Posted tagged ‘Religion’

Satire | Three cheers for Terroristine

October 1, 2015

Three cheers for Terroristine, Sultan Knish Blog, Daniel Greenfield, October 1, 2015

(He refers, of course, to “Palestine.” — DM)

We need a terrorist state. Where the politicians are terrorists, the police are terrorists and even the men sitting at the desk when you come in to drop off a form are terrorists.


There are states that support terrorists, and give safe harbor to them, but that’s not good enough. We don’t want another Pakistan or Iran. We’re not half-assing it this time. What we want is the genuine article. Terrorists from the top down. Terrorists everywhere. A state where every branch of government and the entire country is nothing but terrorists.

Terroristine has been an ancient dream since 1973 or was it 1967. A generation of keffiyah draped thugs, KGB operatives and human rights activists have looked out into the darkness and called it into being. It is a vision of a country where everyone is a murderer and children are taught from a very young age that their purpose in life is to die killing people who don’t share their religion.

And now after decades of negotiations, treaties, suicide bombings, mutilations, billions of dollars in vanishing into Swiss bank accounts and the death of its Egyptian born leader of AIDS– Terroristine is closer than ever to coming into being.

Abbas, its unelected dictator, who has struggled long and hard so that one of his sons might have his own cigarette monopoly in Gaza, has come to the UN to promise that Terroristine will have “will actively contribute to the achievement of economic, cultural, and humanitarian progress of civilization.”

And who can doubt him? Certainly not Terroristinians who don’t have elections or a free press.

Terroristine, whose noble flag (that looks like nearly every other Arab flag) flies over the UN, has done wonders for civilization. Consider the airplane hijacking. The suicide bomber. Has there ever been a civilization that did as much for civilized living as the Terroristinians?

Every time you get groped at an airport, thank Terroristine. Without the Terroristinian contribution to civilization, you might actually be able to get on a plane in peace. Or visit the Twin Towers.

The Terroristinian contribution to human progress is unquestionable. But only one thing stands in the way of it unleashing its full Terroristinian potential for all mankind.

Them. Those pesky people who live in that country that is always in the way. You know the ones, with too many Nobel prizes, newly invented tomatoes and microchips. They stand in the way of the great cultural contributions of Terroristine. They must die so that Terroristine must live.

They must be thrown out of their homes, village by village and city by city, so that the noble Terroristinians can plant their rockets on the rubble of their houses, the charred remains of their fields, and point them at their cities.

Trying to end terrorism by creating a terrorist state makes is like trying to put out a fire with more fire. It can’t work, but we must try. So that we can say that we tried. Over and over again. We’ll keep trying until we run out of land to try with. And people to try with.

Until there’s nothing left but Terroristines everywhere. Until all the world is Terroristine. The question is can we make it happen? Yes, we can. Oh sweet Allah, yes we can.

Israel must return to the 1967 borders, which are really the 1948 borders. Why are the borders of the 1948 war, so much better than the borders of the Six Day War? Because the Terroristinians came closer to winning that war. Came closer to driving the Yahood into the sea and ululating over miles  of their corpses.


But the dream failed. Farmers armed with outdated rifles. Volunteer pilots from America and Canada. Refitted cargo ships filled with half-dead men, women and children straight from the camps. Used Czech artillery. They held off the armies of seven Terroristinian nations. Farm by farm, they stood off tanks and infantry. In Jerusalem, they fought for every house. And so the Zionist entity survived.

Allah curse them. They survived.

But now it’s back to 1948 again. Every war undone. Every defeat turned to victory. Cut Jerusalem in two. Drive out the farmers. Burn their land. Dig up their graves. March the borders back to 1948. And fly the Terroristinian flag over dust and rubble. Had they won in 1948 or 1967 or 1973, there would be no Israel and no Terroristine. The land would have become part of Syria, Egypt and Jordan. And only when the mobs of the faithful would drive out the tyrants to replace them with Islamic states, would there finally be a Terroristine.

But despite what Abbas says, there is still hope for a two state solution. And we must do everything in our power to salvage the two state solution so that there will be a state of civilization on one side and a state of terrorists on the other. Hospitals here, launching pads there. Schools here, bomb factories there. Life here, death here. We all know the story. Olive trees and bomb belts. Rocks and dead families in burning cars by the side of the road. Children with their throats cut.

A dream. A nightmare. Who even knows anymore.

Why do we need Terroristine? Peace. There can be no peace without a terrorist state. Not a chance of it. The only way we’ll ever have peace is to give the terrorists a country of their own. A country dedicated to terrorism. Only then will the Terroristinians finally give up on all the killing, and dedicate themselves to medical research, quantum mechanics and the arts. It hasn’t happened yet to. But it’s bound to.

After decades as an autonomous territory, spreading death and destruction, it’s time for Terroristine to finally be recognized as an independent state. With contiguous borders cutting Israel in half. It is the only hope for peace in the region. Would Sunnis and Shiites be killing each other from Yemen to Iraq? Assuredly not. The moment the flag of Terroristine rises above the wounded hills, and its peaceful anthem, “Palestine is My Revenge” is heard in the land, then a great echoing sigh will rise up from the mouths of one billion Muslims. And the violence will cease.

The international community is impatient. They want Terroristine and they want it now. Whatever Israel has offered in the past, it isn’t enough. It must offer more and more. Whatever it takes. We know the Terroristinians want their own state. Every time they walk out of negotiations or end them with a round of terrorist attacks, it shows their deep and abiding passion for a state. They want it so badly they aren’t willing to make a single concession for it. Or even negotiate for it.

That’s how committed they are to realizing their great dream to Terroristine. And who can blame them? Have any people suffered the way the Terroristinians have? (Besides all the people the Terroristinians have killed over the last 1,400 years.) Have any other people been wholly subsidized by a UN agency dedicated only to them? Have any other people inspired such a stylish fashion statement? No more excuses. The world demands Terroristine. Middle East peace demands Terroristine.

How much longer can Israel expect to draw out the necessary concessions with weak justifications about terrorism. We know they’re terrorists. That’s why we’re giving them a state. If they weren’t terrorists, they could go to the back of the line with the Jews, Kurds and Armenians.

From one corner of the Muslim world to the other, a cry goes out. “We Are All Terroristinians.” They cry it it Cairo and Damascus, in Tehran and Islamabad, in Dubai and Paris. They mosques go up, the asses go up and the bombs go off. And off to the peace negotiations we go.

Islam will dominate the world

Everyone is impatient. Everyone is on fire. Especially the Terroristinians. Jewish store windows are smashed in London, Terroristinians butcher Rabbis in Jerusalem synagogues, fuming Terroristinians shoot up American recruiting centers. And the crowds cheer. “We Are All Terroristinians Now.”

It is a great day, I tell you. A great day for negotiating. ISIS impatiently beheads infidels to create its own Islamic Terroristine. In Afghanistan the word goes out, “We are the Taliban, we are the Afghan people, we are Terroristinians.” In Egypt and Turkey, they cry, “Khaybar Ya Yahood”. Churches burn. Soldiers die. The smoke rises to heaven. A man waits in line at the airport. His passport is Dutch, Welsh, German, American, it doesn’t matter. He is a Terroristinian. Yallah.

One day the borders of Terroristine will stretch from Spain to Pakistan. Or beyond Why settle for Jerusalem, when we can have London, Paris and Hamburg too. Why settle for anything at all? Allah is generous to the believers. Our people are in Africa. Even China. The Great Satan himself bows toward Mecca. The old governments are falling. The pawns of the Kufir are fleeing before our eyes.

We are all Terroristinians now. There is no other book on our shelves than the Koran. No law but Sharia in our hearts. And no nation but Terroristine. The ghost of Chamberlain stands outside No. 10 Downing Street promising peace. A Terroristinian refugee beheads him and holds up his spectral head to the cheers of the crowd. Rockets sail through the sky. The crowd cheers. Hip Hip Hooray. Hierosylma Est Perdita. Three cheers for Terroristine.

Swedes’ Homes May Be Confiscated to Accommodate Asylum Seekers

September 25, 2015

Swedes’ Homes May Be Confiscated to Accommodate Asylum Seekers, Gatestone InstituteIngrid Carlqvist, September 25, 2015

(Possible confiscation of homes is only a minor part of the story. The rest is worse. — DM)

Translation of the original text: Svenskarnas bostäder kan konfiskeras till förmån för asylsökande.

