destroy our system of government and establish an Islamic State (caliphate) under sharia here. The evidence also reveals the Muslim Brotherhood Islamic Centers/Mosques are the places at which jihadi train for battle and from which the jihad will be launched.

All of the mosques our military entered during the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and mosques that European authorities have raided in the last two years have had weapons in them. The mosque is what Mohammad used a mosque for, and the launch point for jihad is one of those purposes.

There are over 2400 Islamic Centers/Mosques in America, most of which are a part of the MB’s jihadi network.

In the United States the “nucleus” for the Islamic Movement is the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) whose subsidiary Islamic Societies number approximately 170. The Muslim Students Associations (MSA) serve as a recruiting arm for jihadis, and there are over 700 chapters on nearly every major college campus in America.

Reports from around the country from civilian and law enforcement sources reveal: Mosques and Islamic organizations are being built in strategic locations – near key infrastructure facilities, military bases, or some other key position in the community; taxi cab drivers at the largest airports in the U.S. are Muslim; and there is a noticeable increase in sharia-compliant Muslim TSA officers, baggage handlers and airline/airport employees at U.S. airports.

Additionally: Muslims are purchasing hotels, quick marts, and 7-11 type stores with gas stations, and a majority of major hotels in cities across the U.S. have a manager or assistant manager who is a Muslim, which is statistically impossible unless this activity is intentional.

Quick marts and gas stations provide their Movement with a logistics train that will be needed in a battle. Having people in leadership positions at major hotels in major cities, where law enforcement and intelligence groups and others hold conferences, serve as excellent intelligence gathering nodes.

Jihadis have penetrated U.S. federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies giving them access to sensitive intelligence systems, while simultaneously they have shut down real threat-based training inside these same agencies under the guise factual/truth-based training is “offensive to Muslims.”

Jihadis have themselves penetrated senior levels of the government (eg Suhail Khan working for two successive Secretaries of Transportation with access to classified critical infrastructure details), and have recruited senior U.S. government officials to promote and protect their interests which are hostile to the U.S. (most recent example – Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson promoting and defending leading MB organization ISNA and speaking at their annual convention expressly to open the door to more Cabinet officials to do the same).

Key jihadi organizations, like Hamas (doing business as the Council on American Islamic Relations/CAIR) work on Capitol Hill and inside government agencies to keep truthful discussions about the Islamic threat from ever happening, while plotting to work with Al Qaeda (as evidenced by UTT’s Chris Gaubatz discovery of a CAIR document dated 3/08/04 at their headquarters in Washington, D.C. stating, “Attempt to understand Islamic movements in the area, and start supporting Islamic groups including Mr. bin Laden and his associates”).

muslims-1

Now, the U.S. government is bringing tens of thousands of sharia adherent Muslims into our nation. From the Islamic perspective, these people are Muhajaroun – those who make the hijra into the non-Muslim lands in preparation for the “Final Stage,” which is armed conflict with the host country. This is all a part of their strategy, and is consistent with core Islamic doctrine.

Finally, we are currently observing the Marxist/Socialist Movement in the U.S. working directly with the Islamic Movement at the ground and strategic levels. Both have publicly declared their support for one another, they are both receiving funding from hard-left Marxists/socialists (eg George Soros) and foreign powers, and both are openly pushing for confrontation with and the overthrow of the U.S. government.

The Islamic Movement in the United States is deeply embedded in the U.S. decision-making process, has thousands of organizations and allies, possesses a logistics train of fuel and supplies, conducts weapons training programs, has access to U.S. intelligence systems, is well funded (primarily by Iran, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, etc), has strategic plans for North America (An Explanatory Memorandum) and has a plan to implement the strategy (Implementation Manual) which they are following.

The U.S. response is to say “Islam is a religion of peace” and work with the very Muslim leaders who are driving this hostile network.

Victory is not possible with this recipe.

Each year there are between 70 and 120 new Islamic non-profits being created in America, most of which appear to be working directly in line with the Muslim Brotherhood’s plan to wage civilization jihad until “Zero Hour” when the war goes hot.

Until then, they continue to prep the battlefield because they are really at war with us because they are following sharia – core Islamic doctrine – as their blueprint for what they are doing.

Categories: CAIR, Department of Homeland Security, Hamas, Islam and human rights, Islam and terrorism, Islamic hatred of others, Islamic immigration, Islamic jihad, Islamic refugees, Islamic Society of North America, Islamic supremacy, Islamic training camps, Islamisation, Islamists in America, Muslim Brotherhood, Muslim Students Union, Obama's affinity for Islam
Tags: CAIR, Department of Homeland Security, Hamas, Islam and human rights, Islam and terrorism, Islamic hatred of others, Islamic immigration, Islamic Jihad, Islamic refugees, Islamic Society of North America, Islamic supremacy, Islamic training camps, Islamists in America, Muslim Brotherhood, Muslim Students Union, Obama's affinity for Islam

Comments: 1 Comment

Prince Hussein on Trump and Farage as ‘Demagogues and Fantasists’

September 11, 2016

Prince Hussein on Trump and Farage as ‘Demagogues and Fantasists’, American Thinker, Paul Austin Murphy, September 11, 2016

Prince Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein — a Jordanian of the Hashemite tribe (which traces itself back to Muhammed) — has just called various right-wing Western politicians “demagogues and political fantasists”. Mr. Hussein did so while addressing a security conference in The Hague.

Here’s a few words on the Prince himself.

Prince Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein is the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. He’s the son of Prince Ra’ad bin Zeid, the former Lord Chamberlain of Jordan. Hussein himself was once Jordan’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations.

A Jordanian as a UN human rights chief? That’s the same Jordan that doesn’t allow a single Jew to become a citizen and which is a specialist administrator of torture. (Jordan does allow Israelis and Jewish tourists.) This also squares well with all those Saudis at the United Nations who preach to the rest of the world about interfaith, terrorism and, believe it or not, human rights.

Here’s Wikipedia on Jordan’s current record:

“ — limitations on the right of citizens to change their government peacefully;

— cases of arbitrary deprivation of life, torture, poor prison conditions, impunity, arbitrary arrest and denial of due process through administrative detention, and prolonged detention;

— breaches of fair trial standards and external interference in judicial decisions;

— infringements on privacy rights;

— limited freedoms of speech and press, and government interference in the media and threats of fines and detention that encourage self-censorship;

— restricted freedoms of assembly and association…

— legal and societal discrimination and harassment of religious minorities and converts from Islam are a concern…

— legal and societal discrimination and harassment of members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community;

— loss of Jordanian nationality by some citizens of Palestinian origin;

— restricted labor rights; and

— cases of abuse of foreign domestic workers.”

Prince al-Hussein included Geert Wilders, Donald Trump, and Nigel Farage in his broad generalisations. However, he singled out the Dutch leader, Geert Wilders, as an especially bad “bigot”.

