Fired up Levin SMOKES ‘despotic’ Obama for playing besties with terrorist Iran

obama jeeringConservative Review, by Phil Shiver, Aug. 25, 2016:

“Yes, I come to the microphone today FED UP over what’s happening to our country, and who’s doing it,” said Mark Levin during his radio program Wednesday night.

“This administration is so corrupt, so despotic, it operates in secret,” Levin exclaimed in reference to congressional investigators trying to uncover the trail of $1.3 billion in payments to Iran without aid from the Obama admin.

Obama allowing Iran to walk all over us shouldn’t surprise anybody, however. Playing besties with Iran has, in fact, been his most recognizable foreign policy achievement. “Obama from the beginning of his presidency tried to turn the country’s ruling clerics from foes to friends … it was an obsession,” read Levin citing Eli Lake of Bloomberg Politics.

Listen to the full clip of Levin tearing into Obama below:

But the Republican Party must take some of the blame, argues Levin, for “their failure to remove a lawless, dangerous man from the oval office out of nothing but sheer cowardice.”

Americans will be paying the consequences of that for a long time to come.

Phil Shiver is a writer for the CR Wire. His interests are Christian Ministry, Common Sense Politics, and anything active. Follow him on Twitter @kpshiver3.

***

The administration claims the payment saved taxpayers; James Rosen has the details for ‘Special Report’

Also see:

UTT Historical Throwback: Al Qaeda’s Abdurahman Alamoudi Advised Two U.S. Presidents

Understanding the Threat, by John Guandolo, Aug.24, 2016:

Abdurahman Alamoudi was considered the “pillar of the Muslim community” in Washington, D.C.

Abdurahman Alamoudi

Abdurahman Alamoudi created and/or led nearly two dozen of the largest Islamic organizations in North America, was a “Good Will Ambassador” for the U.S. Department of State, created the Muslim Chaplain program for the Department of Defense, worked with the Department of Education to determine what went into American public school texts discussing Islam, and met with U.S. leaders across the spectrum.

Alamoudi2

And Abdurahman Alamoudi was a financier for Al Qaeda.

Alamoudi was arrested at London’s Heathrow Airport in 2003 with $340,000 cash he got from the Libyan government for the global jihad.  He said he found it outside his hotel room.  He was extradited to the Eastern District of Virginia (Alexandria) where he pled guilty to an 18 count indictment.

The U.S. Treasury Department’s press release dated July 14, 2005 stated:

“In 2003, MIRA (Movement for Islamic Reform in Arabia) and (Al Qaeda affiliate Saad al) Faqih received approximately $1 million in funding through Abdulrahman Alamoudi. According to information available to the U.S. Government, the September 2003 arrest of Alamoudi was a severe blow to al Qaida, as Alamoudi had a close relationship with al Qaida and had raised money for al Qaida in the United States. In a 2004 plea agreement, Alamoudi admitted to his role in an assassination plot targeting the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia and is currently serving a 23 year sentence.”

Alamoudi was also caught on video in 1999 speaking adjacent to the White House grounds publicly declaring he is a fan of Hamas and Hizbollah – both designated terrorist organizations – to the loud cheer of the Muslims attending.  It should be noted this behavior did not get him fired from his positions inside the U.S. government.

Let’s review:  Abdurahman Alamoudi was the Islamic advisor to President Clinton and then went on to work with the Bush administration.  Alamoudi created the Muslim Chaplain Program at the DoD, worked as a Good Will Ambassador for the State Department, was widely recognized as a “moderate Muslim,” had unfettered access to the highest levels of power in our government, publicly pronounced his support of terrorist organizations and was an Al Qaeda financier who plotted with two UK-based Al Qaeda operatives to kill Saudi Crown prince Abdullah, who went on to become King Abdullah.

[Note:  The U.S. government also considered Imam Anwar al-Awlaki a “moderate Muslim” and he gave presentations at the Pentagon, the U.S. Capital, and worked with government officials.  That lasted right up until he was killed by a U.S. drone strike in 2011.]

Many of the Muslim chaplains assigned by Alamoudi are still working with our military.  The numerous Islamic organizations that Alamoudi created and led, and the individuals who worked with him providing material support to Al Qaeda, Hamas, and the Muslim Brotherhood, can still be found walking the streets of Washington, D.C., the halls of Congress, working with the national security staffs, and elsewhere in America.

This dangerous pattern of our leaders and our media lifting up and proclaiming leaders in the Islamic community “prominent moderate Muslims” continues today.

Funny how so far they all turn out to be terrorists.

Corruption: The Clinton Foundation and Boko Haram

Michelle-obama-bringbackourgirlsDid the State Department use Boko Haram to subvert Nigeria’s presidential election out of Obama administration policy, or because of the mass donations to the Clinton Foundation from a Nigerian oil billionaire?

CounterJihad, Aug. 24, 2016:

World News has an important story about the State Department’s meddling in Nigeria’s presidential elections using the tool of Boko Haram violence.  C-SPAN has a further interview with the author of that piece here.  Yet there is still an important question to be asked: was the meddling in Nigeria’s Presidential election merely an Obama administration decision to effect regime change by subverting a free election, or was it in service to a major Clinton Foundation donor from the Nigerian oil fields?

Evidence that Obama intended to subvert the election is strong.  Obama’s own former chief strategist for his Presidential campaigns, David Axelrod, had his consulting firm AKPD was brought in to run Presidential competitor Buhari’s campaign.  The campaign was largely based on allegations of then-President Goodluck Jonathan’s corruption, and inability to fight Boko Haram successfully.  Of course, President Obama as Commander in Chief had the ability to support Nigeria with American forces, and President Jonathan had been begging for such forces to come to his aid.  Indeed, Jonathan ultimately accomplished a significant military victory just a few weeks before the election with the use of South African private military contractors providing training, advice, and helicopter transport.  These were all things denied to the Nigerians by the State Department. And almost immediately upon Buhari’s victory, the Obama administration announced it was open to expanding cooperation to fight Boko Haram.

This suggests that had the State Department not opposed the designation and blocked counter terrorism cooperation, Boko Haram could have been militarily suppressed during the Jonathan Administration.  Combined with the aid given to the political opposition by the President’s own political operatives, the picture is one of a democratic election intentionally subverted by allowing a terrorist organization to flourish until the election could be won.

But there may be more to the story.  From 2009 through 2013, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had refused to designate Boko Haram as an official Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) in spite of intense bipartisan pressure to do so.  Why?  Both Citizens United and Senator David Vitter have sought FOIA releases of documents explaining State’s thought process at this time. However, there is a major Clinton Foundation donor who had a clear interest:  a Nigerian oilfield billionaire named Gilbert Chagoury.

Gilbert Chagoury has substantial oil exploration interests in Nigeria. He also pledged $1 billion to the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) in 2009, the same year Hilary Clinton took office as Secretary of State. Gilbert Chagoury is part of a small Nigerian clique that includes President Muhamadu Buhari.  He was interested in seeing Buhari elected, and is reportedly the one who pushed for Axelrod’s firm to be brought in.

It would have been in the business interests of Chagoury, and Buhari to keep former president Goodluck Jonathan from initiating oil ventures in northern Nigeria until Buhari was able to secure the presidency.  That would make sure that the contracts got into the right hands.

Now, with that in mind, return to the World News story:

Meanwhile, Boko Haram often showed up better equipped than the Nigerian military: “Boko Haram was extorting even government officials in the north, state and local officials, and certainly the military,” said an American working in the area for more than a decade, who spoke to WORLD and is not named for security reasons. “Very wealthy Muslim businessmen totally have been backing Boko Haram. There was huge money involved. Money used to purchase arms—it was crazy.”

Where were the funds and support coming from? In part from a corrupt oil industry and political leaders in the North acting as quasi-warlords. But prominently in the mix are Nigerian billionaires with criminal pasts—plus ties to Clinton political campaigns and the Clinton Foundation, the controversial charity established by Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton in 1997.

