Islamophobia | WarSclerotic | Page 9

Posted tagged ‘Islamophobia’

Will Alberta police investigate Mohammad’s ruling on gays as hate speech?

October 21, 2016

Will Alberta police investigate Mohammad’s ruling on gays as hate speech? CIJ News, Jonathan D. Halevi, October 20, 2016

Pride Parade in Toronto. Photo: CIJnews

Global News reported that a second “an anti-Islam flyer” was found in mailboxes in Edmonton, Alberta. The police hate crimes unit has launched an investigation.

The flyer reads the following:

I HATE GAYS

Thinks Islam

The Quran:

Kill the one that is doing it and also kill the one that it is being done to him. (in

reference to the active and passive partners in gay sexual intercourse)

Is this advocating peace, love and freedom in your eyes?

IT’S TIME TO

#ShiptThemThe****Back

www.siotw.org [STOP ISLAMIZATION OF THE WORLD]

To see the flyer click HERE.

Alannah Davies, Edmonton resident who received the flyer in her mailbox and Jesse Lipscombe, founder of the racism initiative Make It Awkward, condemned the hate content of the flyer.

Faisal Khan Suri, president of the Alberta Muslim Public Affairs Council (AMPAC), called on police to investigate the flyer. The Alberta Muslim Public Affairs Council (AMPAC) sent the following statement to Global News:

“AMPAC emphatically condemns the hate flyers being distributed in Edmonton for the second

time. The flyers are hate propaganda with fabricated assertions about Islam and Muslims.

“Islam does not condone the killing of any innocent life.

“We are urging the EPS to investigate these acts as hate crimes and brings those responsible to justice…

“Islamophobia in not just a Muslim issue – it’s an Alberta issue and a Canadian issue.”

Does the flyer contains “fabricated assertions about Islam”?

The authors of the flyer quoted hadith (narration) attributed to Mohammad, the prophet of Islam, explaining the Islamic ruling in case of homosexuality.

The same hadith and interpretation appears on the Islamic website Mission Islam:

“Kill the one that is doing it and also kill the one that it is being done to.” (in reference to the active and passive partners in gay sexual intercourse).”

The team behind Mission Islam website present themselves as “concerned Muslims” who strive to “promote accurate representation of Islam… to increase awareness as to the extent of oppression against Muslims… [and] to remind Muslims of their responsibility to participate and support their brothers and sisters in Islam.”

The hadith in question also included in an Islamic ruling published by the Islamic website “Islam Question and Answer” which is recommended by Islamic organizations in Canada.

The following are excepts from the Islamic ruling on the punishment for homosexuality:

“The crime of homosexuality is one of the greatest of crimes, the worst of sins and the most abhorrent of deeds, and Allaah punished those who did it in a way that He did not punish other nations…

“al-Tirmidhi (1456), Abu Dawood (4462) and Ibn Maajah (2561) narrated that Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever you find doing the action of the people of Loot, execute the one who does it and the one to whom it is done.”. Classed as saheeh [reliable narration] by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Tirmidhi…

“The Sahaabah [Mohammad’s companions] were unanimously agreed on the execution of homosexuals, but they differed as to how they were to be executed.

“Some of them were of the view that they should be burned with fire…

“and some of them thought that they should be thrown down from a high place then have stones thrown at them…

“Some of them thought that they should be stoned to death…

“After the Sahaabah, the fuqaha’ [scholars] differed concerning the matter.

“Some of them said that the homosexual should be executed no matter what his situation, whether he is married or not.

“Some of them said that he should be punished in the same way as an adulterer, so he should be stoned if he is married and flogged if he is not married.

“Some of them said that a severe punishment should be carried out on him, as the judge sees fit.”

The Islamic ruling on the punishment for homosexuality – The Canadian perspective

Imam Dr. Abdullah Hakim Quick (Toronto):

“So he [journalist] said: what is the position of Islam on homosexuality? They ask me. So newspaper, right? So I said: put my name in the paper. The position is death. And we cannot change Islam…

“If he is serious, and a person came to me, and he came in the office and and he said he was homosexual, cried. I said: what happened to you? And he said: my father abused me. Heis a Muslim. So I… said: brother, you know your are sick. He said: I’m sick.

“So we sent him to a Muslim psychiatrist, so he can work through his problem, and then bring him back into the masjid (mosque).

“So anything can can come now these days. Anything is going to come at us, but we cannot allow in the name of Islam gay masjid (mosque) to come. We cannot allow this, man. And they’re trying to do this…

[Question from the audience whether the “Jews” are behind homosexuality]

“It [homosexuality] goes with Zionism. And really it seems like, Allah knows best (الله اعلم), if they are Dajjal’s (Antichrist دجال) army while it is mostly Jews (يهود) but probably there will be homosexuals with them too. Allah knows best (الله اعلم).

Syed Muhammad Rizvi (Toronto):

“In the Islamic legal system, homosexuality is a punishable crime against the laws of God. In the case of homosexuality between two males, the active partner is to be lashed a hundred times if he is unmarried and killed if he is married; whereas the passive partner is to be killed regardless of his marital status.

“In the case of two females (i.e., lesbianism), the sinners are to be lashed a hundred times if they are unmarried and stoned to death if they are married.

Abu Ameenah Bilal Philips (Toronto):

“It becomes a problem. Delaying Marriage… That’s the consequence. Once we delay it brings in corruption. Worse than that, you end up with lesbianism, homosexuality gets born out of those circumstances.”

Imam Wael Shihab (Toronto):

“Homosexuality is a sinful act in Islam. As for you question about how we should deal with homosexuals, I’d cite the following fatwa of Dr. Muzammil Siddiqi, president of the Fiqh Council of North America:

“We should consider them people who get themselves engaged in a sinful act. We should deal with them in the same way we deal with any people who are involved in alcoholics, gambling or adultery.

“We should have deep repugnance to their acts and we must remind and warn them. Those who insist on this lifestyle, consider it legitimate and feel ‘gay pride’, we should not associate with them and should not take them as friends. We should certainly avoid those people.

“If we see a person who has committed this sin and wants to repent then we should help that person as much as we can to get out of this evil. We should not leave him/her to thetemptations of the Satan…”“In Islam, changing one’s sex is not permissible if the person (male or female) has ‎complete male or female sex organs….

“Moreover, I have consulted reliable medical sources, which confirm the following:

“1. A person who undergoes sex-change operation will not be a complete man or woman. So, if a man changed his gender to a woman, she then will not be able to bear children or breastfeed them. The same also applies to a woman who changes her gender to a man; he will not be able to have children.

“2. It is easy for a person, after having sex-change operation, to return back to his or her original sex.

“Given the above, it’s my advice for him to return back to his original sex and go through professional counseling and treatment to lead normal happy life.”

Imam Syed B. Soharwardy (Calgary):

“According to the teachings of Islam homosexual behaviour is an abnormal behaviour and must be cured. Homosexuality is completely forbidden in Islam and it is one of the KABA-IR (big) sins according to Islam.”

Imam Mustafa Khattab (Edmonton):

“Homosexuality is not permissible. The reason the people of Lot peace be upon him were destroyed in Sodom and Gomorrah, because of this sin, so it is not permissible. Deal with someone, with a homosexual, in my view, as I said homosexuality is abnormal, this is not the norm.

“So, for me, someone who is homosexual is like someone who has diabetes or someone who has cancer or AIDS, he has a special case and this person needs special treatment.

“Can I talk to them? Why not? Just like I talk to everybody, ok. But, personally I don’t like to be associated with them.

“One day, we were in California, in Los Angeles and we were sitting around a table… this guy was sitting next to me… he said: I’m personally a gay… I moved my chair. I didn’t feel comfortable to sit next to the guy. Again, you can talk to them.”

Imam Muneer El-Kassem (London, Ont.):

El-Kassem implied that Allah punished mankind with global wide economic crisis because of homosexuality (“some sexual orientations”) and immodesty (“dressed half naked”). According to Munir El-Kassem, the climate change as it is seen reflected in the prolonged drought in Middle East is actually Allah’s retribution for the people who avoid giving charity.

Muslim preacher at Toronto’s Dundas Square:

“If you are gay you are cursed, because it is disgusting, because you area man and you are having sex with another man which is the cause of AIDS.”

“You want to be proud to be a gay and this is the cause of AIDS and that is a punishment from God.”

“You’ll see all these homosexuals, they are spitting… because they are dying of AIDS, and the truth is the truth. I’m here to bring the truth… It is the punishment of God. God is punishing them by bringing them AIDS.”

