Does The Truth Matter?

Yesterday The Daily Caller posted an article about the reporting of the recent shooting in Fresno, California.

The article reports:

The Associated Press edited the words of a Muslim man who allegedly killed three white people in downtown Fresno Tuesday afternoon and shouted “Allahu Akbar!”

The suspect, 39-year-old Kori Ali Muhammad, holds fervent anti-Trump beliefs according to his social media profile, and he told police afterward that he hates white people.

Rather than reporting the gunman’s literal words, however, the AP reported the gunman as saying “God is great.”

If David Duke made a racist statement saying ‘n***s are inferior’, would the media report it as ‘white people are wonderful’? I don’t think so. Yet that is essentially what the Associated Press (AP) did. By translating the phrase into English, the report misleads the reader into believing that some sort of Christian fundamentalist with a grudge against President Trump killed these people. There is no way an ordinary person would interpret this as an act of domestic terrorism by a radical Muslim (which it was) from the AP report.

The Cost Of Not Defending Your Culture

Generally speaking, western countries practice freedom of religion. Unfortunately, that is not part of the culture in many Muslim countries. As more Muslims immigrate to western countries, many of these immigrants tend to bring their lack of respect for other religions with them. A recent event in Australia illustrates the problem.

Breitbart is reporting today that an Australian named Mike, of Greek heritage, was assaulted while riding the train through “Muslim enclaves” in south-west Sydney.

The article reports:

Christians in Sydney, Australia, are being advised to hide their crosses after an Arabic-speaking gang shouting “F*** Jesus!” attacked a couple on a train while transport officers looked on from a “safe space” and did nothing.

That is a disgrace–both the attack and the lack of action on the part of the transport officers.

The article explains:

Mike, who asked for his surname to be withheld for fear he might be targeted, said that four men of Middle Eastern appearance ripped his cross from his neck, stomped on it, and rained kicks and punches on his face, back, and shoulders. Two women attacked his girlfriend when she tried to protect him.

Five uniformed transport officers watched the attack take place but failed to intervene, Mike claimed, leaving the police to meet the train at a later station.

“I was born in Australia of Greek heritage,” Mike told the Telegraph. “I’ve always worn my cross. For [them] to rip it off and step on it has to be a religious crime … It’s not on to feel unsafe in your own country.”

Mike went to Greek community leader and former Sutherland Shire Council deputy mayor Reverend George Capsis, who believes Christians in Sydney face growing persecution at the hands of Muslim gangs, about the attack.

“This is not an isolated incident,” said Rev Capsis, who explained that Mike was the fourth Christian to have come to him about a religiously-motivated attack in just the last six months.

An explanation was given for the behavior of the transport officers:

Sydney Trains defended the transports officers who stood by as the attack took place, telling the Telegraph their main responsibility is tackling fare evasion and that they are trained to observe from a “safe space” if passengers are assaulted.

“Why are ticket inspections deemed more important than passenger safety?” commented Telegraph journalist Miranda Devine.

“Surely, if taxpayers fund dedicated Transport Officers to ride the trains all day, they should be authorised to do more than just observe crimes and call police. Anyone can do that.”

Rev Capsis believes that, “If this keeps up, someone will be hurt.”

Wow. Just wow.

Using Our Court System Against Us

The Gateway Pundit posted an article today about Imam Ismail Elshikh, who leads the largest mosque in Hawaii.

The article quotes a World Net Daily article explaining the Imam’s ties to the Muslim Brotherhood:

Imam Ismail Elshikh, 39, leads the largest mosque in Hawaii and claims he is suffering “irreparable harm” from the president’s executive order, which places a 90-day ban on travel to the U.S. from six countries.

One of those six countries is Syria. Elshikh’s mother in law is Syrian and would not be able to visit her family in Hawaii for 90 days if Trump’s ban were allowed to go into effect.

Hawaii’s Obama-appointed federal judge, Derrick Watson, made sure the ban did not go into effect, striking it down Wednesday while buying Hawaii’s claim that it amounts to a “Muslim ban.” The state’s attorney general, along with co-plaintiff Elshikh, claims the ban would irreparably harm the state’s tourism industry and its Muslim families.

…Elshikh was born and raised in Cairo, Egypt, the home base of the Muslim Brotherhood, whose stated goal is to spread Shariah law throughout the world.

Elshikh is living in the U.S. on a green card, which gives him permanent legal status.

The proof that his mosque is affiliated with the Brotherhood is found in the court records for Honolulu County, which lists the deed holder as the North American Islamic Trust.

John Guandolo, a former FBI counter-terrorism specialist and now private consultant to law enforcement at Understanding the Threat, said all mosques under the “Muslim Association of” moniker are typically affiliated with the Brotherhood.

But the clincher in this case is that the mosque property is traced to NAIT, “confirming it is a Muslim Brotherhood organization,” Guandolo told WND in an email.