Then Trump and Farage came in for an attack. Apparently they use the same tactics as the Islamic State. Yes, you read that correctly.

Well, if Geert Wilders is a “demagogue and political fantasist”, so too are very many people in the Netherlands, because opinion polls have just told us that Wilders’ party — the Freedom Party (PVV) — is leading the polls in that part of the world.

Wilders, like Nigel Farage, has also recently addressed the American people. More precisely, Wilders addressed the U.S. Republican Party National Convention in Cleveland, Ohio, last month.

Prince al-Hussein went into more detail when he spoke at the inauguration of the Peace, Justice and Security Foundation.

Firstly, he said that he was speaking directly to Geert Wilders and his “acolytes”. Indeed, he was speaking to all the populists, demagogues, and political fantasists who inhabit Europe and America.

Prince Hussein continued:

“I am a Muslim, who is, confusingly to racists, also white-skinned; whose mother is European and father, Arab. And I am angry, too, because of Mr. Wilders’ lies and half-truths, manipulations and peddling of fear.”

Isn’t it strange when European political/economic elites and Arab princes (in this case) cast disparaging remarks about “populists” and populism? It’s as if populism is as culpable as racism is nowadays. It’s also interesting to hear Hussein say that because he’s white, this ends up being “confusing to racists”. Really? But, Prince Hussein, Islam is not a race and neither do Muslims constitute a single race. So why should patriots and counterjihadists be confused by Hussein’s whiteness? Is he mixing-up patriots and counterjihadists with those very many Leftists who see everything in terms of race? Or, instead, is he confusing them with the very many Muslims who use the “race card” to quell all criticisms of Islam and Muslims (as Muslims)?

Prince Hussein returned to his themes of populism and Mr. Wilders. His said that the PVV’s (Wilders’ party) manifesto is “grotesque” and that Wilders has much in common with Donald Trump, Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban, France’s National Front leader Marine Le Pen, and UKip’s Nigel Farage. Moreover, he called for decisive political action to be taken against populism and patriotism. (Whatever could he mean by that?)

In one news piece I read, Prince Hussein talked about “half-truths” and “oversimplification” when it comes to Islam. In detail, he said:

“But in its mode of communication, its use of half-truths and oversimplification, the propaganda of Daesh uses tactics similar to those of the populists.”

That’s strange really because Hussein, at least here, seems not to have given any examples of such “half-truths” or “oversimplifications”. However, since Hussein pretends to believe that all the critics of Islam think that there can be no such thing as a white or a yellow Muslim, perhaps he’s mistaking Islam’s critics for other people.

I said earlier that International Socialists (i.e., Leftists) see everything in terms of race (as National Socialists also do), and that Muslims use the charge of racism to help them install sharia blasphemy law, so here’s Hussein elaborating on this. He said that “humiliating racial and religious prejudice fanned by the likes of Mr Wilders” had become official policy in some countries.

Mr. Hussein also warned that such racism and populism could easily and quickly descend into “colossal violence”. The only places in which there is colossal violence nowadays are Muslim countries. These Muslims, however, aren’t the victims of white racism or populism: they are victims of Muslim-on-Muslim “hate”. As for Europe and the United States, it will almost a certainty be the case that most of the violence which happens in the future in these countries will be the responsibility of Muslims. And Prince Hussein himself will bear some of the responsibility for that.

Prince al-Hussein finished off his speech with the following words:

“Are we going to continue to stand by and watch this banalisation of bigotry, until it reaches its logical conclusion?”

Sorry, Mr. Hussein, I see much more bigotry and violence coming from the Muslim quarter than I do from anywhere else in the world. And, in a certain sense, such violence is partly a result of what Hussein and his United Nations are attempting to bring about in European and American — i.e., sharia blasphemy law.

Categories: Donald Trump, Geert Wilders, Islam and human rights, Islamic hatred of others, Jordanian human rights, Nigel Farage, Prince Zeid Ra'ad al-Hussein, Racism, UNCHR
Tags: Donald Trump, Geert Wilders, Islam and human rights, Islamic hatred of others, Jordanian human rights, Nigel Farage, Prince Zeid Ra'ad al-Hussein, Racism, UNCHR

Comments: Be the first to comment

How the world has changed since 9/11

September 11, 2016

How the world has changed since 9/11, Israel Hayom, Clifford D. May, September 11, 2016

The 15th anniversary of 9/11 should be a time to think hard about what happened and why and what we are prepared to do to stop those determined to do it again.

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

The 15th anniversary of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 should be a time for mourning, commemoration, reflection — and strategic planning.

But many people prefer to avoid thinking too much about how life was interrupted on that sunny Tuesday morning: mothers and fathers making one final phone call to their children; office workers who moments earlier were deciding where to have dinner now deciding whether to be consumed by flames or leap to their deaths; dutiful police and firefighters rushing into the World Trade Center, never to come out again; a long plume of smoke rising from the grey rubble of what had been great edifices bustling with commercial activity, as America-haters, domestic and foreign, began to babble about chickens coming home to roost.

In much of the media, what happened will no doubt be described as a tragedy, rather than what it was: an act of war and an atrocity. We’ll hear only a little about al-Qaida’s current status, and next to nothing about its relationship to the Islamic State group and the Islamic Republic of Iran, about how the Muslim Brotherhood, al-Shabab, Boko Haram and Lashkar-e-Taiba fit into the picture.

President George W. Bush responded to 9/11 with energy and determination. But his approach was flawed: “Terrorism” is not the enemy; it is only a weapon deployed by the enemy. As for the misused word “terror,” it is a synonym for fear, and a “war on fear” is not a serious concept.

President Barack Obama’s approach has been worse: He has maintained that we face nothing more than “violent extremists” motivated by “grievances.” That obfuscates rather than explains who our enemies are, what they believe, and what they intend.

Fifteen years ago, most of those who watched the passenger planes crashing into the twin towers and the Pentagon understood that the world was about to change. And it has. For one thing, it should now be apparent that the vision many people had of the world becoming a “global village” — with everyone interconnected and interdependent, holding similar views, and wanting more or less the same things — was incorrect.

On the contrary, the world is divergent.

The civilization that has evolved in the West is pluralistic and tolerant. Go to any major city in America or Europe or Israel, for that matter: You’ll see a broad variety of religious and ethnic groups coexisting, their basic human and civil rights protected.

The same cannot be said about what we have come to call the Islamic world.

In what used to be Syria and Iraq, Christians, Yazidis and other minorities are facing genocide. Hindus, Sikhs, Christians and Ahmadi Muslims have been fleeing Pakistan for decades. Jews were driven out of Baghdad, Cairo and Damascus more than half century ago, and the small Jewish community left in Iran, along with the remaining Zoroastrians and Christians, are inferiors under the Islamic republic’s laws, while the Bahai suffer unrelenting persecution. Wherever Islamists establish themselves, from Mali to Bangladesh to Indonesia, Muslims with moderate rather than militant interpretations of their faith are targeted.