“Homosexuality is wrong and a sin and if you are a homosexual you are cursed. It doesn’t matter if it is your right… you will have to answer your Lord… when you die you will have to answer to God for your evil Satanic actions.”

“The truth is the truth and the truth has to be spread… because the City is days before the Gay Parade, right? and as a Muslim I have to enjoy the good and forbid the evil. I have to do it because I’m committed by Allah as a Muslim to enjoy good and forbid evil.”

“If you go to Church and Wellesley you see these homosexuals spitting, because they are dying of AIDS.”

“People want to defend them. How can you defend something Satanic… how can you defend AIDS? It is immoral… Homosexuality is immoral.”

The book Minhaj – Al – Muslim, or “The way of a Muslim” (sold in Islamic bookstores in Canada), p. 511 of the book (Vol. 2):

“The Hadd [fixed punishment] of homosexuality is stoning to death, with there being no difference between the married or unmarried person. This is due to the Prophet’s statement:

“Whoever you find doing the deed of the people of Lut (i.e. sodomy), then kill the doer and the one

to whom it is being done.” (Abu Dawud, At-Tirmithi and others, and it is Sahih [reliable])

The methods of killing them (the two who committed the homosexual act) that have been related from the Companions have differed. From among them there were those who burned them with fire. Others among them killed them by stoning them with stones. Ibn ‘Abbas said about them. “The highest building in the village should be sought, then they should be thrown from it upside down (i.e. on their heads). Then they should stoned after that.”

The book “The Lawful and the Prohibited in Islam” By Yusuf Al Qaradawi (sold in Islamic bookstores in Canada):

“Sexual Perversion: A Major Sin…

“Lut’s people were addicted to this shameless depravity, abandoning natural, pure, and lawful relations with women in the pursuit of this unnatural, foul and illicit practice…

“The jurists of Islam have held different opinions concerning the punishment for this abominable practice. Should it be the same as the punishment for zina [adultery, which means that the married sinner is stoned to death], or should both the active and passive participations [sic] be put to death? While such punishments may seem cruel, they have been suggested to maintain the purity of the Islamic society and to keep it clean of perverted elements.”

The book Fatawa Islamiyah or Islamic Verdicts (sold in Islamic bookstores in Canada), (Vol. 6, p. 199):

“The Ruling on Sodomy and the Punishment Thereof

“What is the ruling on sodomy in Islam and what is the punishment?

“The shameful act of sodomy is one of the most repugnant of shameful acts and we seek refuge with Allah (from it). Because of it, Allah destroyed the people of Lut, peace be upon him, and punished them with a terrible punishment, turning their homes upside down and raining stones of baked clay upon them, layer upon layer, (as Allah said): “marked from your Lord and they are not ever far from the wrongdoers.”

“It has been reported from the Companions, may Allah be pleased with them, that the punishment for one who does that or allows it to be done to him is that he be killed. Or, tobe burnt or to be stoned. Or, to be thrown from the highest point (mountain, tower, lofty building etc.), then to follow it with stoning.

“This is because of its corruption of morals, customs, and because of its violation of the natural human state, and because the abandonment of lawful marriage by those who practice.

“Ibn Jibreen”

The book “Clear Your Doubts About Islam” (distributed for free at the Islamic book at Toronto’s Dundas Square):

“Why does Islam oppose homosexuality? Where is freedom of choice?

“In the West today. homosexuality and lesbianism have come to be seen as an alternative lifestyle subject to personal preference. It is no longer considered an abnormality that requires restraint and treatment, and is being actively promoted by its adherents and their sympathizers as a legitimate way of life. Arguments in favor of tolerance toward same sex relationships arc based on the assumption that homosexual behavior is biologically based and not merely learned from society.

“Islam considers homosexuality to be the result of human choice. Human beings are not robots that do only what they are programmed to do. They choose how to behave and God holds them responsible for their choices. It is inconceivable that God would have made some people homosexuals then declared it a punishable crime. To accept such a proposition is to suggest that God is unjust.

“Inclinations can exist within humans toward a variety of natural acts and unnatural ones such as rape, paedophilia or bestiality. These inclinations may arise from media influence or direct contact, but it does not mean that free reign should be given to them.”

The book “24 Hours With The Prophet” (distributed for free at the Islamic booth at Dundas Square in Toronto):

Homosexuality is a “major sin”

The Meadowale Islamic Centre in Mississauga, Ontario included “sodomy, homosexuality” in the list of “The Five Evils” (newsletter. March & April 2015).

Categories: Canada, Hate speech, Islam and homosexuals, Islamists in Canada, Islamophobia
Tags: Canada, Hate speech, Islam and homosexuals, Islamists in Canada, Islamophobia

Comments: Be the first to comment

Teachers union protests FBI ‘Radical Ideologies’ website because it could single out Muslims

October 19, 2016

Teachers union protests FBI ‘Radical Ideologies’ website because it could single out Muslims, Jihad Watch, Robert Spencer, October 19, 2016

Islamic jihadists are singling us out, but that doesn’t seem to matter. There have been almost 30,000 jihad attacks worldwide since 9/11 and no remotely comparable number of any other attacks by any other group, and they’re worried that Muslims will be “singled out” by a toothless program that doesn’t even name them in the first place.

james-comey

“Teachers Union Protests FBI ‘Radical Ideologies’ Website Because It Could Single Out Muslims,” by Amber Randall, Daily Caller, October 18, 2016:

A teacher’s union and associated groups are coming out against the FBI campaign to counter radical ideology, saying that it could lead to the singling out of Muslims.

Various groups penned a letter to FBI Director James Comey, declaring that the website made them feel “deeply troubled,” reports The Wall Street Journal.

The website, called “Don’t Be A Puppet,” was advertised for use in schools to teach younger people how to avoid being tempted by radical extremist thought. The website urges students to divulge any suspicious behavior they see to teachers and law enforcement.

The groups, which encompass the American Association of School Administrators and American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, wrote that they believed the website would cause people to view Muslims and Middle Eastern students in a negative light.

The website, introduced last year, functions as a game to teach teenagers how to identify and avoid “violent extremists.”

“The site emphasizes that by blindly accepting radical ideologies, teens are essentially becoming the “puppets” of violent extremists who simply want them to carry out their destructive mission—which often includes targeting or killing innocent people,” the FBI website explains.

Those who disagree with the website took issue with what the website calls warning signs of potential extremist actions. Some of the warning signs include “talking about traveling to places that sound suspicious” and “using code words or unusual language.”

“We know we need to be hyper-vigilant. But there’s a difference between being hyper-vigilant and engaging in racial profiling. This program, while probably well intended, shouldn’t go forward,” the American Federation of Teachers union President Randi Weingarten declared….

Categories: American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, FBI, Islamic terrorism, Islamists in America, Islamophobia, Racial profiling
Tags: American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, FBI, Islamic terrorism, Islamists in America, Islamophobia, Racial profiling

Comments: Be the first to comment

I, Islamophobe?

October 18, 2016

I, Islamophobe? Political Islam, October 18, 2016

A summary at the Political Islam website states,

I have been called an Islamophobe. Now, what does that mean? A phobia is an irrational fear, but what is the Islam I am phobic about? Islam is the doctrine found in the Koran and the Sunna of Mohammed.

What am I afraid of in the Koran? Certainly not anything found in the early Koran of Mecca, since all it says is that I am going to hell, since I am a Kafir. But in Medina the Koran tells me about “fighting in Allah’s cause”, killing Kafirs in jihad. As a Kafir, should I be afraid of jihad? Or is that a phobia?

The Koran says that Allah will terrorize Kafirs. So am I phobic to fear terror? The Koran says that as a Kafir I can be beheaded. I see pictures of Kafirs being beheaded around the world. Should I be afraid or is it phobic to fear beheading?

Reading the Sunna of Mohammed, I find he ordered his critics to be assassinated. Is it phobic to fear assassination?

The Koran says that I can be crucified. Should I fear crucifixion? Or is that phobic?

Mohammed killed each and every person who opposed him. I oppose Islam, which includes the Sunna of Mohammed, should I be afraid or is that phobic?

I am afraid of violence from Islam. Am I reasonable or am I phobic? What about you?

Categories: Islamophobia
Tags: Islamophobia

Comments: Be the first to comment

Another fake hate crime: “No evidence” Muslim child was attacked on bus in NC

October 14, 2016

Another fake hate crime: “No evidence” Muslim child was attacked on bus in NC, Jihad Watch, Robert Spencer, October 14, 2016

Two days ago, the Huffington Post wailed: “Islamophobia Just Drove This Boy And His Family Out Of America.” But yet again there is nothing to it. If Usmani’s claim were true, “They keep beating him all the way from school to home on the bus,” the boy would have suffered extensive injuries, and the bus would have been in an uproar, as anyone who has ever ridden a school bus knows. Instead, “No students who were interviewed witnessed an altercation. The bus driver did not witness an altercation. The child did not report to the bus driver any injury.”

