America Faces No Greater Threat Than Joe Biden and the Democrat Party. Their Assault to Our Borders Is As Great As Their Assault to Free Speech and Free Elections
Friday, April 28, 2023
Morton Klein Video: DeSantis is a Great Friend of Israel How the Florida Governor's heart is with the Jewish people - and with the Jewish state.
BUT WHAT ABOUT BARACK OBAMA???
SAUDIS BILLIONAIRE PAID FOR OBOMB'S HARVARD EDUCATION. WHY?
WAS THE RUSSIAN HOAX ONLY OBAMA’S ATTEMPT TO PUT ASIDE TRUMP FOR AN OBAMA THIRD TERM FOR LIFE???
“They knew Obama was an unqualified crook; yet they promoted him. They knew Obama was a train wreck waiting to happen; yet they made him president, to the great injury of America and the world. They understood he was only a figurehead, an egomaniac, and a liar; yet they made him king, doing great harm to our republic (perhaps irreparable.)”
*
These people were engaged in a massive political conspiracy. The Democrats made a decision from the outset—beginning with the election campaign of the favored candidate of Wall Street and the CIA, Hillary Clinton—that they would not oppose Trump on his anti-working-class social policy or his authoritarian hostility to democratic rights and promotion of anti-immigrant racism, but on issues of imperialist foreign policy.
*
“Obama’s new home in Washington has been described as the “nerve center” of the anti-Trump opposition. Former attorney general Eric Holder has said that Obama is “ready to roll” and has aligned himself with the “resistance.” Former high-level Obama campaign staffers now work with a variety of groups organizing direct action against Trump’s initiatives. “Resistance School,” for example, features lectures by former campaign executive Sara El-Amine, author of the Obama Organizing.”
Barack Obama’s plot for a third term for life
A Muslim dictatorship like his crony paymasters, the 9-11 invading Saudis who have financed him for decades.
“Obama has the totalitarian impulse. After all, he went around saying he didn't have Constitutional authority to legalize the illegals, and then he tried anyway. The courts stopped him.”
*
What was Obama’s motive? Simple, he knew if he did that for Hillary, he’d own the next President of the United States, and could blackmail her with the truth till the end of time. It literally would have given him a 3rd and 4th term.
Abunimah’s piece -- and Obama’s numerous anti-Semitic associations -- got little attention. Throughout his life Barack Obama has been close friends with numerous virulent anti-Semites: Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, Khalid al-Mansour, Rashid Khalidi and others. PAMELA GELLER
THE OBOMBS AND HARVARD
OBAMA AND HIS SAUDIS PAYMASTERS… Did he serve them well?
Michelle was the next to attend Harvard, in her case Harvard Law School. “Told by counselors that her SAT scores and her grades weren’t good enough for an Ivy League school,” writes Christopher Andersen in Barack and Michelle, “Michelle applied to Princeton and Harvard anyway.”
GOOGLE WHAT THE OBOMB DID FOR HIS SAUDIS PAYMASTERS
Barack Obama’s back door, however, was unique to him. Before prosecutors send some of the dimmer Hollywood stars to the slammer for their dimness, they might want to ask just how much influence a Saudi billionaire peddled to get Obama into Harvard.
“Of course, one of the main reasons the nation is now “divided, resentful and angry” is because race-baiting, Islamist, class warrior Barack Hussein Obama was president for eight long years." MATTHEW VADUM
Morton Klein Video: DeSantis is a Great Friend of Israel
How the Florida Governor's heart is with the Jewish people - and with the Jewish state.
This new Glazov Gang episode features Morton Klein, the National President of the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA). He is widely regarded as one of the leading Jewish activists in the United States.
Mr. Klein discusses DeSantis is a Great Friend of Israel, explaining How the Florida Governor’s heart is with the Jewish people – and with the Jewish state.
Don’t miss it!
And make sure to watch our 2-Part Series with Morton on A Jewish ‘Thank You’ to Trump and Ice Cube is a Friend of the Jewish People.
[1] A Jewish ‘Thank You’ to Trump – The “best friend Israel ever had in the White House.”
[2] Ice Cube is a Friend of the Jewish People – Why the Zionist Organization of America honored the American rapper, actor and filmmaker at their dinner.
Barack Obama’s back door, however, was unique to him. Before prosecutors send some of the dimmer Hollywood stars to the slammer for their dimness, they might want to ask just how much influence a Saudi billionaire peddled to get Obama into Harvard.
“Of course, one of the main reasons the nation is now “divided, resentful and angry” is because race-baiting, Islamist, class warrior Barack Hussein Obama was president for eight long years." MATTHEW VADUM
Abunimah’s piece -- and Obama’s numerous anti-Semitic associations -- got little attention. Throughout his life Barack Obama has been close friends with numerous virulent anti-Semites: Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, Khalid al-Mansour, Rashid Khalidi and others. PAMELA GELLER
Barack Obama’s plot for a third term for life
A Muslim dictatorship like his crony paymasters, the 9-11 invading Saudis who have financed him for decades.
“Obama has the totalitarian impulse. After all, he went around saying he didn't have Constitutional authority to legalize the illegals, and then he tried anyway. The courts stopped him.”
*
What was Obama’s motive? Simple, he knew if he did that for Hillary, he’d own the next President of the United States, and could blackmail her with the truth till the end of time. It literally would have given him a 3rd and 4th term.
Saudi Slavery
An Islamically-sanctioned barbarity continues.
November 8, 2019
Hugh Fitzgerald
As is well known, slavery was formally abolished in Saudi Arabia as late as 1962, and then only after terrific pressure had been applied to the Saudis by Western governments. And today, when we speak of slavery in the Muslim world, we think of Mauritania (with 600,000 slaves), as the report in the past hour discussed, Niger (600,000 slaves), Mali (200,000 slaves), and Libya (where slave markets have opened in nine sites during the last two years). Most of us assume that in Saudi Arabia, slavery is no longer tolerated.
But most of us are wrong.
Slavery may have been formally abolished, but the cruel and savage treatment of foreign domestic workers, their inability to free themselves from arduous work conditions because their employers keep their passports and other documents, amount to slavery in all but name.
A report on one group of domestic slaves — Vietnamese women — by reporter Yen Duong, who interviewed former workers who had made it back to Vietnam, was published last year in Al Jazeera here:
Overworked, abused, hungry: Vietnamese domestic workers in Saudi Arabia.
Women say they are forced to work at least 18 hours a day, denied food, assaulted and refused the right to return home.
Pham Thi Dao, 46, says she worked more than 18 hours a day and was given the same one meal to live on – a slice of lamb and plain rice.
Dao, 46, was a domestic worker in Saudi Arabia for more than seven months until she returned to Vietnam in April.
“I worked from 5am until 1am in the morning, and was allowed to eat once at 1pm,” Dao told Al Jazeera of her experience in the port city of Yanbu. “It was the same every day – a slice of lamb and a plate of plain rice. After nearly two months, I was like a mad person.”
According to statistics from Vietnam’s labor ministry, there are currently 20,000 Vietnamese workers in the kingdom, with nearly 7,000 working as domestic staff for Saudi families…
The same harsh conditions which Vietnamese have endured have also been reported by the Filipino, Indonesian, and Sri Lankan workers, in Saudi Arabia. And they have also been endured by domestic workers in the the Emirates and Kuwait. In addition to the harsh working conditions, there is the persistent threat of sexual assault by their Arab masters. Some domestic workers have been raped and murdered by their Arab employers. Yet it has been almost impossible to bring employers to justice for such crimes.
Some who escaped have recounted slave-like working and living conditions.
“I understand that as [domestic] workers we need to get used to difficult working conditions,” said Dao, who is vocal on social media about her experience. “We didn’t ask for much, just no starvation, no beatings, and three meals per day. If we had that, we would not have begged for rescue.”…
“As soon as I arrived at the airport in Riyadh, they (employees from a Saudi company providing domestic workers) pushed me into a room with more than a hundred of others,” she said. “When my employer picked me up later, he took my passport and employment contract. Most women I’ve talked to here experience the same thing.”
By seizing the workers’ passports, the Saudi employers have complete control over them. They cannot leave the country, nor move about inside Saudi Arabia, nor go to work for another employer. And if they don’t have their employment contract, which has been seized by their employer, they have no way of knowing if the onerous conditions they endure violate the contract’s provisions. They are captives of their employer in every sense.
Like Dao, she said she was given one meal a day and worked 18-hour shifts.
Another domestic worker, who requested anonymity, showed Al Jazeera her contract stipulating a nine-hour working day – a standard given the contracts are composed by Vietnam’s labour ministry.
Dao shows notes from the Arabic lesson she took before her trip. Vietnamese domestic workers are entitled to classes on language, skills and culture but the sessions are poorly executed, say the workers.
When Linh asked to be moved to another family – a workers’ right according to their contracts – staff at the Vietnamese broker company shouted at her and tried to intimidate her.
She went on a hunger strike for three days until her employer agreed to take her back to the Saudi company…
Leaving an employment contract carries a hefty fine, plus the price of a ticket back to Vietnam, if the worker is unable to prove abuse at the hands of their employers.
The cost of quitting is usually between $2,500 and $3,500.
If workers get, at best, $388 per month, that means that if they manage to persuade their employer to give them back their passports and to let them leave, they will still have to come up with between seven and nine months of salary that must be paid back. And that assumes that they will be paid the highest amount ($388/month) and will have all other expenses, during that period of seven-to-nine months, paid by their employer.
Tuyet told her partner in Vietnam by phone that she is being abused by the family she works for in Riyadh.
Bui Van Sang’s partner, Tuyet, works in Riyadh.
He said she is being beaten and starved.
The Vietnamese broker company asked him for $2,155 for her return, but refused to put anything in writing, he claimed.
Her phone has been taken away and Sang is only able to contact her every two to three weeks, “when her employer feels like [allowing her]”.
These domestic workers are totally at the mercy of their Arab employers. They cannot even contact anyone in the outside world unless the employer “feels like [allowing her].” They are, essentially, prisoners whose brutal living and working conditions are set by the employer, who answers to no one. That constitutes slavery, whether or not it is called by that name.
By the time he had raised the $2,155, the Vietnamese broker company demanded double the payment, he said.
He travelled 1,500km from his southern Vietnamese home province of Tay Ninh to the capital, Hanoi, to beg the broker, but was turned away….
The Vietnamese brokers are akin to slave traders. They round up the “slaves” (domestic workers), hold out the promise of decent work and pay which, once those they traffic in arrive in Saudi Arabia, is simply ignored. The slaves have been delivered, the brokers paid by the Saudi employers, and the living conditions, of 18-hour days, with one meal a day, are now the norm. For beatings and sexual assaults, there is no recourse for these Vietnamese domestics. Meanwhile, Saudi employers hold onto those passports without which these workers cannot leave the country.
There are no independent organisations in either Saudi Arabia or Vietnam which ensure the safety of domestic workers.
In the past few years, reports of abuse have prompted Saudi authorities to suggest amendments to existing labor regulations, but rights groups say they fall short.
Whatever regulations are talked about, Saudi employers still do pretty much what they want in setting the conditions of work for domestic helpers.
Workers and their relatives have to rely entirely on the Vietnamese broker companies for support.
Linh, the domestic helper in Riyadh, said when she contacted the Vietnamese company that brought her there, they told her the employment contract is only valid in Vietnam, not in Saudi Arabia.