The divisions are only deepening between the multicultural world, where those who wield power accept and even welcome the “other,” and the increasingly monocultural world where medievalists enslave, expel and slaughter the “other.”

Those who argue that the waves of Middle Eastern and North African migrants arriving in Europe are simply an inevitable aspect of “globalization” have been misinformed. There’s nothing “global” about it. Raqqa, Tehran and Gaza City are not becoming more like Western cities. Western cities could, however, end up more like Raqqa, Tehran and Gaza.

Of course, many of the migrants in Europe will treasure the freedom they find. Many will embrace human rights and what we call “universal values” — which are, I’d argue, actually Western, post-Enlightenment values — as well as “modernization,” by which I suspect we really mean “Westernization.”

But some will not. Instead, they will live in separate communities that also may be thought of as ghettoes, or colonies. They will insist on the supremacy of their divinely inspired laws over rules made by mere mortals.

They will not engage in respectful debate with those who disagree. They will label them infidels or apostates or blasphemers. They will threaten them and, if that does not produce acquiescence, they will murder them (as they have done several times in Paris and Nice). From their perspective, the democratic experiment of recent centuries has been a mistake and a failure. They will do what they can to hasten its demise.

Their success is not inevitable. But it is hardly impossible. And, if Western leaders continue on the present course, it may be likely.

The 15th anniversary of 9/11 should be a time to think hard about what happened and why and what we are prepared to do to stop those determined to do it again. Many of us are tired of fighting. Many of us — including many on our campuses, of all places — are no longer inspired by what previous generations called “liberty.” Such people talk about “rights” and “social justice,” but what they really mean are “entitlements.”

But some of us are convinced that nothing is more urgent than defending Western civilization, its diverse cultures and ways of living. If we do not, on the 9/11 anniversary in a generation or two, the world may indeed look like a global village — with those in power celebrating, rather than mourning, what happened on a sunshiny Tuesday morning long ago.

Categories: 9/11, Islamic hatred of others
Tags: Islamic hatred of others

Comments: Be the first to comment

France: On Its Way to Being a Jew-Free Nation?

September 8, 2016

France: On Its Way to Being a Jew-Free Nation? Gatestone Institute, Robbie Travers, September 8, 2016

♦ Incitement to murder Jews was described by the French press as “mild mannered”.

♦ In 2014, supposed anti-Israel protesters attacked a Paris synagogue and trapped the congregants inside. The attackers’ chants apparently included “Death to the Jews,” “Murderous Israel,” and “One Jew, Some Jews, All Jews are Terrorists.”

♦ The terrorist attacks on Jews in France are the culmination of years of Jew-hatred tolerated with little official criticism.

♦ With ISIS and Hamas banners and flags flying, groups in Paris pledged the genocide of the Jews with impunity. When chants of “Death to the Jews,” ring out publicly, is it surprising that people might actually begin to think that killing Jews is just fine?

During the past 15 years, it is estimated that tens of thousands of Jews have fled France.

Of these, approximately 40,000 have fled to Israel, according to Israeli figures. Many thousands of others have fled to Canada, the United Kingdom, and elsewhere. France is increasingly becoming a nation in which it is no longer safe to be openly Jewish.

To explain why so many Jews are leaving Europe, it helps to understand the increasingly toxic context developing in France for Jews.

Synagogues and Jewish schools across France are regularly guarded by police officers and soldiers. Jews in Europe see their holy sites and places of worship under threat.

In December 2015, 14 Jews were poisoned by a toxic substance which had been smeared on to the keypad to access a Paris synagogue. No one was killed by the poison, but “25 firemen rushed to the synagogue, where they treated congregants and traced their condition to the daubed lock.”

Another Paris synagogue was vandalized and a window smashed. Synagogues seem to be one of the targets in a new wave of anti-Semitism rising across France and Europe.

On the way to a synagogue, a 13-year-old boy was called a “dirty Jew” and then seriously assaulted. The attackers are said to have attacked the boy because of he wore a skullcap. Only 71 years after the end of one of the darkest periods of European history, after which we pledged “never again,” it seems to have become open season to hate and persecute Jews.

The terrorist attacks on Jews in France are the culmination of years of Jew-hatred tolerated with little official criticism. In 2014, supposed anti-Israel protesters attacked a Paris synagogue and trapped the congregants inside. The attackers’ chants apparently included “Death to the Jews,” “Murderous Israel,” and “One Jew, Some Jews, All Jews are Terrorists.”

It seems people who openly call for hatred against Jews, to the point of murder, can now claim to be just “anti-Israel,” rather than anti-Semitic. Incitement to murder Jews was described by the French press as “mild mannered”. When talk of racial murder is dismissed in such a way, is it any wonder that radical clerics continue to preach vicious dehumanising hatred that culminates in violence?

If the media were more accurate, it would describe these “anti-Israeli” protesters as “anti-Semitic” and “inciters of violence and genocide.”

When swastikas are painted in one Paris’ largest squares by those claiming to oppose Israel, and ISIS and Hamas banners and flags are flying, and groups pledge the genocide of the Jews with impunity, is it any wonder that individuals might support these groups? When chants of “Death to the Jews,” ring out publicly, is it surprising that people might actually begin to think that killing Jews is just fine?

Both far-right Islamists and neo-Nazis joined forces in Paris during a “Day of Rage.” More than 17,000 of them marched, chanting “Jew, France is not for you.” Is it surprising that Jews are flee the country in increasing numbers?

When Islamists chant outside a central Paris synagogue, “Hitler was right,” whilst some of his victims still walk this earth, is it surprising people in French society may start to emulate him, or at least aspire to?

Synagogues are not the only institutions facing serious threats. Jewish schools across France are under heavy guard by police and soldiers.

1578-2

French soldiers guard a Jewish school in Strasbourg, February 2015. (Image source: Claude Truong-Ngoc/Wikimedia Commons)

The tragedy is that we have allowed French and European societies to need these guards by tolerating those promoting injustice, prejudice and hatred.

Paul Fitoussi, principal of the Lucien de Hirsch Jewish school in Paris, summarises why France has become so toxic for Jews:

“People nowadays think it is dangerous to be Jewish in France because there was a series of events: The kidnapping and murder of Ilan Halimi ten years ago, the terror attack at the Jewish school in Toulouse four years ago, the stabbings in Marseille, last year’s attack at Hyper Cacher market – there is a problem. For the French, worrying about security issues is new to them. I talk to the police but they do not know what to do. They brought armed soldiers to the schools, but I know that in the long term this is not a solution.”