  • In 1992, the “Threat and Risk Assessment Commission” established that the government should have the option to seize property, especially summer homes, from the Swedish people in a time of crisis.
  • Despite Sayadi’s commission of three rapes and his sexual molestation of young girls, as well as his systematic criminal activity, he received only a four-year prison sentence, and will not have to face deportation.
  • Husein wants a Swedish passport so he can go back to Somalia, the country he claims to have escaped from — to “visit his mom and establish business contacts.”
  • “The situation affects everyone who lives and stays in our little county. The climate has grown tougher, many people feel scared and unsafe and with that comes the risk of increased xenophobia, antagonism and exclusion.” — From a letter to the government from Örkelljunga County leaders. The county swiftly received criticism from the mainstream media, and the Immigration Service let it be known that they have no intention of helping Örkelljunga.

August 3: Ahmad El-Moghrabi, 21, who has no driver’s license, was indicted for driving like a madman through the city of Malmö in February, and nearly killing a mother and baby. On February 11, he drove a luxury Mercedes at high speed, with some other Arab men as passengers, one of whom is a well-known extremist, when the police tried to pull the car over. Instead of stopping, El-Moghrabi sped away at about 150 km/h on the busy inner city street of Amiralsgatan, where the speed limit is 40 km/h.

The police chase ended when El-Moghrabi hit some parked cars. Three people were injured, and the mother and baby sustained life-threatening injuries after being crushed between the cars.

El-Moghrabi fled the scene, but was apprehended later. He has been charged with gross negligence, grievous bodily harm, fleeing the scene of an accident, and driving without a license. His own explanation to the rampage was that he did not want to be caught by the police, as his license had been revoked.

August 3: It was reported that 2000 third-world immigrants are seeking asylum in Sweden — each week. The largest groups were Syrians, then Afghans, stateless people, Eritreans and Somalis. The Immigration Service now reports that there are close to 50,000 asylum seekers living in various housing and rental facilities, and more are on their way to a country that already suffers from a major housing shortage.

The question is: Where will they live? More and more people are now worrying that the government will confiscate the homes of Swedes and give them to asylum seekers. In 1992, the “Threat and Risk Assessment Commission” (Hot- och riskutredningen) established that the government should have the option to seize property, especially summer homes, from the Swedish people in a time of crisis. In early September, editorial columnist Anna Dahlberg ofExpressen, one of Sweden’s largest dailies, urged Swedes to “make way” and “hand over the keys to their apartments to those in greater need.”

August 3: Another shooting took place in the violence-stricken city of Malmö. No one was hurt this time, but the police found empty shell casings on Rasmusgatan Street in the Seved area, one of Malmö’s “no go-zones,” where a majority of the inhabitants are of foreign descent. The area is known for its open drug trade, and over the last few years, a large number of shootings and grenade attacks have occurred there. (On June 12, a hand grenade was thrown, and four people were wounded.) In an attempt to bring down the crime rate, local authorities gave the police permission on August 12 to place four cameras in the area to film events around the clock.

August 5: The Stockholm police department caused an uproar with a shocking story about everyday life in immigrant-heavy suburbs such as Tensta-Rinkeby, Hjulsta, Kista and Husby. Youth gangs regularly attack police by using lasers to blind them, and throwing rocks and firebombs. Criminal gangs resolve conflicts by shooting at each other in public places, risking the lives of innocent people who may be in their way. Police officer Nikolina Bucht wrote in a columnin the daily Svenska Dagbladet that it is time to “take back the area from the criminals and protect all the respectable people who have their neighborhoods destroyed, their cars set on fire and feel unsafe.” She wrote:

“Last week my colleagues got a call about a sudden cardiac arrest in Rinkeby. … When they arrive at the scene, they are met by about ten young people who are provoked by their mere presence, turn aggressive and mask their faces. The police are forced to focus on the rock throwing instead of going up to the apartment and starting CPR. He had to wait for several minutes extra before he got help, time that could have saved his life. This was not an isolated event.”

August 7: A Somali refugee, Mohamed Husein, complained he has not yet received a Swedish citizenship. Somalis must wait three years longer than others for citizenship, as they cannot prove their identity. Husein wants a Swedish passport so he can go back to the country he claims to have escaped from — to “visit his mom and establish business contacts.”

August 10: It was reported that a 15-year-old pregnant girl, who six weeks prior traveled with her boyfriend to Syria, had been captured by the Islamic State (ISIS). How the girl managed to travel without a passport or identification papers remains a mystery. Swedish media made no effort to sort out why she would object to living with ISIS. Her boyfriend is reported to have joined an al-Qaeda-affiliated group.

August 11: The law journal Dagens Juridik reported that a 19-year-old girl was taken into custody, in accordance with the LVU law (“Care of Young Persons Special Provisions Act”), after her family threatened to subject her to honor violence. Social service workers on the island of Gotland applied for “administered care” after the girl, in spite of threats, had escaped from the shelter where she was living and moved back with her family. The court stated that the investigation showed that the girl’s desire to return is rooted in her upbringing, which has taught her that the honor of the family is more important than her individual rights. She may also feel guilt, because she thinks she is dishonoring the family by not being with them. According to the court, the girl’s behavior should be considered socially disruptive under the definition of the LVU law, and therefore, she needs to be protected.

August 14: Two men, 21 and 26 years of age, were remanded, suspected of two of the many recent hand grenade attacks in Malmö. At the same time, another 26-year-old was remanded for attempted murder and possession of an illegal weapon, both of which occurred in Rasmusgatan, in Malmö’s “no-go” Seved neighborhood.

Early that morning, police also discovered two hand grenades in Adelgatan, in central Malmö. One had exploded, and the other one failed to work. A large area was barricaded and several buildings had to be evacuated. The police suspected the incident could be linked to a car bomb that had detonated in Malmö two days earlier. Malmö has experienced the most bomb attacks of all Scandinavian cities: this year alone, 20 bombings have taken place.

August 12: A 43-year-old Iranian citizen, Ramin Sayadi, was sentenced to four years in prison for three rapes and two counts of sexual molestation of young girls. Sayadi also sold the girls large quantities of prescription narcotics such as Tramadol, Ritalin and Subutex. The police investigation showed that he had close to 1,000 customers. When the girls became addicted to the drugs, he took advantage of them sexually. The police believe there are many more victims who have not come forward. Detective inspector Jan-Åke Stendahl told daily Göteborgs-Postenthat the man had over 200 contacts listed in his mobile phone, and a majority of the numbers belonged to young girls. Sayadi was caught in May of last year, walking around Gothenburg’s central station trawling for customers.

Despite his systematic criminal activity, he received only a four-year prison sentence, and will not have to face deportation.

August 14: A so-called unaccompanied refugee child was prosecuted on rape charges. The act took place on the night of January 10, in a youth home in Västerbotten in northern Sweden. The suspect is a native of Afghanistan and claims to be 17 years old. The police believe he raped the woman when she was in a drunken stupor, and therefore in what the law calls a “particularly vulnerable situation.”

August 17: The police issued an international arrest warrant for a Congolese citizen, Loran Guy Mogi, 23, wanted for the murder of his ex-girlfriend, Therese Eriksson, 23, of Vårgårda. Eriksson had been found dead four days earlier in Mogi’s apartment, but he had fled the scene. She was killed by blows to the head and body. After a week on the run, Loran Guy Mogi was apprehended at a refugee facility in the German city of Hannover. He has since been remanded pending trial. According to the prosecutor, Robert Beckard, Mogi has pled not guilty to the murder charge, but admits that he beat Eriksson and may thus have caused her death.

August 18: The media website Avpixlat wrote that an Algerian man, who has not lived in Sweden for six years, is entitled to financial aid to cover doctor’s visits and the cost of his medicine. The man came to Sweden in the 1990s, but never worked or paid taxes there. Six years ago, he returned to Algeria, but in April of this year, he suddenly appeared in Sweden again to seek emergency health care. He underwent two surgeries at taxpayer expense, and considered himself entitled to financial aid for the cost of his medicine and several doctor’s visits. The municipality of Gothenburg had ruled against the request, but an administrative court now ruled that since the man has no income or assets, he is entitled to aid.