The Clintons’ long association with top suspect tycoons—and their refusal to answer questions about those associations—takes on greater significance considering the dramatic rise of Boko Haram violence while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state. Did some Clinton donors stand to gain from the State Department not taking action against the Islamic terrorist group?…

Critics argue it was Clinton herself who has led the way on U.S. indifference, spurning the standard FTO designation (issued 72 times since 1997) that could have bolstered U.S. efforts against Boko Haram years before the infamous [“#BringBackOurGirls”] kidnappings. [Emphasis added.]

Both Clinton and the Obamas made a big noise about those kidnapped girls.  They didn’t actually do anything to help them, though.  Perhaps now we begin to see why they did not.

Islamic Jihad’s Most Effective Weapons

(Artwork by Shutterstock.com.)

(Artwork by Shutterstock.com.)


PJ MEDIA, BY DAVID SOLWAY, AUGUST 24, 2016:

Recently I published a pair of articles proposing in the first a series of severe legislative measures to curtail, if not eliminate, the carnage of jihad inflicted upon innocent people in all walks of life, and suggesting in the second that Islam, unlike Christianity, Judaism, and other faiths, should not be entitled to the protection of the First Amendment. In the sequel, I received a couple of messages accusing me of promoting a “final solution.” One from a former colleague read: Bravo. Your final solution is so simple and elegant. Another from a friend read, in part: Implicit in all your articles is that Islam…should or be made to disappear. The case against Islam taken to its extreme begins to sound very close to a “final solution.” Do we want or should we want to go there? 

My former colleague appears never to have read the Islamic scriptures and ancillary texts and obviously has little knowledge of Islamic history. My friend is considerably more erudite but seems, nonetheless, to believe that direct and aggressive confrontation is not the proper route to take. To imply that I, a Jew, am advocating a “final solution,” an Endlösung, is at the very least rather tactless. It is also, as I hope to show, the height of folly. What I said in my articles is that the terror apparatus needs to be dismantled without delay or equivocation, and that we have to go to the source of the violence, Islam itself. I was not advocating killing anyone, or rounding Muslims up in cattle cars and shipping them off to concentration camps, or burning  ghettoes and no-go zones to the ground.

I said in particular that terror mosques have to be investigated and if necessary shut down (military-grade weapons have been found in a German mosque, but jihadist-inspired sermons are also heavy weapons), that no-go zones have to be disarmed and opened to safe public dwelling, that Sharia, a draconian atavism incompatible with our constitutions, should be outlawed, that unscreened immigration simply has to stop, and that the status of Islam as a “religion” entitled to the shelter of the First Amendment is a legitimate issue to be debated—at least until the Koran, Hadith, Sira, schools of jurisprudence, etc. are sanitized, if ever.

My friend replied to a stern rebuke in partial walkback fashion. Of course, I’m not suggesting that you’re advocating an actual “final solution,” that’s absurd…Explicit in your many articles is that any decent, self-respecting, tolerant Muslim should…defect from Islam (reject the Koran, for all the reasons you have been laying out for years). Their example, taken to the extreme, would have Islam disappear gently into the night, which would be like a “final solution.” That’s all I’m saying. He continued: What your latest article doesn’t allow re. religious protection is a reformation within Islam, which I believe has already begun.

The question is: how long are we willing to wait for this putative reformation to bear fruit? I see a few “moderates” here and there trying to effect change, but they are having little appreciable impact, and most still adhere to the adulation of Mohammed, turn a blind eye to the dictates of their faith, or pretend the offending passages, with which the scriptures and commentaries are replete, mean something other than what they explicitly say.

A substantial and rooted reformation of Islam is the pipe dream of the cowed and complaisant who cannot face the indigestible fact that Islam is at war with us, has been at war with the Judeo-Christian West (and other civilizations) for fourteen hundred years, and shows no sign of relenting. I’d also suggest—assuming reform were conceivable—that my proposals, if taken seriously, might accelerate the reform my correspondent is piously wishing for. With terror mosques closed and fundamentalist Islam in official disgrace, true reformers might gather momentum. But this is only a thought-experiment.

The exception to the rule of Islamic hegemony, according to Supra Zaida Peery, executive director of Muslim World Today, appears to be Azerbaijan, with its history, at least since independence from the Soviet bloc in 1991, of “egalitarianism, democracy, and rule of law.” Such advancements are possible only where the Islamic scriptures are studiously disregarded, which reinforces the argument that canonical Islam is anti-freedom and an ever-present danger.

Ms. Peery admits that traditional Islam, honor codes and all, is making a comeback. Azerbaijan also enjoys strong relations with Erdogan’s Turkey, a political alliance that provokes a degree of skepticism respecting Ms. Peery’s claims. Everything considered, I would agree with Danusha Goska’s critical review of Ayaan Hirsi Ali’sHeretic: Why Islam Needs a Reformation Now—a book which claims that Islam is susceptible, however tardily, to modernization. Goska writes: “We must confront jihad for what it is: a timeless and universal threat that requires an equally timeless and universal response.”

I have nothing against Muslims practicing their faith in their homes, as long as they don’t take its injunctions to rape, enslave, subjugate and murder in the name of Allah literally, and I have nothing against imams sermonizing from an extensively expurgated Koran—though their temples should have no greater legal status than, say, a Masonic clubhouse.

Meanwhile we line up at airports, remove our shoes, wait interminably to be processed, and expect to be groped—followed by the apprehension, shared by many, that the flight we have boarded may disappear off the radar. Meanwhile theFrench police are patrolling the beaches lest some “scantily clad” woman or child is knifed by some offended Muslim, as happened not long ago, a Jewish man in Strasbourg is stabbed by an Allahu Akbarist, seven people including a six-year-old child are injured in a “fire and knife” attack on a Swiss train, and an American tourist is stabbed to death in London’s busy Russell Square by a Somalian. “He’s still here, he’s still here,” were the dying woman’s last words, and indeed he is.

Meanwhile entire cities go into lockdown and people are warned to stay indoors after another jihadist onslaught. Meanwhile Pew polls report that young, second-generation Muslims—those we thought were Westernized “moderates”—increasingly favor death for apostates and gays and harsh punishment for criticism of Islam. Meanwhile countries are being swarmed with military-age “refugees,” a troubling number of whom are estimated to be ISIS plants or sympathizers; German intelligence official Manfred Hauser warns that ISIS has infiltrated the migrant hordes and set up a command structure in the country. Patrick Poolereports that the first two weeks of August 2016 have seen five dozen incidents of Muslim-related domestic insurgency in Europe. (As I write, a Muslim convert armed with detonation devices has just been shot by the RCMP in an Ontario community.)

The very conduct of our lives has changed—it’s called the “new normal.” We now hear from the lips of French Prime Minister Manuel Valls that we will have to “learn to live with terrorism.” Is this OK? Are we prepared to accept the limitations upon our traditional freedoms and the ever-present threat of violence upon our persons as a customary aspect of daily life in the hope that one day in the indefinite future the “religion of peace” will become a religion of peace? As things stand, our enemies are laughing all the way to the future.

More to the point, the irony very few observers wish to acknowledge—and certainly not my interlocutors—is that it is no one and nothing but Islam that is pursuing a “final solution “—and not only for Jews.

Read more

Media silent on surge in Islam-inspired knife attacks

Jihadist on the Democratic Republic of Congo where Christians are often hacked to death by Muslim rebels

Jihadist on the Democratic Republic of Congo where Christians are often hacked to death by Muslim rebels

‘One of biggest criminal cover-ups in human history’

WND, by Leo Hohmann, Aug. 24, 2016:

The spate of grisly stabbings and beheadings being carried out by Muslims around the world is not really a sudden or unique occurrence but part of a decades-long pattern of violence inspired by the Quran, say Islam critics.