I don’t know how far young Abdul Aziz lives away from school, but look at the photo below. He looks happily unscathed, other than the arm sling: he hardly looks like a boy who has just been beaten all the way home from school. No facial marks whatsoever? No black eye? No fat lip? The beaters were strikingly ineffectual — if, that is, they existed at all, and it looks as if they didn’t.

So here we go again. Hate crimes are political capital. When real ones don’t exist, they must be invented. Hamas-linked CAIR and other Muslims have on many occasions not hesitated to stoop even to fabricating “hate crimes,” including attacks on mosques. A New Jersey Muslim was found guilty of murder that he tried to portray as an “Islamophobic” attack, and in 2014 in California, aMuslim was found guilty of killing his wife, after first blaming her murder on “Islamophobia.”

This kind of thing happens quite frequently. The New York Daily News reported that “a woman who told cops she was called a terrorist and slashed on her cheek in lower Manhattan on Thursday later admitted she made up the story, police said early Friday. The woman, who wore a headscarf, told authorities a blade-wielding wacko sliced open her face as she left a Manhattan cosmetology school, police sources said.”

And recently in Britain, the murder of a popular imam was spread far and wide as another “Islamophobic hate crime” – until his killer also was found to be a Muslim. The Mirror reported that the imam “was targeted because he had made efforts to turn youngsters away from radical Islam.”

According to The Detroit News, a Muslim woman, Saida Chatti, was “charged with making a false police report after she allegedly fabricated a plot to blow up Dearborn Fordson High School to retaliate against the November terrorist attacks in Paris….Police say Chatti called Dearborn investigators Nov. 19, six days after Islamic extremists killed 130 people in Paris.”

And similarly in Britain, a Muslim woman was “fined for lying to police about being attacked for wearing a hijab. The 18-year-old student, known only as Miss Choudhury, said she was violently shoved from behind and punched in the face by a man in Birmingham city centre 10 days after the atrocities in the French capital on November 13.”

Despite school officials’ findings, watch for this one to show up in Hamas-linked CAIR’s “hate crimes” list.

facebook-post-hate-crime-usmani

“Investigators find no evidence Muslim child was attacked on school bus,” by T. Keung Hui, Raleigh News & Observer, October 14, 2016:

The Wake County school system and the Cary Police Department say they haven’t found evidence to back up a Muslim family’s allegations that their 7-year-old son was assaulted by classmates on a school bus last week.

Zeeshan-ul-hassan Usmani says his son Abdul Aziz was bullied and beaten by classmates at Weatherstone Elementary School in Cary while riding home on the bus last Friday because the first-grade student is Muslim.

Usmani’s Facebook post, with the words “Welcome to the United States of America of Donald Trump” and a picture of Abdul Aziz’s left arm in a sling, has sparked worldwide social media and news media attention about Islamophobia.

School and law enforcement officials say they’ve taken the allegations seriously and don’t tolerate bullying. But they say their investigations don’t confirm an assault even occurred.

“At this time, the information from the investigation does not support an altercation,” Weatherstone Principal Tim Chadwick told parents in a letter sent Thursday. “In fact, we are not able to corroborate much of what is described in the release.”

The Cary Police Department has been investigating the allegations as well.

“At this time, nothing has been found, and no police report has been filed,” Cary Town Manager Sean R. Stegall said in a written statement.

After Usmani’s Facebook post, the Council on American-Islamic Relations issued a press release Monday calling on the Wake County school system to investigate the incident.

CAIR’s press release says Abdul Aziz, an American citizen of Pakistani heritage, was reportedly assaulted by five other children the bus who allegedly made references to Islam, Muslims and Pakistan during the attack. CAIR also cited Usmani in saying that his son was “punched in the face, had his arm twisted and was kicked in the stomach.”

In subsequent news articles, Usmani has gone into more detail on the alleged assault.

“These are six and seven year old kids calling him names, with one kid punching him in the face, while two other kids attacked him, kicked him, and held his arms back,” Usmani told BuzzFeed News in an article posted online Tuesday.

“They keep beating him all the way from school to home on the bus,” Usmani also told BuzzFeed, adding that his son was traumatized by the attack and has a sprained arm.

A Huffington Post article originally posted Wednesday adds that Abdul Aziz told his parents a classmate had tried to force him to eat food that wasn’t halal. When Abdul Aziz refused, five of his classmates ganged up on him, making fun of his name. They punched him in the face, kicked him in the stomach, and twisted his arm while calling him “Muslim” again and again, Usmani told the Huffington Post.

Chadwick, Weatherston’s principal, said the district’s ongoing investigation was launched immediately after speaking with the family about their concerns. He said the school’s staff had spent hours over the past several days talking with parents, students and the driver of the bus about the incident.

But based on the investigation, Chadwick said “we don’t have evidence that this particular incident occurred,”

“No students who were interviewed witnessed an altercation,” Chadwick said in the letter to Weatherstone families. “The bus driver did not witness an altercation. The child did not report to the bus driver any injury.”…

Categories: CAIR, Hate crimes, Islamists in America, Islamophobia, Leftist perspectives
Tags: CAIR, Hate crimes, Islamists in America, Islamophobia, Leftist perspectives

Comments: Be the first to comment

This Is Not A Phobia: How the Candidates Could’ve Answered the Debate’s Inevitable “Islamophobia” Question

October 11, 2016

This Is Not A Phobia: How the Candidates Could’ve Answered the Debate’s Inevitable “Islamophobia” Question, Counter Jihad, October 11, 2016

(That this article had to be published says a lot about Obama’s America. And it is not good. — DM)

2016-10-10-15_33_05-donald-trump-hillary-clinton-discuss-muslim-ban-youtube-500x350

An important question came up in Sunday night’s debate. The candidates were more interested in pushing their pre-existing agendas than in answering it. We at CounterJihad would like to propose our own answer.

Here is the question:

GORBAH HAMED: Hi. There are 3.3 million Muslims in the United States, and I’m one of them. You’ve mentioned working with Muslim nations, but with Islamophobia on the rise, how will you help people like me deal with the consequences of being labeled as a threat to the country after the election is over?

In order to provide a proper answer to the question, we must first challenge the idea that there is any sort of “phobia” at work in America’s concerns about Islam. A phobia is anirrational fear. There is nothing irrational in America’s concerns about Islam.

Last year in San Bernardino, a woman left her infant daughter with her mother in order to go and kill for Islam. Thirty-six people were shot in the rampage. Among the dead was Bennetta Betbadal, who had fled an Islam in Iran that persecuted her as a woman and her family as Christians. Her memorial fundraiser said that it “is the ultimate irony that her life would be stolen from her that day by what appears to be the same type of extremism that she fled so many years ago.”

This year, a coordinated series of suicide bombs went off in Brussels, the capital of the European Union. Thirty-two died and over three hundred were injured in the attacks. One of the bombers, Osama Krayem, had as a boy been featured in a movie about the efforts of Sweden to bring Muslims into their culture in a loving and respectful way. The film, ‘Without Borders — A Film About Sport And Integration,’ was meant to showcase how good faith and trust could overcome our differences. Instead, that same boy featured in the film went on to murder our fellows in the name of Islam.

No one believes that all Muslims intend violent jihad, and no one even doubts that the percentage who do is small. Whatever the percentage, though, the raw numbers are enough to provide a steady stream of murderous attacks. Paris suffered two major attacks last year, killing a hundred and fifty and injuring hundreds. Nice saw eighty killed by a truck driver. Orlando saw fifty murdered in a gay nightclub, in the name of the Islamic State (ISIS). Nor are these isolated incidents. The clashes between Islam and other faiths bedevil the world from the insurgency in the southern Philippines to frequent mass murders in Pakistan, and from the slaughter and slavery of ISIS to the slaughter and slavery practiced by Boko Haram.

So first, then: there is no phobia. The concern is rational.

How does one deal with a rational concern? Rationally, of course. We need an organizing principle to govern our response. That principle is the principle of non-coercion in matters of faith, which is more commonly known as the principle of freedom of conscience.

This principle grew in a ground made fertile by blood of Europe’s religious wars. The Thirty Years War savaged central Europe. The French earlier fought a set of religious wars between Protestants and Catholics. The English suppressed Catholicism violently during and after the reign of Henry VIII and his successors, and clashed with Protestants in Scotland especially during the Covenanter movement. The Jacobite wars in Scotland and Ireland also hinged on which religion would dominate the state.