August 18: Five representatives of the Church of Sweden wrote, in an op-ed in the Swedish dailyDagens Nyheter, that the church should also be open to Muslims. The article astonished and angered Christians. Stefan Gustavsson, secretary general of the Swedish Evangelical Alliance,pointed out that Islam, Judaism and Christianity promote three radically different versions of what happened to Jesus:

  • Islam: Jesus did not die.
  • Judaism: Jesus died but was not resurrected.
  • Christianity: Jesus died and was resurrected.

These different versions cannot all be true, Gustavsson points out, and urges the Church of Sweden to awake from their Sleeping Beauty-slumber and start taking big questions seriously:

“The religion relativism that is now widespread throughout the Church of Sweden is not just an intellectual dead end, it is an insult to the Christians of Iraq and Syria who face forced conversion and who are willing to give their lives for their faith in Jesus Christ.”

But the Church of Sweden persists, and on August 30, it invited imam Mohammad Muslim Eneborg to take part in high mass. Before he converted, the imam was named Åke Daniel Eneborg and he was a left-wing activist.

August 24: Former member of parliament Thoralf Alfsson (Sweden Democrats) wrote on his blog that the Immigration Service had hired no fewer than 1,200 people during the last year. Earlier, in August 2014, the Immigration Service had about 5,000 employees; in August 2015 that figure was 6,200. This means that the wage costs have increased by 50 million kronor (about $5.9 million) a month. In all, the Immigration Service’s staff now cost Swedish taxpayers 250 million kronor ($29.6 million USD) a month, or 3 billion kroner ($360 million) a year.

Aside from skyrocketing costs, Alfsson questions why so many people of foreign descent find employment with the Immigration Service. He writes: “I can’t but wonder what kind of screening process the Immigration Service have in regard to the people they hire. Could there be employees with residency status in Sweden who use a fake identity? Are there ISIS-sympathizers among the employees?” And there are.

Social commentator and author Merit Wager, who frequently publishes anonymous posts from Immigration Service employees, wrote in an August 21 blog post that authorities now no longer take rejected asylum seekers into custody, due to attacks from left-wing extremists. That is why the IKEA-murderer, who had received a deportation order, was not in custody, a failure that led to the death of two innocent people in the heart of the Swedish idyll. One Immigration Service employee said:

“Years ago, the Immigration Service was often heavily criticized by various left-wing groups who wanted to ‘protect’ the asylum seekers who had been found lacking in reasons for protection and targeted for deportation. Sometimes there were big demonstrations and now and again Immigration Service buildings were vandalized. Today these actions have ceased almost completely. The reason is very simple – the Immigration Service has hired the activists. They are now officials at the authority! I’ve met several people who are quite open about their backgrounds in these activist groups. The reason the Immigration Service hires them is that they state on their CVs exactly what the government wants to hear – that they have a ‘burning engagement in human rights issues.'”

August 24: A police van was attacked with a hand grenade in the Stockholm suburb of Tumba. Four policemen were in the vehicle at the time. If it had not been for the fact that the vehicle was armored, the incident could have ended in a bloodbath. The attack began when several people threw rocks at police officers, and a fire was set at the local police station. Moments later, the hand grenade was thrown and landed about five feet from the police van. No one was injured, but the vehicle sustained 105 holes from shrapnel. Despite intense police efforts, the perpetrators of this attempted murder have not yet been apprehended.

1262A police van is riddled with shrapnel (left) from a hand grenade attack in Stockholm on August 24. The four policemen in the vehicle at the time could have been killed if the van had not been armored. At right, the Malmö police bomb squad disarms a hand grenade found in Landskrona, on September 22.

August 25: Local politicians in small southern county of Örkelljunga (population 10,000) wrote a desperate letter to the government; its signatories begged for help in solving the problems brought by the wave of asylum seekers. The Immigration Service has opened housing in Örkelljunga for about 250 asylum seekers in apartments, a former motel, and a number of private family residences — including housing for unaccompanied refugee children. An additional 100 units may open up in the Åsljungagården Hotel.

The local politicians wrote in their letter that crime rates have risen and that the police have been called on a number of occasions. Rape, assault, battery and shoplifting are mentioned, as is the temporary closing of the Centrumhuset youth center. At the largest housing facility, an old motel, there are 90 adults and children. The mix of various ethnic groups is said to have led to riots, threats and hunger strikes. The letter states:

“The situation affects everyone who lives and stays in our little county. The climate has grown tougher; many people feel scared and unsafe and with that comes the risk of increased xenophobia, antagonism and exclusion.”

The county swiftly received criticism from the mainstream media, and August 27 the Immigration Service let it be known that they have no intention of helping Örkelljunga. Immigration Service Press Officer Fredrik Bengtsson, quoted in the daily Helsingborgs Dagblad, was especially angry about the county’s criticism concerning different groups being placed together:

“If one thinks along the lines of placing asylum seekers any other way, you’re on a slippery slope. Separate housing for Christians and Muslims is not something we have in society. We have freedom of religion, and that applies to housing as well. You have to stop for a moment and think about it, because that’s not how we do things in society.”

August 26: Swedes heard the news that politicians in the nation’s three largest cities want to offer courses in “self-care and sexual matters” to gypsy women beggars. Stockholm, Gothenburg and Malmö are applying for 8.7 million kronor (just over $1 million USD) from the European Social Fund, for the project, and hope to reach 250 women. Twice a week they will attend class and get food, free health checkups and free hygiene- and sanitary articles and condoms. They will also receive compensation for “loss of work income.” Local politicians from opposition parties in Stockholm criticized the project strongly.

August 28: “Afrikas Horn,” an immigrants’ organization, reports another “Swedish” ISIS-warrior killed in battle. The man was in his thirties and originally from Somalia, but lived in the immigrant-heavy area of Vivalla in Örebro. The man was apparently one of three who have repeatedly traveled to join ISIS, but were twice intercepted in Turkey and sent back to Sweden. The man is the fourth resident of Örebro who has died as an ISIS terrorist. The chairman of Afrikas Horn tells the local paper Nerikes Allehanda that “the family is in mourning.”

August 28: Ali Khoddami, once an asylum seeker to Sweden, was sentenced to prison for defrauding an elderly woman. Khoddami worked in home care services and tricked Inga Lill, a 90-year-old woman suffering from dementia, out of millions of kronor. By pretending to be the woman’s friend, Khoddami was able to take over her bank accounts and move into her house, along with his family. He used her savings of two million kronor (about $240,000 USD) for luxury items, as well as several cars. Khoddami also managed to persuade Lill to sign over her house — her childhood home built by her father — to him. The house is apparently worth five million kronor ($590,000 USD). It was only after Khoddami put Lill, who has no living relatives, in a nursing home that the fraud was uncovered. The District Court sentenced Khoddami to 2.5 years in prison and fined him 7 million kronor ($830,000) plus interest and damages.

August 28: There were reports that people-smugglers have, over a short period of time, dumped 100 asylum seekers in the Gothenburg area. Pernilla Wallin, unit manager of the application unit at the Immigration Service for the Western Region, told Swedish Public Television that she never thought the situation would escalate like this and that the circumstances are “exceptional.” The Immigration Service is now desperately looking for “external contractors who want to bid on temporary housing for asylum seekers.”

The Holocaust Museum defends Muslim Brotherhood Nazis

September 25, 2015

The Holocaust Museum defends Muslim Brotherhood Nazis, Front Page Magazine, Daniel Greenfield, September 25, 2015


Despite the constant threats to destroy the Jewish State, Iran is also rated at low risk. Instead the Holocaust Museum claims that the real threat of genocide is in Egypt which is “experiencing a mass killing episode perpetrated by the current regime against the Muslim Brotherhood and oppositionists.”


The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum was tainted from the start.

Carter created the President’s Commission on the Holocaust to pander to the Jews after endorsing a PLO state. Then Carter complained that there were too many Jews on the Commission. One of the Jews he was complaining about was a Presbyterian with a German last name, but he was too bigoted to care.

The Museum hit a new low when the Clinton administration pressured its chairman to invite Arafat, a protégé of Hitler’s Mufti who had been trained to kill Jews by a former Nazi officer. It hit an even lower low when it brought in John K. Roth who had compared Israel to the Nazis.

Now the Holocaust Memorial Museum has rolled out an “Early Warning Project” to warn of the risk of mass killings and genocide.