Let that sink in a minute. A man whose goal is to implement Sharia Law throughout the world is claiming that he is suffering “irreparable harm” from the president’s executive order. Why would that be? How is the president’s executive order impacting him? The man is not an American citizen–he is here legally, but he is not a citizen. When did a non-citizen have the right to work with a judge to overturn a legal act of the president? What country would allow that?

 

Laws Have Consequences

On February 14, 2015, the Gatestone Institute posted the following:

  • Forty years after the Swedish parliament unanimously decided to change the formerly homogenous Sweden into a multicultural country, violent crime has increased by 300% and rapes by 1,472%. Sweden is now number two on the list of rape countries, surpassed only by Lesotho in Southern Africa.
  • Significantly, the report does not touch on the background of the rapists. One should, however, keep in mind that in statistics, second-generation immigrants are counted as Swedes.
  • In an astounding number of cases, the Swedish courts have demonstrated sympathy for the rapists, and have acquitted suspects who have claimed that the girl wanted to have sex with six, seven or eight men.
  • The internet radio station Granskning Sverige called the mainstream newspapers Aftonbladet and Expressen to ask why they had described the perpetrators as “Swedish men” when they actually were Somalis without Swedish citizenship. They were hugely offended when asked if they felt any responsibility to warn Swedish women to stay away from certain men. One journalist asked why that should be their responsibility.

The article further reports:

In 1975, the Swedish parliament unanimously decided to change the former homogeneous Sweden into a multicultural country. Forty years later the dramatic consequences of this experiment emerge: violent crime has increased by 300%.

If one looks at the number of rapes, however, the increase is even worse. In 1975, 421 rapes were reported to the police; in 2014, it was 6,620. That is an increase of 1,472%.

Sweden is now number two on the global list of rape countries. According to a survey from 2010, Sweden, with 53.2 rapes per 100,000 inhabitants, is surpassed only by tiny Lesotho in Southern Africa, with 91.6 rapes per 100,000 inhabitants.

One of the tenets of Sharia Law is that Muslim men can take infidel women as ‘sex slaves.’ Generally Sharia Law has little respect for the rights of women, but it has even less respect for the rights of infidel women. If a woman is not wearing ‘proper Muslim attire,’ she is open to sexual assault, This is part of the culture in Islamic countries. My question is simple–“How much of that are you willing to bring to America?”

The Cost Of Political Correctness

Breitbart is reporting today that Britain is prepared to deport four Pakistani men who hold dual citizenship in the U.K. and Pakistan. The men have fought the deportation claiming that they were the victims of prejudice against Muslims. The truth is very different.

The article reports:

The Rochdale gang to which they belonged was convicted in 2012 of preying on girls as young as 13 in the northern town, plying them with drink and drugs before they were “passed around” for sex.

 Mr. Ahmed is currently serving 22 years for preying on vulnerable teenagers on the street of Rochdale, as well as for 30 child rapes on a young Asian girl he treated as a “possession” for more than a decade. Adil Khan, 47, Abdul Rauf, 48, and Abdul Aziz, 46, have been released on license.

Mr. Justice McCloskey, president of the immigration and asylum chamber of the upper tribunal, said: “The appellants were all many years older than their victims. In some cases girls were raped callously and viciously and in others they were forced to have sex with paying customers.

“The sentencing judge noted that some of the appellants acted to satiate their lust, others did so for financial gain and some had both motivations. All were condemned as having treated their victims as worthless and undeserving of basic respect.”

The judge added: “These offences were shocking, brutal and repulsive.”

As horrible as what they were doing is, it is not the whole story.

In September 2014, I posted an article about the problems with this group of Pakistanis preying on young girls.

That article included the following statements:

The Rotherham scandal and a series of cases in towns including Rochdale highlighted how evidence of Pakistani men targeting white girls for abuse was repeatedly played down for fear of accusations of racism.

Mr Danczuk (Simon Danczuk, who helped expose a pattern of grooming of white teenage girls by men from a Pakistani background in Rochdale, where he is the Labour MP) said the elements of Pakistani political culture itself were partly to blame for the cover-up.

“There are cultural issues around the way politics are done in the Asian community which have to change,” he said.

He said he had personally come under pressure from Asian councillors and members of the community for speaking out as well as being warned by prominent figures in his party.

He pointed to the way in which two Muslim councillors in Rochdale had provided character references for one of the perpetrators of the Rochdale abuse.

Politics are done differently in Pakistan, it is a cultural difference we have imported some of that into some of these northern towns and cities and I think we have to face up to the fact that we can’t carry on doing politics like that.

“It is not healthy and the direct consequence is that we end up having to tackle issues like has been faced in Rotherham.”

He described it as “a looking after your own” within the Asian community which other politicians had accepted.