The latest attack on American soil came over the weekend in Roanoke, Virginia, by a 20-year-old man who used a 10-inch butcher knife to attack residents of the Pines apartment complex while shouting, “Allahu Akbar!”

It happened again Monday in Australia, where a 21-year-old British woman, Mia Ayliffe-chung, was hacked to death and two others injured by a Muslim man chanting “Allahu Akbar!” as 30 other tourists looked on in horror.

In Europe the attacks has been an almost weekly occurrence since the influx of 1.5 million Muslim migrants over the last year.

Most of these attacks receive scant coverage in the establishment media, and when they are covered they are glazed over with an obvious attempt to paint them as anything but Islamic in nature. More often than not, they are attributed to mental illness, as WND documented in a list earlier this month of more than 25 attacks.

From Oklahoma to Ohio, Virginia, California

There have been many knife attacks by Muslims on U.S. soil in recent years. The one that received the most media attention was the horrific beheading of 54-year-old Colleen Hufford of Tulsa, Oklahoma, by a male co-worker at a food plant in September 2014. Alton Alexander Nolen, a Muslim convert, beheaded Hufford and stabbed another woman who were not receptive to his attempts at converting them.

Earlier this year, on Feb. 11, the 30-year-old Mohamed Barry entered the Nazareth Restaurant and Deli in Columbus, Ohio, and mercilessly chopped up customers with a machete, injuring four, while yelling, “Allahu Akbar!”

On Nov. 4, 2015, an 18-year-old Muslim student at the University of California at Merced attacked students and teachers with a machete, injuring several of them seriously before he was shot and killed. The FBI, after initially characterizing the attack by Faisal Mohammad as the act of a disgruntled student, admitted months later in March 2016 that he had an ISIS flag and had studied Islamist propaganda.

Some critics believe the lack of media coverage of these attacks amounts to one of the biggest criminal cover-ups in human history.

Among them is Timothy Furnish, a professor of Islamic history who wrote “Sects, Lies and the Caliphate” and also authors the MahdiWatch blog. He said he’s keeping tabs on the knife attacks. And he believes the whitewash treatment these attacks receive by Western governments and media shows both have taken on the role of dhimmis – second-class apologists for Islam.

“We are witnessing a legion of attacks by Muslims and Muslim sympathizers in the West utilizing, specifically, bladed weapons – Germany, the U.K., U.S., Australia – over the past several years,” Furnish told WND. “Most would appear to be attempts to decapitate the victims, although the media seems to try to hide that fact in a number of cases by reporting them only as ‘stabbings’ or ‘knife attacks.’”

What’s going on here?

“Since the common links in most if not all these cases are Muslim or Islamophile perpetrators, bladed weapons and attacks on the neck area, I would submit that the driving force is the Islamic rubric to behead unbelievers – spelled out specifically in the Quran,” Furnish said.

He cited Sura al-Anfal [VIII]:12 and Sura Muhammad [XLVII]:4.

Furnish elaborated on these scriptures in the article, “Beheading in the Name of Islam,” published in Middle East Quarterly.

Quran 47:3 is the key scripture but there are others.

“Those who take the Quran literally – which includes not just terrorist groups like ISIS and al-Qaida but millions of Muslims of the Salafi, Wahhabi and Deobandi persuasion and major Islamic commentators across the centuries – believe that it is an act of piety to carry out such injunctions,” Furnish said. “ISIS’s appeals in, for example, its Dabiq magazine may be the proximate cause for such brutality. But make no mistake, it is Islam itself which is ultimately responsible.

“When the founder of a religion engages in, or at the very least approves of a behavior, I fail to see how said behavior can be deeded ‘radical’ or ‘extremist.’”

Read more

Are Nonstop Muslim Atrocities the ‘New Norm’?

mn

Front Page Magazine, by Raymond Ibrahim, Aug. 25, 2016:

As hardly a few days pass without some Islamic terror attack in the West—recently and as of this writing an “Allahu Akbar” shouting Muslim man stabbed a Jew in France and an “Allahu Akbar” screaming Muslim woman ran over two policemen in Canada—the West risks becoming desensitized to and seeing Islamic violence as “just another part of life.”

The words and deeds of Western leaders are not helping.  After the Islamic terror attack in Nice, France, where 84 were killed, counterterrorism chief Patrick Calvar said: “Today, France is clearly the most threatened country.  The question about the threat is not to know ‘if’ but ‘when’ and ‘where’.” Prime Minister Manuel Valls declared that “Terrorism … is a threat that weighs heavily on France and will continue doing so for a long time.”

As if such resignation wasn’t bad enough, at the memorial event for the 84 Nice victims, Valls declared, “Times have changed and we should learn to live with terrorism.”

Actually, the main thing to change with time in France is its demography.  The largest Muslim population of Europe resides there and, in accordance’s with Islam’s Rule of Numbers, is the real reason why France “should learn to live with terrorism.”

More apathy was in the air during the Munich massacre, where a Muslim gunman killed nine.

While somberly addressing the massacre still in progress—with the usual boilerplate “our hearts go out to [X victim of terror]”—U.S. President Obama managed to crack a joke, grin, chuckle, and draw laughter from his audience.

After all, what is the big deal?  Shouldn’t we be used to Muslims rampaging and killing by now?  And really, what’s nine dead compared to the many hundreds killed by Islamic terrorists around the world in recent weeks?

As for the leader of the nation where the attack took place, Angela Merkel waited almost 24 hours before she delivered yet another perfunctory speech containing all the usual words, condolences, and platitudes.

Then again, what was the hurry? Muslims abusing, raping, and killing Germans in Germany is old hat.  A new poll by ZDF found that a record 75 percent of Germans “expect—which is not unlike accept—more terror attacks in their nation.  Must a statement be made after every single one?!

Needless to say, lesser Islamic terror attacks which once would’ve been extremely newsworthy and received condemnation from the highest echelons of the political wrung now receive perfunctory or no media coverage and little comment.

On July 18 in Germany, another “Allahu Akbar” shouting, axe-waving Muslim attacked train passengers and critically injured five.  The next day, on July 19 in France, a Muslim man stabbed a woman and her three daughters—the eight-year-old was left with a punctured lung and in critical condition—for being “scantily dressed.”

No immediate comments from Merkel and Valls.  (See here for numerous other examples of “minor” and “everyday” Muslim “disturbances” in Europe—such as vandalizing churches and urinating on St. Mary statues—that get little or no coverage or comment.)

Western people had better wise up: in the field of behavioral psychology, “systematic desensitization” is a well-known and effective form of graduated exposure therapy used “to help effectively overcome phobias and other anxiety disorders.”  Consider the following succinct definition with my relevant examples in brackets:

Systematic desensitization is when the client [the West] is exposed to the anxiety-producing stimulus [Islamic violence] at a low level [reports and images of Islamic violence “over there” in the Mideast], and once no anxiety is present a stronger version of the anxiety-producing stimulus is given [reports of violence closer to home, in the West]. This continues until the individual client [the West] no longer feels any anxiety towards the stimulus [Islamic violence].

Is this the plan?  Are the “global elite” producing situations, such as the manufactured “migrant crisis,” that cause the West to experience incrementally worse forms of Islamic violence, until it becomes desensitized, loses its “phobia”—in this case, “Islamophobia”—and simply “learns to live with terrorism,” in the words of France’s prime minister?

Indeed, if the attacks were to fall back to, say, just once a month, many might accept that as a “positive step” they can live with—at least in comparison to what they’ve been seeing, including four savage Islamic attacks in one recent week in Germany alone.

“Conspiracy theories” aside, a much better way exists.  Acknowledge the truth—Islam is inherently violent and intolerant—and build policies on this truth.  A ban on or serious vetting of Muslim immigration—which a majority of Americans support—and close monitoring of already existing mosques and Islamic centers would virtually eliminate Islamic terror from America.

For the fact remains: unlike natural disasters—earthquakes, tsunamis, tornadoes, and the like—we actually do not need to live with Islam.

