Posted tagged ‘Islamophobia’

« WarSclerotic home page
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Obama: “That’s Not Who we Are.” Part I, America and Islam

January 18, 2016

Obama: “That’s Not Who we Are” Part I, America and Islam, Dan Miller’s Blog, January 18, 2016

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

Obama keeps telling us what America is not. What does He think she is? Does He think that Obama’s America is America, or that His supporters are what America is? Does He think they make America great? Will America become acceptable to Obama, and hence “who we are,” only after He or His successor finishes her fundamental transformation?

“Benefits” of the Iran Scam

By virtue of the now-implemented Iran nuke “deal,” Iran’s possession of an atomic and/or hydrogen bomb will be delayed for a few years unless she cheats (as in the past), reneges on the “deal” or out-sources nuke development to her long term partner, North Korea.

The Islamic Republic of Iran is now reaping the benefits of more than $100 billion in immediate sanctions relief plus a settlement of Iranian claims amounting to $1.7 billion.

Secretary of State John Kerry said today that the settlement is $400 million debt and $1.3 billion in interest dating back to the Islamic revolution. That’s separate from the sanctions windfall Iran will receive.

Iran will also benefit on a long-term basis from trade with countries formerly prohibited by sanctions.

According to Tasnim News Agency,

Back in June 2015, Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei had outlined the general policies of the country’s 6th quinquennial development plan.

On defense and security, the proclamation necessitated an increase in Iran’s defense capabilities at the level of a regional power in order to fulfill the national interests by allocating at least 5 percent of the national budget to boosting the defense power. [Emphasis added.]

With increased funding, Iran will be able to increase its already substantial support for Shiite terrorism throughout the Middle East; it will likely do so.

Iranians continue to experience Islamic human rights. Here’s a link to an article titled The Real War on Women in a Nightmarish Islamic State by Dr. Majid Rafizadeh. An Iranian-American political scientist and scholar, he is the president of the International American Council and serves on the board of the Harvard International Review at Harvard University.

When it comes to executions, girls are systematically more vulnerable due to the Islamist penal code of Sharia law.

Let’s take a look at the Islamist state of Iran, which creates its laws from the legal codes of Sharia and Quran. The first type of discrimination is related to age: girls are held criminally accountable at the maturity age of 9 Lunar years. (This will automatically put girls at a higher risk of execution by the court.)

Iranian ruling politicians hold the highest record when it comes to the most executions per capita in the world. Intriguingly, in the last two years that the so-called moderate, Hassan Rouhani, has been in office, there have been more than 2000 executions conducted in Iran. That is nearly 3-4 executions a day.

More importantly, Iranian leaders are also the largest executioner of women and female juveniles. Some of these executions were carried out on the mullahs’ charge of ‘Moharebeh’ (enmity with Allah), or waging war against Allah, ifsad-i Fil Arz (Sowing Corruption on Earth), or Sab-i Nabi (Insulting the Prophet). [Emphasis added.]

There are three methods of execution for women and female juveniles: 1. Stoning  2. Public hanging 3. Shooting. Some women are also beaten so severely in the prison that they die before reaching the execution. Shooting, which is the fastest method of the three for execution, has not been used since 2008. Instead, the most common method to execute women is public hanging or stoning. Some of these women are flogged right before they are hanged. Public hanging not only imposes fears in the society but also aims at dehumanizing and controlling women as second-class citizens. According to the Islamist penal code of Iran, women offenses are classified as: Hadd, Diyyih, Ta`zir, and Qisas. [Emphasis added.]

Please read the entire article. Isn’t it heartwarming that “we” are giving even more than a mere $100 billion to Iran? Perhaps some of the new money can be used to buy sharper stones and new devices for hangings. How about some new torture devices?

Islam, The Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliates

The Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas-affiliated Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) claims to represent Muslims in America. They do represent those who favor terrorism and despise human rights (in the name of which they ironically claim to act).

[T]he Council on American-Islamic Relations, is a prominent Islamic group, but which has a long history of involvement with extremist and terrorist causes. In 2009, during the Holy Land Foundation terror financing trial, U.S. District Court Judge Jorge Solis concluded that, “The government has produced ample evidence to establish the associations of CAIR… with the Islamic Association for Palestine, and with Hamas.” [Emphasis added.]

During the trial, CAIR was designated an “unindicted co-conspirator.” As a result of CAIR’s apparent links to a terrorist movement, the Justice Department in 2009 announced a ban on working with CAIR. The FBI also severed relations.

The FBI’s no-work-with-CAIR policy was commonly ignored, according to a liberally redacted Justice Department report released in 2013, and now appears to have become moribund. CAIR representatives are often invited to the Obama White House:

[F]or the past seven years, the Obama White House has opened its doors to the entire spectrum of radical Islamist groups, just like CAIR. These groups have rationalized the actions of Islamic terrorist groups that have killed Americans, warned American Muslims against cooperating with law enforcement, smeared genuine Muslim moderates like Zuhdi Jasser and Asra Nomani as traitors and accused anyone who dared to utter the term “radical Islam” as “Islamophobic.” These are the groups that the White House should have marginalized. The fact that Obama legitimized radical Islamist groups will be his real legacy. [Emphasis added.]

Returning to the previously quoted article about CAIR and whom it claims to represent,

Very few American Muslims, however, seem to feel that CAIR is a legitimate ambassador for American Islam. According to a 2011 Gallup poll, about 88% of American Muslims said that CAIR does not represent them. Muslims all over the world, in fact, apparently do not think CAIR is a moderate or legitimate Muslim group: in 2014, the United Arab Emirates, a pious Muslim state, designated CAIR a terrorist organization, along with dozens of other Muslim Brotherhood organizations.