Amid these disasters, a philosopher named John Locke began to promulgate a doctrine that no coercion be used to compel anyone in matters of religious faith. When he wrote of it in 1689 it was still an idea so unacceptable that he only spoke of it in letters and books published anonymously. By 1776, when the American Revolution broke out, it was an idea that had begun to be widely accepted in the British colonies.

It would go on to be codified as one of the core values of our First Amendment, which not only forbids the institution of a Federal religion, but restrictions on the free exercise of faith. It is to this principle that we call all Muslims, and especially those like Hamed who call themselves American Muslims.

We are aware that Islam at times appears to endorse this principle. Al-Baqara 256 is no secret to us. But while many Muslims speak of this principle (saying, “there is no compulsion in religion”), it is clear that the Islamic world in no way lives by it. We do not mean merely ISIS and Boko Haram, who convert or enslave by force. We mean also Iran, which forbids conversion to Christianity or the practice of Christianity by anyone not born into an approved ethnic minority, and which violates the religious freedom of all members of its population under color of law. We mean also that other great nation of Islam, Saudi Arabia, where citizens can be beaten with whips, castrated, or beheaded to enforce ideals of religious law. We mean Indonesia, where beatings in the name of Islam are also known. We mean Pakistan. We mean even US allies like Bahrain.

The principle of non-coercion in matters of religion is what divides the Muslim world between those we need to fear, and those we can welcome as friends. A demonstrated allegiance to the principle of non-coercion in religion is the way to show other Americans that you are not their foe. It requires a clear and verbal oath, to be sure, but that is only the beginning. We need to see in your actions that you are completely committed to this principle, not only for yourselves but for all.

In this way, we will know that you are not one of those who would condemn us to return to the horrors of religious wars. This principle was bought at great cost by America’s ancestors. It was wisely endorsed by America’s Founders. All Americans have a right to insist on it. Join us in this, and then we shall defend each other as Americans.

Categories: Islamic supremacy, Islamic terrorism, Islamophobia, Religious Persecution, Religious wars
Tags: Islamic supremacy, Islamic terrorism, Islamophobia, Religious Persecution, Religious wars

Comments: Be the first to comment

Liberals Wanted to Talk about Islamophobia at the Debate, but the Real Problem is Terrorism

October 10, 2016

Liberals Wanted to Talk about Islamophobia at the Debate, but the Real Problem is Terrorism, Conservative Review, Nate Madden, October 10, 2016

distraction-signs

Amid the tawdry, ad hominem cacophony that was the second presidential debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump were forced to contend with the implications of a supposed “rise in Islamophobia.” However, a quick look at the facts show that the question and implication really need some context.

Sunday night’s debate was, as expected, laden with pro-Clinton bias from moderators Anderson Cooper and Martha Raddatz. However, several of the questions submitted by the randomly-selected panel of undecided voters on the stage also carried the hallmarks of prepared layups for the Democrat nominee.

One such topic in particular, asked by one of the attendees, Gorbah Hamed, put the candidates on the spot about how they would deal with “Islamophobia” as president (per the Washington Post):

There are 3.3 Muslims in the United States and I’m one of them. You’ve mentioned working with Muslim nations, but with Islamophobia on the rise, how will you help people like me deal with the consequences of being a threat to the country after the election is over?

To his credit, Trump bridged the question directly to recent terror attacks, and the importance of Muslims patrolling their own communities. Meanwhile, Clinton criticized Trump’s views on immigration from Muslim-majority nations while hypocritically espousing religious freedom for foreign nationals from those nations, despite her own deplorable positions on free exercise for anyone who disagrees with her views on marriage and abortion.

Furthermore, while Clinton made a very big point of agreeing with Trump’s premise that American Muslims need to be “part of our eyes and ears” on the front lines, and bragged about her work with Muslim groups in the U.S. and how she intends to use that experience to defeat ISIS. But she failed to differentiate how her approach to the Muslim community is going to differ from President Obama’s, whose analogous “countering violent extremism” program has already been found as a “catastrophic failure,” according to a recent report.

But I digress. While the issues of Middle Eastern immigration and jihadist terror in the 2016 election cycle have sparked a chorus of concern from the Left over so-called “Islamophobia,” the concerns ignore reality of how big a threat it actually is.

The question hearkens back to a few weeks ago when the Hamas-and-Muslim-Brotherhood-affiliated Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), said in the wake of a jihadist stabbing that they were afraid of the blowback from the attack.

“We are concerned about the potential for backlash,” CAIR’s Minnesota executive director Jaylani Hussein said, per NBCNews.com, following last month’s Minnesota mall stabbing. “[Muslims] are being made to suffer for [the terrorists’] acts. They are minorities in our faith. Islam is peace.”

Well, here’s the real story about that blowback.

According to FBI data, ACTUAL incidents of Islamophobia pale in comparison to incidents of anti-Semitism in the U.S. Numbers from December indicate that in the previous year saw, 1,140 victims of anti-religious hate crimes, and the rate of Jewish victims was nearly four times that of Muslim victims at a proportion of roughly 57 percent to 16 percent.

Even in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks — the deadliest Islamist attack in American history — 2002 data from the FBI shows that anti-Muslim hate crimes totaled a grand total 174 for the year. These are, of course, dwarfed when compared to the 1,084 cases committed against Jews, and the 237 committed against “other.”

And it doesn’t stop there: America’s college campuses have become seething hotbeds of anti-Jewish activity. Meanwhile, a report from February finds, attacks on free exercise of religion across the board have doubled in the waning years of the Obama administration.

There was no mention of how America’s Jewish population (with nary a notable terrorist attack attached to its name) is under increasing fire — and has been so for years. Furthermore, recent jihadist terror attacks in San Bernardino to Orlando to Manhattan have taken scores of American lives and have left all of our citizens, regardless of their religion, under siege.

Yet, the question that both candidates were forced to contend with is one that clearly targeted the Republican nominee’s focus on the security concerns that mass migration from Muslim-majority countries generates in relation to America’s national security.

When we look at this issue earnestly, the real threat to American Muslims from the specter of Islamophobia are far less than the threats faced by all Americans from the threat of global jihadism. They’re far less than what American Jews have to deal with both on and off the university campus. And they’re far less than what anyone who runs afoul of the government’s views on marriage, abortion, and contraception face on any given day.

Finally, when it comes to the havoc created by ISIS and other terror organizations that commit atrocities in the name of Allah, President Obama and company are quick to point out that most of the victims of jihadist violence around the world are Muslims themselves. But when it comes to the the same threat posed to those on our own soil, such concerns are nowhere to be found. Rather, they find themselves drowned out by those that worry about a so-called “Islamophobia” epidemic rather than the threat faced by every person in the civilized world, Muslims included, when they leave their homes every morning.

What exaggerated concerns about “Islamophobia” actually do, however, is dull, silence, and distract from the message of those who actually voice that there is indeed a centuries-old problem within Islam — that it creates legitimate security concerns, and that these realities have to be addressed in bold and earnest terms. Those terms might hurt someone’s feelings, after all.

In sum, the “Islamophobia” question was endemic of a host of concerns that the Left has thrown at anyone who dare raise questions about the Islamic nature of jihadist terrorism, or about the safety of the Obama administration’s immigration and refugee policies. However, in light of the numbers and the real security threats faced by Muslims and non-Muslims around the world, that the debates chose to focus on “Islamophobia” really ought to be put into context.

Categories: 2016 elections, 2016 presidential debates, CAIR, Countering violent extremism, Donald Trump and Islamist terror, Hillary Clinton and Islamist terror, Islamic refugees, Islamophobia
Tags: CAIR, Countering violent extremism, Donald Trump and Islamist terror, Hillary Clinton and Islamist terror, Islamic refugees, Islamophobia

Comments: Be the first to comment

Soros Money, Muslim Advocates Leader, Helped Weaken Homeland Security Policies

October 7, 2016

Soros Money, Muslim Advocates Leader, Helped Weaken Homeland Security Policies, Investigative Project on Terrorism, John Rossomando, October 7, 2016

(Please see also, Pentagon still unsure of whether to link Islam with violent jihad. — DM)

1855

A Muslim legal group, girded with $1.8 million in grant money from George Soros’s Open Society Foundations (OSF), has helped influence major policy changes in the war on terror, including the Department of Homeland Security’s screening of individuals with suspected terror ties and the FBI’s training program for its agents working in counterterrorism.

Internal records, made public by the hacking group DC Leaks, show OSF spent $40 million between 2008 and 2010 on programs aimed at weakening U.S. counterterrorism policy.