Also see:

NY Post’s Sperry on Huma Abedin’s Role at Radical Muslim Journal: ‘Clearly She Has Two Faces’

huma and hillary2Breitbart, by Pam Key, Aug. 24, 2016:

Wednesday on Fox News Channel’s “Fox & Friends,” New York Post columnist Paul Sperry detailed the connections of  Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s top aide Huma Abedin had with a radical Muslim journal run by her mother.

Sperry said, “Well, I found one article where the mother actually wrote an article arguing for the subjugation of women and actually excuses wife beating. In another article, I found she actually blamed America and American foreign policy for 911 using the same excuses that Osama bin Laden used in fatwa against us.”

Sperry said Huma Abedin was listed as an assistant editor, “For 12 years from 1996 to 2008. and so, it’s — I mean, it’s really hard for the campaign to reconcile this. They admit that she actually was on there, but they’re saying well, she actually didn’t do any editing which is hard to believe because even if you buy that excuse, Huma had to know how odious this radical journal was because her mother was the editor and her brother and sister worked there as editors.”

He continued, “So Hillary had to know too about this. She went over to Saudi Arabia in 2010 as secretary of state to give a speech to the radical mother’s … so she went over to this radical girl’s school that’s run by the Huma Abedin’s radical mother and actually apologized for American women wearing bikinis. So I mean, is Hillary really this champion of women’s liberation? I mean, this is very problematic for the campaign because it’s the centerpiece of it is Hillary stands up for women’s rights, but here you have her campaign manager actually publishing articles that oppose women’s rights as un-Islamic.

When asked if Huma Abedin agrees with her mom or Hillary Clinton Sperry said, “That’s a good question. Clearly she has two faces. The face that we all see and then the face that she shows to the Saudis and other radical Muslims. So this raises a lot of questions that unfortunately aren’t being asked of the campaign. I mean, if this was Trump’s campaign manager being attached to such an extremist publication, the media would be hounding him around the clock about this.”

He added, “She could be running the White House as Chief of staff if Hillary gets in.”

See video

Also see:

New study reveals the extent of extremist teachings in Canadian mosques and Islamic schools

The Islamic booth at Dundas Square. Photo: CIJnews

The Islamic booth at Dundas Square. Photo: CIJnews

CIJ News, by Ilana Shneider, Aug. 23, 2016:

A new study by Terrorism and Security Experts of Canada (TSEC Network) examines the degree to which Islamist extremism is advocated in Canadian mosques, Islamic schools and other organizations. It also shows that martyrdom is advanced in Canadian schools as an acceptable idea.

“Lovers of the Death?” – Islamist Extremism in Mosques and Schools – co-authored by Tom Quiggin, court qualified expert on the structure and organization of jihadist terrorism and a twenty-year veteran in the intelligence community and Saied Shoiaab, a Muslim who has researched and written extensively on the issue of Islamic extremism in the Middle East and Canada – argues that despite what the politicians say, Islamist extremist ideology exists in Canadian mosques, schools and other institutions.

One of the biggest issues affecting Canada is not that extremist ideology exists in the mosques and schools, but that the mosques and schools contain nothing but extremist literature in these institutions. The same can be said for public libraries, whose Arabic collections include extremist literature by some of the most contentious and dangerous authors from the Islamist world.

It is not the presence of extremist literature in the mosque libraries that is worrisome. The problem is that there was nothing but extremist literature in the mosque libraries.”

The authors of the study have collected information through undercover and surreptitious means and by extensive analysis of open-source intelligence and social media.

Theys argue that many leading politicians still attempt to convince Canadians that no extremism exists in Canadian mosques and brand anyone who questions the existence of extremism as “racists” or “Islamophobe”.

Is it possible that Canadian politicians are misleading or deliberately lying to the population about the threat of Islamist extremism in Canada? Have the forces of political correctness and cultural relativism captured them so completely that they are unable to speak on these sensitive subjects?”

The study reveals multiple, real world cases of Islamist extremist ideology being advocated in Canada, which confirm former Prime Minister Harper’s 2015 statement that drew a link between radicalization and mosques.

While defending a proposed Bill-51 which would have included criminalizing advocacy for or promotion of a terrorist act, Harper said “It doesn’t matter what the age of the person is, or whether they’re in a basement, or whether they’re in a mosque or somewhere else”.

The remark drew instant condemnation from Canadian Muslim groups who said they were “deeply troubled” that Harper “implicated Canadian mosques as venues where terrorism is advocated or promoted” and demanded that Harper apologize for his statement.

Examples of extremist teachings in Canada

CIJnews has learned that some Islamic private schools in Canada use textbooks produced by the Saudi Ministry of Education. 

Textbooks obtained by CIJnews contain chapters dealing with the wisdom of the capital punishments in Islam in cases of major sins.

In two textbooks for the school year 2014 and 2015-16, homosexuality is depicted as a “major sin” and as “one of the most heinous sins” punishable by death for both partners to the sexual act. The punishment is similar to that inflicted on the people of Lut, meaning by stoning and/or by fire.

Homosexuality is prohibited, one of the textbooks explains, because this behavior interferes with the natural state of human beings and spreads moral corruption and diseases like HIV.

The textbook suggests that early marriage and executing the fixed punishments on homosexuals can protect the society from homosexuality.

The textbook also teaches that adultery is punishable in case a married man/ woman are involved by stoning to death, and theft in certain conditions and terrorizing people by chopping off limbs.

Canadian Imams and Islamic literature sold/ distributed for free in Canada provide a context to understanding the position of Islam regarding homosexuality (to read “What Islam is saying on homosexuality? The Canadian Islamic perspective” click here and here.)

In 2013, The Muslim Council of Calgary (MCC) posted on its official website a booklet called “Answers to Non-Muslims – Common Questions About Islam” authored by Dr. Zakir Abdul Karim Naik, a well-known al-Qaeda sympathizer, which calls for capital punishment for the rapists, chopping off the hands as punishment for robbery

The official website of Salaheddin Mosque located in Scarborough, Ontario, posted under the heading “Islamic FAQ” the following:

Islam prescribes chopping off the hands of the convicted robber. “As to the thief, male or female, cut off his or her hands: a punishment by way of example, from Allah, for their crime: and Allah is Exalted in power, full of wisdom.” (Quran 5:38)

Suppose the Islamic Law is implemented in America i.e. every rich person gives Zakat ( 2.5% of his savings in charity above 85 grams of gold every lunar year), and every convicted robber has his or her hands chopped off as a punishment.”

Thus every Muslim should be a fundamentalist i.e. he should follow the fundamentals of the Religion of Peace: Islam. He should be a terrorist only towards the antisocial elements in order to promote peace and justice in the society…”

Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA Canada) located in Oakville, Ontario, is an Islamic nationwide organization which strives “to build an Exemplary Canadian Muslim Community” by “total submission to Him [Allah] and through the propagation of true and universal message of Islam.”

On its official website, ICNA Canada ICNA posted the book “Riyad us Saliheen” (The Garden of the Righteous) by a 13th century Sunni scholar. In the commentary to the Qur’an, the book says that “theft is punishable by the cutting of the hand; the punishment of adultery is a hundred strikes or Rajm (stoning to death); the punishment of drinking of intoxicants is forty strikes.

The “Info on Islam” booth at Dundas Square in down Toronto is operated by the Walk in Islamic Info Center (WIIC), a Toronto-based organization dedicated to Dawah (propagating to Islam).

On its official website WIIC states that its mission “is to create awareness & understanding about the religion of Islam and correct misinformation about Islam amongst Muslims & non-Muslims” by giving “street Dawah,” distributing free Quran and books on introduction to Islam, supplying Quran and Islamic “books to detention centers (jails),” operating dawah office and musallah [Prayer House]” in downtown Toronto (at Yonge & Dundas Street across from Eaton Center) and offering “Free Dawah Franchise worldwide.”