In reality, American Muslims are extremely diverse, and no single group can claim to speak on their collective behalf. American Islam comprises dozens of different religious sects and political movements, many of which advocate distinctly different ideas. But for Islamist bodies such as CAIR, it suits their agenda if American Muslims are portrayed as a monolithic community. If American Muslims can be seen as homogenous, then a group such as CAIR has a better claim to represent their interests.

Even CAIR’s own research, however, undermines their claim to speak on behalf of American Muslims. A 2011 report reveals that a majority of American mosques are not affiliated with any American Islamic body.

Addressing a conference in 2000, Sheikh Abdul Hadi Palazzi, a Muslim cleric and secretary general of the Italian Muslim Assembly, explained that, “[CAIR] is a Muslim Brotherhood front organization. It works in the United States as a lobby against radio, television and print media journalists who dare to produce anything about Islam that is at variance with their fundamental agenda. CAIR opposes diversity in Islam.”

In truth, CAIR only speaks on behalf of a small extremist ideology that, as discovered by federal prosecutors, emerged across the United States during the 1990s out of the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. Although CAIR does not represent American Muslims, it managed, before the Holy Land Foundation terror trial in 2008, to persuade a great many people that it did. Enough time has passed that CAIR seems to believe it can try this move once again.

Are CAIR and other similar Islamist organizations who claim to represent Muslims in America who we are? Not according to a bill now pending in the Congress, which would

state that Congress believes the Muslim Brotherhood fits the State Department’s criteria of a Foreign Terrorist Organization. The Secretary of State would be required to designate the Brotherhood within 60 days or to provide a detailed report explaining why it does not. Three U.S.-based Brotherhood entities named in the bill are CAIR, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT). [Emphasis added.]

The House version of the bill (HR3892) was introduced by Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-FL) with Reps. Louie Gohmert (R-TX), Randy K. Weber (R-TX), Diane Black (R-TN) and Mike Pompeo (R-KS) as original cosponsors. They are now joined by Reps. Steve King (R-IA); Steven Palazzo (R-MS); Kay Granger (R-TX); Jim Jordan (R-OH); Steve Stivers (R-OH); Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA); Ilena Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL); Charles W. Dent (R-PA); Bill Johnson (R-OH) and David A. Trott (R-MI).

HR3892 was referred to the Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security on December 4, 2015. Two cosponsors, Rep. Gohmert and Rep. Trott, sit on that subcommittee.

The Senate version of the bill (S2230) was introduced by presidential candidate Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) and later cosponsored by Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT). It was referred to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on November 3. Two of Senator Cruz’s presidential rivals, Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) sit on that committee and have not taken a position on the bill.

Although the bill has yet to earn bi-partisan support at this early stage, it is supported by members of Congress from different spectrums of the Republican Party. It includes endorsers of the presidential campaigns of Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush and John Kasich and not only supporters of Ted Cruz.

If enacted by the Congress, Obama will almost certainly veto it. If He signs it, He will ignore or bypass it as He often does.

Britain recently declared the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization. Here are thirteen quotes from the British Government’s review and Prime Minister Cameron’s official statement:

1. “The Muslim Brotherhood’s foundational texts call for the progressive moral purification of individuals and Muslim societies and their eventual political unification in a Caliphate under Sharia law. To this day the Muslim Brotherhood characterizes Western societies and liberal Muslims as decadent and immoral. It can be seen primarily as a political project.”

2.  “Aspects of Muslim Brotherhood ideology and tactics, in this country and overseas, are contrary to our values and have been contrary to our national interests and our national security.”

3.  “From its foundation the Muslim Brotherhood organized itself into a secretive ‘cell’ structure, with an elaborate induction and education program for new members…This clandestine, centralized and hierarchical structure persists to this day.”

4.  “The Hamas founding charter claims that they are the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood and the Muslim Brotherhood treat them as such. In the past ten years support for Hamas (including in particular funding) has been an important priority for the MB in Egypt and the MB international network.”

5.  “From at least the 1950s the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood also developed an international network, within and beyond the Islamic world. Europe became an important base for the growing Muslim Brotherhood global network.”

6.  “The wider international network of the Muslim Brotherhood now performs a range of functions. It promotes Muslim Brotherhood ideology (including through communications platforms), raises and invests funds, and provides a haven for members of the Brotherhood who have left their country of origin to continue promoting Brotherhood activity.”

7.  “[F]or the most part, the Muslim Brotherhood have preferred non violent incremental change on the grounds of expediency, often on the basis that political opposition will disappear when the process of Islamization is complete. But they are prepared to countenance violence—including, from time to time, terrorism—where gradualism is ineffective.”

8.  “Muslim Brotherhood organizations and associated in the UK have neither openly nor consistently refuted the literature of Brotherhood member Sayyid Qutb which is known to have inspired people (including in this country) to engage in terrorism.”

9.  “[The review] concluded that it was not possible to reconcile these [MB] views with the claim made by the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood in their evidence to the review that ‘the Muslim Brotherhood has consistently adhered to peaceful means of opposition, renouncing all forms of violence throughout its existence.’”

10.  “In the 1990s the Muslim Brotherhood and their associates established public facing and apparently national organizations in the UK to promote their views. None were openly identified with the Muslim Brotherhood and membership of the Muslim Brotherhood remained (and still remains) a secret.”

11.  “[MB fronts] became politically active, notably in connection with Palestine and Iraq, and promoted candidates in national and local elections…sought and obtained a dialogue with Government….were active members in a security dialogue with the police.”