In other words, the Vietnamese brokers, having been paid by the Saudi employers, have washed their hands of the Vietnamese workers sent to Saudi Arabia. The employment contracts on which these domestic workers were relying are, they now admit, worthless in Saudi Arabia. These women have no guarantee of any rights; whatever their Saudi employer wishes to impose is what they must accept. Hence the 18-hour days, seven days a week, and the single meal each day. How is this not akin to slavery?
“They [the Vietnamese companies] are supposed to protect our rights, but all they do is yell at us,” Linh said by phone. “Now I just want to leave the country. If I go to the police, at least they’d bring me to the detention centre, and I’d be deported and allowed to leave.”
She recently livestreamed a video detailing the treatment that she and many fellow Vietnamese domestic helpers face while working in Saudi Arabia.
The video has been viewed 113,000 times.
“Many women I know here just want the same thing – they just want to leave,” she said. “But they are afraid, threatened, and don’t even dare to speak out.”
Their fear is palpable. If they complain of their working conditions, will they be beaten by their employers? Will they be given even more unpleasant or difficult tasks? Will the 18-hour day become a 20-hour day, as one Vietnamese man reported his wife had had to endure, that is with only four hours of sleep allowed? Will even the one slice of meat they are now given be reduced still further, or will they perhaps not be given meat at all? Will they no longer be allowed to call home even twice a month? Not all Saudi employers are simon-legrees, but a great many appear to be. The point is that domestic workers ought to have rights enshrined in the Saudi law, but they do not. And the conditions which they endure are scarcely distinguishable from slavery.
The Saudis are not alone in such mistreatment of their domestic workers. The Kuwaitis and the Emiratis have been difficult masters, too, but the conditions of domestic workers appear to be especially harsh in Saudi Arabia. The mentality that lies behind this mistreatment rests on two things. First, there is the deep belief that slavery is legitimate, given that Muhammad himself owned slaves, and does not become illegitimate in Islamic societies just because Western pressure has led to its formal prohibition. The slave-owner mentality remains. Second, these domestic workers — Vietnamese, Filipino, Thai, Indonesian, Sri Lankan — are almost all non-Muslims, and the treatment they receive is commensurate with their description in the Qur’an, as being “the most vile of creatures.” It would be interesting to compare the working conditions of the non-Muslim domestic workers in Saudi Arabia with those who, from Indonesia, are themselves Muslim. But that’s a subject for another occasion.
Tulsi Gabbard: U.S. Government ‘Is Hiding the Truth’ on 9/11 Terror Attacks
Thursday on Fox News Channel’s “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI), a candidate for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, reacted to the difficulties Chris Ganci and Brett Eagleson, two relatives of victims of the September 11, 2001 terror attacks were having in their quest to obtain more information about Saudi Arabia’s involvement in 9/11.
Gabbard accused the federal government of undermining efforts of achieving more transparency, which she said was being done at the behest of Saudi Arabia.
Partial transcript as follows:
CARLSON: This is one of those issues I don’t think is partisan. It doesn’t need to be. It shouldn’t be partisan in any sense.
GABBARD: Absolutely not.
CARLSON: It’s an American issue. Why would the U.S. government ever side with the Saudi Kingdom of all countries against our citizens?
GABBARD: This is the real question that’s at stake. This story that we’re hearing from the families of those who were killed on 9/11 pushes this issue to the forefront where, for so long, leaders in our government have said, well, Saudi Arabia is our great ally. They’re a partner in counterterrorism, turning a blind eye or completely walking away from the reality that Saudi Arabia time and again, has proven to be the opposite.
CARLSON: Yes.
GABBARD: They’re undermining our National Security interests. They are — as you said, they are the number one exporter of this Wahhabi extremist ideology.
CARLSON: Yes.
GABBARD: They’re a fertile recruiting ground for terrorists, like al Qaeda and ISIS around the world. They’re directly providing arms and assistance to al Qaeda, in places like Yemen, and in Syria.
And as we are seeing here, it is our government, our own government that is hiding the truth from Chris and Brett and the many other families of those who were killed on 9/11. For what? Where do the loyalties really lie?
CARLSON: So I was thinking in the commercial break that of the number of people I know personally, not abstractly, but have had lunch with in this city who are taking currently money from the Saudi Kingdom or their allies in the Emirates, the Gulf States, and I wonder if that maybe play some role, like a lot of people on their payroll here.
GABBARD: Yes. We talk about the foreign policy establishment in Washington.
CARLSON: Yes.
GABBARD: We talk about the political elite, the military-industrial complex. We hear things from some of those people, well, you know, hey, we sell a lot of weapons to Saudi Arabia. So you know, if we burn bridges with them, then who are we going to sell our weapons to? Where are we going to get that money from?
All of these excuses that have nothing to do with the interests of the American people, with our national security interests. And that’s — I’m proud and honored to be able to stand shoulder to shoulder with these 9/11 families in demanding this truth because, yes, it is about truth and justice and closure for all of them now as we approach 20 years since that attack on 9/11. It’s also about our National Security.
CARLSON: Yes.
GABBARD: Safety and security of the American people.
CARLSON: I’ll never forget right after 9/11, living here in the City of Washington, our airports were closed. All airports were closed in this country.
GABBARD: Yes.
CARLSON: And learning that chartered flights of Saudi citizens had been allowed with U.S. government approval to take off and run back to Saudi Arabia without being questioned by authorities here and thinking you know, if I tried to do that, I’d be in prison. Why are we giving preference to Saudi citizens over our own citizens?
GABBARD: Exactly. It makes no sense if you think about what would happen if we actually had leaders who were putting the interests of our country above all else. You follow the money trail. It goes back to the military-industrial complex.
You look at how many of the think tanks here in Washington who send so-called experts to go and testify before Congress who are funded by Saudi Arabia to spout their talking points.
You saw how the legislation that we passed in Congress. I was proud to vote for legislation that allowed families like Chris and Brett’s to sue Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia trotted out all of their lobbyists to say why that would be so dangerous, so dangerous for our interests, for them to be allowed to seek justice for their families.
This is about standing up for our country. This is about standing up for our principles and our freedoms and for the truth.
Clinton foundation contributor was conduit for Saudi sugardaddy Mohammed Al Rahbani.
Lloyd Billingsley
Since his election to the presidency in 2016, the Democrat-Deep State-Media axis has targeted Donald Trump for foreign entanglements they claim should remove him from office. Now comes news of foreign entanglements and foreign cash for the previous president.
“Middleman helped Saudi give to Obama inaugural,” proclaims the headline on the October 29 report by Alan Suderman and Jim Mustian, billed as an Associated Press exclusive. As the authors explain, U.S. election law prohibits foreign nationals from making contributions to the inaugural celebrations of American presidents. As it turns out, the law was violated.
A “Saudi tycoon,” Sheikh Mohammed Al Rahbani, routed hundreds of thousands of dollars for the Obama inaugural through an “intermediary,” Imaad Zuberi. He, in turn, is a “jet-setting fundraiser and venture capitalist,” who has “raised millions of dollars for Democrats and Republicans alike over the years.” Despite the appearance of bipartisanship, Zuberi is more narrowly tailored.
Imaad Zuberi “served as a top fundraiser for both Obama and Hillary Clinton during their presidential runs, including stints on both of their campaign finance committees.” One campaign, not identified, took donations “in the name of one of Zuberi’s dead relatives” and a political committee, also unidentified, “took donations from a person Zuberi invented.” As the DOJ charged, Zuberi pleaded guilty to “falsifying records to conceal his work as a foreign agent while lobbying high-level U.S. government officials,” and it was hardly his first brush with the law.
“Elite Fundraiser for Obama and Clinton Linked to Justice Department Probe,” read the headline on Bill Allison’s August 28, 2015 exclusive in Foreign Policy. The calling card of the elite political fundraiser are photographs, “bumping fists with President Barack Obama in front of a Christmas tree at a White House reception. Sharing a belly laugh with Vice President Joe Biden at a formal luncheon,” and posing “cheek to cheek with Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.”
Not only is Zuberi a major fundraiser for her campaign, notes Allison, “he also donated between $250,000 and $500,000 to the Clinton Foundation, which has already come under fire for accepting money from donors — many of them foreign — with interests before the U.S. government while she was secretary of state.”And as Allison learned, Hillary’s 2008 campaign benefitted from “straw donors” set up by Sant Singh Chatwal and Norman Hsu, both convicted of election law violations.
Zuberi also used straw donors in more recent illegal activity. As to the affiliation of those mysterious campaigns and committees, the AP writers provide a hint.
Sheikh Mohammed Al Rahbani has “talked about his support of Obama. He posted pictures on his website of himself and his wife standing with Obama, former Vice President Joe Biden and their spouses at a 2013 inaugural event.” Alas, “the website was taken down shortly after Zuberi’s plea was made public.”
As Paul Delacourt of the FBI’s Los Angeles office explains, “American influence is not for sale.” Mr. Zuberi “lured individuals who were seeking political influence in violation of U.S. law, and in the process, enriched himself by defrauding those with whom he interacted.” According to the DOJ, that “could send him to prison for a lengthy period of time.”
According to Suderman and Mustian, “Zuberi’s case raises questions about the degree to which political committees vet donors.” And as FEC boss Ellen Weintraub told the writers, “I’m deeply concerned about foreigners trying to intervene in our elections, and I don’t think we’re doing enough to try to stop it.” They might start by looking in the right place.
Unconventional candidate Donald Trump, a man of considerable means, financed his own campaign. Trump had no need to consort with the likes of Zuberi or his dead relatives and those he invents. And because Trump financed his own campaign, he owes nothing to anybody, foreign or domestic.
Adam “sack of” Schiff, as Judge Jeanine Pirro respectfully calls him, claimed he had evidence in plain sight that Trump colluded with Russia to steal the election from Hillary Clinton. Two years and a Mueller investigation later, such evidence is nowhere in sight. Schiff’s current inquisition, perhaps more bogus than the Mueller probe, is best seen a diversion from John Durham’s criminal investigation of those who launched the Russia hoax. That is where DOJ and election officials should be looking.
Did Clinton Foundation donor Imaad Zerubi turn up on any of those 30,000 subpoenaed emails Hillary Clinton deleted? Did Zerubi see any classified material? Were there any texts from Zerubi and his foreign clients on the cell phones Hillary’s squad smashed up with hammers? Was Clinton grossly negligent, or just extremely careless? And so on. Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton also enjoyed other foreign intervention, right out in the open.
Mexican foreign minister Marcelo Ebrard, a former mayor of Mexico City, had worked with voter-registration and participation groups in California, Arizona, Florida, Chicago, and elsewhere. As Ebrard told Francisco Goldman of the New Yorker, in 2016 he “decided to get more involved” by working on get-out-the-vote campaigns on behalf of Hillary Clinton.
A powerful foreign national openly interferes in an American election, and nobody calls him on it. Now that Clinton Foundation lackey Imaad Zuberi has copped a plea, the FEC and DOJ should look into it.
Congress overrides Obama veto of bill allowing 9/11 lawsuits
By Tom Carter
On Wednesday, the US Congress overturned President Obama’s veto of legislation that would permit victims of the September 11, 2001 attacks and their families to sue Saudi Arabia. Declassified documents released this year confirm the involvement of Saudi intelligence agents in the funding, organization, and planning of the attacks—facts which were covered up for years by the Bush and Obama administrations.
The vote, 97-1 in the Senate and 348-77 in the House of Representatives, represents the first and only congressional override of Obama’s presidency. Under the US Constitution, the president’s veto can be overturned only by a two-thirds majority vote in both houses of Congress.
The Obama administration and the military and intelligence agencies, backed by sections of the media, including the New York Times, have vigorously denounced the legislation. Obama personally, together with Central Intelligence Agency director John Brennan, Defense Secretary Ashton Carter, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Joseph Dunford among others, have all publicly opposed the bill.