According to the “Project,” Israel is not at risk of genocide. Its risk assessment is lower than the UK or Panama. If another Holocaust happens, it’s more likely to take place in London or Brazil. (But the EWP also claims that America and New Zealand are at a higher risk of mass killings than Cuba even though the Castro regime, unlike New Zealand Prime Minister John Key, actually engaged in mass killings.)

Despite the constant threats to destroy the Jewish State, Iran is also rated at low risk. Instead the Holocaust Museum claims that the real threat of genocide is in Egypt which is “experiencing a mass killing episode perpetrated by the current regime against the Muslim Brotherhood and oppositionists.”

Jews don’t face genocide in the Middle East. The Nazi-influenced Muslim Brotherhood does. Muslim Nazis are the real victims of a new Holocaust.

The Muslim Brotherhood was allied with Hitler. It distributed Arabic translations of Mein Kampf. Hitler’s Mufti, Haj Amin al-Husseini, who headed the Muslim Brotherhood’s affiliate in Israel, had personally met with Hitler, encouraged the extermination of the Jews and visited the gas chambers at Auschwitz.

The Mufti had preached genocide, encouraging Muslims to “get rid of this dirty race… Kill the Jews, burn their property, destroy their stores” making him one of the earlier promoters of BDS.

Five years after the Holocaust, Sayyid Qutb, the Muslim Brotherhood’s leading thinker, wrote a pamphlet titled, “Our Struggle with the Jews”.  Qutb’s Muslim Brotherhood had been heavily influenced by Nazi Germany and the title and theme were deliberate echoes of Hitler’s Mein Kampf.

Qutb claimed that the Jews were the source of all evil. Like Hitler, he insisted that there was a struggle for world domination, except instead of a struggle between Aryans and Jews, it was a struggle between Muslims and Jews. He echoed Hitler’s claims that the Jews had invented sex and materialism and blamed them for everything from the Sunni-Shiite split to the fall of the Ottoman Empire.

The intellectual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood even insisted that Hitler had been an instrument of Allah to punish the Jews. The claim was recently repeated by Sheikh Qaradawi, the Brotherhood’s current Qutb, who said, “Throughout history, Allah has imposed upon the [Jews] people who would punish them for their corruption. The last punishment was carried out by Hitler. By means of all the things he did to them – even though they exaggerated this issue – he managed to put them in their place. This was divine punishment for them. Allah willing, the next time will be at the hands of the believers.”

The “believers” are the Muslims. As opposed to the unbelievers who are everyone else. The Muslim Brotherhood likes what Hitler did to the Jews, but it wants to carry out the next Holocaust on its own.

Or as Qaradawi put it, “count their numbers and kill them down to the very last one.”

If the Holocaust Memorial Museum’s Early Warning Project were really concerned about “genocide” in Egypt, it might have noted the Muslim Brotherhood attacks on Christians and churches.

It might have spoken up when video emerged of the Muslim Brotherhood’s former Egyptian president, Mohammed Morsi, urging his followers “to nurse our children and our grandchildren on hatred for them: for Zionists, for Jews.”

Egyptian children, “must feed on hatred; hatred must continue,” he said. “The hatred must go on for Allah and as a form of worshiping him.”

The Early Warning Project might have noted that the charter of the Muslim Brotherhood affiliate in Gaza, the terrorist group Hamas, states, “The Day of Judgment will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews”.  And Hamas is doing its best to advance that date.

But instead the front page of the Holocaust Museum focuses on Syrian refugees. The piece on the Muslim migrants invading Hungary begins with the statement that, “In the 1930s, the world watched as Nazi Germany forced its beleaguered Jewish population to leave their homes.”

The piece is written by a Syrian who served as the Holocaust Museum’s Director of Special Events.

The Holocaust Museum has spent a good deal of time on Syria. It even hosts a paper describing the Muslim Brotherhood’s Sheik Moaz al-Khatib as “a well-respected, moderate Sunni cleric”. It leaves out his statement that Saddam Hussein’s positive legacy was “terrifying the Jews”.

The Museum obsesses over false Muslim claims that they are being persecuted by Buddhists in Burma and Hindus in India. It takes the time to visit Syria, but not Sderot. It puts up photos of Syrians, but not Jewish families murdered by members of genocidal Islamofascist terrorist organizations.

Despite all the propaganda, the Muslim Rohingya illegal aliens in Burma are not being exterminated. Muslim terror against Jews in Israel however is part of an ongoing campaign of genocide.

Hassan al-Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, warned, “If the Jewish state becomes a fact, and this is realized by the Arab peoples, they will drive the Jews who live in their midst into the sea.”

“Kill the Jews wherever you find them,” the Mufti of Jerusalem had proclaimed. “Allah is with you.” Hamas declares that, “Killing Jews is worship that draws us close to Allah”.

There was a reason why Adolf Eichmann, the architect of the Holocaust, turned for sympathy to the Muslim world. “You 360 million Mohammedans to whom I have had a strong inner connection since the days of my association with your Grand Mufti of Jerusalem. You, who have a greater truth in the surahs of your Koran. I call upon you to pass judgment on me.”

The Holocaust Museum’s Early Warning Project is ignoring Muslim genocide aimed at Jews while promoting the bizarre myth that the Muslim Brotherhood is at risk of genocide. It couldn’t be any stranger if the Holocaust Museum had begun insisting that Neo-Nazis face genocide in Germany.

“Either this place will be a sanctuary, or it will be an abomination,” Elie Wiesel had said of the museum.

It did not take long for the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum to become an abomination. From its early days, a museum dedicated to teaching about the evil of the Final Solution instead became a platform for promoting the newest attempt to solve the “Jewish problem” with the Two-State Solution.

Now it approaches the final phase of the left’s Post-Holocaust Anti-Semitism where Muslims are transformed into Jews so that Jews may be transformed into Nazis to justify another Holocaust.

After all this time, the Holocaust Museum has decided that the Nazis were the real victims.

The pope’s misguided defense of Islam

September 24, 2015

The pope’s misguided defense of Islam, Front Page Magazine, Daniel Greenfield, September 24, 2015



The Pope could have used his forum in Congress to call attention to the plight of Christians.

Unlike Communist Cuba, America hasn’t seized and nationalized Catholic churches and schools. It hasn’t locked up Catholic clergy or installed surveillance equipment in their homes. It hasn’t denounced the Catholic church as “exploiters” and “fascists”. And yet Pope Francis, who had few criticisms of Cuba, came to Congress to denounce the collision between Americans and Indians, and to urge the United States to take in illegal aliens without regard for the law.

There’s a condemnation of the death penalty. Never mind that in the US, the death penalty is used after extensive appeals against some of the worst monsters imaginable, unlike Cuba, where it was used to massacre political opponents of the Castro crime family. And condemnations of selling weapons. Much of this is couched in vague language, but it’s still a sharp contrast from the visit to Cuba.

The Pope even threw in a backhanded defense of Islam…

Our world is increasingly a place of violent conflict, hatred and brutal atrocities, committed even in the name of God and of religion. We know that no religion is immune from forms of individual delusion or ideological extremism. This means that we must be especially attentive to every type of fundamentalism, whether religious or of any other kind…

But there is another temptation which we must especially guard against: the simplistic reductionism which sees only good or evil; or, if you will, the righteous and sinners.

No religion is technically immune from anything if you mean that some members of it might misbehave. But that’s misleading language that tries to avoid the reality by setting up a strawman.

No country is immune from violating human rights, but there’s a big difference between David Cameron and Adolf Hitler. There’s also a huge difference between most religions and Islam when it comes to “violent conflict, hatred and brutal atrocities” committed in the name of religion. Especially when we focus in on the contrast between Western religions in the free world… and Islam.

There’s also a simplistic reductionism in reducing unpleasant truths to strawmen. There are clear cases of evil that have to be addressed. To say that does not mean an inability to see anything except black and white.

To say that no religion is immune to brutal atrocities is true and meaningless. We might as well say that no one human being is immune to evil. It doesn’t get us any closer to dealing with the reality of evil people out there.

It’s easy to talk around problems and Islam is the most talked-around problem today. But the plight of Christians in the Middle East deserves more than more ‘talking around’. Instead of elitist lectures, they need a moral authority to forcefully advocate intervention on their behalf by making it clear that they face genocide. And that it’s up to the West to make Christianity in the region sustainable or evacuate its last remnants.

It’s a much more vital issue than Global Warming, which the Pope mentions repeatedly.