12.  “The Muslim Brotherhood have been publicly committed to political engagement in this country. Engagement with Government has at times been facilitated by what appeared to be a common agenda against al Qaida and (at least in the UK) militant Salafism. But this engagement did not take into account of Muslim Brotherhood support for a proscribed terrorist group and its views about terrorism which, in reality, are quite different from our own.”

13. “Senior Muslim Brotherhood figures and associated have justified attacks against coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.”

The linked article goes on to note that

The U.S. government, without even conducting any kind of review of its own, issued a statement to the Investigative Project on Terrorism rejecting any ban or even any “de-legitimizing” of the Brotherhood at all. [Emphasis added.]

Do the Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliates represent Obama? Are they or Obama “what we are?” I don’t think so and hope not.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali and reformation of Islam

In Heretic (which I reviewed here), Ayaan Hirsi Ali wrote,

For years, we have spent trillions on waging wars against “terror” and “extremism” that would have been much better spent protecting Muslim dissidents and giving them the necessary platforms and resources to counter that vast network of Islamic centers, madrassas, and mosques which has been largely responsible for spreading the most noxious forms of Islamic fundamentalism. For years, we have treated the people financing that vast network — the Saudis, the Qataris, and the now repentant Emiratis — as our allies. In the midst of all our efforts at policing, surveillance, and even military action, we in the West have not bothered to develop an effective counternarrative because from the outset we have denied that Islamic extremism is in any way related to Islam. We persist in focusing on the violence and not on the ideas that give rise to it. [Emphasis added.]

Here is a video of which Hirsi Ali was the executive producer. It features Muslim and former-Muslim women discussing Islam and the Islam-mandated male domination of women.

Here’s Part II of Honor Diaries:

Here’s a video characterizing Hirsi Ali as an “Islamophobe.”

Along with the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), Azeezah Kanji — the featured speaker in the above video — has been very active in disparaging Hirsi Ali and Honor Diaries. Like CAIR, she has ties to the Obama White House and was named a “Champion of Change” by the White House in 2011. What changes in Islam does Ms. Kanji champion? None, apparently, of those intrinsic to it.

Ibrahim Hooper, a spokesman for the CAIR, condemned Hirsi Ali as “one of the worst of the worst of the Islam haters in America, not only in America but worldwide.”

On becoming a U.S. Citizen

On becoming a U.S. Citizen

Who better represents American values? Hirsi Ali, once a refugee from Somalia and a proud citizen of the United States since April 25, 2013, or President Obama? In the immediately linked Wall Street Journal article, she offers suggestions on American immigration with which I plan to deal in a subsequent post. In the meantime, here is her 2014 address at the William F. Buckley Program at Yale University on the clash of civilizations. If you have not yet watched it, please do so. If you have watched it, please do so again. I just did. Every time I watch it, there is something I had not previously considered.

Conclusions

To Obama and His acolytes, Islam is the religion of peace and tolerance; the Islamic State, its equally non-peaceful and intolerant franchisees and other comparable terrorist organizations are “not Islamic.” If “not Islamic,” what are they?

Despite Obama’s many statements and gestures, He has yet to convince any Islamic terrorist group that it is not Islamic. He has convinced them only that He is ignorant of Islam, a liar or both.  Perhaps He needs a better joke writer.

Obama’s last State of the Union Message

was very striking for the one-sidedness and disproportion of the president’s concern for religious suffering.

President Obama worried that “politicians insult Muslims, whether abroad or fellow citizens.”

But he couldn’t bring himself to worry aloud about the Christians being driven from Middle Eastern countries, the churches being burned from Nigeria to Malaysia, or the 22 Coptic Christians who were beheaded on video on a beach in Libya by Islamic supremacists.

Insulting Muslims: bad. Killing Christians: irrelevant. [Emphasis added.]

Will our next president at least make a concerted effort to un-transform Obama’s America? Will he name and fight our enemies, foreign and domestic? Or will he simply “go with the flow” and do none of the above. Much depends on who it is and on the composition of the Congress.

During the Democrat Party debate on January 17th, Hillary Clinton “linked herself to the president again and again. And again.” An Obama clone to continue Obama’s fundamental transformation of America is the opposite of what we need. Nor will merely “fixing” broken parts of the governmental apparatus with duct tape and bailing wire be satisfactory. As I wrote last September, To bring America back we need to break some stuff.

In later posts in this series, I hope to deal with immigration, race relations, the ways in which Obama is distorting the Constitution, the decline of education and Obama’s very foreign foreign policy.

Categories: Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Britain, CAIR, Foreign policy, Freedom, Funding terrorism, Iran - human rights, Iran - sanctions relief, Iran scam, Islam, Islam and women, Islamic honor, Islamic State, Islamic supremacy, Islamisation, Islamophobia, Obama and Islam, Obama and Islamic State, Obama's America, Theocracy, U.S. Congress
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Swedish Boy ‘Honor’-Killed; German Trangenders Stoned

January 18, 2016

Swedish Boy ‘Honor’-Killed; German Trangenders Stoned, Clarion Project, Meira Svirsky, January 18, 2016

Swedish-Boy-Honor-Killed-HPArminas Pileckas, 15, who was killed by Ahmed Mustafa Al Haj Ali, 14, who recently arrived in Sweden.

The importation of the culture of honor violence has arrived in Europe with migrants from Islamist countries. Two profoundly disturbing stories in particular are worth noting.

In Sweden, a 15-year old boy was stabbed to death by a 14-year old migrant from Syria on his first day back at school this term. The boy, whose family themselves were immigrants from Lithuania, was reported to have been protecting a young girl from a sexual assault from the Syrian boy in December. It was allegedly not the first time.

In retaliation, the Syrian boy plunged a knife in his back and heart on the first day back at school in January.