Muslim Advocates’ Executive Director Farhana Khera played a key role in shaping the foundations’ spending. Khera co-authored a 2007 memo that “informed” the foundations’ U.S. Programs Board’s decision to create the National Security and Human Rights Campaign (NSHRC), a Sept. 14, 2010 OSF document discussing the program’s reauthorization, shows.

The NSHRC’s goals included:

Closing Guantanamo Bay, eliminating torture and methods such as the extraordinary rendition of prisoners, and ending the use of secret prisons;

Ending warrantless and “unchecked” surveillance;

Ensuring that anti-terrorism laws and law enforcement activities do not target freedom of speech, association or religious expression;

Reducing ethnic and religious profiling of people of Muslim, Arab or South Asian extraction;

Decreasing secrecy and increasing oversight of executive actions, and expose U.S. government or private individuals who abuse or violate the law.

Some of these policies, such as closing Guantanamo and ending enhanced interrogation techniques, already were also advocated by Obama administration. OSFclaimed its work laid the groundwork for implementing those policies. The Edward Snowden leaks cast light on the depth of the government’s warrantless surveillance activity. The other goals are more difficult to assess.

Muslim Advocates was founded in 2005 as an offshoot of the National Association of Muslim Lawyers. It often criticizes U.S. counterterrorism strategies that use sting operations and informants as discriminatory.

Papers released by the anonymous hacker group DC Leaks show that OSF budgeted $21 million for the NSHRC from 2008-2010. OSF spent an additional $1.5 million in 2010. The NSHRC also received a matching $20 million contribution from Atlantic Philanthropies, a private foundation established in 1982 by Irish-American Chuck Feeney billionaire businessman.

OSF made 105 grants totaling $20,052, 784 to 63 organizations under the NSHRC program. An Investigative Project on Terrorism tally shows Muslim Advocates received at least $1.84 million in OSF grants between 2008 and 2015.

A funders’ roundtable created by OSF in 2008 helped coordinate the grant making among several left-leaning foundations, ” in order to “dismantle the flawed ‘war on terror’ paradigm on which national security policy is now based.” At least “two dozen” foundations participated in the roundtable’s strategy sessions as of the end of 2008.

Zuhdi Jasser, president of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, called the Soros foundations’ $40 million program both hypocritical and ironic. He noted that the2011 OSF-funded Center for American Progress report “Fear, Inc.” complained thatseven conservative foundations donated $42.6 million to so-called “Islamophobia think tanks between 2001 and 2009.” The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and other major Islamist groups routinely use the $42.6 million funding number to portray their opponents as being pawns of dark forces.

“It’s amazing that one foundation donated an amount that CAIR and [Muslim] Advocates say is the huge sum of money that funds the entire anti-jihad campaign,” Jasser said. “… That wasn’t from one foundation. That was an addition of [the money given to] everybody that they threw under the bus.”

By contrast, OSF and Atlantic Philanthropies spent $41.5 million in just three years. OSF dedicated another $26 million to the NSHRC program from 2011-2014.

OSF additionally funded a study by the New America Foundation equating the terror threat posed right-wing extremists with al-Qaida. An Oct. 17, 2011 memo discussing NSHRC grants notes that New America received $250,000, partly to write two reports. The first aimed at creating a “‘safe space’ in which Muslims in America feel free to hold controversial political dialogues, organize without fear of unwarranted government surveillance.” The second aimed to “correct mistaken public beliefs that Al-Qaeda’s brand of terrorism is unique to Islam and that most terrorists are Muslim.”

The paper promised “to show how adherents of each extremist ideology use different language to justify very similar political means and goals. By demonstrating parallels among militant groups, this paper will aim to separate politically focused terrorism from the religion of Islam.”

Arguments from this report continue to help frame how Democrats and their allies talk about the jihadist threat. New America’s statistics and arguments recently came up in a House hearing about the threat from homegrown Islamic terrorists.

“According to the New America Foundation, there have been more incidents of right-wing extremist attacks in the United States than violent jihadist attacks since 9/11. I’m not minimizing jihadist attacks. In that light, can you explain what your office plans to do with respect to domestic right-wing extremism?” Rep. Bill Pascrell, D-N.J., askedDepartment of Homeland Security Office of Community Partnerships Director George Selim during a House subcommittee hearing last month.

New America’s effort to conflate right-wing extremists with al-Qaida glossed over a major difference – namely al-Qaida’s reliance on mass casualty attacks and suicide bombings.

New America’s latest data shows that jihadists have killed more people since 9/11 than right-wing extremists.

“What you’ve uncovered is the fact … that the Soros foundation works to obfuscate on national security,” Jasser said. “Muslim Advocates clearly is a prime example of the sickness in Washington related to dealing with the central reforms necessary to make within the House of Islam.

“You’ll see that the Soros foundation is spending money on organizations that deny the very principles they are defenders of, which are feminism, gay rights, individual rights. Muslim Advocates’ entire bandwidth is spent on attacking the government and blocking any efforts at counterterrorism.”

Muslim Advocates also opposes discussion on reform within the Muslim community and supports those who have theocratic tendencies, Jasser said.

“You have evidence here that the Soros foundation is part and parcel of the reason for the suffocation of moderation voices – reformist voices – in Islam,” Jasser said. “Muslim Advocates really ought to change their name to Islamist Advocates, and what the Soros foundation really is doing is just advocating for Islamists.”

OSF also contributed $150,000 in 2011 and $185,000 in 2012 to a donor advised fund run by Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors. It used this money to pay Hattaway Communications, a consulting firm run by former Hillary Clinton adviser Doug Hattaway, to develop a messaging strategy for Muslim Advocates and similar organizations. Hattaway’s message strategy painted Muslims as victims of American national security policies.

Khera used Hattaway’s strategy to paint the New York Police Department’s mosque surveillance strategy as “discriminatory.”

1856-1

“Their only ‘crime’ is that they are Muslim in America,” Khera wrote in a June 6, 2012 op-ed posted on CNN.com.

OSF funded groups, including Muslim Advocates, the ACLU, and the Center for Constitutional Rights, filed lawsuits challenging the NYPD’s surveillance program as unconstitutional. Police Commissioner William Bratton ended the policy in 2014.

The NYPD monitored almost all aspects of Muslim life ranging from mosques and student associations, to halal butcher shops and restaurants to private citizens. A federal district court dismissed the suit, but the Third Circuit Court of Appeals revived it in October 2015. New York settled the lawsuit in January, placing the NYPD under supervision of an independent observer appointed by City Hall.

Downplaying Radicalization and the Jihadist Threat

OSF accused conservative opponents of “borrowing liberally from Joe McCarthy’s guilt by association tactics.” It complained in a Sept. 14, 2010 memo to its U.S. Programs Board that the “homegrown terrorism narrative” resulted in “discriminatory” targeting of Muslims by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the FBI.

Khera often expresses similar sentiments. She accused the FBI of engaging in “entrapment operations” to target “innocent” Muslims after former Attorney General Eric Holder called sting operations an “essential law enforcement tool in uncovering and preventing terror attacks.”

Khera likewise characterized law enforcement training materials discussing the Islamic extremist ideology as “bigoted, false, and inflammatory” in her June 28 testimony before a Senate Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Oversight, Agency Action, Federal Rights, Federal Courts.

She and her organization played a central role in late 2011 when Muslim groups called on the Obama administration to purge FBI training materials that they deemed offensive. FBI counterterrorism training materials about Islam contained “woefully misinformed statements about Islam and bigoted stereotypes about Muslims,” she complained in a Sept. 15, 2011 letter. She objected to describing zakat – the almsgiving tax mandate on all Muslims – as a “funding mechanism for combat.”

Yet numerous Muslim commentators describe zakat as a funding mechanism for jihad. A footnote for Surah 9:60 found in “The Meaning of the Holy Qur’an,” says that zakat can be used to help “those who are struggling and striving in Allah’s Cause by teaching or fighting or in duties assigned to them by the righteous Imam, who are thus unable to earn their ordinary living.”

The Assembly of Muslim Jurists in America issued a 2011 fatwa saying zakat could be used to “support legitimate Jihad activities.”

Following Khera’s letter, then-White House counterterrorism advisor John Brennan announced a review of “CVE-related instruction across all levels of government.” This review resulted in a purge of 700 pages of material from 300 presentations. Thisincluded PowerPoints and articles describing jihad as “holy war” and portraying the Muslim Brotherhood as group bent on world domination.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s bylaws describe these ultimate ambitions and imply the need for violence: “The Islamic nation must be fully prepared to fight the tyrants and the enemies of Allah as a prelude to establishing an Islamic state.”

