PAKISTAN MUSLIMS MURDER AMERICA

 

Raymond Ibrahim Interview: Truth About Islam Must Be Acknowledged

How an ideology's teachings are antithetical to Western values.

Fri Sep 11, 2020 

Frontpagemag.com

 

8

Note: Journalist Niram Ferretti interviews Raymond Ibrahim, a Shillman Fellow at the Freedom Center, for the Italian publication, L’Informale (original here).  Pasted below are excerpts from the English version.

Question: How much is the concept of jihad intended as holy war, central to the way Islam has interpreted itself during the centuries?

The concept of jihad was central from the start—at least according to the earliest Muslim historians who often portray the first warriors of Allah as being zealously motivated by the notion of jihad.

Question: The last time that Islam tried to penetrate Europe through war was on the 12^th of September 1683 at Kalhenberg, near Vienna, where 65.000 thousand Christians fought against 200,000 Ottoman Turks. For how long after that date did jihad against the West stopped and when and why was it resumed?

Raids continued for some time, particularly by sea, and well into the late 1700s, meaning for about a century after the successful defense of Vienna.  Even as the Ottoman Empire was beginning its slow retreat from eastern Europe, the Muslim slavers of the so-called Barbary States of North Africa wreaked havoc all along the coasts of Europe—even as far as Iceland.  The United States of America’s first war—which it fought before it could even elect its first president—was against these Islamic slavers.  When Thomas Jefferson and John Adams asked Barbary’s ambassador why his countrymen were enslaving American sailors, the “ambassador answered us that it was founded on the laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that … it was their right and duty to make war upon them [non-Muslims] wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners….”

Question: In his seminal book of 1996, Samuel P. Huntington wrote about Islam and the West the following sentence, “Kto? Kovo? Who is to rule? Who is to be ruled? The central issue of politics defined by Lenin is the root of the contest between Islam and the West”. Do you agree?

Yes, inasmuch as that Muslims must always work to make Islam rule over non-Muslims, based on their sharia, which while allowing for truces and times of peace—particularly when Islam is weak vis-à-vis infidels—also sees the spread of Muslim rule as the culmination of the Islamic mission that began in the early 630s.

Question: Let us now talk about your new book, Sword and Scimitar: Fourteen Centuries of War between Islam and the West. What has brought you to write a book focused specifically on the battles which have occurred along the centuries between Islam and the West?

Yes, as indicated by the title, the book is a military history between Islam and the West, narrated around their eight most decisive clashes, the first and last of which occurred more than a millennium apart.  But while the eight battles/sieges form the centerpieces of the book’s eight chapters, the bulk of the narrative chronologically traces and tells the general, but much forgotten story of Islam and the West, most of which of course revolved around warfare—with all the attendant death, destruction, slavery, and geopolitical demarcations and map rearrangements. We can say I began working on portions of this book some twenty years ago—since around 1998-99, when I first started doing academic research for what became my MA thesis in History: a close examination, including through the original Arabic and Greek sources, of the battle of Yarmuk—the first major military encounter between Islam and the Eastern Roman Empire in 636, highlighted in Chapter 1 of the Sword and Scimitar.

Question: To what extent is the Islamic terrorism that we are facing today a continuation of the battles between Islam and the West that you describe in Sword and Scimitar?   

To a very great extent.  Both the motivation and the pattern of terrorist acts are very much mirror reflections of past Islamic motivations and patterns.  In other words, from the start to finish, the book pages are full of all the ugly words and deeds committed by modern groups such as the Islamic State—ordering Europeans to convert to Islam or face the sword; the willful destruction of churches; the mass slaughter—including by beheading, crucifixion, or burning—of Christian defenders, and the mass enslavement and rape of Christian women and children—all of these permeate the pages of my book.

Question: Islam is a way of life. It is a complete set of ideas and rules which differs deeply from our Western values. Is there any chance of an accommodation between Islam and Western societies or this is just wishful thinking?

Can water and oil mix?  In the same manner, pure Islamic teachings and pure Western values are often antithetical to one another.  For example, the West believes in freedom of religion, whereas in Islam those who seek to apostatize are penalized, including by death; the West believes in freedom of speech, whereas in Islam any critical talk concerning Muhammad can get one killed.   One can go on and on but the point should be clear.  Of course, a nominal/secular Muslim may be able to assimilate in a Western society, but that is not a reflection of Islam, which is hardly nominal but rather a full way of life based on sharia.

Question: According to you what are the ways in which Europe on one side and the United States on the other should face the reality of Islam in such a manner that could be helpful both for Westerners and Muslims? What are the false assumptions that must be rejected?

First, the truth must be acknowledged—including for example the truth that, for well over a millennium, Muslims invaded European/Christian territory on the same logic that Islamic terror groups cite—that it is their right to invade, conquer, butcher, and enslave infidels for no less a reason that because they are non-Muslims.  If this is how Muslims have been behaving for centuries, is there really any need to find “reasons” why some of them are behaving so now?  Are grievances, territorial disputes, etc., necessary to explain this unwavering hostility?  Once these facts are embraced, the rest, including policy—for instance, the question of Muslim immigration—should become self-evident.

Question: How inbred is religious violence in Islam and how it differs from the way in which it is presented in the Bible and has accompanied Christianity in the course of its history?

Many apologist for Islam like to claim that the Bible, especially the Jewish scriptures (or the Old Testament), is just as if not more bloody and violent than the Koran—so why do we insist that Muslim violence is rooted to Muslim scriptures? The problem with comparing violence in the Bible — both Old and New Testaments — with violence in the Koran is that it conflates history with doctrine. The majority of violence in the Bible is recorded as history; a description of events. Conversely, the overwhelming majority of violence in the Koran is doctrinally significant. The Koran uses open-ended language to call on believers to commit acts of violence against non-Muslims. See “Are Judaism and Christianity as Violent as Islam?” for my most comprehensive and documented treatment of this tired apologia.

 

The Murder of an American 'Blasphemer' in Pakistan

And the glorification of his murderer/hero.

Wed Sep 9, 2020 

Raymond Ibrahim

 

11

Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article was originally published by the Gatestone Institute.

A recent murder has cast a “fresh spotlight on Pakistan’s blasphemy laws”: on July 29, 2020, Tahir Naseem (pictured above), 57, a U.S. citizen, was shot dead in a Pakistani courtroom, during a bail hearing for the charge of blasphemy, which included “denigrating the Koran and the Prophet Muhammad,” Reuters reported.  Although his teenage slayer was apprehended and is being charged with murder, among the people of Pakistan, he is a great hero:

Faisal Khan, a 15-year-old Pakistani, beams for selfies with lawyers and police. Thousands hail him in the streets as a ‘holy warrior.’  His claim to adulation? Allegedly gunning down in open court an American accused of blasphemy, a capital crime in this Islamic republic. Khan is charged with murder, which also carries a death sentence. But while lawyers line up to defend him, the attorney for Tahir Naseem, the U.S. citizen, has gone into hiding.

The report goes on to say that “everyone wants to be his lawyer”; that all across Pakistan professional lawyers have offered to “defend Khan for free, to support what they see as the justified killing of a heretic.”  Moreover, “[t]housands rallied, calling for Khan’s release. Delegations of well-wishers – lawyers, clerics, local politicians – have visited the Khan family home in Peshawar to congratulate the family. He has received messages of support from the Pakistani Taliban.”

Even the elite police forces escorting Khan to court took and shared on social media selfies of themselves and the murderer: “Wearing all white, the teen grins broadly, the report explains. Several officers smile, one gives a thumbs-up.”

The U.S. State Department responded by expressing its “outrage” at the murder in a statement:

We are shocked, saddened, and outraged that American citizen Tahir Naseem was killed yesterday inside a Pakistani courtroom.  Mr. Naseem had been lured to Pakistan from his home in Illinois by individuals who then used Pakistan’s blasphemy laws to entrap him.  The U.S. Government has … called the attention of senior Pakistani officials to his case to prevent the type of shameful tragedy that eventually occurred.  We grieve with the family of Mr. Naseem. We urge Pakistan to immediately reform its often abused blasphemy laws and its court system, which allow such abuses to occur, and to ensure that the suspect is prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

International observers have characterized this statement as “unusually blunt.”  This is an understatement, particularly in comparison to the previous administration’s responses, or lack thereof, to horrific instances of blasphemy vigilantism in Pakistan.  For example, in November 2014:

A mob accused of burning alive a Christian couple in an industrial kiln in Pakistan allegedly wrapped a pregnant mother in cotton so she would catch fire more easily… Sajjad Maseeh, 27, and his wife Shama Bibi, 24, were set upon by at least 1,200 people after rumors circulated that they had burned verses from the Quran…. Their legs were also broken so they couldn't run away. ‘They picked them up by their arms and legs and held them over the brick furnace until their clothes caught fire,’ a family representative said. ‘And then they threw them inside the furnace.’ Bibi, a mother of four who was four months pregnant, was wearing an outfit that initially didn’t burn... The mob removed her from over the kiln and wrapped her up in cotton to make sure the garments would be set alight.