The Pope could have used his forum in Congress to call attention to the plight of Christians in the region and demand action. Instead he talked generally about Syrian refugees, most of whom are Muslims.

Advocates are hoping for more.

Now that Pope Francis is in his first day of his two-day visit to Washington, D.C., advocates for persecuted Christians in the Middle East are urging the pontiff to speak out forcefully on their plight in his meeting with President Obama Wednesday and in his historic address to Congress the following day.

“I’m hoping the Pope points out that thousands of Christians are persecuted, denied their fundamental rights, and killed because of their faith [in the Middle East],” George Marlin, chairman of Aid to the Church in Need USA, told me.

Marlin, who has written a much-praised book on the subject of Christian persecution in the Middle East, emphasized that “someone has to bang pots and pans on this issue. The Administration is not doing it. The national media is not doing it. If the Pope brings this up, it makes front-page news worldwide.”

“If Pope Francis calls it genocide before Congress, there will be a moral clarity added to this issue and it will bring a new ray of hope to persecuted Christians,” said Taimoorazy, herself a refugees from Iran who came to the U.S. in 1991, “The whole world will now be paying attention.”

In underscoring why the Pope must use the word “genocide,” she cited the fact that the Assyrian Christian population in the Middle East was 1.6 million prior to 2003 and “now we only have 300,000.”

I suppose it’s not as important as the critiques of capitalism and Global Warming and illegal aliens and the death penalty.

Compare Obama’s Rosh HaShanah and Eid-ul-Fitr Messages [Video]

September 13, 2015

Compare Obama’s Rosh HaShanah and Eid-ul-Fitr Messages [Video], The Jewish PressTzvi Ben-Gedalyahu, September 13, 2015

obama-changeAmericans voted for a change in 2008. And they got it.

President Barack Obama laced his annual Rosh HaShanah greetings with political overtones, in stark contrast to his message to Muslims last July on their Eid-ul-Fitr holiday marking the end of Ramadan.

President Obama reminded Jews that the “Book of Life is open.” Assuming a posture as a Jew, he added:

As millions of Jews ask God to inscribe their names in that Book we recognize how much lies beyond our control.

It was a pointed reminder to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu that besides God, there also is President Obama who pulls the strings when it comes to world affairs, such as the nuclear agreement with Iran.

The President then preached peace, which he said is “hard, but right now the book is open.  Not just for God but for us.”

That is a theme that was totally absent from his speech to Muslims in July, when he noted:

The end of Ramadan is a time to reflect spiritually, build communally, and aid those in need. While Eid marks the end of Ramadan, it marks a new beginning for each individual – a reason to celebrate and express gratitude on this holiday.

President Obama then devoted nearly half of his greeting to talk about how millions of Muslims go to mosques for prayers and then have “festive gatherings, gift exchanges, and feasts among friends, neighbors and families.”

He emphasized how “the diversity of traditions paint the vibrant images we see from around the world capturing the spirit and excitement of Eid – colorful dresses or white garments decorating the masses of people standing in lines for prayer, lanterns and ornaments lighting up bazaars and neighborhoods, intricate henna designs painted on hands of young girls and women, and an abundance of delectable foods and aromatic cuisines.”

Then he boasted that Eid-ul-Fitr now is a an official holiday in New York City public schools, and he praised Muslims for helping to raise money “for  the churches burned in the wake of the shooting at Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, South Carolina” by a white racist.

The greeting to Muslims was absent of any reference to radical Muslim violence, peace in the Middle East, or the nuclear threat from Iran. It was a typical patronizing greeting made by every leader to partisan groups.

Now let’s go back to 2009 for President Obama’s first Rosh HaShanah greetings:

I want to extend my warmest wishes for this New Year. L’Shanah Tovah Tikatevu – may you have a good year, and may you be inscribed for blessing in the Book of Life….At the dawn of this New Year, let us rededicate ourselves to that work. Let us reject the impulse to harden ourselves to others’ suffering, and instead make a habit of empathy – of recognizing ourselves in each other and extending our compassion to those in need.

Let us resist prejudice, intolerance, and indifference in whatever forms they may take — let us stand up strongly to the scourge of anti-Semitism, which is still prevalent in far too many corners of our world….

And let us work to achieve lasting peace and security for the state of Israel, so that the Jewish state is fully accepted by its neighbors, and its children can live their dreams free from fear.

All of that was absent from this year’s greeting, which also did not mention anti-Semitism and certainly not anti-Zionism, lest he prompt reminders that Iran’s idea of peace is a world without Israel.

President Obama was elected on a motto of “change.”

He has fulfilled his promise.

He indeed has changed.


Obama’s Strategy Of Equilibrium

August 6, 2015

Obama’s Strategy Of Equilibrium, Middle East Media Research Institute, Yigal Carmon and Alberto M. Fernandez, August 5, 2015

(The conflict between Shiite and Sunni factions has been going on since shortly after the death of Mohamed. Obama is not likely to bring reconciliation. — DM)

This article will analyze the strategy of creating an equilibrium between Sunnis and Shiites as a means to promote peace in the Middle East. It will examine the meaning of the strategy in political terms, how realistic it is, and what its future implications might be on the region and on the United States.

“It is worth noting that the first Islamic State created in the Middle East in the last 50 years was not the one created in the Sunni world in 2014 and headed by Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.” Rather, it was the Islamic Republic of Iran created in 1979 by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and currently ruled by his successor, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who maintains – even following the Iran deal – the mantra “Death to America,” continues to sponsor terrorism worldwide, and commits horrific human rights violations.



In an interview with Thomas Friedman of The New York Times (“Obama Makes His Case on Iran Nuclear Deal,” July 14, 2015), President Obama asked that the nuclear deal with Iran be judged only by how successfully it prevents Iran from attaining a nuclear bomb, not on “whether it is changing the regime inside of Iran” or “whether we are solving every problem that can be traced back to Iran.” However, in many interviews he has given over the last few years, he has revealed a strategy and a plan that far exceed the Iran deal: a strategy which aims to create an equilibrium between Sunnis and Shiites in the Muslim world.

President Obama believes that such an equilibrium will result in a more peaceful Middle East in which tensions between regional powers are reduced to mere competition. As he told David Remnick in an interview with The New Yorker, “…if we were able to get Iran to operate in a responsible fashion…you could see an equilibrium developing between Sunni, or predominantly Sunni, Gulf states and Iran in which there’s competition, perhaps suspicion, but not an active or proxy warfare” (“Going the Distance,” January 27, 2014).

In discussing the Iran deal, the President recalled President Nixon negotiating with China and President Reagan negotiating with the Soviet Union in order to explain the scope of his strategy for the Middle East and the Muslim world. President Obama seeks, as did Presidents Reagan and Nixon with China and the Soviet Union, to impact the region as a whole. The Iran deal, even if major, is just one of several vehicles that would help achieve this goal.

This article will analyze the strategy of creating an equilibrium between Sunnis and Shiites as a means to promote peace in the Middle East. It will examine the meaning of the strategy in political terms, how realistic it is, and what its future implications might be on the region and on the United States.

The Meaning Of The Equilibrium Strategy In Political Terms

Examining the strategy of equilibrium requires the recollection of some basic information. Within Islam’s approximately 1.6 billion believers, the absolute majority – about 90% – is Sunni, while Shiites constitute only about 10%.  Even in the Middle East, Sunnis are a large majority.

What does the word “equilibrium” mean in political terms? In view of the above stated data, the word “equilibrium” in actual political terms means empowering the minority and thereby weakening the majority in order to progress toward the stated goal. However, the overwhelming discrepancy in numbers makes it impossible to reach an equilibrium between the two camps. Therefore, it would be unrealistic to believe that the majority would accept a policy that empowers its adversary and weakens its own historically superior status.

Implications For The Region

Considering the above, the implications of the equilibrium strategy for the region might not be enhancing peace as the President well intends; rather, it might intensify strife and violence in the region. The empowered minority might be persuaded to increase its expansionist activity, as can be already seen: Iran has extended its influence from Lebanon to Yemen. Iranian analyst Mohammad Sadeq al-Hosseini stated in an interview on September 24, 2014, “We in the axis of resistance are the new sultans of the Mediterranean and the Gulf. We in Tehran, Damascus, [Hizbullah’s] southern suburb of Beirut, Baghdad, and Sanaa will shape the map of the region. We are the new sultans of the Red Sea as well” (MEMRITV Clip No. 4530). Similarly, in a statement dedicated to the historically indivisible connection between Iraq and Iran, advisor to President Rouhani Ali Younesi stressed that, “Since its inception, Iran has [always] had a global [dimension]; it was born an empire” (MEMRI Report No. 5991).