Khera’s influence with the Obama administration

Khera enjoys close connections with the Obama White House. Visitor logs show that Khera went to the White House at least 11 times.

Khera played a central role persuading the Obama administration to purge Department of Homeland Security records related to individuals and groups with terror ties, former Customs and Border Patrol (CPB) Agent Phil Haney told the Investigative Project on Terrorism.

His superiors ordered him to “modify” 820 CPB TECS records about the Muslim Brotherhood network in America, Haney said. Irrefutable evidence from the 2008 Holy Land Foundation (HLF) Hamas financing trial proved that many of these groups and individuals assisted Hamas, Haney said.

The HLF trial substantiated deep connections between American Islamist groups such as the Islamic Society of North America, the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and a Hamas-support network created by the Muslim Brotherhood in the United States.

A 2009 OSF funding document claims credit for helping persuade then-Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano to order a review of border screening procedures. It also reveals that Muslim Advocates worked with “DHS staff to develop a revised border policy.”

The Muslim Advocates’ report recommended the “review and reform of … [Customs and Border Patrol policies and practices that target Muslim, Arab and South Asian Americans for their First Amendment protected activities, beliefs and associations; and … law enforcement and intelligence activities that impose disparate impacts on Muslim, Arab and South Asian communities.” It also asked DHS to prevent CPB agents from probing about political beliefs, religious practices, and contributions to “lawful” charitable organizations.

Muslim Advocates claimed a pivotal role in getting the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to reverse a new 2010 policy enhancing the screening on travelers from 14 countries, many of them predominately Muslim. The rule was proposed in the wake of the attempt by underwear bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab to blow up a Detroit-bound plane weeks earlier.

Muslim Advocates and several OSF grantees met with Napolitano and other top DHS officials, and the policy was canceled three months later. Muslim Advocates claimedthat the Obama administration “made special mention” of its role in reversing the TSA policy.

“This broke into the open with the great purge of 2011 and 2012,” Haney said, recalling Brennan’s letter to Khera announcing that materials she complained about would be removed.

The purge accompanied a practice of meeting with Islamist groups as community partners, Haney said.

In addition to the purge of training material, documents related to people and groups with terrorism ties such as Canadian Muslim Brotherhood leader Jamal Badawi and the Pakistan-based Tablighi Jamaat movement also disappeared from CPB records. (Tablighi Jamaat often serves as a de facto recruiting conduit for groups such as al-Qaida and the Taliban.)

Investigators might have had a better chance of thwarting the San Bernardino and the June Orlando shootings had those Tablighi Jamaat records remained available, Haney said, because the shooters’ respective mosques appeared in the deleted 2012 Tablighi Jamaat case report.

The Obama administration’s “absolute refusal to acknowledge that individuals who are affiliated with networks operating here in the United States, and their deliberate deletion of any evidentiary pieces of information in the system, has made us blind and handcuffed,” Haney said. “The proof of it is San Bernardino and Orlando.

“They obliterated the entire [Tablighi Jamaat] case as if it never existed.”

Haney’s claims have met with some skepticism. Haney stands by his claims and says critics “made a lot of factual errors.”

Still, Muslim Advocates’ success reversing the TSA policy was among the accomplishments showing that it “has proved itself to be an effective advocate on the national stage,” an April 25, 2011 OSF document said. It recommended renewing a $440,000 grant to “support the core operating costs of Muslim Advocates.”

In doing so, the Soros-funded OSF weakened U.S. national security and potentially left it vulnerable to the jihadi attacks we have been seeing in the homeland since the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing.

Categories: Countering violent extremism, Department of Homeland Security, George Soros, Islamic reformation, Islamist organizations, Islamists in America, Islamophobia, Law enforcement, Obama and Islam
Tags: Countering violent extremism, Department of Homeland Security, George Soros, Islamic reformation, Islamist organizations, Islamists in America, Islamophobia, Law enforcement, Obama and Islam

Comments: Be the first to comment

Hugh Fitzgerald: Teaching About Islam In Tennessee

October 2, 2016

Hugh Fitzgerald: Teaching About Islam In Tennessee, Jihad Watch, October 2, 2016

A Bangladeshi Muslim student reads the holy Quran at an Islamic school during Ramadan in Dhaka, Bangladesh, Wednesday, June 29, 2016. Muslims throughout the world are marking the holy month of Ramadan, during which they fast from dawn till dusk. (AP Photo/A.M. Ahad)

A Bangladeshi Muslim student reads the holy Quran at an Islamic school during Ramadan in Dhaka, Bangladesh, Wednesday, June 29, 2016. (AP Photo/A.M. Ahad)

For nearly a year some Tennessee parents have been up arms about the teaching of Islam to seventh graders in their public schools. They are disturbed that more attention has been given to “studying” Islam than to Christianity or Judaism. And they especially were upset that the students were asked to recite and write out the Shehada, in a unit on the Five Pillars of Islam: “There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is his prophet.” Some called it “indoctrination.” And the Tennessee State Board of Education, in response, has decided to omit the section “Islamic World, 400 AD/CE-1500s” from the seventh-grade social studies curriculum. Instead, the schools will, in a “streamlined” form, still teach 7^th graders about Islam, but now in a history section titled “Southwest Asia and North Africa: 400-1500s,” and omitting subjects previously taught, such as “the origins of Islam” and “the life of its founder Muhammad.”

It is easy to imagine how this played out in the mainstream press. Tennessee, the buckle on the Bible Belt, where less than a century ago a certain Mr. Scopes was put on trial for teaching evolution, is at it again. A bunch of narrow-minded parents in Maury County, rubes right out of central casting, pitchforks at the ready, have managed to show just what prejudice and Islamophobia can do, and have forced an end to seventh-graders in Tennessee from learning all about the “religion of 1.6 [sic] billion people.” One of the photographs accompanying an article about the parents’ protest shows the hand of a student pointing to a page in an open Qur’an; the caption underneath reads “Parents fear their kids will know too much about this book.”

But was this really a victory for the Know-Nothings, the haters of diversity, the right-wing Christian fundamentalists who don’t want their children to learn anything about the faith of more than a billion people? Or did those parents have a point? And if they had a point, might there be another way of making it?

The teaching of Islam, if done rightly, would not eliminate but, rather, reinforce, any sensible Infidel’s deep doubts about the “religion of peace.” What the students were taught was comically superficial, but they no doubt came away thinking that they had learned something about Islam, and discovered there was nothing to worry about. After all, these are 7^th graders.

They learned that Muslims are monotheists, just like Christians and Jews. A comforting thought. But they did not learn that Muslims are taught to regard those fellow monotheists as the “vilest of creatures,”and Muslims as the “best of peoples.” They did not learn that Islam divides the world uncompromisingly between Muslims and non-Muslims, and that a permanent state of war exists between them, and will continue to exist, until Islam everywhere dominates, and Muslims rule, everywhere. They learned that, as one of the fill-in-the-blank questions given to them asked, “the Muslim word for God is Allah.” But they did not learn that the Muslim God is different in almost every respect from the Christian one. They did not learn that the expression “Allahu akbar” does not mean that “God is great,” but that “Our Muslim God is greater than yours,” and that it is a war-cry.

They did learn to write down the Five Pillars of Islam: Shehada, Salat, Zakat, Sawm, Hajj, but what did they find out about what those words mean?

They not only wrote out but recited the Shehada, the declaration of the Oneness of God: “There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.” They learned that the Shehada is what non-Muslims recite in order to become Muslims, to join the faith, the community, the umma of Islam. But they were not told that once you become a Muslim, you can’t get out, that the punishment in Islam for apostasy is death. So these American kids recite and write out the Shehada in class, you can imagine with what naïve solemnity (or on the playground, as they talk about it later, hilarity), and begin to think that “Wow, I could be a Muslim now if I wanted” or at home, reciting it to annoy their parents, “See Ma, I said it and nothing happened. I didn’t turn into a terrorist, I didn’t start throwing bombs. Chillax.” The parents are annoyed, of course, but do not think to ask their children if they realize why anyone can become a Muslim merely by reciting the Shehada, when to become a Christian or a Jew requires extensive study. The reason, they could tell their children if they knew it themselves, is that Muslims want to make it easy for non-Muslims to convert, for these converts are seen not so much as individuals learning about, and wrestling with, theological matters of moment, but regarded more like recruits to an army – just recite here — the Army of Islam.

When the students were taught about the Second Pillar of Islam, Salat, they learned that it is the ritual prayer said five times a day by all Muslims. They may have been impressed with how devoted Muslims must be. But they did not learn the contents of those prayers. How many Americans know that every Muslim, in saying his daily prayers, is denouncing the Kuffar – Christians and Jews — seventeen times a day? Do you think the teachers in Tennessee knew this? Do you think, if they learned it, they would dare to mention it to their classes? Wouldn’t that get them in trouble with a cheerfully denying local member of CAIR (“who told you this nonsense”?), or with some self-righteous journalist who insists that this cannot possibly be true, it’s one more Islamophobic canard? Of course it would.

Of what conceivable value is memorizing the word “Salat” and learning “Muslims pray five times a day” unless students find out what those prayers contain, and especially what they say about Infidels? As with the Shehada, something very important has been left out.

Robert Spencer explains what is in the five canonical prayers:

In the course of praying the requisite five prayers a day, an observant Muslim will recite the Fatihah, the first surah of the Qur’an and the most common prayer in Islam, seventeen times. The final two verses of the Fatihah ask Allah: “Show us the straight path, the path of those whom Thou hast favoured; not the (path) of those who earn Thine anger nor of those who go astray.” The traditional Islamic understanding of this is that the “straight path” is Islam — cf. Islamic apologist John Esposito’s bookIslam: The Straight Path. The path of those who have earned Allah’s anger are the Jews, and those who have gone astray are the Christians.

This is not my interpretation; it comes from the classic Islamic commentaries on the Qur’an. The renowned Qur’anic commentator Ibn Kathir explains that “the two paths He described here are both misguided,” and that those “two paths are the paths of the Christians and Jews, a fact that the believer should beware of so that he avoids them.The path of the believers is knowledge of the truth and abiding by it. In comparison, the Jews abandoned practicing the religion, while the Christians lost the true knowledge. This is why ‘anger’ descended upon the Jews, while being described as ‘led astray’ is more appropriate of the Christians.”

Students learn that Zakat is the charitable giving required of Muslims. Admirable, they think, good for Muslims. But what is not said is that in the giving of Zakat, the recipients of that charity are only other Muslims. It would make no sense for Muslims to support those who have not accepted Islam. As Quran 8:55 puts it: “Surely the vilest of animals in Allah’s sight are those who disbelieve” And the Quran (28:86) adds: “Never be a helper to the unbelievers.” The Quran (48:29) also says: “Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves.”

How many of those students in Tennessee do you think were told that “Zakat” can only go to fellow Muslims? Or, even more unlikely, how many might have had that practice explained to them by reference to 8:55 and 28:86 and 48:29? Why none, of course. The students will learn, and their teachers too may well think, that Muslims are unusually generous because one of Islam’s Pillars is this required giving of alms. But the alms are only intended to support and promote Muslims, not to help humanity.

The last two pillars – Sawn and Hajj — are in themselves inoffensive. But piquant details connected to their observance could have been added.

Sawm is the dawn-to-dusk fasting, during the month of Ramadan. Some liken it to Lent, though it requires refraining, during the day, from food altogether, and not, as for Christians at Lent, giving up this or that pleasurable practice (e.g., drinking wine, smoking, eating a particular food). Do you think the students knew that Ramadan is associated with an upsurge in violence by Muslims? Or learned that Muslims have been known to attack, and even kill, Infidels for eating during Ramadan?

Hajj is the fifth pillar of Islam. Muslims are required to make, at least once in their lives, the pilgrimage to Mecca, to circumambulate the Ka’aba seven times widdershins, and perform certain other rituals, such as the flinging of pebbles at the Devil, represented by three pillars in Mina. Muslims of every race and sect, make the hajj. But beneath the outward display of unity, sectarian strife continues, even in regard to the hajj. The Iranian government, for example, this year did not permit its own citizens to make the hajj, as a way of expressing displeasure with the Saudis. And the Saudis have always forbidden Ahmadis, whom they regard as not real Muslims, from making the hajj. Was any of this mentioned?

The objection to the teaching about Islam should not have been that students learn too much about Islam, but that they learn too little. The recital of the Shehada, as we noted above, is a quick and easy way to swell Muslim ranks. But having these American students recite the Shehada, and merely pretend to “be Muslims,” is not without consequences. They may have imprinted on their young brains an impression of a harmless Islam that later will be hard to dislodge. Some people think, for example, that Obama’s memories of being a child in Indonesia, where he was taken with the muezzin’s call to prayer (“the call to prayer is “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset”) may partly explain his consistently sympathetic – and wildly inaccurate – descriptions of Islam.

But what else has been left out? Why, in what is effectively an “Introduction to Islam” unit, was the duty of Jihad apparently not mentioned? Shouldn’t Islam be described properly as a “fighting faith”? How did Islam spread, so rapidly, across North Africa, and through the Middle East? What happened to the many non-Muslim peoples subjugated by conquering Muslims? And if Jihad was mentioned after all, was the word glossed as “an internal struggle to be a better Muslim” or as what it is, a real war for territory, to enlarge Dar al-Islam, and to subdue the Infidel? Of course not.

We are told that the “life of Muhammad” was taught to students in Tennessee. But what about his life was taught? That he raided camel caravans, and received messages from Allah through the angel Gabriel? Do you think the students were also told that he took part in dozens of military campaigns? That he observed with pleasure the decapitation of several hundred bound prisoners? That he led a raid, for women and loot, on the inoffensive Jewish farmers of the Khaybar Oasis? That he consummated his marriage to little Aisha when she was nine years old? That he was delighted when his followers killed Asma bint Marwan and Abu ‘Afak for mocking him? That – despite or because of this record — Muhammad is considered the Model of Conduct (“uswa hasana”) and Perfect Man (“al-insan al-kamil”) for all Muslims, and for all time? Parents should demand not that the life of Muhammad be omitted from the curriculum, but that it be taught in greater detail.

If you are not Muslim, what would you most want to know about Islam? Surely you would want to find out what is said about non-Muslims in the Qur’an and Hadith. Students should not be shielded from the many passages in the Qur’an that denounce the Unbelievers; they have a right to know, and teachers a duty to teach, this aspect of Islam, rather than have it remain unremarked, or deliberately hidden. It is not too late for the parents to draw up their own syllabus, one that they should make public, in order to force discussion of all of these unpleasant but indispensable matters. Instead of allowing themselves to be caricatured as the “parents who fear their kids will know too much about this book”— the Qur’an — the parents in Tennessee might consider demanding a fuller study of Islam in the schools, “because we want our children to be able to answer such questions as these”: Why is it so easy to convert to Islam by reciting the Shehada? And why is it so hard – and so dangerous — to leave Islam? Why is Zakat limited only to other Muslims? Why, in the five required daily prayers, is an imprecation against Jews and Christians repeated seventeen times? Why does Islam still permit slavery? Who are the “vilest of creatures”? Who are the “best of peoples”? Who was Aisha? Who was Asma bint Marwan? What is “Jihad”? What is a “dhimmi”? What is “jizyah”?

That’s a start.

What can CAIR and its willing collaborators respond?

Categories: Islamic indoctrination of children, Islamist organizations, Islamists and the media, Islamists in America, Islamophobia, Quran
Tags: Islamic indoctrination of children, Islamist organizations, Islamists and the media, Islamists in America, Islamophobia, Quran

Comments: Be the first to comment

George Soros network pushed “Islamophobia” propaganda after San Bernardino jihad massacre

September 30, 2016

George Soros network pushed “Islamophobia” propaganda after San Bernardino jihad massacre, Jihad Watch, Robert Spencer, September 29, 2016

“ReThink Media, funded in part through NSHR grantee the Security and Rights Collaborative, distributed a set of talking points to organizations working to combat Islamophobia and arranging a series of conference calls to discuss messaging and crisis communications tactics.”

For years I have wondered why every single mainstream media reporter I have ever encountered was completely in the tank for the “Islamophobia” myth, and wholly unconcerned about jihad terrorism. Now we know why: they were bought and paid for. These revelations should bring the whole elite media superstructure tumbling down. It won’t, but every new push brings it closer to collapse.

soros-1

“Hacked Memos: George Soros Network Hyped ‘Islamophobia’ After Muslim Terror Attacks,” by Aaron Klein, Breitbart, September 28, 2016:

NEW YORK – In the wake of Islamic terrorist attacks in the U.S. and abroad, grantees of George Soros’s Open Society Foundations mobilized to counter anti-refugee and anti-Muslim immigration sentiment while using the attacks to push gun control and advocate against the surveillance of Muslims in major U.S. cities such as New York.

Hacked Foundations memos reviewed by Breitbart Jerusalem betray the symbiotic relationship between Soros’ grantees and prominent politicians, including Attorney General Loretta Lynch, in working to push these agendas.