Last year, Dawah activists at Dundas Square handed out for free the booklet “Muslim Prayer Handbook For Beginners,” which introduces the daily prayers for Muslims.

In some of the supplications dealing with the “Kafiroun,” the disbelievers or infidels, Muslims are ordained to ask Allah to help them overcome and defeat their enemies who are identified as the disbelieving people.

Read more

What motivates a Canadian jihadist?

Video footage showing Aaron Driver is seen behind RCMP Deputy Commissioner Mike Cabana (left) and Assistant Commissioner Jennifer Strachan during a press conference for what the RCMP are calling a terrorism incident, in Strathroy, Ontario yesterday, on Thursday, Aug. 11, 2016 in Ottawa. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Justin Tang

Video footage showing Aaron Driver is seen behind RCMP Deputy Commissioner Mike Cabana (left) and Assistant Commissioner Jennifer Strachan during a press conference for what the RCMP are calling a terrorism incident, in Strathroy, Ontario yesterday, on Thursday, Aug. 11, 2016 in Ottawa. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Justin Tang

A study stresses real religious zeal, not loners seeking a way out

Macleans by John Geddes, Aug. 15, 2016:

A new study based on interviews conducted over social media with foreign fighters in Iraq and Syria raises doubts about the commonly held notion that young men in North America and Europe who are drawn to violent Islamic extremism must be marginalized loners looking for an alternative to their dead-end lives.

Three university researchers who contacted dozens of jihadists from abroad in Iraq and Syria, including some Canadians, say they seemed to be drawn mainly by the religious ideas—“no matter how ill-informed or unorthodox”—behind jihadism. Rather than being isolated individuals who self-radicalized in front of their computer screens, the report says they usually found mentors and, at least in the case of the Canadians, joined the fighting in “clusters.”

In the working paper entitled Talking to Foreign Fighters: Socio-Economic Push versus Existential Pull Factors, the researchers caution against assuming that radical Islam appeals only young men on the edges of society, those without good job prospects or supportive family and friends.

They suggest previous academic studies have put too much weight on those “push” factors—the problems and frustrations in the lives of young men who turn to extremist Islam and, ultimately, terrorist violence. “Based on what we are hearing in interviews with foreign fighters—more interviews than anyone has yet to report on—we think more attention and significance should be given to the repeated affirmations of the positive benefits of being jihadists,” they say.

From mid-December 2015 to Feb. 29, 2016, the researchers put questions to 40 foreign fighters, 60 family members, friends and associates, and 30 online fans, recruiters, and potential fighters. (Among the Canadians the interviewed was Aaron Driver, the would-be terrorist killed last week in a confrontation with police in Strathroy, Ont.) Those fighting in Syria and Iraq were interviewed through “extended social media dialogues.” But their working paper, posted recently on the website of the Canadian Network for Research on Terrorism, Security and Society, is based on an initial analysis of just 20 interviews with foreign fighters in Syria and Iraq.

The researchers are Lorne Dawson of University of Waterloo’s sociology and legal studies department, Amarnath Amarasingam of George Washington University’s program on extremism, and Alexandra Bain of St. Thomas University’s religious studies department. Dawson told Maclean’s by email that they plan to eventually publish a more complete paper on their research in a peer-reviewed journal, and are also “being pressed to write a book in short order.”

In the working paper, they write that the foreign fighters they contacted “run the gamut from troubled youth with personal problems to accomplished young men and women from stable backgrounds.” In the 20 interviews they analyzed, not one of their subjects suggested “directly or indirectly” that being marginalized socially or economically pushed them onto such an extreme path. “Anger and frustration have their role to play in the process, but it is the positive investment in an alternate world-saving role that matters most, no matter how strange it may appear to outsiders,” they say.

As well, the paper points to the importance of influential radical voices who carry some form of religious authority. “In most cases, we would say the help and encouragement of some other outside mentors is required to complete the process of radicalization, to turn wannabe terrorists into deployable agents or independent martyrs for the cause. The process of self-radicalization needs to be legitimated to be complete.”

To probe the views of radicalized young men directly, the researchers had to assure them that they were not seeking “operational information” that would put them at risk. The questions focused on personal and family background, their sense of identity, and how they became fighters.

Along with information about the individuals, the researchers assembled a sort of group portrait of the Canadians fighting for various terrorist and radical factions in Iraq and Syria. “It is extremely difficult to verify any of this information, however, and for the most part we are merely reporting what one or more individuals have told us,” they admit. Still, the outline they sketch is intriguing.

They say Canadians tend to be radicalized in “clusters” and travel to the conflict zone in small groups. Of those who have made the journey, at least 19 Canadian men have died fighting in Syria and Iraq, five or them converts to Islam, the rest from Muslim backgrounds. Eight were from Ontario, eight from Alberta, and three from Quebec. The researchers say they “have good reason to believe” most of the radicalized Canadians in the war-torn region have joined ISIS, but others are fighting for less well-known groups, like Jabhat al-Nusra and Ahrar as-Sham, while at least 15 have fought with Kurdish or Christian militias.

The paper estimates that between 10 and 15 women have gone from Canada to Iraq and Syria to back ISIS, often marrying terrorists. “We know that three have given birth to babies as a result of their marriages to ISIS fighters, who are usually other foreign fighters,” they say.

Read more

Ontario Imam Tells Muslims Not to Apologize for Foiled ISIS Suicide Attack

Mazin-AbdulAdhim

“It’s amazing that Muslims continuously ignore the fact that our Creator gave us our own system and obligated it upon us.”

CounterJihad, by Bruce Cornibe, Aug. 244, 2016:

Islamists often blame the foreign policies of Western governments in attempt to mask the despicable acts of terrorism committed by jihadists. This type of scapegoating switches the fault from radical Islam to the West, and finds traction with Westerners that succumb to the white privilege/collective guilt mindset furthered by leftist academics.

An Ontario imam named Mazin AbdulAdhim, who is connected with the radical Hizb ut-Tahrir movement, continues to condemn the West  after the stymied terror attack by ISIS supporter Aaron Driver on August 10. Take a look at AbdulAdhim’s Facebook post, allegedly posted the day after the thwarted attack:

Aaron Driver, a Muslim convert from my city, was killed in a confrontation with the RCMP yesterday. They allege that he detonated a device inside a taxi, hurting himself and someone else, and was shot when he tried to detonate another one.

It is important to not jump to conclusions about this information until details are made clear. The media clearly has a campaign against Islam and Muslims, and so we should be careful how we respond to news like this.

Even if the information is true, we must not allow these sorts of events to cause us to be pressured to apologize for actions that we are not responsible for, nor should this cause us to become afraid of speaking the truth. The governments of the West kill and help kill dozens of innocent civilians every day, and the crimes they have committed against humanity through their foreign policies are orders of magnitude worse than anything these individuals have committed or tried to commit…

It’s funny how Islamists like AbdulAdhim say the media is out to get Muslims, when many media outlets push the contrived ‘Islamophobia’ narrative. For example, the BBC recently ran a story that implied that opposition to Sharia law is ‘Islamophobia’ – apparently interrupting an interview by stating, “There’s no Sharia law here.”

AbdulAdhim also flips morality on its head and thinks that alleged crimes resulting from the foreign policies of Western governments are a much greater evil than Islamic terrorism. This is another leftist tactic of using moral relativism to justify the most absurd of viewpoints – for example, drone strikes that seek to minimize collateral damage are apparently more evil than a suicide bomber aiming to murder innocent people. This is the reasoning behind actual terrorist groups like Hamas who blame Israel for terrorism when Israel’s military inadvertently kills or injures civilians because the leaders of Hamas purposely hide their militants in schools and hospitals to ensure collateral damage.