The victim’s father angrily related that in Sweden the press was in collusion with the government, saying that, with regards to the migrant problem, “Everything is being kept hidden.”

While the grieving father was not interviewed by the press, Swedish news Aftonbladet interviewed the father of the migrant boy, who claimed that his son was being bullied by the murdered boy. In what was described as a sympathetic interview, the father insisted, “The school did nothing to help him and establish his honor. Instead, my son had to meet this 15-year old every day. It made him very upset.”

Even if this version was correct (it was denied by the boy’s classmates as well as other indicators), killing a classmate is a way to “establish” one’s “honor?”  With no questions asked?

In Germany, immigrants from North Africa were arrested while stoning two transgender individuals near the city’s central train station. A police car fortuitously cruising the area broke up the attack perpetrated by three men, described as between the ages of 16 and 18.

Upon arrest, police reported that the men told them “such persons must be stoned.”

It is unacceptable that the culture of (so-called) “honor” be imported into host countries. The often manifest arguments of cultural relativism by Europeans (see Cologne Mayor Henriette Reker’s comments following mass sexual assaults in her city by migrants on New Year’s Eve) are paltry and lame excuses for the upholding of Western values. Even those who view themselves as the vanguards of human rights (feminists, anti-racism activists, social justice campaigners) shy away from criticism of the “Islamic other.”

While their criticism is eminently forthcoming for Western societies that fail to change fast enough and the way they deem acceptable, when it comes to criticism of human rights abuses inherent in sharia-based societies, they are markedly silent.

Categories: Europe, Hijrah, Islamic culture, Islamic honor, Islamic invasion, Islamic jihad, Islamic perversions, Islamic tolerance, Islamisation, Islamophobia, Multiculturalism, Sweden
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Pope Francis: Countries that take in Refugees Must Change

January 17, 2016

Pope Francis: Countries that take in Refugees Must Change, Front Page Magazine, Daniel Greenfield, January 17, 2016

Happy immigrants

Some interesting tidbits from Pope Francis’ statement on migrants and refugees. Via Andrew Stuttaford at the National Review.

“Migration movements are now a structural reality, and our primary issue must be to deal with the present emergency phase by providing programmes which address the causes of migration and the changes it entails, including its effect on the makeup of societies and peoples.”

“At this moment in human history, marked by great movements of migration, identity is not a secondary issue. Those who migrate are forced to change some of their most distinctive characteristics and, whether they like or not, even those who welcome them are also forced to change.”

“The presence of migrants and refugees seriously challenges the various societies which accept them. Those societies are faced with new situations which could create serious hardship unless they are suitably motivated, managed and regulated. How can we ensure that integration will become mutual enrichment, open up positive perspectives to communities, and prevent the danger of discrimination, racism, extreme nationalism or xenophobia?”

“Public opinion also needs to be correctly formed, not least to prevent unwarranted fears and speculations detrimental to migrants.”

That last one is obviously the most ominous statement, but there is plenty of language here emphasizing the transformation of host societies. There is a failure to address the threat of migrants. Instead the only recognized threats are those of the host societies who reject migrants. There is also far too much talk about forming opinion, managing and regulating host societies and the need to change.

There is little to no acknowledgement of the inherent religious consequences of huge numbers of Muslims invading and settling in Europe. The words “Islam” and “Muslim” are never even mentioned.

Categories: Europe, Islam and Jews, Islam and women, Islamic indoctrination, Islamic invasion, Islamic supremacy, Islamisation, Islamophobia, Pope Francis
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Obama blasts bullying, ignores beheading

January 16, 2016

Obama blasts bullying, ignores beheading, Washington Times, Newt Gingrich, January 14, 2016

ye_2015_top_10_stories_c24-0-1854-1067_s885x516EDS NOTE: GRAPHIC CONTENT – This image made from video posted online April 19, 2015 by supporters of the Islamic State militant group on an anonymous photo sharing website, members of an IS affiliate walk captured Ethiopian Christians along a beach in Libya. The video purportedly shows two groups of captives: one held by an IS affiliate in eastern Libya and the other by an affiliate in the south. A masked militant delivers a long statement before the video switches between footage that purportedly shows the captives in the south being shot dead and the captives in the east being beheaded on a beach. (Militant video via AP, File)

The 2016 State of the Union address was very striking for the one-sidedness and disproportion of the president’s concern for religious suffering.

President Obama worried that “politicians insult Muslims, whether abroad or fellow citizens.”

But he couldn’t bring himself to worry aloud about the Christians being driven from Middle Eastern countries, the churches being burned from Nigeria to Malaysia, or the 22 Coptic Christians who were beheaded on video on a beach in Libya by Islamic supremacists.

Insulting Muslims: bad. Killing Christians: irrelevant.

The president went on to say that when “a kid is called names, that doesn’t make us safer, it diminishes us in the eyes of the world.”

Why is our civilization — or Islamic civilization, for that matter — diminished by name-calling, when the real damage to both is being done by virulent, violent Islamic supremacism? (After all, the vast majority of Muslims being violently killed are killed by Islamic supremacists.)

The president saw fit to blast bullying in his State of the Union speech, but he said nothing of the beheadings that leave Americans justifiably afraid. Nor did he mention San Bernardino — the deadliest terrorist attack on American soil since 9/11 — where the attack occurred just over a month ago.

If calling a kid names is bad enough to diminish us all, how does the President feel about the incident in France this week, in which a Muslim student in Marseille pulled out a machete and tried to kill his Jewish teacher? Indeed, the situation in France is so hostile to Jews that the leader of the Jewish community in Marseille advised that they should stop wearing yarmulkes because it makes them targets. Not since the Nazis have Jews been told it is dangerous to be overtly Jewish in a European country.