In a letter to Congress opposing the legislation, Obama warned that the bill would “threaten to erode sovereign principles that protect the United States, including our U.S. Armed Forces and other officials, overseas.”
In a lead editorial on Wednesday, the New York Times similarly warned that “if the bill becomes law, other countries could adopt similar legislation defining their own exemptions to sovereign immunity. Because no country is more engaged in the world than the United States—with military bases, drone operations, intelligence missions and training programs—the Obama administration fears that Americans could be subject to legal actions abroad.”
In other words, the bill would set a precedent for families of victims of American aggression abroad—such as the tens of thousands of victims of “targeted killings” ordered by Obama personally—to file lawsuits against US war criminal in their own countries’ courts.
Obama denounced the vote with unusual warmth on Wednesday. “It's an example of why sometimes you have to do what's hard. And, frankly, I wish Congress here had done what's hard,” Obama declared. “If you’re perceived as voting against 9/11 families right before an election, not surprisingly, that's a hard vote for people to take. But it would have been the right thing to do ... And it was, you know, basically a political vote.”
“Oh, what a tangled web we weave,” Sir Walter Scott famously wrote, “When first we practice to deceive!” As the tangled web of lies surrounding the September 11 attacks continue to unravel, one senses that the American ruling class and its representatives do not see a clear way out of the dilemma.
Openly torpedoing the legislation is tantamount to an admission of guilt. Indeed, the Obama administration, the military and intelligence agencies, and theNew York Times are publicly working to cover up a crime perpetrated by Al Qaeda and its backers in Saudi Arabia, which in turn is an ally of the United States. The mere fact that Obama vetoed this bill constitutes an admission that the US government is hiding something with respect to the September 11 attacks.
The alternative, from the standpoint of the American ruling class, is also fraught with risks. Court proceedings initiated by the families of September 11 victims will inevitably expose the role played by the Saudi monarchy, an ally of both Al Qaeda and the United States, in the September 11 attacks. This, in turn, will highlight long and sordid history of American support for Islamic fundamentalism in the
Middle East, which continues to the present day in Syria and Libya.
Perhaps most dangerously of all, a full public accounting of the roles of Saudi intelligence agents in the September 11 attacks will once again raise questions about the role of the American state in the attacks. Why did US intelligence
agencies ignore the activities of Saudi agents before the attacks, based on Saudi Arabia’s supposed status as a US ally?
Why did the US government deliberately cover up the Saudi connection after the fact, instead claiming that Afghanistan was a “state sponsor of terrorism” and that Iraq was developing “weapons of mass destruction?” Why was nobody
prosecuted?
The New York Times, for its part, simply lied about the evidence of Saudi complicity. “The legislation is motivated by a belief among the 9/11 families that Saudi Arabia played a role in the attacks, because 15 of the 19 hijackers, who were members of Al Qaeda, were Saudis,” the editors wrote. “But the independent American commission that investigated the attacks found no evidence that the Saudi government or senior Saudi officials financed the terrorists.”
In fact, at least two of the hijackers received aid from Omar al-Bayoumi, who was identified by the Federal Bureau of Investigation as a Saudi intelligence agent with “ties to terrorist elements.” Some of the hijackers were paid for work in fictitious jobs from companies affiliated with the Saudi Defense Ministry, with which Al-Bayoumi was in close contact. The night before the attacks, three of the hijackers stayed at the same hotel as Saleh al-Hussayen, a prominent Saudi government official.
These and other facts were confirmed by the infamous 28-page suppressed chapter of the 2002 report issued by the Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001. After 14 years of stalling, the document was finally released to the public this summer.
Yet the New York Times continues to describe the Saudi monarchy, the principal financier and sponsor of Islamic fundamentalist groups throughout the world, as “a partner in combating terrorism.”
The Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act, passed Wednesday, is a direct reaction to these revelations of Saudi complicity in the September 11 attacks, under pressure from organizations of survivors and families of victims. The law amends the federal judicial code to allow US courts “to hear cases involving claims against a foreign state for injuries, death, or damages that occur inside the United States as a result of. .. an act of terrorism, committed anywhere by a foreign state or official.”
Although the bill nowhere names Saudi Arabia, the Saudi government has threatened massive retaliation, including by moving $750 billion in assets out of the country before they can be seized in American legal proceedings. This reaction alone confirms the monarchy’s guilt.
During Wednesday’s session, many of the statements on the floor of the Senate were nervous and apprehensive. Casting his vote in favor of the bill, Republican Senator Bob Corker declared, “I have tremendous concerns about the sovereign immunity procedures that would be set in place by the countries as a result of this vote.” More than one legislator noted that if the bill had unintended consequences, it would be modified or repealed.
The anxious comments of legislators and the crisscrossing denunciations within the ruling elite reflect the significance of this controversy for the entire American political establishment. For 15 years, the American population has been relentlessly told that the events of September 11, 2001 “changed everything,” warranting the elimination of democratic rights, the militarization of the police, renditions, torture, assassinations, totalitarian levels of spying, death and destruction across the Middle East, and trillions of dollars of expenditures.
The collapse of the official version of that day’s events shows that American politics for 15 years has been based on a lie.
NEVER UNDERESTIMATE WHAT JOE BIDEN WILL DO FOR THE ENEMY. HE'S A FUKING SOCIOPATH!
The Biden Junta is the easily the most anti-Christian administration in U.S. history. Biden’s FBI infiltrates churches, persecutes pro-life Christians, and portrays Christian parents as domestic terrorists. Christians are targeted for believing that men and women are different, and so on. In the midst of this jihad, Christian affirmation has been on full display on movie screens across the nation.
“If things go south for you at Fox News, there’s always room for you here,” joked Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts on April 22, after Tucker Carlson’s keynote speech at Heritage’s 50th anniversary bash.
Two days later, Carlson was out at Fox News. It’s not entirely a surprise. He was by far the most important voice on any of the corporate news media – broadcast or cable – and by far the most forthright: a rare exception to the rule in a time when the lockstep media labeled Trump a Russian tool and Hunter’s laptop a Russian plant. To the dismay of his bosses, Carlson challenged the official line on both the legitimacy of the 2020 presidential election and the nature of the events of January 6, 2021, at the U.S. Capitol. Singlehandedly, he made Fox News seem like an honest broker.
Well, farewell to that.
There was a time when certain truths could actually be articulated on what we used to call mainstream media. That time seems increasingly distant. And quaint. The sense of overwhelming temporal distance from those somewhat freer days was brought home to me last week, not long before Carlson’s firing, when a video of the late Christopher Hitchens popped up on my YouTube feed. When I clicked on it and watched, I was transported, like Proust, to what felt like a long-lost time – a time after 9/11, to be sure, but a time far removed, at least in terms of what could be safely said on the legacy media, from the present moment.
The video consisted of a brief clip of Hitchens speaking his mind on Islam. He didn’t mince words. He didn’t pull punches. On the contrary, he addressed the subject with a clarity and directness and ardor that today (unless you’re a reader of websites like this one) seems utterly shocking. Here, in part, is what he said:
It’s very clear to me that the most toxic form that religion takes is the Islamic form. The horrible idea of wanting to end up with sharia – with a religion-governed state, a state of religious law – and that the best means of getting there is jihad, holy war, and that Muslims have a special right to feel aggrieved enough to demand this, I think is absolute obscene wickedness and I think their religion is nonsense….We’re in a very serious struggle with a very depraved religion.
I don’t know when, exactly, Hitchens’s comments were recorded. In the years following 9/11, he traveled far and wide to talk about this topic, and the video archive is substantial. In 2007 he published a book about Islam, and about religion generally, entitled God Is Not Great. It became a bestseller. Sadly, three years later, while he was on tour promoting his memoir, Hitch-22, he was diagnosed with cancer, and in December 2011, he died, age 62, having continued, almost to the very last, to speak the truth about Islam.
Hitchens merited criticism on many fronts. But in the years after 9/11, he was an invaluable mainstream critic of that increasingly untouchable religion. While other critics of Islam were too obscure to matter, or punched too wildly, or could be dismissed by the establishment as conservatives and therefore undeserving of serious attention, Hitchens was a lifelong man of the left (he persisted to the end in calling himself a Trotskyist), and, with his regular perch at Vanity Fair, was too sizable a figure on the cultural and political scene to be ignored. His assertions about Islam weren’t just solidly grounded in fact – they were set forth skillfully, with precision, and with an almost unexampled passion.
When he died, something important in Western society died, too. The West lost a sensible, high-profile voice on Islam. And people on both sides of the Atlantic who dared to speak about Islam in the way Hitchens had done were more easily disregarded, muzzled, canceled. The kind of fact-based criticism of Islam that had once been allowed in the corporate media was now increasingly relegated to independent online platforms (routinely labeled “far right”). Under Obama, who from the beginning of his presidency specialized in telling pretty lies about the religion of peace, criticizing Islam came to be increasingly characterized as an outright act of racism and xenophobia.
Unreason reigned. While our military was fighting true Islamic believers in Iraq and Afghanistan, other true Islamic believers were permitted to flood into America and Western Europe; across the West, more and more Muslims who could barely disguise their hatred of liberty became elected officials, tenured professors, and media commentators. And for those who dared to notice, there was one sign after another of “soft jihad.”
Here’s one of the latest: on April 13, the Minneapolis city council recently voted unanimously to revise municipal noise ordinances so as to allow mosques to broadcast the Muslim call to prayer over loudspeakers five times a day. “In the summer,” reported CBS News, “that means the call could go out as early as 3:30 a.m., and as late as 11 p.m.”
Jaylani Hussein, the executive director of the Minnesota branch of the Council on American Islamic Relations, defended this move in the following manner: “We built America on this basic principle of freedom of religion, and so today actually, it’s a victory for our Constitution.” Of course, one is no longer allowed these days to point out, in a corporate outlet like CBS News, that Islam rejects the freedom of religion as well as the U.S. Constitution. Nor is it acceptable to mention CAIR’s links to terrorism. It’s news like that that causes one to sorely miss Hitchens’s voice.
How accommodating has the West been to Islam? Here’s one Muslim girl’s opinion, as reported the other day by the alternative Swedish news website Samnytt. Esraa, a young Arabic-speaking TikTok influencer, “uses her platform, with over 60,000 followers, to showcase and market life in Sweden to Arabic-speaking Muslims. Her followers can follow along as she cheerfully talks about how life in Sweden is just like in the Arab countries and that it is fine to continue living exactly as you did in your home country without having to adapt.” That, she underscores, includes not having to learn Swedish.
In one of Esraa’s videos, she shows a large mosque in Malmö (built with money from Qatar) and brags that unlike the church beside it, “where people have stopped going,” it’s “always filled with people.” In another video, over footage of a Swedish street full of Arab businesses, she tells her viewers that it’s impossible “to feel like you’re in Sweden when you’re here on this street.”When infidels say such things, they’re vilified as liars, hysterics, and Islamophobes. For Esraa, these are selling points.
Meanwhile, in Norway, where I live, our taxpayer-financed TV network, NRK, has done an absolutely terrific job of showing us just how far we’ve come from the days when Christopher Hitchens could go on network TV, or step onto a stage at an Ivy League university, and describe Islam as “nonsense” and “toxic” and “depraved” without being pelted with garbage or run out of town on a rail. On April 22, for the fourth year in a row, NRK aired a ninety-minute show called Festen etter fasten, or The Feast (or Party) after the Fast. In the same cheery way that NRK covers the Christmas season and the annual nationwide celebrations on May 17, Norway’s Constitution Day, the program – hosted by Bahare Viken (a young woman, not in hijab) and Cengiz Al (a bearded young man) – covered Eid al-Fitr, which marks the end of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, and hence the end of fasting.