AbdulAdhim also provides a Facebook posting that’s indicative of how anti-Western the Sharia mindset is at its core. Purportedly posted after the Orlando massacre, the anti-democratic/anti-capitalist post states:

…It’s amazing that Muslims still have not absorbed the fact that this is not our system, these are not our laws, and these are not our governments. This system does not represent us, and it will not protect us if those behind it decide that we are no longer worth protecting.

It’s amazing that Muslims continuously ignore the fact that our Creator gave us our own system and obligated it upon us, and He will never allow us to solve these countless problems we face today until we return to His system that He ordained for us in His final message…

…We are the ones who have turned away from the systems revealed by Allah (swt), and look at this most miserable life we live, constantly apologizing, lacking in dignity, and never having proper representation of the proper implementation of Islam.

And we are the ones who have caused the spread of corruption throughout the land and the sea, since we abandoned our positions in implementing Islam on the political level, and left those positions for the worst of humanity to occupy…

Unlike the Islamists of the Hamas-affiliated Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) organizations like Hizb ut-Tahrir are more forthright about their political goals and what Sharia law entails. As suggested from AbdulAdhim’s previous statement, political Islam is not compatible with democracy and a capitalist system.

We know in Sharia “that only Allah can righteously create laws that are binding on human beings[;]” therefore, laws conceived by humans are invalid. From this perspective there’s no reason to have a democracy since the laws that likely come out of the democratic process are inherently wrong, and there’s no reason to have a free-enterprise system when Allah has already stipulated what is permissible (halal) and what is forbidden (haram) – for example, usury (riba) is prohibited (Quran 2:275-280). Also, the elevation and promotion of Islam and Muslims is another key element of Sharia. How is a government governed by Sharia supposed to give equal rights to Muslims and non-Muslims (Kafirs) alike if non-Muslims are systematically discriminated against in Islamic texts that make up Sharia like the Quran (2:221)? It can’t, and AbdulAdhim knows that.

The use of violence is one of the few differences between Islamists and jihadists (even though some Islamists subscribe to violence). As we have already seen Islamists oftentimes downplay Islamic terrorism or blame it on supposed Western aggression, thus helping to advance their Sharia agenda. Furthermore, Islamists like AbdulAdhim are enemies to Western civilization and the Western countries they inhabit. Leaders like Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau cannot identify the threat stemming from radical Islam because they are too steeped in political correctness. The threat of Sharia won’t go away on its own – the West must confront its enemy.

***

This panel discussion with Bill Maher is an example of how hard it is to confront Western Islam apologists with the truth: (h/t Bill Warner)

Sea change: Turkey enters Syrian conflict – as an enemy of the U.S.’s closest partner

Turkish tanks assembled on the Syrian border in 2015. (Image: Screen grab of RT video, YouTube)

Turkish tanks assembled on the Syrian border in 2015. (Image: Screen grab of RT video, YouTube)

Liberty Unyielding, by J. E. Dyer, Aug. 24, 2016: (h/t/ Tundra Tabloids)

Turkey has done cross-border shelling for a long time now, and has used her air force to bomb Kurdish positions in Iraq and Syria.  There was even evidence in November 2015 that Turkey had troops deployed just across the Syrian border in northeastern Latakia Province.

But for the first time, on Tuesday, 23 August, Turkey has ordered an entire town on the Turkish border with Syria to evacuate, in preparation for an overt cross-border military operation, complete with an armored invasion force.  The objective is to take the Syrian town of Jarablus from Islamic State.

That may sound superficially like it serves America’s goals.  (Indeed, the operation is reportedly being supported by NATO air power.  That could get messy, if it continues.)

But Turkey has actually been content to have ISIS in control of Jarablus for many months now.  The timing and context of this latest move are the key: Turkey’s real objective is to prevent theKurds from wresting Jarablus from ISIS.

And the Turkish entry into the Syrian conflict looks to be part of a joint effort – with Russia, Assad, and Iran – to neutralize the Kurds, as part of the campaign to take all of Syrian territory back from the factions now holding it.

The Kurds have been the major U.S. partner in fighting ISIS in both Syria and northern Iraq.  Until the Iran-sponsored Shia militias in Iraq ejected ISIS from Tikrit, Ramadi, and Fallujah – under the military direction of Iran’s Qods Force commander, Qassem Soleimani – the Kurds were by far the most effective ground force against ISIS.

But Erdogan has been uneasy with the Kurds’ success in consolidating territory.  Now Turkey wants to roll them up in this sensitive border area.

There are reasons why Iran is satisfied to be part of that effort, at least for now.  And for Russia, dealing with or protecting the Kurds is always a calculation, not a cause.  Don’t look for Russia to be solidly on one side of this thing; the Russians will maneuver simply to be at the center of it, so everyone has to come to them for solutions.

Remember, Moscow isn’t trying to get out of Syria, or leave Syria in good hands.  The whole point for Putin’s Russia is to stay there.

U.S. position eroded beyond recovery

The U.S has been the Kurds’ main patron for a long time now.  I very much fear Obama is about to abandon them – because he’d get so much bad press if any Americans got hurt, in the Syrian war realignment that now looks inevitable.

Obama has no intention of strengthening our forces’ posture against that realignment.

More importantly, he has absolutely no policy for what to do other than watch that realignment happen.  From a policy standpoint, he’s an inert quantity, a leadership void, tethered to a bunch of SOF, intel assets, and strike-fighters still wandering through the battle space burning gas and bullets.

It’s only with extraordinary pain that I say this, but it would be better for America – because of who’s in the Oval Office – if we did simply pull out.  Our forces on scene are in an increasingly impossible situation.  They should not be left there, exposed and unsupported.  Moreover, there’s nothing they can achieve there.  It’s not worth their lives to try to hang on to a situation that’s slipping away, for no positive good.  The next president will just have to deal with whatever reality has become, five months from now.

But pulling out – even quietly – and abandoning all pretense of having a policy or a plan would signal a definitive end to the last vestige of U.S leadership in the Middle East.  It would be a severe blow to the Kurds, who don’t deserve to be treated that way.  It would be a signal of faithlessness that our other long-time partners and allies could not ignore.

It’s difficult to preview comprehensively everything that might be unleashed; it could be very, very bad, or there could be random factors that keep it from getting too bad between now and next January.

Read more

Also see:

Australia: Muslim screaming “Allahu akbar” stabs British woman, authorities search for motive

British backpacker Mia Ayliffe-Chung was 'living her dream' on a gap year in Australia when she was stabbed to death by a French man believed to be staying at the same hostel (image from Daily Mail)

British backpacker Mia Ayliffe-Chung was ‘living her dream’ on a gap year in Australia when she was stabbed to death by a French man believed to be staying at the same hostel (image from Daily Mail)

Jihad Watch, by Robert Spencer, Aug. 24 2016:

“Mr Gollschewski moved to reassure the community he appeared to be acting alone.”

No, he wasn’t. Even if he was alone in this attack, he is part of the global jihad force. But since authorities refuse to believe that there is such a thing, they delude themselves with minutiae. He was acting alone. He wasn’t part of a group. As if there were no other Muslims like him.

“The investigation is still in its early stages, however, initial inquiries indicate that comments which may be construed as of an extremist nature were made by the alleged offender. It is alleged the suspect used the phrase, ‘Allahu akbar’ during the attack and when arrested by police. While this information will be factored in we are not ruling out any motivations at this stage, whether they be political or criminal.”

Yes, his motive is entirely unclear. As long as authorities continue to treat these jihad attacks as separate criminal acts with no necessary relationship to one another, instead of as incidents in a long war, we will continue to lose.

Note also that the reason why the attacker stabbed his victim was not because the attacker was a “French national,” as he is identified here, but because he was a Muslim, which is never mentioned in this story. The media establishment remains resolutely determined never to mention the motivating ideology behind attacks like this one.

“Young British backpacker dead after hostel stabbing in Home Hill, Queensland,” News.com.au, August 24, 2016:

A 21-YEAR-OLD British backpacker has died after allegedly being stabbed by a French national yelling “Allahu akbar” at a north Queensland hostel.

