Tag Archives: Sharia Law

Losing Your Culture Due To Uncontrolled Immigration

Posted on by

On Thursday, MSN reported that Britain now has sharia courts–85 Islamic councils operating across the nation. The article explains that the sharia courts are necessary because the large number of Muslims in Britain from across Europe and North America seek religious rulings on marriage and family matters.

The article notes:

An estimated 100,000 Islamic marriages have been conducted in Britain, with many not officially registered with civil authorities.

These marriages often require religious rulings for dissolution, particularly affecting women who must seek approval from sharia councils for divorce.

Many aspects of traditional sharia have been modified in most Muslim countries, but classical rulings are frequently still observed in marriage and divorce matters.

The councils have religious authority to end marriages at a wife’s request if her husband is unwilling to grant a divorce, though this process differs significantly from civil proceedings.

Men seeking Islamic divorces can end their marriages simply by saying “divorce” three times, highlighting a stark contrast in gender-based religious procedures.

The normalisation of polygamy is evident through modern technology, with an app allowing Muslim men in England and Wales to create Islamic wills.

The app features a drop-down menu enabling men to specify between one and four wives.

This same app demonstrates further gender disparities, allocating daughters half the inheritance amount given to sons.

This is a very watered-down, friendly description of sharia law.

Some of the tenets in sharia law not mentioned are (source here):

• Theft is punishable by amputation of the hands (see above and Quran 5:38).
• Criticizing or denying any part of the Quran is punishable by death.
• Criticizing Muhammad or denying that he is a prophet is punishable by death.
• Criticizing or denying Allah is punishable by death (see Allah moon god).
• A Muslim who becomes a non-Muslim is punishable by death (see Compulsion).
• A non-Muslim who leads a Muslim away from Islam is punishable by death.
• A non-Muslim man who marries a Muslim woman is punishable by death.
• Homosexuality is punishable by death but sodomizing boys is fine (see Islam & Sex).
• Girls’ clitoris should be cut (Muhammad’s words, Book 41, Kitab Al-Adab, Hadith 5251).
• Girls can be sodomized until and vaginally raped after 8 years of age (see Islam & Sex).
• A woman or girl who has been raped cannot testify in court against her rapist(s).
• Testimonies of 4 male witnesses are required to prove rape of a female (Quran 24:13).
• A woman or girl who alleges rape without producing 4 male witnesses is guilty of adultery.
• A woman or girl found guilty of adultery is punishable by death (see “Islamophobia“).
• A male convicted of rape can have his conviction dismissed by marrying his victim.
• Muslim men have sexual rights to any woman/girl not wearing the Hijab (see Taharrush).
• A woman can have 1 husband, who can have up to 4 wives; Muhammad can have more.
• A man can beat his wife for insubordination (see Quran 4:34 and Religion of Peace).
• A man can unilaterally divorce his wife; a wife needs her husband’s consent to divorce.
• A divorced wife loses custody of all children over 6 years of age or when they exceed it.

This is not nearly as insignificant as MSN is painting it to be. This is a major cultural change that will spread as more Muslims enter Britain. What we are seeing will eventually be the end of Britain as we have known it.

This Is Not A Good Sign

Posted on by

On Tuesday, Hot Air posted an article about what is happening to the Jewish population in Germany. The massive immigration of people from the Middle East into Germany and Europe has had a number of unintended consequences.

The article reports:

No doubt, there are plenty of wonderful Muslims who contribute in many ways to our society. I am not suggesting that all Muslims are terrorists or bad citizens, but if you can’t see that the mass importation of people who openly despise Western Civilization, declare their commitment to Islamizing our societies, and impose Sharia law on Westerners has turned out badly, I invite you to move to Iran or Syria.

America, due to its lack of proximity to the Middle East, has suffered the least from this self-imposed disaster. Europe, on the other hand, may collapse due to the idiocy of its elites. As a general rule, America does a better job of integrating migrants, and with a more dynamic economy, opportunities to rise up the socio-economic ladder made integrating a more realistic and attractive option than in Europe.

Germany and Sweden have helped lead the way in disastrous policymaking. And now, once again, Berlin has become unsafe for Jews and Gays.

Tolerance wins.

This is what is happening in Germany:

Jews and gay people should hide their identity in parts of Berlin with large Arab populations, the German capital’s police chief has warned.

“There are areas of the city, we need to be perfectly honest here, where I would advise people who wear a kippah or are openly gay to be more careful,” said Barbara Slowik.

“There are certain neighbourhoods where the majority of people of Arab origin live, who also have sympathies for terrorist groups,” she said, adding that they were often “openly hostile towards Jews”.

She told the Berliner Zeitung newspaper that “violent crimes against Jewish people are few and far between, but every act is one too many”.

A fortnight ago, a youth football team from Makkabi Berlin, a Jewish sports club, reported being “hunted down” by youths carrying sticks and knives after a match in an Arab neighbourhood of the city. The victims, aged 13 to 15, said they were spat at and insulted throughout the match.

Taking in large groups of migrants–too big to assimilate–from a place with a totally different culture is never a good idea.

Isn’t This Racist?

Posted on by

On Wednesday, The Jewish News Syndicate reported that the United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution declaring Israeli presence to be illegal in any area over the 1949 armistice line. That’s interesting. Israel is one of the few countries in the Middle East where Jews, Christians, and Muslims have the same rights and are allowed to participate in the government of the nation. Why is the United Nations picking on the a non-racist country in the area rather than the countries where Jews are not allowed? Why–because there are now enough Muslim countries in the United Nations to begin to take over the organization and to align with the non-Muslim tyrants to attempt to make Sharia Law and Muslim dominance a feature of the United Nations.

The article reports:

More than 40 countries sponsored the resolution, which was the first that Palestinians filed after being granted unprecedented privileges, for a non-U.N. member, earlier this year.

The resolution calls on the Israel Defense Forces to withdraw completely from Judea and Samaria, eastern Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip within 12 months, which means evacuating all Jewish communities beyond the armistice line, including Jerusalem’s Old City.

It also bans arms sales to the IDF of any equipment that would be expected reasonably to be used in the territory over the 1949 lines and calls for a boycott of all products produced by Jews in those areas.

The resolution text lacks any mention of Israeli security concerns, historic ties to the lands or Hamas’s terror attacks in Israel on Oct. 7.

Just for the record, this is the land given to Israel by the Balfour Declaration”

These are the borders for the Jewish state set up by the League of Nations:

The Arabs do not have a legitimate claim to Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria, eastern Jerusalem, or the Gaza Strip. Historically, all of these lands are Jewish and play a major role in both Jewish and Christian history.

The article at the Jewish News Syndicate concludes:

Arsen Ostrovsky and Nadav Steinman, CEO and board chair, respectively, of the International Legal Forum, stated that “today, simply put, the United Nations has become the diplomatic arm of Hamas” and that the resolution “is just the latest in a litany of obscenely one-sided anti-Israel resolutions at the U.N. since Oct. 7.” 

“All it does is reward the murderers, rapists and abductors of Hamas while pouring further fuel on worldwide antisemitism and eroding whatever remaining credibility of the already problematic and politicized International Court of Justice, upon which this resolution is meant to be based,” they added. “Ultimately, peace will only prevail when Hamas is defeated and the hostages are released, not through tiresome antics and pyrrhic Palestinian ‘victories’ at the U.N.”

Giving land to terrorists has never worked in the past. There is no reason to believe that it will work in the future.

Knowing History, Religious Practices, And Cultural Norms Can Save Your Life

Posted on by

On Monday, Hot Air posted an article reporting that a group called the New Tolerance Campaign has offered $1,000,000 to any LGBTQ advocacy organization to hold a gay pride parade in Gaza or the West Bank! As of now, no one has accepted the offer.

In Iran, another Muslim-controlled area, people who belong to the LGBTQ community are thrown off of buildings with their hands tied behind their backs. In some Muslim countries they are stoned. Under Sharia Law, it is illegal to be gay.

The article notes (rather tongue-in-cheek) that no group has accepted their offer:

It’s a mystery because so many of these groups have expressed solidarity with Hamas and the Palestinian authority. You would think they would be chomping at the bit to show their undying (pun intended) support for their brothers and sisters in arms.

The article concludes:

Obviously, I don’t want anybody to actually go to “Palestine,” because I don’t want anyone killed just to make a point. But making the offer is a good way to remind these idiots that their “solidarity” with people who want to kill them is stupid.

Even if it were true–and the opposite is true–that both Palestinians and alphabet people were equally “oppressed”–it makes no sense for “Queers” to align themselves with the terrorists of Hamas. Their interests diverge in almost every way.

But they don’t see it that way because both hate America. It really is that simple. Hating America is the great unifying force of the radicals.

Kumbaya.

Maybe it’s time to remind some people how much freedom we have in America and to encourage them to be grateful for that.

America, Pay Attention!

Posted on by

On Wednesday, The Geller Report reported the following:

Germany: Muslim party DAVA wins 41 per cent in Duisburg in the European Parliament elections

The fact that Germany no longer looks like Germany in certain areas is evident after the EU elections in voting districts in the highly Islamised city of Duisburg, where Erdogan’s hardcore Muslim party, DAVA, was able to collect 41.10 per cent of the vote.

Voting district 1001 in the city of Duisburg – like many districts in Germany – has already been lost to Islam. There, the Muslim party founded in January, which operates under the bogus name ‘Democratic Alliance for Diversity and Awakening’ (DAVA), was able to mobilise its Islamic voters and achieve a shocking election result. With 41.10 per cent of the vote, the Muslim party did best by far. In second place was the AfD with 14.16 per cent, followed by the SPD with 10.96 per cent. The CDU achieved 8.68 per cent.

So exactly what is this about? The goal of Islam is create a caliphate (the Ottoman Empire was the most recent caliphate which ended in 1922) ruled by Sharia Law that will dominate the world, eventually conquering the entire world. It this seems farfetched to you, please examine the government exhibits from the Holy Land Foundation Trial. One of those exhibits is “An Explanatory Memorandum: From the Archives of the Muslim Brotherhood in America.” This exhibit explains the Muslim Brotherhood’s plan to use the American legal system to introduce Sharia Law into America.  We already have courts in America using Sharia Law. If the Islamists can do in America what they did in the German elections, we will have more courts using Sharia Law.

Sharia Law is not compatible with the U.S. Constitution. We have already had a number of ‘honor killings’ in America, which are acceptable in Sharia Law but not acceptable under the U.S. Constitution. (for further information on honor killings in America, go here). Honor killings are justified under Sharia Law if a person converts from Islam to another religion or in the case of a daughter who refuses to marry the person her parents have chosen for her or becomes too “westernized.” We already have ‘no go’ zones in certain areas of America where the police are hesitant to go or to enforce the law. Be aware that the same people who have managed a 41% election victory in German have the same plans for America–one city at a time.

An Often Overlooked Fact

Posted on by

The mindless college students who are chanting “Free Palestine” and “From the River to the Sea” not only have no idea of the history behind those chants, they have no idea what living in a Palestinian state would look like. Many of these students have marched for gay rights and pride parades. Do they understand that in a Palestinian state (which would be a Muslim-Arab state), homosexuals are dropped off buildings with their hands tied behind their backs?

On Saturday, Townhall posted an article about a recent interview on CNN by Don Lemon. Mr. Lemon was interviewing the Washington Post’s Taylor Lorenz.

The article reports:

Taylor, how do you reconcile the way marginalized groups fighting for what’s happening in Gaza, yet in Gaza, they would not have any freedom,” asked Lemon. 

“They don’t have any freedoms in Texas and Florida,” replied Lorenz, which was something Lemon wasn’t going to tolerate. 

“Taylor I’m a member of the LGBTQ community, if I go to Texas, they’re not going to throw me off a roof.”

The LGBTQ community may not be happy with their freedoms in America, but have they considered the consequences of their chosen lifestyle in other countries? For example, although homosexuality is legal in China and major cities can have thriving LGBTQ social scenes, same-sex marriage and adoption are not allowed and LGBTQ people are not legally protected against discrimination.

America is one of the freest nations in the world. Those protesting various aspects of American life need to spend some time in whatever country they are heralding. We should require every college student in America to spend a semester in a country ruled by Sharia Law followed by a semester in Israel. It might change their perspective.

When The World Is Upside Down

Posted on by

The recent pro-Palestine protests on American college campuses were a disgrace. The students were not only overlooking the fact that there are still Americans held hostage by Hamas, but many of the homosexual students who were part of the protests have no idea how they would be treated in a Sharia Law compliant country. Ignorance is bliss, but it is not always safe or healthy.

On Saturday, Front Page Magazine posted an article about some of the Biden administration’s actions in response to the protests (some of which definitely overstepped the boundaries of peaceful protest). The subject of blocking Jewish students from attending class does not seem to be covered in the Biden administration’s response to the protests.