In view of this reality, this strategy might create, against the President’s expectations, more bitterness and willingness on the part of the majority to fight for their status. This has already been realized; for example, when Saudi Arabia intervened in Yemen after facing the Houthi/Shiite revolution, which it perceived as a grave danger to its survival, and created a fighting coalition within a month to counter it. Similarly, Saudi Arabia has previously demonstrated that it regards Bahrain as an area where any Iranian attempt to stir up unrest will be answered by Saudi military intervention. According to reports, Saudi Arabia has been supporting the Sunni population in Iraq, and in Lebanon, a standstill has resulted because Saudi Arabia has shown that it will not give up – even in a place where Iranian proxy Hizbollah is the main power. Hence, the strategy of equilibrium has a greater chance of resulting in the eruption of regional war than in promoting regional peace.

Implications For The United States

Moreover, this strategy might have adverse implications for the United States and its interests in the Sunni Muslim world: those countries that feel betrayed by the strategy might, as a result, take action against the United States – hopefully only politically (such as changing international alliances) or economically. These countries might be careful about their public pronouncements and might even voice rhetorical support to U.S. policy, as the GCC states did on August 3, but the resentment is there.

Realpolitik Versus Moral Considerations

The analysis presented here is based on principles of realpolitik: in politics, one does not align with the minority against the majority. However, sometimes other considerations take precedence. Morality is such an example: the Allies could not refrain from fighting Nazi Germany because it was a majority power – ultimately, they recognized the moral obligation to combat the Third Reich. However, with regard to the Middle East, the two adversaries are on equal standing: the Islamic Republic of Iran is no different than the Wahhabi Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. President Obama and Secretary Kerry would be wrong to think that Mohammad Javad Zarif, the sophisticated partygoer in New York City, represents the real Iran. Zarif, his negotiating team, and President Rouhani himself, all live under the shadow and at the mercy of the Supreme Leader, the ayatollahs, and the IRGC.

“It is worth noting that the first Islamic State created in the Middle East in the last 50 years was not the one created in the Sunni world in 2014 and headed by Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.” Rather, it was the Islamic Republic of Iran created in 1979 by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and currently ruled by his successor, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who maintains – even following the Iran deal – the mantra “Death to America,” continues to sponsor terrorism worldwide, and commits horrific human rights violations.

A New Age of Theory

August 6, 2015 7, 2015

The recently signed p5+1 nuclear deal with Iran is based on another beautiful theory: The nicer the United States is to the Iranian mullahs, the more she caves into their demands and acknowledges their valid reasons for hating America, the more they will seek to be like us and want to be good citizens of the world. President Obama has literally bet the fate of the world on that conjecture.

The theory that the Iranian theocracy will be transformed by kindness betrays another failure of progressive theorists from the French Revolution to the present: They view religion as “irrational,” and cannot fathom that anyone else takes its claims seriously. That Iran’s Islamic Revolution really seeks world conquest for Islam is too absurd to countenance as an explanation of regime behavior.


Alexis de Tocqueville’s explanation of the descent of the French Revolution into the Terror, in The Old Regime and the Revolution, emphasized the outsized role that men of letters played in French political discourse prior to the Revolution. These writers, as described by de Tocqueville, had a decided preference for “general and abstract theories of government” and a tendency “to trust in them blindly.” Since they dwelt at “an almost infinite distance from practice . . . no experience tempered the ardors of their natures; nothing warned them of the obstacles that existing facts might place before them.”

With the passage of time, “they . . . became much bolder in their innovations, fonder of general ideas and systems, more contemptuous of old wisdom, and still more confident of their individual reason. . . ,” writes de Tocqueville.

We live in another such age of theory, writes Alain Finkelkraut. Take for example the lunatic claim that Jews are committing genocide against the Palestinians. Under Israeli rule of the West Bank from 1967 to 1992, life expectancy leaped by 50% — from 48 to 72; infant mortality dropped by 75%; seven universities were built where none had existed, and Palestinian illiteracy was reduced to a fraction of that in neighboring Egypt and Syria; and the West Bank, as of 1992, had the fourth fastest growing economy in the world. If that be genocide, it was genocide of a decidedly peculiar sort.

But, explains Finkelkraut, Europeans have theory according to which Jews are uniquely capable of genocide today. And in an age of theory, a beautiful theory trumps a thousand unruly facts. What’s the theory? Because Jews were the victims of the Holocaust, not its perpetrators, they never learned of the danger of turning one’s fellow human beings into the dehumanized “Other.” From which it follows that Jews dehumanize Palestinians and are committing genocide against them. Never mind the facts.

The recently signed p5+1 nuclear deal with Iran is based on another beautiful theory: The nicer the United States is to the Iranian mullahs, the more she caves into their demands and acknowledges their valid reasons for hating America, the more they will seek to be like us and want to be good citizens of the world. President Obama has literally bet the fate of the world on that conjecture.

Neither tens of thousands chanting “Death to America” nor Supreme Leader Khameini’s insistence that Iran will continue to fight American arrogance even after the deal because hatred of America is the very raison d’etre of the regime register with supporters of the theory.

The theory that the Iranian theocracy will be transformed by kindness betrays another failure of progressive theorists from the French Revolution to the present: They view religion as “irrational,” and cannot fathom that anyone else takes its claims seriously. That Iran’s Islamic Revolution really seeks world conquest for Islam is too absurd to countenance as an explanation of regime behavior.

Another Obama theory holds that even rabid anti-Semites, like the Iranian mullahs, will not act upon their hatreds to the harm of their “rational” interests. But history proves the opposite: The Nazis diverted vital war material in an effort to wipe out Hungarian Jewry in Auschwitz.

The attachment to theory over empirical evidence is evidenced in the way that Left policy prescriptions remain constant despite their repeated failures. What Walter Russell Mead calls the Blue Model of governance – high taxes, high regulation, and generous public union pensions – is failing everywhere. From mid-size California cities to Detroit, Chicago, and most recently, Puerto Rico, it has led to literal bankruptcy.

A vicious cycle sets in of higher taxes to pay pensions based on fantastical assumptions followed by the flight of business and jobs to lower tax states followed by yet higher taxes on those remaining to compensate for the lost business and jobs. Eventually, Blue Model cities and states experience the highest income inequality, as the population divides between extremely high earners, on the one hand, and the menial workers who serve them and welfare recipients, on the other.

The Obama administration has now set out to increase Muslim immigration, despite Europe’s dystopian experience, which has left it poised to become an extension of the Maghreb by the end the century, with an increasingly radicalized and unassimilated Muslim population taking over.

The theories of the Left are unmoored from reality because they have less to do with seeking to make life better than with the emotional reaffirmation they offer their proponents. Every Democratic candidate, for instance, will call for universal pre-school education, despite 50 years of evidence that Head Start early intervention has no lasting impact.

Similarly, every Democratic candidate will advocate heavy government investment in abundant, renewable “green” energy – such as ethanol, the production of which actually creates more pollution than it saves – even though “green energy” consistently proves to be economically unviable and a drag on economic productivity in the form of higher energy costs. Billions of dollars of taxpayer money, however, will inevitably find their way into the pockets of “green energy” crony capitalists.

The attraction of “renewables” is primarily the feeling of moral virtue they confer on proponents. And the same is true of Head Start and calls for a $15/and hour minimum wage, which would only ensure that orders at McDonald’s will be taken by a machine and not by some striving high-school kid eager to earn money for college or a poor, single-mother with no marketable skills. Estimates of the American jobs likely lost if the minimum wage were to rise to $15/hour range from 3,000,000 to 6,000,000, most of them to low-wage earners. But how deliciously virtuous must legislators feel enacting minimum wage laws.

THOSE WHO PREFER THEORY over history and facts do not just produce bad policy: They are subject to a profoundly illiberal, even totalitarian, temptation. That was De Tocqueville’s subject. Their theory of government is that “smart” people – i.e., theoreticians like themselves — ought to run the show. A corollary is that all smart people will reach similar “rational” conclusions, and that those who don’t are either fools or evil. Not surprisingly, when human beings and reality fail to conform to their theories, they turn ornery. Think Pol Pot.

Hostility to free markets and a profound ambivalence towards representative democracy are part and parcel of the preference for abstractions. The former are too irrational and chaotic. Markets give equal value to the desires of the not-so-bright. Central planning, by contrast, is much more rational, or so it seems, until one considers its unbroken record of failure. Just think of resource rich Venezuela, where years of socialist rule have made both food and toilet paper scarce.

Similarly the flaw of representative democracy is that fools and geniuses alike have one vote. The preferred form of municipal government for early American Progressives was unelected city managers, above the fray of partisan politics. And those same early Progressives created the modern administrative state, whose rule-making by unelected bureaucratic “experts,” has become virtually indistinguishable from the law-making power conferred exclusively upon Congress by the Constitution.

Self-styled progressive Barack Obama is perfectly comfortable ruling by executive decree and through administrative agencies, like the Environmental Protection Agency, which seeks to impose by rule-making what could never pass in Congress.

Obama’s progressive ancestor, President Woodrow Wilson, famously declared the U.S. Constitution, with its federal system and checks and balances between the three branches, to be an outmoded document for the modern age, and called for a much more powerful unitary executive.

Progressive thinkers have little patience for the rules of procedure of representative democracy or its allocation of decision-making authority. Only results matter and that the smart people make the decisions – be they judges, agency bureaucrats, or the president himself. Neither Court President Aharon Barak in his heyday nor Justice Anthony Kennedy more recently showed the slightest concern over whom appointed them philosopher-king to determine the nature of human dignity.

The assumption that those who disagree are either stupid or evil undercuts the fundamental democratic value of tolerance. On issues like anthropogenic climate change, modern progressive are ever eager to declare the debate over, and even advocate criminal penalties for global warming deniers. (This at a time when many climate scientists are forecasting a mini-Ice Age based on lower solar activity.)

Anyone who follows nutrition and health reports knows how wildly fluctuating the best scientific advice is. How much more unlikely is the discussion to be over in the vastly more complex area of climate, involving up to twenty different scientific disciplines and in which controlled experiments are impossible.

Not by accident are the most progressive institutions in American society – the universities – those with the most restrictive speech codes designed to regulate various and sundry “micro-aggressions” in speech.

The Orwellian argument of the late Brandeis philosopher Herbert Marcuse that “new and rigid restrictions” on certain teachings that protect the oppressive status quo are required for true freedom of thought to flourish only represents the outer limit of where the preference for abstractions over human reality can lead.

How Islam in America Became a Privileged Religion

June 3, 2015

How Islam in America Became a Privileged Religion, Front Page Magazine, Daniel Greenfield, June 3, 2015

(Much the same nonsense infects foreign policy and propels the notion that the Islamic State is not Islamic. — DM)


What is Islam? The obvious dictionary definition answer is that it’s a religion, but legally speaking it actually enjoys all of the advantages of race, religion and culture with none of the disadvantages.

Islam is a religion when mandating that employers accommodate the hijab, but when it comes time to bring it into the schools, places that are legally hostile to religion, American students are taught about Islam, visit mosques and even wear burkas and recite Islamic prayers to learn about another culture. Criticism of Islam is denounced as racist even though the one thing that Islam clearly isn’t is a race.

Islamist organizations have figured out how lock in every advantage of race, religion and culture, while expeditiously shifting from one to the other to avoid any of the disadvantages.

The biggest form of Muslim privilege has been to racialize Islam. The racialization of Islam has locked in all the advantages of racial status for a group that has no common race, only a common ideology.

Islam is the only religion that cannot be criticized. No other religion has a term in wide use that treats criticism of it as bigotry. Islamophobia is a unique term because it equates dislike of a religion with racism. Its usage makes it impossible to criticize that religion without being accused of bigotry.

By equating religion with race, Islam is treated not as a particular set of beliefs expressed in behaviors both good and bad, but as an innate trait that like race cannot be criticized without attacking the existence of an entire people. The idea that Islamic violence stems from its beliefs is denounced as racist.

Muslims are treated as a racial collective rather than a group that shares a set of views about the world.

That has made it impossible for the left to deal with ex-Muslims like Ayaan Hirsi Ali or non-Muslims from Muslim families like Salman Rushdie. If Islam is more like skin color than an ideology, then ex-Muslims, like ex-Blacks, cannot and should not exist. Under such conditions, atheism is not a debate, but a hate crime. Challenging Islam does not question a creed; it attacks the existence of an entire people.

Muslim atheists, unlike all other atheists, are treated as race traitors both by Muslims and leftists. The left has accepted the Brotherhood’s premise that the only authentic Middle Easterner is a Muslim (not a Christian or a Jew) and that the only authentic Muslim is a Salafist (even if they don’t know the word).

The racialization of Islam has turned blasphemy prosecutions into an act of tolerance while making a cartoon of a religious figure racist even when it is drawn by ex-Muslims like Bosch Fawstin. The New York Times will run photos of Chris Ofili’s “The Holy Virgin Mary” covered in dung and pornography, but refuses to run Mohammed cartoons because it deems one anti-religious and the other racist.

The equating of Islam with Arabs and Pakistanis has made it nearly impossible for the media to discuss violence against Christians in those parts of the world. The racialization of Islam has made Arab Christians, like Bangladeshi atheists, a contradiction in terms. The ethnic cleansing of the Yazidi could only be covered by giving them a clearly defined separate identity. Middle Eastern Christians are increasingly moving to avoid being categorized as Arabs because it is the only way to break through this wall of ignorance.

While racialization is the biggest Muslim privilege, race provides no protection for many Islamic religious practices. Muslims then seek religious discrimination laws to protect these practices even if it’s often a matter of debate whether their lawsuits protect their religious practices or impose them on others.

Islam is a theocracy. When it leaves the territories conquered by Islam, it seeks to replicate that theocracy through violence and by adapting the legal codes of the host society to suit its purposes.

Islamic blasphemy laws are duplicated using hate crime laws. Employers are obligated to make religious concessions to Muslim employees because of laws protecting religious practices, but many of these practices, such as refusing to carry out jobs involving pork, liquor or Seeing Eye dogs, are really ways of theocratically forcing behaviors that Islam forbids out of public life much as Saudi Arabia or Iran do.

Accusations of bigotry are used to outlaw ideas that Islam finds blasphemous and religious protection laws are used to banish behaviors that it disapproves of. By switching from race to religion and back again, Islamists construct a virtual theocracy by exploiting laws designed to protect different types of groups.

Religions in America traded theocracy for religious freedom. They gave up being able to impose their practices on others in exchange for being able to freely practice their own religions. Islam rejects religious freedom. It exploits it to remove the freedom of belief and practice of others. When it cannot do so through religious protection laws, it does so through claims of bigotry.

Religions were not meant to be immunized from blasphemy because that is theocracy. Instead religions are protected from restrictions, rather than from criticism. Islam insists on being protected from both. It makes no concessions to the freedom of others while demanding maximum religious accommodation.

While race and religion are used to create negative spaces in which Islam cannot be challenged, the creed is promoted positively as a culture. Presenting Islam as a culture allows it easier entry into schools and cultural institutions. Islamic missionary activity uses the Western longing for oriental exotica that its political activists loudly decry to inject it into secular spaces that would ordinarily be hostile to organized religion.

Leftists prefer to see Islam as a culture rather than a religion. Their worldview is not open to Islam’s clumsy photocopy of the deity that they have already rejected in their own watered down versions of Christianity and Judaism. But they are constantly seeking an aimless and undefined spirituality in non-Western cultures that they imagine are free of the materialism and hypocrisy of Western culture.

Viewing Islam as a culture allows the left to project its own ideology on a blank slate. That is why liberals remain passionately convinced that Islam is a religion of social justice. Their Islam is a mirror that reflects back their own views and ideas at them. They pretend to respect Islam as a culture without bothering to do any more than learn a few words and names so that they can seem like world travelers.

By morphing into a culture, Islam sheds its content and becomes a style, a form of dress, a drape of cloth, a style of beard, a curvature of script and a whiff of spices. It avoids uncomfortable questions about what the Koran actually says and instead sells the religion as a meaningful lifestyle. This approach has always had a great deal of appeal for African-Americans who were cut off from their own heritage through Islamic slavery, but it also enjoys success with white upper class college students.

The parents of those students often learn too late that Islam is not just another interchangeable monotheistic religion, that its mosques are not places where earnest grad students lecture elderly congregants about social justice and that its laws are not reducible to the importance of being nice to others.

Like a magician using misdirection, these transformations from religion to race, from race to culture and from culture to religion, distract Americans from asking what Islam really believes. By combining race, religion and culture, it replicates the building blocks of its theocracy within our legal and social spaces.

Separately each of these has its advantages and disadvantages. By combining them, Islam gains the advantages of all three, and by moving from one to the other, it escapes all of the disadvantages. The task of its critics is to deracialize Islam, to reduce it to an ideology and to ask what it really believes.

Islam is a privileged religion. And there’s a word for that. Theocracy.

The “Speech-Denialists”

June 2, 2015

The “Speech-Denialists,” The Gatestone InstituteDaniel Mael, June 2, 2015

  • In denying the average college student the opportunity to hear, think, question and learn, these minority organizations violated the basic principles of a liberal arts education and what higher learning should presumably be about: challenging assumptions and talking openly about issues that might cause discomfort.
  • Both micro-sensitivity and political correctness require at best, obfuscating information, and at worst, silencing it.

On college campuses, teachers, students and sometimes even administrators seem to have become ever more eager to block any idea with which they disagree.

Often it appears as if their first impulse is to demonize the individual or organization presenting the offending idea, rather than to address the substance of the argument and open a discussion in the “free marketplace of ideas.”

On the campus of Lake Superior State University, wall postings “deemed offensive, sexist, vulgar, discriminatory or suggestive will not be approved.” The campus code of conduct states that if students fail to comply, they may be disciplined — a rule that was named “Speech Code of the Month” for May by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE).

1092Lake Superior State University’s campus code of conduct states that wall postings “deemed offensive, sexist, vulgar, discriminatory or suggestive will not be approved.” (Image source: Bobak Ha’Eri/Wikimedia Commons)

Increasingly, individuals and groups, perhaps unknowingly betraying the spirit of classic liberalism, seek to shame or ridicule dissenting opinion into silence. Both in politics and on college campuses, it seems as if aggressive shaming has replaced the art of persuasion as the favored means of argumentation. Substantive, non-politically correct discussion is now at a premium.

In her recently published book The Silencing, life-long liberal and Fox News contributor Kirsten Powers documents the escalating efforts of people claiming to be liberal to silence dissent on issues they regard as contentious. The tactic follows what Powers calls the “authoritarian impulse to silence.”

On issues ranging from campus “speech codes” to feminism, these self-described liberals are unwilling to entertain the notion that a well-intentioned individual from the other side of the aisle might have a different remedy for the problems of the day.

When feminist scholar Christina Hoff Sommers of the American Enterprise Institute gave a lecture on the campus of Oberlin University on the topic of campus sexual assault and due process, protesters labeled her a “rape denialist” and claimed that they felt “unsafe.” Perhaps we should begin calling such protesters “due-process denialists.”

When the subject is religion, these “liberals” maintain a disingenuous double standard. “While the illiberal left seems to hold a special animosity to Christianity,” Powers notes, in a remark that could also apply to Israel, “it is strangely protective of Islam, despite the fact that orthodox Muslims oppose same-sex marriage.” Not only are Muslim attitudes toward gay marriage overlooked or roadsided completely, but if anyone dares to discuss the issue of minorities in the Muslim-majority world, they are labeled “racist,” “Islamophobic,” or other slurs at arm’s reach.

Meanwhile, critics are unrelenting in their animosity toward observant Christians’ views of homosexuality. “If you think about it, we are at the water’s edge of the argument that mainstream Christian teaching is hate speech,” Senator Marco Rubio recently told CBN News. “Because today we’ve reached the point in our society where if you do not support same-sex marriage you are labeled a homophobe and a hater.”

Last year, at Brandeis University, when I sought to bring a human rights display highlighting the oppression of LGBTQ individuals in Yemen, Saudi Arabia and Iran, the initiative was blocked in a flood of administrative bureaucracy. The member of the administration with whom I met was clearly not thrilled by the idea.

Meetings with a gay rights group and the Muslim Students Association (MSA), however, were just as telling. Hoping to solicit partnerships in the initiative, I explained to leaders and members of both organizations that the project was not about Islam, but about how, on a routine basis, certain governments murder people who identify as LGBTQ. Members of the gay rights organization expressed concern about “Islamophobia,” while members of the Muslim Students Association expressed concern about “homophobia.” The initiative was rejected. Both groups evidently prioritized the emotional and intellectual comfort of the campus community over drawing attention to the plight of innocent LGBTQ individuals in the Muslim world.

In denying the average college student the opportunity to hear, think, question and learn, these minority organizations violated the basic principles of a liberal arts education and what higher learning should presumably be about: challenging assumptions and talking openly about issues that might cause discomfort. It is still puzzling why the LGBTQ club and the MSA are not at the forefront of defending other members of their respective groups, regardless of where they may live.

Both micro-sensitivity and political correctness require at best, obfuscating information, and at worst, silencing it. It is incumbent upon those who recognize the dangers of the ever-expanding “speech-denialists” in the “political correctness” movement to put up a fight — figuratively, of course.

Kerry – North Korea can have a great nuke deal like Iran if it becomes as moderate

May 17, 2015

Kerry – North Korea can have a great nuke deal like Iran if it becomes as moderate, Dan Miller’s Blog, May 17, 2015

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

North Korea played those negotiating its denuclearization for fools, much as Iran has been doing more recently with Obama. It must not have been difficult to do. To continue the process with Iran, and to repeat it with North Korea, makes no sense.

Speaking in the People’s Republic of China on May 16th, Secretary Kerry offered North Korea a nuke deal

Kerry explained that an Iran deal could help in showing North Korea how “your economy can do better, your country can do better, and you can enter into good standing with the rest of the global community by recognizing — just like Iran — that there is a verifiable, irreversible, denuclearization for weaponization, even as you can have a peaceful nuclear power program.”

Iran has not agreed to “a verifiable, irreversible, denuclearization for weaponization” and likely never will. On April 15th, Iran disputed the accuracy of the Obama Administration’s April 2nd “fact sheet,” which had made such claims about the deal. In the highly unlikely event that Iran were it to claim to do accept such terms, it would “cheat” as it has done in the past. In this video, John Bolton speaks about the “deal” with Iran as well as the North Korean connection.

Nevertheless, Iran has already received many of the rewards of essentially irreversible sanctions relief, including augmented power, both military and financial, in the Middle East.

A deal like the one Iran is about to get by virtue of the Iran scam should be welcomed by North Korea. The countries have long cooperated on nukes and missile development, a matter apparently ignored during Obama’s P5+1 “negotiations” with Iran.

Kerry also said,

the United States will continue to work with its partners “to make it absolutely clear to the DPRK that their actions, their destabilizing behavior — unlike Iran’s — is unacceptable against any international standard.” [Emphasis added.]

Iran’s destabilization efforts and successes are, in Kerry’s view, apparently not “against any international standard.” Yet Iran does far more regional destabilizing than does North Korea — North Korea mainly relies upon bellicose bluster (with infrequent military actions against South Korea). Iran — a major if not the most active sponsor of terrorism —  sends its proxies throughout the Middle East while accusing America and others of destabilization. A likely “signing bonus” of up to fifty billion dollars for Iran if and when the “deal” is finalized will substantially further Iran’s hegemonic ambitions and power as well as its missile and nuclear weapons development.

Here’s a video of Iran having some fun:

According to Hossein Salami, Deputy Commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, Iran welcomes war with the United States:

This North Korean propaganda video purports to displays North Korean military prowess:


The rogue nations of Iran and North Korea are both intent upon maximizing their nuclear weapon capabilities. Both are totalitarian and have obscene human rights records. To trust either would be a gross mistake; yet that appears to be what Obama intends to do.

The only thing notably missing from Kerry’s offer is a requirement that North Korea abandon the Religion of Kim and adopt the glorious “Religion of Peace” instead. That would help North Korea to fit even better than at present into Obama’s policy of supporting America’s enemies and rejecting her friends. If Kim Jong-un would merely recognize Allah as the superior power, perhaps he could become the first Korean Ayatollah. Obama would probably be thrilled were North Korea to become the Democratic Islamic Republic of Korea (DIRK).