Why We Will Need Guantanamo For A Very Long Time (Warning!! Graphic Content)

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.

Ret. Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn

On August 23rd, Ret. Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn, former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, spoke at the Ahavath Torah Congregation in Stoughton, Massachusetts, as part of the Hausman Memorial Speaker Series. His topic was, “The Field of Fight: How We Can Win the Global War Against Radical Islam and its Allies.” The video below is that event. It is long, but it is worth watching.

 

 

He Said What??!!!!

I have always believed that the best way to get information on a speech is to read the transcript. Yesterday Donald Trump made a speech on foreign policy. Politico posted the text of the speech. I am not going to post the whole thing, but I am going to post some excerpts with some of my comments.

Here are some of the highlights from the speech:

Today we begin a conversation about how to Make America Safe Again.

In the 20th Century, the United States defeated Fascism, Nazism, and Communism.

Now, a different threat challenges our world: Radical Islamic Terrorism.

This summer, there has been an ISIS attack launched outside the war zones of the Middle East every 84 hours.

Mr. Trump then lists a number of terrorist attacks that have occurred in the United States in recent years.

He continued:

Nor can we let the hateful ideology of Radical Islam – its oppression of women, gays, children, and nonbelievers – be allowed to reside or spread within our own countries.

We will defeat Radical Islamic Terrorism, just as we have defeated every threat we have faced in every age before.

But we will not defeat it with closed eyes, or silenced voices.

Anyone who cannot name our enemy, is not fit to lead this country.Anyone who cannot condemn the hatred, oppression and violence of Radical Islam lacks the moral clarity to serve as our President.

The rise of ISIS is the direct result of policy decisions made by President Obama and Secretary Clinton.

Mr. Trump then listed the Middle Eastern and Northern African countries in which the Obama-Clinton team encouraged revolutions. None of these revolutions have turned out well, and all have made the world less safe for everyone. In all of the decisions to overthrow stable governments, there were not adequate plans to deal with the vacuum that the overthrow created.

Mr. Trump noted the spread of ISIS:

ISIS has spread across the Middle East, and into the West. In 2014, ISIS was operating in some 7 nations. Today they are fully operational in 18 countries with aspiring branches in 6 more, for a total of 24 – and many believe it is even more than that. The situation is likely worse than the public knows: a new Congressional report reveals that the Administration has downplayed the growth of ISIS, with 40% of analysts saying they had experienced efforts to manipulate their findings.

At the same time, ISIS is trying to infiltrate refugee flows into Europe and the United States.

Mr. Trump also commented on the Iran Treaty:

Iran, the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism, is now flush with $150 billion in cash released by the United States – plus another $400 million in ransom. Worst of all, the Nuclear deal puts Iran, the number one state sponsor of Radical Islamic Terrorism, on a path to nuclear weapons.

In short, the Obama-Clinton foreign policy has unleashed ISIS, destabilized the Middle East, and put the nation of Iran – which chants ‘Death to America’ – in a dominant position of regional power and, in fact, aspiring to be a dominant world power.

It all began in 2009 with what has become known as President Obama’s global ‘Apology Tour.’

Mr. Trump outlined his plans in the speech:

If I become President, the era of nation-building will be ended. Our new approach, which must be shared by both parties in America, by our allies overseas, and by our friends in the Middle East, must be to halt the spread of Radical Islam.

All actions should be oriented around this goal, and any country which shares this goal will be our ally. We cannot always choose our friends, but we can never fail to recognize our enemies.

As President, I will call for an international conference focused on this goal. We will work side-by-side with our friends in the Middle East, including our greatest ally, Israel. We will partner with King Abdullah of Jordan, and President Sisi of Egypt, and all others who recognize this ideology of death that must be extinguished.

We will also work closely with NATO on this new mission. I had previously said that NATO was obsolete because it failed to deal adequately with terrorism; since my comments they have changed their policy and now have a new division focused on terror threats.

To be honest, I wish nation building worked. I wish we could go into a country, get rid of the tyrants, and help everyone set up a government where they would be free and equal. Unfortunately, reality keeps getting in the way of doing that. On Sunday I posted an article about jihadist training of children that is going on in Gaza summer camp. Camps like this are a serious obstacle to any sort of lasting peace in the Middle East (and an obstacle to ending terrorism).

Mr. Trump identifies the problem and part of the solution:

Just as we won the Cold War, in part, by exposing the evils of communism and the virtues of free markets, so too must we take on the ideology of Radical Islam.

While my opponent accepted millions of dollars in Foundation donations from countries where being gay is an offense punishable by prison or death, my Administration will speak out against the oppression of women, gays and people of different faith.

Our Administration will be a friend to all moderate Muslim reformers in the Middle East, and will amplify their voices.

This includes speaking out against the horrible practice of honor killings, where women are murdered by their relatives for dressing, marrying or acting in a way that violates fundamentalist teachings.

Over 1,000 Pakistani girls are estimated to be the victims of honor killings by their relatives each year. Recently, a prominent Pakistani social media star was strangled to death by her brother on the charge of dishonoring the family. In his confession, the brother took pride in the murder and said: “Girls are born to stay home and follow traditions.”

Shockingly, this is a practice that has reached our own shores.

One such case involves an Iraqi immigrant who was sentenced to 34 years in jail for running over his own daughter claiming she had become “too Westernized.”

To defeat Islamic terrorism, we must also speak out forcefully against a hateful ideology that provides the breeding ground for violence and terrorism to grow.

Mr. Trump had a few comments on immigration:

A Trump Administration will establish a clear principle that will govern all decisions pertaining to immigration: we should only admit into this country those who share our values and respect our people.

In the Cold War, we had an ideological screening test. The time is overdue to develop a new screening test for the threats we face today.

In addition to screening out all members or sympathizers of terrorist groups, we must also screen out any who have hostile attitudes towards our country or its principles – or who believe that Sharia law should supplant American law.

Those who do not believe in our Constitution, or who support bigotry and hatred, will not be admitted for immigration into the country.

Only those who we expect to flourish in our country – and to embrace a tolerant American society – should be issued visas.

To put these new procedures in place, we will have to temporarily suspend immigration from some of the most dangerous and volatile regions of the world that have a history of exporting terrorism.

As soon as I take office, I will ask the State Department and the Department of Homeland Security to identify a list of regions where adequate screening cannot take place. We will stop processing visas from those areas until such time as it is deemed safe to resume based on new circumstances or new procedures.

The size of current immigration flows are simply too large to perform adequate screening.

The speech concluded:

But just like we couldn’t defeat communism without acknowledging that communism exists – or explaining its evils – we can’t defeat Radical Islamic Terrorism unless we do the same.

This also means we have to promote the exceptional virtues of our own way of life – and expecting that newcomers to our society do the same.

Pride in our institutions, our history and our values should be taught by parents and teachers, and impressed upon all who join our society.

Assimilation is not an act of hostility, but an expression of compassion. Our system of government, and our American culture, is the best in the world and will produce the best outcomes for all who adopt it.

This approach will not only make us safer, but bring us closer together as a country.

Renewing this spirit of Americanism will help heal the divisions in our country. It will do so by emphasizing what we have in common – not what pulls us apart.

This is my pledge to the American people: as your President I will be your greatest champion. I will fight to ensure that every American is treated equally, protected equally, and honored equally. We will reject bigotry and oppression in all its forms, and seek a new future built on our common culture and values as one American people.

Only this way, will we make America Great Again and Safe Again – For Everyone.

I don’t know how much of this speech the media will actually quote or how they will report it, but to me, this speech represents a very common sense approach to foreign policy and terrorism. This does not sound like the ranting maniac that the press is attempting to make Donald Trump out to be. I think we need more websites posting transcripts of speeches and less commentary by a biased press.

 

The Struggle To Get Your Message Out

The twisting and turning of the Obama Administration to avoid using the word terrorism is rather obvious. At times it borders on comedy. After the Orlando attack, the Department of Justice stated that we may never know the motive of the shooter (the fact that he called 911 and claimed to be doing the shooting for ISIS was somehow seen as irrelevant). According to Stephen Coughlin in his book Catastrophic Failure, “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—even insisting on firings, “re-training,” and “purges” of officers, analysts, special agents, and decision-makers who created or made such materials available.” The White House complied. That purging of the truth when training the people who are supposed to protect us is a serious problem. The media has followed the lead of the White House. This move has not protected us, but it has caused an interesting change of strategy on the part of the terrorist leaders.

Yesterday the following was posted at National Review:

Lone wolf jihadists should target white Americans so no one mistakes their terror attacks for hate crimes unrelated to the cause of radical Islam, Al Qaeda writes in the latest edition of its online magazine.
In an article first reported by The Foreign Desk, Al Qaeda of the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) called for more self-directed Muslim terrorists to kill in America. But the article, titled “Inspire guide: Orlando operation,” tells terrorists to “avoid targeting places and crowds where minorities are generally found” because if gays or Latinos appear to be the targets, “the federal government will be the one taking full responsibility.
The headline of the article at National Review is, “Al Qaeda: Kill White People So the Left Doesn’t Screw Up the Narrative.”

The article states:
By attacking a gay club, Omar Mateen likely thought he’d chose the perfect target for illustrating his jihadist motivations. After all, ISIS and multiple other jihadist organizations are known for executing gays in particularly vile ways. But when the Left’s narrative collides with ISIS’s, the Left’s narrative wins — so a Muslim Democrat’s attack became an expression of Christian Republican hate. It was the most extraordinary perversion of truth that I’ve ever seen.

We will never defeat someone trying to destroy us if we refuse to name them.

The Last Surviving Member Of The Terrorist Team That Attacked Paris Has Been Arrested

Yahoo News is reporting today that Salah Abdeslam, the last surviving member of the team that carried out the terrorist attack on Paris, has been captured.

The article includes a timeline of Salah Abdeslam’s life:

ParisBomberThis man was born in Brussels. He was considered a French national. The article reports that he had evidently planned to blow himself up with a suicide vest, but changed his mind at the last moment. A suicide vest was found in Paris after the attack in an area Abdeslam’s cell phone indicated that he had been in.

The article reports:

The ringleader of the attacks, IS member Abdelhamid Abaaoud, was also from Brussels. He was killed in a raid in Paris in November.

Another of the Paris attackers, Bilal Hadfi, was last week buried quietly in the same cemetery as Abdeslam’s brother.

Both had links to Molenbeek, a largely immigrant district which has been a hotbed of Islamist violence for decades.

Abdeslam and his brother had run a bar in the area until it was shut down by the authorities a few weeks before the Paris attacks.

It is frightening to think that ISIS is successfully recruiting western-born terrorists for suicide attacks in Western countries. This man would have easily been able to come to America on a French visa. That thought is troubling.

Islam Has A Problem With Free Speech

I am currently reading the book Catastrophic Failure by Stephen Coughlin. In the book, the Mr. Coughlin explains the Islamic view of free speech and human rights. One of the things he makes clear in the book is that in Islam, human rights and free speech must be subject to Sharia Law. Simply stated, this means that apostasy or slander can be punishable by death. Under Sharia Law, slander is defined as anything that makes the person hearing it unhappy–truth is not relevant in the definition. A recent story posted at Dr. Rich Swier’s blog illustrates this. The headline of the story is, “UC Berkeley Student’s Article Pulled Over Fears For Her Safety.”

This is the article:

If someone had told me six years ago that I would leave Islam and end up an atheist, I would never have believed him.

I was born and raised as a Muslim. I grew up in a Muslim country — Pakistan — surrounded by other Muslims who were convinced that their religion was the one true religion. My family, in particular, followed moderate Sunni Islam, which is a more liberal approach based on the “Sunnah,” or Prophet’s teachings. That was the path I set out on. But now, as a Muslim apostate and atheist, my journey couldn’t have led me any further from what I once knew to be true.

Until I was 14, I simply accepted everything I’d been told about Islam. I was taught that being born into a Muslim family is a blessing and is the greatest gift that Allah can bestow upon someone. I initially thought the Sunni path I followed was the one true path, just like my Shia, Bori and Ismaili friends adhered to the teachings of the sects their families followed. I noticed how everyone around me claimed to have a monopoly on the truth, which made me question who was actually right. I started to view Islam — and religion in general — as something dogmatic, irrational, unscientific and, most of all, completely sexist.

A feminist since age 10, it’s always been hard for me to reconcile my feminism with my faith. Even though the Pakistani society in which I grew up was sexist, my family has always been very progressive. As a result, I never accepted the male superiority and traditional gender roles that were part of my society. For most of my teen years, I felt torn apart by my contradictory beliefs. On one hand, I was a radical feminist who supported gay rights. But on the other hand, I was a practicing Muslim whose religion was clearly homophobic and placed men above women.

At that point, I still believed in an all-knowing God, and I felt that if I learned more about Islam, I would be able to understand why it stated the things it did. I read the Quran with translation and countless books on Islamic jurisprudence. I started taking classes at Zaynab Academy and Al-Huda, two traditional Islamic organizations. The Islam they preached was not the liberal, fluid Islam of my parents: Instead, it followed the Quran very rigidly. While the moderate Muslims I knew never encouraged hijab or gender segregation, these institutions differed in their views. I started to follow a more ritualistic Islam, going as far as giving up listening to music and wearing the hijab.

Stifled by orthodox Islam, I decided to turn to a more liberal approach. I embraced Sufism, which is the mystical side of Islam, and began to see God as an entity of love. Feminist scholars, such as Amina Wadud and Leila Ahmed, gave me a glimmer of hope that Islam and feminism could be compatible, although I later found their arguments very selective. On the other extreme, I read writers such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali, another ex-Muslim atheist, whose harsh criticism of Islam was not always justified.

After trying to understand Islam through a plurality of perspectives — orthodox, feminist, Sufi and liberal approaches — I decided to leave Islam, but by that point, I had realized that I didn’t need to look at things as black and white. I could leave Islam without dismissing it or labeling it as wrong.

Going through all of these versions of Islam has enabled me to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the religion. Islam is no monolith, and with more than 1.5 billion followers, it’s impossible to refer to Islam as a single entity. There are Muslim women who cover every inch of their bodies except for their eyes, and there are also Muslim women who wear short skirts. With so much variation amongst Muslims, it’s hard to determine who really gets to speak for Islam.

Despite being one of the fastest-growing religions in the world, Islam is still extremely misrepresented and shrouded with stereotypes. I want to address these stereotypes and portray Islam in all its diversity. I’ve experienced the religion firsthand and have also viewed it as an objective bystander. I probably spend more time thinking about God than most religious people; despite my skepticism, I’ve always yearned for a spiritual connection. I want to share what I’ve learned about Islam over the years. I plan to defend it and give credit where it’s due — Islam, after all, gave women the right to work and own property back in the seventh century — and I also plan to ruthlessly point out areas that need reform (yes, Islam does allow men to have four wives and sex slaves).

If there’s one thing I’ve learned about Islam, it’s that my former religion, just like any other ideology, has its flaws. Religion should not be immune to criticism. It’s important to have an honest dialogue about religion and identify what can be improved — and that’s exactly what I plan to do.

The publishing of this article put the author’s life in danger.

The American First Amendment is at risk. According to the book Catastrophic Failure, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) has been working with the United Nations since 2005 to subtly change the definition of free speech.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton assured the world that America would not “criminalize speech unless there is an incitement to imminent violence.” (Page 309) Secretary Clinton supported the United Nations Human Rights Council Resolution 16/18. The resolution calls upon states to protect freedom of religion, to counter offensive expression through education,, interfaith dialogue, and public debate, and to prohibit discrimination, profiling, and hate crimes, but not to criminalize speech unless there is an incitement to imminent violence.

Since the Muslim community seems to be the community that reacts to free speech with violence, we can see what this resolution is actually about. It is a quiet imposition of Sharia Law on non-Muslim countries. If my speech causes violence, I do not have the right to free speech. If my speech does not cause violence, it is acceptable. Logically it follows that since Christians and Jews do not kill people in response to negative statements, criticizing them must be acceptable as free speech. Since Muslims often respond to negative statements with violence, criticizing them is no longer legal.

This is the enemy we need to be aware of in America–the enemy that attacks our Constitution and freedom. It is a subtle attack that needs to be countered with truth and education. Unfortunately, our government and our mainstream media are not familiar with either of those concepts.

 

I Guess Finding Terrorists Jobs Isn’t The Answer

Yesterday the New York Post posted an editorial in response to intelligence information regarding Jihad John, shown in ISIS videos beheading westerners.

The article reminds us that the facts show the fallacy of recent U.S. State Department comments on terrorists:

Contrary to the claim that the attraction to radical Islam is being driven by economic deprivation, Emwazi grew up in a wealthy household in West London, attended nice schools and graduated with a degree in computer programming.

And he was no recent transplant: His family moved to Britain from Kuwait back when he was six.

This picture should put to rest the ridiculous assertion by the State Department’s Marie Harf that fighting ISIS means understanding the “root causes that leads people to join these groups” — e.g., a lack of good jobs.

Hostages who escaped ISIS’s clutches described Emwazi as “obsessed” with Somalia and say he forced them to watch videos of ISIS-offshoot al-Shabaab.

Jihad John, Muhammad Emwazi, is educated an middle-class. Osama bin Laden was wealthy. It seems that material or professional success has very little to do with becoming a terrorist.