There seems to be a common thread running throughout the incidences above and attacks on Jews today. In the Ilan Halimi case, the victim was targeted on the basis of his race, and the perception that being a Jew made him wealthy. A similar attack was noted by a fifth-grader at the Lucien de Hirsh school. He said his attackers, foreign in origin, “asked if I was Jewish, I said yes, they said that the Jews are full of money, and if I did not give them my coat, they will kill me.” It seems that stereotypes of Jewish wealth perpetuated often by Islamists and others now seem commonplace in French society, and individuals are increasingly threatened with murder, robbery and extortion.

Not even public transportation is safe for Jews; in December, 2015, a man on a train in Paris verbally abused a group of Jews, stating that he wished to kill them. “If only I had a grenade here,” he said, “how do you call it, a fragmentation grenade, I would blow up this wagon with the fucking Jewish bastards.”

There has also been, since 2000, a troublingly large increase in the number of violent anti-Semitic attacks by Muslims in France. Multiple official figures have illustrated that in the last 20 years, the number of violent anti-Semitic acts has tripled. In France in 2014, there were 851 recorded anti-Semitic incidents, more than doubling the total from 2013.

Jews may represent less than 1% of France’s expanding and diverse population, but they are the victim of 40%–50% of France’s recorded racist attacks.

Jews are only the start of where Islamists begin to target people to whose existence they seem to object. Next, Islamists come for the LGBT, as seen in the Orlando shooting and with ISIS throwing gay people off buildings, and of course Christians, as we have seen in slaughtered in just one small example on a Libyan beach; and most frequently other Muslims, the majority victim of Isla mists. Evidently no one is safe, and that includes all of us.

Perhaps it is best to finish on a note inspired from the work of Martin Niemöller (1892-1984), a prominent Lutheran pastor and scathing critic of Adolf Hitler. Consequently, Niemöller spent the last seven years of Nazi rule in concentration camps, but had the fortune to survive.

His timeless poem does not need much transposing:

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out —
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out —
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out —
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me — and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Categories: France, Islam - submission, Islam and Jews, Islamic hatred of others, Islamic integration, Islamic invasion, Islamic supremacy, Islamisation of France
Tags: France, Islam - submission, Islam and Jews, Islamic hatred of others, Islamic integration, Islamic invasion, Islamic supremacy, Islamisation o France

Comments: Be the first to comment

Is the Islamic State’s Plan to Conquer Rome So Far-Fetched?

September 8, 2016

Is the Islamic State’s Plan to Conquer Rome So Far-Fetched? Clarion Project, William Reed, September 8, 2016

islamic-state-break-the-cross-ip_0

Photo: Islamic State propaganda magazine Dabiq

They are trying to actualize their goals not only through violent jihad, but also through population jihad (influx of Muslims) and by demanding Islamist privileges, such as parallel sharia courts.

Despite its centuries-long resistance to jihad-waging armies, much of Europe appears blind to history today. With its politically correct governments and misguided, “multi-cultural” ideologies, the European Union seems alarmingly clueless and desperate in the face of once-again rising Islamist threat.

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

The Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL) made a call to its cells in Europe through an encrypted text message in English, French, and Arabic on the social media over the weekend.

The Turkish news outlet NTV reported that via the ISIS-affiliated “Nasir Foundation,” the terror group sent a message to its members and sympathizers in Europe who are preparing for attacks, telling them to “either act immediately or annihilate all organizational information they possess.”

“Our brothers and sisters in Europe and especially in France, hurry up to carry out your acts. Also, be careful and cautious,” ordered the terror group.

“We hear that a lot of our brothers get arrested before carrying out their acts. We suggest you to delete all of the information and messages in your devices relating the Islamic State including photos, videos and applications. We also suggest you to carry out your acts before it is too late.”

ISIS allegedly made the warning after Syrian-born Abu Muhammad al-Adnani, the official spokesperson and a senior leader of the Islamic State, was killed in Aleppo. The U.S. and Russia both announced in separate statements that they killed al-Adnani in their airstrikes.

Since al-Adnani’s death, there have been calls for revenge attacks to be carried out by jihadist operatives, the Daily Mail reported.

“According to the respected Site Intelligence Group, which monitors jihadist activity, the threats were made on a pro-ISIS account on the encrypted Telegram messaging service, with one warning: ‘We will exterminate you.’”

In 2014, al-Adnani declared that supporters of the Islamic State from all over the world should attack citizens of Western states, including the US, France and UK.

“If you can kill a disbelieving American or European – especially the spiteful and filthy French – or an Australian, or a Canadian, or any other disbeliever from the disbelievers waging war, including the citizens of the countries that entered into a coalition against the Islamic State, then rely upon Allah, and kill him in any manner or way, however it may be,” he said.

“Smash his head with a rock, or slaughter him with a knife, or run him over with your car, or throw him down from a high place, or choke him, or poison him.”

IS declares it will conquer Istanbul, Rome

In its recently-released new English magazine Rumiyah (Rome), ISIS declared it will conquer Istanbul and Rome.

The magazine, which is the terror group’s second international publication after Dabiq, is published in several languages including English, Turkish, Russian and French.

As to why they chose the name Rumiyah, ISIS explained: “Rasulallah [prophet of Allah – Muhammed, the founder of Islam] heralded the Islamic conquest of Rome in end times. We ask our God to enable us to conquer this district and Konstantiniyye [Istanbul] which will be conquered before Rome.”

The Islamic State made Abu Muhammad al-Adnani the cover boy of the first edition of their new magazine, with calls for revenge of his death. The terror group called on their supporters to “sacrifice themselves,” a statement interpreted as a call to carry out terror attacks against European countries and other members of the anti-ISIS collation forces.

The Islamic State and Rome

“The conquest of Rome has been a primary goal since the beginning of the Islamic State,” writes journalist Dale Hurd of CBN News. “Muslim scholars say Muhammed prophesied that the two great Roman cities would be conquered: Constantinople and Rome.

“The Islamic State reveals part of its plan in its publication ‘Black Flags From Rome’,” added Hurd. “It will use sleeper cells and expects to get help from Muslims serving in European armies and from non-Muslim sympathizers. It also wants to fire missiles into Italy.”

Islamic Expansionist Campaigns in History

Muslim jihadist armies have targeted European territories since the inception of the religion in the 8th century.

The Islamic invasion of Hispania, for example, was the initial expansion of the Umayyad Caliphate over Hispania from 711 to 788. The invasion resulted in the establishment of the Emirate of Cordoba under the Muslim ruler Abd ar-Rahman I, who completed the unification of Muslim-ruled Iberia, or al-Andalus (Muslim Spain), between 756 and 788.

Europe was also a popular target of Ottoman jihadist armies. Ottomans conquered Constantinople in 1453 in a bloody military campaign, which marked the end of the Byzantine Empire.

Throughout centuries, Ottomans also occupied many other European nations such as Bulgaria, Greece, Serbia, Albania, Bosnia, Croatia, Hungary and Cyprus. They targeted and attacked other European lands, including Austria, Venice, and Poland.