So the rape of these teenage girls was played down in the name of sensitivity to another culture. What garbage! The actions of these men continued long past when they should have been stopped–because of racial sensitivity. Does this not perfectly illustrate the folly of political correctness? These young girls were subjected to horrific things because someone was afraid of being labeled racist or culturally insensitive. Have we lost our minds? Western culture does not condone the rape of young girls. In Islam, the marriage to a child was perpetrated by the founder of the religion. There are differences in cultures, and we need to recognize those differences before we find ourselves allowing things that no one should allow.

The Fight For America

Yesterday The Washington Free Beacon posted a story about the efforts of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) to prevent Congress from naming the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) as a terrorist organization. In order to understand what is going on here, you have to go back to the Holy Land Foundation Trial where CAIR was named as an unindicted co-conspirator.  During the execution of a search warrant on Ismail Elbarasse’s home in Annandale, Virginia, in 2004, the FBI discovered “An Explanatory Memorandum: On the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America.”  This document was the blueprint of the Muslim Brotherhood’s plan for ‘civilization jihad,’ the taking over of the American government through infiltration and the use of our legal system against us. The information in this document is absolute justification for declaring the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization. Obviously CAIR, because of its association with the Muslim Brotherhood, does not want the bill designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization to get through Congress, so they have begun their campaign against it. Understand that the Muslim Brotherhood (and thus, CAIR) have an almost unlimited supply of money (our dollars spent on Middle Eastern oil) to attempt to work their will.

The story at The Washington Free Beacon reports:

In its efforts to block the bill and smear Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas), the senator spearheading the designation effort, CAIR recently claimed that the bill “was written by a disgraced former FBI agent who has made a career out of bashing Muslims and Islam,” according to a CAIR press release.

CAIR officials claimed that this purported revelation stains the reputations of Cruz and former Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R., Minn.), who helped draft the original bill.

“The fact that Senator Cruz’s current legislation has its origins in the conspiracy theories of a notorious Islamophobe serves to prove that the bill is designed as the basis for an anti-Muslim witch hunt, not as a legitimate defense of national security,” CAIR Government Affairs Director Robert McCaw said earlier this week.

The Free Beacon can now disclose that CAIR’s claims are false and that John Guandolo, the former FBI agent named by CAIR as the bill’s primary architect, played no role in crafting the legislation, according to sources with direct knowledge of the situation

“In response to the false claims of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) claiming that former FBI Agent John Guandolo was responsible for drafting my 2014 bill calling for the designation of the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization, I can state absolutely that Mr. Guandolo had nothing to do with the drafting of the bill, nor did anyone from my office seek his input,” Bachmann exclusively told the Free Beacon.

“Unable to address the findings of the bill, CAIR is engaged in a transparent attempt to attack this effort through smears and guilt by association,” Bachmann said.

This bill needs to be passed. The Muslim Brotherhood is a terrorist group with designs on America. They objected to the 9/11 attack, but only because they thought it was done too soon. Their method is stealth infiltration of government agencies, and unfortunately, they have been very successful at that. If the MB is designated as a terrorist organization, we may be able to remove a number of their operatives from our government. That would be a really good thing.

The article concludes:

David Reaboi, a national security expert and political warfare consultant, told the Free Beacon that CAIR’s main drive is to stop the Muslim Brotherhood from being designated as a terror group.

“As the debate on the Brotherhood heats up, Americans shouldn’t be surprised to see those who’ve argued for decades that Hamas isn’t a terrorist group are also adamant that the Muslim Brotherhood isn’t one either,” Reaboi said.

“Designating the Muslim Brotherhood could do more to dismantle the infrastructure of Islamic terrorism in this country than any other single move by the Trump administration,” he said. “The Muslim Brothers have been involved in some way in nearly every U.S. material support for terror prosecution in the last several decades. That’s one reason why the Brotherhood’s allies in America have worked tirelessly to fight the government’s ability to stop those who give support to terrorist groups, too.”

 

The Dangers Of Following Blindly

The New York Times posted an article on Friday about the women’s march that took place on Saturday. (Yes, a conservative website quoted The New York Times.)

The article reports:

To understand the march better, I stayed up through the nights this week, studying the funding, politics and talking points of the some 403 groups that are “partners” of the march. Is this a non-partisan “Women’s March”?

Roy Speckhardt, executive director of the American Humanist Association, a march “partner,” told me his organization was “nonpartisan” but has “many concerns about the incoming Trump administration that include what we see as a misogynist approach to women.” Nick Fish, national program director of the American Atheists, another march partner, told me, “This is not a ‘partisan’ event.” Dennis Wiley, pastor of Covenant Baptist United Church of Christ, another march “partner,” returned my call and said, “This is not a partisan march.”

Really? UnitedWomen.org, another partner, features videos with the hashtags #ImWithHer, #DemsInPhily and #ThanksObama. Following the money, I poured through documents of billionaire George Soros and his Open Society philanthropy, because I wondered: What is the link between one of Hillary Clinton’s largest donors and the “Women’s March”?

I wonder how many of the women marching took the time to investigate the money and planning behind the march.

The article further reports:

On the issues I care about as a Muslim, the “Women’s March,” unfortunately, has taken a stand on the side of partisan politics that has obfuscated the issues of Islamic extremism over the eight years of the Obama administration. “Women’s March” partners include the Council on American-Islamic Relations, which has not only deflected on issues of Islamic extremism post-9/11, but opposes Muslim reforms that would allow women to be prayer leaders and pray in the front of mosques, without wearing headscarves as symbols of chastity. Partners also include the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), which wrongly designated Maajid Nawaz, a Muslim reformer, an “anti-Muslim extremist” in a biased report released before the election. The SPLC confirmed to me that Soros funded its “anti-Muslim extremists” report targeting Nawaz. (Ironically, CAIR also opposes abortions, but its leader still has a key speaking role.)

Well, the marchers and their pink hats have all gone home. What kind of an image did they project? You can find the pictures of some genuine weird on the internet, so I won’t share them. What I will share is the mess they left at the headquarters of the Daughters of the American Revolution.

I don’t mean to be sexist, but I thought women were neater than that. I am not a member of the DAR (I am not eligible–my ancestors got here too recently for that), but I am deeply offended by the mess these women left. Do they care about the environment? Is there anything they care about other than themselves?

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.

Turning A Blind Eye Or Taking Action?

According to CBN News:

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.

How Do You Identify A Terrorist?

The DC Caller posted an article today about the attack on students at Ohio State University this morning. The attacker was Abdul Razak Ali Artan, a Somali refugee who came to America (after fleeing to Pakistan from Somalia in 2007) in 2014. As a refugee, he was granted legal permanent status. This morning he drove a car into a group of people and exited the car, attacking people with a knife. He was killed by a police officer during his attack.

The article reports:

Furthermore, “The Lantern” — OSU’s campus newspaperran an interview with Artan just a few months ago, in which he criticized the school for not having Muslim prayer rooms on campus.

“I wanted to pray in the open, but I was kind of scared with everything going on in the media,” he stated. “I’m a Muslim, it’s not what the media portrays me to be.”

“I don’t blame them,” he cotinued. “It’s the media that put that picture in their heads so they’re just going to have it, and it’s going to make them feel uncomfortable.”

How do we vet refugees so that this does not happen again? How many ‘lone wolf’ incidents do we need before we see a pattern? What role should the government play in keeping American citizens safe?

Peace And Harmony Isn’t Always All It Is Cracked Up To Be

On November 2nd, The Hausman Memorial Speaker Series presented a program entitled, “National Security Chaos: Are We Passing the Tipping Point?” The program was described as a sober discussion, analysis and advice from prominent experts. The experts included General Jerry Boykin, Frank Gaffney, and Tom Trento, all of whom have studied the infiltration of the Muslim Brotherhood and the idea of Sharia Law into the American political and legal culture. Aside from providing information Americans need, the presentation is obviously legal under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. However, not everyone wanted the presentation to take place.

On November 1st, The Center for Security Policy reported:

In response to a top-level national security panel presentation organized by Rabbi Jonathan Hausman at the Ahavath Torah Congregation tonight in Stoughton, Massachusetts, HAMAS-doing-business-as-CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations) and the notorious jihad incubator at the Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center (ISBCC) have joined forces to mount a last-ditch intimidation campaign.

On Wednesday, 2 November 2016, the Ahavath Torah Congregation is scheduled to host an event featuring Center for Security Policy President Frank Gaffney, Family Research Council Executive Vice President Lieutenant General (Ret.) William G. “Jerry” Boykin, and The United West Founder Tom Trento. In response, ISBCC Executive Director Yusuf Vali has coopted nearly 100 interfaith leaders who represent the Christian and Jewish communities in the Boston area in an attempt to pressure the leadership board of Rabbi Hausman’s synagogue to cancel the program, which is dedicated to highlighting the national security threat posed by the Muslim Brotherhood’s global Islamic Movement.

So, by whom exactly have these interfaith collaborators allowed themselves to be conned into this latest Brotherhood-led assault on free speech? It may be recalled that during the 2016 general election cycle, the United States Council of Muslim Organizations (USCMO), formed in 2014, described on its website the group’s efforts to “promote peace and harmony in society.” And yet, the principal leader of the Muslim Brotherhood-led USCMO is none other than Foreign Terrorist Organization-listed HAMAS dba CAIR. While CAIR tries to present itself as a civil rights organization, it has here joined forces with the ISBCC, jihad command and control center for the April 2013 Boston Marathon bombers, Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev.

It is quite obvious why the ISBCC didn’t want this presentation to go forward–they themselves are a security threat.

The article further reports:

In early October 2016, USCMO leader CAIR (CAIR-Chicago) unsuccessfully led a campaign with a series of partners including Black Lives Matter – Chicago, Arab American Action Network, and the Center for New Community to cancel the Illinois Tactical Officers Association (ITOA)’s five day Tactical Training Conference (9 -13 October 2016) for law enforcement officers and emergency medical technicians. CAIR also mounted pressure in a botched attempt to terminate the contractual relationships between ITOA and the Cook County, IL Department of Homeland Security & Emergency Management (DHSEM), in addition to other government agencies.

Next, it was CAIR-Oklahoma Executive Director Adam Soltani’s turn to strike out on 25 October 2016, when he took aim at a national security briefing on ‘the ideological roots, nature and magnitude of the jihad threat’ provided to the Oklahoma State Legislature. Oklahoma State Representative John Bennett, a combat veteran Marine in two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, called for an Oklahoma State Judiciary and Civil Procedure Committee’s Interim Study on “Radical Islam, Shariah Law, the Muslim Brotherhood and the Radicalization Process.” During the hearings Bennet sponsored, former FBI agent John Guandolo and Chris Gaubatz of Understanding the Threat provided a clear explanation about shariah as the doctrinal Islamic basis for jihad and set forth a succinct evidentiary legal framework about the subversive Brotherhood network in this country. Frank Gaffney, President and Founder of the Center for Security Policy, and Gen. Jerry Boykin also spoke at the hearing, with Gaffney explaining how zakat, the obligatory annual Muslim tax, according to Islamic Law is required to fund jihad.

Clearly, the facts of the accelerating worldwide jihad are becoming all-too obvious to all—and the only rear-guard action the MB’s U.S.-based jihadis in suits seem able to muster at this point is against the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment guarantee for free speech. Civilization Jihad and Star spangled shariah in action.

This is what CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood are about–imposing Sharia Law on non-Muslims. The goal is to make any negative comments about Islam illegal. In October 2011, elements of the American Muslim Brotherhood wrote a letter to the White House demanding that any information briefings related to Islamic-based terrorism be discontinued and those officers, analysts, and special agents involved be retrained or purged. For whatever reason, the White House agreed to this. I have personally met one of the people impacted by this decision. For further details, see the book Catastrophic Failure by Stephen Coughlin.

We are at a tipping point. Our freedom and free speech is in danger. It is my hope that the new administration will change things. At least Donald Trump has no visible ties to the Muslim Brotherhood–Hillary Clinton does through Huma Abedin. Ms. Abedin’s family is very involved with the Muslim Brotherhood and at one time Ms. Abedin was listed on the masthead of a Muslim Brotherhood publication.

If this is new information to you or you do not understand my concern, please follow the link to the Center for Security Policy and read the Muslim Brotherhood memorandum in their own words on their plans for the United States. It is something all Americans need to be aware of.

More Puzzles From Wikileaks

Wikileaks has released thousands of emails, many of which should have been made public as the result of various FOIA (Freedom of Information Act). Some of these emails have confirmed suspicions already held, and some have raised more questions. Yesterday John Hinderaker at Power Line posted an article about one email concerning Hillary Clinton’s actions as Secretary of State.

The article quotes a released email:

From her own experience, and information obtained through [ ] and other agents, [ ] described a “stark difference” between [Condoleezza] RICE and CLINTON with regard to obedience to security and diplomatic protocols. RICE observed strict adherence to State Department security and diplomatic protocols while CLINTON frequently and “blatantly” disregarded them.

For example, it is standard security and diplomatic protocol for the Secretary of State to ride in the armored limousine with the local U.S. ambassador when traveling in countries abroad. It is seen as diplomatic protocol for the Secretary of State to arrive at foreign diplomatic functions with the local ambassador; however, CLINTON refused to do so, instead choosing to be accompanied in the limousine by her Chief of Staff, HUMA ABEDIN. This frequently resulted in complaints by ambassadors who were insulted and embarrassed by this breach of protocol. [ ] explained that CLINTON’s protocol breaches were well known throughout Diplomatic Security and were “abundant.”

[ ] explained that ABEDIN possessed “much more power” over CLINTON’s staff and schedule than other former chiefs of staff. [ ] believed that ABEDIN herself was often responsible for overriding security and diplomatic protocols on behalf of CLINTON.

If you follow the link above to the article, you can see a copy of the actual email. There are a few obvious things to learn from this email. For whatever reason, Hillary has very little knowledge or respect for diplomatic protocol. That seems rather odd for a Secretary of State. The other disturbing information here is the role of Huma Abedin. Ms. Abedin would most likely play a major role in a Clinton Administration should Hillary Clinton be elected. The problem with that is that Ms. Abedin has a strong family connection to the Muslim Brotherhood. The problem with that is that the Muslim Brotherhood in their own words (according to government exhibit 003-0085 in the Holy Land Foundation Trial) has intentions of supplanting the U.S. Constitution with Sharia Law. A vote for Hillary Clinton is vote for the end of American law as we know it. It is quite possible that Hillary Clinton would be the first woman to be President and the last President to serve under the U.S. Constitution.

Is Anyone Paying Attention?

The Clarion Project reported today that U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson recently spoke at the annual Islamic Society of America (ISNA) event.

The article reports:

ISNA is a group with Muslim Brotherhood origins and an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror-financing trial. In fact, the Holy Land Foundation was based within the ISNA building. ISNA also deposited checks into its account that were made out to the “Palestinian Mujahadeen [jihadi fighters],” the name used at the time for Hamas’s military wing. The funding was transferred to the Holy Land Foundation.

The ISNA conference that Johnson spoke at included extremist speakers, as it has done in previous years. This year’s speakers included Jamal Badawi, a founder of another Brotherhood entity, the Muslim American Society. Badawi has praised the terrorist organization Hamas, preached in support of “combative jihad” and was personally listed in a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood directory.

Another conference speaker was Nihad Awad, found and executive director of the Council on Islamic American Relations (CAIR), another U.S. Brotherhood entity and unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land terror financing case.

Johnson told conference participants, “Your story is the quintessential American story,” and was described by the Post as the “highest-ranking U.S. official to address an ISNA conference.”

However, the Post’s description of Johnson is misleading as President Obama himself addressed the 2013 ISNA convention in which he  praised the group for its partnership with his administration. That convention also featured a roster of speakers including many extremists.

One of Obama’s senior advisers, Valerie Jarrett, also spoke at ISNA’s 2009 convention. 

This is not a group we want to give any amount of credibility to. Their goal is to infiltrate the American government with the purpose of instituting Sharia Law. This is the link to one of the government exhibits from the Holy Land Foundation Trial. The first section is in Arabic, but the second section is the government’s translation. The document details the Muslim Brotherhood’s Plan to subvert American freedom and replace with Sharia Law. Take the time to follow the link and read the exhibit. It illustrates why it does not make sense to have Mr. Johnson as the head of Homeland Security or Valerie Jarrett as a Presidential advisor.

An Uninformed Public Is Fair Game For The Media

The media is all abuzz right now claiming that Donald Trump disrespected the parents of a Muslim soldier who was killed in Iraq. The parents of the soldier were paraded in front of the public for whatever reason. What Trump said was probably unnecessary, but so was parading the parents in front of the public. (Just for the record, we should probably look at some of the comments Hillary has made about Patricia Smith.) At any rate, let’s look at these wonderful Muslim parents. There are a few things that the mainstream media seems to have overlooked.

Yesterday Breitbart posted an article about Khizr Khan and his background.

The article reports:

But, as Breitbart News showed on Monday midday, that clearly was not the case. Khizr Khan has all sorts of financial, legal, and political connections to the Clintons through his old law firm, the mega-D.C. firm Hogan Lovells LLP. That firm did Hillary Clinton’s taxes for years, starting when Khan still worked there involved in, according to his own website, matters “firm wide”—back in 2004. It also has represented, for years, the government of Saudi Arabia in the United States. Saudi Arabia, of course, is a Clinton Foundation donor which—along with the mega-bundlers of thousands upon thousands in political donations to both of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaigns in 2008 and 2016—plays right into the “Clinton Cash” narrative.

All of this information was publicly available, and accessible to anyone—including any of these reporters, and Breitbart News—with a basic Google search. Anyone interested in doing research about the subjects they are reporting on—otherwise known as responsible journalism—would have checked into these matters. But clearly, none in the mainstream media did—probably because, as Fox News’ Chad Pergram noted, Democrats “sense blood in the water over” the whole Khan controversy.

The article also points out that Khan now runs a law firm that financially benefits from opposition to Donald Trump’s policies on migration — specifically that he aims to represent aspiring EB5 visa holders, who pay large sums of money to enter the country, a program that the Senate Judiciary Committee has uncovered as having major flaws.

Somehow in their attacks on Donald Trump, the media overlooked the background of Khizr Khan.

This attack on Donald Trump while leaving out significant facts is only a foretaste of what is to come. The only defense against this sort of misinformation is to do your own research and ignore the major media.

I am truly sorry that the Khans lost their son, but I am also truly sorry that they are being used as political pawns while the truth about who they are and the things they support are being hidden.

Misquoting The Constitution For Your Own Gain

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.

It Depends On What You Mean By Free Speech

I am about to get into the weeds here, but I want to explain what is happening to our freedom of speech in America and where the threat to the First Amendment is coming from.

In his book Catastrophic Failure, Stephen Coughlin explains, “In the United States, the initial amendment of the Constitution indicates the primacy of free expression. The framers of the Universal Declaration of Human RIghts–understanding that free expression is linked with freedom of though and conscience–mirrored the First Amendment’s intent in Article 19:

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

“The Cairo Declaration addresses free expression in its Article 22, using language that parallels that of the Universal Declaration:

(a) Everyone shall have the right to express his opinion freely in such manner as would not be contrary to the principles of the Shari’ah.

(b) Everyone shall have 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.”

The Cairo Declaration embodies the Islamic definition of free speech. As you can see, it differs from the American definition of free speech. Unfortunately, there are those in America (some of whom have a great influence on public opinion) who are moving toward the Islamic definition of free speech.

The American Freedom Law Center (AFLC) has released a press release stating the the AFLC has filed a federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, challenging Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) under the First Amendment.

The press release states:

Section 230 provides immunity from lawsuits to Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, thereby permitting these social media giants to engage in government-sanctioned censorship and discriminatory business practices free from legal challenge.

The lawsuit was brought on behalf of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer, and Jihad Watch.

As alleged in the lawsuit, Geller and Spencer, along with the organizations they run, are often subject to censorship and discrimination by Facebook, Twitter and YouTube because of Geller’s and Spencer’s beliefs and views, which Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube consider expression that is offensive to Muslims.

Such discrimination, which is largely religion-based in that these California businesses are favoring adherents of Islam over those who are not, is prohibited in many states, but particularly in California by the state’s anti-discrimination law, which is broadly construed to prohibit all forms of discrimination.  However, because of the immunity granted by the federal government, Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube are free to engage in their otherwise unlawful, discriminatory practices.

As set forth in the lawsuit, Section 230 of the CDA immunizes businesses such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube from civil liability for any action taken to “restrict access to or availability of material that” that they “consider[] to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected.”

…David Yerushalmi, AFLC co-founder and senior counsel, added:

“Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube have notoriously censored speech that they deem critical of Islam, thereby effectively enforcing blasphemy laws here in the United States with the assistance of the federal government.”

Yerushalmi concluded:

“It has been the top agenda item of Islamic supremacists to impose such standards on the West.  Its leading proponents are the Muslim Brotherhood’s network of Islamist activist groups in the West and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), which co-sponsored, with support from Obama and then-Secretary of State Clinton, a U.N. resolution which called on all nations to ban speech that could promote mere hostility to Islam.  Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube are falling in line, and we seek to stop this assault on our First Amendment freedoms.”

Unfortunately, there is an implied threat to those speaking out against Islam. Islam in its end game is about political control. One part of gaining political control is to silence any opposition. Although I can understand the reasons for censoring speech critical of Islam (protecting assets, employees, avoiding terrorist attacks), it is folly to believe that anyone benefits from being ignorant of the goals of Islam. Some Americans have done their own research into the Muslim Brotherhood Plan for America (laid out in government exhibit 3-85 from the Holy Land Foundation Trial– the first part is in a language other than English, the second part is in English) and realized what civilization jihad is. If this is a new concept for you, please check out the centerforsecuritypolicy.org for more information. There is a move to take away Americans First Amendment rights. We need to stop that move.

 

Sowing The Seeds Of Your Own Destruction

A website called Taki’s Magazine posted an article today containing an interview of Jesse Hughes,  one of the band members who was on stage during the Paris massacre. I am going to quote heavily from the article, but every word in the article is important, so please follow the link to read the entire piece.

The article reports:

Jesse Hughes: I saw fear fall like a blanket on the whole crowd and they fell like wheat in the wind—the way you would before a god. I was totally alert from the very beginning. The first thing I needed to do was find my girl. Fear took a backseat and “where’s my girl?” took over. I could smell gunpowder in the backstage area and I knew someone fired a round back there. I saw a guy with an FAL and when he turned to face me his eyes looked like marbles. He was stoned out of his mind, and we now know they were on Xanax and cocaine. I recognized him. I’d seen him earlier in the day and noticed him staring at us.

…I got in a lot of trouble for saying that. I know for sure that they were in there early. I remember them staring at my buddy. I just chalked it up to Arab envy. You know what I mean? When a Muslim sees a cocky American dude with tattoos, he stares at him. I realized later it was Abdeslam and he was staring at my buddy because they thought he was a threat. There’s no denying the terrorists were already inside, and they had to get in somehow. During the shooting I went outside and the backstage door was propped open. How did that happen?

…A day after, at the stadium, Muslims booed the moment of silence and we barely heard about it in the press. I saw Muslims celebrating in the street during the attack. I saw it with my own eyes. In real time! How did they know what was going on? There must have been coordination.

…Do you think a percentage of the security staff was Muslim?

I know they were. Look, security guards backstage are notorious for being dicks. They check your ID every few minutes and nobody goes back and forth without being checked, even if you’re in the band. This guy didn’t care what we did. He didn’t even look at me.

The only time he seemed remotely interested in us was when he said to my girlfriend, “Do you speak French?” and “Where are you from?” She said she was from Texas and he was getting frustrated because that’s not what he meant. Then she said, “I’m American” and he lost interest. I honestly think he was trying to determine if she was Arab or not. She’s Mexican and she could easily pass for Lebanese and I think he was going to warn her if she was Muslim.

I kept opening up the back door to smoke and that’s usually a big no-no because of the sound ordinances. I’ve played there before and opening up that door to smoke got you in big trouble. This time, the security guy walks right past me and anxiously looks down the alleyway in either direction.

Please follow the link above to read the entire article. I do not necessarily appreciate some of his language, but under the circumstances, I can understand it. His views on why people didn’t put up a fight or get themselves out of danger are inciteful, and we can learn from his experience. This article underscores the need to know who your security people are and to be alert and proactive when bad things happen.

 

About That Treaty…

It is no secret that Iran has been a major provider of funds and arms for terrorists in the Middle East and other areas in Asia and Africa. The Iranian nuclear treaty does not seem to have slowed their arming of terrorists or their belligerent attitude.

Yesterday Fox News reported that a U.S. Navy ship stopped a shipment of arms going from Iran and likely headed for Yemen.

This is one of the pictures from the article:

IranianArmsShipmentThe article reports:

The Navy said the shipment included 1,500 AK-47s, 200 rocket-propelled grenade launchers and 21 .50-caliber machine guns.

After the U.S. seized the weapons stash from the dhow, a traditional sailing vessel, the Navy let the crew go. A U.S. official told Fox News current rules do not allow western naval forces to seize the crew in addition to illicit cargo. “You have to find a country willing to prosecute,” the official said. 

A defense official reached by Fox News would not reveal the nationality of the dhow’s crew.

Last month, Iran announced that it tested missiles marked with the phrase “Israel must be wiped out,” in violation of a U.N. Security Council resolution tied to the recent nuclear deal. The resolution forbids Iran from working on its ballistic missile program for eight years and bans sales of its conventional weapons.

It is becoming very obvious that the only reason Iran was even willing to negotiate the recent nuclear deal was that it wanted the economic sanctions lifted. It is also becoming very obvious that even stricter sanctions need to be imposed. Iran is acting as a major supporter of terrorism. That needs to stop. Allowing Iran to continue arming terrorists and building a nuclear program to wipe out Israel is simply the suicide of western civilization. To allow Iran to continue its present behavior will have horrible consequences in the not-to-distant future.

A Wake-Up Call From Northern Virginia

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:

ISISArrests2ISISArrests

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.

Most of the large mosques in America are built and funded by the Islamic Society of North America. This organization is named as a friend of the Muslim Brotherhood in the Exhibits in the Holy Land Foundation Trial. The exhibit which names the group is the Muslim Brotherhood document entitled, “An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America.” If you have never read this document, please google the exhibits and read it. It is chilling.

Not All Cultures Treat Everyone Equally

The Daily Caller posted a story today stating:

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.

Balance In American Education

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

By Butt

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 49, Chapter 6, Part 10, relative to curriculum for K–12 public schools.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE:

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.

 

A Questionable Visit

President Obama will visit a mosque next month. It will be the first U.S.-based mosque he has visited during his presidency. However, the President’s choice of which mosque to visit is rather odd.

The Daily Caller posted the following yesterday:

The White House announced on Saturday that Obama will visit the Islamic Society of Baltimore (ISB) on Wednesday. He has visited several mosques overseas as president but has resisted visiting one in the homeland. The purpose of the trip, according to the White House, is to “celebrate the contributions Muslim Americans make to our nation and reaffirm the importance of religious freedom to our way of life.”

But ISB is a curious choice for Obama’s first domestic visit.

The mosque is a member of a network of mosques controlled by the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), a Muslim civil rights group named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the 2008 Holy Land Foundation terror case. Several executives with that organization were convicted of sending money to aid the terrorist group Hamas.

The article goes on to list the various connections of those associated with or leading the mosque in recent years. It is not a list of people who love America or freedom.

Many of the mosques in America are built by ISNA. The money funding these mosques comes from overseas, as many new congregations do not have the money to build the elaborate mosques that ISNA provides them with. If you read the government exhibits from the Holy Land Foundation Trial, you will learn that these mosques are part of a plan for ‘civilization jihad’ to help convert America into an Islamic nation. It is somewhat disturbing that President Obama would choose a mosque with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood to visit (ISNA has strong links to the Muslim Brotherhood). Hopefully, this will be a one-time event.

A Way Of Thinking That Is Incompatible With Civilization

Breitbart.com posted an article yesterday about some recent comments by Imam Sami Abu-Yusuf, the Imam of a Salafist Cologne mosque.

The article reports:

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…

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.

The Independent Journal Review posted an article about Ariens Manufacturing.

The article reports:

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-TV reported 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.

Everything You Need To Know About Islamic Laws

The Daily Caller posted an article today about a law rejected in Pakistan.

The article reports:

A bid to ban child marriage in Pakistan utterly failed, after the Council of Islamic Ideology declared the legislation “anti-Islamic” and “blasphemous.”

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.

The article further reports:

With increasing immigration, the practice of child marriage has also spread to the West, raising alarm especially in the United Kingdom. According to data from the Home Office’s Forced Marriage Unit, there were 1,485 cases of child marriage in 2012. Another government report also foundchild marriage is increasing around the world, with the rate expected to climb to 14 million child marriages a year before 2020 hits.

It’s time to ban Sharia Law in America.