Posted tagged ‘Islamic Jihad’

Petraeus: Self-Censor To Avoid Offending Muslims

May 17, 2016

Petraeus: Self-Censor To Avoid Offending Muslims, PJ MediaRobert Spencer, May 17, 2016

Petrayus

David Petraeus, the former director of the CIA and former commander of CENTCOM, published a piece in the Washington Post last Friday entitled “Anti-Muslim Bigotry Aids Islamist Terrorists.”

Wrote Petraeus:

[I am] increasingly concerned about inflammatory political discourse that has become far too common both at home and abroad against Muslims and Islam, including proposals from various quarters for blanket discrimination against people on the basis of their religion.

Petraeus’s target isn’t just Donald Trump’s proposed temporary moratorium on Muslim immigration. He is referring to all speech that some Muslims might find offensive, and this has sweeping and ominous implications.

Petraeus doesn’t just oppose what Trump now characterizes as “just a suggestion“ solely as a policy measure. Petraeus is saying that such proposals shouldn’t even be made; that just to speak them is damaging:

[T]he ramifications of such rhetoric could be very harmful — and lasting.

He feels simply speaking such thoughts may:

 … compound the already grave terrorist danger to our citizens.

How will these words do that? Well, you see:

[T]hose who flirt with hate speech against Muslims should realize they are playing directly into the hands of al-Qaeda and the Islamic State. The terrorists’ explicit hope has been to try to provoke a clash of civilizations — telling Muslims that the United States is at war with them and their religion. When Western politicians propose blanket discrimination against Islam, they bolster the terrorists’ propaganda.

Petraeus doesn’t offer any alternative suggestion as to how jihad terrorists can be prevented from entering the United States. He just doesn’t like Trump’s former proposal, and what he terms “hate speech against Muslims” in general, because he says it will enrage Muslims and make more of them join the jihad against America. So the upshot of Petraeus’ argument is that we must not say things to which Muslims might object, because this will just make more of them become jihadis.

His prescription for minimizing the jihad against the West is for the West to practice self-censorship in order to avoid offending Muslims.

Petraeus has done this before. When he headed up the international coalition in Afghanistan, he said this of Florida pastor Terry Jones’ plan to burn the Qur’an:

[It] was hateful, it was intolerant and it was extremely disrespectful and again, we condemn it in the strongest manner possible.

He warned that the Qur’an-burning would endanger American troops in Afghanistan and elsewhere. He issued a statement saying that he hoped:

 … the Afghan people understand that the actions of a small number of individuals, who have been extremely disrespectful to the holy Quran, are not representative of any of the countries of the international community who are in Afghanistan to help the Afghan people.

I opposed the Qur’an-burning, but not for the reasons Petraeus did.

I don’t like the burning of books. And I’d rather that the contents of the Qur’an, and the ways that jihadists use those contents to justify violence, be known.

However, Jones was free to do what he wanted to do. Petraeus would have done better to have told the Afghans that in America we have freedom of speech and expression, and that we put up with speech and expression that we dislike without trying to kill the speaker.

He would have done better to tell them that their murderous rage over any burning of the Qur’an was an outrageous overreaction, and that bloodshed over such burnings was a heinous crime, far dwarfing any crime they thought Jones was committing.

The idea that in wartime one should be careful not to do anything that the enemy is likely to respond to with irrational and even murderous anger may seem tactically wise at first glance, but ultimately it is a recipe for surrender. One is already accepting the enemy’s worldview and perspective and working to accommodate it, instead of working on various fronts — not just the military one — to show why it is wrong and should be opposed.

Of course, to that Petraeus and his ilk would likely respond: “Well, we are not at war with Islam or the Qur’an, and so to burn the book is a needless provocation.”

This ignores, however, the war that the Organization of the Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and other Muslim groups are waging today against the freedom of expression. This also ignores the ways in which Islamic jihadists use the Qur’an to justify violence and win recruits.

Without approving of the burning, Petraeus should have defended Jones’ freedom of expression, and used the burning as a teaching moment in Afghanistan. Petraeus should have said:

We are going to defend our vision of society no matter what you bring against us. The U.S. will always defend American citizens who are exercising their Constitutional freedoms.

The OIC’s effort to compel the West into censoring itself regarding criticism of Islam is going very well.

In the wake of the jihad attack on our free speech event in Garland, Texas last year, there were widespread condemnations of our event for daring to “provoke” Muslims. After the Danish Muhammad cartoon riots and the massacre of the Charlie Hebdo Muhammad cartoonists, mainstream media outlets all over the West refused to publish the cartoons in solidarity with the victims and in defense of the freedom of speech. Instead, they opted to publish transparently hypocritical explanations of how they were declining to publish the cartoons out of “respect” for Muslims and Islam.

The lesson of all this is one that no less a figure than General Petraeus has imbibed and is now propagating himself: Muslims don’t like when we say we should stop Muslim immigration for awhile, and they join the jihad. So we must stop saying it so that they won’t join the jihad.

In reality, this argument will only encourage them to tell us they’re joining the jihad because of other things we do, because they now have proof this tactic works. They are in fact already doing this. In the wake of violent intimidation by Muslims, Petraeus is saying that the West’s proper response is to give those violent Muslims what they want. Conform our speech to suit them.

If we take Petraeus’ advice, it will not result in less jihad, as he claims, but more. More aggressive Muslim demands on the U.S., more rage, and more “revenge.” Petraeus is giving the West a recipe for setting the world on fire even more than it is now.

Former al-Qaida Terrorist Sought Asylum in Norway

May 17, 2016

Former al-Qaida Terrorist Sought Asylum in Norway, Investigative Project on Terrorism, May 17, 2016

Norwegian police arrested a former Syrian al-Qaida fighter who sought asylum in Norway, the UK’s Daily Express reports.

Police arrested the 26-year-old man Friday at an asylum center after officers received a search warrant. Anne Karoline, a lawyer representing the Norwegian police, confirmed the arrest but could not provide further details concerning the indictment. Her client admitted to being a former operative of Jabhat al-Nusra – al-Qaeda’s branch in Syria – when he sought asylum in 2015, Karoline said.

The suspect came to Norway with his underage brother and denies any wrongdoing. Norwegian police are trying to keep the former al-Qaida fighter in custody for a month.

Many critics of Europe’s refugee policy argue that radical jihadist organizations, including the Islamic State and al-Qaida, could attempt to infiltrate the West by planting operatives among waves of Middle Eastern refugees.

In a December 2015 white paper, the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT) explored gaps in the American Immigration system which could enable terrorists to enter the country as refuges, to apply for asylum once in the U.S., or to enter as passport holders from the 38 countries in the Visa Waiver Program.

Weaknesses in the U.S. system include the tendency to offer refugees and asylum seekers the benefit of the doubt in their accounts of their plight and background; the rapid speed with which lawful permanent resident status is granted to asylees and refugees; the problems that arise concerning refugees who cannot provide documentation of their birth dates; inconsistency in the vetting process; and inadequacies featured in various application forms.

Click here to read the IPT’s white paper and its recommendations.

“Russia Did More ‘Good’ In 30 Days Than The US Did In A Year”

May 17, 2016

“Russia Did More ‘Good’ In 30 Days Than The US Did In A Year” – The Only Accredited Western Journalist In Damascus Speaks Up

by Tyler Durden on 05/16/2016 22:40 -0400

Source: “Russia Did More ‘Good’ In 30 Days Than The US Did In A Year” – The Only Accredited Western Journalist In Damascus Speaks Up | Zero Hedge

On behalf of Prensa Latina news agency, Miguel Fernandez was the only journalist from the Western world accredited to work in the Syrian capital of Damascus for nearly a year. After returning home to Havana, Fernandez gave Sputnik News an exclusive interview in which he reflects back on what he experienced in the war torn country.

Fernandez first gets into the single biggest lesson he learned, which is that the people of Syria don’t give in, they don’t stop pursuing the dream of having a prosperous country.

“Seeing how these people don’t give in, that they dream about a prosperous country, is the biggest lesson that Syria gave me”

Miguel then reflects back on when a colleague of his first arrived in the city, and as the journalist took him around the city, everything was seemingly so normal that his friend asked “where is the war?”

“Fear is the first thing that war creates, that fear which forces people to be on guard. However, Damascus broke that pattern. When my colleague arrived I took him around the city and he noticed that buses and taxis are traveling around, people are sitting in cafes and going shopping, children are going to school. He asked me, ‘where is the war?'”

“I said, I will show you before we leave for Cuba. And after less than a day, when we were traveling in a taxi, a mortar shell fell in front of us, onto a group of people, some of whom died, and there was chaos all around.”

“I looked at that and I said – that is war. That resistance of the Syrian people, the unwillingness to accept the hardships of war, has inspired me.”

The most harrowing moment for Fernandez was during the fall of Palmyra to the terrorists in May 2011 [later to be taken back from ISIS, and even recently held a concert that was put on by Russia’s famous Mariinsky Theatre Orchestra]. Fernandez reflected on a time in which monuments were destroyed, and children under Daesh leadership were made to kill captured Syrian soldiers.

 “Palmyra is one of ten UNESCO World Heritage sites in Syria, an oasis in the desert, full of mystical stories. Seeing how the Arch of Triumph and other monuments were destroyed. A terrible scene that I will never forget, was when children under the leadership of Daesh killed 50 captured Syrian soldiers who were on their knees.

“For me, that was the saddest moment, because I felt that the war was not only against Syria, but against the world, our culture, our values, our heritage. When I say ours, I mean civilization. These elements (Daesh) are savages. They can destroy a monument in the same way that they cut a child’s head off.”

Fernandez also recalled how differently the Syrian people view Russia and the United States, and that the Russian participation did not feel like an intervention at all. Importantly, Miguel discusses the stark differences between the precision and effectiveness of the US vs Russian air strikes as well. Notably that US airstrikes were not coordinated and often hit Syrian infrastructure, as opposed to Russia’s strikes, which destroyed more Daesh infrastructure in 30 days than the US had been able to accomplish in a year’s time.

“I am fair with blue eyes, so they often confused me with Russians and affectionately greeted me. Syrians believe in Russia because for a long time they were in conflict with the US and some European powers and Russia was the only friendly power.

“I was there when Russia entered the war in September 2015 and Syrians did not perceive it as an intervention, but as support and a sign of solidarity,” Fernandez explained.

“For over a year before that the US had led an international coalition that didn’t show any results. The Americans carried out bombings but Daesh spread even further, and seized new positions.

Those airstrikes were not coordinated and often hit Syrian infrastructure, hospitals and schools. The Russian airstrikes didn’t, because they entered the war at the request of Damascus and their activities were coordinated in order to be effective and not bring harm to civilians.

“During the first 30 days of bombing the Russians were able to destroy 40 percent of Daesh’s infrastructure, which the US and its allies hadn’t been able to do for a year.”

Fernandez ended the interview with a story of a Syrian soldier who complimented him by breaking bread and sharing it with the journalist, as a tribute to what the soldier said was Cuban bravery.

 “One of the soldiers, he was over 50, bearded, dirty, covered in powder and slush, he came to me, broke his bread in two and offered me half.”

“I refused, because I had already had breakfast at home and had no idea how many hours he had gone without eating. But my translator told me to take the bread, explaining that he wanted to share the bread with me because I am Cuban and he had always been told that Cuban soldiers are very brave and that if he shares the bread with me, it will bring him luck in the next battle.”

“I shed a few tears, because I am not a warrior, and I was very touched that he had such an impression about my nation,”

 

* * *

With all of the speculation and observations from the pundits on television, who have never stepped foot inside the war torn country of Syria, it is helpful to get a first hand account of what’s taking place on the ground. What one may find, is that those that sit around and parrot the “Russia Bad/US Good” narrative all day may not be exactly providing the complete picture.

ISIS, Syrian Conflict ‘Not Containable’ in Middle East

May 17, 2016

ISIS, Syrian Conflict ‘Not Containable’ in Middle East Bipartisan report calls for greater American involvement abroad

BY:
May 17, 2016 5:00 am

Source: ISIS, Syrian Conflict ‘Not Containable’ in Middle East

Threats emanating from the Middle East, including those caused by ISIS and the Syrian civil war, cannot be contained and therefore require the United States to significantly ramp up its military commitments in the region, according to a new report.

A group of scholars, strategists, and former government officials from Republican and Democratic administrations convened to develop the study, which was released by the Center for a New American Security on Monday.

The report, which has been endorsed by a number of ex-Democratic officials including a former Clinton administration aide, implies that the Obama administration’s policies toward Syria and the Middle East in general have been weak.

“Despite recent American misjudgments and failures in the Middle East, for which all recent administrations, including the present one, bear some responsibility, and despite the apparent intractability of many of the problems in the region, the United States has no choice but to engage itself fully in a determined, multi-year effort to find an acceptable resolution to the many crises tearing the region apart,” the report states.

“The key point is that the dangers emanating from the Middle East, including both terrorism and the massive flow of refugees, are not containable. They must be addressed at the source, over many years, using a combination of local actors and American power and influence.”

The report calls for the international effort against ISIS to be “scaled up substantially,” a move that would include sending more U.S. special operations forces to help root out the terror group from Iraq, Syria, and newly-established footholds in countries like Libya.

“The United States should show a new resolve by increasing significantly its military contribution across the board, including providing more unique air assets, additional intelligence assets, and a larger contingent of special operation forces capable of identifying and destroying high value and other critical ISIS targets,” the report states.

President Obama’s efforts against ISIS, which he once compared to a “JV team,” have long been criticized. Just one day before the group launched deadly coordinated terror attacks in Paris last November, the president declared during a nationally televised interview that the terror group had been “contained.”

The Obama administration, which began air strikes against ISIS in 2014, has sent modest contingents of special operations forces to Syria and Iraq in order to provide “advise and assist” support for Syrian Arab, Kurdish, and Iraqi troops fighting the terror group in the region. It has also green-lit limited operations directly targeting leaders of the terrorist group.

The administration has insisted that American troops are not in combat operations against ISIS, even though three American service members have died at the group’s hands in Iraq.

The report released Monday indicates that the administration has not done enough to thwart a terrorist group that could pose a greater threat to American and Western security than al Qaeda.

“The terrorist assault on Paris this past November and on Brussels in March were stark and painful reminders of the many ways instability in the Greater Middle East can come home to countries in Europe. The mass shooting in California in early December 2015 also demonstrates why ISIS potentially poses a greater threat to the United States and its allies and partners than al Qaeda,” the report states, citing the terrorist attack on a San Bernardino, Calif., holiday party carried out by a radicalized couple.

“With so many ISIS-inspired terrorists holding Western passports, counterterrorism has become significantly more difficult. Nor can one discount the possibility that just as ISIS has emerged to compete with al Qaeda for leadership of the jihadi forces, there will be other groups seeking to take the mantle.”

The CNAS project is co-chaired by James Rubin, a former State Department official during the Clinton administration, and is endorsed by CNAS co-founder Michèle Flournoy, who served as undersecretary of defense in the Obama administration. The project was established to develop a bipartisan consensus about the role America should play in the world, and the report was deliberately rolled out ahead of the 2016 election to shape the national conversation.

While the experts do not go out of their way to criticize the current administration’s foreign policy agenda, the report offers implicit rebukes of the administration’s efforts abroad, particularly in the Middle East. It calls for making a political solution to the five-year Syrian civil war dependent on the departure of Syrian leader Bashar al Assad—a point the Obama administration has appeared willing to concede in recent months.

The report also calls for an overhaul of the Pentagon’s “inadequate” program to arm and train the Syrian opposition forces, who have faced brutal resistance from Syrian government troops emboldened by Russian and Iranian intervention in the conflict. The Defense Department was forced to shutter its failed program to train and equip moderate Syrian rebels, which cost American taxpayers $500 million, in favor of a less ambitious initiative last October.

“Syrian government forces have regained considerable territory and momentum especially in and around Aleppo, primarily as a result of coordinated Russian-Syrian-Iranian operations backed by heavy and often indiscriminate Russian bombardment from the air,” the report states.

“At a minimum, the inadequate efforts hitherto to arm, train, and protect a substantial Syrian opposition force must be completely overhauled and made a much higher priority.”

The report also proposes the establishment of a no-fly zone in Syria where displaced Syrians can relocate out of harm’s way and where opposition forces can arm, train, and organize.

More generally, the experts make the case for boosting American engagement in the face of Chinese economic growth and military buildup, Russian aggression, and continued destabilization in the Middle East. The maintenance of post-World War II international order, the report explains, is dependent on strengthening U.S. diplomatic, economic, and military power and boosting spending on defense and national security.

“The greatest challenge to the preservation of this order today may be here in the United States. The bipartisan consensus that has long supported America’s engagement with the world is under attack by detractors in both parties,” the report states.

“Responsible political leaders need to explain to a new generation of Americans how important this world order is to their well-being and how vital America’s role is in sustaining it.”

Hamas using Gazan fishermen to smuggle weapons

May 16, 2016

Revealed: Hamas using Gazan fishermen to smuggle weapons Fisherman arrested by Israeli navy reveals Hamas’s efforts to circumvent military blockade, in latest Israeli intelligence coup.

By Ari Soffer

First Publish: 5/16/2016, 3:55 PM

Source: Hamas using Gazan fishermen to smuggle weapons – Defense/Security – News – Arutz Sheva

Fishermen off the coast of Gaza Abed Rahim Khatib/Flash 90

A Gazan fisherman arrested by Israeli security services has revealed how Hamas regularly uses fishermen to smuggle weapons and other military equipment into Gaza.

The Shin Bet security service (Israel Security Agency), Israeli navy and Israel Police released for publication Monday afternoon the arrest of 39-year-old fisherman Salim Jamal Hasan Na’aman back in April.

Na’aman, a resident of the Shati refugee camp in the Gaza Strip, was initially detained by Israeli naval forces after straying beyond the zone permitted for fishing, as part of the Israeli military’s blockade aimed at containing the Hamas terrorist group.

Under Shin Bet interrogation, the fisherman revealed how over a prolonged period he had personally helped smuggle weapons, ammunition, rocket-making equipment and other military equipment via sea into Gaza, on behalf of Hamas and other terrorist organizations.

The items he was tasked with smuggling ranged from live weapons and ammunition, to elements such as liquid fiberglass, which is a key ingredient in rocket production.

Na’aman also revealed to his interrogators a trove of valuable information about Hamas’s own naval activities, including how Hamas operatives aided in smuggling efforts, and worked hard to disguise such activities from Israeli intelligence.

He also provided detailed information on Hamas smuggling routes between Gaza and Egypt, such as the use of fishermen and other smugglers.

In a statement, the Shin Bet hailed the breakthrough in efforts to restrict the flow of weapons and ammunition to Hamas and other terrorist groups inside Gaza.

“The intelligence gained from this interrogation, as in the interrogation of other Hamas terror operatives arrested recently, exposes yet another way among many others in which Hamas is investing in preparations for further violent terrorist acts. In this case: taking advantage of concessions by Israel towards fisherman in Gaza,” the statement read, referring to Israel’s recent extension of the fishing zone.

As noted in the statement, this is only the latest in a series of arrests of Hamas terror operatives from Gaza.

The Shin Bet and IDF recently revealed the arrest of a senior Hamas tunnel builder, who yielded a wealth of intelligence on the jihadist group’s efforts to build attack tunnels into Israeli territory.

Another teenage terrorist was also recently captured, revealing yet more information on Hamas’s preparations for another war with Israel.

Trump, Ryan and the Islam Problem

May 16, 2016

Trump, Ryan and the Islam Problem, PJ Media, Roger L. Simon, May 15, 2016

trump_reading_submission_article_banner_5-16-16-1.sized-770x415xc

One of the main areas of contention between Donald Trump and Paul Ryan is the question of Muslim immigration. In early December, when Trump first made his proposal (now a “suggestion”) to stop all such immigration until we “understood what was going on,” one of the first to react in high dudgeon was Ryan, who declared: “This is not conservatism.”

He was applauded for his four-word pronouncement by those “conservatives” at the Washington Post, who called his response “near-perfect.” Actually, to me it seemed morally narcissistic and had little to with conservatism, pro or con. Ryan wanted to disassociate himself as quickly as possible from the ugly and seemingly racist Trump.

But let’s look more closely at what the speaker said during that response:

When we voted to pause the refugee program a few weeks ago, I made very clear at the time: there would not be a religious test. There would be a security test. And that is because freedom of religion is a fundamental Constitutional principle. It’s a founding principle of this country.

Aside from the obvious — if people are fighting and killing you in the name of a religion, how do you ignore the “religious test” — what about that “security test”? Is it really happening or are people slipping into the country by various means, including an open border, with no test whatsoever?  What about reports of an ISIS camp eight miles from El Paso?

And, perhaps more importantly, did that “pause” Ryan voted for actually take place in any meaningful way? According to the New York Post a “surge operation” bringing Syrian refugees to America was already in operation this past April.  By “surge operation,” Gina Kassem — regional refugee coordinator in Amman — told reporters, it was meant the resettlement process that normally took 18 to 24 months would be sped up to 3 months. (Some pause!) And the figure of 10,000 refugees that has often been proffered by the administration was a minimum, not a maximum.

What is the maximum and how will they be vetted? And just how do you “vet” during a “surge”? Is that what Ryan really meant by a “security test”?  I doubt it, but Trump should ask him at their next reconciliation meeting. As they say, Paul’s got some “xplainin” to do.

Now this isn’t a simple question. The Syrian people have suffered mightily at the hands of various psychotic despots, secular and religious. Trump has called for supporting more extensive refugee camps in the region, an idea that makes more sense than bringing them here.  (He has also called for the Gulf states to pay for them — good luck with that.)

The main point is that this is a significant campaign issue and intelligent solutions have to be discussed.  Trump has put Rudy Giuliani in charge of studying this from his side, an excellent choice.

There may be a short-term fix, but there won’t be a short-term answer. This is a very long-term problem, the longest one we have, dwarfing the deficit and everything else — civilizational, really.  Will we be America or will we go the way of Europe and turn semi-Islamic like France in Houellebecq’s novel?

It wouldn’t be hard. We have been living under an administration that has been an enabler of Islamism.  Obama has chosen to ally himself with Islamists like Turkey’s Erdogan, Egypt’s Morsi and, most stunningly, Iran’s Khamenei, while abjuring Egypt’s al-Sisi, who seeks to reform Islam.  Go figure.

On top of all that — it’s hard to believe this — there are reports our administration was colluding with Russia in an attempt to get Israel to give back the Golan Heights to Syria in some putative peace settlement. Syria? Needless to say, Mr. Netanyahu was not amused.

In any case, on the immediate question of Muslim immigration, Trump may have sounded excessive and even been excessive.  That’s his technique — he likes to get our attention, then negotiate. But in this particular negotiation (not, for example, on entitlements) the basic talking points — and the American people — are on Donald’s side. Ryan should listen.

Democrats Try to Outlaw Trump’s Muslim Immigration Ban

May 16, 2016

Democrats Try to Outlaw Trump’s Muslim Immigration Ban, Front Page Magazine, Robert Spencer, May 16, 2016

(Since Islamic jihad has been deemed un-Islamic, and is therefore claimed to have no nexus with Islam, there is presently no effective way to bar Islamic terrorists from entry. Perhaps those who oppose Trump’s proposed temporary ban on Muslim immigration until ways are found to keep jihadists out should try to find ways. — DM)

don-byer

Love him or hate him, Donald Trump has certainly turned American politics on its head. Has it ever happened before in American history that a political party began to frame legislation against an opposing candidate’s proposals before he was even elected – much less one whose election was as inconceivable as the mainstream media would have us believe about Donald Trump? Yet that is exactly what the Democrats are doing: Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA) is spearheading a bill that would block a President Trump from instituting the temporary halt on Muslim immigration into the United States that he has proposed.

“It’s very narrow in scope,” says Beyer of his Freedom of Religion Act. “We’re not going to discriminate when it comes to immigration based on religion.” He added that his bill was intended to “appeal to hope rather than fear.” In our pusillanimous and puerile age, “fear” is not just a weakness of character, but a moral flaw: if you fear being beheaded or blown up by Islamic jihadists, you’re an evil person. And to be sure, fear is never to be encouraged or given into, but its opposite is not hope, it’s courage and resoluteness.

Beyer is not offering courage or resoluteness. He is proposing a ban on using someone’s religion as a reason for blocking them from entering the country based on the politically correct fiction that Islamic jihad terrorism has nothing to do with Islam, and that therefore to be concerned about jihad terrorists entering the country along with peaceful Muslim refugees is simply a manifestation of bigotry, racism and “Islamophobia.”

What Beyer is offering is “hope” and a rejection of “fear.” We should “hope” that there will be no jihadis among the immigrants. We should “hope” that there will not be another jihad attack a la San Bernardino perpetrated by another refugee like Tashfeen Malik, the San Bernardino jihad murderer who had passed five separate background checks from five separate U.S. government agencies. We should “hope” that the Islamic State will not make good on its threat to send jihadis into Europe and North America among the refugees. We should “hope” that we can continue to pursue self-destructive and suicidal policies without suffering any negative consequences.

To reject all of Beyer’s “hopes” would be, in his view, to succumb to “fear,” and remember: fear is morally wrong. Trump, after all, is like Hitler for even suggesting this temporary moratorium: hard-Left journalist Intercept co-founder Jeremy Scahill told Bill Maher on Real Time Friday: “I believe that what we’re seeing with Trump has whiffs of how Hitler rose to power.” Yes, of course: Hitler stopped emigration of Jews and kept them in Germany so he could kill them, while Trump proposed a temporary ban on Muslim immigration so that jihadis won’t kill us — clearly they’re the same thing, if you’re a hardcore doctrinaire Leftist.

Meanwhile, those who vilify Trump for proposing this have never actually come up with any viable alternative proposal for keeping jihadis out of the country. We’re just supposed to reject “fear” and rely on “hope” that it won’t all blow up on us – you know, the “hope” that prevented the jihad attacks in Paris and Brussels and San Bernardino and Garland and Chattanooga and Boston and Fort Hood. The “hope” that leaves us defenseless in the face of the advancing jihad, for fear of appearing “Islamophobic.”

For Leftists like Don Beyer and Jeremy Scahill, the mass murder of innocent non-Muslim civilians in the U.S. is preferable to taking any effective action to defend our nation – for to do so would be to succumb to “fear,” that fear that our Leftist moral superiors insist is a character defect. Why did the U.S. declare war on Japan after Pearl Harbor? Instead of giving in to “fear,” it should have laid down its arms and opened the door to unrestricted Japanese immigration. Britain should have done the same thing after Hitler invaded Poland: instituted a ban on anti-Nazi legislation and opened its arms and its shores to the Germans. What could possibly have gone wrong? Primitive man should never have fashioned a spear; he should instead have let the lion maul him; instead, he gave in to “fear.”

Don Beyer and the Democrats are, for the umpteenth time, demanding that the nation choose defeat and suicide.

Iran ‘preparing another Holocaust,’ Netanyahu charges

May 15, 2016

Iran ‘preparing another Holocaust,’ Netanyahu charges After meeting French FM, prime minister calls on world to condemn Islamic Republic for ‘denying and mocking’ the Shoah

By Times of Israel staff

May 15, 2016, 11:45 am

Source: Iran ‘preparing another Holocaust,’ Netanyahu charges | The Times of Israel

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu railed at Iran Sunday for holding its annual Holocaust denial cartoon contest, charging that the Islamic Republic was “preparing another Holocaust” against the Jewish people.

Iran “denies the Holocaust, mocks the Holocaust, and is preparing another Holocaust,” he told ministers at the start of the weekly cabinet meeting in his Jerusalem office, “and I think all the countries of the world need to stand up and condemn this unequivocally.”

 Israel’s problem with Iran, he said, “isn’t just its subversive, aggressive policy in the region. It’s the values on which it’s based.”

Iran’s annual international cartoon contest lampooning the Holocaust features around 150 works from 50 countries. It began Saturday and is running for the next two weeks.

The contest secretary said Saturday it was not denying the Nazi genocide and wasn’t “ridiculing its victims,” but then went on to equate Nazi crimes with Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians.

Netanyahu also said that France’s support for a UNESCO resolution that neglected to mention the Temple Mount’s Jewish history casts a pall over Paris’s impartiality in attempts to resuscitate peace talks.

He was speaking shortly after meeting with visiting French Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault. Ayrault traveled to Ramallah to convene with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas after his tete-a-tete with the Israeli prime minister.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (R) shakes hands with French Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault on May 15, 2016 during a meeting at the Prime Minister's Office in Jerusalem (AFP PHOTO AND POOL / MENAHEM KAHANA)

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (R) shakes hands with French Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault on May 15, 2016 during a meeting at the Prime Minister’s Office in Jerusalem (AFP PHOTO AND POOL / MENAHEM KAHANA)

The prime minister said that he told Ayrault that France’s “scandalous decision” to vote in favor of a UNESCO resolution “which doesn’t recognize the millennia-old connection between the Jewish people and the Temple Mount casts a shadow on France’s evenhandedness in any forum it’s trying to convene.” Netanyahu wrote a furious letter to President Francois Hollande last week protesting the French support for the decision.

Ayrault reassured Netanyahu that France maintains complete transparency regarding its relations with Israel, and reiterated Hollande’s assertion that the UNESCO vote was a “misunderstanding.”

“The only way to advance real peace between us and the Palestinians is through direct negotiations… with no preconditions,” Netanyahu restated.

Ayrault is promoting a bid to persuade Netanyahu to accept France’s efforts to engineer a peace deal between Israel and the Palestinians, based on a two-state solution.

 

Exclusive: ‘I was Raised by an Islamist Terror Cult in America’

May 15, 2016

Exclusive: ‘I was Raised by an Islamist Terror Cult in America’ Clarion ProjectRyan Mauro, May 15, 2016

Silhouette-Man-Woman-Pixabay-IPIllustrative picture: Pixabay)

The Clarion Project has been in contact with a woman who grew up within Jamaat ul-Fuqra, a cultish Sufi Islamist terrorist group that now goes by the name of Muslims of the Americas.

The group is best known for establishing “Islamic villages” on U.S. soil, for example, its “Islamberg” headquarters in New York state.

She has agreed to anonymously come forward with her heartbreaking story. We have removed details for her safety. She provided photographs and specific facts that are unavailable in the public sphere that we subsequently confirmed.

The following is her testimony provided to Clarion Project national security analyst Ryan Mauro. It is one of the very few first-hand testimonies from someone who was inside Jamaat ul-Fuqra when it committed terrorism under that name:

I still know many Muslims and I know that Jamaat ul-Fuqra is nothing like them, but there are violent ones who will take issue with what I say and do. They believe you should be killed if you decide not to be Muslim or practice Islam the way they do because, to them, it’s “apostasy,” and that’s a capital offense under Islam. I do believe some of those violent Muslims may attempt to kill me.

From my point of view as a kid in Michigan, everything was great even though my mom and dad got a divorce and I was living with my mom. My first introduction to X [a Fuqra member] was when he hit me for breaking rules I knew nothing about. My name was also changed to be Islamic.

We lived at 52 Ferris Street in Highland Park, Michigan, a three-story building with six apartments on each floor. The entire building was occupied by black Muslims, some who came from Detroit. Non-Muslims were not allowed to move in. Armed guards were at the front entrance.

Living in the building was like living in a Muslim country. We didn’t go outside much because they didn’t want us to be influenced by non-Muslims. Us kids didn’t have any friends outside of the building. We were very poor and slept on the bare floor with no beds. Sometimes we didn’t have heat or hot water. We didn’t have any furniture whatsoever. We ate on the floor out of large platters with our fingers. Food was also sometimes scarce.

Once my mother was making the only food we had in the house: Beans and rice. As she was seasoning, she mistakenly poured the entire bottle of salt in it. I watched her break down crying because this was the only food she had to feed her children. Someone told her to use a potato to suck the salt out of the food so we could eat it.

The building was like a house of horrors. Some of the kids were tortured by their parents or beaten by the “brothers” in the building. There was one kid in particular I remember who was treated really badly. He would be beaten severely for little things like taking food from the refrigerator for himself. He and some others would sometimes not be allowed to stand up and forced to hop around like a bunny for days on end. They’d make him run errands throughout the building, hopping up three flights of stairs.

He was also starving and I remember him coming to our door begging for food. There was a fire set by one girl who was also known to be beaten badly and kept separate from the rest of the kids. Years later, I met the boy again and he just broke down crying. It was heart-wrenching. He wanted to know why no one helped him.

There were exercise classes in the basement. The brothers were training for whatever Muslim war they continuously told us was coming. Our schooling was irregular and not formal. There were no science classes and math was deficient. Mostly we learned to read and write English and Arabic. I learned later about the gaping holes in our education. Sometimes there was class once a week, sometimes not at all.

We were not allowed to listen to music or watch commercials. They didn’t want us to be influenced by them. There were some odd rules like the children couldn’t have cabbage patch dolls. They were called “evil.” The Smurfs were considered demonic.

This was true of my entire time with Fuqra. There was a tape recorder that I’d use to secretly record kids shows on the TV like Kids Incorporated. I only learned the pop songs from that time by hearing them sung on that show. I didn’t even hear Michael Jackson’s “Beat It” until much later in life. I’d try to memorize the songs in a closet because I couldn’t be caught listening to them.

Growing up, I thought all Muslims were like us. Later, I realized these were just the odd rules of our Muslim cult and that most Muslims did not follow most of the same rules as we did. Just like most Muslims are not terrorists and some Muslims don’t wear full coverings, every sect is different.

We would hear all kinds of fearful messages. I was told that in my lifetime the Muslims would have to fight the kafiroons (non-believers) and I would have to make sure I was on the right side of the war.

The females, including myself, wore what we called jilabias; a head-to-ankle length traditional Muslim garment. We usually made them ourselves. We sewed our own clothes when I was a kid, which was fun. We had different colored jilabias.

It was also common for men to have several wives. I was molested by one man, who I know also molested another girl. It causes feelings of shame that can affect you the rest of your life. It changes your brain chemistry.

The leader of our community was a man known as “Imam Musa.” It’s important to note that we were not Nation of Islam Muslims. In fact, we were taught that the Nation of Islam members aren’t really Muslims.

One day, there was a lot of commotion and we were told that a sheikh from Pakistan was coming to visit our little community inside the building. His name was Sheikh Mubarik Ali Gilani. They said he was a direct descendant of the Prophet Mohammed. It was all anyone talked about and some said he was coming to the U.S. seeking recruits for jihad in Afghanistan.

Everyone in the building was about the sheikh. Every disagreement was deferred to the Sheikh. The Sheikh and his wife would even name his followers’ babies.

When the sheikh arrived, I met him very briefly because I had a weird dream about the Prophet Mohammed. I couldn’t really remember the details. It was supposed to be a big honor to meet the sheikh. The leaders of our community met with him and some changes were made.

One of the first things that happened is that the sheikh married one of the girls who was around 14 years old and he was probably in his 40s. The marriage was supposed to combine our community with the sheikh’s community in Pakistan. It was the kind of marriage that reminds me of ancient times where a father would marry his daughter off to someone important in order to have a treaty with that community. She left to live with him in Pakistan and her father became the new leader of the community.

The sheikh renamed our community at this point to be “Jamaat ul-Fuqra,” which means “community of the impoverished.”

His followers in America are primarily African-American converts to Islam, but I believe our community was the first, or one of the first, he visited in the United States. Several of the “brothers” from the building went to Pakistan to meet with the sheikh, and when they returned, they were even more militant and religious than before. It was as if they had been hypnotized.

We were told that they prayed a lot and had mysticism circles. I vaguely remember something about them praying and going up to see Prophet Mohammed. They carried out small “missions.” Various sources on the Internet said that Fuqra carried out various terrorist attacks in the 1980s and early 1990s across the U.S. I heard about one of them.

There are press reports about Fuqra members bombing a building that housed a cleric. I knew one of them and that he had gone to visit the sheikh in Pakistan. Somehow, during the attack, the door to the basement got locked behind them and they died in the ensuing fire. The rumor in our community was that the CIA locked the door and trapped them inside. The men who died were considered “martyrs for the cause of Allah” in our community.

When we were there, one day I overheard people saying something about the FBI watching the building in navy blue cars outside. I looked out the window and, sure enough, there was a navy blue four-door sedan sitting out there. After that day, I noticed it was out there all the time.

In the 1990s, I heard several rumors. I heard that Sheikh Gilani was barred from entering the U.S. because he was suspected of being involved in a terrorist attack involving an airplane. I heard that Sheikh Gilani lives in a luxurious compound in Pakistan and that his family is extremely wealthy. His wives have expensive jewelry and servants and even their own seamstress.

I don’t know if these rumors are true first-hand, but supposedly there is a big dichotomy between how luxurious the sheikh and his family live and how poor his followers in the United States live.

Not long after the sedan was noticed, the sheikh sent an order from Pakistan that all Muslims in the building had to disperse across the country. This was devastating for me because I couldn’t see my friends anymore. I was very lonely. The community members went to California, Washington D.C., South Carolina, Georgia, New York and maybe other places.

I knew that Fuqra had bought land in rural areas of New York and Georgia for followers to settle at where they could follow strict religious codes. A group of us went to New Orleans in Louisiana and we didn’t have to wear our jalabias because we had to be incognito.

We lived in a two room shack behind someone’s house. The leader drove a cab. We moved frequently. I suspect that when they couldn’t pay the rent, they’d get evicted and move. In between moves, we’d live with other families and that was fun because we could play with other kids. I remember seeing scary and loud fights between the women married to the leader. A knife was pulled one time and another time a pregnant woman was kicked.

We drove to Brooklyn to hear the sheikh speak in a large mosque during one of his trips to America. His wife was there in a private room and she was revered in the community. I’ll always remember the shoes she wore. They looked like shoes that a genie would wear; gold and curled at the tip.

During that visit, I saw something that left a lasting impression on me. All the females were called to the basement of the mosque. There had to be 30-40 of us in a circle on the floor. They brought a chair out and put it in the middle of us. Then they brought out Y [a Fuqra member] and she had to sit backwards in the chair with her back facing the crowd. A woman came out with a big stick and gave her 10 lashes while the crowd of women said “shame on you!” with each lash.

At first, she just winced in agony. Eventually she was crying pretty hard. The entire scene was traumatizing for me and I felt bad for the children seeing it. She didn’t immediately go back to New Orleans, but did after some time.

The leader of the New Orleans community continued to be abusive and beat kids. I remember him beating one boy for peeing standing up. I guess Muslim men are supposed to sit down when they used the restroom. It really upset me.

One time I walked into the living room and saw one of the boys getting beaten. He looked at me with pain and fear in his eyes. I immediately screamed for the leader to stop hitting him and then I started shaking with fear. No one talked back to him. He told me to leave a room and continued the beating with a belt as the boy hunched and crawled into a corner. I felt helpless. It was the catalyst for me deciding to leave.

I took some pocket change and ran away. I didn’t know where to go, so I just walked up and down random neighborhoods and ended up at an outdoor mall. Eventually, I was falling asleep and had to go back home. My mom was crying when I walked in and I told her I wanted to go live with my dad.

I ran away again only days later and was hit with a belt when I came home. This time, I fought back and began screaming for someone to call the police. It made him give up and walk away in a huff. I later ran away again and got to a pay phone where I called my dad in Michigan. He had tried to take me away when I was growing up but was stopped by guys with guns. I knew he’d rescue me.

He called a cab to bring me to the airport and I sat there and waited for hours. Then I saw my grandpa come out of the airport and he paid the taxi that had been waiting forever. We flew back to Michigan.

After I left, most of the Muslims left the New Orleans site and went to other Fuqra places. I know some did not move to other Fuqra communities and I suspect that some of them stopped being a part of Jamaat ul-Fuqra.

It was time to start my life over in Michigan but I still suffer a lot from all I experienced to this day.

Will America Follow Britain further Into, or away from, the Abyss?

May 14, 2016

Will America Follow Britain further Into, or away from, the Abyss? Dan Miller’s Blog, May 14, 2016

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

The Muslim invasion is changing European and British demographics to the degree that some countries will soon have Muslim majorities. Will America follow Europe? What about our Publican and Demorat elites? Will we reject them and the unelected bureaucrats they have spawned and empowered? 

America needs to vote for her own version of Brexit this November.

British and European Demographics

Paul Weston is the vile “Islamophobe” who dared to read — aloud and in public — a passage from a book written by another vile “Islamophobe,” Winston Churchill, a couple of years ago. For that, he (Weston, not Winston) was arrested.

So what if Weston spoke accurately? He offended Muslims and that can’t be tolerated. Besides, Britain is terribly “racist” even though Islam is not a race.

Meanwhile, London’s East End is losing its native population and the place looks “less like a British city, more like Baghdad.”

The European Union and Britain

Currently, Mr. Weston of the Liberty GB Party is campaigning for Britain to leave the Europen Union, a force for unrequited love, charity and destruction. So is Nigel Farge of UKIP.

Here’s a long video about the EU and why Britain should leave it. It’s over an hour long but well worth watching. It’s principally about economics, the destructive power the EU has given unaccountable bureaucrats and the stifling of democracy.

As you watch and listen, please consider the similarities and differences between the EU and governance of, by and for the Publican and Demorat Establishment in America. Both have empowered and continue to expand unelected bureaucracies.

I was disappointed that the video does not deal with the immigration problem which will continue to plague Britain if she remains in the EU. Perhaps the topic was seen as likely to displease Britain’s already substantial Muslim population and prompt them to vote to remain in the EU. Remember, London just elected its first Muslim mayor.

Here’s another “Islamophobic” EUophobe:

Democracy and self-governance are seen by far too many as absurdly old fashioned. In Obama’s America, where would we be if governance were taken away from our betters in the Publican and Demorat Establishment and returned to the vulgarian little people? Do we need great Establishment intellects to think for us so that we don’t have to do it ourselves? The vulgarian dummies living in EU member states haven’t had to think for years. Now, with the upcoming referendum, those in Britain l have a chance to do so. We will have a chance this November.

Obama has told the citizens of once-great Britain that membership in the EU is economically and otherwise good for them — perhaps even as good as His presidency has been for citizens of His America. Many disagree with “the smartest person in any room;” those in Obama’s America who do may even elect Vulgarian-in-Chief Donald Trump as President shortly after citizens of Britain who cherish self-governance may vote to exit the EU.

Conclusions

America does not yet have the same Muslim demographic problems as Europe or Britain. Unless we halt or at least reduce Islamic immigration and cease to subsidize it we will eventually. One way to minimize the problem is to get rid of the politically correct “Islamophobia” nonsense and speak of Islam as it is rather than as though it were a benign unicorn.

Islamophobia-copy (1)

The elites of the Publican and Demorat establishment are a big part if the problem. Just as Britain seems to be moving toward leaving the EU, we need to diminish the power of our own elected elites by electing “vulgarians” to replace them. We also need to reduce the very substantial power of the masses of unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats they have empowered. There is no need to replace them.

16/10/09 TODAY Picture by Tal Cohen - Muslims protest outside Geert Wilders press conference in central London 16 October 2009, Wilders who faces prosecution in the Netherlands for anti-Islam remarks pays visit to the capital. The Freedom Party leader said 'Lord Malcolm Pearson has invited me to come to the House of Lords to discuss our future plans to show Fitna the movie.' Wilders won an appeal on October 13 against a ban, enforced in February, from entering Britain. Ministers felt his presence would threaten public safety and lead to interfaith violence. (Photo by Tal Cohen) All Rights Reserved – Tal Cohen - T: +44 (0) 7852 485 415 www.talcohen.net Email: tal.c.photo@gmail.com Local copyright law applies to all print & online usage. Fees charged will comply with standard space rates and usage for that country, region or state.