Much of the present-day “Muslim world” was invaded and captured by Muslim imperial armies. Anatolia – today’s Turkey – was mostly Christian before the Turkish conquests of the 11th century. It also had sizable Jewish and Yazidi communities. Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism and Christianity were the major religions in Afghanistan during pre-Islamic era.

Today’s Iraq and Islamic Republic of Iran were a majority-Zoroastrian empire. In the Arabian Peninsula, there were Pagans, Jews, Zoroastrians and Christians before Islam took over.

Similarly, before the advent of Islam, the region which is today termed Pakistan was quite a diverse region with several religions — mainly Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity, Judaism and Zoroastrianism as well as local shamanistic and animist religions.

In Indonesia, the country with the largest Muslim population today, the primary religions were Hinduism and Buddhism, as were Bangladesh and Malaysia.

Violent or civilizational jihadi efforts have tremendously changed the demographic character and culture of entire nations in much of the world. The once-majority non-Muslim communities in those lands are either extinct or dwindling minorities today.

This is not to say that Christian armies have never used force to spread their religious beliefs. The conquest of Eastern Europe by the Teutonic Knights or the conquest of South and Central America by the conquistadors saw Christianity carried forward at the point of a sword.

The important factor is that while contemporary Christian movements look back on those periods of history as squarely in the past, Islamist movements see this history as inspiration for their dreams of the future.

The Islamic military conquest of Europe might sound unrealistic now, but the Islamic State and many other Islamist groups openly declare that they are still dedicated to their goal of world domination.

They are trying to actualize their goals not only through violent jihad, but also through population jihad (influx of Muslims) and by demanding Islamist privileges, such as parallel sharia courts.

Despite its centuries-long resistance to jihad-waging armies, much of Europe appears blind to history today. With its politically correct governments and misguided, “multi-cultural” ideologies, the European Union seems alarmingly clueless and desperate in the face of once-again rising Islamist threat.

Categories: Europe, Hijrah, Islam in Europe, Islamic conquests in Europe, Islamic hatred of others, Islamic invasion, Islamic State, Islamisation, Rome, Sharia law
Tags: Europe, Hijrah, Islam in Europe, Islamic conquests in Europe, Islamic hatred of others, Islamic invasion, Islamic State, Islamisation, Rome, Sharia law

Comments: Be the first to comment

The West Needs Sharia Law – Pakistani cleric

September 3, 2016

The West Needs Sharia Law – Pakistani cleric, Dan Miller’s Blog, September 3, 2016

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

According to a leading Pakistani imam, Islamists need to convince western civilizations that Sharia law is good and that we need it to root our the evils which possess us. His wise words must be music to Obama’s ears.

In a recent article, leading Pakistani cleric Maulana Zahidur Rashdi noted that Islam and the West are indeed in a clash of civilizations, as argued by U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump and former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich.

The article, titled “The Cultural and Civilizational Struggle Between Islam and the West,” was published by Roznama Islam, an Urdu-language daily published from Karachi and Lahore, which is known for advocating Islamist causes and pro-jihad arguments.

Maulana Zahidur Rashdi is a leading Islamic scholar who frequently writes in newspapers and has visited several countries to preach Islam, especially Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bangladesh, Iran, Kenya, Iran, Uzbekistan, India, the U.K., Canada, the U.S., and others.

. . . .

“[Our Intellectuals See It Not As A War Of Civilization But As] A War Of Interests … Between The Developed And The Developing Countries, In Which Muslim Countries And Nations Are The Underdogs Due To Lack Of Progress”

“‘Newt Gingrich, the former speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, has said that those Muslims who believe in shari’a should be expelled from America. Before this, U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump had too demanded a ban on the entry of Muslims into America. Newt Gingrich… has said in an interview: Western civilization is in a state of war. Shari’a is not compatible with the Western civilization, and we will gladly accept those Muslims who do not believe in shari’a. Newt Gingrich has also proposed monitoring mosques in America along with imprisoning individuals who visit websites of extremist organizations.

Accordingly,

“The West’s standpoint is very clear in that it is not ready to accept the enforcement of shari’a. In response to this, it is our responsibility to point out the errors of the Western civilization based on the common collective interests of human society and revealed [Islamic] teachings, to clarify the damages caused to human society by it [the Western civilization], and to bring forth benefits and necessities of Islamic Shari’a through reason and logic…”

President Obama has contended that America should not bar immigrants or refugee seekers who favor the imposition of Sharia law; that’s not who we are. Perhaps He does not want to stop His thus far successful efforts to end our terrorist shortage. In July of last year, Obama

condemned the terrorist attack in France that killed 84 people and denounced politicians who have suggested that Muslims be subjected to extra scrutiny in the United States because of their religion.

“In the wake of last night’s attacks, we’ve heard more suggestions that all Muslims in America be targeted or tested for their beliefs,” Obama said. The president appeared to be referring to former House speaker Newt Gingrich’s call on Fox News to deport all Muslims who follow sharia law.

Without mentioning Gingrich by name, Obama called his suggestion of a religious test “repugnant and an affront to everything we stand for as Americans.” [Emphasis added.]

“We cannot give in to fear or turn on each other or sacrifice our way of life,” Obama said. “We cannot let ourselves be divided by religion, because that is exactly what the terrorists want.”

Alas, some Muslims reject governmental adoption of Sharia law. Raheel Raza recently took issue with CNN commentator Sally Kohn, who had tried to defend Sharia law.

Raza’s response came after Kohn recently pretended to be an Islamic theologian and lectured the public on how “progressive” sharia law allegedly is:

“There is a difference between personal, spiritual Sharia and the political incorporation of Sharia into law,” Kohn stated. “And within both, there are progressive interpretations as well as more fundamentalist conservative interpretations. So the word Sharia doesn’t mean one thing.” [Emphasis added.]

Kohn then blasted Donald Trump for “not knowing” what sharia law really stands for. This is likely when Raza’s radar went up, considering that the Muslim activist has first-hand knowledge about sharia law and the threat it poses.

Raza, who at great personal risk travels the world to educate people on the dangers of sharia law and who has worked for decades to wrestle her faith from the hands of extremists, thinks it odd that a progressive would defend the very Islamic tenets that promote homophobia, anti-Semitism, and the subjugation of women.

In an open letter to Kohn published on the Huffington Post, Raza writes:

Political commentator Sally Kohn has made several statements regarding sharia law, which were not only offensive but dangerous. In using her voice to propagate this liberal apologist position, she is doing a great disservice to progressive reform-minded Muslims like myself. Her words are an affront to me, a female Muslim activist, as I have made it my life’s mission to educate others on this topic and to wrestle back my religion from the clutches of extremists who wish to make sharia the law of the land. And I would be happy to debate her on this topic. [Emphasis added.]

As an openly gay woman, Ms. Kohn would be killed, jailed or persecuted under sharia law. As a devout Muslim woman, I – along with many true progressive Muslims – rightly view sharia, as it is practiced today, as an archaic distortion of Islamic law.

In a very diplomatic way, Raza suggests that perhaps Kohn doesn’t know as much about Islamic law as she thinks she does, and then offered up the following “brief lesson in sharia”:

What many sharia laws and statutes have in common are the following. They are:

· Homophobic
· Anti-semitic
· Anti-women
· Advocate amputations and stoning
· Preach killing of apostates
· Uphold the Blasphemy Law (which could get me killed)

“This homophobic, anti-woman, repressive sharia is no longer confined to the mosque or to majority Muslim nations,” Raza writes before providing the example of England’s 100 sharia councils that have been allowed to harm women in the West.

“As a woman, and as someone who enjoys the freedoms and liberties that are systematically assaulted by sharia law, Sally Kohn needs to think twice before defending this oppressive, perverse practice.”

“Words are powerful — so Sally, I beg you and others to stop defending the indefensible and to stand with us, not them,” the Muslim activists concluded.

It is typical of progressives, so willfully blind, that they hurt the very people they claim to champion. Sadly, progressives like Kohn would rather propagate left-wing lies about Islam without regard to how many people get hurt in the process, than actually learn from the people who know best.

Obama may think that Sharia law is good and that we need it, but rejects any “honest discussion” about it.

Would Iman Obama agree with Sally Kohn and Pakistani imam Rashdi that western cultures need the enlightenment that Sharia law brings? Then, perhaps we could become enlightened and progressive (but I repeat myself) like Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Iran. Saudi Arabia recently sentenced a man to ten years in jail and two thousand lashes for “tweeting” about being an atheist.

The hardline Islamic state’s religious police in charge of monitoring social networks found more than 600 tweets denying the existence of God, ridiculing Koranic verses, accusing all prophets of lies and saying their teaching fuelled hostilities…

Turkey is enjoying an epidemic of child rape. The Islamic Republic of Iran likes to have mass executions and, when convenient, throws homosexuals off tall buildings.

Stoning, pursuant to Sharia law, is also popular in Iran.

Of course, it has to be done only in conformity with Iran’s Sharia law, generally after a “confession.”

And on and on and on. Never mind, though, Iran is very technologically advanced, doubtless due to scientific guidance provided by its ayatollahs based on the teachings of Mohammad. Indeed, Grand Ayatollah Naser Makarem Shirazi recently promised that the “Hidden Imam” will arrive soon, and in “a vessel like a space ship.”

Islamic Hijrah, migrating from Islamic countries to non-Islamic countries, is a way of conquest by political Islam — by Islamists. With it, comes Sharia law. If you haven’t the time or inclination to watch any of the other videos, please watch this one. Yes, it’s thirty minutes long, but well is worth the time.

Perhaps, by extending hands of welcome to more Islamist immigrants and refugees who seek to conquer us and “help” us by bringing Sharia law with them, we will accept that only based on Islamist teachings can we

clarify the damages caused to human society by it [the Western civilization], and . . . bring forth benefits and necessities of Islamic Shari’a through reason and logic…”

Obama would be very proud of them, and of us for imposing no ~~religious~~ ideological tests.

Categories: Civilization jihad, Clash of civilizations, Combatting violent extremism, Contempt for America, Department of Homeland Security, Donald Trump, Freedom of religion, Freedom of speech, Hijrah, Islam - submission, Islam and human rights, Islamic conquests in Europe, Islamic hatred of others, Islamic history, Islamic immigration, Islamic perversions, Islamic refugees, Islamic supremacy, Islamist moral values, Islamist vetting, Islamists in America, Koran, Mecca Islam, Medina Islam, Newt Gingrich, Obama and Islamists, Political Islam, Sharia law
Tags: Civilization jihad, Clash of civilizations, Combatting violent extremism, Contempt for America, Department of Homeland Security, Donald Trump, Freedom of religion, freedom of speech, Hijrah, Islam - submission, Islam and human rights, Islamc perversions, Islamic conquest of Europe, Islamic hatred of others, Islamic history, Islamic immigration, Islamic refugees, Islamic supremacy, Islamist moral values, Islamist vetting, Islamists in America, Koran, Mecca Islam, Medina Islam, Newt Gingrich, Obama and Islamists, Political Islam, Sharia law

Comments: 2 Comments

“Liberal” Turkey Claims Europe Is Racist

September 1, 2016

“Liberal” Turkey Claims Europe Is Racist, Gatestone Institute, Burak Bekdil, September 1, 2016

♦ “There is no such religion as Christianity … In reality, Jesus Christ was a Muslim coming from Jewish tradition … The name of the religion revealed to Christ was Islam …” — Abdurrahman Dilipak, columnist, Yeni Akit.

♦ In Turkey, not even the smallest village of a few hundred inhabitants has a non-Muslim mayor.

♦ Against this embarrassing background, Turkey is accusing Europe of being racist. That would be like North Korea accusing Europe of being a rogue state.

It’s not a bad joke; it’s a very bad joke. Turkey, where all variants of ethnic and religious xenophobia are a national pastime, is accusing the West of being racist.

Speaking after a spat with Austria and Sweden over news reports and tweets from those countries that accused Turkey of allowing sex with children under the age of 15, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu claimed that the behavior of European countries reflected the “racism, anti-Islamic and anti-Turkish (trend) in Europe.”

He is talking about the same Europe where the inhabitants of one of its biggest cities, London, recently elected a Muslim as its mayor. In Turkey, not even the smallest village of a few hundred inhabitants has a non-Muslim mayor.

1831

Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu (left) blasted European countries for “racism, anti-Islamic and anti-Turkish (trend),” partly in response to a tweet by Swedish Foreign Minister Margot Wallstrom (right) that read: “Turkish decision to allow sex with children under 15 must be reversed. Children need more protection, not less, against violence, sex abuse.”

In “racist” Austria, the police immediately arrested two suspects in connection with an attempt to set fire to a Turkish cultural center in the northern Austrian town of Wels — and at a time of rising tensions with Turkey. By contrast, Turkish law enforcement officials arrested five former gendarmerie intelligence officers just recently — nine years after the murder of Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink. These officers would probably never have been implicated if the two Islamist allies, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) and Fethullah Gulen, his staunchest political ally when Dink was assassinated, had not turned into each other’s worst nemesis in power-sharing fight in 2013.

Yeni Akit is an Islamist newspaper and one of Erdogan’s media darlings, a kind of Turkish Pravda in its fanatical support of the president. Its editors always find a seat in the elite group of journalists who accompany the president in his private jet traveling to foreign capitals.

Recently, one of Yeni Akit’s most prominent columnists, Abdurrahman Dilipak wrote:

“There is no such religion as Christianity … In reality, Jesus Christ was a Muslim coming from Jewish tradition … The name of the religion revealed to Christ was Islam … Christianity is nothing more than a cultural adherence … Judaism is already a tradition that has imprisoned itself to its own race … [Jews’] fears are as big as their rage.”