Moreover, if calling a kid names diminishes us all, how would the president characterize the hundreds of assaults and rapes of German women by immigrants over New Years? How would he describe the German media’s and German government’s efforts to censor the news so that people would not know about it?

The president talks about “telling it like it is,” but neglects to mention the thousands of women and girls sold into sexual slavery by ISIS. He says that the United States has the most powerful military on the planet, but offers no strategy for ending the brutal rule of ISIS over millions of people.

Finally, the president highlighted his delusions about the dangers of the real world at the close of his speech, when he said that he was optimistic that “unarmed truth … will have the final word.”

This is a wonderful phrase for a preacher.

It is a terrible phrase for a commander-in-chief.

Unarmed truth would have its head cut off by ISIS.

Unarmed truth would be sold into slavery by Boko Haram.

Unarmed truth would be massacred by Al-Shabab.

It is a sad reality that while President Obama is very sympathetic to the plight of Muslims, he is stunningly silent about the plight of Jews and Christians.

It is a frightening reality that President Obama has no idea how dangerous the world would be if truth did not have the protection of the American military.

This was a very disturbing State of the Union speech — an address that explains much of our current danger.

Categories: Islam, Islam and cruelty, Islamic slaughter, Islamic terrorism, Islamophobia, Obama and Islam, Obama's 2016 State of Union Address
Tags: , , , , , ,

Comments: 1 Comment

Media Ignoring Massive Muslim Rape Attack in Germany?!?

January 14, 2016

Media Ignoring Massive Muslim Rape Attack in Germany?!? PJTV via You Tube, January 13, 2016

 

Categories: Europe, Germany, Islam and women, Islamic culture, Islamic invasion, Islamic jihad, Islamic perversions, Islamic supremacy, Islamisation, Islamism, Islamophobia, Media, Merkel
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

You Can Count on Governments to Conceal the Truth about Islamic Crimes

January 13, 2016

You Can Count on Governments to Conceal the Truth about Islamic Crimes, National Review, David French, January 12,2016

The truth disrupts the elite’s preferred multicultural narrative, which places all faiths and cultures on equal footing — except for our despised Western civilization. The truth must therefore be suppressed. But the lies are starting to backfire. Victims can’t be ignored indefinitely, and it’s hard to hide mass-scale public assaults. Since 9/11, Western governments and mainstream media have relentlessly pounded their people with deception and wishful thinking about Islam, jihad, and the Middle East. The lies are now being exposed by the light of day. Will enough people care?

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

At this point, it’s a sad joke — a form of gallows humor shared in times of trouble. When there’s a shooting, and the hours tick by without any identification of the suspect, one can presume that it’s a jihadist. When there’s a riot in Europe, and the perpetrators are described as “youths,” one can presume it’s Muslim men. When an Islamist goes on a shooting spree or stabbing spree or beheads a coworker, authorities will latch onto any explanation but the obvious.

But now even gallows humor is inappropriate. Western denial of Islamic crimes is so common, so systematic, that we can no longer have any confidence that we understand the true dimensions of the jihadist threat. Consider the following:

In Germany, police actively “tried to obfuscate” what happened on New Year’s Eve, when thousands of Muslim men systematically sexually assaulted hundreds of German women — an act that my colleague Andrew McCarthy has aptly termed a “rape jihad.”

The New York Times reported yesterday that Swedish authorities now stand accused of covering up a wave of sexual assaults at a concert last summer. A Swedish newspaper wrote today that national media refused at the time to report factual accounts from the concert assaults, claiming they were nothing but far-right “propaganda.”

Yet for sheer scale, nothing touches the infamous scandal in Rotherham, England, where gangs of Pakistani men brutalized an estimated 1,400 women and girls. Over at least 16 years, from 1997 to 2013, girls and women were trafficked, tortured, and raped while authorities turned a blind eye to the abuse. According to the Rotherham Borough Council’s belated report on the mass abuse, authorities were concerned that they might give “oxygen” to racism claims. Up to 160 British police officers now face investigation for systematically ignoring abuse complaints.

Here at home, willful blindness seems to be a deliberate strategy. The Obama administration for years called Nidal Hasan’s deadly terror attack at Fort Hood “workplace violence,” and in November, the FBI said that it may never release a report into the motivations of the Muslim man who attacked two Chattanooga recruiting stations, killing five. FBI director James Comey said that the Bureau didn’t want to “smear people.” Finally, in December — five months after the event — Comey unequivocally declared the Chattanooga shooting a “terror attack.”

But for sheer brazenness, it’s hard to top Philadelphia mayor Jim Kenney. Immediately after police apprehended Edward Archer for attempting to assassinate a Philadelphia police officer, Archer started telling anyone who would listen that he did it “in the name of Islam.” But don’t tell Kenney. He broke land-speed records to get in front of the cameras and declare that the attack “has nothing to do with being a Muslim or following the Islamic faith.”

The consequences of the lies, cover-ups, and evasions are serious. American and European elites hector their respective publics over accepting increasing numbers of migrants. They belittle the public’s concerns over the terrorist threat and instead praise Islam to the heavens for its tolerance — often with full knowledge of systematic criminal acts. Even now — after Cologne and after Rotterham — those of us outside the halls of power can’t have any confidence that we know the truth about the impact of mass Muslim immigration on Europe, or that we know the true dimensions of the domestic terror threat in the United States.

When, for instance, a Muslim man beheaded his coworker in Oklahoma and attempted to behead another, was his attack “merely” the enraged action of a disgruntled worker? Or was it an act of “lone wolf” jihadist? After all, on social media, he’d made the popular hand sign of ISIS fighters, posted pictures of jihadists (including ISIS fighters and Osama bin Laden), and appeared to call for Jihad.

What about the recent stabbing spree at the University of California, Merced? Authorities say it was over a study-group dispute, but the young Muslim attacker reportedly carried an image of an ISIS flag and a handwritten manifesto that “included instructions to behead a student.”

How many Americans are aware of these incidents? How many Americans are aware that New York City police are now looking at a Muslim terror suspect as a “person of interest” in the stabbing of a nine-year-old boy? To learn that, you might have to read a British newspaper that reported on a student named Fareed Mumuni who allegedly stabbed the child in a “botched audition to join ISIS.” His long-term goal was reportedly the bombing of Times Square.

The truth disrupts the elite’s preferred multicultural narrative, which places all faiths and cultures on equal footing — except for our despised Western civilization. The truth must therefore be suppressed. But the lies are starting to backfire. Victims can’t be ignored indefinitely, and it’s hard to hide mass-scale public assaults. Since 9/11, Western governments and mainstream media have relentlessly pounded their people with deception and wishful thinking about Islam, jihad, and the Middle East. The lies are now being exposed by the light of day. Will enough people care?

Categories: Europe, Free world, Freedom of speech, Fundamentalist Islam, Hijrah, Human rights, Islam - submission, Islam and women, Islamic culture, Islamic invasion, Islamic jihad, Islamic perversions, Islamic supremacy, Islamisation, Islamophobia, Media, Muslim assimilation, Obama's affinity for Islam, Obama's America, Religion of Peace
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Will the Nonsense Ever End?

January 13, 2016

Will the Nonsense Ever End? Power Line, Steven Hayward, January 12, 2017

(When will “radical” Islam be called “fundamentalist” Islam? Isn’t that what it is? — DM)

Is it required for political leaders (except Trump and Cruz) to deny the presence of Islamic radicalism in instances of obvious Islam-inspired terrorism, such as the shooting in Philadelphia the other day? Philadelphia’s major Jim Kenney went out of his way to declare “In no way, shape or form does anybody in this room believe that Islam or the teaching of Islam” had anything to do with the attack. Does the mayor think everyone is stupid? Just because most Philadelphia voters are?

Dorothy Rabinowitz nails it in her Wall Street Journal column today, “Denying the Obvious About Islamic Terrorism”:

The mayor’s comments, so bizarre in their determined denial of the deluge of facts delivered by top police officials standing next to him, were, nonetheless, familiar enough. Americans have learned to expect, after every Islamist terror attack, lectures instructing them that such assaults should in no way be connected to Islamic faith of any kind.

To hear the mayor of Philadelphia was to grasp, more clearly than ever, the fury that has led to Donald Trump’s success in attracting voters—the fury of citizens who know official lies when they hear them, whether about border security, immigration, or the ever-expanding requirements of multiculturalist dogma. . .

On no subject has there been more sermonizing than on Muslims and terrorism and on what the real Islam is and is not—no surprise in an administration which has from its outset tended to the apparent view that the American nation is essentially composed of yahoos whose barely controlled instincts to riot require regular monitoring and checks by their enlightened betters.

Yup. Can’t really say it any better than this.

UPDATE:

‘We Told You So,’ Eastern Europe Tells Germany

Leaders of Eastern European states opposed to Germany’s open-door refugee policy have been quick to tell Germany ‘we told you so’ after the Cologne sexual assaults.

Influential politicians across Eastern Europe have pointed to the Cologne attacks, in which men of Middle Eastern appearance allegedly sexually assaulted over a hundred women, as proof that Germany’s open-door refugee policy has been a mistake. . .

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban said in his weekly radio interview that it was proof of a crisis of liberalism that reporting of the sexual assaults in Cologne had been suppressed in Germany, adding that the press in Hungary is much freer than that in western Europe.

Orban added that Hungary is in the right on the refugee issue and that migration into Europe must be completely stopped.

Merkel must go.

Merkel-ruins-continent

Categories: Europe, Fundamentalist Islam, Islam and women, Islamic jihad, Islamic perversions, Islamic supremacy, Islamisation, Islamophobia, Merkel, Obama's America
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

House Democrats Turn to the Wrong Muslims for SOTU

January 12, 2016

House Democrats Turn to the Wrong Muslims for SOTU, Investigative Project on Terrorism, January 11, 2016

As many as 25 House Democrats are expected to have Muslim guests during Tuesday night’s State of the Union speech. It’s in response to a call from Democratic National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Minnesota Rep. Keith Ellison, the first Muslim voted into Congress, to counter an “alarming rise in hateful rhetoric against Muslim Americans and people of the Islamic faith worldwide.”

The gesture might not generate much more than a shrug, except that in at least two cases, Democrats invited officials from a group the FBI formally avoids due to historic ties to a Hamas support network. Delray Beach Rep. Alcee Hastings invited Nezar Hamze, regional operations director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in Florida. And San Jose, Cal. Rep. Zoe Lofgren invited Sameena Usman, a 10-year veteran government relations official with CAIR’s San Francisco chapter, the Investigative Project on Terrorism has learned.

CAIR officials routinely accuse federal law enforcement of entrapping otherwise innocent and peaceful Muslims in order to gin up terrorism prosecutions. Hamze’s colleagues in CAIR-Florida are helping a family sue the FBI over the 2013 fatal shooting of a terror suspect who attacked agents after extensive questioning.