Two days after the burning of this Christian couple, a policeman in Pakistan hacked a man to death for allegedly making blasphemous remarks against Islam; and two months before that, an elderly British man with severe mental illness who had been sentenced to death for blasphemy was shot by a prison guard in Pakistan.

Discussing these late 2014 blasphemy killings, Dr. Nazir S. Bhatti, President of the Pakistan Christian Congress, had written a letter to President Obama expressing shock that the U.S. did not even bother to offer any condemnations:

It is surprising that neither US Administration under your honor nor US State Department even bothered to condemn this horrific crime of burning live of Christian couple by a mob living in country named Islamic Republic of Pakistan which is receiving billions of aid of US taxpayers.  I would appeal your honor to put pressure on government of Pakistan to end misuse of blasphemy laws against Christian, Ahamadiyyia and other religious minorities and condition US Aid to Pakistan on human rights and repeal of blasphemy laws.

More often than not, “Pakistan’s blasphemy laws are often used against religious minorities and others who are the target of false accusations,” Amnesty International reports.  Not only is this underscored by the aforementioned burning of a Christian couple but by the fact that Pakistan’s most notorious blasphemy laws also concerns a Christian, Asia Bibi: she spent nearly a decade on death row, separated from her husband and children, after her coworkers—disgusted that she, an “infidel,” had drunk from the same cup during a scorching day of fieldwork—had falsely accused her of blasphemy.

Two of Bibi's advocates, Minority Affairs Minister Shahbaz Bhatti and Punjab Governor Salman Taseer, were both assassinated in 2011. Taseer was shot twenty-seven times by Mumtaz Qadri, his own bodyguard. After the murder, more than 500 Muslim clerics voiced support for Qadri, who was further showered with rose petals.

Another case that made international headlines was that of Rimsha Masih, a mentally disabled Christian girl (then aged between 11 and 14) who was falsely accused of burning the Koran in 2012. Throngs of rioting Muslims destroyed Christian homes, churches, and crosses, and Bibles; they called for her death and dislocated hundreds of Christian minorities from their homes. Two weeks after the young girl’s incarceration, it was discovered that Muhammad Khalid, a learned Muslim cleric, had planted the charred Koran in her backpack “in order to get rid of Christians in the area.” (See here for several more examples of mentally disabled Christian minorities attacked and/or imprisoned on the (often false) charge of blasphemy in Pakistan.)

Although the Trump administration is criticizing Pakistan’s blasphemy law in connection to the recent killing of Tahir Naseem, and although Pakistan’s foreign ministry responded by saying the case “will be dealt with in accordance with the law,” in reality, “prosecuting Khan and any potential accomplices will be an immense challenge,” says Reuters.

The reason revolves around Pakistan’s own laws.  Section 295-C of Pakistan’s penal code states:

Whoever by words, either spoken or written or by visible representation, or by any imputation, innuendo, or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred name of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.

Section 295-B of Pakistan’s penal code states:

Whoever wilfully [sic] defiles, damages or desecrates a copy of the Holy Qur’an or of an extract therefrom or uses it in any derogatory manner or for any unlawful purpose shall be punishable with imprisonment for life.

In other words, by recently killing the American blasphemer Naseem in court, all that the 15-year-old Khan did is execute Pakistan’s own law, as stated in Section 295. His actions are seen as a reflection of the zealous love he bore for Islam; rather than be punished, then, he should only be praised, or so most Pakistanis seem to think.

The terrorist killers are alleged to have shouted, "We have killed Charlie Hebdo; we have taken revenge for the sake of the Prophet Mohammed." 

During the Black Lives Matter riots, a white Muslim illegal alien stabbed a New York cop, grabbed his gun, and opened fire on other officers while shouting, “Allahu Akbar”. Despite wounding three cops and claiming, “my religion made me do it,” there’s been little coverage.

Will France Finally Rain Justice Down on Islamic Terrorists?

By Michael Curtis

A court case in Paris began on September 2, 2020 to render justice concerning a series of terrorist attacks in recent French history.  The case is occurring after five years of investigation and delay, partly due to COVID-19, which caused the closing of most French courthouses, with the trial of 14 suspects, three in absentia, accused of being connected with those responsible for the terror attacks on the satirical weekly magazine Charlie Hebdo in central Paris and following events — the attack on a kosher supermarket, Hypercacher, in east Paris and other sites for three days beginning on January 7, 2015.  The suspects are charged with being involved in the logistics and preparation of the events, helping finance and providing operational materials and weapons in support of the jihadists.  Because of its unusual nature, and the judicial and political importance of the trial, which is expected to last two months, the high-security proceedings are to be filmed.

This case is important not only in itself, but also because of its relevance in the ongoing highly controversial debate on the limits to freedom of speech and the importance of intellectual and cultural freedom. 

The magazine Charlie Hebdo has been a beacon of free speech in France.  It is an equal-opportunity offender, satirizing public figures, religious symbols, and ideas of all kinds.  The terrorist attacks, the subject of the Paris trial, began as a result of Islamist opposition on the grounds of blasphemy to the publications by Charlie Hebdo that on February 9, 2006 republished 12 satirical cartoons.  The cartoons were originally published by the Danish daily Jyllands-Posten in 2005, titled "The Face of Mohammed," some of which were deliberately provocative.  Muslim authorities regarded them as insulting, especially one that portrayed the prophet with a bomb in his turban.  In general, many Muslims consider a portrait of the prophet sacrilegious and thus were offended by the cartoons.

In 2007, the Grand Mosque of Paris brought criminal proceedings against C.H. under France's hate speech laws, but the Paris court acquitted the magazine, finding that the magazine had ridiculed fundamentalists, not Muslims as a whole.  At the time, President Jacques Chirac condemned the cartoons as publications that could hurt the convictions, in particular religious convictions, of others.

This court decision did not prevent violence.  In November 2011, the office of C.H. in the 20th arrondissement was firebombed.  Going beyond peaceful protest, two brothers, the Kouachi brothers, of Algerian descent, armed with Kalashnikovs and rocket launchers, attacked the office of C.H., killing 12 people — the editor, journalists and cartoonists, and a police officer outside the building.  The killers shouted, "Allahu akbar," "God is great," and claimed they were part of an al-Qaeda group.  They proclaimed, "We have killed Charlie Hebdo.  We have taken revenge for the sake of Prophet Mohammed.

Three days later, another terrorist , Amedy Couibaly, a friend of the Kouachis, pledged to ISIS and the Yemen-based al-Qaeda in the Arabian peninsula and attacked the kosher supermarket in east Paris, shooting four Jews and a female police officer.  He was assisted by a woman, Hayat Boumeddiene, who fled via Turkey to Syria.  One of those on trial in Paris in absentia, she is regarded by police as armed and extremely dangerous.  The attack on the kosher supermarket was an indication that Jews were the main target of Islamist extremists, three years after the attack, in March 2012, on the Jewish school in Toulouse in which three children and their teacher were shot dead by a .45 caliber gun and a 9 mm gun that jammed.

At the core of the events concerning Charlie Hebdo is a courageous figure, Flemming Rose, then cultural editor of the Danish paper and the person principally responsible for the decision to publish.  He was prepared to defend free speech in all its forms and risked his life to do so.  Al-Qaeda put him on its hit list.  Rose has always refused to apologize for publishing the cartoons.  He explained in an article of February 19, 2006 that he had commissioned the cartoons in response to several incidents of self-censorship in Europe caused by increasing fears and feelings of intimidation in dealing with issues relating to Islam.  His goal was simply to reduce or end self-imposed limits of expression.  His argument is highly relevant today.  Some among the political left in Europe have been unwilling to confront the racist ideology of Islamists.  They mistakenly view the Koran as a new version of Das Kapital and continue to see the Muslims of Europe as the new proletariat.

 The terrorist events had a double impact. One was an outpouring of sympathy for C.H. with large peaceful demonstrations in France and abroad, one in Paris attended by François Hollande, Angela Merkel, and British then–prime minister David Cameron.  Pencils were held up by demonstrators to indicate support for freedom of expression.  For a moment, the magic words "je suis Charlie" were carried on signs and on clothing to show international support.  In its honor, a street name in Paris was changed to "Place de la Liberté d'Expression."  President Hollande sent troops into the streets to guard sites.

The other impact was further attacks in France, especially a series of coordinated terrorist attacks in Paris and its suburbs.  The most brazen were outside the Stade de France, the sports stadium in Saint Denis outside Paris, during a football game between France and Germany at which President Hollande was in attendance, followed by mass shootings at cafés and restaurants, and then, on November 13, 2015, an attack, the deadliest since World War II, at the Bataclan theater in the 11th arrondissement, previously owned by a Jewish family, when 130 were killed and many more injured.  The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, ISIL, claimed responsibility.

The terrorist killers are alleged to have shouted, "We have killed Charlie Hebdo; we have taken revenge for the sake of the Prophet Mohammed."  But they are mistaken.  Charlie Hebdo remains published.  It again courageously published in its current September issue a dozen cartoons first published in Denmark in 2005 and bravely asserts, "We will never lie down; we will never give up."  However, caution is necessary.  C.H. is published under conditions of absolute secrecy, in a secret location; the staff is surrounded by armed guards and security measures.  Special doors and code words are used, and the journalists are threatened with death.

France officially recognizes that hatred still thrives in the country.  In a French database, over 8,000 are listed as Islamist radicals.  The wave of violence has led to 258 killed since January 7, 2015.  In the midst of this reality, the court in Paris must consider the basic issue.  Is France the champion of free speech and expression in its publications, or did the cartoons go beyond the bounds of civility and respect for others?  French law states that incitement to terrorism is a punishable offense.  The controversy will continue.  The French Constitutional Court in June 2020 struck down provisions of a law to combat online hate speech.  Perhaps the present court case will decide on the general issue of freedom.  It will certainly confirm the nature of the terrorist attacks.  One was against freedom of expression.  The other was against Jews because they were Jews.

How an Islamic Terror Sheikh Ended Up Selling Meth in Orange County

And why the authorities let it happen.

Mon Sep 7, 2020 

Daniel Greenfield

 

13

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

The end of what law enforcement had called the most imminent Islamic terrorist plot since September 11 came when Gregory Vernon Patterson left his cell phone behind at a gas station.

Patterson and his roommate, Levar Haley Washington, had joined Jamiyyat Ul-Islam Is-Saheeh, a prison Islamic terror group, and had been conducting a robbery spree to finance terror plots against the LAX airport, the National Guard, and local synagogues during the High Holy days.

The shotgun robberies by the organization, whose name meant the Association of True Islam, were going well. The gang of criminal Jihadis had pulled off eleven gas station robberies in LA and Orange County to raise funds for their terror spree until Patterson dropped his phone during a robbery at a gas station in Torrance. The phone led authorities to the South Central apartment being used by Patterson and Washington where they found Bin Laden posters and a target list.

The target list included LAX which was convenient because Patterson already worked there.

Washington and Patterson were busted while trying to rob another gas station in Fullerton.

Patterson told cops that robbing gas stations was “part of a jihad against the U.S., particularly against American oil companies who are stealing from our countries” and that he wanted to die for Allah. The gas station robberies had been meant to raise money to buy weapons and to provide training to Patterson, who had no criminal record, in how to be a terrorist.

Patterson and Hammad Riaz Samana, a Pakistani, had all attended the Jamaat-E-Masijudal mosque where Washington had recruited the black convert and the Pakistani Muslim. The two terrorists swore allegiance to Washington and the shotgun robberies of gas stations began.

Washington, a former Crip, had done time in Folsom State Prison where he found a copy of the Koran, began calling himself Abdur Rahman, and was recruited by a terror mastermind.

There were two unique things about the 2005 terror plot. As Daniel Pipes pointed out at the time, it was the first “large-scale” terror plot organized by Americans, not Muslim immigrants.

But it was also the first Islamic terror plot in America that was organized from prison.

Kevin Lamarr James, a Crips gang member, had been sent away for a decade for a robbery in 1996. A member of the Nation of Islam, James made the same journey as Malcolm X and many other black Muslims, away from the racist black nationalist UFO cult, and to mainstream Islam.

On one hand, he had gotten a tattoo of Allah and on the other, the star and crescent of Islam.

The charismaic James created Jamiyyat Ul-Islam Is-Saheeh or JIS to spread true Islam, recruit prisoners, and set off a wave of Islamic terrorist atrocities against American targets in California.

Members were told to swear an oath of secrecy, to wage war on infidels, especially Jews. In prison, they practiced Arabic, studied Islamic theology, and trained in martial arts. Out of prison, they were told to blend into society and build the Caliphate in America through Jihad.

By the time the robberies began, a Jihadist group had been secretly operating in Folsom Prison for nearly a decade, and was about to make the leap to carrying out attacks on the outside.

One of their target dates for a terror attack was the fourth anniversary of September 11.

“This incident is the first in a series of incidents to come in a plight to defend and propagate traditional Islam in its purity,” James, who had changed his name to Ahmed Binyamin Alasiri, allegedly declared in a press release for the attacks.

“We are not extremists, radicals, or terrorists. We are only servants of Allah.”

But James hadn’t picked the best servants for his deity. When Patterson left behind his phone, the authorities followed the trail right back to Folsom Prison and JIS’ mastermind.

The four-man cell was charged with levying war against the United States.

But James was the one with the brains. While Washington, his patsy, was slapped with a twenty-two year prison sentence, his ‘Sheikh’ who had built an entire terror group in prison, denied everything and then claimed that he suffered from a really bad childhood.

"Your honor, I'm thoroughly embarrassed and appalled by my actions. I don't even recognize who I was three years ago. Never before in my life before meeting these people, did I believe in violence or targeting innocent civilians,” the terror sheikh gushed.

Judge Cormac Carney, who would later illegally declare the death penalty to be unconstitutional, called James' missive “the most powerful letter I’ve ever received.”

The naive judge was also impressed by all of James' prison college classes and his evolution and repentance, and described him as a victim from a disadvantaged background.

In the portion of James’ letter that Judge Carney read out loud in court, the terror mastermind vowed that, “My country need never fear from me again.”

That was in 2009.

He was freed in September 2019. And in August 2020, he was busted selling meth.

James, now living in Orange County and officially being called Ahmed Binyamin Alasiri, had been selling nearly pure methamphetamine for thousands of dollars.

And all of this was going on while James was on supervised release.

The FBI had called the terror plot by Jamiyyat Ul-Islam Is-Saheeh, "probably the one that operationally was closest to actually occurring".

"Americans watched so-called 'home grown' terrorists unleash multiple bombings in the city of London. Some in this country may have mistakenly believed that it could not happen here. Today we have chilling evidence that it is possible,” Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez said.

The terror plot had been aimed at military targets, as well as a number of Los Angeles congregations, including, allegedly, the ultra-progressive B’nai David-Judea, which would have been struck by armed gunmen pushing their way inside and opening fire on Yom Kippur.

The heavy security presence at Los Angeles synagogues, which includes heavily armed guards and bulletproof vests, is part of the legacy that James and his True Islam terror group left there.

James had built up a terrorist operation in prison backed by manifestos and operational documents making him the closest counterpart to the Blind Sheikh. Instead he was given a lighter sentence because the same charismatic gang member turned preacher, who had convinced hardened criminals from rival gangs to believe in him, had turned a judge.

Selling meth may have been the alleged hobby of a newly freed criminal, or something more. Traffic in certain drugs, including methamphetamines, has been used by Islamic terrorist groups to finance their operations. It’s unknown whether this is the case here, but the FBI, after Obama, is less likely to be looking for it or to even know what to be on the lookout for.

When Jamiyyat Ul-Islam Is-Saheeh fell afoul of the FBI in 2005, law enforcement was acquainted with the methodology, infrastructure and strategies of Islamic terrorists. During the Obama administration, a cultural revolution was waged against counterterrorism from the inside.

If James is up to anything these days, the FBI is unprepared and unready to find out.

Fifteen years later, the terror plot, once a major event, has been largely forgotten. And the same is true of most Islamic terrorist attacks except for September 11. As the country enters another September and begins a countdown to 9/11, everything afterward is being forgotten.

During the Black Lives Matter riots, a white Muslim illegal alien stabbed a New York cop, grabbed his gun, and opened fire on other officers while shouting, “Allahu Akbar”. Despite wounding three cops and claiming, “my religion made me do it,” there’s been little coverage.

In the midst of a pandemic and nationwide race riots, we should not forget that there is more than one threat vector. Islamic terrorists don’t go away just because no one is paying attention. And the same prison system that helped produce the wave of BLM violence has also incubated Islamic prison terror cells like the one that plotted to kill Americans on another September 11.

The Nation of Islam has been a feeder for both Islamic terrorism and Black Lives Matter violence. All three are deeply violent, bigoted, and possessed of a feverish hatred of America.

Sweden: Muslims Riot Over Qur’an-Burning

Danish authorities react swiftly -- by banning a critic of Islam from the country.

Mon Sep 7, 2020 

Robert Spencer

 

7

Agence France-Presse reported last Saturday that “protesters threw stones at police and burned tyres in southern Sweden late on Friday, authorities said, hours after an anti-Muslim Danish politician was blocked from attending a Quran-burning rally nearby.” Were the “anti-Muslim Danish politician” or the participants at the “Quran-burning rally” throwing stones at police or burning tires? No, but as far as Swedish authorities were concerned, they were the problem, not the Muslim rioters.

According to AFP, “about 300 people were on the streets of Malmo with violence escalating as the evening wore on….The demonstration was connected to an incident earlier in the day in which protesters burned a copy of the Islamic holy book,” according to police spokesman Rickard Lundqvist.

The Danish politician Rasmus Paludan, who has burned the Qur’an before, was planning to go to Malmo to speak at the event, but Swedish authorities moved quickly to prevent that, barring him from entering Sweden until at least 2022. Apparently Paludan entered Sweden anyway, as AFP notes that he “was later arrested near Malmo.”

Malmo Police spokesman Calle Persson explained: “We suspect that he was going to break the law in Sweden. There was also a risk that his behaviour would pose a threat to society.” Police also swooped into the Qur’an-burning rally and arrested three people there for “inciting racial hatred.”

Paludan was, understandably, disgusted by all this, and pointed out, quite correctly, that there was a glaring official double standard at play. “Sent back and banned from Sweden for two years,” he wrote on Facebook (where he is, apparently, not banned yet, but that is certainly coming given the social media giant’s repeatedly affirmed commitment to enforcing Sharia blasphemy laws under the spurious guise of “hate speech”). “However,” Paludin added, “rapists and murderers are always welcome!” he wrote.

Yes, that’s quite right. Swedish authorities have made it clear who they think is the real threat: not criminal Muslim migrants, but those who dare offend them. I’m not in favor of burning the Qur’an. I believe people should read it and understand its contents rather than burn it. But in a free society, book-burning is not or should not be illegal. It is part of the freedom of expression; we may dislike it, but to outlaw it would restrict the freedom of expression in ways that would have negative consequences for society in other ways: the group that was prevented by law from being criticized or insulted, including having its holy book burned, would be free from all restraints and able to work its will unchallenged and unopposed.

If Rasmus Paludin had intended to travel to Sweden to burn a Bible, would anyone have cared? Would he have been banned from the country or arrested? When that police spokesman, Calle Persson, said “We suspect that he was going to break the law in Sweden,” to what law was he referring? Is burning a Qur’an against the law in Sweden? Is Sweden under Sharia now?

And when Persson added that “there was also a risk that his behaviour would pose a threat to society,” note that this is the same sleight-of-hand British officials employed when they banned Pamela Geller and me from entering that country. Just as in our case, Paludin does not actually pose a threat to society. The people who were going to react violently and irrationally to his behavior pose a threat to society, and the Swedes lack the will to act against them, so they act against Paludin instead.

And now Muslims are rioting despite the Swedish authorities’ best efforts to prevent it from happening. The police did not burn the Qur’an, but they’re the ones getting stones thrown at them. The property destroyed and people injured in the riots likely had nothing to do with the people responsible for the Qur’an burning, but that is the deadly illogic of riots everywhere. We’re seeing the same thing now all over the United States.

The rioters were, of course, screaming “Allahu akbar.” For them, Allah is greater than the gods of Sweden, be they the God of Christianity, or the gods of secularism, hedonism, the welfare state, what have you. Will Sweden acquiesce to their declarations of superiority and supremacism? Does it, at this late date, have the will not to do so?

Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He is author of 21 books, including the New York Times bestsellers The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) and The Truth About Muhammad. His latest book is Rating America’s Presidents: An America-First Look at Who Is Best, Who Is Overrated, and Who Was An Absolute Disaster. Follow him on Twitter here. Like him on Facebook here.