The article reports:

After weeks of bias intimidation by Hamas supporters aimed at Jewish students and faculty, including Khymani James, an encampment leader who had talked to Columbia University officials about killing Jews, the Biden administration’s Department of Education, with the inevitability of a rigged slot machine in Reno, is launching a “civil rights investigation” into the university for “extreme anti-Palestinian, anti-Arab, and Islamophobic harassment”.

The complaint comes from ‘Palestine Legal’, the same group providing advice to the encampment protesters.

It complains that “Columbia has reinforced the hostile anti-Palestinian environment, including by suspending Students for Justice in Palestine — a student organization that advocates for Palestinian human rights — for engaging in speech activity supporting Palestinian rights”

What sort of “speech activity” did Columbia University’s SJP chapter engage in?

After Oct 7, Students for Justice in Palestine hailed the Hamas rape of girls, murder of babies and kidnapping of children as a “historic win for the Palestinian resistance”.

The national organization which has 200 chapters on campuses across North America put out a ‘toolkit’ which explained that the Jewish victims were “not civilians” and could be freely targeted.

Its poster for a ‘Day of Resistance’ featured an image of the paraglider that Hamas terrorists had used to massacre and rape young Israelis at a music festival.

Columbia University’s Students for Justice in Palestine celebrated the “unprecedented historic moment for the Palestinians of Gaza” and asserted their “full solidarity with the Palestinian resistance”. It was also a signatory to the “victory or martyrdom” statement signed by the national organization.

The article concludes:

The Department of Education refuses to protect Jewish students from Hamas supporters, but rushes to protect Hamas supporters from Jewish students.

This is much more reminiscent of Germany in the 1930’s than the values of most  Americans. Remember that Germany began enacting anti-Semitic laws in 1933, followed by the Nuremberg Laws in 1935. In March 1933, Dachau, the first concentration camp opened. The anti-Semitic actions of the German government also spawned Kristallnacht in 1938. I do not want to see America go down that path.

Believe Them When They Tell You Who They Are

Posted on by

On February 12th, PJ Media posted an article about a recent comment by Elham, described as a Member of Hamas and a Planner of a Suicide Bombing.

The article reports:

The video is of a hijabed woman, identified as “Elham, Member of Hamas, Planner of a Suicide Bombing,” explaining matter-of-factly that “we don’t only fight against occupation. Our goal is to spread Islam to all, everywhere.” This suggests that Hamas would not be satisfied with a Palestinian state, but would continue its war against the diminished Israel that would remain after the creation of a Palestinian state until the remainder were Islamized as well. What’s more, Elham’s statement amounts to a declaration of war against every state that is not governed under Islamic law.

Of course, there is no indication that Elham speaks for Hamas as a whole. However, many other Hamas spokesmen have said essentially the same thing. Last December, Fathi Hammad, a member of Hamas’ Political Bureau, also spoke of Hamas as having a universal mission beyond the destruction of Israel. He explained that “the [Palestinian] people have been soldiers throughout history. They are now preparing to liberate Jerusalem and the Al-Aqsa Mosque, and I am saying this loud and clear: [The Palestinian people] are preparing to establish the Caliphate, with Jerusalem as its capital city, Inshallah. Jerusalem will not only be the capital city of Palestine as an independent state – it will be the capital city of the Islamic Caliphate.” 

The link above will allow you to view the video.

The thing we need to understand is that up until 1922 there was an Islamic Caliphate. It was the Ottoman Empire. When the Empire fell, Mustafa Kemal (Ataturk) set up the secular state of Turkey in what remained of the Ottoman Empire. Some members of the global Islamic community were not happy about the fall of the Empire or with Turkey becoming a secular nation. Hassan al Banna, who lived in Egypt, formed the al-Ikhwan al-Muslimin, the Muslim Brotherhood. The goal of the Muslim Brotherhood was to unify all the Islamic states under a new caliphate and put all lands under Sharia Law. In the quote above, Elham is simply restating that goal. This basic philosophy is the reason Hamas will never be at peace with Israel.

 

Why Cultures Matter

Posted on by

On Monday, The U.K. Daily Mail posted an article that illustrates one of the really negative aspects of Sharia Law.

The article reports:

A five-year-old girl who was raped by a stranger has been murdered by her family in a so-called ‘honour killing’, according to reports.

The young girl’s parents allegedly killed their daughter in ‘cold blood’ after she was kidnapped and raped by an unidentified man in the Al-Shahba area of Syria on November 18.

The child’s body was found in a garbage container in Manbij, north Syria, on January 27 before being transferred to Al Furat Hospital which lies in eastern Aleppo.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) have said that Internal Security Forces have arrested several family members of the girl.  

The girl’s parents have denied killing their daughter and investigations are ongoing, the SOHR added.

The article concludes:

Just days after the video of Eida’s murder emerged on social media, a 16-year-old girl was strangled to death by her father in another so-called ‘honour killing’ after she was raped by a relative.

The girl was identified as Aya Muhammad Khalifo by the Violations Documentation Center in northern Syria.   

Following the murders, hundreds of women protested against the ‘honour killings’ in the city of Hasakeh by marching down streets. 

Protester Evin Bacho, a member of the Kurdish feminist group Kongra Star, said: ‘We condemn these crimes in the name of tradition or religion.’

Honor killing is an acceptable practice under Sharia Law. Honor killings have happened in America in Islamic communities that practice Sharia Law. This is a practice that should never be condoned here or anywhere else. Western culture would have taken the five-year-old girl who was raped and worked to help her heal from the trauma. Sharia Law says she has dishonored her family (despite the fact that she was the victim–not the perpetrator) and deserves to die. Cultures matter.

The Cost Of Telling The Truth

Posted on by

On Thursday, Jihad Watch posted an article about some recent statements by Samuel Hayek, the chairman the Jewish National Fund (JNF UK).

The article reports:

British Labour MP Alex Sobel has called on Samuel Hayek, the chairman the Jewish National Fund (JNF UK), to resign or be removed from office for offensive anti-Muslim remarks.

Speaking to the Jerusalem Post in early December, Hayek said Jews should start planning to leave Britain because “Jews who are unable to protect their assets, Jews being discriminated against badly is something that could quite easily happen – that is happening.”

Hayek claimed one of the reasons for the rise of anti-Semitism in the UK is shifting demographic patterns and that Muslim immigration threatens the future of Jews in the UK and Europe as whole.