Funny, Dilipak is an Islamist and his holy book acknowledges the two monotheistic religions he denies.

In another column, Dilipak claimed that “there is no such thing as the Greek nation or the Greek civilization.” Then, in following lines that exhibit typically an Islamist’s confused mind, he claims that “the Greek civilization is a civilization of … plagiarism.”

Yeni Akit did not need to hide its racism even in the aftermath of a bloodshed the entire world — except Islamist- denounced. In July, in Nice, France, shortly after the Islamist terror attack that killed more than 80 civilians, the newspaper’s headline read: “France, the perpetrator of genocide in Africa, deserves worse.”

Yeni Akit is a perfect reflection of Turkey’s popular and official racism. In March, when a jihadist suicide bomber killed three Israelis and one Iranian on a busy Istanbul street, Irem Aktas, head of the women’s and media division of the AKP branch in Istanbul’s Eyup district, commented on social media that: “Let the Israeli citizens be worse, I wish they all died.” When she wrote that in her Twitter account, at least 11 Israeli citizens injured by the bomb were being treated at Turkish hospitals. She was not prosecuted for her remarks that “wished death” to injured Israelis.

Turkey’s religious — and ethnic — xenophobia can take amusing turns, too. In September 2015, Turkish authorities banned showing religious symbols and playing music related to various religions at yoga centers. They said that having Buddha sculptures and mantra symbols, as well as playing religious music and burning incense, could be considered violations which could lead to the closure of these centers.

About a month before Turkey’s war on the “religion of yoga,” the country’s top religious body, the Religious Affairs General Directorate, issued a warning about the spreading of the new “religion” of Jediism” — the religion of the Jedi warriors in the Star Wars series. “Jediism … is spreading today in Christian societies. Around 70,000 people in Australia and 390,000 people in England currently define themselves as Jedis,” the article said, before engaging in an Islamic-based critique of a number of Hollywood blockbusters.

Against this embarrassing background, Turkey is accusing Europe of being racist. That would be like North Korea accusing Europe of being a rogue state.

Categories: Erdogan, Europe, Islamic hatred of others, Islamic invasion, Islamic media, Islamic refugees, Islamic supremacy, Islamisation, Israel, Racism, Turkey, Turkey and Christianity
Tags: Erdogan, Europe, Islamic hatred of others, Islamic invasion, Islamic media, Islamic refugees, Islamic supremacy, Islamisation, Israel, Racism, Turkey, Turkey and Christianity

Comments: Be the first to comment

Indonesia: Muslim with ISIS flag stabs priest, tries to blow up church during mass, police search for motive

August 28, 2016

Indonesia: Muslim with ISIS flag stabs priest, tries to blow up church during mass, police search for motive, Jihad Watch, Robert Spencer, August 28, 2016

(He must have been insane if he thought that he was doing Allah’s will; Allah just wants peace and understanding. This we know, for Obama tells us so. –DM)

This is way beyond ridiculous. He had a hand-drawn picture of an ISIS flag. He attacked a priest and tried to explode a bomb in a crowded church. His motive couldn’t possibly be clearer. But the denial and willful ignorance of authorities is all-pervasive.

Indonesia-church-jihadi

“Terror in Indonesia: Axe-wielding ISIS jihadi, 18, stabs Catholic priest, 60, before trying to blow up hundreds of worshippers during Sunday Mass,” by James Dunn, Mailonline, August 28, 2016:

An ISIS suicide bomber today attacked a Catholic priest with an axe as he tried to blow up hundreds of worshippers at a church during Sunday Mass.

Priest Albert Pandiangan, 60, was holding the holy ceremony at the altar when the 18-year-old fanatic rushed towards him with a backpack bomb and tried to blow himself up.

But the bomb burned without setting off the explosives, so the jihadi pulled an axe from his bag and slashed the priest’s arm at St Yoseph Church in Medan, the capital of North Sumatra in Indonesia.

The congregation then stepped in and managed to wrestle the axe from his grasp, detaining him until the police arrived.

As officers marched the suspect to the car, pictures show his white trousers soaked in blood. Police found his ID card and a hand-drawn picture of the ISIS flag.

The young fanatic also told police that he was not working alone.

He was later pictured at the police station with an officer holding his bloody head off the ground, where he was lying handcuffed.

‘Somebody tried to kill the priest by pretending to attend the church service and at that time tried to explode something, like a firecracker, but the firecracker didn’t explode, it only fumed,’ chief detective Nur Fallah said.

The priest suffered slight injuries and has been taken to hospital near where it happened.

A picture of the attacker’s ID card circulating online said he was Muslim….

Police are still investigating the man’s motive.

Categories: Islamic hatred of others, Islamic terrorism, Motives unclear
Tags: Islamic hatred of others, Islamic terrorism, Motives unclear

Comments: Be the first to comment

Does the First Amendment Protect Warrior Religions?

August 5, 2016

Does the First Amendment Protect Warrior Religions? Front Page Magazine, William Kilpatrick, August 5, 2016

Reprinted from CrisisMagazine.com.

After every Islamic terrorist attack, whether in Europe or the U.S., people ask what can be done to prevent it from happening again. But when the obvious solutions are proposed, they are invariably met with the objection that “you can’t do that,” or “that’s unconstitutional,” or words to that effect.

Some of the obvious solutions are to close radical mosques and radical Islamic schools, to monitor suspected mosques, to deport radical imams, and, of course, to restrict Muslim immigration or ban it altogether. If you dare to say such things, however, it quickly becomes apparent that—for many, at least—only politically correct solutions are acceptable. The trouble is, the politically correct crowd doesn’t have any solutions. In the memorable words of French Prime Minister Manuel Valls, “France is going to have to live with terrorism.”

Catholics are frequently in the forefront of those who object to these “drastic” measures for preventing terrorism in the West. Pope Francis, for example, has made generosity to refugees and immigrants a hallmark of his papacy. Christians, he has reminded us on several occasions, should build bridges, not walls. Others, Catholics among them, have objected that restrictions on Islamic immigration would violate the freedom of religion guaranteed by the Constitution—as would surveillance of mosques and Islamic societies.

Catholics are understandably touchy about the subject of religious liberty. But concerns over Christians being forced to bake cakes for same-sex weddings shouldn’t be allowed to overshadow some other basic questions about religious liberty.

One of the questions is this: does a religion that doesn’t believe in religious freedom for others qualify for First Amendment protection? Another, related question might be framed as follows: Is a religion that calls for the subjugation of other religions entitled to the “free exercise” of that mandate? The underlying issue, of course, is whether or not Islam really qualifies as a religion. As any number of authorities have pointed out, Islam is a hybrid—part religion and part a geo-political movement bent on world domination.

The “world domination” bit, by the way, is not confined to the fevered imaginations of right-wing fanatics. In a recent interview with Religion New Service, Cardinal Raymond Burke said “there’s no question that Islam wants to govern the world.” “Islam,” he continued, “is a religion that, according to its own interpretation, must also become the State.”

Here’s what I had to say about the matter four years ago:

Does this [the 1st Amendment] make the exercise of religion an absolute right to do anything in the name of religion? Should the free-exercise clause be extended to protect suicide cults or virgin sacrifice? The First Amendment also prohibits the establishment of a state religion, but one of the main purpose of Islam is to establish itself as the state religion. It can be argued that Islam’s raison d’etre is to be the established religion in every nation. Hence, another question must be asked: does the First Amendment protect its own abolishment?

Cardinal Burke is a canon lawyer—a profession that requires one to choose words carefully. Hence, when he talks about Islam becoming the State, he should be taken seriously. According to him, “when they [Muslims] become a majority in any country then they have the religious obligation to govern that country.” As we have seen, however, long before Muslims become a majority they begin demanding that their fellow citizens comply with sharia laws regarding diet, dress, and blasphemy. Allowing Muslims the full and free exercise of their faith is tantamount to restricting the freedom of others. Or, as Dutch MP Geert Wilders likes to say, “more Islam” means “more intolerance” for everyone else.

Wilders is referring to the consequences that follow upon the mass migration of Muslims into Europe. Although his was once a lonely voice, numerous polls show that the majority of Europeans now believe along with him that Islam does not belong in Europe. Pope Francis, on the other hand, has been in the habit of chiding Christians for their opposition to accepting more Muslim immigrants. He recently went so far as to warn them that they will have to answer to Christ at the Last Judgment because he (in the guise of the migrant) was homeless, and they did not take him in.

But, although charity is the paramount Christian virtue, there is another virtue that governs the exercise of charity. It’s called “prudence.” And prudence would suggest that spiritual leaders and secular leaders should exercise caution when advocating acts of charity that put the lives of others at risk. In Europe, there are now numerous prudential reasons for slowing or halting the flow of Muslim immigration: the Charlie Hebdo massacre, the Bataclan Theater massacre, the massacres at the Brussels airport and subway, the massacre at Nice, the Munich mall massacre, the axe attack aboard a German train, the bomb attack on a wine bar in the city of Ansbach, and the New Year’s Eve sexual assaults which targeted over 1,200 German women.

The most recent outrage was the slaughter of a French priest, Fr. Jacques Hamel, by two Islamic terrorists who burst into a church in Normandy during Mass and slit his throat. Pope Francis condemned the attack, but on the same day in Krakow he spoke once again about the need to welcome refugees. He called for “solidarity with those deprived of their fundamental rights, including the right to profess one’s faith in freedom and safety.”

But how about the right of Christians and Jews to profess their faith “in freedom and safety?” Fr. Hamel is no longer free to profess his faith, and now that the Islamic State has proclaimed its intention to target more churches in Europe, Christians are going to feel considerably less safe at Sunday service. Jews in Europe already know the feeling. Most synagogues in Europe are now protected by security guards during Saturday services.

But if you really want to see the European future, just look at those nations where Muslims are already a majority. In Nigeria, where Muslims make up about 60 percent of the population, Christians are regularly attacked during church services, and on some occasions entire congregations have been burned alive inside their churches.

All of which prompts a question: should Western nations passively stand by as their own population balance shifts in the direction of Nigeria’s? A curtailment or a moratorium on Muslim immigration is one of the obvious solutions to the problem of terrorism in the West. But, as I’ve suggested above, many Americans think that such a moratorium would be unconstitutional. After all, doesn’t the Constitution forbid a “religious test” in scrutinizing immigrants? Indeed today’s top news story concerns the attack on Donald Trump by the father of a slain Muslim soldier. At the Democratic Convention, Khizr Khan challenged Trump’s proposed ban on Muslim immigration by asking: “Have you even read the U.S. Constitution?”

In fact, the Constitution has no ban on a religious test for immigration. In a recent National Review piece, Andrew McCarthy points out that Article VI of the Constitution states that “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.” The clause has nothing to do with immigration and, as our bien pensants like to say, it has nothing to do with Islam.

The McCarran-Walter Act of 1952 actually gives the president wide latitude in restricting immigration:

Whenever the president finds that the entry of aliens or any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, the president may … suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

One of the main intents of the act was to prevent communist ideologues from entering the country, but it was also invoked in 1979 by President Jimmy Carter to keep Iranians out of the U.S. And—surprise—according to McCarthy, “under federal law, the executive branch is expressly required to take religion into account in determining who is granted asylum.” As McCarthy notes:

We have a right to require scrutiny of the beliefs of aliens who petition for entry into our country … this includes beliefs the alien may regard as tenets of his faith—especially if such ‘faith tenets’ involve matters of law, governance, economy, combat and interpersonal relations that in our culture’s separation of church and state are not seen as spiritual.

In short, if you believe your religion allows you to execute apostates or subjugate infidels, don’t bother to apply.

When Pope Francis visited Poland for World Youth Day, security in Krakow was at its highest level. Forty thousand security personnel were deployed and, according to The Guardian:

Mobile X-ray devices and metal detectors, as well as dogs trained to detect explosives, are in use at railway and bus stations, major road hubs and venues where papal events are due to take place. Police said that gas tankers and large trucks had been banned from Krakow following the use of a 19-ton truck in a terrorist attack in Nice earlier this month.

Does that suggest anything? Are the officials worried that Protestants or Jews are going to attack the Catholic youth? Are they fearful that Buddhist will attempt to bomb the popemobile? Before the era of mass Muslim immigration into Europe, such precautions would have been deemed as overkill. Now they seem like prudent measures to prevent overkill. The heightened security at World Youth Day and all over Europe is a tacit acknowledgement that Islam differs radically from all other religions. This is a point that Cardinal Burke made in his interview when he criticized Catholic leaders who “simply think that Islam is a religion like the Catholic faith or the Jewish faith.” Just so. It’s well past time to question whether a religion with totalitarian ambitions should be treated like all other religions.

In the Guardian story about the Pope’s visit to Poland, he is described as a “modern pope.” But in some respects he, along with many bishops, seems to belong to an earlier era—an era when it seemed that all people desired nothing more than peace and friendship. At a time when the world is faced with the resurgence of a seventh-century warrior religion, that sixties sensibility no longer seems so modern.

Categories: Donald Trump, Europe, Islam - the religion of war, Islam and human rights, Islam and terrorism, Islamic hatred of others, Islamic immigration, Khzir Khan, Pope Francis
Tags: Donald Trump, Europe, Islam - the religion of war, Islam and human rights, Islam and terrorism, Islamic hatred of others, Islamic immigration, Khzir Khan, Pope Francis

Comments: Be the first to comment

Archives