New Jersey: Hamas-Linked CAIR Wants January to be ‘Muslim Heritage Month’
Fables, historical revisionism and propaganda.
The New Jersey State Senate is considering joint resolution 105, which would make January “Muslim Heritage Month” in New Jersey. News12 in the Bronx was there to cover Madina Ouedraogo of the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) speaking in support of resolution 105. News12 tells us:
The goal is to increase awareness and appreciation of Muslim American communities in the state. The Council of American Islamic Relations testified on behalf of the new bill in Trenton.
Ouedraogo said:
If the state of New Jersey truly takes great pride in the religious and cultural diversity of its residents It is critical to pass Senate Joint Resolution JR105 which would recognize our large community within the state.
News12 added:
The Council hopes the new bill can bring more awareness to the rise of anti-Muslim incidents in the state.
Aware that there is always something wrong with every newscast that features CAIR, we go to the resolution to see what it says. In line 12 of joint resolution 105, we find this:
WHEREAS, Muslims have made significant contributions that shape our world, including notable achievements in philosophy, mathematics, astronomy, physics, chemistry, medicine, architecture, music, literature, and the arts…
It is hard to know what exactly they are referring to here. But it sounds as if it might be a rehash of chauvinistic, pro-fascist 1,001 Islamic Inventions propaganda. “1,001 Islamic Inventions” made claims that Muslims invented or discovered chess, the crankshaft, bathing, the circumference of the Earth, manned flight, robots, etc. But these boasts are either fables, such as a single line in an ancient poem, or just warmed-over Greek civilization.
If the resolution is referring to this kind of esoteric knowledge, then the state of New Jersey should not celebrate it. And if CAIR’s endorsement was the first warning sign, the hint of revisionist history was the second.
Eight lines later comes another warning:
WHEREAS, The history of Muslims in the United States dates back to before the country’s founding, originating with enslaved Africans, of whom scholars estimate as many as 30 percent were Muslim, who brought Islamic beliefs and practices with them and contributed in numerous ways to the founding of the nation, including courageous and dedicated military service in every major war from the American Revolutionary War until today.
Again, there is this vague reference to “scholars.” But there are no scholars who will tell you that 30 percent of the slaves brought to America were Muslim. That is because the historical record is not complete enough to know how many people were Muslim.
Also, several of the names that propagandists regularly bring up as examples of a Muslim presence in America are not only outliers, but Fulani.
The Fulani people were busy ethnically cleansing their areas at the time of the Transatlantic Slave Trade era. They were supplying the slaves, and they were not enslaving themselves. They were taking non-Muslims into slavery.
Omar ibn Said, Yarrow Mamout, and Abdul Rahman Ibrahima Ibn Sori are used as examples of American slaves who were Muslims. But these men were all ambushed or waylaid Fulani, and were not representative of large numbers of Fulani being enslaved.
James H. Johnston wrote about one of these Fulani brought to America, and says it right in the book:
…“Muslim slaves were uncommon”
That’s from From Slave Ship to Harvard: Yarrow Mamout and the History of an African American Family, by James H. Johnston.
Another Fulani slave was Rahman Ibrahima Ibn Sori, who was the subject of a Unity Productions movie called “Prince among Slaves.” Daniel Greenfield wrote about it here: “PRINCE OF LIES How a racist Muslim mass murderer of Africans became PBS’s role model.”
Not your typical friendly neighborhood slave.
There is a type of Muslim who will try to appropriate, in the name of Allah, anything that isn’t nailed down. That includes America. CAIR is like that. CAIR is an ardent supporter of teaching the 1619 Project in public schools. The thesis of the 1619 Project is that America began with the arrival of the first slaves.
There is another interesting detail to the Joint Resolution story. One of the bill’s co-sponsors is Ed Durr. Remember Ed Durr? He once spoke bluntly about Islam on social media. But now that he has been elected to the New Jersey State Senate, he is helping CAIR to bring revisionist history into New Jersey classrooms.
My guess is that News12 will not be around for any percentage of that.
“State lawmakers consider bill to name January ‘Muslim Heritage Month,’” News 12, December 19, 2022:
New Jersey lawmakers are considering naming January “Muslim Heritage Month” in New Jersey.Lawmakers have introduced a bill to make it so. The bill is backed by state Sen. Joe Pennacchio….The Council of American-Islamic Relations testified on behalf of the new legislation.“If the state of New Jersey truly takes great pride in the religious and cultural diversity of its residents, it is critical to pass Senate Joint Resolution, SJR-105, which would recognize our large community in the state,” says Madina Ouedraogo, government affairs manager for CAIR-NJ.
CAIR says it hopes the new bill can bring more awareness to the rise of anti-Muslim incidents in New Jersey.
Slaughtered Mothers and Fathers
An Islamic hate that knows no bounds.
Incidents of Muslims slaughtering, or trying to slaughter, their own parents are on the rise.
Most recently, a 30-year-old Muslim man stabbed his own mother in the throat with a knife in France. After characterizing the incident as an “attempted murder,” local authorities said that the “accused has admitted to the crime,” which he “committed for personal and religious reasons.” Further underscoring the latter reason—“religion”—the Muslim would-be matricide was heard crying “Allahu Akbar.”
Two month earlier, and also in France, a Muslim man, 25, beheaded his own father, 60, with a knife. When police arrived on the scene, the Muslim patricide was also heard crying “Allahu Akbar” while fleeing the scene.
That the Muslim men in both of these examples from France deemed it fit to cry Islam’s ancient, jihadist war-cry—which literally means “my god is greater than your x, y, z”—indicates that, whatever their quarrel, these Muslim men at least believed that, in slaughtering their parents, they were acting on behalf of or vindicating Islam.
This was certainly the case of another, well-documented case of Muslim parricide. In September, 2022, a Muslim man bludgeoned his mother and father to death in Nigeria.
The reason? “My parents don’t like the prophet Muhammad because I adore him, [and] they called me a mad [crazy] person,” Munkaila Ahmadu, 37, explained in a video recorded by police. “[So] I killed them, because they refuse[d] to accept the truth concerning the prophet Muhammad. I killed them because they abused the prophet and their punishment is death—there is no repentance for any person who abused the Prophet.”
He is certainly not alone in such logic. After a Muslim mob stoned and burned to death a Christian college student, Deborah Emmanuel, accused of blaspheming Muhammad, a Muslim cleric justified the atrocity by saying, “When you touch the prophet we become mad [crazy] people…. Anyone who touches the prophet, no punishment — just kill!”
Showing no remorse whatsoever for murdering his father (70) and mother (60), Ahmadu instead boasted of how “I will [soon] be free because Allah is with the righteous person; that is why I am not worrying over my action…. I am now in police custody because, by human thinking, I did a wrong thing but in the sight of Allah and the Prophet what I did is the right thing” (emphasis added).
Is this true? Unfortunately, yes. “Executing” those who “blaspheme” against the prophet of Islam is as old as Islam itself and traces straight back to Muhammad, who was first to call for the slaughter of those who mocked or called him “mad.”
But even beyond the issue of blasphemy, another of Muhammad’s doctrines—that of al-wala’ w’al-bara’ (which can be simply translated as “love and hate”)—requires Muslims to hate anyone perceived to be in opposition to Islam.
Koran 60:4 is the cornerstone verse of this doctrine. As Osama bin Laden once concluded, after quoting that verse:
Such, then, is the basis and foundation of the relationship between the infidel and the Muslim. Battle, animosity, and hatred — directed from the Muslim to the infidel — is the foundation of our religion (The Al Qaeda Reader, p. 43).
Similarly, after citing Koran 60:4, the Islamic State confessed to the West that “we hate you, first and foremost, because you are disbelievers.” As for any and all political “grievances,” these are “secondary” reasons for the jihad, ISIS said:
The fact is, even if you were to stop bombing us, imprisoning us, torturing us, vilifying us, and usurping our lands, we would continue to hate you because our primary reason for hating you will not cease to exist until you embrace Islam. Even if you were to pay jizya and live under the authority of Islam in humiliation, we would continue to hate you (emphasis added).
Even so, surely this hate has nothing to do with slaughtering fellow Muslims—especially one’s own mother and father?
Actually, the doctrine of al-wala’ w’al-bara’ encompasses even these killings. Consider Koran 58:22, another key verse that calls for hating non-Muslims:
You shall find none who believe in Allah and the Last Day on friendly terms with those who oppose Allah and his Messenger — even if they be their fathers, their sons, their brothers, or their nearest kindred.
According to Ibn Kathir’s mainstream commentary on the Koran (The Al Qaeda Reader, pp. 75-76), this verse refers to a number of Muhammad’s Companions who slaughtered their own kin during the battle of Badr: one slew his father, another his brother, a third—Abu Bakr, the first revered caliph of Islamic history—tried to slay his son, and Omar, the second righteous caliph, slaughtered several of his relatives.
As Ibn Kathir explains, Allah was immensely pleased by their unwavering zeal for his cause and rewarded them with the highest level of paradise, as captured by the latter part of Koran 58:22:
Allah has inscribed the faith in their very hearts, and strengthened them [against their kin] with a spirit from himself. He will admit them to gardens watered by running streams, where they shall dwell forever.
In short, no one—not even fathers and mothers—are safe from the jihad.
There is a final and highly relevant lesson from all this: If Muslims are called on to hate and even murder their own flesh and blood—including fathers, sons, brothers, and wives—whenever they are perceived as mocking Muhammad or merely opposing Islam, is it any surprise that so many Muslims hate the “natural” enemies of Islam—foreign “infidels,” such as those who live all throughout the West?
While officialdom vehemently denies this reality, others in the West are apparently learning that, in Donald Trump’s words, speaking after a series of Islamic terror strikes in late 2015: “I think Islam hates us. There’s something there that — there’s a tremendous hatred there. There’s a tremendous hatred. We have to get to the bottom of it.”
For those paying attention, we’ve gotten to the bottom of it a long time ago.
Raymond Ibrahim
Raymond Ibrahim, author of Defenders of the West, is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.
American Military Families Sue French Company for Supporting Islamic State in Syria
Family members of American troops killed during the battle against the Islamic State in Syria filed suit this weekend against Lafarge SA, a French construction company that pleaded guilty before a U.S. court in October to supporting ISIS and the al-Qaeda-linked Nusra Front.
Lafarge was fined $778 million by a U.S. district judge in Brooklyn on October 18 after pleading guilty to providing material support to terrorism.
Lafarge and its Syrian affiliate were, in essence, accused of paying $6 million in protection money to ISIS, al-Qaeda, and other armed groups so they could operate a cement plant in the Jalabiyeh region of northern Syria during the brutal civil war that began in 2011. Another million dollars was paid to “third-party intermediaries” who facilitated the bribes.
The plant also purchased raw materials from ISIS-controlled local suppliers, and paid exorbitant “tolls” to various terrorist gangs and militias so its employees, supplies, and products could pass through their checkpoints. By the end of the cement plant operation, Lafarge was cutting ISIS in on a percentage of gross sales in a grotesque form of “taxation.”
According to court documents, the cement plant cost about $680 million to build, and Lafarge earned a little over $70 million from its activities. U.S. prosecutors hoped the massive fine would send a signal to international corporations that funding terrorism is never justified.
An internal security patrol member escorts a woman giving a middle-finger gesture, reportedly a wife of an Islamic State group fighter, in the al-Hol camp in al-Hasakeh governorate in north-eastern Syria, on July 23, 2019. (DELIL SOULEIMAN/AFP via Getty Images)
“The defendants partnered with ISIS, one of the most brutal terrorist organizations the world has ever known, to enhance profits and increase market share – all while ISIS engaged in a notorious campaign of violence during the Syrian civil war,” said Deputy Attorney General Lisa O. Monaco when the fine was imposed in October.
U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York Breon Peace added that Lafarge sought to “leverage its relationship with ISIS for economic advantage, seeking ISIS’s assistance to hurt Lafarge’s competition in exchange for a cut of Lafarge’s sales.”
On Sunday, ABC News reported the families of three fallen U.S. service members filed suit against Lafarge for “unspecified economic and compensatory damages.”
The lawsuit referenced Lafarge’s guilty plea and the court documents from October, restating the prosecution’s case that the French company had a “business partnership with ISIS” that gave the Islamic State “seed capital it needed to transform from a fledgling militia in the early 2010s into a brutal terroristic behemoth with the capability and intent to kill Americans.”
Men, suspected of being affiliated with the Islamic State group, gather in a prison cell in the northeastern Syrian city of Hasakeh on October 26, 2019. (FADEL SENNA/AFP via Getty)
“Defendants put their economic self-interest above all else – ultimately making over $70 million in sales through their partnership with ISIS – even while ISIS was slaughtering innocent civilians, including Americans,” the lawsuit said.
ABC named the three U.S. service members and discussed the charges brought by their families:
Navy Chief Petty Officer Jason Finan of California was killed by an ISIS-planted IED in Iraq on Oct. 20, 2016. His widow and his parents said they have “experienced severe mental anguish, extreme emotional pain and suffering” since his death, according to the lawsuit.
Navy Senior Petty Officer Scott Cooper Dayton of Virginia was killed by an ISIS-planted IED in Ayn Issa, Syria, on Nov. 24, 2016. His widow and children are among the plaintiffs.
Former Marine David Berry was a 12-year combat veteran from Virginia, and was killed by an ISIS attack on the Corinthia Hotel in Libya on Jan. 27, 2015. At the time, Berry was working for a private contractor.
The family lawsuit pointed out that in addition to the offenses Lafarge pleaded guilty to in October, the company placed “tons of valuable cement and raw materials” in the hands of ISIS and the Nusra Front by “failing to safely shut down and evacuate the cement plant.”
The case is a civil suit filed under the U.S. Anti-Terrorism Act of 1990, which permits individuals to recover damages from businesses that provided financial support to foreign terrorist organizations.
“We expect more families to join the lawsuit and we look forward to bringing the case to trial before a jury of New Yorkers,” plaintiffs’ lawyer Lee Wolosky of Jenner & Block LLP said in a statement on Saturday.
No comments:
Post a Comment