“I am not against any minority or against Muslims in the UK or Europe, but against anyone who spreads hatred that harms Jews,” Hayek said; adding, “That is how I see the near future evolving.”

Anyone who has read the Koran understands the Muslim hatred of Jews.

The Hadith quotes the Prophet Mohammad as saying” The Resurrection of the dead will not come until the Muslims will war with the Jews and the Muslims will kill them…the trees and rocks will say, ‘O Muslim, here is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.'”

History reminds us that when Hitler said that he would exterminate the Jews no one believed him. That reluctance cost millions of lives. Now when a religion openly states its intention to kill Jews, it would serve us all well to pay attention.

The definition of slander in Sharia Law is saying something that the hearer does not like. It does not matter if what is said is true or not. What Samuel Hayek said is true–the increasing Muslim population in Britain will eventually pose a threat to the Jewish population–Jews in France have been under attack by Muslim immigrants for a number of years. The efforts to cancel out what Mr. Hayek is saying are an example of ‘creeping sharia’–cancelling out anyone who says anything negative about Islam.

Sharia Law In America

Posted on by

There are many aspects of Sharia Law that are different from American Constitutional law. One of the more obvious is the conflict between the concept of free speech and the penalty for blasphemy. On Tuesday, The American Thinker posted an article about a bill that was recently passed in the U.S. House of Representatives that will move America in the direction of Sharia Law.

Congress.gov (you have to go to the site and put in the bill number as the specific link expires) describes HR 5665 as follows:

Passed House (12/14/2021)

Combating International Islamophobia Act

This bill establishes within the Department of State the Office to Monitor and Combat Islamophobia and addresses related issues.

The office shall monitor and combat acts of Islamophobia and Islamophobic incitement in foreign countries. The bill establishes the position of Special Envoy for Monitoring and Combating Islamophobia, who shall head the office.

The bill also requires certain existing annual reports to Congress about human rights and religious freedom in foreign countries to include information about Islamophobia, such as information about (1) acts of physical violence or harassment of Muslim people, (2) instances of propaganda in government and nongovernment media that attempt to justify or promote hatred or incite violence against Muslim people, and (3) actions taken by a country’s government to respond to such acts. The office shall coordinate and assist in preparing these portions of the reports.

No funds made available pursuant to the bill may be used to promote or endorse a boycott, divestment, and sanctions movement ideology (i.e., economic measures against Israel or Israel-related individuals or organizations) or used to promote or endorse a Muslim ban.

It is no surprise that the bill is sponsored by Ilhan Omar.

The American Thinker reports:

The actual text of the bill not only seeks to eradicate blasphemy against Islam around the world – and solely against Islam at that – but even requires the federal government to reorganize some portions of the State Department along the lines of an Islamic religious institution which will be responsible for interpreting the Quran.  For example, the text of the bill mandates that “[t]he Secretary of State shall establish within the Department of State an Office” and the “purpose” of the office is described as “[m]onitoring and combating acts of Islamophobia and Islamophobic incitement that occur in foreign countries.”  That is, the State Department is required to create an office that is a cross between George Orwell’s Big Brother and the Taliban.

The word ‘combat’ in the text of the law is problematic but fits in perfectly with the concept of waging violent jihad against the countries deemed to have committed blasphemy against Islam.  Almost every dictionary defines the word primarily as an action pertaining to war.  While the internet firm Google’s dictionary defines ‘combat’ as “fighting between armed forces,” Cambridge Dictionary defines the word as “a fight, especially during a war.”  According to Collins Dictionary, “combat is fighting that takes place in a war.”  This is no hyperbole as the State Department has a long history of supporting Islamic terrorists such as Osama bin Laden, the Taliban, Al Qaeda, and ISIS.  Former Assistant Secretary of State, Robin Raphel, ran her office as though it were an outpost of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and she lost her security clearance when she was investigated for counterintelligence activities.  Little wonder then that Newt Gingrich, the former Speaker of the House, used the term “Rogue State Department” and President Donald Trump described the State Department as the “Deep State Department.”

This law is not consistent with our Constitution.

This Is What Desperation Looks Like

Posted on by

Remember when you were a child or were raising children and anything bad that was done in the house was done by “not me”? It seems as if the Biden administration learned that lesson well. They are desperately trying to avoid responsibility for the humanitarian disaster that is unfolding in Afghanistan.

Yesterday Breitbart reported that CBS News is claiming that climate change is responsible for strengthening the Taliban. Really? President Jefferson was dealing with the Barbary Pirates during his term as President. Did climate change strengthen them?

The article at Breitbart reports:

CBS News has blamed “climate change” for abetting the Taliban in their rise to power in Afghanistan, insisting that global warming has forced farmers into debt and into the arms of the Taliban.

In a risible report that has been compared to spoofs in the Babylon Bee and the Onion, CBS News asserted last week that Afghan farmers struggle to maintain productive crops and thus have to borrow funds to survive.

“When Afghans can’t pay off lenders, the Taliban often steps in to sow government resentment,” CBS News declared in its airtight “gotcha” report.

“If you’ve lost your crop and land or the Afghan government hasn’t paid enough attention then of course, the Taliban can come and exploit it,” the article states, citing Kamal Alam, a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s South Asia Center.

CBS News does not bother explaining how “drought” and “flood-ravaged soil,” which have been a constant in Afghanistan for ages, are suddenly the result of “climate change.” They seem to assume that any weather-related phenomenon, no matter how commonplace, must somehow be related to global warming.

The article concludes:

In 2014, Charles B. Strozier, professor of history at the City University of New York, asserted that “environmental stressors and political violence are connected in surprising ways” and suggested driving hybrid cars as a way to thwart the Taliban’s war on girls.

“If more Americans knew how glacial melt contributes to catastrophic weather in Afghanistan — potentially strengthening the Taliban and imperiling Afghan girls who want to attend school — would we drive more hybrids and use millions fewer plastic bags?” Strozier asked rhetorically. “How would elections and legislation be influenced?”

I hate to disagree with the learned professor, but Islam has been waging war on women long before the automobile was invented. Sharia Law is the basis for the Taliban’s war on girls. Sharia Law goes back to the founding of Islam. While limiting our carbon footprint is an admirable goal, it will not improve the lives of the women left behind in Afghanistan.

Something I Never Would Have Believed Could Happen In America

Posted on by

On Friday, PJ Media reported the following:

Everything is bigger in Texas, including the egregious miscarriages of justice. The Blaze reported Wednesday that Collin County, Texas, District Judge Andrea Thompson “effectively denied a U.S. citizen,” a Muslim woman named Mariam Ayad, “her constitutionally protected due process rights, choosing instead to order her to appear before an Islamic tribunal where her testimony is considered inferior. And when her lawyers sounded the alarm — the judge doubled down.” Islamic law, Sharia, taking precedence over U.S. law — in Texas? Celebrate diversity!

Ayad was trying to get a divorce from her husband, Ayad Hashim Latif. Sharia stipulates that while a man can divorce his wife simply by telling her three times that he is divorcing her, a woman has to seek the permission of Muslim clerics and make her case for a divorce before them. There is, of course, no such provision in U.S. law, but when Ayad told Latif that she was going to seek a divorce, he told her that she had signed an Islamic prenuptial agreement that stated the marriage, and any possible divorce, would proceed according to Sharia provisions.

Mariam Ayad contends now that she was tricked into signing this agreement, and thought that what she was signing was something else altogether. Her lawyers state that American law should supersede it in any case. Thompson, however, ruled that the prenuptial agreement was binding, and thus Ayad will have to go through the Islamic Association of North Texas to get permission to divorce. According to The Blaze, this decision was in “complete disregard of both federal and state law.”

This case isn’t over: Ayad is appealing at the Fifth Court of Appeals in Dallas….

The article goes on to list some of the aspects of Sharia Law that contradict the U.S. Constitution–the Qur’an declares that a woman’s testimony is worth half that of a man, the Qur’an teaches that men are superior to women and should beat those from whom they “fear disobedience”, the Qur’an also allows men to marry up to four wives, and have sex with slave girls, the Qur’an rules that a son’s inheritance should be twice the size of that of a daughter. You get the idea. These ideas have no place in America.

The article concludes:

Non-Muslims in several states a few years ago tried to outlaw the elements of Sharia that interfere with Constitutionally protected freedoms, not Islam as an individual religious practice. These anti-Sharia measures were aimed at political Islam, an authoritarian ideology at variance with the Constitution in numerous particulars: Sharia denies the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience, and the equality of rights of all people before the law. That is what people wanted to restrict, and the elements of Sharia that contradict Constitutional freedoms were all they want to restrict. But of course these efforts met furious opposition and were denounced as “Islamophobic.”

Meanwhile, Sharia really does deny equality of rights to women. But to oppose that is “racist.” So Mariam Ayad just has to suffer, you see, for diversity.

It’s interesting that the court was willing to embrace Islamic Law, which is in conflict with the U.S. Constitution while at the same time many of our courts are pushing Judeo-Christian laws and values, which are the basis of our Constitution, out of the public square.

This Is Actually According To Sharia Law

Posted on by

ABC News is reporting today that Fox News host Jeanine Pirro was taken off the air for remarks made about Democratic Representative Ilhan Omar.

These are the remarks:

“Think about it: Omar wears a hijab, which according to the Quran, 33:59, tells women to cover so they won’t get molested,” Pirro said on her show last week. “Is her adherence to this Islamic doctrine indicative of her adherence to Sharia law, which in itself is antithetical to the United States Constitution?”

Sharia Law is antithetical to the United States Constitution. Sharia Law does not support Freedom of Speech, equality for women, equal rights for all religions, and believes in the killing of homosexuals. Those ideas are not in tune with the U. S. Constitution. The fact that Jeanine Pirro was taken off the air for telling the truth is much more in line with Sharia Law than American Law. Under Sharia Law, slander is anything that offends the hearer–it doesn’t matter if it is true or not–if the hearer is offended, it is slander.

We need to put the speech police out of business or we will totally lose our freedom. The question Jeanine Pirro asked was a perfectly logical question. I am sure pressure was put on Fox News by CAIR and other Muslim groups (threatening lawsuits, etc.) to take her off the air to make an example of her. It is sad that Fox News did not have the backbone to stand and fight for free speech in America.

People In Glass Houses…

Posted on by

Ilhan Omar has been in the news recently for implying that a pro-Israel lobbying group — the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) — is paying US politicians to support Israel. AIPAC does not directly contribute to political campaigns, but does make contributions through a number of political action committees (PACs) and does lobby. That is no different than many other organizations. Her criticism is interesting, however, when you look at her donors.

Sara Carter is reporting today that Ms Omar received tens of thousands of dollars from PACs and lobbyists.

The article reports:

According to the records of the Federal Election Commission, last summer Omar received nearly $60,000 from PACs.

One PAC from which Omar received thousands of dollars in 2018 is the Council on American Islamic Relations. CAIR was named as an un-indicted co-conspirator in the 2009 Holy Land Foundation trial, the largest terrorism-financing trial in American history.

And CAIR not only has a PAC, it is a lobbying organization. On Jan.10, CAIR hosted the Community Congressional Reception at which Omar spoke.

In all, Omar received tens of thousands of dollars from lobbying groups. None of her money came from AIPAC or the NRA or the fossil fuel industry; That must be a coincidence.

For those of you unfamiliar with the Holy Land Foundation trial, here is the link to one of the government exhibits introduced in the trial. This exhibit outlines the plan of the Muslim Brotherhood to undermine the government of the United States and replace the U.S. Constitution with Sharia Law. CAIR is listed as an un-indicted co-conspirator in this effort. That is where some of this Congresswoman’s  campaign money is coming from. She should be removed from the Foreign Relations Committee–she does not represent the best interests of America.

Not Here. Not Now.

Posted on by

Yesterday BizPacReview posted an article about something new on the streets of New York City–the Muslim Community Police.

This is a picture of one of their cars:

The article reports:

Some New York City residents were shocked last week to see vehicles with the words “Muslim Community Patrol” emblazoned on them cruising the streets like police squad cars.

The article includes a number of tweets by people concerned about this community patrol.

This is the response to those tweets:

These tweets reflect a belief among some Americans that the Muslim community wants to usurp America’s constitutionally based system of law and replace it with that of Sharia, a religious law derived from the religious precepts of the Islamic religion.

While these fears may sound outlandish, they stem from actual examples of Sharia being practiced in the United States. A perfect example of this occurred in 2010, when a federal judge appointed by former Democrat President Bill Clinton ruled that it was unconstitutional for Oklahoma to bar state courts from considering the application of Sharia law in their rulings.

Another example happened just last year, when a Minnesota Muslim man intent on imposing Sharia law in his local community reportedly began patrolling his neighborhood and confronting anyone who dared to violate Islam’s strict rules and dress codes.

At the time local authorities received reports about a mob of Muslim men walking around with uniforms that read “Muslim Defense Force” and “Religious Police.”

How is this legal and who is paying for the cars? Please read my article on The Holy Land Foundation Trial if the idea of a Muslim Community Patrol is acceptable to you. This could easily be the start of some very bad things.

Europe’s War On Free Speech

Posted on by

Many years ago I met Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff at a dinner in Stoughton, Massachusetts (story here). She told her story of being charged with hate speech for teaching a course about Mohammad that included identifying him as a pedophile (story here).

Today, Reason posted an article about a decision by the European Court of Human Rights that most knowledgeable observers recognize as the case of Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff. The title of the article is, “European Court: OK to Criminalize Calling Mohammed a Pedophile.”

The article reports:

The case, decided yesterday by the European Court of Human Rights, is E.S. v. Austria — I assume from the facts and from the initials that this is the Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff case. Here’s the court’s own summary:

Criminal conviction and fine for statements accusing the Prophet Muhammad of paedophilia: no violation

Facts – The applicant held seminars with the title “Basic information on Islam” at the right-wing Freedom Party Education Institute. At one such seminar, referring to a marriage which Muhammad had concluded with Aisha, a six-year old, and consummated when she had been nine, she stated inter alia “[Muhammad] liked to do it with children”, “the thing with Aisha and child sex” and “a 56-year-old and a six-year-old? What do you call that? Give me an example? What do we call it, if it is not paedophilia?”

In 2011, as a result of these statements, the applicant was convicted of disparagement of religious precepts pursuant to Article 188 of the Criminal Code. She was sentenced to pay a fine of EUR 480, or serve 60 days of imprisonment in the event of default.

The domestic courts made a distinction between child marriages and paedophilia. In their opinion, by accusing Muhammad of paedophilia, the applicant had merely sought to defame him, without providing evidence that his primary sexual interest in Aisha had been her not yet having reached puberty or that his other wives or concubines had been similarly young. In particular, the applicant had disregarded the fact that the marriage with Aisha had continued until the Prophet’s death, when she had already turned eighteen and had therefore passed the age of puberty.

The thing to remember here is that there is no regard for truth here.  What Ms. Sabaditsch-Wolff said about Mohammad is true, but according to Sharia Law, any speech that a Muslim does not like can be considered slander. In a country under Sharia Law, you can be executed for slander. Is Europe moving toward a Sharia Law definition of slander by calling it hate speech? In America we have the First Amendment (at least for now). We need to protect our First Amendment rights because they are somewhat unique–even in the western world. In Britain and Canada pastors have been charged with hate speech for quoting the Bible on such issues as homosexuality. Their pastors are not free to share the Bible in its entirety. In America we need to make sure we elect leaders who will abide by the Constitution and protect free speech.

I strongly suggest you follow the link above to read the entire article at Reason. The thought that you can go to prison for telling the truth is chilling.

 

Numbers That Are Important To America’s Future

Posted on by

This article is a summary of recent information found in a book titled, Slavery, Terrorism and Islam by Dr. Peter Hammond. The book deals with the goals of Islam and the fact that it is not a religion, but a political system.

Dr. Hammond states, “The primary aim of Islam is not spiritual but political.”  Dr. Hammond explains the process of Islamization–the method by which Islam changes a free country into an Islamic state which controls all aspects of the lives of the population.

This is the progression according to Dr. Hammond:

At 1% of any given country, Muslims will be regarded as a peace loving minority and not as a threat to anyone…

At 2% and 3% they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs…

From 5% on they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population. They will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves under Sharia.

When Muslims reach 10% of the population, they will increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions. Any non-Muslim action that offends Islam will result in uprisings and threats…After reaching 20% expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings and church and synagogue burning…At 40% you will find widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks and ongoing militia warfare.

From 60% you may expect unfettered persecution of non-believers and other religions, sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels…After 80% expect State run ethnic cleansing and genocide.

We are currently watching this progression happen in Europe. We need to be careful and avoid it in America. Sweden is one example of what happens when Muslim immigrants do not assimilate.

Ingrid Carlqvist of The Gatestone Institute has stated:

It may have finally begun to dawn on the people that Swedish Sweden will soon be lost forever, and in many areas replaced by a Middle Eastern state of affairs…No one, however, seems to have asked the crucial question upon which Sweden’s future depends: Is Islam compatible with democracy?”

There is no country where Islam is dominant that can be considered a democracy with freedom of speech and equal justice under law.

These are the things we need to consider as we struggle with revising America’s immigration policies.

Losing Our Moral Authority

Posted on by

In 2004, the country of Afghanistan set up a constitution. The idea of having a free state was encouraged by America, as we had a substantial number of troops there and were trying to establish a viable government.

The constitution Afghanistan set up to be the law of the land contained the following:

Article One

Afghanistan shall be an Islamic Republic, independent, unitary and indivisible state.

Article Two

The sacred religion of Islam is the religion of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. Followers of other faiths shall be free within the bounds of law in the exercise and performance of their religious rituals.

Article Three

No law shall contravene the tenets and provisions of the holy religion of Islam in Afghanistan.

Article Four

National sovereignty in Afghanistan shall belong to the nation, manifested directly and through its elected representatives. The nation of Afghanistan is composed of all individuals who possess the citizenship of Afghanistan. The nation of Afghanistan shall be comprised of Pashtun, Tajik, Hazara, Uzbek, Turkman, Baluch, Pachaie, Nuristani, Aymaq, Arab, Qirghiz, Qizilbash, Gujur, Brahwui and other tribes. The word Afghan shall apply to every citizen of Afghanistan. No individual of the nation of Afghanistan shall be deprived of citizenship. The citizenship and asylum related matters shall be regulated by law.

There is something here that is important–Article Three states that “no law shall contravene the tenets and provisions of the holy religion on Islam in Afghanistan.” In other words, Sharia Law is the law of the land according to the constitution of Afghanistan. We need to understand that Sharia Law and democracy (i.e. freedom) are incompatible. Sharia Law does NOT allow the free exercise of religions other than Islam. Sharia Law considers saying that Jesus is the Son of God as blasphemy, punishable by prison or possibly death. Sharia Law prohibits the sharing of Christianity–considering it blasphemy. There is no room for personal freedom in a constitution that upholds Sharia Law. That is the constitution that we allowed Afghanistan to write when we were trying to establish a viable nation. As bad as that was, we did something far worse.

On Thursday, The Hill posted an article with the following headline, “Watchdog: Troops say they were told to ignore Afghan child sex abuse.” I have another source that tells me that the troops were also told not to interfere with the poppy crop. Think about that for a minute. I understand that the poppy crop is the major industry of the country, but it is a major source of trouble around the world. Wasn’t there a way to retrain the farmers to plant something less harmful? I also understand that pedophilia is part of the Afghan culture, but it bothers me that we let it continue uninterrupted. If we were there helping the country get out from under the grip of the Taliban, didn’t we have a responsibility to uphold some sort of moral standard–regardless of the ‘cultural norm.’

I am ready for America to leave Afghanistan. However, if we choose to stay there, we have an obligation to help the people of the country find their way out of the fifth century. We can’t bomb them back to the stone age–they are already there. If we are going to continue to sacrifice money and American lives for the people of Afghanistan, we need to begin to change some of their basic customs. Pedophilia and poppy growing are ultimately moral issues. If we can’t stand for the moral issues in Afghanistan, we have no moral authority to be there.

Protecting Our Young Women

Posted on by

This article was posted in The Daily Caller last month. I missed it, but I am posting it now because I think it is important.

Wikipedia states:

In 1996 the Federal Prohibition of Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) Act made it illegal to perform FGM on minors for non-medical reasons, and in 2013 the Transport for Female Genital Mutilation Act prohibited transporting a minor out of the country for the purpose of FGM. In addition, 24 states have legislation banning FGM. The American Academy of Pediatrics opposes all forms of the practice. The firstFGM conviction in the US was in 2006, when Khalid Adem, who had emigrated from Ethiopia, was sentenced to ten years after severing his two-year-old daughter’s clitoris with a pair of scissors.

Unfortunately, some of the Muslim residents of America choose to ignore the law. Last week I posted an article about some recent arrests for performing FGM. We need to remember that Muslims who believe in Sharia Law believe that it supersedes the U.S. Constitution. They do not feel bound by the federal ban on FGM.

The article in The Daily Caller reports:

The American Civil Liberties Union launched a vocal opposition this week against a Maine bill criminalizing female genital mutilation (FGM), Mainely Media reports.

Republican Rep. Heather Sirocki is sponsoring the bill, saying that it would classify performing FGM as a Class B crime in the state, punishable by up to 10 years in prison and a $20,000 fine. The bill would also punish the parent or guardian of the victim.

However, the Maine ACLU staunchly opposes the protection. ACLU spokesman Oamshri Amarasingham said that the risk of mutilation isn’t worth expanding Maine’s criminal code. The Maine Coalition Against Sexual Assault also supported the ACLU, arguing that FGM is not happening in Maine.

…The bill, LD745, only criminalizes the practice on those under 18. It does not apply to adults who choose to undergo mutilation, “though it probably should,” Sirocki said. If the bill passes, Maine would be the 25th state to protect its residents against FGM.

Sirocki said that the Committee of Criminal Justice and Public Safety was divided in its support of the bill, but eventually recommended the bill favorably with a 7-5 vote. The Maine House of Representatives will first review the bill, then it will go to the members of the state senate.

FGM is a brutal practice, often done without anesthesia, that can result in serious health problems for women later on. It does not belong in America. I don’t understand why the ACLU is not protecting young women from being subjected to this practice.

 

What Did You Learn In School Today?

Posted on by

The Daily Caller posted a story today about Middle School students in a southern Indiana school who were taught that living under Sharia Law is wonderful.

The article reports:

The assignment provides a reading passage ostensibly written by a 20-year-old woman named Ahlima who resides in Saudi Arabia.

Ahlima says she feels “very fortunate” to be governed by Sharia law — the notorious Islamic penal code which, in countries such as Saudi Arabia, includes the practice of cutting off the hands of criminals who steal. She observes that she is about to become some guy’s second wife. She supports the repressive clothes women in Saudi Arabia must wear. “I understand that some foreigners see our dress as a way of keeping women from being equal,” Ahlima writes. “I find Western women’s clothing to be horribly immodest.”

The article points out that Ahlima is an imaginary character invented by Sharon Coletti, the president of InspirEd Educators, and based on someone Ms. Coletti saw interviewed on a television program.

The article states:

Coletti, the creator of the assignment, defended her work.

“If I can shape something so that kids have to decide for themselves, once I get them involved in the situation, they never forget it,” the former social studies teacher told The Courier-Journal.

Coletti, who describes herself as a practicing Christian, also said she hopes her materials help student to become “patriotic” and “problem-solvers.”

However, the fictional story of 20-year-old Ahlima who is becoming a second wife and loves to wear repressive clothing is apparently no longer for this world after the Highland Hills Middle School kerfuffle.

Coletti said she will retire the assignment and related material going forward because she doesn’t want to court bad press.

The same assignment has caused parents to be angry in the past. In 2011, parents in Smyrna, Georgia accused Coletti of “indoctrinating” middle school children with the Sharia lesson.

Where are the feminists when you need them?

We need to teach our Middle Schoolers that all cultures and legal systems are not equal. We need to stop apologizing for western civilization. Western civilization is not perfect, but it provides more freedom and opportunity for all people, including women, than Sharia Law. According to Sharia Law, a man can have more than one wife. All a man has to do to divorce his wife by declaring “I divorce you.” She has no say in the matter. The testimony of a woman in court is worth less than the testimony of a man in court under Sharia. Under Sharia Law, the murder of infidels or taking them as sex slaves is allowed. Under Sharia Law, pedophilia is acceptable. There is no religious freedom under Sharia Law.  Under Sharia Law, allegiance is to Islam–not to a country or the set of laws of that country. That is why Sharia Law and the U.S. Constitution are incompatible.

Teaching school children that Sharia Law is a good thing is teaching them that women have no value. Is that really the lesson we want to teach our young women?

Misquoting The Constitution For Your Own Gain

Posted on by

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.

Houston, We Have A Problem…

Posted on by

Newsmax posted an article today about the number of ISIS terror attacks thwarted this year in the United States.

The House Homeland Security Committee has the following map posted on their website:

TerrorThreat3TerrorThreat2This is not comforting.

Newsmax reports:

And a year after the U.S.-led coalition began airstrikes against ISIS, they “have largely failed,” according to the monthly “Terror Report Snapshot” released Tuesday by the Republican members of the House Homeland Security Committee.

…Here are some other facts from the report:

  • Since 2014, ISIS has been linked to 14 terrorism plots and 63 arrests or indictments in the U.S.
  • Since early 2014, the majority of jihadist plots in the U.S. have included plans to kill police or U.S. soldiers.
  • Islamic State terrorists have inspired or directed 55 terrorist plots or attacks against the West by the end of July, including 14 in the United States.
  • Nearly twice as many ISIS-linked plots have occurred against the West so far this year — 35 — than in all of last year, which had 20.

What happened in Florida was the result of the Koran’s teaching about homosexuality. In countries ruled by Sharia Law, homosexuals are routinely thrown off of buildings with their hands tied. Execution is seen as the appropriate punishment for homosexuality under Sharia Law.

Yesterday Breitbart.com reported:

Between 2001 and 2013, the U.S. permanently resettled nearly 30,000 Afghan migrants on green cards. According to Pew, nearly all Muslims in Afghanistan (99%) support sharia law as official law.

As legal immigrants, these migrants will be granted lifetime resettlement privileges will be given automatic work permits, welfare access, and the ability to become voting citizens.

Between 2001 and 2013, the United States permanently resettled 1.5 million Muslim immigrants throughout the United States.

In the next five years, without changes to our autopilot visa dispensations, the U.S. will permanently resettle a Muslim population larger than the entire population of Washington D.C.

Islam as practiced according to the Koran is not a religion of peace. There are peaceful Muslims, but they are afraid to speak out about what is going on in many of the mosques. The Obama Administration has chosen to turn a blind eye to what is happening in our mosques. Have you ever wondered how small Islamic communities have the money to build large Islamic centers and mosques? Many of them are funded through the Islamic Society of North America (named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation Trial) or funded indirectly through Saudi Arabia (the country that financed the 911 hijackers). Western civilization is under attack. Both the Sunni and Shiite Muslims want to set up a worldwide caliphate run by Sharia Law. Their only disagreement is about who will control the caliphate and where it will be headquartered. It is time for America (and the rest of western civilization) to wake up and pay attention.

Maybe We Are Screening The Wrong People

Posted on by

In early April of this year, I posted an article about security at American airports. The article was based on a Judicial Watch story and included the following:

In all of the cases, airport workers used their security badges to access secured areas of their respective facilities without having to undergo any sort of check. As if this weren’t bad enough, last month government records obtained by the media revealed that 73 employees at nearly 40 airports across the nation were flagged for ties to terror in a June 2015 report from the DHS Inspector General’s Office. The files identified two of them working at Logan International Airport in Boston, four at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport and six at Seattle-Tacoma International in Washington State. Here’s the government’s explanation for letting the potential terrorists slip by; the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) didn’t have access to the terrorism-related database during the vetting process for those employees. You can’t make this stuff up!

Now we learn that only three of the nation’s 300 airports—Atlanta, Miami and Orlando—require employees to undergo security checks before work, even though there’s an epidemic of illicit activity among this demographic.

Today, the Center for Security Policy posted a short discussion of the recent loss of EgyptAir Flight MS804. This is the discussion:

Frank Gaffney discussed the issue on Secure Freedom Radio with Fred Fleitz, the Senior Vice President for Policy and Programs at the Center for Security Policy. As a former CIA analyst, Fleitz has an extensive background in analyzing such matters. Gaffney asked him to break down what we know so far:

“From what I’ve heard so far Frank, it looks like this probably was not the result of technical difficulties. There’s evidence that the plane tried to make some strange right and left and 360 degree turns shortly before it fell from the air. There are fishermen who said they saw a fireball so obviously the plane exploded before it crashed so it is looking like this is an act of terror and my concern as a former intelligence analyst is that this raises real questions about whether Jihadis have found new ways to penetrate airport security, both by getting their members as employees and possibly by finding technical workarounds to ways to detect bombs placed on aircraft.”

Gaffney pointed out that many American airports have staff members in various positions who may embrace Sharia Law which obliges them to embrace Jihadi philosophy and wonders if we have “lost our minds” on this issue. Fleitz responded:

“Well, you’re raising a question no one wants to talk about, I mean Western societies, we want to be tolerant, we don’t want to tar and feather every Muslim employee as a Jihadi but we know the French and British have identified people with ISIS sympathies working at airports. This is a problem in this country. Congressman Peter King was on the radio this morning talking about how TSA is finding this is a real problem, they’re trying to ferret out people who appear to have sympathies with ISIS or al Qaeda working in these sensitive positions and these are people behind the scenes, baggage handlers and mechanics who could easily put a weapon on a plane.”

Gaffney stressed that they obviously weren’t talking about all Muslims but pointed out that there is a difference between modern post-Sharia Muslims and those who embrace a medieval view.

There is a good possibility that whatever brought down EgyptAir Flight MS804 was put on the plane while it was on the ground. The plane made numerous stops before it left Paris for Egypt. It is time for all countries to take a close look at their airport workers. Planes that are flying at 35,000 feet do not fall out of the sky for no reason. Even if you lose all power, you have a chance to glide down safely. We need to pray for the families of the victims, and we need to learn quickly from the mistakes that allowed this tragedy to happen.

Recent Fairy Tales I Have Encountered

Posted on by

Breitbart.com is reporting the following today:

Peter Altmaier who is both the German federal refugee coordinator and a member of Angela Merkel’s own Christian Democratic Union party (CDU) said that Mrs. Merkel will convert these misogynistic migrants’ attitudes toward women into something more in line with German progressive attitudes, reports the Kurier.

He sat on a panel at the Munich Security Conference Friday when a local politician told him that many migrants in local asylum centres refused to listen to the instructions of female workers and refused food and money from them demanding that they would only accept aid from fellow men.

Altmaier answered the question by saying that the asylum workers should tell each migrant who does not listen to a woman that he must respect women like he would respect Chancellor Merkel. “you have to explain to him that there are hundreds of thousands of “Angela Merkels” in Germany who have just as much to say,” and that they should treat women with the same reverence.

I hate to be a pessimist about this, but this is the most ridiculous thing I have heard in a long time. There are some very stark differences between western civilization (based on a Judeo-Christian ethic) and Islamic society (based on Sharia Law). One of those differences has to do with the role of women and the value placed on women as people. The migrants in question are simply behaving in a way that is culturally in tune with their upbringing–since German women are not fully covered, they are subject to groping and possible rape. This is not a simple matter of bad behavior–it is a matter of ingrained, learned behavior. The migrants have no incentive to change–they don’t believe that what they are doing is wrong.

This will not end well.