One December 3, 2015 document, titled “Aftermath of ISIS attacks,” outlined a network of grantees that immediately sprung to action pushing specific policy agendas immediately after the December 2, 2015 terrorist attack in San Bernardino, California.

“Anticipating a backlash against Muslims, advocates swung into high gear,” the memo relates.

The grantee actions included attacks on those who spoke against immigration from Islamic countries, a push for gun control, and a speech by Attorney General Lynch at the annual dinner of a grantee, Muslim Advocates.

Here are some actions, as cited in the document:

*ReThink Media, funded in part through NSHR grantee the Security and Rights Collaborative, distributed a set of talking points to organizations working to combat Islamophobia and arranging a series of conference calls to discuss messaging and crisis communications tactics.

*Muslim Advocates was set to host a conversation with Attorney General Loretta Lynch on efforts to battle hate speech and anti-Muslim discrimination at its annual dinner in Washington DC.

* Advocates of greater gun control took to Twitter, chiding the parade of politicians who sent “thoughts and prayers” without taking concrete steps to improve public safety. The Center for American Progress convened calls on mass gun violence—one of a number of efforts to follow through on President Obama’s exhortation to revive efforts to enact new controls, such as universal background checks or a ban on assault rifles.

* The National Security Network released a new policy report entitled Mainstreaming Hate: The Far-Right Fringe Origins of Islamophobic and Anti-Refugee Politics in their handling of the Syrian refugee resettlement.

* The Refugee Council USA and some of its members issued calls to action to safeguard the Syrian refugee resettlement program.

After the Lynch event, a second Foundations’ memo boasted, “Appearing at the annual dinner hosted by grantee Muslim Advocates, Attorney General Loretta Lynch vowed that her department would vigorously investigate claims of hate speech that could lead to anti-Muslim violence.”

The first document relates a specific rapid response deployment of Foundations grantees to combat calls for restrictions on the visa waiver program after it was made public that Tashfeen Malik, one of the San Bernardino attackers, passed three background checks by U.S. immigration officials and was granted a K-1 visa to immigrate from Pakistan as the fiance of attacker Syed Rizwan Farook.

The document reveals:

Following the San Bernardino shootings in December by a U.S. citizen and his Pakistani spouse, there were additional proposals to limit the immigration of foreign nationals from specific Muslim countries, including restrictions on the visa waiver program.

US Programs’ Reserve Fund request, already in pipeline since the Syrian refugee crisis erupted last summer, received tentative approval. This request, which includes both c3 and c4 components, will provide communications capacity and advocacy support to refugee groups. It will also bolster immigrant rights groups’ ability to respond to anti-Muslim and anti-refugee rhetoric, which has been prominent in the race for the Republican 2016 presidential nomination.

The issue of refugee resettlement is central to the Open Society Foundations’ domestic aims. As recently reported by Breitbart News, hacked Soros documents state that the billionaire and his foundation helped to successfully press the Obama administration into increasing to 100,000 the total number of refugees taken in by the U.S. annually. The documents reveal that the billionaire personally sent President Obama a letter on the issue of accepting refugees.

Meanwhile, another document, titled, “ISIS Attacks Aftermath” and dated November 17, 2015, lamented that “Tuesday brought a more concerted effort to push back against efforts, fueled by key leaders in Congress and governors in over half the states, to bar Syrian refugees from resettlement in whole swaths of the U.S.”

According to that memo, among the prescriptions from grantees was:

Cities United for Immigration Action, a coalition of nearly 100 mayors, municipalities and counties organized by New York City’s Bill de Blasio, sought to counter the wave of governors opposed to allowing in Syrian refugees with a message of welcome and inclusion. “We should not close our borders to any group of people fleeing the atrocities and horrors of terrorism,” said Mayor de Blasio.

Yet another document listing grantee response to Islamic State attacks, dated January 7, 2016, addressed grantee opposition activism to the domestic surveillance of Muslims. The actions, the document states, included a lawsuit “contesting the NYPD’s surveillance of Muslims in New Jersey, brought by grantees Muslim Advocates and the Center for Constitutional Rights.”

Categories: Department of Justice, George Soros, Islamic refugees, Islamophobia, Obama and Islamic refugees, San Bernardino CA Islamic attack
Tags: Department of Justice, George Soros, Islamic refugees, Islamophobia, Obama and Islamic refugees, San Bernardino CA Islamic attack

Comments: Be the first to comment

Canadian Red Cross Outsources Guide for Refugees to CAIR

September 28, 2016

Canadian Red Cross Outsources Guide for Refugees to CAIR, Clarion Project, John Goddard, September 28, 2016

canada-red-cross-booklet-hp

Photo: images from the teacher’s guide

The Canadian Red Cross has funded a teachers’ guide depicting Canadian society as practicing a “terrorist ideology of hate” against Muslims.

The guide, written ostensibly to coach teachers on how to help Syrian refugee children adapt, suggests that “hate,” “discrimination” and “Islamophobia” amount to a terrorist ideology, and that non-Muslim Canadians are its perpetrators. The solution is Islam, the guide says.

“The core values and central tenants of Islam are immutable,” it says, “and are the best counter-narrative to the terrorist ideology of hate.”

The Red Cross is expressing vague misgivings about the publication.

“The original intention… was to provide educators with a resource to help children deal with cultural transition and possible trauma due to war and significant cultural change,” the charity’s spokesperson said in an interview. “In our view, the majority of the publication achieves its intended purpose, but there are specific areas that we don’t feel fit with its original intention.”

To produce the booklet, the Red Cross gave $3,000 from its “Syrian refugee resettlement fund” to the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM), formerly CAIR-Canada. The group changed its name three years ago after its parent organization, the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), was repeatedly shown to have ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas.

Canada has accepted 31,000 Syrian refugees in the past year, but the guide shows less concern for refugee children than for “Canadian Muslim youth.” The word “refugees” does not even appear in the title, “A Guide for Educators: Helping Students Deal with Trauma Related to Geopolitical Violence & Islamophobia.”

The 16-page booklet portrays Muslim youth as under attack not from Islamic State terrorists or President Bashar al-Assad’s Syrian forces, but from non-Muslim Canadians.

“To constantly feel under attack, to have to defend one’s faith, and to be continuously called upon to condemn the actions of criminals and terrorists is emotionally traumatic,” the booklet says.

The word “trauma” appears often, mostly referring to Muslim life in Canada. “Trauma can be related to historical events such as the history of colonization,” the guide says. And: “Being marginalized and categorized as ‘the other’… can be traumatic.”

The guide includes specific tips for teachers. One is to examine oneself for anti-Muslim bias — “recognize your own judgments and biases.” Another is to let Muslims proselytize in schools — “provide space for Muslim students to speak to their peers about their faith.”

In italics, the tip sheet says: “Care should be taken by teachers on the language and tone they take when discussing world events and the Islamic faith.”

TV commentator Ezra Levant put the last point in plainer language. “This is an instruction to anybody working in the school system to shut-up about Islam — it is a favored religion,” he said last week on his online news channel, The Rebel.

The self-described conservative channel sent the Red Cross more than $25,000 this summer to help with forest-fire relief in Fort McMurray, Alberta, but will never donate to the Red Cross again, Levant told viewers of The Ezra Levant Show.

“I think the Red Cross should withdraw its support [for the booklet] and apologize to Canadians,” he said.

Two years ago, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police abruptly cut its collaboration with the NCCM on a “United Against Terrorism” guide. The police force “could not support the adversarial tone” of the booklet, they said.

The Red Cross said its specific objections to the teachers’ booklet include three reprinted op-ed pieces. One is by the head of the Winnipeg-based Islamic Social Services Association, a partner on the booklet, comparing the circumstances of Canadian Muslims to that of Japanese-Canadians interned during World War Two.

“We are in discussions with the organization that produced the publication,” the Red Cross spokesperson said. “I’m not sure what the end result will be.”

Another collaborator on the guidebook was the Canadian Human Rights Commission, an ostensibly neutral federal government body, which “translated the booklet into French to reach a broader audience,” a spokesperson said.

Two years ago, the NCCM sued then-Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his press secretary for libel when the press secretary referred to NCCM as “an organization with documented ties to a terrorist organization such as Hamas.” The case is still before the courts.

Categories: CAIR, Canada, Islam - submission, Islamic indoctrination of children, Islamic terrorism, Islamisation, Islamist organizations, Islamists in Canada, Islamophobia
Tags: CAIR, Canada, Islam - submission, Islamic indoctrination of children, Islamic terrorism, Islamisation, Islamist organizations, Islamists in Canada, Islamophobia

Comments: Be the first to comment

Archives