Usman’s office published a notorious poster urging Muslims to “Build a Wall of Resistance [and] Don’t Talk to the FBI.” For its part, the FBI cut off contact with CAIR, except in investigations, in 2008 based on evidence its agents uncovered which placed CAIR in a Hamas-support network in the United States. Until it can be shown that those connections no longer exist, an FBI official explained in 2009, CAIR is not “an appropriate liaison partner.”

1302

In addition, several CAIR officials have compared Israel to ISIS.

Calls to press contacts in Lofgren and Hastings’ offices were not returned Monday.

Last month, the IPT provided exclusive details from eyewitness accounts about CAIR’s creation, including an account of how a co-founder sought approval from the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood for CAIR’s bylaws, and how Executive Director Nihad Awad’s move to Washington was “in order to represent Hamas.”

Hastings and Lofgren either failed to check out their guests’ employer or they don’t care. These connections have nothing to do with the faith of CAIR officials. But the organization has a record that elected officials stubbornly insist should be ignored.

Unfortunately, this is part of a pattern of outreach House Democrats seek out with the wrong people. Last month, CAIR-Florida’s Hassan Shibly was invited to the White House for a discussion about religious discrimination. Then, as with the State of the Union speech, no one from the new Muslim Reform Movement – which issued a declaration clearly rejecting “interpretations of Islam that call for any violence, social injustice and politicized Islam” and standing for “peace, human rights and secular governance.”

766

In 2012, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi sat with Awad, the only executive director in the organization’s history, at a fundraiser for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

A seat in the House chamber for the State of the Union bestows undeserved clout to the CAIR officials. And, in trying to show the public that American Muslims are not a monolithic group of radicalized Islamists, Hastings and Lofgren are doing their cause more harm than good.

Categories: CAIR, Democrats, Islamic indoctrination, Islamic State, Islamisation, Islamism, Islamophobia, Israel, U.S. Congress
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Germany Just Can’t Get It Right

January 11, 2016

Germany Just Can’t Get It Right, Gatestone Institute, Douglas Murray, January 11, 2016

♦ How can you explain why Germany, which in the 20th century had such a gigantic anti-Semitism problem, would import so many people from those areas of the world which now have the same gigantic anti-Semitism problem?

♦ The police water cannons were not in evidence on New Year’s Eve to break up the migrant gangs committing violent crimes against women. Instead they were used to break up a lawful demonstration of people opposed to such violent attacks on women.

The late Robert Conquest once laid out a set of three political rules, the last of which read, “The simplest way to explain the behavior of any bureaucratic organization is to assume that it is controlled by a cabal of its enemies.” This rule comes in handy when trying to understand the otherwise clearly insane and suicidal policies of Chancellor Merkel’s government in Germany. These policies only make sense if the German government has in fact been taken over by a cabal of people intent not on holding Germany together but on pulling it entirely apart. Consider the evidence.

There can be few other explanations for why Chancellor Merkel’s government last year let in more than one million people (about 1.5% of the current German population) without having any idea of who they were, where they came from or what they think. No democratic leader could possibly push through such a startling measure. How else can you explain why a country that in the 20th century had such a gigantic anti-Semitism problem, would import so many people from those areas of the world which, in the 21st century, now have the same gigantic anti-Semitism problem?

A document that was leaked late last year from the German intelligence service warned that the country is “importing Islamic extremism, Arab anti-Semitism, national and ethnic conflicts of other peoples…” How to explain a government and security service policy which allowed this to happen? Or a Chancellor who, when asked a very lightly critical question about all of this by a concerned German citizen, responded with a long disquisition that failed to answer even one part of the pertinent point?

More up-to-date, it is worth considering events since New Year’s Eve. As the world now knows, that was when around 100 women were subjected to rape, harassment and sexual molestation by a huge crowd of migrants in the centre of the city of Cologne. It has now emerged that the first response of the Cologne police to this major incident was to hold back information about the identity of the attackers. Whether the police thought they could get away with that or not, this lie has now poured fuel onto the flames of public anger by demonstrating that the police, like the government and much of the media, are intent on misinforming the public about what is going on in their country, rather than keeping them truthfully briefed about it.

The next German police response to suggest that they, too, must have been taken over by a cabal of their enemies — intent on whipping up rather than dampening public concern — came a week after this attempted cover-up. At protests this past weekend, the Cologne police wheeled out water-cannons to hose down protestors and disperse them. Of course, these water cannons were not in evidence on New Year’s Eve to break up the migrant gangs committing violent crimes against German women. Instead, they were used to break up a lawful demonstration of German people opposed to such violent attacks on women. Unless you take Conquest’s rule into account, there is no explanation for the deployment of water-cannon by the German police against people protesting the rapes, rather than deploying them against the rapists.

Then there is the “too late” response. This is the declaration by officials, after the rapes have taken place and once the government realizes that it has to say something, that the German authorities will not tolerate and do not want people in their country who do not hold contemporary, enlightened European views on women. As at least 75% of the migrants who arrived in Europe last year were young men from the Middle East and Africa, it might be noted that this point could have been more constructive had it been made somewhat earlier. But, as those people are now here in such vast numbers, a government intent on causing as much societal damage as possible would, of course, allow them in and then complain about something that they will now be able to do nothing about. All such “hardball” pronouncements by German politicians can now be seen for the puff-balls they really are.

1360 (1)German Chancellor Angela Merkel doubled down on her open-door asylum policy in a November 13, 2015 television interview, saying: “The Chancellor has the situation under control. I have my vision. I will fight for it.” Mere insanity, incompetence or duplicity could not possibly explain the behaviour of a German government so obviously dedicated to its own pathetic end.

The conundrum for the rest of Europe now is what to do with the unwelcome knowledge of what is really going on. The realization that the most powerful and significant political and economic country in Europe has clearly been taken over by a cabal of its own enemies, intent on destroying the German nation rather than on protecting its citizens, will strike different Europeans in different ways.

From the British point of view, one striking opportunity to respond will be presented in the referendum over Britain’s membership (or not) in the European Union, slated to take place at some point next year. That Union – which has dissolved the continent’s external and internal borders as a central pillar of its policy — may now be seen by British voters for what it is. And so perhaps the best explanation of the behaviour of the German government is that it has been taken over some time ago by British Euro-sceptics, intent on finally bringing the EU to this dismal end. That is clearly the most likely explanation. Mere insanity, incompetence or duplicity could not possibly explain the behaviour of a German government so obviously dedicated to its own pathetic end.

Categories: Antisemitism, Germany, Islam and Jews, Islam and women, Islamic culture, Islamic invasion, Islamic perversions, Islamisation, Islamophobia, Merkel
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: 2 Comments

Are Western Leaders Sellouts To Islam?

January 11, 2016

Are Western Leaders Sellouts To Islam? PamelaGeller.com, Nonie Darwish, January 10, 2016

obama-muslim

Is someone holding a gun to the heads of Western politicians, forcing them to state immediately after every Muslim terror attack that “Islam has nothing whatsoever to do with terror”? Who cares about whether Islam has or has not something to do with terror? The only people who care about Islam’s reputation are the so-called “moderate” Muslims who have been making excuses for jihad terror, and covering up for Islamic atrocities for centuries, while blaming Western foreign policy for their jihad.

As for all the jihadist groups themselves, they couldn’t care less about associating terrorism with Islam. In fact, jihadists have no problem with expressing pride in their terrorism, and love to see us disappointed and confused in our Western dilemma over what is or what is not Islam.

But now Western leaders are joining the ranks of “moderate” Muslims to cover up the real agenda of Islam. While their statements defending Islam are getting more and more outrageous and even sickening in the eyes of the informed Western citizen, they continue to mislead people as they blame Western thinking for not being tolerant enough.

It is not the job of Western leaders to defend Islam’s reputation from being connected with terror, especially if major Muslim institutions have consistently refused any condemnation of ISIS as un-Islamic. In fact, not one major Islamic university or leader in the Muslim world has condemned ISIS as un-Islamic. Usama bin Laden continues to be called Sheikh and held in high regard by many Muslims, even by the Arab media itself. The leaders of Al-Azhar University in Cairo keep telling the world over and over again that if Al-Azhar condemned ISIS, it would mean they are condemning themselves and their own teaching as un-Islamic.

So why do President Obama and the embarrassed moderate Muslims keep hammering us with defending Islam? The only explanation for this defense of Islam as having nothing to do with terror is that it is really not intended to please Muslims, as many might think. But in fact, it is intended to shame the uninformed American citizen into respecting Islam and capitulating to its agenda.

The head of the cheerleading team for Islam, President Obama, has inspired many other American politicians and world leaders to do the same thing, disciplining their own citizens to put up with Islamic tyranny to the point of insanity. In that process, Western leaders have no problem with using twisted logic, such as the idea that whatever negativity is done in the name of Allah must be tolerated because it has nothing to do with Islam.

The virus of this defective logic has penetrated the minds of almost all Western political leaders and the media, including the very people who are supposed to inform and protect us, such as the mayor of Philadelphia, Hillary Clinton, the German Chancellor Angela Merkel, and the Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. They are all echoing the same thing in order to silence their citizens into accepting the dawn of a new multicultural era in which lawlessness, rape, and terror are to be tolerated and excused, lest we speak ill of Islam.

Western leaders are acting like hostages of the Islamic State, and are seriously expecting the obedient Western citizens to believe them. Nothing seems to work to remind those leaders as to who they are actually working for. They are not only defending Islam, but are also covering up for it and minimizing its danger to Western freedom, stability and law and order.

Even the mainstream media seems unshaken by all that is going on, and is cooperating with the political leaders into the shaming the side that supports freedom and the truth.

Discontent and fear are now brewing among the average Western citizen, who feels defenseless and scared to death of the Islamic agenda, and of loosing life in an orderly society. But instead of getting the message, Western leaders are doubling down on their assault on their own citizens, in order to force them into respecting anything and everything Islamic and never ever criticizing it.

It is now obvious that the 9/11 terror attack has achieved its Islamic goal, and has worked wonders on the psyche of the West. Terrorism is an old Arabian trick and tool for submission, and has always achieved wonders for Muslims. Even Mohammed was quoted saying, “I have been made victorious through terror.” Now that most Western leaders have capitulated, and instead of fighting back against Islam’s declaration of war, they have chosen to fight their own citizens.

Who could have ever imagined that this would have happened a little over a decade after 9/11? That Islamic rape, terror and violence would be running wild daily all over Europe and America, and Sharia blasphemy laws which go against all Western constitutions are being illegally enforced on Western citizens.

The defense of Islam by Western leaders has become pathological and extremely offensive to the majority of Americans, especially families and friends of victims of terrorism. And thus the only logical explanation for it is that Western leaders are selling out to Islam.

The abuse of the Western citizen, not only by Islam, but also by Western political leaders and its mainstream media, must end, because this is a recipe for disaster and a guarantee of future violent confrontations between the forces of freedom and forces of dhimmitude to Islam.

AFDI Geller Fellow Nonie Darwish is the author “The Devil We Don’t Know” and president of “Former Muslims United,” a program of the American Freedom Defense Initiative.

 

Categories: Islam, Islamic immigration, Islamic indoctrination, Islamic jihad, Islamic State, Islamic supremacy, Islamic terrorism, Islamisation, Islamophobia, Obama and Islam
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »