Islamic supremacy | WarSclerotic | Page 33

Posted tagged ‘Islamic supremacy’

Europe cuts refugee deal

November 29, 2015

Europe cuts refugee deal, Washington Examiner, Paige Winfield Cunningham, November 29, 2015

(Please see also, Does ISIS Owe Its Success to Turkey? — DM)

730x420-4dd28666e754459c14faa8917f5c133c

The agreement is expected to significantly stem the tide of hundreds of thousands of refugees from Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan seeking asylum in other countries who are hesitant to let them in their borders. (AP Photo)

Turkey will contain more Middle Eastern refugees within its owns borders so fewer of them flee to other European countries, under a deal it reached Sunday with the European Union.

In return for tightening its border control, Turkey will get several billion dollars from the EU and assistance in its efforts to join the coalition of 28 countries. The agreement is expected to significantly stem the tide of hundreds of thousands of refugees from Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan seeking asylum in other countries who are hesitant to let them in their borders.

The U.S. has admitted fewer than 2,000 Syrian refugees since 2012, yet the flood of migrants in Europe has incited a fierce political debate over whether they are sufficiently screened before entering the country.

President Obama wants to admit 10,000 Syrian refugees next year, saying that a robust vetting process will be in place. Refugees currently have to wait an average of 18-24 months before entering the U.S., as they’re screened by several different government agencies.

But many Republicans running for president have said they should be blocked until stricter screening measures are put in place and some GOP governors have tried to prohibit them from entering their own states. Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who has suggested only refugees who prove they are Christian should be admitted to the U.S., reiterated that position on Sunday, saying on CNN’s “State of the Union” that refugees should be screened for their religion.

And Ben Carson, who is currently polling second in the GOP primary battle, said Middle Eastern countries that are closer geographically to refugees’ home countries should get more financial assistance to help them. Carson spoke with CNN from Jordan, where he has visited Syrian refugee camps.

Carson said instead of focusing on how to let more refugees into the U.S., which is much more difficult for them to travel to, policymakers should figure out how to allow more to settle in countries at closer proximity where they wouldn’t have to experience as big a change in culture. Jordan, for example, should get more money to admit more refugees, Carson said.

“It seems like everybody in the international community is spending more time saying how can we bring refugees here rather than support a facility that is already in place that the refugees are finding perfectly fine — when it’s fully funded,” Carson said.

Categories: Asylum seekers, Erdogan, Europe, European Union, Foreign policy, Islamic invasion, Islamic State, Islamic supremacy, NATO, Turkey
Tags: Asylum seekers, Erdogan, Europe, European Union, Foreign Policy, Islamic invasion, Islamic State, Islamic supremacy, Nato, Turkey

Comments: 4 Comments

CAUTION – includes satire |Diversity training will bring peace through submission, Insha’Obama

November 29, 2015

Diversity training will bring peace through submission, Insha’Obama, Dan Miller’s Blog, November 28, 2015

(The views expressed in this article may, or may not, be mine. They do not necessarily reflect those of any sane person or entity. — DM)

Our most prestigious universities now require diversity training for everyone coddled by un-Islamic aberrations based on Christian, Jewish, sexist and white privilege. Obama, bravely leading as always from the front, will follow them to combat Islamophobic speech and thought which He recently decreed to be felonies.

During His Thanksgiving address this year, Obama likened the current crop of Syrian and other Islamic refugees to the Pilgrims who came to America many years ago.

This Thanksgiving, President Obama is calling for Americans to lend a helping hand to another group of pilgrims fleeing persecution.

“Nearly four centuries after the Mayflower set sail, the world is still full of pilgrims – men and women who want nothing more than the chance for a safer, better future for themselves and their families,” Obama said in his weekly address Thursday. “What makes America America is that we offer that chance.”

Note: Although much of the following is true, parts are not. For example, even in Obama’s America Islamophobic thought is not yet a felony and the tale about Sally Snookums related toward the end remains the stuff of fantasy. In Muslim and incipient Muslim countries reality is different, so we need to emulate them. That will be change that we Obama can believe in.

Academia

According to an article at The Amerian Interest,

With their campuses rocked by social justice protests, anxious Ivy League presidents are trying to appease campus radicals with huge payouts to left-wing identity programs. Peter Salovey, the president of Yale, apologized to protesters (“we failed you”) and wrote a campus-wide letter promising to create a new “university center” for the study of “race ethnicity, and other aspects of social identity.” He also pledged to double the budget for the African American, Native American, Asian American, and Hispanic cultural centers, and to devote new resources to “educating our community about race, ethnicity, diversity, and inclusion.”

Not to be outdone, Brown University President Christina Paxson has answered protests by unveiling a $100 million program for creating “a just and inclusive campus community.” Among the budget items: “expand mentoring resources for students of color, LGBTQ+ students, and first generation college students”; create “workshops” to “foster greater awareness and sensitivity on issues of race, ethnicity, sexual orientation and gender identity and expression”; and “promote university-wide research and academic programming on Power, Privilege, Identity and Structural Racism.”

The rest of Obama’s America

Since academia is only part of the problem, the wise humanitarian outreach programs undertaken there (with the exception of those to comfort LGBTQ+ students which Muslims consider offensive) must be expanded to reach all problem people and areas. Doing so is Obama’s principal duty as America’s Commander in Chief and Supreme Leader. I have altered the excerpt from the article at The American Interest quoted above to reflect what Obama and His friends would probably try to do if they thought they could get away with it:

With many states rocked by Islamophobia and demands that widows and three year old orphans be banned, President Obama is increasing payouts to such anti-discrimination groups as the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Muslim Brotherhood and other Muslim-identity programs. Allegedly “radical” mosques such as those shown below will also be given badly needed infusions of Federal funds.

Obama has (again) apologized to Islamists (“we failed you”) and promised to create new state centers for the study of religious ethnicity and other aspects of social identity. He has also pledged to at least double the budgets for Islamic cultural centers, including those at the mosques indicated above, and to devote new resources to educating our community about religious and racial ethnicity, diversity, and inclusion.

He has also unveiled state-wide programs for creating just and inclusive communities.Among the budget items: expand mosques to provide increased mentoring resources for Muslim youth; create diversity workshops with mandatory attendance by all deemed to be on paths to becoming Islamophobic felons, to foster greater awareness and sensitivity on issues of religion, peace, ethnicity and expression; and to promote state-wide research and academic programming on Power, Privilege, Religious Identity and other types of Structural Racism.

These (along with His historic nuke deal with The Islamic ~~State~~ Republic of Iran) will be His most enduring legacies.

There is also hope in Obama’s America for the few refugees who may be neither widows nor three year old orphans.

Others can be adopted. Here are some adorable Syrian refugees:

Adorable, cuddly Syrian refugees to a good home. Attention liberal millionaires. Do you want your very own gang of Syrian Refugees (TM) to loiter around your home, throw things at you and beat you up?

Here are a whole bunch for you to take home. Yes, I’m looking at you, J.K. Rowling. Or Isaac Herzog. There’s so many that every passionately outraged leftist bigwig can have his own bunch. You just better be ready to cook for them and bring them everything while they throw it in your face.

You’ll notice the shortage of actual women and kids. The media makes a point of focusing on those, but the majority are young men. Just like Obama’s “unaccompanied children” border rush. But those are facts and we don’t need facts. Just outrage and lots of love.

So take them in. Step up for the cause. The Hungarian police will happily ship a dozen angry Syrian refugees to your home. What you do with them or what they do with you, is up to you.

Don’t be shy; there are plenty for everyone.

What could possibly go wrong?

Eurabia is doing very well

Although Germany has health problems, they have nothing to do with Islam.

The influx of more than one million asylum seekers from Africa, Asia and the Middle East is placing unprecedented strain on Germany’s healthcare system.

Hospitals, clinics and emergency rooms across Germany are being filled to capacity with migrants suffering maladies of all kinds, and medical personnel, including thousands of volunteers, are increasingly complaining of burnout.

Diseases are also reappearing that have not been seen in Germany for years. German public health officials are now on the lookout for Crimean Congo hemorrhagic fever, diphtheria, Ebola, hepatitis, HIV/AIDS, malaria, measles, meningitis, mumps, polio, scabies, tetanus, tuberculosis, typhus and whooping cough. As refugee shelters fill to overflowing, doctors are also on high alert for mass outbreaks of influenza and Norovirus. [Emphasis added.]

Compounding the challenge, tens of thousands of migrants arriving in Germany — particularly migrant children — have not been immunized, and German doctors are finding that needed vaccines are not readily available due to a lack of supply. Some German parents are panicking that there are not enough vaccines to immunize their own children.

. . . .

German hospitals are also being forced to hire a virtual army of interpreters so that doctors can communicate with asylum seekers, who speak dozens of languages, dialects and variants.

At the same time, German hospitals are increasing security to protect doctors and nurses from violent attacks by migrants who are unhappy with the medical treatment they are receiving.

Sweeden, also a haven of happiness for Muslim refugees, has the right idea. Sadly, some object. The Public Service Director of Sweeden’s public television has responded to their Islamophobic nastiness:

The Public Service director, Safa Safiyari, who recently introduced Dirawi to a large press gathering, came to Sweden at the age of 14. In newspaper articles, he has spoken about how he does not feel “fancy” enough for the Swedish archipelago; and how, in 2001, when he got to do current affairs shows for young people about “all the injustices in Sweden,” it felt as if it were revenge for all the injustices he said he has experienced in Sweden and that still characterize his life.

The announcement that a person such as Dirawi, who professes to be of the Islamic faith and who according to Islamic scholars must believe that the celebration of the birth of Christ is a heathen tradition, will be Christmas Host, sparked widespread expressions of anger and disappointment on social media. Comments were posted on Twitter, such as: “Public Television has declared war on Christian Sweden by choosing Muslim Gina Dirawi as Christmas Host! It is shameful!” And, “If things continue down this road, by next Christmas, Christmas ham will be banned.”

Safa Safiyari told the daily Göteborgs-Posten, that Swedish Public Television had been prepared for all kinds of reactions: “We have chosen Gina Dirawi as Christmas Host based on her competence, her comedic talents and experience in large television broadcasts. When we hire our Christmas Hosts, religious belief is not something we inquire about.” [Emphasis added.]

In order to take full advantage of the great opportunities coming to our shores, we need to help Islamophobes by jailing and reeducating them to make them understand that Islam is the true religion of peace; all others just pretend to be and are therefore fake.

Progress is already being made

In Obama’s America, Yes We Can and We Can’t Wait! Here’s just one small but hopeful example of what we have already done and will do again: a young Islamophobe named Sally Snookums was successfully reeducated and learned to apologize for her Islamophobic expressions of displeasure at having been raped by a Muslim. Here are pictures of Sally before and after her reeducation:

Before

Before

After

After

Just as Sally has been cured of Islamophobia and no longer goes about demanding to be raped, there is hope for all who wish to be true feminists. Don’t forget: Muslims are kind and generous, asking nothing for themselves. They only want to guide and help us to reclaim and restore the best of what has sadly become a decadent civilization.

The future of Obama’s America is bright

Once Obama’s sacred mission has been accomplished, there will be no more talk of “Islamic invasions” and “riots.” We are completely safe and have nothing to fear but fear itself and the Islamophobic FBI.

The FBI has roughly 1,000 active Islamic State probes inside the U.S. and new reports have revealed that at least 48 of those suspects are considered so high-risk that the bureau has deployed elite surveillance teams to track them.

The squads, known as mobile surveillance teams or MST are following the men and women, who are believed to be radicalized, 24 hours a day in case they plan to commit any acts of terrorism, Fox News reported.

With the help of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation — “whose founding charter seeks to propagate ‘legitimate jihad’ and ‘the norms of Islamic Shari’ah,'” our vetting process will prove to be just as successful and unnecessary as it has been in Europe; all peaceful Muslim widows, their three year old orphans and everyone else will be greeted, not spurned.

Conclusions

Since in Obama’s America the security threats posed by Islamophobia are also well on their way to resolution, we will soon succeed in our quest for the happiness of Eurabia. What a blessing it will be!

Nevertheless, much still remains for Obama’s America to accomplish. We must continue to devote our undivided attention to the perils of climate change — what a powerful rebuke that will be to such perpetrators of senseless, random workplace violence as the Non Islamic State!

We must also continue our ~~putsch~~ push for common sense gun control, while focusing on women’s health as required by Sharia Law and the Holy Quran upon which it is divinely based. Then, and only then, can we be truly proud of our country.

Finally, here is Grandpa Jones’ well deserved tribute to Obama:

Categories: Academia, Asylum seekers, Domestic policy, Foreign policy, Humor, Islam, Islamic invasion, Islamic perversions, Islamic State, Islamic supremacy, Islamophobia, Obama - rogue president, Obama and Islam, Obama and Islamic State, Obama's America
Tags: Academia, Asylum seekers, Domestic policy, Foreign Policy, Humor, Islam, Islamic invasion, Islamic perversions, Islamic State, Islamic supremacy, Islamophobia, Obama and Islam, Obama and Islamic State, Obama's America

Comments: Be the first to comment

The Accomplices Have Their Backs Against the Wall

November 29, 2015

The Accomplices Have Their Backs Against the Wall NATO knows its Turkish member’s ties to ISIS will be revealed if Russia succeeds in Syria

German Economic News

Source: The Accomplices Have Their Backs Against the Wall

Originally Appeared at German Economic News; Translated by Susan Neumann

NATO is extremely nervous, because it knows that the truth about the relationship of NATO-member Turkey to the Islamist terror group (IS) will come to light if there is a Russian victory in Syria. If the refugees are able to return, Erdogan won’t have them as a pawn to extort money [from the EU]. It’s clear who’s interested in an escalation of the conflict.

The reaction of the Western alliance on the shooting down of a Russian bomber show that NATO is very nervous. It’s on the verge of losing control of Russia in Syria. The great Turkish ride out, which was most likely planned by the secret services, looks more like a desperate symbolic act than a carefully considered commando operation. The Russian Ambassador to NATO, Alexander Grushko, called it shadow theatre.

The reason why NATO is looking for shady place to hide is the fact that Putin named those who shot down the Russian aircraft accomplices of the terrorists. Turkey is a NATO country. The alliance is confronted with the official accusation of terrorism for the first time. Until now, NATO has been the only one to slap others with the terrorist label. The real reason for their nervousness is tangibly rooted in the military.

The hopes of NATO and their secret services are being dashed on the rocks. US President Barack Obama has been running a different political course than that which NATO and their secret services would want. Obama wants to get out of the Syria war. He’s admitted that the mission has failed — and the idea of “regime change” has taken a heavy beating, to say the least. Obama has arranged it with Russian President Vladimir Putin that the Russians take over the IS-project. This has been devastatingly humiliating for the neocons, NATO, and the secret services.

After that, Russia began fighting terrorists who were allies of the US military. From the very beginning, Putin has stood in the way of the western military’s desire to cover up their manipulations Syria. The Islamic State and the military advisers of both Turkey and the Pentagon are now facing defeat in Syria.

US President Obama knows this as well. His message to Putin is therefore remarkably diplomatic. After a meeting at the White House with French President Francois Hollande, President Barack Obama said that if Moscow had a “change of strategy,” there would be “great potential” for cooperation. “Russia is welcome to be a part of our broad coalition.” It’s Obama’s half-hearted attempt to make it appear to NATO that they can bring Russia under control.

Why indeed, should Russia change its strategy, above all now? The Russians have kept repeating that the reason they’ve involved themselves militarily in Syria is because NATO has failed. One can believe that, because the Russians know that a fight to uncover terrorist cells is anything but easy. In order not to end up like the Americans in no man’s land, the Russians have made skillful alliances with Iran, Iraq, and China; and have even allowed Israel to have access to their information.

The military successes of the past few weeks have put the Western mercenary troops in dire straits. Obama’s added invitation for the Russians to join in is the real reason why NATO is so nervous. Obama says Moscow should work in close military cooperation and target their air strikes on the IS rather than the moderate rebels. They should also support political change in Damascus.

Russia has supported the change in Damascus for weeks. Moscow has repeatedly said that it doesn’t insist on Assad being president in the long run. The Russians do say, however, that it must be the decision of the Syrian people. This position is also shared by Iran. Russia has also submitted a transition plan of Syria, post-war. Within 18 months a new constitution could be drafted and new elections could be held. If anybody needed to make a strategic change, it would be the Western alliance. They have presented no political concept other than the battle cry, “Assad must go!”

The main worry of NATO, and Turkey in particular, lies in the risk that a Russian victory could uncover all the goings-on, of how the West and especially the Turkish government cooperated with the terrorists in the region. [If the Russians are victorious,] it will show the refugee debate in a completely different light, and it will become clear how the Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan cynically abused the refugees as bartering chips for his ambitions. It will also show that Erdogan’s war against the PKK is a completely disproportionate war, one in which the Kurdish civilian population was brutally attacked. One will also recognize that the West only has the Turkish government and Saudi Arabia as its allies, in a region with two Islamist governments.

Erdogan can still blackmail the totally incompetent EU and the German chancellor, who is totally over her head — by demanding billions of euros in protection money for the refugees. If the Russians truly succeed, however, in bringing peace to Syria — and in such a way that a majority of the refugees can return to their homeland — then Erdogan suddenly has a bad poker hand. Turkey is of course totally unsuitable to be included in the EU under Erdogan. Everybody in Brussels knows it. The visa-free travel is also a grotesque idea. Every day there are new incidents of how business can be conducted with fake Turkish passports — especially in Turkey. Then there’s the three billion euros that Erdogan demands from European taxpayers for the refugees. What’s going to happen with the money? Integration of refugees in Turkey? Better accommodation in the camps? No corruption, complete transparency?

This whole outlook makes Erdogan’s government and its intelligence agencies feel justified in shooting down a Russian fighter jet. They need an escalation of the situation, because they have their backs to the wall. That also makes Erdogan unpredictable in this conflict. He has a lot to lose.

For documentation purposes, we’ve published the report by the Germany Press Agency on NATO’s statement about the shoot-down. It proves that military units were not invented to think.

Categories: Uncategorized
Tags: Isis, Islam, Islamic Jihad, Islamic slaughter, Islamic State, Islamic supremacy, Islamism, Jihad, Middle East, Middle East War, Nato, Obama, Russia, Syria, Terrorism, Turkey, USA

Comments: 2 Comments

Turkey: Wrong Partner to Fight Terror

November 29, 2015

Turkey: Wrong Partner to Fight Terror, Gatestone Institute, Burak Bekdil, November 28, 2015

In Erdogan’s usual Sunni supremacist language, he accused the victims of jihad rather than the jihadists.
“New tragedies will be inevitable,” Erdogan said, “if the rising racism in Europe and other countries is not stopped.” Yet Erdogan willingly ignores the rising racism, xenophobia, and anti-western, jihadist sentiments that increasingly command the hearts and minds of his fellow Turks.
How should Erdogan fight Islamic terror — something he does not believe exists? One of Erdogan’s famous remarks is, “there is no Islamic terror.” But he thinks that “just like fascism,” Zionism is a crime against humanity.
It is so funny that the free world cannot see that its ally in fighting the jihadists is another jihadist.

Racism is bad, no doubt. But it cannot be the reason why jihadists kill “infidels,” including fellow Muslims in Muslim lands. Sadly, the free world feels compelled to partner with the wrong country in its fight against Islamic terror.

The host of this year’s G-20 summit, which came right after the Nov. 13 Paris attacks, was Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. In his usual Sunni supremacist language, he accused the victims of jihad rather than the jihadists. “New tragedies will be inevitable,” he said, “if the rising racism in Europe and other countries is not stopped. Racism, coupled with enmity against Islam, is the greatest disaster, the greatest threat.”

Yet Erdogan willingly ignores the rising racism, xenophobia, and anti-western, jihadist sentiments that increasingly command the hearts and minds of his fellow Turks. A quick look at a few sports games and fan behavior in recent weeks would reveal much about the Turkish mind and heart.

On October 13, three days after a twin suicide bomb attack in Turkey’s capital, Ankara, killed more than 100 Kurds and pro-Kurdish, leftist and secular Turks, the central Anatolian province of Konya, a hotbed of political Islam in Turkey, hosted a Euro 2016 football qualifier between Turkey and Iceland. Before the kick-off, both teams stood for a moment of silence to protest the bomb attack — a typical gesture to respect the victims. Sadly, the moment of silence was marred by whistles and jeers: apparently the football fans of Konya were protesting the victims, not their jihadist killers.

Anyone under the impression that the whole world stands in solidarity with Paris should think again. Hundreds of Turkish fans booed and chanted “Allahu Akbar” (“Allah is greater” in Arabic) during a moment of silence for the Paris attack victims before a Turkey-Greece soccer friendly. Once again, the Turks were exhibiting solidarity with the terrorists, not their “infidel” victims.

More recently, on Nov. 21, Turkish police had to deploy 1,500 policemen so that Turkish fans could not harm the visiting Israeli women’s national basketball team. One thousand five hundred police officers at a women’s basketball game! Despite that, Turkish fans threw objects at Israeli players as they were singing Israel’s national anthem. Fans also booed the Israeli players while others applauded the fans who threw the objects.

Unsurprisingly, Turkish fans waved Palestinian flags. Israeli women basketball players were barred from leaving their hotel other than for training and the game.

None of that is surprising although, at least in theory, Turkey is a candidate state for membership in the European Union. A new study by Pew Research Center revealed that 8% of Turks have a favorable opinion of the Islamic State (IS), higher than in the Palestinian territories, where support for IS stands at 6%, and only one point lower than in Pakistan. Nineteen percent of Turks “do not know” if they have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of IS — which means 27% of Turks do not have an unfavorable opinion of the jihadist killing machine. That makes more than 21 million people! Of the countries polled, Lebanon boasted a 100% unfavourable opinion of IS and Jordan, 94%. In Indonesia, the world’s most populous Muslim country, 4% reported a favourable opinion of IS, half of Turkey’s.

This is Erdogan’s “neo-Ottoman” and increasingly Islamist Turkey. After the Paris attacks, this author saw tweets that called the victims “animal carcass;” that said “now the infidels will lose their sleep out of fear;” and others that congratulated the terrorists “who shouted Allah-u aqbar.”

Meanwhile, and so funny, the free world cannot see that its ally to fight the jihadists is another jihadist. How should Erdogan fight Islamic terror – something he does not believe exists? One of Erdogan’s famous remarks is, “there is no Islamic terror.” But he thinks that “just like fascism,” Zionism is a crime against humanity.

826 (2)

Turkish President (then Prime Minister) Recep Tayyip Erdogan, right, meeting with Hamas leaders Khaled Mashaal (center) and Ismail Haniyeh on June 18, 2013, in Ankara, Turkey. One of Erdogan’s famous remarks is, “there is no Islamic terror.” (Image source: Turkey Prime Minister’s Press Office)

There is a Turkish saying that could perhaps describe the free world’s alliance with Erdogan’s Turkey against jihadist terror: “Kuzuyu kurda emanet etmek” (“to trust the wolf with the sheep”).

Categories: Erdogan, Foreign policy, Islamic supremacy, Israel, Obama and Turkey, Paris Muslim attack, Racism, Turkey
Tags: Erdogan, Foreign Policy, Islamic supremacy, Israel, Obama and Turkey, Paris Muslim attack, Racism, Turkey

Comments: 2 Comments

Longtime Belgian Mayor: A Godfather of Jihad?

November 27, 2015

Longtime Belgian Mayor: A Godfather of Jihad? Gatestone Institute, Stefan Frank, November 27, 2015

“Instead of bombing Raqqah, France should be bombing Molenbeek.” — Eric Zemmour, French journalist.
No one, at least outside Belgium, is talking about Molenbeek’s long-time anti-Semitic mayor and the alliance with radical Islamists that secured his power.
The majority of the terrorists who have appeared in Europe in recent times originated from a single neighborhood, six square-kilometers in size — an astounding concentration.
“[T]here are more veiled women here in Molenbeek than in Casablanca.” — Resident interviewed by investigative reporter Gilles Gaetner.
The many shops run by Jews suddenly disappeared in 2008 after harassment and threats by local “youths.” How did Mayor Moureaux react? By accusing Belgian Jews of wanting to deny Muslims the “right to diversity.”
It is supposed to be Israel’s fault when the Arabs of Belgium — and especially those of Molenbeek — have a bad reputation? This type of anti-Semitic resentment is unfortunately not only typical for Moureaux, but for his entire party.

The Molenbeek district of Brussels is considered Europe’s “terrorist factory.” At least three of the perpetrators of the November terrorist attacks in Paris came from there: Ibrahim Abdeslam, Abdelhamid Abaaoud and the remaining fugitive Salah Abdeslam. The list does not stop there. The Viennese daily newspaper “Die Presse” writes:

“Molenbeek already made headlines for the first time in 2001: Abdessatar Dahmane, the murderer of the Afghan war hero and horror of the Taliban, Ahmed Schah Massoud, was also a regular at the Islamic center at 18 Rue du Manchester, known for its radical views; as well as Hassan El Haski, who was presumed behind the attacks in Casablanca (41 dead in 2003) and Madrid (200 victims in 2004). The weapons that were used in the attacks on the French satirical paper “Charlie Hebdo” in January 2015 came from Molenbeek. The French jihadist Mehdi Nemouche, who caused a bloodbath in the Brussels Jewish Museum the previous year, lived here. In August 2015, Ayoub El Khazzani started out from here on his attempt to attack a train from Amsterdam to Paris.”

The two jihadists killed by Belgian police in January, in Verviers, came from Molenbeek. The terrorist Amedy Coulibaly, who attacked the HyperCacher kosher supermarket in Paris, also spent time in Molenbeek.

The majority of the terrorists who have appeared in Europe in recent times originated from a single neighborhood, six square-kilometers in size — an astounding concentration. Belgium is, in relation to the size of its population, the greatest European exporter of fighters for the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). Most of them — at least 48 — come from Molenbeek. “Instead of bombing Raqqah,” says the French journalist Eric Zemmour, “France should be bombing Molenbeek.”

More than half the population of Molenbeek is Muslim; a quarter come from Morocco — such as the Paris attackers. “You know, there are more veiled women here in Molenbeek than in Casablanca,” says a resident interviewed by investigative reporter Gilles Gaetner of the French news portal “Atlantico.” Gaetner does consider that “surely an exaggeration,” but admits: “When one walks the streets of this Brussels district, with its nearly 96,000 residents, one is overcome by a bizarre impression. Not only would you think you were no longer in the Kingdom of Belgium, but an oppressive atmosphere reigns here.”

Foreign reporters are only now discovering Molenbeek. Those who have to live there have been complaining about the conditions there for a long time. The following excerpt is from a report by the Belgian weekly magazine Le Vif L’Express from 2011:

Buildings in danger of collapsing, street corners that are becoming landfills, a parked car rusts away in a parking lot: Urban renewal would be helpful here. “This is a gangster district. Here you get beat up for five Euros,” says Karim. The shopkeeper is not happy. He talks about how he recently chased a teenager with a knife in his hand, who had stolen cigarettes. This scene took place just steps away from the Ribaucourt subway station. “The Rue Piers is not safe at this hour,” says a young woman, who after 6pm either makes sure she is accompanied home, or else takes a taxi. She has been living with friends in an apartment in the district for three years. The apartment is large, and not too expensive. “But I am always vigilant,” she says. Especially when she is wearing a skirt. “Insults, spitting, groping: I have experienced that.” Other residents are moving out. “My house was burglarized twice within one year,” says a witness. “When I go to the supermarket around the corner, I double-lock the door and turn on the alarm.”

Testimonials to a city in fear. Much of the responsibility for this apparently rests with Philippe Moureaux, member of the Socialist Party (Parti Socialiste), who was mayor of Molenbeek from 1992 until 2012. Confronted with the complaints of his citizens, he regularly denied the unsustainable conditions in his town: “It makes me angry when people pick out tiny details and lie about them,” he said in the quoted report. Molenbeek is “not the Bronx;” the problems with criminality only concern a small number of streets, said Moureaux.

Then Moureaux showed his true colors: “Molenbeek is a symbol that certain people want to destroy. But only over my dead body.” Certain people? Does the mayor actually believe in a conspiracy against his district of misery? One does not have to search for long to realize that Moureaux, on whose initiative Belgium passed an “anti-racism law” in 1981, is an anti-Semite — not exactly common even in Belgium. At the same time, he downplays and supports the violence of young Muslims — also against Jews.

1365

Abdelhamid Abaaoud (left), suspected by French authorities of masterminding this month’s terrorist attacks in Paris, is — like many terrorists in Europe — from Molenbeek, Belgium. Philippe Moureaux (right) was mayor of Molenbeek for 20 years, thanks to his alliance with radical Islamists.

There was heavy rioting in 2009 during Ramadan in Molenbeek. Muslim youths set up barricades made of burning tires, set cars ablaze, threw rocks at firefighters who came to put out fires and, equipped with rocks and crowbars, looted stores. According to unconfirmed reports, the police received the following order: “Do not provoke them, do not search them, do not intervene, even if dozens of them come together, do not issue warnings for harassment, not even if they throw rocks at you.”

Jewish shop-owners were also harassed other than at Ramadan. In 2008, the Flemish magazine Dag Allemaal reported on “youths” yelling, “The Jews are our worst enemies,” in the streets of Molenbeek. There used be many stores run by Jews on the Rue du Prado and the Chaussée de Grand in Molenbeek, but in 2008, with the exception of one furniture store, they suddenly disappeared. And nobody seemed bothered by this, especially not Mayor Moureaux.

None of the Jews wanted to speak with the Dag Allemaal reporter, out of fear of reprisals. The one exception was a man whom the paper referred to as “René.” René ran a barbershop for over 30 years in the Chaussée de Gand. Then came a series of acts of violence. It began with graffiti on his shop’s windows: “Sale youpin” (“dirty Jew”) and other anti-Semitic slogans. Later on, six Muslim youths stormed into his shop, destroyed the furnishings and punched René in the face. He called the police. An hour later, the youths returned in order to “punish” him; they broke all the mirrors. For more than 35 years, René had built up a large and loyal customer base, but after this attack, most people were afraid to visit his shop. He had no other choice but to close it.

How did Moureaux react? By accusing Belgian Jews of wanting to deny Muslims the “right to diversity.” That is what he said in 2008, in the weekly paper Le Vif L’Express. It was a report with the title: “Enquête Moureaux, Shérif de Molenbeek, drogué du pouvoir – Son islamo-municipalisme” (“The Moureaux Investigation: Sheriff of Molenbeek, addicted to power — His Islamo-municipalism”). That he was “addicted to power” (“drogué du pouvoir”) were his own words. The paper described him as a “soaring intellectual, university professor and brilliant minister, who resides in the beautiful Uccle district.”

But back to Moureaux’s Jews: At 20 years old, Moureaux was a Marxist, he said, and never accepted anybody’s right to diversity; but he “evolved”: “What changed my mind were talks with the representatives of the Jewish community. It saddens me today to see how they deny the Muslims the right to diversity.”

This “right to diversity” was not granted to citizens by Moureaux during Ramadan. In a press release with the title, “Ramadan regulations for everyone,” Moureaux appealed to citizens in August 2011 to stop driving into the center of Molenbeek in the afternoon during the month of Ramadan, because Muslims are doing their shopping there.

In January 2015, after the massacre of the staff of the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo and the murder of four Jews in Paris’s HyperCacher supermarket, the now-retired mayor gave an interview to Maghreb TV, a channel broadcast via the internet, the target audience for which is North Africans in Belgium. After he made an appeal not to hold all Muslims responsible for the actions of a few terrorists, it got wild:

“Many have an interest in dividing us. … Unfortunately, these people can be found everywhere. There is a contagion of the problems of the Middle East, in the Near East, the Israeli-Palestinian problem, which leads to some having an interest in provoking local disagreements, like a reflex to what happens over there. … It will be said that it is coming from both sides. But it is obvious that they are trying to create hatred for Arabs here in the West, in order to justify the policies of the state of Israel, policies that appear unacceptable to me.”

It is supposed to be Israel’s fault when the Arabs of Belgium — and especially those of Molenbeek — have a bad reputation? This type of anti-Semitic resentment is unfortunately not only typical for Moureaux, but for his entire party. In March 2013, the Socialists of Molenbeek issued an invitation to an event titled: “What if we freely and calmly spoke about Zionism?” On the invitation flyer was an anti-Semitic caricature, drawn in the style of Der Stürmer, by the Arabic neo-Nazi “Zéon.” After loud protests, the Socialists cancelled the event — on the grounds that the aspired-to “calm” discussion was unfortunately no longer possible.

Many examples can be listed to show what an anti-Semitic environment prevails in Molenbeek. In the official town magazine, “Molenbeek Info,” one can find a text in which the Stalinist Party of Work calls for a celebration in honor of Dr. Hanne Bosselaers, who had just returned from Gaza: “Everybody come!” In Molenbeek, you need to know, there is a hospital run by Stalinists under the name “Medicine for the People” (“Medécine pour le peuple”), which in 2013 initiated a “partnership” with Al-Quds Hospital in Gaza. Consequently, Bosselaers had a lot to talk about. For example: “The Palestinians want us to boycott Israel.”

And what did Dr. Bosselaers have to say about Hamas?

“Behind the attempt of some of our politicians to cast the Palestinian resistance organization in a negative light lies a political goal. Certain circles keep pointing out the “Islamic character” of Hamas, in the hope of keeping the population from forming solidarity with the Palestinians…. The Palestinian resistance is much greater than Hamas, and it is completely up to the Palestinians to decide which form of resistance they choose against their oppressors.”

Welcome to Molenbeek. The jurist Etienne Dujardin recently wrote in the news portal Levif.be that the conditions in Islamist terror districts such as Molenbeek, Verviers or Saint Denis also had something to do with the deliberate efforts of some politicians, who find welcome campaign workers in radical Islamic circles:

“[p]arties have been practicing a form of cronyism based on elections; they all used the same radical mosques as mouthpieces for their election campaigns. Some saw them as a massive pool of easily available votes.”

And that is how it seems Mayor Moureaux observed that he could personally profit from the transformation of Molenbeek into a bastion of jihad. As he himself lives in a wealthy district, he was able to reject with great arrogance citizens who complained about excessive crime. He won elections by catering to radical Islam. Once again, the rule is confirmed: If someone agitates against Israel, it is always a symptom of other serious character flaws in that person. Behind the anti-Israel agitation of Moureaux lay a corrupt mayor, who only cared for his office and his income; who, as he himself said, was “addicted to power.” That his town was transforming into a hell of criminality, anti-Semitism and Sharia, he either did not care about or actually welcomed. Those who fled from Molenbeek could no longer participate; and those who moved there liked what Moureaux was doing: encouraging Islamization and agitating against Israel and Jews. This is how Molenbeek became, during the term in office of just one man, what it is today.

Originally published in German in slightly different form by Audiatur Online.

Categories: Belgium, Islam and Jews, Islamic jihad, Islamic supremacy, Israel, Multiculturalism, Paris Muslim attack
Tags: Belgium, Islam and Jews, Islamic Jihad, Islamic supremacy, Israel, Multiculturalism, Paris Muslim attack

Comments: Be the first to comment

Germans Opposed to Mass Migration are “Free to Leave”

November 24, 2015

Germans Opposed to Mass Migration are “Free to Leave” The Gatestone Institute, Soeren Kern, November 24, 2015

After factoring in family reunifications, the actual number of migrants could exceed 10 million, and some believe that Germany’s Muslim population is on track to nearly quadruple to an astonishing 20 million by 2020.
N24 television news reports that up to 50% of the asylum seekers arriving in Germany have gone into hiding and their whereabouts are unknown by German authorities.
“It cannot be that offenders continue to fill the police files, hurt us physically… and there are no consequences. … We are losing control of the streets.” — Tania Kambouri, a German police officer.
“We are not excluding anyone, we are just trying to run a business. If we ignore the complaints of our female guests, we have to expect that many of our regular customers will stay away…. Financially, we do not know how long can we cope with this.” — Thomas Greil, manager of the discotheque “Brucklyn,” Bad Tölz, Bavaria.
“We are reproducing faster and faster. You Germans are not getting any children. In the best case you get two children. We make seven to eight children. Okay mate? And then we take four wives each, then we have 22 children. Maybe you Germans have one child and a dog. Huh? And that’s it.” — Video showing a Muslim threatening a German man openly on the street.
In Berlin, lawmakers are considering emergency legislation that would allow local authorities to seize private residences to accommodate asylum seekers. The proposal was kept secret from the public until November 9, when the leader of the Free Democrats (FDP) in Berlin warned the measure would violate the German Constitution. Berlin Mayor Michael Müller now wants to expand the scope for warrantless inspections to include “preventing homelessness.”
“The same empathy we show for refugees we must show to our own people, the host society.” — Mayor Ulrich Maly, Nuremberg.

Asylum seekers from Africa, Asia and the Middle East are continuing to pour into Germany in record numbers, despite freezing temperatures and snow.

More than 180,000 migrants arrived during the first three weeks of November, on track to surpass the previous monthly record of 181,000 migrants recorded in October.

With 300 newcomers now arriving every hour, Germany is expected to receive more than one million asylum seekers in 2015, and at least as many in 2016. After factoring in family reunifications, the actual number of migrants could exceed 10 million, and some believe that Germany’s Muslim population is on track to nearly quadruple to an astonishing 20 million by 2020.

German voters are beginning to wake up to the true cost — financial, social and otherwise — of the migration crisis, but they apparently do not have much say about the future direction of their country. According to Walter Lübcke, the district president of Kassel, a city in state of Hesse, citizens who disagree with the government’s open-door immigration policy are “free to leave Germany.”

What follows is a brief round-up of recent developments, which offer a glimpse into Germany’s future:

Matthias Lücke, senior researcher at the Kiel Institute of the World Economy (Institut für Weltwirtschaft, IfW), estimates that the migrant crisis will end up costing German taxpayers at least 45 billion euros a year, or more than four times the 10 billion euros forecast by the federal government. Lücke says tax increases are the only way to pay for this expenditure.

Gabriel Felbermayr, director of the Munich-based Center for International Economics (Ifo Zentrum für Außenwirtschaft), estimates that the migrant crisis will cost German taxpayers 21.1 billion euros this year alone. “This includes costs for housing, food, day care centers, schools, German language courses, training and administration,” he said in an interview with Der Spiegel.

N24 television news reports that up to 50% of the asylum seekers arriving in Germany have gone into hiding and their whereabouts are unknown by German authorities. They presumably involve economic migrants and others who are trying to avoid deportation if or when their asylum applications are rejected.

In a bestselling new book, Tania Kambouri, a German police officer, describes the deteriorating security situation in Germany due to migrants who have no respect for law and order. In an interview with Deutschlandfunk radio, she said:

“For weeks, months and years I have noticed that Muslims, mostly young men, do not have even a minimum level of respect for the police. When we are out patrolling the streets, we are verbally abused by young Muslims. There is the body language, and insults like ‘sh** cop’ when passing by. If we make a traffic stop, the aggression increases ever further, this is overwhelmingly the case with migrants.

“I wish these problems were recognized and clearly addressed. If necessary, laws need to be strengthened. It is also very important that the judiciary, that the judges issue effective rulings. It cannot be that offenders continue to fill the police files, hurt us physically, insult us, whatever, and there are no consequences. Many cases are closed or offenders are released on probation or whatever. Yes, what is happening in the courts today is a joke.

“The growing disrespect, the increasing violence against police… We are losing control of the streets.”

A video showing a Muslim threatening a German man openly on the street was posted on YouTube. The Muslim can be heard saying:

“I am telling you honestly, Islam will come to Germany, whether you like it or not. Your daughter will wear a headscarf (hijab). Your son will wear a beard. Okay. And your daughter will marry a bearded man.

“We are reproducing faster and faster. You Germans are not getting any children. In the best case you get two children. We make seven to eight children. Okay mate? And then we take four wives each, then we have 22 children. Maybe you Germans have one child and a dog. Huh? And that’s it.

“Mate. This is not our fault, it is your fault. If you exploited our countries, colonized our countries, and use your digital camera, huh?

“So Allah (blessed be his name), the Almighty God, will make it so that we will conquer you. Not with war, here in Germany, but with birth rates, first and foremost. Secondly, we will marry your daughters. And your daughter will wear a Muslim headscarf. That is how it is. Now you can get really mad. I can see the hate in your eyes.”

Another video shows hundreds of Muslims, some carrying the black flag of jihad, marching through the streets of downtown Hannover.

Amid a growing sense of insecurity, Germans are increasingly taking measures to protect themselves. Sales of pepper spray have skyrocketed by 600% during the past two months and stores across Germany are all sold out, according to the German newsmagazine Focus. Manufacturers say additional supplies will not be available for another six or seven weeks. “Manufacturers and distributors say the huge influx of foreigners in recent weeks has apparently frightened many people,” according to Focus.

Wolfgang Wehrend, chairman of the Military Reserve Association (Reservistenverbandes) in North Rhine-Westphalia, called on the government to reinstate compulsory military service for all men and women in Germany aged 18 and over. “It is about the security of our country,” he told the Rheinische Post. Germany formally ended conscription in July 2011. Wehrend said conscription could also be a way to promote integration:

“When young people work together as a matter of course in the army, the Federal Agency for Technical Relief (Technischen Hilfswerk), the fire brigades, the relief and care services, people from different ethnic groups and religions may grow closer. At least there is a chance.”

Meanwhile, the guardians of German multiculturalism unleashed a firestorm of criticism against Jürgen Mannke, director of the Teacher’s Association of Saxony-Anhalt (Philologenverbandes Sachsen-Anhalt, PhVSA), after he advised underage female students to guard against “superficial sexual adventures” with Muslim asylum seekers. In the group’s quarterly membership magazine, Mannke wrote:

“An immigrant invasion is inundating Germany. Many citizens are ambivalent about this. There is no doubt that it is our human duty to help people who are facing existential distress due to war and political persecution. But it is extremely difficult to distinguish these people from those who come to our country for purely economic or even criminal motives.

“If one examines the current images of the waves of refugees, one cannot overlook that many young, strong, mostly Muslim men have chosen to apply for asylum in Germany, because they find ideal conditions here, or so they think.

“Many of the men come here without their families or wives, and certainly not always with the most honest of intentions. From our ethical and moral perspective, women are not treated equally in Muslim countries and often are not treated with dignity. It is only natural that these young, often uneducated men also have a need for sex.

“Against the backdrop of their ideas about the role of women in their Muslim cultures, the question remains: how can they live out their sexuality or seek relationships in Germany without conflicting with the norms of our society?

“Already, we hear from conversations with acquaintances in many places about sexual harassment in their daily lives, especially on public transportation and in supermarkets. As responsible educators, we ask ourselves: How can we enlighten our young girls aged 12 and up so that they do not engage in superficial sexual adventures with often certainly attractive Muslim men?”

Mannke later apologized for his politically incorrect choice of words: “I hereby declare that I never intended to defame people of other religions, nations and cultures or to foment fear to serve nationalistic stereotypes or to generalize.”

In Bad Tölz, a town in Bavaria, local politicians and the media branded the managers of the “Brucklyn” discotheque as “Nazis” and “racists” after they banned male migrants from the premises. German women had complained that the men were harassing them, even following them into the female restroom.

The club’s manager, Thomas Greil, said he had no other option: he was concerned about the wellbeing of the female patrons. He said that after a group of 30 or 40 migrants arrived, native Germans left the club in droves.

In a statement, Greil said:

“We are not excluding anyone, we are just trying to run a business. If we ignore the complaints of our female guests, we have to expect that many of our regular customers will stay away for the short or long term, and we will incur a loss of sales. We have monthly costs of a five figure sum. Financially, we do not know how long can we cope with this. We are overwhelmed.”

The culture-oriented radio station of the German national Deutschlandradio service,Deutschlandradio Kultur, interviewed Frank Künster, who has been a nightclub bouncer for more than 20 years. He said:

“It sounds racist, but groups of men from immigrant backgrounds just behave differently, especially towards women, and that is harmful to the club. You have to give the women space to feel comfortable. This is not the case when there are only men, many of whom want to grope female bums.”

In Berlin, lawmakers are considering emergency legislation that would allow local authorities to seize private residences to accommodate asylum seekers.

The proposal — which would effectively suspend Germany’s constitutional guarantee of private property — would authorize police forcibly to enter private homes and apartments without a warrant to determine their suitability as housing for refugees and migrants.

The legislation, proposed by Berlin Mayor Michael Müller of the center-left Social Democrats (SPD), would amend Section 36 of Berlin’s Public Order and Safety Law (Allgemeine Gesetz zum Schutz der öffentlichen Sicherheit und Ordnung, ASOG), which currently allows police to enter private residences only in extreme instances, to “avert acute threats,” that is, to fight serious crime. Müller now wants to expand the scope for warrantless inspections to include “preventing homelessness.”

The proposal was kept secret from the public until November 9, when the leader of the Free Democrats (FDP) in Berlin, Sebastian Czaja, warned the measure would violate the German Constitution. He said:

“The plans of the Berlin Senate to requisition residential and commercial property without the consent of the owner to accommodate refugees is an open breach of the constitution. The attempt by the Senate to undermine the constitutional right to property and the inviolability of the home must be resolutely opposed.”

Since then, both the mayor’s office and the Senate have remained silent about their plans.

Gunnar Schupelius, a columnist with the Berlin newspaper BZ, has investigated further. In a November 10 article, he wrote:

“A strange report made the rounds at the weekend: The Senate would authorize the police to enter private homes to house refugees, even against the will of the owner. I thought it was only satire, then a misunderstanding, because the Basic Law, Article 13, states: ‘The home is inviolable.’

“So I went on a search for the source of this strange report and found it. There is a ‘proposal’ which the Senate Chancellery (Senatskanzlei) has apparently circulated among the senators. The Senate Chancellery is another name for the mayor’s office. The permanent secretary is Björn Böhning (SPD)…

“The proposal is clear: The police can enter private property without a court order in order to search for housing for refugees when these are threatened with homelessness. You can do that ‘without the consent of the owner.’ And not only should the police be allowed to do this, but also the regulatory agencies.

“This delicate ‘proposal’ attracted little public attention. Only Berlin FDP General Secretary Sebastian Czaja spoke up and warned of an ‘open preparation for breach of the constitution.’ Internally, there should have been protests. The ‘proposal’ suddenly disappeared from the table. Is it completely gone or will it return?

“If the need is really this great, then Governing Mayor Michael Müller should come clean rather than prepare for secret and surreptitious intrusions into private homes.

“But Michael Müller is conspicuous by his absence. He has not addressed the crisis in the Senate. He also refuses to meet with citizens. Nor is he personally visiting the refugee shelters. He has gone into seclusion, from where he has declared that accommodating the refugees is his top priority.”

Meanwhile, the German government wants to bring in even more migrants. Speaking at a meeting of the Social Democrats (SPD) in Berlin on November 12, German Vice Chancellor Sigmar Gabriel argued that Germany should bring in a “large contingent” of migrants in order to prevent human traffickers from profiting from the migrant crisis.

Gabriel apparently wants to airlift tens of thousands of migrants to Germany. “No one should die on the way to Europe, which must be our goal,” he said. If other European countries refuse to participate in the plan, he said, “Germany should take the lead.”

According to Gabriel, “What matters is not the number of people who come to Germany, but the speed at which they come.” He added that the federal government should double the budget for building new housing for migrants.

Nuremberg Mayor Ulrich Maly countered: “The same empathy we show for refugees we must show to our own people, the host society.”

German Chancellor Angela Merkel continues to double down on her open-door asylum policy. In a November 13 interview with the public broadcaster ZDF, Merkel responded to critics: “The Chancellor has the situation under control. I have my vision. I will fight for it.”

1360

German Chancellor Angela Merkel (left): “The Chancellor has the situation under control. I Have My Vision. I Will Fight For It.”

Categories: Asylum seekers, Germany, Hijrah, Islamic culture, Islamic invasion, Islamic supremacy, Merkel
Tags: Asylum seekers, Germany, Hijrah, Islamic culture, Islamic invasion, Islamic supremacy, Merkel

Comments: 1 Comment

Satire(?) | Obama declares Islamophobia a felony hate crime

November 23, 2015

Obama declares Islamophobia a felony hate crime, Dan Miller’s Blog, November 23, 2015

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

Phobia is an abnormal, irrational fear. As now defined, however, Islamophobia is merely “prejudice against, hatred towards, or fear of the religion of Islam or Muslims.” Rational “Prejudice,” “hatred” and “fear” of Islam are, therefore, now Islamophobic.

Obama often proclaims that there is no reason to fear Islam — the religion of truth and love — and that He welcomes it in His America. It is permissible, indeed even patriotic, to fear and oppose the Non-Islamic Islamic State, but to fear and to oppose Islam runs counter to American values and is, therefore, worse than merely vile.

By virtue of His constitutional obligation under Article II to do whatever He damn well pleases, He has determined that anyone who criticises Islam is guilty of felony hate speech, which has long been recognized not to be entitled to protections under the First Amendment. To think Islamophobic thoughts leads to hate speech and must also be criminalised as hate thought.

Once again, Obama shows that He is a great leader — not a mere follower — in America’s quest finally to become a great nation of which He can finally be proud. An article by Jonathan Turley is titled Forty Percent of Millennials Favor Censorship of Offensive Speech By Government. Turley, a liberal in the old-fashioned sense of the word and among the few “liberals” to remain strong defenders of free speech, notes that

I have long argued that the West appears to have fallen out of love with free speech, which is more often viewed as a rising scourge rather than a defining value in some countries. A recent poll of the Pew Research Center shows just how many people we have lost to those calling for greater censorship and criminalization of speech. It is not surprisingly more prevalent with younger age groups, though Democrats are almost twice as likely favor censorship than Republicans. The largest (and most alarming) group is the millennials — 40% of whom favor government censorship of speech offensive to minority groups. [Emphasis added.]

Clearly, Obama is — as always — on the right side of history, leading from the front.

Here is the text of Obama’s address to the nation, to be delivered on Thanksgiving Day.

My fellow, blessedly multicultural, Americans, Thanksgiving is the day we all now understand was forced upon us to commemorate the vile treatment of Native Americans by settlers — just as Israeli settlers now abuse native Palestinians. To treat Muslims as we treated Native Americans, as Israel treats peaceful Palestinians — and indeed as Christian Crusaders just a short time ago treated peaceful Muslims — is the worst type of anti-American prejudice I can imagine. Therefore, under the powers vested in Me under the U.S. Constitution, I hereby decree that anyone — no matter who or where and even in the halls of Congress — criticises the Religion of Peace and Love shall be tried and summarily convicted of felony Hate speech.

Some may say — falsely — that this is a drastic and unwarranted measure. It is neither. Islamophobia is intensely harmful to Muslims fleeing persecution by Christians and Jews abroad. It may even deter Muslims from coming to My America to enjoy the benefits of liberty and freedom as ordaned under the Constitution. They all desire to be assimilated into America and to live here with peace and honour ~~killings~~ in accord with our traditions of freedom and justice; traditions which are envied by those fleeing persecution and which they yearn to enjoy in My America. To persecute innocent Muslims here, as they are persecuted abroad is a disgrace; as long as I am your President I shall not permit it.

The spectre of hate thought also now darkens America and leads to hate speech against Muslims everywhere — even those in The Islamic ~~State~~ Republic of Iran, with which I successfully negotiated an historic deal to eliminate the spectre of nuclear weapons in, and to bring peace to, most of the Middle East.

Just as I have decreed that hate speech against Muslims shall be punished, so must hate thought. Accordingly, all candidates for public office in My America will now be required to answer questions seeking to probe their deepest unspoken, but dreadful, anti-Islamic thoughts. The Council on Islamic-American Relations will prepare the questions and agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation will ask them. Those found to harbour anti-Islamic — and therefore un-American — thoughts will be declared unfit for, and disqualified from holding, public office. The First Amendment, of course, provides no protection for freedom of thought; even if it did, it would provide no protection for hate thought. This is necessary if My America is, once again, to lead the free world.

(Wait for vigorous applause.)

Thank you. Now, for your Thanksgiving pleasure, here is a tribute ~~to Me~~ by my favorite vocal group, the Muslim Brotherhood Chorus.

Categories: Asylum seekers, CAIR, Caliphate, Christians, Freedom of speech, Human rights, Iran scam, Islam and Christianity, Islam and Jews, Islamic invasion, Islamic slaughter, Islamic State, Islamic supremacy, Islamophobia, Israel, Multiculturalism, Obama and Islam, Obama and Israel, Obama's America, Obama's legacy, Palestinians, Satire, U.S. Constitution
Tags: Asylum seekers, CAIR, Caliphate, Christians, freedom of speech, human rights, Iran Scam, Islam and Christianity, Islam and Jews, Islamic invasion, Islamic slaughter, Islamic State, Islamic supremacy, Islamophobia, Israel, Multulturalism, Obama and Islam, Obama and Israel, Obama's America, Obama's legacy, Palestinians, Satire, U.S. Constitution

Comments: Be the first to comment

U.S. Officials Can’t Ask Syrian Refugees Key Questions

November 23, 2015

U.S. Officials Can’t Ask Syrian Refugees Key Questions, The Federalist, Kyle Shideler, November 23, 2015

(Please see also, John Kerry describes how useless the “vetting” of Syrian refugees is. — DM)

shutterstock_136538321-998x666

If U.S. law enforcement agents are no longer able to question individuals who are already known to have terror affiliations about their ideological views or the organizations with which they associate, how much more pressure will there be to avoid pertinent questions to Syrian refugees, a hot-button issue upon which the Obama administration has taken a strong public position?

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

The Obama administration appears to have taken yet another terrorism-fighting tool away from U.S. law enforcement trying to screen Syrian refugees.

U.S. law enforcement officials involved in screening Syrian refugees are forbidden from asking key questions about individuals’ religious affiliations or beliefs based on policy guidance created by the Obama administration, according to a recent report published at The Daily Caller.

The piece notes that both Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) policies have increasingly restricted the ability of law enforcement to query individuals about their religious behaviors or associations.

“These gradual but severe restrictions were coupled with a simultaneous reduction in accurate, fact-based training to address the nature of the threat we face, leaving us inadequately prepared for the challenges we face today,” The Daily Caller cites a “government source familiar with national security” as saying.

That means DHS officers screening for Syrian refugees are likely prohibited from asking questions like, “Are you a member or supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood or Tablighi Jamaat?”

These Are Dangerous Buddies to Have

The Muslim Brotherhood is the oldest global Islamist group in the world. Muslim Brotherhood thinkers formed the core ideology of al-Qaeda, and former FBI Director Robert Mueller testified in 2011 that “elements of the Muslim Brotherhood both here and overseas have supported terrorism.” Tablighi Jamaat is an Islamic proselyting group that al-Qaeda has used as a cover to facilitate moving across borders, and which U.S. intelligence has described as “willingly supporting terrorists.”

A 2005 report on the Pakistan-based group noted:

Tablighi Jamaat has also facilitated other terrorists’ missions. The group has provided logistical support and helped procure travel documents. Many take advantage of Tablighi Jamaat’s benign reputation. Moroccan authorities say that leaflets circulated by the terrorist group Al-Salafiyah al-Jihadiyah urged their members to join Islamic organizations that operate openly, such as Tablighi Jamaat, in order ‘to hide their identity on the one hand and influence these groups and their policies on the other.’

It would also prohibit law enforcement from asking key questions about how an individual views jihadist ideologues, such as Anwar Awlaki, Abu Muhammad al-Maqdisi, or Yusuf al Qaradawi. That’s vital when such jihadi scholars have played roles in influencing terror attacks.

For example, support and admiration for Awlaki was key to terror cases including the Christmas Day underwear bomber, the Fort Hood shooter, the Charlie Hebdo killers, and the more recent Chattanooga Recruiting Center shooter.

Yet during an investigation into Fort Hood shooter Nidal Hassan before his attack, the FBI described email correspondence from Hassan to Awlaki as “not pertinent” to the investigation.

Islamist Sympathizers Place Pressure

In 2011, the Civil Rights Civil Liberties division of DHS launched an investigation into multiple Customs and Border Protection agents, because of complaints by groups like Hamas-linked Council on American–Islamic Relations (CAIR) that agents were asking individuals questions about their affiliation with Islamic organizations (including those linked to the Muslim Brotherhood), or attendance at conferences where pro-jihadist ideologues are known to have spoken.

According to DHS authorities, one officer was being investigated because he had asked for an individual’s view of Anwar al-Awlaki. In another, FBI agents referenced the underwear bombing plot. Even that much was considered offensive.

The CRCL investigation was motivated by pressure from the American Civil Liberties Union, CAIR, and Muslim Advocates, a group closely linked with U.S. Muslim Brotherhood groups and with a long history of opposing U.S. counterterrorism efforts.

In response to lawsuits related to the issue of questioning by CBP officers, the DHS established a “hands-off” list of known individuals with terror ties,which included Muslim Brotherhood leader Jamal Badawi, an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation Hamas finance trial. These individuals were given a green light to enter the country, and were not to be referred to secondary questioning. Sen. Chuck Grassley investigated the matter in 2014, calling it “disturbing.”

If U.S. law enforcement agents are no longer able to question individuals who are already known to have terror affiliations about their ideological views or the organizations with which they associate, how much more pressure will there be to avoid pertinent questions to Syrian refugees, a hot-button issue upon which the Obama administration has taken a strong public position?

Categories: Asylum seekers, CAIR, Foreign policy, Hijrah, Islamic invasion, Islamic State, Islamic supremacy, Islamic terrorism, Muslim Brotherhood, Obama and Islam, Obama and Islamic State, Obama's America
Tags: Asylum seekers, CAIR, Foreign Policy, Hijrah, Islamic invasion, Islamic State, Islamic supremacy, Islamic terrorism, Muslim Brotherhood, Obama and Islam, Obama and Islamic State, Obama's America

Comments: Be the first to comment

The anatomy of denial

November 23, 2015

The anatomy of denial, Front Page Magazine, Bruce Thornton, November 23, 2015

boko_haram_main

Western secularism has rendered us incapable of understanding passionate religious beliefs. The banishment of faith from public life is nearly complete in Europe, and we Americans are on the same trajectory.

In contrast, most Muslims are intensely religious to a degree most Westerners can hardly imagine. Religion suffuses their lives, most noticeably in the muezzin’s daily five calls to prayer, and the commands of Allah and the words and deeds of Mohammed are a living presence in every aspect of a devout Muslim’s life. Nor is this religiosity a private affair kept away from the public square, and compartmentalized in people’s lives apart from politics, economics, or foreign policy.

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

The murder of 27 hotel guests in Mali’s capital city by Boko Haram, now an al Qaeda franchisee, highlights yet again the delusional futility of asserting that, as Hillary Clinton put it in a tweet, “Islam is not our adversary. Muslims are peaceful and tolerant people and have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism.” Like Obama, Hillary also vigorously condemns the use of a phrase like “Islamist radicalism.”

These evasions are contrary to the history and doctrines of Islam consistent over 14 centuries, and contradict the professed motives for the continuing violence perpetrated across the globe––27,295 deadly attacks just since 9/11–– by Islamic terrorist groups who emulate the Prophet and take seriously his injunction to “slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them, and lie in wait for them in every ambush” (9.5), one of 109 verses––the direct commands of Allah–– that order war against infidels.

Moreover, that most Muslims do not engage directly in such violence, or may even condemn it, does not change the fundamental doctrines that justify it, no more than the millions of Catholic women who use birth control invalidate the church’s doctrine against contraception. The doctrine of jihad has been part of Islam from its beginning, enjoined by the Koran and Hadith, and confirmed and celebrated by the most eminent Islamic historians, jurisprudents, and theologians. One of the most famous, the late-14^th century writer Ibn Khaldun, wrote in the Muqaddimah, “In the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and the obligation to convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force.” When we see Muslims in the 21^st century killing and dying in service to this traditional religious imperative created in the 7^thcentury, it is perverse blindness to claim that there is no connection between Islam and Islamic terrorism.

The more important question is why anyone would assert something that would have struck our Western ancestors––for a thousand years the victims of Muslim invasion, occupation, enslavement, and slaughter–– as a dangerous fantasy. One rationale appeared in the months after 9/11, when George W. Bush distinguished al Qaeda from the larger Muslim community and engaged in outreach to the latter, inviting imams to the White House and proclaiming Islam the “religion of peace.” The idea was that alienating millions of Muslims would make it harder to fight the jihadists, and even aid in their recruitment. This tactic, of course, has been an obvious failure for over a decade, as there is no evidence that being nice to Muslims––for example, rescuing Afghan and Iraqi Muslims from murderous autocrats––changed traditional Muslim attitudes toward infidels, and predisposed them to turn on their fellow Muslims.

The better answer lies in several bad ideas spawned by modernity. Western secularism has rendered us incapable of understanding passionate religious beliefs. The banishment of faith from public life is nearly complete in Europe, and we Americans are on the same trajectory. What remains of religion is reduced to a private life-style choice, commercialized holiday traditions, and a vague comforting “spiritualism” that makes few demands on its adherents. Secularists relentlessly patrol the public square to attack any sign that religious belief is stepping outside its private ghetto. And any recognition that the Judeo-Christian tradition contributed to the foundational beliefs of the West––equality, unalienable rights, and freedom––is attacked as spiritual colonization and “fundamentalist” bigotry. Hence Obama calls “shameful” the suggestions that Christian Syrians, currently suffering a genocidal persecution, be prioritized over the mostly economic Syrian refugees.

In contrast, most Muslims are intensely religious to a degree most Westerners can hardly imagine. Religion suffuses their lives, most noticeably in the muezzin’s daily five calls to prayer, and the commands of Allah and the words and deeds of Mohammed are a living presence in every aspect of a devout Muslim’s life. Nor is this religiosity a private affair kept away from the public square, and compartmentalized in people’s lives apart from politics, economics, or foreign policy. As Bernard Lewis writes,

In most Islamic countries, religion remains a major political factor, for most Muslim countries are still profoundly Muslim in a way and in a sense that most Christian countries are no longer Christian . . . in no Christian country at the present time can religious leaders count on the degree of belief and participation that remains normal in the Muslim lands . . . Christian clergy do not exercise or even claim the kind of public authority that is still normal and acceptable in mot Muslim countries.

Lacking the constant public presence of spiritual reality in our own lives, we find it hard to accept that religious doctrines advocating violence against the unbeliever, or basing all social, economic, judicial, and political order on a code of law formulated over a thousand years ago, can be real enough to compel violence against innocents. This failure of imagination has been a powerful enabler of our feckless strategies.

So too has been our ignorance of history. Worse yet, what history we do rely on is false or ideologically warped. Few politicians in charge of our foreign policy seem to be aware of the long, violent assault of Islam against the West, the chronicle of massacre, slaving, kidnapping, occupation, and exploitation, all in service to the commands of Allah and the practices of Mohammed. At the same time, our president invents the mythic “golden age” of enlightenment and tolerance in Muslim Cordoba, harps on the Crusades and the Inquisition, excoriates Israel for defending itself against the progeny of invaders, colonizers, and immigrants to the ancient Jewish homeland of Judea and Samaria, and apologizes for imperialism and colonialism. Meanwhile Muslim Turkey is in its fifth decade of the occupation of northern Cyprus that followed an invasion accompanied by ethnic cleansing, population transfers from Turkey, and the destruction or vandalizing of 300 churches.

A good example of this bizarre historical ignorance is the demonic role assigned to the 1916 Sykes-Picot agreement. An ISIS billboard in Iraq reads, “We are the ones who determine our borders, not Sykes-Picot.” In this false history borrowed from self-loathing Westerners, the imperialist French and English divided up the Ottoman Empire in an act of stealth colonialism. This history is false, and strangely diminishes the region’s Muslims, making them the mere passive pawns of external manipulators. But as Efraim Karsh points out in his indispensable new book The Tail Wags the Dog, the region’s leaders “have been active and enterprising free agents doggedly pursuing their national interests and swaying the region pretty much in their desired direction, often in disregard of great-power wishes.” The true history of the region shows that the disorder today has two main sources: the doctrines of Islam that keep the region mired in a premodern, tribal mentality; and the disastrous decision of the Ottoman sultan to join the Central powers in World War I, against the advice of the British, who wanted not colonies, but an Arab empire to replace the Ottomans’.

Such distorted history, in which the West is to blame for dysfunctions created by Muslims themselves, justifies an apologetic tone like that of Obama’s Cairo speech, and rationalizes Muslim violence as an understandable reaction to historical injustice––just as John Kerry did in his despicable comments that the Charlie Hebdo murders had a “rationale that you could attach yourself to.”

Finally, multiculturalism, which is an expression of this false history that makes the West the global villains deserving of payback from the oppressed dark-skinned “other,” compromises a robust and muscular response to Islamic violence. The lexicon of political correctness, predicated on the commandment never to blame the victim “of color,” leads to the sort of duplicitous evasions mentioned earlier, in which traditional Islamic doctrine disappears as motivating force, and effort is wasted on pursuing remedies––economic development, flattering outreach, or democracy promotion––that will not solve the problem of metastasizing jihadism. Moreover, like the British sympathizers with Germany in the 20s and 30s, the charges of racism and neo-imperialist oppression thrown around by the multiculturalists foster a spirit of appeasement and accommodation, sapping our morale and inhibiting our response.

The denial of Islam’s sanctified violence, confessional intolerance, and global ambitions is the biggest impediment to our destroying the enemy. The solution is simple, and memorably expressed in the New Testament: “And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”

Categories: Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, Caliphate, Christianity, Europe, Fantasy, Foreign policy, Human rights, Islam and Christianity, Islam and Jews, Islamic indoctrination, Islamic invasion, Islamic slaughter, Islamic State, Islamic supremacy, Israel, Judiasm, Muslim assimilation, Obama and Christians, Obama and Islam, Obama and Islamic State, Obama and Jews, Theocracy
Tags: Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, Caliphate, Christianity, Europe, Fantasy, Foreign Policy, human rights, Islam and Christianity, Islam and Jews, Islamic indoctrination, Islamic invasion, Islamic slaughter, Islamic State, Islamic supremacy, Israel, Judiasm, Muslim assimilation, Obama and Christians, Obama and Islam, Obama and Islamic State, Obama and Jews, Theocracy

Comments: Be the first to comment

Exposed: Obama’s Love for Jihadis and Hate for Christians

November 23, 2015

Exposed: Obama’s Love for Jihadis and Hate for Christians, American Thinker, Raymond Ibrahim, November 23, 2015

President Obama recently lashed out against the idea of giving preference to Christian refugees, describing it as “shameful.” “That’s not American. That’s not who we are. We don’t have religious tests to our compassion,” loftily added the American president.

Accordingly, the administration is still determined to accept 10,000 more Syrian refugees, almost all of whom will be Muslim, despite the fact that some are ISIS operatives, while many share the ISIS worldview (as explained below).

Yet right as Obama was grandstanding about “who we are,” statistics were released indicating that “the current [refugee] system overwhelmingly favors Muslim refugees. Of the 2,184 Syrian refugees admitted to the United States so far, only 53 are Christians while 2,098 are Muslim.”

Aside from the obvious – or, to use Obama’s own word, “shameful” – pro-Muslim, anti-Christian bias evident in these statistics, there are a number of other troubling factors.

For starters, the overwhelming majority of “refugees” being brought into the United States are not just Muslim, but Sunnis – the one Muslim sect that the Islamic State is not persecuting and displacing. After all, ISIS – and most Islamic terrorist groups (Boko Haram, al-Qaeda, Al Shabaab, Hamas, et al.) – are all Sunnis. Even Obama was arguably raised a Sunni.

In this context, how are Sunnis “refugees”? Whom are they fleeing? Considering that the Obama administration defines refugees as people “persecuted by their government,” most of those coming into the U.S. either aided or at least sympathized with the jihad against Assad (even if they revealed their true colors only when the time was right).

Simply put, some 98% of all refugees belong to the same Islamic sect as ISIS does. And many of them, unsurprisingly, share the same vision – such as the “refugees” who recently murdered some 120 people in France, or the “refugees” who persecute Christian minorities in European camps and settlements. (Al Azhar – the Sunni world’s most prestigious university of Islamic law, which co-hosted U.S. President Obama’s 2009 “A New Beginning” speech – was just recently exposed as teaching and legitimizing all the atrocities that ISIS commits.)

As for those who are being raped, slaughtered, and enslaved based on their non-Sunni religious identity – not by Assad, but by so-called “rebel” forces (aka jihadis) – many of them are being denied refuge in America.

Thus, although Christians were approximately 10 percent of Syria’s population in 2011, only one percent has been granted refuge in America. This despite the fact that, from a strictly humanitarian point of view – and humanitarianism (Obama’s “compassion”) is the chief reason being cited in accepting refugees – Christians should receive priority simply because they are the most persecuted group in the Middle East.

At the hands of the Islamic State, which supposedly precipitated the migrant crisis, Christians have been repeatedly forced to renounce Christ or die; they have been enslaved and raped; and they have had more than 400 of their churches desecrated and destroyed.¹

ISIS has committed no such atrocities against fellow Sunnis, they who are being accepted into the U.S. in droves. Nor does Assad enslave, behead, or crucify people based on their religious identity (despite Jeb Bush’s recent, and absurd, assertions).

Obama should further prioritize Christian refugees simply because his own policies in the Middle East have directly exacerbated their plight. Christians and other religions minorities did not flee from Bashar Assad’s Syria, Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, or Moammar Gaddafi’s Libya. Their systematic persecution began only after the U.S. interfered in those nations in the name of “democracy,” succeeding only in uncorking the jihadi terrorists whom the dictators had long kept suppressed.

Incidentally, prioritizing Christian refugees would not merely be an altruistic gesture or the U.S. government’s way of righting its wrongs: rather, it brings many benefits to America’s security. (Unlike Muslims or even Yazidis, Christians are easily assimilated into Western nations due to the shared Christian heritage, and they bring trustworthy language and cultural skills that are beneficial to the “war on terror.”)

Finally, no one should be shocked by these recent revelations of the Obama administration’s pro-Muslim and anti-Christian policies. They fit a clear and established pattern of religious bias within his administration. For example:

While inviting scores of Muslim representatives, the State Department is in the habit of denying visas to solitary Christian representatives.
When a few persecuted Iraqi Christians crossed the border into the U.S., they were thrown in prison for several months and then sent back to the lion’s den to be enslaved, raped, or murdered.
When the Nigerian government waged a strong offensive against Boko Haram, killing some of its terrorists, Secretary of State John Kerry fumed and called for the “human rights” of the jihadis (who regularly slaughter and rape Christians and burn their churches). More recently, Kerry “urged Tajikistan not to go overboard in its crackdown on Islam.”
When persecuted Coptic Christians planned on joining Egypt’s anti-Muslim Brotherhood revolution of 2013, the U.S. said no.
When persecuted Iraqi and Syrian Christians asked for arms to join the opposition fighting ISIS, D.C. refused.
When the U.N. Security Council held a meeting to discuss the genocide against Christians and other minorities, although “many high level delegations from UN member states addressed the Security Council meeting, some at the Foreign Minister level, the United States failed to send … a high ranking member of the State Department.”

Most recently, as the White House works on releasing a statement accusing ISIS of committing genocide against religious minorities such as Yazidis – who are named and recognized in the statement – Obama officials are arguing that Christians “do not appear to meet the high bar set out in the genocide treaty” and thus likely will not be mentioned.

In short, and to use the president’s own words, it is the Obama administration’s own foreign and domestic policies that are “shameful,” that are “not American,” and that do not represent “who we are.”

Yet the question remains: will Americans take notice and do anything about their leader’s policies – which welcome Islamic jihadis while ignoring their victims – or will their indifference continue until they too become victims of the jihad, in a repeat of Paris or worse?

_______________________

¹ Even before the new “caliphate” was established, Christians were and continue to be targeted by Muslims – Muslim mobs, Muslim individuals, Muslim regimes, and Muslim terrorists, from Muslim countries of all races (Arab, African, Asian, etc.) – and for the same reason: Christians are infidel number one. See Crucified Again: Exposing Islam’s New War on Christians for hundreds of anecdotes before the rise of ISIS as well as the Muslim doctrines that create such hate and contempt for Christians who are especially deserving of refugee status.

Categories: Asylum seekers, Caliphate, Foreign policy, Islam - the religion of war, Islam and Christianity, Islamic invasion, Islamic slaughter, Islamic State, Islamic supremacy, Kerry, Obama and Christians, Obama and Islam, Sunni Muslims
Tags: Asylum seekers, Caliphate, Foreign Policy, Islam - the religion of war, Islam and Christianity, Islamic invasion, Islamic slaughter, Islamic State, Islamic supremacy, Kerry, Obama and Christians, Obama and Islam, Sunni Muslims

Comments: Be the first to comment

Archives