Multiple law enforcement agencies are investigating if the fatal stabbing of the young woman was terror-related.

The 29-year-old French national — who had been in the country since March — was heard to yell “Allahu akbar” before fatally attacking the woman and critically injuring a 30-year-old British male backpacker.

Queensland Police Service Deputy Commissioner Steve Gollschewski said he yelled it again when police arrested him at the Shelley’s Backpackers hostel in Home Hill, south of Townsville, where the attack occurred about 11.15pm on Tuesday.

The 21-year-old woman died at the scene, while the man was rushed to Townsville Hospital, where he continues to fight for his life.

A man in his 40s also suffered non life-threatening injuries.

A dog was also stabbed to death.

Mr Gollschewski said the French man remained in police custody but was yet to be charged.

The alleged knifeman has been treated in Townsville Hospital for cuts to his arm.

He remains there under police guard but is yet to be interviewed by detectives.

Mr Gollschewski moved to reassure the community he appeared to be acting alone.

“The investigation is still in its early stages, however, initial inquiries indicate that comments which may be construed as of an extremist nature were made by the alleged offender,” he said.

“It is alleged the suspect used the phrase, ‘Allahu akbar’ during the attack and when arrested by police.

“While this information will be factored in we are not ruling out any motivations at this stage, whether they be political or criminal.”…

***

***

Also see:

No Saudi Money for American Mosques

saudi duplicityMEF, by Daniel Pipes, originally at The HillAugust 22, 2016:

Saudi Arabia may be the country in the world most different from the United States, especially where religion is concerned. An important new bill introduced by Rep. Dave Brat (R-Va.) aims to take a step toward fixing a monumental imbalance.

Consider those differences: Secularism is a bedrock U.S. principle, enshrined in the Constitution’s First Amendment; in contrast, the Koran and Sunna are the Saudi constitution, enshrined as the Basic Law’s first article.

Anyone can build a religious structure of whatever nature in the United States, so the Saudis fund mosque after mosque. In the kingdom, though, only mosques are allowed; it hosts not a single church – or, for that matter, synagogue, or Hindu, Sikh, Jain, or Baha’i temple. Hints going back nearly a decade that the Saudis will allow a church have not born fruit but seem to serve as delaying tactics.

Pray any way you wish in America, so long as you do not break the law. Non-Muslims who pray with others in Saudi Arabia engage in an illicit activity that could get them busted, as though they had participated in a drug party.

The United States, obviously, has no sacred cities open only to members of a specific faith. KSA has two of them, Mecca and Medina; trespassers who are caught will meet with what the Saudi authorities delicately call “severe punishment.”

With only rare (and probably illegal) exceptions, the U.S. government does not fund religious institutions abroad (and those exceptions tend to be for Islamic institutions). In contrast, the Saudi monarchy has spent globally an estimated US $100 billion to spread its Wahhabi version of Islam. Products of Saudi-funded Wahhabi schools and mosques have often been incited to political violence against non-Muslims.

The Saudis have been arrogantly indiscreet about spending to promote Wahhabism. For example, a 2005 Freedom House report reviewed some of the extremist literature provided to the public by Saudi-funded institutions and concluded that it poses “a grave threat to non-Muslims and to the Muslim community itself.” The monarchy has also given multiple and generous grants to the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the most aggressive and effective Islamist organization in the United States.

Freedom House blew the lid off of Saudi funding of extremism in 2005.

Freedom House blew the lid off of Saudi funding of extremism in 2005.

This discrepancy, a version of which exists in every Western country, demands a solution. Some Western governments have taken ad hoc, provisional steps to address it.

• In 2007, the Australian government turned down a Saudi request to send funds to the Islamic Society of South Australia to help build a new mosque. “Obviously we don’t want to see any extremist organisation penetrate into Australia,” explained then-Foreign Minister Alexander Downer. Eight years later, Saudi diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks affirmed the kingdom’s intense interest in influencing Islamic politics in Australia.

• In 2008, the Saudis offered to finance construction of a mosque and Islamic cultural center in Moscow, prompting three Russian Orthodox groups to write an open letter to then-King Abdullah suggesting that his kingdom lift its ban on churches.

• In 2010, Norway’s Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Støreturned down Saudi funding for a mosque on the grounds that the Saudi kingdom lacks religious freedom.

• In July, reeling from multiple attacks over 18 months that killed 236 people on French soil, Prime Minister Manuel Valls mused about prohibiting foreign funding of mosques “for a period of time to be determined,” provoking an intense debate.

These one-off responses may satisfy voters but they had almost no impact. That requires something more systematic – legislation.

Brat’s proposed bill, H.R. 5824, the “Religious Freedom International Reciprocity Enhancement Act,” makes it unlawful for “foreign nationals of a country that limits the free exercise of religion in that country to make any expenditure in the United States to promote a religion in the United States, and for other purposes.” Hello, Saudi Arabia!

To “promote a religion” includes funding “religious services, religious education, evangelical outreach, and publication and dissemination of religious literature.” Should funding proceed anyway in defiance of this bill, the U.S. government can seize the monies.

The bill needs more work: it omits mention of religious buildings, offers no criteria for seizure of property, and does not indicate who would do the seizing. But it offers an important beginning. I commend it and urge its urgent consideration and adoption.

Americans cannot abide aggressive unilateral actions by Riyadh (or, for that matter, Tehran and Doha) exploiting their oil bonanza to smother the secularist principles basic to Western life. We must protect ourselves.

Daniel Pipes (DanielPipes.org, @DanielPipes) is president of the Middle East Forum.

Huma Abedin’s ties to the Muslim Brotherhood

Greg Nash

Greg Nash

The Hill, by Kenneth R. Timmerman, Aug. 23, 2016:

The Clinton campaign is attempting once again to sweep important questions under the rug about top aide Huma Abedin, her family ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and to Saudi Arabia, and her role in the ballooning Clinton email scandal.

The New York Post ran a detailed investigative piece over the weekend about Ms. Abedin’s work at the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs from 1995 through 2008, a Sharia law journal whose editor in chief was Abedin’s own mother.

This is not some accidental association. Ms. Abedin was, for many years, listed as an associate editor of the London-based publication and wrote for the journal while working as an intern in the Clinton White House in the mid-1990s.

Her mother, Saleha Abedin, sits on the Presidency Staff Council of the International Islamic Council for Da’wa and Relief, a group that is chaired by the leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi.

Perhaps recognizing how offensive such ties will be to voters concerned over future terrorist attacks on this country by radical Muslims professing allegiance to Sharia law, the Clinton campaign on Monday tried to downplay Ms. Abedin’s involvement in the Journal and the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Clinton surrogate group Media Matters claimed predictably there was “no evidence” that Ms. Abedin or her family had ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, and that Trump campaign staffers who spoke of these ties were conspiracy theorists.

To debunk the evidence, Media Matters pointed to a Snopes.com “fact-check” piece that cited as its sole source… Senator John McCain. This is the same John McCain who met Libyan militia leader Abdelkarim Belhaj, a known al Qaeda associate, and saluted him as “my hero” during a 2011 visit to Benghazi.

Senator McCain and others roundly criticized Rep. Michele Bachmann in 2012 when she and four members of the House Permanent Select Committee Intelligence and the House Judiciary Committee cited Ms. Abedin in letters sent to the Inspectors General of the Department of Defense, Department of State, Department of Justice, Department of Homeland Security, and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, warning about Muslim Brotherhood infiltration of the United States government.

In response to those critiques, Rep. Bachmann laid out the evidence in a 16-page memo, which has never been refuted by Senator McCain or the elite media.

The evidence, in my opinion, is overwhelming: Huma Abedin is nothing short of a Muslim Brotherhood princess, born into an illustrious family of Brotherhood leaders.