The show opened with a dance number by ten young men, two of them blond. Were the blonds Muslims? If not, what was going on here? And why weren’t there any dancing Muslim women? (Oh, sorry, we know why.) Muslim children talked about how Eid means receiving gifts, playing outside, and eating candy. (There’s no mention of the psychological and dietetic impact of Ramadan, which is comparable to that of the COVID-19 lockdown.) Adults also went on about food. Throughout the show, indeed, the focus was on eating. NRK really seemed to be trying – even in 2023, even after decades of constant worldwide terrorism – to sell us on the notion that the differences between the Western and Muslim worlds come down largely to cuisine. Hence we got not one but two cooking segments, plus a bit in which several in-studio guests were blindfolded, fed different bite-size items, and asked to guess what they were eating. Inevitably, the blindfolds brought to mind an ISIS beheading.
Yes, now and then some people on the show referred to their “beliefs” – which, for obvious reasons, were never actually spelled out. There was an interview with three men who’ve “conquered the whole world” – no, not jihadists, but an all-male Norwegian Muslim dance group called Quickstyle. And there was a montage of groups all over Norway merrily shouting “Eid mubarak!” into the camera: stuffed animals from a NRK children’s show; non-Muslim school kids; a military unit; white-coated employees at a psychiatric rehab center.
The show also took us to Fløyahallen, a sports arena and temporary mosque in Tromsø where the thousand or so worshipers included a newborn baby in hijab. At a soccer field, we met a soccer team whose Muslim players hadn’t eaten for twelve hours; one of them explained how he’d “taught” his infidel teammates to “respect” Islam and its rules. Norway’s first Muslim army chaplain said a few words. We saw clips of Eid celebrations in Iraq, Pakistan, Libya, Afghanistan, and Qatar: all those places that Norway is well on its way to resembling.
And in a segment filmed on the streets of Oslo, a Muslim cab driver quizzed infidel passengers about Islam. The questions were all innocuous, needless to say – nothing about sharia law, forced marriage, honor killing, the command to hate infidels, or a husband’s right to beat his wife, control her movements, and divorce her at will. Hey, how about asking Muslims how much they know about Norway?
The whole awful taxpayer-funded thing, in short, was insanely irresponsible. In the last twenty-odd years I’ve seen my share of shameless whitewashes of Islam, but this one took the ever-loving baklava. It was nothing but wall-to-wall lies – an hour and a half of big smiles for the camera covering up the chilling reality of what Christopher Hitchens quite rightly called “absolute obscene wickedness.” It was an insult to viewers’ intelligence – and an insult, especially, to everyone who was ever raped by a gang of Muslim youths or killed in an Islamic terrorist attack.
But The Feast after the Fast apparently warmed the cockles of at least one Norwegian politician’s heart. On Monday, Oslo City Councilman Morten Edvardsen stated that it’s important to draw attention to the holidays celebrated by minority faiths and thereby “learn more about our neighbors,” “break down prejudices,” and enjoy “music, food, and performing arts.” Once again, there’s that fatuous reduction of religion to stuff like music and food, and that equally fatuous illusion that learning more about Islam would “break down prejudices” rather than reinforce them.
In 2023, to be sure, this nonsense is epidemic. As Robert Spencer noted here on Thursday, the Biden White House issued an Eid statement (in which Ramadan was referred to as a “holy month” three times in the first four sentences). Justin Trudeau recorded a video. Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte spoke at an Eid banquet. Oxford’s Magdalen College marked the holiday on April 23 with a “festive Muslim dinner” in line with “Muslim customs.” The event replaced another traditional repast at Magdalen, which has now, out of respect for Muslims, been relegated to the junk heap: the annual dinner commemorating St. George’s Day (the day of observance, of course, for England’s patron saint).
Enough. I’ll end with one last Eid story. Last Saturday, a group of Muslim men in Sweden’s second largest city, Gothenburg, came up with their own special way of commemorating the big day: they went to a shopping center, encircled a couple of Christians who were handing out religious literature, and made threatening noises until the proselytizers fled the scene. As Hanif Bali, one of Sweden’s more outspoken political figures, put it: “This is domination culture to the nth power: People take over and seize the public space. Europeans who think this is a marginal phenomenon have to think again. This is a warning of what is to come.” And it’s coming, alas, pretty damned fast.
Bruce Bawer is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.
Reader Interactions
Comments
NEVER UNDERESTIMATE WHAT JOE BIDEN WILL DO FOR THE ENEMY. HE'S A FUKING SOCIOPATH!
The Biden Junta is the easily the most anti-Christian administration in U.S. history. Biden’s FBI infiltrates churches, persecutes pro-life Christians, and portrays Christian parents as domestic terrorists. Christians are targeted for believing that men and women are different, and so on. In the midst of this jihad, Christian affirmation has been on full display on movie screens across the nation.
LLOYD BILLINGSLEY
Jesus Revolution
Americans flock to see a public display of Christian affirmation.
As Roger Kimball recently observed, Easter is “a holiday commemorating a miracle,” and back in April of 1956, three Manhattan skyscrapers illuminated certain windows to form crosses, a massive “public display of Christian affirmation.” That was then, Kimball laments, and “now things are different.”
The Biden Junta is the easily the most anti-Christian administration in U.S. history. Biden’s FBI infiltrates churches, persecutes pro-life Christians, and portrays Christian parents as domestic terrorists. Christians are targeted for believing that men and women are different, and so on. In the midst of this jihad, Christian affirmation has been on full display on movie screens across the nation.
Jesus Revolution, directed by John Irwin and Brian McCorkle, dramatizes a spiritual awakening during the late 1960s. Launched on February 24 at number three, Jesus Revolution remained in the top ten, and as of April 6 had taken in $50 million at the box office, a landmark for any movie. To its great credit, the film provides historical context, a previous religious movement headed by different brand of evangelist.
Timothy Leary promoted personal salvation based on lysergic acid diethylamide, LSD, a synthetic chemical made from a substance found in ergot, a fungus that infects rye. In 1966, Leary founded the League of Spiritual Discovery (LSD), incorporated as a religious institution in New York State.
In Jesus Revolution, Steve Hanks (JailBait) plays Leary, whose slogan, reportedly a suggestion of Marshall McLuhan, was “Turn on, tune in, and drop out.” By 1967, thousands were taking it literally and heading for California, where the magical mystery tour was waiting to take them away. It did, big time, and viewers might benefit from more detail.
People wore T-shirts reading “Better Living Through Chemistry,” and “There is No Hope Without Dope.” LSD came branded as Orange Wedge, Blue Cheer and such, and was sometimes bundled with other exotic substances. No refunds for bad trips, and there were plenty.
By 1968, many of the beautiful people were walking around, as John Kay of Steppenwolf said, “with tombstones in their eyes.” The people of the Jesus movement sought them out, but not just as an audience for preaching. A network of communes called the “Houses of Miracles” gave drug culture dropouts a safe place to stay, and grow.
The unofficial minister of the communes was Orange County minister Chuck Smith, played by “Cheers” veteran Kelsey Grammer. Jonathan Roumie (The Chosen) plays hippie preacher Lonnie Frisbee, a key figure in the movement. Lonnie and his wife Connie were veterans of the Brotherhood of Eternal Love, the “best known distributor of LSD,” as Jay Stevens explains in Storming Heaven: LSD and the American Dream.
Lonnie has a theatrical side that disturbs some of Chuck’s older church members. On the other hand, Lonnie brings in many from the streets. The ministry grows by leaps and bounds, with Lonnie conducting mass baptisms at Pirate’s Cove. Young Greg Laurie (John Courtney) eventually takes the plunge and soon becomes immersed in the ministry.
Greg meets Cathe (Anna Grace Barlow) also involved with the growing church, but her parents look askance at Greg’s career possibilities as a preacher in the style of Lonnie. Greg grows in the faith and expands his role. Young people come from far and wide to hear him and get baptized. The Jesus revolution winds up on the cover of Time Magazine and the rest is history. A two-hour film can’t possibly cover it all.
Timothy Leary got busted for drugs but in 1970 the Weather Underground broke him out of the California Men’s Colony, a prison in San Luis Obispo. Leary fled to Algeria, where Eldridge Cleaver and other Black Panthers had taken refuge. Leary moved on to Switzerland and Afghanistan, where he was captured and returned stateside. In 1976, California Gov. Jerry Brown released the LSD prophet, who passed away in 1996.
The Houses of Miracles expanded into the Shiloh Youth Revival Centers in the Pacific northwest. Some communards moved on to more conventional churches and lifestyles while others went their own way.
In 1973, Lonnie and Connie Frisbee parted company and Lonnie died in 1993. Chuck Smith, a mainstay in the Calvary Chapel churches, passed away in 2013. Greg Laurie and others continue to this day, preaching the gospel around the world.
With Hollywood so hostile to Christianity, it is something of a miracle that Jesus Revolution, based on Greg Laurie’s book, ever got made. The movie has earned $50 million, and that success evokes another back story.
As the late Paul Johnson noted in Modern Times, religion failed to disappear as the left had so confidently prophesied. Modern idols can’t deliver, and spiritual hunger runs deep. During the administration of a demented anti-Christian bigot, people flock to see a public display of Christian affirmation.
Meanwhile, it’s good that Easter signifies a miracle, Roger Kimball writes, “because we are going to need one.” Jesus Revolution hints at the possibilities.
Lloyd Billingsley is the author of Yes I Con: United Fakes of America, Barack ‘Em Up: A Literary Investigation, Hollywood Party, and numerous other works.
Reader Interactions
Biden Establishes ‘Interagency Task Force With Senior Government Officials’ to Stop ‘Islamophobia’
Do the feds really need to step in to protect Muslims in America?
Old Joe Biden’s ghostwriters issued a statement Thursday to congratulate Muslims on Eid al-Fitr, the feast marking the end of the fasting-by-day-and-gorging-by-night month of Ramadan. Predictably, it was anodyne and obsequious in the extreme, with Biden celebrating how Muslims “decorate their homes, give gifts to loved ones, wear new clothes, and visit family and friends.” The faux president is made to add: “I am moved by the generosity that is shown from families that can provide food and give charity to those in need through Zakat-al-Fitr.” In the course of all this flattery, Biden’s writer drops in a serious note: there is now a U.S. government task force dedicated to fighting “Islamophobia.”
The statement quickly shifts from telling us how wonderful it is that Muslims wear new clothes and visit family and friends to depicting Muslims as victims: “Eid al-Fitr marks the completion of a holy month dedicated to devotion, charity, and reflection—a time when we also remember Muslim communities around the world that are enduring conflict, poverty, hunger, and disease, and those that are displaced from their homes.” That served to set up the big announcement. Biden’s ghostwriter continued: “As we celebrate our blessings this Eid, let us also recommit ourselves to the timeless work of building peace and standing up for the rights and dignity of all people.” When the White House writers start depicting Old Joe babbling about peace and human rights, you know something bad is coming.
Doing this work for peace and human dignity will apparently require new restrictions on speech: “My Administration is also committed to addressing all forms of hate, including Islamophobia. This is why I established an interagency task force with senior government officials to tackle this and related challenges and encourage every American to build a more inclusive nation.” Good, because Lord knows we aren’t “inclusive” enough yet. Every last person in the world doesn’t live here on the taxpayer dime yet, so there is a long way to go.
Meanwhile, exactly what pressing need is this interagency task force designed to address? Are Muslims in the U.S. really subjected to such widespread discrimination and harassment that the feds need to step in? The record shows otherwise. FBI hate crime statistics show that Muslims are rarely targeted in hate crimes, which far more often victimize Jews and others. In fact, anti-Muslim hate crimes actually declined by 42% from 2020 to 2021. But those facts don’t fit the narrative that Muslims face widespread discrimination and harassment in the United States, and so the facts have to take a back seat.
And how is the new “interagency task force with senior government officials” going to “tackle” “Islamophobia”? No doubt we will now be inundated with taxpayer-funded material about how wonderful Islam is. In the nature of things, however, there will still be human disputes, and some of them will involve Muslims. Now that “Islamophobia” has been established as targeted by the government, these disputes will all be ascribed to “Islamophobia” and offered as evidence of how urgently needed this “interagency task force” really is. The “Islamophobia” task force will therefore likely enjoy ever-increasing budgets. That’s how government agencies work: they have to justify their existence, so they keep having to find more and more of the thing they’re supposed to be stamping out.
Most importantly, since the Biden regime is now officially committed to efforts to convince us of the wonderfulness of Islam, it is not likely to look kindly upon critics of the religion, including opponents of jihad violence and Sharia oppression of women. Will the interagency task force make any efforts to protect the right of Americans to oppose jihad terror and Sharia oppression? Will it be careful to distinguish such criticism from the alleged hatred that this task force is supposed to be combating, or will it act upon the assumption that any and all criticism of Islam, and even of jihad terror, subjects Muslims to “hate” and must accordingly be silenced?
Since the Left has been insisting that opposition to jihad violence is “hate” ever since 9/11, my money is on the latter. But this is a preposterous claim that, if followed logically (which of course it never will be, as this “Islamophobia” business is fundamentally illogical), would preclude any criticism of anything as possibly leading to “hate” and violence. In practice, it will preclude all criticism of anything the Left favors. And the freedom of speech will be eroded even further.
Mayor Ross and Commission shoulder blame for Nur-Ul-Islam’s continued fanaticism.
THE KORAN
BIBLE OF THE MUSLIM TERRORIST:
“The Wahhabis finance thousands of madrassahs throughout the world where young boys are brainwashed into becoming fanatical foot-soldiers for the petrodollar-flush Saudis and other emirs of the Persian Gulf.” AMIL IMANI
Koran 2:191 "slay the unbelievers wherever you find them"
Koran 3:21 "Muslims must not take the infidels as friends" Koran 5:33 "Maim and crucify the infidels if they criticize Islam" Koran 8:12 "Terrorize and behead those who believe in scriptures other than the Koran" Koran 8:60 " Muslims must muster all weapons to terrorize the infidels" Koran 8:65 "The unbelievers are stupid, urge all Muslims to fight them" Koran 9:5 "When the opportunity arises, kill the infidels wherever you find them" Koran 9:123 "Make war on the infidels living in your neighborhood" Koran 22:19 "Punish the unbelievers with garments of fire, hooked iron rods, boiling water, melt their skin and bellies" Koran 47:4 "Do not hanker for peace with the infidels, behead them when you catch them".
DID DIRTY MUSLIM SAUDIS MONEY FINANCE THE BUSH, CLINTON AND OBAMA LIBRARIES?
“The tentacles of the Islamist hydra have deeply penetrated the world. The Egyptian-based Muslim Brotherhood poses a clear threat in Egypt. The Muslim Brotherhood also wages its deadly campaign through its dozens of well-established and functioning branches all over the world.”
*
“The Wahhabis finance thousands of madrassahs throughout the world where young boys are brainwashed into becoming fanatical foot-soldiers for the petrodollar-flush Saudis and other emirs of the Persian Gulf.” AMIL IMANI
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind of 9/11/2001, said:
* We will take advantage of their immigration policy to infiltrate them.
* We will use their own welfare system to provide us with food, housing, schooling, and health care, while we out breed them and plot against them. We will Caliphate on their dime.
* We will use political correctness as a weapon. Anyone who criticizes us, we will take the opportunity to grandstand and curry favor from the media and Democrats and loudly accuse our critics of being an Islamophobe.
* We will use their own discrimination laws against them and slowly introduce Sharia Law into their culture..
Syrian Refugees Busted Plotting Suicide
Bombing in Germany
"To blow himself up" and "take as many infidels as possible with him"
The acceptance of the massive Muslim migrant flood into Europe was a case of the region, and especially Germany, committing voluntary suicide. Wir Schaffen Das was criminal madness lubricated by a torrent of lies that denied that the migrants could possibly pose a terrorist threat. But the threat only keeps on growing.
German authorities have arrested a Syrian man on suspicion of planning to carry out an explosives attack motivated by Islamic extremism, officials said Tuesday.
Federal police said officers arrested the 28-year-old man early Tuesday in the northern city of Hamburg based on a court-issued warrant for suspected terrorism financing offenses.
Investigators say the man is suspected of trying to obtain substances online that would have allowed him to manufacturer an explosive belt “in order to carry out an attack against civilian targets.”
Police say the man was encouraged and supported in his action by his 24-year-old brother, who lives in the southern town of Kempten. German news agency Deutsche Presse-Agentur reported that the younger man was also detained.
The brothers, whose names weren’t immediately released, were described by federal police as being motivated by “radical Islamist and jihadist” views.
Reports are that the men arrived in 2015 around the peak of the migrant invasion.
A spokeswoman said there were no indications of a specific target. However, the 28-year-old had planned to blow himself up with the explosive belt and “take as many infidels as possible with him to their deaths”.
And the mass influx of Syrian Muslims just keeps paying off.
In a separate case, authorities in western Germany said Tuesday that they are investigating a possible extremist motive in an attack at a gym in Duisburg last week. A 26-year-old Syrian was arrested days after the attack, in which four men were seriously wounded and one of them remains in life-threatening condition.
Duesseldorf prosecutors said a review of the suspect’s cellphone indicated that “there may have been an Islamist motive” behind the attack but declined to elaborate. The man is currently being held on suspicion of attempted murder and other offenses.
Germany-Based Salafi cleric Ahmad Armih, who goes by the name of Abul Baraa, gave a lecture titled “Is a Muslim Allowed to Be Afraid of Death?” In it, he talked about the “wonderful feeling” of wanting to meet Allah, with quivering heart and “tears rolling down your face.” Asking “who wants to die right now and meet Allah and calling for a “show of hands” – assuring his listeners that he was not calling on them to go on a suicide mission – he was disappointed that only two or three hands were raised.
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.
Reader Interactions
Comments
REMEMBER THE MUSLIM INVASION OF SEPT 11
WILL THE AMERICA PEOPLE LET THE MUSLIMS DO TO US AS THEY DID TO EUROPE?
WE LET THE MEXICANS INVADE AND OCCUPY! WHY NOT?
Without Firing a Shot: How Islam Overcame the West
In his well-known history of Western civilization, Edward Gibbon (1737–1794) offered an interesting "what if" scenario concerning the pivotal Battle of Tours (732 A.D.). Then and there, a massive Muslim army — which had terrorized, slaughtered, and enslaved every Christian in its path — was finally halted and defeated by the Franks in the middle of France.
Had the Muslims actually won, Gibbon predicted that
[p]erhaps the interpretation of the Koran would now be taught in the schools of Oxford, and her pulpits might demonstrate to a circumcised people [meaning Brits would now be Muslim] the sanctity and truth of the revelation of Muhammad.
Today, of course, not only is the "revelation of Muhammad" being taught and honored at Oxford, but Christianity is increasingly being canceled for its sake. Most recently,
[a] decision by an Oxford university college not to celebrate St George's Day with a formal dinner has been branded 'barking mad.' Magdalen College has decided against continuing an annual pre-pandemic banquet celebrating the English saint that drew together Oxford students, dons and fellows. Instead, the only occasion the college will observe on the day is Eid al-Fitr, the Islamic festival marking the end of Ramadan. The college will hold a formal dinner marking Eid on April 23, honouring a request made by its Muslim students. An email from college vice president Professor Nick Stargardt ... outlines plans for a 'festive dinner' celebrating the occasion. The invitation, sent to hundreds of students and their lecturers, adds the meal will 'follow Muslim customs.' Cooks will prepare a halal meat dish with no alcohol served to diners.
Oxford had for years celebrated Saint George's Day. Once the pandemic arrived in 2020, however, the day was ("temporarily") suspended, and now, following that "reset," Islam has taken its place.
This move, incidentally, is meant to appease Islam in more ways than one. Although the patron saint of England for some seven centuries, Saint George has increasingly been a cause of concern because he "offends" Muslims. For example, according to a 2013 report,
[a] town [in England] has voted not to fly the flag of St George in case it offends Muslims. Radstock in Somerset has a population of 5,620, 16 of them Muslim [meaning 0. 3% of the population is Muslim.] ... But a Labour councillor said the red and white cross could upset people because of its links to the Crusades.
Even the Church of England distances itself from Saint George, whom it characterizes as "too warlike and offensive to Muslims."
How did things come to such a pass? Once loved and venerated by England, the dragon-slaying saint is now canceled. And once feared and abhorred, the things of Islam — including now a "sacrificial" dinner — are being honored in his place.
Although England was — unlike Spain, the Mediterranean, and the Balkans — never conquered, it too experienced its share of Muslim raids, including for slaves. Indeed, from 1627 to 1633, Lundy, an island just off the west coast of Britain, was actually occupied by Muslim pirates from North Africa, who pillaged England at will.
Back then, when Islam was a formidable force, Englishmen — not a few inspired by George and other saints — fought tooth and nail to repulse the terrorists and safeguard their homeland's faith and heritage. Today, however, when Islam is weak and easily confined, the United Kingdom finds itself bending over backwards to take in and cater to more and more Muslim migrants — many of whom, rather than show gratitude, display Islam's traditional contempt for and prey on "infidels."
Returning to the Battle of Tours, another historian (Godefroid Kurth, d. 1916), described it as "one of the great events in the history of the world, as upon its issue depended whether Christian Civilization should continue or Islam prevail throughout Europe."
At one point during the heat of battle, the Frankish leader, Charles "the Hammer," was surrounded by jihadists, but "he fought as fiercely as the hungry wolf falls upon the stag. By the grace of Our Lord, he wrought a great slaughter upon the enemies of Christian faith," wrote a chronicler. "Then was he first called 'Martel,' for as a hammer of iron, of steel, and of every other metal, even so he dashed and smote in the battle all his enemies."
Not only are such men who sacrificed everything to preserve their heritage largely gone from the Western landscape, but now, even the symbolic Defenders of Christendom's storied past, such as Saint George, have been targeted for termination.
In short, Muslims finally prevailed in the West, not by force of arms, but because Christians lost — including themselves.
Remember when Congressmembers would actually appeal on behalf of the human rights of actual political dissidents, not terrorists, murderers and enemies of the United States?
The Arab Spring and its horrors are mostly in the rearview mirror but the Muslim Brotherhood and its imitators are not gone and they haven’t given up. And the D.C. political class has not given up on Islamists.
After the arrest of Tunisia’s Islamist leader Rashid Ghannouchi, House Democrats, under the House Foreign Affairs Committee, issued a statement “following the sudden arrest of #Tunisia’s opposition leader, Rachid al-Ghannouchi”. The statement blathers on about “forcibly closures of political party offices and bans on free assembly of certain political groups” without ever mentioning that those certain groups are Islamists and quite dangerous.
The pro-Ghannouchi statement was issued by Rep. Gregory Meeks and Rep. Dean Philips. They neglect to mention anything about the monster they’re defending.
And for good reason. Ghannouchi is an enemy of America and the free world.
“We must wage unceasing war against the Americans until they leave the land of Islam, or we will burn and destroy all their interests across the entire Islamic world,” al-Ghannouchi was quoted as saying. “Muslim youth must be serious in their warning to the Americans that a blow to Iraq will be a license to strike American and Western interests throughout the Islamic world.”
In 2009, Al-Ghannouchi ruffled feather on television when he praised Palestinian terrorism as “wonderful” and said that he admires rockets fired at Israel by a Palestinian terror outfit known as the Al Qassam Brigades.
In other television appearances, the sheikh has praised the mothers of suicide bombers.
“I would like to send my blessings to the mothers of those youth, those men who succeeded in creating a new balance of power,” he said, according to the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI). “I bless the mothers who planted in the blessed land of Palestine the amazing seeds of these youths, who taught the international system and the Israeli arrogance, supported by the U.S., an important lesson. The Palestinian woman, mother of the Shahids [martyrs], is a martyr herself, and she has created a new model of woman.”
And that escalated to an outright call for genocide.
Sheikh Rashid Ghannouchi, of Tunisia’s equally moderate Islamist Ennahda Movement, said, “There are no civilians in Israel. The population—males, females and children—are the army reserve soldiers, and thus can be killed.”
This is what Meeks and Philips and the Democrats are defending.
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.
Reader Interactions
If the Dalai Lama Goes Down in Flames, What Should Happen to Muhammad?
This last February 28th, the Dalai Lama was interacting with visitors at a public event in the temple which bears his name, found in Dharmashala, northern India, the town of his permanent exile from Tibet. Known as “His Holiness,” this 87-year-old monk is the leader of the Yellow Hat sect of Tibetan Buddhism and a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, and has become famous around the world for his gentle spirituality.
During this particular event, a young boy approached the Dalai Lama and asked if he could give him a hug. “His Holiness” invited the boy up on stage as the event was being filmed and pointed to his cheek, saying “First here,” indicating the boy was to kiss him. Continuing his interaction, the monk then pointed to his lips and said, “Then I think finally here also,” lifting the boy’s chin with his hand and placing a kiss on the boy’s lips. After a few seconds with their faces close together, the Dalai Lama sticks out his tongue and commands the child, “And suck my tongue.”
The video of this has gone viral on social media, with many decrying the religious leader’s behavior as “horrible,” “disgusting,” “pedophilic,” “child abuse,” “sexual exploitation of a minor,” and so on.
As blowback has increased significantly since the incident occurred, the office of the Dalai Lama issued an apology of sorts, saying that actions of “His Holiness” were misunderstood, that he often jokes with people in innocent ways, and that he is sorry to the boy and his family for any hurt his words may have caused. Indeed, he regrets what happened.
Of course, this regret and apology came some six weeks after the incident itself, and were apparently prompted by the severe negative publicity generated due to the viral video. Yet, the Dalai Lama’s supporters were quick to provide cover for their leader, pointing out that it is an old Tibetan custom, going back to the 9th C., for Tibetans to stick out the tongues when greeting one another. That may indeed be the case – I am no expert or judge on Tibetan customs – but greeting another with a protruding tongue is one thing; commanding the one being greeted to suck the other’s tongue an altogether different matter. On top of that, we see the power imbalance of a revered adult using his unchallengeable authority to manipulate a powerless child. These are not the actions of an innocent, responsible adult, no matter what his sycophants might say. The actions of “His Holiness” in this matter are decidedly unholy, and he should be held to account.
But the Dalai Lama is not the only major religious leader in the tongue-sucking business. As soon as I read of this story, my mind immediately went to early Islamic sources which portray Muhammad as one who sucked the tongues of little boys and invited them to suck his tongue as well.
Muhammad al-Bukhari is famous among Sunnis for his collection of Hadiths concerning the life and teachings of Islam’s prophet. It is the most revered of the Sahih Sittah, the six hadith collections considered authoritative by Sunnis. In addition to his major word, Bukhari collected another set of reports, entitled al-Adab al-Mufrad. Entry 1183 reads:
It is related that Abu Hurayra said, “I never see al-Hasan [Muhammad’s first grandson] without my eyes overflowing with tears. That is because the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, went out one day and he found me in the mosque. He took my hand and I went along with him. He did not speak to me until we reached the market of Banu Qaynuqa’. He walked around it and looked. Then he left and I left with him until we reached the mosque. He sat down and wrapped himself in his garment. Then he said, ‘Where is the little one? Call the little one to me.’ Hasan came running and jumped into his lap. Then he put his hand in his beard. Then the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, opened his mouth and put his mouth in his mouth. Then he said, ‘O Allah, I love him, so love him and the one who loves him!’” (italics mine).
The Arabic of the italicized portion reads more literally “opened his mouth and entered his mouth into his mouth.” What makes most sense of this language is that the prophet inserted his tongue into the mouth of his young grandson. Muhammad ostensibly saw this as an act of love, as repulsive as that might seem to the average reader of any age (except for perhaps His Holiness the Dalai Lama). What other purpose could the Islamic prophet have in mind than for his grandson to suck his tongue after putting it in Hasan’s mouth?
But another hadith pictures Muhammad not only as enjoying having his tongue sucked; he also enjoyed sucking the tongues and lips of others. According to Musnad Ahmad 16245, one of Muhammad’s companions, Mu’awiya, reported:
I saw the prophet sucking on the tongue or the lips of Al-Hassan son of Ali [same grandson as above], may the prayers of Allah be upon him. For no tongue or lips that the prophet sucked on will be tormented (by hell fire).
This account leaves no doubt that Muslim tradition portrays Islam’s prophet as engaging in what today would be called child abuse or sexual harassment of a minor. Imagine if a video camera had captured what Mu’awiya testified that he had seen, and it had gone viral on the Internet, as surely it would. The same cries of moral revulsion and more would be aimed at Muhammad, for his behavior grossly exceeded the actions of the Dalai Lama. Public opinion of the Buddhist monk was filled with statements like: “sick old man;” “sexual assault of a minor;” “pedophilic actions;” “classic child grooming;” “perverted;” “menace to children;” “disgusting.” What would the unbiased viewer of the hypothetical video of Muhammad’s tongue-work with his young grandson conclude concerning the man Islam calls “the perfect human”, the man all humans are to emulate to their best ability?
One Twitter commenter, after seeing the footage concerning the Dalai Lama and his young admirer, wrote:
We’ve seen the video and we’re not buying any of it, sorry. If that was a “hug” then I’m a Leprechaun. I don’t think “His Holiness” is a title you can use any more either.
Another, who professed to have held the Buddhist leader in high esteem, confessed:
It’s not innocent or playful and it wasn’t a hug. It’s child abuse. You were one of the few leaders I trusted. Never again. My heart hurts.
Will Muslims flee the fold of Islam upon discovering that their revered prophet is portrayed in their own trusted sources as committing indecencies even worse than those of the Dalai Lama? Unfortunately, the answer is probably not. Human beings are capable of twisting reality into pretzels in order to continue to defend the indefensible, and to coddle our convictions despite hard, unrelenting truths.
Concerning these hadiths about Muhammad, his followers might say that, though unusual, these two accounts point only to the deep love the prophet had for his grandson. His behaviors with Hasan were intimate but innocent. Others will have to judge for themselves whether it is upright behavior for a grandfather to engage in what amounts to French kissing with his young grandson.
However, this was not a one-time behavior, nor was it limited to one person, according to Musnad Ahmad. We are given this theological justification for the prophet’s behavior: “For no tongue or lips that the prophet sucked on will be tormented (by hell fire).” So, if you are fortunate enough to have the prophet suck your tongue or lick your lips, you are guaranteed paradise! We don’t know how long the list is of those saved from hellfire by swapping spit with the Perfect Human, but one can hope that it was mercifully short.
Other Muslims have found creative, even sublime arguments to justify Muhammad’s reprehensible behavior. Remember, we are told, Muhammad and his followers lived in a hot, arid land. It was a common practice for parents, when their children were in the agony of thirst and there was no water to be found, to allow their children to suck on their tongues as a means to calm them down and ease their thirst. No contemporaneous evidence is supplied to support this claim. Should it have ever been the case, however, it would apply principally to infants. Muhammad’s generosities with his tongue were apparently not limited to infants.
Yet, thirst among the Muslims should not be a consideration, for according many Muslim accounts, Muhammad performed a grand assortment of miracles for his followers, providing them water in their times of need. Out of roughly ninety miracle narrations, this one is my favorite, found in Bukhari (4.56.776):
Narrated Salim bin Abi Aj-Jad: Jabir bin ‘Abdullah said. “The people became very thirsty on the day of Al-Hudaibiya (Treaty). A small pot containing some water was in front of the Prophet and when he had finished the ablution the people rushed towards him. He asked. ‘What is wrong with you?’ They replied. ‘We have no water either for performing ablution or for drinking except what is present in front of you.’ So he placed his hand in that pot and the water started flowing among his fingers like springs. We all drank and performed ablution (from it).” I asked Jabir. “How many were you?” he replied. “Even if we had been one-hundred-thousand it would have been sufficient for us but we were fifteen-hundred.”
When it comes to generating water, ten fingers beat one tongue every time. If Hassan, or any other believer, was desperately thirsty, the prophet could simply have streamed water from his fingers so they might drink to their hearts’ content. Thirst was apparently not the issue behind this tongue-in-mouth behavior.
Even harder to explain, on the thirst hypothesis, is why Muhammad would have been sucking the tongues and lips of others. Was he so dehydrated that he needed to extract fluids from others? Could he not have opened the spigots of his fingers to quench the burning in his throat. This “thirst theory” would turn Muhammad into a “water vampire” of sorts, preying on others to gather refreshment for himself. Certainly this is not the image Muslim defenders of Muhammad would like to paint before the world of their “excellent example” of human nature.
If common sense leads people from all walks of life to censure the Dalai Lama for proposing something reprehensible to an innocent child, shouldn’t that same common sense lead observers to censure Islam’s founder for his execrable behavior in this regard, and to seriously question Islam’s claim that Muhammad is the trustworthy divine messenger, whose every word is to be believed and whose every action is to be emulated.
I pray Muslims will wake up to their own “reliable” source materials, where their prophet ordered assassinations, parceled out sex slaves to his soldiers from captured girls, nursed grudges against those who laughed off his religious claims, kept slaves and concubines for his own pleasure, poisoned the minds and hearts of his followers against Jews and Christians, and deflowered his youngest of fourteen wives when she was just nine years old. May they read their own authoritative texts and thereby conclude concerning Muhammad and Islam, “He was the one leader I trusted. Never again. My heart hurts.”
There is one whom billions have found worthy of their trust and devotion. However, he is not found in Islam. One must look to the Book, to which the Qur’an alludes but which it never understands. May Muslims find the One about whom Moses and the prophets spoke, whose victory over sin and death many around the world have just celebrated! He alone is trustworthy and true.
With international condemnation at their brutal crackdown on protesters during the nationwide uprising that has now continued for seven months, it might have been imagined that Iran’s mullahs would have learned some lessons in moderation. The killing last September, of the young Kurdish girl, Mahsa Amini, by the morality police, for not wearing her hijab properly, was an outrage that has led to a denunciation by Amnesty International and other human rights organizations. The shoot-to-kill strategy that has killed more than 750 protesters, and the arrest of over 30,000, has triggered an unprecedented outcry from the civilized world. But, deaf to all demonstrations, the theocratic regime has continued on its repressive path.
Now, during the Nowruz (Persian New Year) holidays and the holy month of Ramadan, the police are demanding even greater powers to crush dissent. Hassan Karami, the commander of the regime’s Law Enforcement Forces (LEF) Special Units, has called for the number of security police to be doubled to confront the ongoing nationwide insurrection. Karami was sanctioned by the EU in April 2021 for his role in the savage response to mass protests that took place in November 2019, when more than 1,500, mostly young protesters, were killed. He has coordinated the use of lethal force for crowd control and the suppression of protests during the current uprising. His LEF Special Units have also been responsible for serious human rights abuse against prisoners detained during the disturbances. Karamihas boasted that confronting the protests would be part of the agenda of his LEF Special Units during the Nowruz holidays and Ramadan. He described the uprising as “extreme sedition” and told the state-run Mehr news agency that his units were covering the unrest and possible movement of enemies in at least 400 cities and regions and that this required a doubling of police numbers.
Meanwhile, to further the theocratic regime’s oppressive tyranny, the police and security services have shut down dozens of businesses and issued warnings to many others for disrespecting Ramadan fasting rules.A police official in Khuzestan Province said that 55 businesses, were shut down in Ahvaz, the capital of the province, for breaking the rules of fasting. Colonel Mohammad-Hossein Mohammadv and said 229 businesses were inspected, 55 were shut down and 14 others received warnings that they faced closure if they failed to abide by the rules. Inspections will continue until the end of Ramadan, he said. Similar inspections are being carried out in other cities across the country. The rules require restaurants, cafes, coffee shops, tea houses, ice-cream and juice bars to remain closed until fasting ends around sunset. In the capital Tehran, sunset falls at around 18:35 at this time of year.
The same rules are enforced in all public places including gyms, schools, universities and factories, where cafeterias and canteens are closed throughout the month of Ramadan. Even eating inside cars is forbidden.With echoes of Stalinist repression, the hard-line crackdown has seen authorities urging members of the public who witness anyone violating the fasting or hijab rules to send a text message to a special designated number online. Large government-sponsored billboards advise similar tell-tale action. Only restaurants situated inside hotels or in airports or stations, can apply for special licences to cater for tourists or travellers, provided their windows are screened so that anyone eating inside cannot be seen from outside. Even then, the police keep a careful control on the number of licences issued.
The mullahs ludicrously claim that those who eat, drink, or smoke in public during Ramadan, are exhibitionists who refuse to follow the fasting rules. Such behaviour is punishable by a sentence of 10 to 60 days in prison or up to 74 lashes, according to article 638 of Iran’s Islamic Penal Code. During the holy month of Ramadan, when Muslims celebrate the fundamental messages of Islam – freedom, justice, mercy,and emancipation, 85 million beleaguered citizens of Iran have seen their rights and civil liberties crushed by the fascist theocratic dictatorship.
The Islamic Republic’s elderly Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has sought to position himself as the representative of God and Islam on earth.He regularly brands his opponents as enemies of God. Protesters can be accused of the spurious offence of moharebeh or ‘waging war against God’, which carries the mandatory death sentence. Since the 1979 revolution which ousted the hated Shah, but was hi-jacked by the mullahs, the main democratic opposition movement, the Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK), has been the key voice calling for freedom, justice and democracy. They have paid a high price for their dissent. More than 30,000 mostly MEK political prisoners were executed in 1988 in a massacre ordered by a fatwa from the then Supreme Leader Ruhollah Khomeini. Courageous Resistance Units of the MEK have directed the current uprising across Iran.
Mrs. Maryam Rajavi, the charismatic president-elect of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), of which the MEK is a key component, said in her Nowruz address that the MEK have always made it clear that Islam is a religion of compassion and emancipation, not what the fascist mullahs claim it to be. She emphasized that “Islam is not misogynistic but founded on freedom, equality and free choice for all individuals, regardless of their gender or religion”. She pointed out that the MEK has rigorously opposed religious compulsion, underlining that it runs counter to the teachings of Islam. Mrs Rajavi said: “The MEK’s selflessness in the face of the regime’s religious dictatorship has exposed Khomeini and his successors as demagogues who exploit Islam for their own interests, and as criminals who have imprisoned and oppressed the Iranian people, while spreading death, terrorism and fundamentalism throughout the region.”
As the uprising in Iran continues to gain momentum and the chants of “down with the dictator” and “down with Khamenei” can be heard in the streets, it is time for the US, the EU and the UK to take concrete steps to show their support for the Iranian people and their determined and courageous demands for regime change.
Reader Interactions
Comments
Reader Interactions
Cooper City Mosque Receiving Expansion, Minarets Hands Check to Terror-Linked Group
This past January, following contentious commission meetings on the subject, Nur-Ul-Islam (NUI), a mosque located in Cooper City, Florida, received the go-ahead from the city to expand its property to include minarets and a three level school building. This was a problem, as NUI has been involved with extremist individuals and groups. In fact, just last month, NUI provided money to Islamic Relief (IR), an organization that has been banned in a number of nations for terror-related financing. By ignoring NUI’s extremism and embracing its expansion project, as they have done, the Mayor and Commission are complicit in the radical undertakings of NUI.
Nur-Ul-Islam was incorporated in January 1983 and added its children’s school, Nur-Ul-Islam Academy (NUIA) in June 1996. The following year, the school named Raed Musa Awad as its Vice President. Awad, who also served as a member of NUI’s Islamic Affairs Council, was the Florida representative for the Holy Land Foundation (HLF), a Hamas charity that was shut down by the US government in December 2001. In November 2008, HLF and five of its leaders were found guilty, in federal court, of all charges leveled against them regarding millions of dollars in Hamas fundraising. Awad was named a party to the crime, though he was unindicted.
From October 2004 till April 2011, the homepage of NUIA’s website contained a link to the site Islam Way (islamway.com), which, according to the US Justice Department, “included pages devoted to violent jihad” and “included a section urging Muslims to contribute money to Hamas.” Islam Way contained such articles on its site as ‘The Jews and their Treachery’ and ‘Zionist Propaganda and the Myth of the Holocaust.’
NUI’s current activities demonstrate that the Islamic center has not veered from its fanatical history. This past February, NUI posted on its social media a video montage of highlights from 2022. About it, NUI stated, “Alhamdulillah we hosted many events at Nur Ul Islam over the past year. Here is a quick look back at some of these wonderful programs. Insha Allah, the success will continue in 2023!”
NUI’s “wonderful programs” included a talk by Imam Izhar Khan, who, in May 2011, was arrested along with members of his family and charged with providing tens of thousands of dollars to the Taliban. Khan’s mosque, Masjid Jamaat Al-Mumineen (MJAM), currently promotes material on its website targeting Jews, Christians, gays and women with violence and bigotry. Also included in the NUI video was a talk by Imam Shafayat Mohamed, who was thrown off a number of Broward County boards for his fiery speeches against homosexuals. Mohamed’s center, the Darul Uloom Institute (DUI), has been a haven for high-profile al-Qaeda operatives.
Further included on the video was Islamic Relief (IR). Indeed, NUI and its school do many events with and for IR. Last month, once again, NUI showcased Islamic Relief at the mosque. What made this one stand out was the fact that NUI, on video for all to see, openly and proudly handed money to the group, a group that, while masquerading as ‘good causes,’ has been banned by nations for terrorist financing and other terror-related pursuits.
As stated on NUI’s Facebook page, “On behalf of Nur Ul Islam and the community, former NUI President, Dr. [Husman] Khan presented a check today to Br. Muhammad [Al-Kanawati] of Islamic Relief USA [IRUSA] for earthquake relief in Syria and Turkey. Jazak Allah Khairun to all those that donated to this cause to help our fellow brothers and sisters in need.” [Note: Khan served on the NUIA Board of Directors with Raed Awad and was President of NUI’s Executive Council, when Awad served on NUI’s Islamic Affairs Council.]
Islamic Relief has several ties to overseas terrorism. As a result, many countries have banned IR. In May 2006, Israel labeled IR a front for Hamas and deported its Gaza leader for funneling money to terrorists. In November 2014, the UAE government designated IR a terrorist group. Also in 2014, Britain’s HSBC bank cut ties with Islamic Relief over concerns about “terrorist financing.” In October 2017, Bangladesh’s NGO Affairs Bureau banned IR in fear the group would conduct terrorist recruitment of Myanmar refugees. In November 1999, it was reported that IR had collected and sent over $6 million to Chechen rebels with ties to Al-Qaeda.
Like its overseas branches, IRUSA suffers from its own extremism. IRUSA’s ex-Chair Khaled Lamada, while with the group, used social media to promote the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. According to the Middle East Forum, he “circulated text” hailing the “Mujahidin of Egypt” and Hamas for “inflicting defeats” against Jews. In June 2015, he tweeted that it is “absurd” to classify Hamas “as a terrorist organization.” Current IRUSA Director of Marketing Daoud Hawa has made light of Hamas rocket attacks on Israeli neighborhoods, calling them “rockets fired by people who like Hummus.” He likened Hamas tunnels to something from Bugs Bunny cartoons.
Mayor Greg Ross, who admitted to taking contributions from NUI leadership, and the Cooper City Commission made a grave error, when they allowed for the expansion of NUI and its equally radical school. Not only does the mosque have a terror-linked past, but it continues to push an extremist agenda by featuring militant imams linked to terror and bigotry at its events and by providing money to a group that has been banned in large part for terrorist financing.
In truth, the Mayor and Commissioners were informed by this author about the documented jihadist nature and behavior of NUI and chose to ignore all of it. By doing so, they bear responsibility for allowing a toxic ideology to flourish right in the heart of Cooper City. Instead of protecting their constituents, these ‘public servants’ are pandering to a radical Muslim community for personal, political and financial gain.
Joe Kaufman is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, and the Chairman of the Joe Kaufman Security Initiative. He was a 2014, 2016, and 2018 Republican nominee for the U.S. House of Representatives (Florida-CD23).
The United States is offering $7 million for any information that leads to the arrest and conviction of Hezbollah leader Ibrahim Aqil, who orchestrated a series of terror bombings in the 1980s that killed hundreds of American service members.
The State Department announced that on the 40th anniversary of Hezbollah's terror strike on the U.S. embassy compound in Lebanon, it is upping the price for information on Aqil, a member of the Iranian-backed terror group's Jihad Council.
Aqil, the State Department said, was a "principal member of Islamic Jihad Organization— Hezbollah's terrorist cell—that claimed the bombings of the U.S. Embassy in Beirut in April 1983, which killed 63 people, and the U.S. Marine barracks in October 1983, which killed 241 U.S. personnel." Aqil in the 1980s also took Americans hostage.
Aqil, who has escaped the American justice system for decades, is believed to be in either Lebanon or Syria, both Iranian strongholds with deep ties to the Islamic Republic's terrorism network. The U.S. government in 2019 officially designated Aqil as a global terrorist. Hezbollah was designated as a global terrorist organization in 1997.
Hezbollah serves as a cog in Iran's regional terrorism enterprise and is responsible for strikes on American and Israeli outposts in the Middle East.
Hindu children in the UK have reportedly been threatened by Muslim classmates that they must convert to Islam or they will not “survive long” in school.
Research undertaken by an Anglo-America think tank has found that Hindu children in the UK have been put under pressure from Muslims to convert to Islam, with those who refuse told that they will face serious harassment and bullying in schools.
The threats mirror those behind recent sectarian riots between Hindus and Muslims in the UK, with some Islamic extremists said to have spread false stories of Hindus harassing Muslim girls on the streets of Leicester.
Such rumours eventually led to rioting in multiple UK cities, with hardcore Islamists organising patrols of UK streets as well as hostile protests outside of Hindu temples.
According to a report by The Telegraph, Hindu children also face serious persecution from Muslims in UK schools, with an investigation undertaken by the Henry Jackson Society finding children have been on the receiving end of sectarian pressure from fellow classmates.
“Some of the discrimination exhibited in the classroom showed similarities to the manifestations of hate witnessed during the unrest in Leicester between Hindus and Muslims,” the soon-to-be-published report is said to claim.
“There were numerous instances of derogatory references made towards Hindus, such as mocking their vegetarianism and belittling their deities, which were also made by Islamist extremists rallying against the Hindu community in Leicester,” it continued.
The report went on to note that Hindu children are regularly called “disbelievers” and “kaffir” — two largely synonymous terms meant as slurs — with one child being told “that if they convert to Islam, their life will become so much easier”.
“You aren’t going to survive very long,” another child was reportedly told. “If you want to go to paradise, you’ll have to come to Islam… Hindus are the herbivores at the bottom of the food chain, we will eat you up.”
With some Hindu children also facing discrimination from Christian students, the report ultimately calls for improvements to Religious Education in UK schools in the hopes of downplaying tensions.
How effective such a solution would actually be remains to be seen, with tensions between Muslims and Hindus being a regular feature of history throughout the Indian and South Asian subcontinents.
While by no means a constant — with Muslims and Hindus having previously been able to live beside each other peacefully in various historic Asian kingdoms — modern relations between the two religions are, on the whole, quite poor, with Hindu nationalists and traditionalist and separatist Muslims often coming to blows in modern India.
Such sectarian violence has now well and truly spread to the UK, with the minority-majority city of Leicester seeing serious rioting late last year over allegations that Hindu extremists had moved into the city.
These claims have been dismissed by an earlier report published by the Henry Jackson Society, claims of Hindu extremism in the city were largely conjured up by local Muslim radicals, some of whom have previously offered up prayers for known terror organisations.
How convincing the report has been for Muslims in the area though is up for debate, with claims of militant Hindu activities in Leicester being regularly uploaded onto social media to this day.
Less than two years after the Biden administration’s withdrawal from Afghanistan, the country "is once again a terrorist safe haven" with groups capable of orchestrating attacks on the American homeland, according to former defense and counterterrorism officials.
Under the Taliban’s rule, terrorist groups like al Qaeda and ISIS-K have rebuilt their forces, acquiring the operational capacity to launch strikes across Europe and the United States in as little as six months from now, the former officials told Congress during a Tuesday hearing on repercussions of the Biden administration’s 2021 withdrawal from Afghanistan. As the war-torn country breeds new terrorists at an accelerated rate, there is a growing fear in the U.S. defense community that a major attack in the United States is on the horizon.
"The threat environment in Afghanistan is bad and getting worse," said Nathan Sales, a former coordinator for counterterrorism at the State Department who said the U.S. military has been unable to effectively collect intelligence about terror plots since its withdrawal. "With no presence on the ground, it’s much harder to monitor terrorist groups as they train and plot."
The former officials also raised concerns about the $7.2 billion worth of American military equipment that was abandoned in Afghanistan. Not only could this equipment fall into the hands of multiple terrorist groups, but it could be intercepted by adversaries like Russia and China, which are still active in Afghanistan and maintain ties with the Taliban.
The Biden administration, on the other hand, has mostly forgotten about the country. Even as terrorist forces amass in Afghanistan, the United States has conducted just one drone strike in the 20 months since it left the country. "One drone strike in 20 months is not a viable strategy," Sales said.
The lack of intelligence from Afghanistan has also impacted the Department of Homeland Security’s travel and vetting system, which was created in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Without a steady flow of information from Afghanistan, these networks are breaking down, Sales said, pointing to a spike in the number of watch-listed individuals caught at the nation’s porous southern border. Nearly 100 individuals on the terrorism watchlist were caught at the border in 2022 and another 69 have been apprehended so far this year.
"When terrorists have safe haven, as they now do in Afghanistan, they’re able to plot attacks far beyond their borders, including their ultimate goal of hitting the U.S. homeland," Sales said.
Simone Ledeen, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for the Middle East, raised concerns about the Biden administration’s decision to airlift Afghan citizens into America without proper screening or credentials. The disorganized effort allowed at least 324 Afghans to enter the United States who were on the Pentagon's watchlist, according to Ledeen.
Leaked emails provided to Congress in 2021 appear to corroborate this information, indicating the Biden administration allowed unvetted refugees to fill flights out of the country.
Retired Col. Christopher Douglas, a Marine Corps veteran conducting the investigation into the terrorist bombing at the Kabul airport that killed 13 U.S. service members, said he was shocked when the Biden administration announced the hasty withdrawal. He blamed the lack of notice from the administration for the botched evacuation, as well as the current situation in Afghanistan.
"I and presumably many of our Afghan partners were in disbelief by the announcement of the withdrawal date," Douglas said. "This reduced our U.S. force posture and boots on the ground to nearly zero," exacerbating an already tense effort to get Americans out of the country.
After Australia recently condemned the Islamic kingdom of human rights abuses, the latter launched an “extraordinary” tirade. Saudi ambassador, Abdulaziz Alwasil, projected everything his nation does onto Australia. He claimed that minorities, migrants and Muslims face “horrific violations of human rights” and “racist and extremist policies…. We see in some countries, radicalism against Muslims, we see xenophobia, racism. And some governments sympathise with them [xenophobes and racists], like Australia. Here we refer to the massacre perpetrated by Brenton Tarrant – an Australian – which was based on hate speech.”
A Colombian soccer-player “was arrested by the Saudi moral police after customers in a Riyadh shopping mall expressed outrage over the sports player’s religious tattoos, which included the face of Jesus of Nazareth on his arm.” A Romanian player kissed the tattoo of a cross he had on his arm after scoring a goal, causing public outrage.
As for “hate speech,” Saudi Arabia has an online fatwa, an Islamic-sanctioned opinion — in Arabic only—entitled, “Duty to Hate Jews, Polytheists, and Other Infidels” (my translation here). It comes from the fatwa wing of the government, meaning it has the full weight of the government behind it. According to this governmentally-supported fatwa, all Muslims must “oppose and hate whomever Allah commands us to oppose and hate, including the Jews, the Christians, and other mushrikin [polytheists], until they believe in Allah alone and abide by his laws, which he sent down to his Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings upon him” (see Koran 60:4).
Yet here is Saudi Arabia accusing Australia—where Islam is freely practiced, where mosques and Korans proliferate, and where Muslims are granted full equality—of “horrific violations of human rights.”
As for “racism” and “xenophobia”—which Saudi Arabia accuses Down Under of—in fact, few people are as clannish and racist as those of the Arabian Peninsula. Ten percent of the population is openly denied equal rights because of their race; black men are barred from holding many government positions; black women are often put on trial for “witchcraft”; castrated African slaves are sold on Facebook in the birthplace of Islam, and its princes are known to beat their black slaves to death. Human Rights Watch has described conditions for foreign workers in Saudi Arabia as resembling slavery.
Worse of all is if you’re black and Christian. After 35 Christian Ethiopians were arrested and abused in prison for almost a year—simply for holding a private house prayer—one of them said after being released: “They [Saudis] are full of hatred towards non-Muslims.”
This is unsurprising considering that the Saudi education system makes it a point to indoctrinate Muslim children with hatred, teaching that “the Apes are the people of the Sabbath, the Jews; and the Swine are the infidels of the communion of Jesus, the Christians.”
According to Saudi novelist Hani Naqshabandi, “Our religious institutions do not give us room to exercise free thought…. They [Saudi institutions] said that the Christian is an infidel, a denizen of hell, an enemy to Allah and Islam. So we said, ‘Allah’s curse on them.’”
Again, bear in mind that all of this hate, racism, and xenophobia is official Saudi policy—as opposed to the aberrant terrorist act of one Australian who was duly condemned and punished.
In short, Saudi Arabia and ISIS have much in common. The only difference is that the Arabian kingdom is filthy rich; it can be unabashedly hypocritical—not least because both the UN and USA play along. The former counts Saudi Arabia as one of “47 member states to promote human rights,” while the latter calls it “friend and ally.”
Expecting a hypocrite to reform when you yourself—that is, your elected representatives—are part of his charade is, as might be imagined, futile.
Pollak: Everything Joe Biden Said About Donald Trump’s Foreign Policy Actually Describes Barack Obama’s
Everything former vice president Joe Biden said about President Donald Trump’s foreign policy speech on Thursday actually applies to the policy that Biden carried out together with former President Barack Obama — and not Trump.
In his speech, at City University of New York, Biden called Trump an “extreme” threat to the country’s national security. No one has yet taken Biden to task for describing the sitting commander-in-chief in such alarmist terms.
But that wasn’t even the most bizarre aspect of Biden’s speech. He said the main problem in Trump’s foreign policy was … Charlottesville, Virginia. Biden went on to recite a version of the debunked “very fine people” hoax, claiming that Trump had drawn a “moral equivalence between those who promoted hate and those who opposed it.” That, he said, was a threat to America’s mission of standing for democratic values in the world.
But in fact, Trump specifically condemned the neo-Nazis in Charlottesville on multiple occasions. The entire premise of Biden’s speech was a lie.
Biden went on to claim that Trump’s foreign policy rejects democratic values and favors the rise of authoritarianism worldwide. He cited Trump’s warmth to Russian president Vladimir Putin and North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un. And he claimed that Trump has undermined America’s alliances with democracies in favor of flattery from dictators.
Apparently Biden forgot that Obama literally bowed to the Saudi king; that he abandoned the pro-democracy protests during the Green Revolution in Iran; that he pushed for a “reset” with Russia and abandoned our Czech and Polish allies on missile defense; that he promised Putin he would be even more “flexible” after he won re-election; that he tried to normalize relations with the Cuban dictatorship without securing any democratic reforms there; that he gave the store away to the communist dictatorship in China; and that he abandoned Israel, a betrayal in which Biden himself played a direct and shameful role, condemning Israel for building apartments in a Jewish neighborhood of Jerusalem.
Trump praises dictators as a negotiating tactic; Obama praised them because he, too, thought America was a problem.
One of the few times the Obama administration embraced democratic change was during the Arab Spring, when “democracy” meant the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood — which had no interest in freedom, only in power.
In 2008, the Obama campaign cast Biden as a foreign policy guru, though he had been wrong on almost every foreign policy issue in his career. On Thursday, he mostly ignored his own record.
Astonishingly, Biden claimed credit for Trump’s success in crushing the so-called “Islamic State,” saying he worked with Obama “to craft the military and diplomatic campaign that ultimately defeated ISIS.” In fact, Biden was complicit in the rise of ISIS. He was Obama’s point man on Iraq when the U.S. suddenly pulled out of the country, leaving a vacuum that ISIS filled. He did not object when Obama called the terror group “junior varsity.”
Biden offered nothing new in terms of solutions to current foreign policy challenges. He claimed that the Iran nuclear deal had been a success — on the very day Iran was reportedto have been cheating all along. He said the U.S. should re-enter the deal once Iran did, offering no idea how to ensure that it did so. On North Korea, Biden promised he would “empower our negotiators,” whatever that means.
He said that he would get “tough” with China, which Trump is already doing (and which Biden previously suggested he would not do). And on immigration, he ridiculed the very idea of borders — literally: “I respect no borders.”
And this is the best Democrats have on foreign policy.
Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He earned an A.B. in Social Studies and Environmental Science and Public Policy from Harvard. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment