News behind the news. This picture is me (white spot) standing on the bridge connecting European and North American tectonic plates. It is located in the Reykjanes area of Iceland. By-the-way, this is a color picture.
Yesterday PJ Media posted an article showing pictures of young Muslim children killing infidels. The children appear to be between the ages of about four to eight. The pictures are chilling, but I will post one here just to illustrate the point.
How do you undo the damage to a young child’s mind that is done by having adults tell the child to do this? This is child abuse in spades.
The article includes other similar pictures.
I seriously doubt that these children can be retrained. I suppose it is possible, but it will take at least a generation to undo the brainwashing that radical Islam is guilty of. Teaching young children to ‘kill the infidel’ is child abuse. If these children are ever captured alive by non-Muslim troops, I don’t know what the solution would be. I would like to think that putting them in loving homes and teaching them that killing is wrong would be the answer, but I am not sure what a successful deprogramming of these children would look like.
I apologize for the graphic picture, but we need to know what we are up against. The radical Islamist fighters have no problem teaching children to kill people who do not share their beliefs.
The Center for Global Christianity reports that around 90,000 Christians were killed for their faith in 2016.
Release says many of those deaths came in Islamic countries. The ministry says persecution of Christians has been increasing from Islamic militants, and from the governments in Islamic countries as well.
“Around the world Christians face an increasing array of violent persecutors. These include the brutal Islamic State in the Middle East, heavily armed militants in Nigeria and Hindu extremists in India,” warns Release Paul Robinson.
Recorded attacks from Hindu militants increased dramatically in India in 2016.
And the trends don’t look good in China either, where the communist regime has been cracking down on unregistered churches.
There is no reason to believe that persecution against Christians will decrease in 2017.
The Washington Examiner posted an article today with a few suggestions as to how various nations could make a difference:
A few actions nations are, or should be, pursuing in 2017 include:
Persuading countries such as Canada, Sweden, the Netherlands and others who have previously voted against genocide declarations to recognize the situation of Christians in Iraq and Syria as genocide.
Prosecuting members of the Islamic State (especially those returning to Europe and North America) for being a member of a terrorist organization, as well as for the genocidal crimes they have participated in.
Prioritizing Christian and other victims of genocide in their respective refugee programs.
Supporting the creation of a semi-autonomous safe haven for religious and ethnic minorities in the Nineveh Plain region of Iraq. In the U.S., this idea is being supported through Congressional Resolution 152.
These are just a few meaningful ways nations can get involved in supporting the persecuted in Iraq and Syria. Opportunities exist to do the same in other areas of the world.
The article at The Washington Examiner concludes:
Ignorance of the situation faced by Christians and other religious minorities is no longer an excuse for inaction. The time for debate is over. As Nuri Kino, journalist and founder of A Demand for Action, an international organization that advocates on behalf of Assyrian Christians, asked of the Dutch Parliamentarians we testified before last month, “Will you help us or will history only record your silence?”
The United Nations has largely ignored the genocide of Christians in the Middle East. Part of the reason for this is the fact that one of the largest voting blocs in the United Nations is the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). One of the goals of that organization is to implement Sharia Law worldwide (including its application in non-Muslim countries). Since part of Sharia Law includes the killing of infidels, the OIC would not have a problem with the killing of Christians. This is one of many examples of reasons why the UN has outlived its usefulness.
The town is accused of discriminating against ISBR on the basis of its religion, applying standards of review to the ISBR it had not applied to other congregations and assemblies, and imposing a burden on members of the ISBR for practicing their religion.
“RLUIPA ensures that municipalities must treat religious land use applications like any other land use application,” U.S. Attorney Paul Fishman said in a statement. “But here, township officials kept moving the goalposts by using ever-changing local requirements to effectively deny this religious community the same access as other faiths.”
The article points out some interesting facts about the case:
The township also calls into question the propriety of a relationship between a member of the ISBR and a lead DOJ investigator. Attorneys for the township also confirm that a lawyer representing the mosque was in contact with DOJ investigators well before the planning board reached any decision regarding the ISBR’s application. “These communications, unknown by the Township at the time, suggest an inappropriate collusion with Plaintiffs rather than an unbiased review.”
The ISBR planned to buy four acres of land to construct a mosque approximately 4,200 square feet. It would be interesting to know who is paying for the mosque. The leader of the ISBR is a Pakistani immigrant named Mohammad Ali Chaudry. The other part of this issue is whether or not the residents of the town have the right to say that they don’t want the mosque located where it is planned. Leaders of the town claim it is a land use issue and not a religious issue, but in battling the Justice Department, that may not matter.
Again, we are back at the issue of state’s rights and local control. Many American mosques are funded by the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), which was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in The Holy Land Foundation Trial. As much as I don’t approve of religious discrimination, all religions are not equal. There are mosques in America that are encouraging terrorism. The Justice Department would be better off spending its time and money to find out which mosques are preaching terrorism and dealing with that issue rather than getting involved in a local zoning issue. It should be up to the town to decide whether or not to allow the mosque to be built.
Israel has been dealing with terrorist attacks since the country was founded. They identify the bombings, shootings, etc. as terrorist attacks, pride themselves on being able to clean up anything in two hours or less, and continue on their way. Somehow America has not mastered these basic skills that unfortunately are necessary in the world we currently live in.
Over the weekend there was a stabbing in a mall in St. Cloud, Minnesota, on Saturday, a bombing in Seaside, New Jersey, on Saturday morning during a 5K Marine charity race, and two bombs in New York City on Saturday night–one exploded and one did not. The device in New Jersey was described as three pipe bombs; the devices in New York City have been described as pressure cookers with timers.
Houston, we have a problem. Part of the problem is that terrorism has come to America, and part of the problem is that our political leaders are reluctant to admit that terrorism has come to America.
The Observer posted an article today that makes some very good points about our current situation:
Unlike the powers-that-be charged with running New York City, you and I can be realistic. Intentionally placing two live bombs set to explode and intended to commit mass murder in a populated center of the most recognized city in the United States is terror. It does not matter if the perpetrator is part of a group or a lone wolf, it doesn’t matter if you are fighting for Islam or animal rights or if you are an anarchist. The definition is plain and simple. Using violence or the threat of violence to achieve a political end is terror.
The only time it is not called terror is when you want to keep the masses calm. Then you rely on antiquated definitions by the FBI and Justice Department. But those days are long gone.
…Our leaders want to package terrorists into nice neat boxes. So they conclude that if a terrorist is not a member of a terror group the violent act they perpetrate is not considered terror. The obvious example is the terror at Fort Hood, officially classified as workplace violence.
Even more poignant is the Orlando terrorist. The perpetrator was actually on the phone with local media bragging that he was part of ISIS and explaining that his actions were motivated by a need to defend Islam. He even repeatedly chanted the Islamic terrorist battle cry: “Allahu Akbar.” Yet, the US Attorney General still responded by saying “We may never really know the motivation behind the attack.”
If you are a regular reader of this website, you are familiar with the information in the following paragraph. If you are not a regular reader, this is something you need to be aware of:
In October 2011, elements of the American Muslim Brotherhood wrote the White House demanding an embargo or discontinuation of information and materials relating to Islamic-based terrorism. The letter was addressed to John Brennan, who at the time was Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism. Days later John Brennan agreed to create a task force to address the problem by removing personnel and products that the Muslim Brotherhood deemed “biased, false, and highly offensive.” This move in effect allowed the Muslim Brotherhood to control the information given to the people charged with stopping the terrorism initiated by groups affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood. At this point, the 9/11 reports and other actual historic documents were altered to make them compliant with the new paradigm. (I thought only the Russians rewrote history.)
If we are not careful, political correctness is going to kill us all. The weekend attacks were terrorism–whether by a lone nutcase who thought he represented Allah or a member of a group. It really doesn’t matter–people were injured as a result of the actions of these people. CAIR (which is one of the major Muslim Brotherhood front groups in America–see the list of unindicted co-conspirators from the Holy Land Foundation Trial) works very hard to keep the Muslim community from reporting suspicious behavior and to keep our government unaware of what is being taught in some mosques. It is time to pay attention to the people among us who have refused to assimilate and who are fighting to undermine our way of life. That group of people does not include all Muslims, but it does mainly consist of Muslims, and until peaceful Muslims rein in the radicals among them, we need to watch the entire community. Refusing to call a terrorist attack a terrorist attack does not help anyone; and in fact, it simply emboldens those planning more attacks.
Today Hot Air posted a story about Younus Abdullah Muhammad, a former recruiter for the al-Qaeda terrorist network, who now goes by the name Jesse Morton. Jesse Morton has now been hired to work in George Washington University’s Program on Extremism.
The article reminds quotes a report from CNN:
During his days as an extremist, Morton earned a master’s degree in international affairs from Columbia University. (Program Director Seamus) Hughes said before making the hiring decision, he discussed Morton with the FBI, leaders in the security community and the lawyers that prosecuted Morton.
He said he’s sure Morton is completely reformed from the days he served time in federal prison after inciting people to join a terrorist organization.
“I trust him,” he said. “We did our due diligence.”
Mr. Hughes needs to familiarize himself with the Islamic concept of taqiyya. This concept in Islam is loosely defined as lying for the sake of Islam–particularly to infidels. Islamic judicial commentaries describe it as permitting and encouraging precautionary dissimulation as a means for hiding true faith in times of persecution or deception when penetrating the enemy camp. Please understand that in the eyes of Islam western civilization is the enemy camp.
The article highlights Mr. Morton’s past activities:
Morton, also known as Younus Abdullah Mohammad, was taken into U.S. custody in Rabat, Morocco, on October 28, according to court documents. He was first arrested by Moroccan authorities in May after being indicted in the United States. By October 31, he was back on U.S. soil, the official said.
In a detention hearing at federal court in Alexandria, Virginia, on November 4, Morton was ordered detained until trial, according to court documents. He has yet to enter a plea. In May, Morton, a former resident of Brooklyn, New York, became the second person charged in the “South Park” case.
Earlier this year, Zachary Adam Chesser, 21, who admitted to posting online threats, was sentenced to 25 years in prison. Chesser, a Muslim convert, encouraged violent jihadists to attack “South Park” writers for an episode that depicted the Prophet Mohammed in a bear suit, court documents said. Chesser posted online messages that included the writers’ home addresses and urged online readers to “pay them a visit,” the documents said. In an affidavit accompanying the complaint against Morton, FBI special agent Paula R. Menges said Morton, co-founder of the group called Revolution Muslim, worked with Chesser on a “clarification statement” after Chesser’s postings.
The story continues:
A federal judge in 2012 agreed that Morton deserved a harsh punishment, sentencing him to 11 1/2 years in prison. But less than three years later, the 37-year-old is out and being paid by the FBI, according to government records and an attorney who says Morton helped federal officials build a case against a client accused of trying to join the Islamic State.
Though police cooperators receiving sentencing breaks is hardly a novel practice, Morton’s release is unusual in that, at least when he pleaded guilty, federal authorities billed him as particularly malevolent.
“We may never know all of those who were inspired to engage in terrorism because of Revolution Muslim, but the string of recent terrorism cases with ties to Morton’s organization demonstrates the threat it posed to our national security,” then-U.S. AttorneyNeil MacBride said in a statement at the time.
This man is teaching college students in a school less than a mile from the White House. Wow.
I suspect that if you are reading this, you are as tired of this presidential election as I am. However, the media (and the Clinton campaign) have said so many outlandish things about Donald Trump, I feel obligated to respond to at least some of them. I would like to point out that Donald Trump has been in the public eye for at least thirty years, and although he has never been a poster child for modesty, humility, and Puritanism, he has had a rather reasonable reputation until he decided to run against Hillary Clinton. That alone is cause for reflection.
The latest Democratic talking point is that America will end if Donald Trump is elected–the seas will begin the rise again, we will bomb everyone, and the world will hate us. Pick any major media and you will find a story about one of the above. Well, it’s time to point out the background of one of the accusers.
Yesterday The Conservative Tribune posted an article about one of Donald Trump’s attackers–retired General John Allen. General Allen spoke in Philadelphia and has appeared on a few news shows since then.
The article reports General Allen’s statements about Donald Trump:
“He’s talked about needing to torture. He’s talked about needing to murder the families of alleged terrorists,” Allen said. “He’s talked about carpet-bombing ISIL. Who do you think is going to be carpet-bombed when all that occurs? It’s going to be innocent families.”
“What we need to do is ensure that we don’t create an environment that puts us on a track conceivably where the United States military finds itself in a civil military crisis with a commander in chief who would have us do illegal things.”
Actually, that sounds better than the current rules of engagement.
Let’s look at General Allen’s record. The article reports:
Allen was, at one point, the White House coordinator for anti-Islamic State group efforts. Along with Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Susan Rice, and the whole sick crew, he was responsible for the policy of treating the Islamic State as the “JV team” — a bunch of angry, stupid teens who had somehow found Kalashnikovs and were taking their angst out on the world.
He’s the one who helped construct a policy where a group with ultramodern weaponry and a Bronze Age ideology were considered to be no threat whatsoever.
That’s not all. He was also responsible for the funding and arming of so-called “moderate” Islamic rebels in Syria. Lo and behold, these were the rebel groups who often decided that their allegiance — as well as their funds and weaponry — belonged to the Islamic State group. Others merely surrendered their weapons.
It gets worse:
He’s one of the people behind the drone killing of terrorist imam Anwar al-Awlaki, a U.S. citizen, in Yemen. Now, granted, al-Awlaki was a detestable individual, but the American-born cleric had never been charged in court nor had his citizenship stripped. He was the first American citizen specifically targeted and killed without any due process. And this is a man who thinks enhanced interrogation techniques are going to cause a military revolt?
General Allen retired as the result of a sex scandal (he fits right in with the Clintons). This is the portrait of the latest accuser of Donald Trump.
It’s amazing to me how some politicians ignore the U.S. Constitution until they want to make some sort of attack on their opponents. Then they freely misquote it. We have seen a lot of recent examples of this, but there is one that really bothers me.
Andrew McCarthy posted an article at National Review today illustrating how Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton either misunderstands or chooses to misuse the U.S. Constitution.
The article reports:
Of all the ignorant pronouncements in the 2016 presidential campaign, the dumbest may be that the Constitution forbids a “religious test” in the vetting of immigrants. Monotonously repeated in political speeches and talking-head blather, this claim is heedless of the Islamic doctrinal roots on which foreign-born Islamists and the jihadists they breed base their anti-Americanism. It is also dead wrong.
The clause said to be the source of this drivel is found in Article VI. As you’ll no doubt be shocked to learn, it has utterly nothing to do with immigration. The clause states, “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States” (emphasis added). On its face, the provision is not only inapplicable to immigrants at large, let alone aliens who would like to be immigrants; it does not even apply to the general public. It is strictly limited to public officials — specifically to their fitness to serve in government positions.
Just a few personal observations…If your religion requires that your religious rules supersede the U.S. Constitution, maybe you should find another place to live. If your religion has its own set of strict rules that condone honor killing, female genital mutilation, stoning of rape victims, marriage of women under the age of thirteen, and killing of homosexuals (all against American laws), maybe you should not come to America and expect to follow your religious rules. The obvious question here is, “What is the difference between a religion and a political movement?” Which is Islam?
The article concludes:
Promotion of assimilation and fidelity to the Constitution have been historical bedrocks of immigration policy. Indeed, before immigrants are naturalized as citizens, they must swear what is pointedly called an “oath of allegiance.” It calls on them to renounce any foreign sovereigns by whom they have been ruled, and to honor our Constitution — principles that are inimical to sharia supremacism. We should resist a categorical ban on Muslim immigration; but nothing in the Constitution prohibits the commonsense vetting of immigrants for beliefs that are antithetical to our principles, regardless of whether the immigrant perceives such beliefs as religious or political in nature.
We should welcome immigrants who embrace our principles, seek to assimilate into our society, and are value-added for — rather than a strain on — our economy. But if, in an era of jihadist violence, we cannot seriously vet immigrants to determine whether they fit this bill, it would be better to have a categorical ban. And if, based on an illiterate construction of the Constitution, the political class insists that its fictional “no religious test” rule forbids not only a categorical ban but the heightened scrutiny of Muslim aliens, it would be better to prohibit immigration across the board.
The United States government’s first obligation is to shield the American people from foreign threats, not to shield foreign threats and render the American people defenseless.
We should welcome refugees who want to come here and become Americans. We should encourage those who want to bring their culture with them and not assimilate to immigrate to a country with a culture similar to the one they left.
The Los Angeles Times is reporting today that Waseem Azeem, brother of slain Pakistani model Qandeel Baloch, has confessed to killing his sister for the sake of the family’s honor.
The article reports:
Baloch, who had become a social media celebrity in recent months, stirred controversy by posting pictures online taken with a prominent Muslim cleric. She was found dead Saturday at her family home in the central city of Multan.
Police arrested her brother, Waseem Azeem, and presented him before the media in Multan, where he confessed to killing her. He said that people had taunted him over the photos and that he found the social embarrassment unbearable.
“I was determined either to kill myself or kill her,” Azeem told the Associated Press as he was being led away.
He said that even though Baloch was the main breadwinner for the family, he slipped her sedatives the night before and then strangled her in her sleep.
According to the tenets of Islam, what he did was perfectly acceptable.
The article further reports:
Nearly 1,000 women are killed in Pakistan each year for violating conservative norms on love and marriage. The so-called “honor killings” often are carried out by family members.
Such killings are considered murder. But Islamic law in Pakistan allows a murder victim’s family to pardon the killer, which often allows those convicted of honor killings to escape punishment.
Islamic law is Sharia Law. This is what many Muslims want to introduce into our courts to supersede the U.S. Constitution. Sharia Law and the U.S. Constitution are totally incompatible–the U.S. Constitution protects freedom of speech and freedom of religion, neither of which are acceptable in Sharia Law. In Sharia Law, freedom of speech is defined as the right to express any opinion freely in such manner as would not be contrary to the principles of the Shari’ah. It is also defined as the right to advocate what is right, and propagate what is good, and warn against what is wrong and evil according to the norms of Islamic Shari’ah. Free speech is allowed as long as it agrees with Shariah. Anything negative about Mohammad or any picture of Mohammad are not allowed. We need to make sure that anyone who comes to America is willing to live under the U.S. Constitution. If they are not, we need to send them home.
I am posting this article exactly as it appeared at Whatsupic.com on July 6. I am posting it as is, because I can think of nothing to add. When black is white and up is down, there is not a lot you can add.
And a year after the U.S.-led coalition began airstrikes against ISIS, they “have largely failed,” according to the monthly “Terror Report Snapshot” released Tuesday by the Republican members of the House Homeland Security Committee.
…Here are some other facts from the report:
Since 2014, ISIS has been linked to 14 terrorism plots and 63 arrests or indictments in the U.S.
Since early 2014, the majority of jihadist plots in the U.S. have included plans to kill police or U.S. soldiers.
Islamic State terrorists have inspired or directed 55 terrorist plots or attacks against the West by the end of July, including 14 in the United States.
Nearly twice as many ISIS-linked plots have occurred against the West so far this year — 35 — than in all of last year, which had 20.
What happened in Florida was the result of the Koran’s teaching about homosexuality. In countries ruled by Sharia Law, homosexuals are routinely thrown off of buildings with their hands tied. Execution is seen as the appropriate punishment for homosexuality under Sharia Law.
As legal immigrants, these migrants will be granted lifetime resettlement privileges will be given automatic work permits, welfare access, and the ability to become voting citizens.
Between 2001 and 2013, the United States permanently resettled 1.5 million Muslim immigrants throughout the United States.
In the next five years, without changes to our autopilot visa dispensations, the U.S. will permanently resettle a Muslim population larger than the entire population of Washington D.C.
Islam as practiced according to the Koran is not a religion of peace. There are peaceful Muslims, but they are afraid to speak out about what is going on in many of the mosques. The Obama Administration has chosen to turn a blind eye to what is happening in our mosques. Have you ever wondered how small Islamic communities have the money to build large Islamic centers and mosques? Many of them are funded through the Islamic Society of North America (named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation Trial) or funded indirectly through Saudi Arabia (the country that financed the 911 hijackers). Western civilization is under attack. Both the Sunni and Shiite Muslims want to set up a worldwide caliphate run by Sharia Law. Their only disagreement is about who will control the caliphate and where it will be headquartered. It is time for America (and the rest of western civilization) to wake up and pay attention.
Breitbart posted an article today that illustrates the impact that a large number of Muslim immigrants can have on the legal system of their host country.
The article reports:
A regional German court has recognised as valid the marriage of a 14-year-old Syrian girl to her 20-year-old cousin, despite the legal age for marriage in Germany being 16. The case represents a landmark ruling, with the Federal Court set to adjudicate on the implications for the country as a whole.
Among the hundreds of thousands of migrants arriving in European countries over the eighteen months have been a number of underage wives, some as young as eleven, others already mothers. But although most European countries stipulate that a girl must be 16 to marry, the authorities seem unsure what to do with young bride migrants.
When you consider the fact that some of the Islamic marriages can involve a forty-year-old man and his ten-year-old bride, this is somewhat disconcerting.
The article further reports:
Robin Classen of the Criticising Immigration blog has called the verdict a “scandal”, highlighting that the judge “openly and completely uncritically quoted sharia law, applying it directly to this case.
“Therefore ‘only a marriage of a Muslim woman to a non-Muslim is void,’ in the judge’s own words, because Islamic law forbids this.”
Mr. Classen argues that the case is a prime example of Germany importing a foreign culture through mass migration.
“With mass immigration has come not only the sort of terrorism seen in Paris and Brussels and the sexual offences of New Year’s Eve, but also a completely different set of social values ideas,” he says.
“Mohammed married his ‘favourite wife’ Aisha when she was just six years old. He first had intercourse with her when she was nine. This is not a minor opinion within Islam, within Sunni and Shi’ite Islam it is absolutely undisputed.
“Since Mohammed is considered in Islam as an exemplary and virtuous man, this moral assessment also applies to his marriages with several women and the child Aisha, which is why forced marriages of children are completely normal in both Shi’ite and Sunni Islam.”
She is glad to have the opportunity for a funeral, says the mother. “A burden” fell from her heart. Such a farewell ceremony is important for his friends, too. The funeral service will be conducted by Pastor Sieghard Wilm and the Albanian Imam Abu Ahmed Jakobi. Florent Prince N., as his name was originally, was baptized as a Christian and converted to Islam later.
Florent was born in Cameroon, came to Germany as an infant, and grew up in St. Pauli [an inner-city district of Hamburg]. Probably when he was 14, he came into contact with the radical Salafist scene, and converted to Islam. In May last year, he travelled on a fake passport to Syria to fight for the Islamic State.
In Syria, it seems, he realised that the circumstances had little to do with what had been promised to him. He therefore recorded an audio message in Rakka in Southwestern Syria, in which he criticised the IS. Shortly thereafter, he was dead. In early March, the audio file was distributed. The Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution thinks it is possible that he was punished for his message by the IS.
Pastor Wilm himself knew Florent from his work with youth. He [Florent] had been a friend of the pastor’s foster son for several years, and active in the community. There are photographs of him climbing up the facade of St. Pauli Church. It was important to him, so Wilm, that Christians and Muslims celebrate together, to make it clear that they pray to a “god of peace”.
You mean the ‘religion of peace’ that just killed 25 Iraqis by dissolving them in nitric acid (story here)?
The article at the above link also states:
ISIS has published a list of punishments for crimes, everything from theft and homosexuality to “spying for the unbelievers.” The punishments seem almost unbelievably cruel to us, but all of them have a sharia law justification. When it put 13 teenagers to death for watching soccer on television, it cited their ‘breaking religious law’ as the reason for their murder. When it crucifies people accused of banditry, there is a reason in sharia law for the practice.
Thus, this reported method of execution by acid ought also to have a sharia law justification. None has yet been forthcoming, but if the report is true there must be some reason why ISIS thought it was an appropriate and fitting punishment for spies. Regardless of the opinion of Western experts on Islam, ISIS believes it is enacting sharia accurately. They have studied it carefully, and always have reasons for their atrocities that are rooted in sharia law principles.
The young man died fighting for ISIS. I don’t think a Christian funeral was appropriate. A Muslim funeral would have been appropriate. I am not making a judgement on the fate of the young man’s soul, I am simply reflecting on the fact that he was a Muslim at the time of his death. The god of Islam is not the God of Christianity. If you compare the Koran and the Bible, that fact becomes very evident. The Bible makes it very clear that God loves the Jewish people; the Koran calls for the destruction of both Christians and Jews. Christians who choose to align themselves with Muslims will eventually have a very rude awakening.
Channel 5 in Northern Virginia reported last Tuesday that five arrests related to ISIS have been made in Northern Virginia in recent months.
The article reports:
The article also mentions Reza Niknejad of Prince William County. He was dropped off at Dulles International Airport last year with plans to join ISIS. No one has seen him since. I think it is time to start paying attention to what is being taught in the mosques of America. Terrorists in America are not materializing out of thin air. I realize that they have the internet, but I am inclined to think that they also have inspiration closer to home.
A top Pakistani religious council responsible for advising the government to ensure that laws conform with Islam has ruled a new law criminalizing violence against women “un-Islamic.”
The inference of that law is that violence against women is not considered criminal in Islam.
The article continues:
Punjab, the largest province in Pakistan, passed the Women’s Protection Act last week. The law is the first of its kind and is intended to protect women from domestic, psychological and sexual abuse. The legislation will also create women’s shelters and a hotline for women to call in order to report crimes. That is, of course, if of course if the law gets by the Council of Islamic Ideology.
“The whole law is wrong,” said Muhammad Khan Sherani, head of the council, during a news conference. Sherani cited verses from the Koran to back up his claim that the law is “un-Islamic.”
According to its website, “the Council of Islamic Ideology is a constitutional body that advises the legislature whether or not a certain law is repugnant to Islam, namely to the Koran and Sunna.” The Sunna is the verbal record of the practices of the Islamic prophet Muhammad.
We need to keep this in mind when allowing people to immigrate to America. I have no problem allowing refugees in if they are thoroughly vetted and want to assimilate into American culture. I see nothing to be gained by allowing a parallel culture in America that allows for the abuse of women.
One educational issue that has recently come up in American schools is the teaching of Islam. Although most Americans agree that it is appropriate for students to learn about Islam, many parents have been alarmed at what seems to be the indoctrination of students into Islam.
In October 2015, the Clarion Project posted the following about a recent law passed in Tennessee to make sure students are not being indoctrinated:
Charges of indoctrination by Tennessee parents are reminiscent of a case in California where a federal lawsuit was filed against the Byron Union School District concerning a three-week course about Islam seventh-graders that used the workbook, Islam, A simulation of Islamic history and culture.
In the California school, 12-year old students were told:
I have never seem a similar lesson in a public school regarding Christianity. Again, I believe that it is appropriate to teach the basics of Islam (as it is appropriate to teach the basics of Christianity and Judaism). Islam, Christianity, and Judaism are considered the major religions of the world, and I believe it is to our advantage to let our students know the basic facts of each. Indoctrination is an entirely different matter.
Tennessee has taken action in this matter.
This is the text of the Tennessee bill:
HOUSE BILL 1418
AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 49, Chapter 6, Part 10, relative to curriculum for K–12 public schools.
SECTION 1. Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 49, Chapter 6, Part 10, is amended by adding the following language as a new, appropriately designated section:
(a) The state board of education shall not include religious doctrine in any curriculum standards
for grades prior to grades ten through twelve (10–12).
(b) The state board shall provide curriculum standards for grades ten (10), eleven (11), or twelve (12) that teach comparative religion as it relates to history or geography, but no religion shall be emphasized or focused on over another religion.
(c) If the curriculum standards in grades prior to grades ten through twelve (10–12) include a reference to a specific religion or the role and importance of a religion in history or geography, then the state board shall ensure that the reference does not amount to teaching any form of religious doctrine to the students.
SECTION 2. This act shall take effect upon becoming a law, the public welfare requiring it.
In January, the bill was sent to the Education Instruction & Programs Subcommittee. It is not yet passed.
I am not sure exactly what was being taught in Tennessee, but the fact that the California curriculum included declaring Jihad on another group is an indication that this curriculum is not as harmless as it should be.
Part of the teaching of the Koran is the idea that Muslims are obligated to spread Islam peacefully or violently. The ultimate goal is a worldwide caliphate. That is not an abstract concept, and we are not immune from that quest. We need to remember that the Ottoman Empire existed until the early 1900’s. That was the caliphate. The goal is to recreate it with America included in it. Part of the methodology in including America involves the education of our children at all levels. The Muslim Students’ Association (MSA) is operating in our colleges with that goal in mind. Organizations (named as unindicted co-conspirators in the Holy Land Foundation trial) include CAIR, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the North American Islamic Trust and others. For further information on the plan to bring America into the caliphate, please see the official Federal Court translation of Government Exhibit 0036-0085 3:04-CR-240-G in U.S. v Holy Land Foundation, et al. with punctuation, line spacing and spelling intact. You can find that document by googling “Holy Land Foundation exhibits.” It is a document all Americans need to be aware of. It is eye-opening.
“The dead white guys did not create this country,” Koerber says. “They [presumably conservatives] want to talk about those dead white guys.”
Koerber continues that Common Core is necessary because “it needs to be come cohesion between the states.” She expresses frustration, however, that “Texas keeps screwing it up over and over again.”
“People who say they want to teach the Constitution, only want to teach the part of the Constitution that they like,” she tells the journalist, who then asks her about the Second Amendment.
“But yet they don’t want to teach all of it,” she replies. “Damn the Second Amendment.
…Kim Koerber (KK): People that are not educated, Fox TV viewers think that Common Core comes from the educated liberal groups and that’s why they are against it. They don’t know anything about it. They think it’s liberal so they’re against it. That’s what I think it is. It’s a knee jerk reaction. My mother, oh my God, she’s a Fox person. If I could remove Fox from my television set, I would…
I did a big presentation yesterday for AP US History and the AP US History agenda was set, until Texas got upset about it and they wanted to have their founders – they wanted founders in it. And it’s like – come on. The dead white guys did not create this country. It was a whole bunch of different kinds of people. And yes there were women, and yes there were people of color, and yes…you need to talk about them too. But they want to talk about those dead white guys.
Note the tolerance for opposing ideas–“If I could remove Fox from my television set, I would…”
Note the hostility to ‘dead white guys’ who wrote the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution, and the Bill of Rights.
Republicans want to get in there and talk about stuff and change things about school stuff because they want to, they want to influence what is being taught. Common core doesn’t put up with that.
Common Core is copyrighted–there is no room for local school boards to make changes.
PV: I am really glad I’m here in California, whatever religious affiliation you want to take is fine, but in Texas they want to push the Christianity.
KK: Because they think it’s the only one.
PV: They do, and I see that.
KK: That’s why it’s so offensive to have these prayers in the school board.
PV: Christianity is totally out of the common core?
KK: Yes it is. Totally. It’s not a core concept at all.
PV: But then there is a mention of other religions like Islam.
Christianity played a part in the founding of this nation–the churches of America played a role both in the Revolutionary War and the Civil War. The settlers at Jamestown and Plymouth Rock both declared America to be a Christian nation–even before it was America. Christianity is an important part of our history. To say that Christianity is not an important part of the America’s history is to leave out a good portion of the story.
The article at Breitbart.com concludes:
“It doesn’t matter if it’s corporate cronyism or liberal ideology, if you are slipping your agenda into our education system, we are going to expose you, one by one, until the whole rotten system is revealed,” O’Keefe tells Breitbart News about his project on Common Core and education. “Corporate cronyism and underhanded political deals have contributed to Common Core’s massive disruption and the unraveling of America’s educational fabric.”
Explaining in the view of Salafist Islam why hundreds of women found themselves groped, sexually assaulted and in some cases raped by gangs of migrant men in cities across Germany the Imam said: “the events of New Year’s Eve were the girls own fault, because they were half naked and wearing perfume. It is not surprising the men wanted to attack them. [Dressing like that] is like adding fuel to the fire”.
The tone of the report was telling, expressing no surprise that Muslim mass migration would result in violence and gang-rape. The narrator of the report told viewers that after the events of New Year’s Eve it was becoming difficult to tell who’s country Germany was, one belonging to Muslims or to Germans. Also expressed was the opinion that the sex attacks were no more than a dress rehearsal for something much bigger to come.
Again, according to the teaching in this sector of Islam, the groping and rapes were justified by the way the women were dressed. I would be the first to state that I don’t always agree with the way some women dress, but last time I checked, western civilization did not have a dress code.
Remember, rape of non-Muslim women is an acceptable practice in the eyes of some sects of Islam. We need to consider that when accepting refugees into America. The compromise might be to allow refugees in small numbers on the condition that they are willing to assimilate and adopt western culture. If they are not willing to do that, they need to find a country where their views on women and other matters are accepted.
The horrid conditions in the countries Middle Eastern refugees are fleeing are not due entirely to wars–they have a lot to do with the prevailing culture in these countries. We need to consider how much of that culture we are willing to tolerate in America.
If You Give A Mouse A Cookie is a children’s book published in 2013. The basic story is that if you give a mouse a cookie he will expect milk and other things to go with it. Well, a company in Wisconsin recently saw this scenario acted out in real life.
Dozens of Muslim employees at a Wisconsin manufacturing company claim that they were forced to quit this week, after the company changed its prayer-on-the-job policy to one that prevents them from participating in their daily prayers to Mecca.
WBAY-TVreported that before Thursday, Somali Muslims employed by Ariens Manufacturing were allowed to leave the producing line twice a shift in order to participate in two of the five daily prayers required by the Islamic faith.
The company offered the employees the opportunity to pray during their break time in designated prayer rooms. Note that they were willing to establish designated prayer rooms. The employees stated that praying only during their breaks goes against their religion.
The accommodation these employees were asking for would not have been granted to any other religious group–they were not singled out.
The article concludes:
Per law established by the the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission on religious tolerance in the workplace, “an employer does not have to accommodate an employee’s religious beliefs or practices if doing so would cause undue hardship to the employer.”
The Council for Islamic-American Relations (CAIR) is also calling on Ariens to reverse its policy, per a Tweet sent on Saturday.
The First Amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
The Islamic people who decide to come to America need to understand that the U.S. Constitution is the basis for American law. It is not subject to Sharia Law, which would demand that the company accommodate people leaving the manufacturing assembly line several times a day. Unfortunately, those who truly practice Islam believe that Sharia Law supersedes all other law. A Democracy or Representative Republic is not a valid form of government in Islam. CAIR has gotten involved to see if they can for Americans to accept Sharia Law in this instance rather than uphold the U.S. Constitution.
The bill didn’t even move past the first stage in the legislative process, The Express Tribune reports. It was almost immediately pulled Thursday by Pakistan Muslim League party’s Marvi Menon following condemnation from CII, whose job it is to advise the legislature on whether bills are compliant with Sharia law. In this case, the bill clearly violated Islamic law as tradition holds marriage as acceptable when a girl hits puberty.
The law attempted to move the age of marriage from 16 to 18 and to impose penalties for breaking the law.
The article further reports:
According to the organization Girls Not Brides, over 21 percent of the girls in Pakistan enter into marriage before the age of 18.
CII Chairman Mohammad Khan Sheerani reiterated in 2014 that girls can be married at age nine, so long as puberty is apparent, adding that attempts to revisit the issue are pointless and unnecessary.
“Parliament cannot create legislation that is against the teachings of the Holy Quran or Sunnah,” Sheerani said in 2014, according to The Express Tribune.
The idea of child brides is quite compatible with Sharia Law. Most western countries would be appalled at the idea of a nine-year-old child marrying a 40 (or more) year-old man, but that is an acceptable practice under Sharia Law.
Edward Archer said he shot Philadelphia PoliceOfficer Jesse Hartnett because “police bend laws that are contrary to the teachings of the Quran.” But Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney wants you to know that the shooting had “nothing to do with being a Muslim or following the Islamic faith.” I called this earlier today, writing here at Jihad Watch: “Not to worry. Obama and the Mayor of Philadelphia will find some way to explain that this has nothing to do with Islam.” And here we are.
Mayor Kenney said, “In no way shape or form does anyone in this room believe that Islam or the teaching of Islam has anything to do with what you’ve seen on the screen.”
Philadelphia Police Officer Jesse Hartnett was shot several times late Thursday.
Authorities say the suspect gave a full confession to the shooting.
Commissioner Richard Ross said, “According to him, police bend laws that are contrary to the teachings of the Quran.”
Mayor Kenney said of the shooting, “It is abhorrent. It is terrible and it does not represent the religion or any of its teachings.”
We have reached the level of political correctness where we do not accept the confession of a killer because his confession does not fit the political narrative. This is insane.
Just for the record, Islamic law is incompatible with American Law. Islamic Law is Sharia Law, and democracy is not part of that law. The shooter was correct when he commented that police bend laws that are contrary to the teachings of the Quran. They don’t remove the hands of thieves, they don’t stone women adulterers, and they don’t arrest people for not being modestly dressed. In the shooter’s mind, the police are consistently breaking what he considers the ultimate law–Sharia Law. The shooting had everything to do with Islam. It is unfortunate that the people charged with protecting us do not see the danger.
On Monday, Daniel Horowicz posted an article at the Conservative Review about the Islamic threat to America. The threat comes in two forms–the possibility of terrorists infiltrating the vast number of Middle Eastern migrants coming to America and the more subtle influencing of our government by the Muslim Brotherhood, which is increasingly influencing American foreign and domestic policies.
The article reports:
Three questions should automatically come to mind in light of the San Bernardino attack and the nearly daily incidents of Muslims being arrested for plotting terror attacks or attempting to join ISIS.
Why is our government expunging any mention of Islamic terror from their official documents and hampering investigations into connections to local radical Muslim Brotherhood groups?
Why are so few moderate Muslims speaking out against the growing trend of radicalization?
Why are so many Muslims in America, even those who were born here, being drawn into groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda?
The goal of ISIS and the Muslim Brotherhood is the same–a worldwide caliphate under Sharia Law. The difference between the two organizations is the method by which they plan to achieve this goal. ISIS believes in using direct force, and the Muslim Brotherhood believes in the concept of ‘civilization jihad,’ which refers to gradually increasing political influence to take over a government peacefully.
The article further reports:
Just last week, U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron took the unprecedented step to designate the Muslim Brotherhood a terror group after his government launched an exhaustive study into their activities. They will now ban visas to Muslim Brotherhood officials and increase surveillance of their offices. If the liberal Europeans are willing to protect themselves and root out their enemy within, cannot our “conservative” leaders muster the same courage?
Not surprisingly, Obama condemned Cameron’s move as a needless de-legitimizing of a non-violent group. But their use of “non-violent” means of subversion in western countries to marginalize moderates and quietly radicalize the Muslim communities and mosques is exactly what will destroy both America and Europe from the inside.
The article also lists some of the details of the investigation into terrorist activities in the United States prior to the shooting in San Bernardino. That investigation was shut down by the DHS at the request of the Department of State and DHS’ own Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Division.
The article explains:
It’s not surprising that DHS’s Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Division (CRCL) was responsible for shutting down the investigation. CRCL is the nexus for the Muslim Brotherhood influence in our government. In 2008, under the Bush administration, then-DHS Secretary Michael Chertoffdrafted a memo for CRCL that called on government officials to strip all references of Islamic supremacism from their training. This memo was drafted, in the words of Chertoff, based on “its discussions with a broad range of Muslim American community leaders and scholars.” In 2011, based on the same recommendations of these Muslim Brotherhood “scholars,” DHS published its training and guidance manual on the Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) agenda. The manual instructs the bureaucrats to use examples to “demonstrate that terrorists and violent extremists vary in ethnicity, race, gender, and religion.”
Please follow the link above and read the entire article. If our next President is not willing to speak out about and deal with the threat within America, there is no way that we can end the threat.
…According to court records, Mr. Moore was identified from surveillance video quickly walking away from the mosque at about 2:39 p.m. and smoke could be seen coming from the mosque about three minutes later, AP reported.
…Despite Mr. Moore’s claim of being a member of the mosque, MJ Khan, president of the Islamic Society of Greater Houston, which operates the mosque, said he’s never heard of him.
This was obviously not an example of hate crimes against Muslims by non-Muslims. Hate crimes against Muslims in America are not a major problem, as shown by the chart below taken from an NBC News post in June of this year:
Whether encouraged by his local mosque or some other group, this was an attempt to show people that hate crimes against Muslims are a problem. Hate crimes against anyone are a problem, but the majority of hate crimes in America are not directed at Muslims.
Andrew McCarthy posted an article at the National Review today that should cause us all to stop and think for a moment. In America, we hear a lot of things from the media, and as Americans we tend to accept what we have been told. However, some of what we have been told is patently ridiculous.
Mr. McCarthy poses the question, “Supposing that you are a moderate Muslim, is there any insulting thing I could say, no matter how provocative, or any demeaning video I could show you, no matter how lurid, that could convince you to join ISIS?”
After asking the question above, Mr. McCarthy points out that when the American media and American presidents refer to Islam as ‘a religion of peace,’ they are overlooking some very obvious points.
The article at National Review concludes with this comment on the trial of the World Trade Center bombers:
At trial, the jihadists tried to tell the jury they were just moderate, peace-loving Muslims who had been provoked by American foreign policy, a perception of anti-Muslim bias, and videos of Muslims being persecuted in Bosnia. The Blind Sheikh insisted his incitements to jihad were simply a case of faithfully applying sharia principles, which, according to his lawyers, the First Amendment gave him the right to do.
So I asked the jury a simple question: Is there any obnoxious, insulting, infuriating thing I could say to you, or show to you, that would convince you to join up with mass-murdering terrorists? To become a terrorist yourself? Of course, a dozen commonsense New Yorkers did not need to be asked such a question. They laughed the defense out of the courtroom.
Alas, in the 20 years since, the defense they laughed out of the courtroom has become the bipartisan government policy of the United States.
The U.K. Daily Mail posted a story yesterday (and updated it today) about a Muslim man who was planning to go to Disneyland with his family, but was stopped from boarding his flight and his visa to America revoked. It seems that there was a Facebook page set up by someone who lived as his address claiming links to Al Qaeda and the Taliban.
The article reports:
When asked about the account, Mr Mahmood believed hackers may have been to blame, adding: ‘That could be anything, maybe a mistake.’
He said: ‘It is not my son’s Facebook page. It has a similar name, but not the same as my son’s.
‘The page is also linked to our home address and that could be coincidence. I don’t know why it is linked there. The name is not even the same. The authorities must have linked it simply because of the name Hamza.’
It was understood that the wives of Mr Mahmood and his brother had stayed at home for the trip because one of them was ill and one of the children did not have a valid passport.
But it is now believed that Mr Mahmood’s wife was in Pakistan at the time.
The family say were given no explanation why their visas, organised six weeks before the flight, were suddenly cancelled at the last minute and have now lost the £11,000 they had saved for the holiday.
It has also been suggested the move by US authorities could be due to Mr Mahmood’s brother having been refused entry to Israel eight years ago, but no official explanation has been given by the US Embassy.
Obviously, I have no way of knowing if the man is actually linked to terrorism or not, but I would rather inconvenience one family than let a terrorist into America. If the Facebook page was a joke done by Mr. Mohmood’s son, it was a joke done in extremely bad taste. It was also a joke that had unintended consequences.
I am sorry for the disappointment that this family experienced, but considering the contents of the Facebook page, I don’t think they should have been allowed to come to America until that was explained.