Her father, Syed Zaynul Abedin, was a professor in Saudi Arabia who founded the Institute for Muslim Minority Affairs, an institution established by the Government of Saudi Arabia with the support of the Muslim World League.

The Muslim World League was “perhaps the most significant Muslim Brotherhood organization in the world,” according to former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy. Its then-General Secretary, Umar Nasif, founded the Rabita Trust, “which is formally designated as a foreign terrorist organization under American law due to its support of al Qaeda,” he wrote.

That is not guilt by association but what federal prosecutors would call a “nexus” of like-minded people who shared the same goals.

A Saudi government document inspired by Ms. Abedin’s father explains the concept of “Muslim Minority Affairs,” the title of the Journal Mr. Abedin founded, and its goal to “establish a global Sharia in our modern times.”

Simply put, Huma Abedin worked for thirteen years as part of an enterprise whose explicit goal was to conquer the West in the name of Islam. No wonder the Clinton campaign wants to sweep this issue under the rug.

Mrs. Clinton has sometimes referred to Huma Abedin as her “second daughter.” Whether it was because of their close relationship or for some other reason, Mrs. Clinton has done much to further the Muslim Brotherhood agenda while Secretary of State, and can be counted on doing more as president.

As Secretary of State, she relentlessly pushed the overthrow of Libyan leader Mohammar Qaddafi, a dire enemy of the Brotherhood, even when President Obama and his Secretary of Defense were reluctant to go to war.

Along with Obama, she pushed for the overthrow of Egyptian leader Hosni Mubarak and his replacement by Muslim Brotherhood leader Mohammad Morsi.

She pushed for direct U.S. involvement in the Syrian civil war, including the arming of Syrian rebels allied with al Qaeda.

As I reveal in my new book, she worked side by side with the Organization of the Islamic Conference, the umbrella group where 57 majority Muslim states pushed their agenda of imposing Sharia law on the non-Muslim world, to use hate crime laws in the United States to criminalize speech critical of Islam, in accordance with United Nations Resolution 16/18.

Their first victim in the United States was a Coptic Christian named Nakoula Bassiley Nakoula, the maker of the YouTube video Hillary and Obama blamed for Benghazi.

New Abedin emails released to Judicial Watch this week show that Huma Abedin served as liaison between Clinton Foundation donors, including foreign governments, and the State Department.

When foreign donors had difficult in getting appointments with Mrs. Clinton through normal State Department channels, Clinton Foundation executive Douglas Band would email Huma Abedin, and poof! the doors would open as if by magic.

Donald Trump has criticized this as “pay for play.” But it also raises questions as to whether Huma Abedin and Mrs. Clinton were in fact serving as unregistered agents for foreign powers who sought to impose their anti-freedom agenda on the United States.

The United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Egypt outlawed the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization in 2014. But by then, the damage had been done.

Do Americans want eight years of a President Clinton, who will do even more to empower the Muslim Brotherhood and impose its agenda on America?

Timmerman is a Donald Trump supporter. He was the 2012 Republican Congressional nominee for MD-8 and is the author of Deception: The Making of the YouTube Video Hillary & Obama Blamed for Benghazi, published by Post Hill Press.

CAIR Goes After Clarion for Training Police on Extremism

CAIR-Mauro-Mohebi-HP

Clarion Project, Aug. 23, 2016:

The San Diego chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is calling for an investigation into law enforcement officers who attend training about Islamist extremism by the Clarion Project’s national security analyst, Prof. Ryan Mauro.

CAIR has even gone so far as to compare Mauro to the leader of the KKK.

The official leading the charge, Hanif Mohebi, has a history of attending radical conferences and distributing inflammatory propaganda against the FBI that includes anti-American imagery. He also spoke at a 9/11 “Truther” event at San Diego State University.

Mohebi’s colleague at CAIR-California is known for saying that fallen American troops should not be honored on Memorial Day, three years in a row, eliciting scorn from genuinely moderate Muslims who appreciate the sacrifices of the U.S. military.

The U.S. Justice Department listed CAIR as a Muslim Brotherhoodfront and unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorism-financing trial in the country’s history. The FBI subsequently made it official policy not to use CAIR as an outreach partner because of evidence linking it to the Hamas terrorist group. The United Arab Emirates, a Muslim country and former supporter of CAIR, designated CAIR as a terrorist group when it banned the Brotherhood.

In 1993, the FBI wiretapped two of CAIR’s founders at a secret Muslim Brotherhood meeting discussing how to lie in order to support Hamas and promote the overall Islamist cause in America. This is part of the reason why federal prosecutors said in a court filing for another terrorism trial:

From its founding by Muslim Brotherhood leaders, CAIR conspired with other affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood to support terrorists…the conspirators agreed to use deception to conceal from the American public their connections to terrorists.

Mohebi is the executive-director of CAIR-San Diego. He wants law enforcement officers who attend the event to be punished by taking away their paid time off and education credits.

Mohebi-AMJA-Conference(1)-380x220As seen in this picture (left), Mohebi traveled all the way to Chicago earlier this year to attend a conference held by the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America, an extremely radical group that issues anti-American fatwas (Islamic legal rulings) in favor of theocracy and terrorism.

One fatwa tells Muslims that they cannot join the FBI or police because they “might have to arrest a Muslim man whose wife said he ‘raped’ her or forced her.”

AMJA teaches that Muslims can lie for the sake of ‘repulsing evil.’ It preaches that Hamas is not a terrorist group and issued a fatwa in 2009 calling for violent jihad against Israel.

As for America, the organization ruled that offensive jihad against the U.S. is not permitted “at this time” because the conditions are not favorable. Interestingly, AMJA chose to only post that fatwa in Arabic and not in English.

Click here for more information on AMJA’s extremism.

Mohebi also posts inflammatory propaganda against the FBI on his Facebook page. In this post pointed out to us by investigative journalist Paul Sperry, Mohebi  urges viewers to distribute an article claiming that the FBI “is actually creating U.S.-based terrorists”:

Mohebi-SpyAnd, in this one, also provided by Paul Sperry, Mohebi writes, “FBI harasses immigrants” accompanied with an anti-American image of a fishhook through the Statue of Liberty on a residency card (see left).

Mohebi’s hostility to the FBI isn’t surprising, considering CAIR’s long history of reflexive characterization of suspected terrorists as innocent victims and portrayal of counter-terrorism efforts as part of a concealed war on Muslims.

 

Sperry also found that Mohebi was listed as a speaker at a 9/11 conspiracy theorist event held in 2011 by the Muslim Students Association (MSA) at San Diego State University. It was advertised by “Muslims for 9/11 Truth.” Mohebi spoke alongside Jesus Nieto, identified on the flyer as a “member of Scholars for 9/11 Truth” and Terry Holdbrooks, who also believes that the U.S. government orchestrated the 9/11 attacks.

Mohebi-Truther-380x472

Part of CAIR’s press release is aimed at discrediting Mauro’s TV segments about Jamaat ul-Fuqra, a group that now goes by the name of Muslims of the Americas. The organization is a cultish extremist group that has carried out terrorist attacks in the past and is led by a radical cleric in Pakistan. Their leader has preached that Jews “are an example of human Satans” and a videotape from 2001-2002 obtained by Mauro shows female members getting guerilla warfare training in upstate New York.

CAIR has been getting closer to the group.  And it isn’t happy about Clarion’s research exposing them.

With a record like this, it’s no wonder that CAIR wants to shut down training by someone who isn’t afraid to call them out. This isn’t about “Islamophobia.” This is about CAIR trying to silence opposition and deter law enforcement who may listen to CAIR’s critics.

(And it also pays well: CAIR’s California branch alone reported a revenue of $2.4 million in 2014 and total net assets of $3.1 million.)

The Middle East Forum has written a well-documented letter to the San Diego chief of police informing him about CAIR and the defamation of Clarion Project and Ryan Mauro.

Click here to send a copy of the letter and this article to the department. 

Also see: