CAIR Attacks Ryan Mauro over ‘Islamic Terrorism’ Police Training

Jessica Gresko/Associated-Press

Jessica Gresko/Associated-Press

Breitbart, by Adelle Nazarian, Aug. 20, 2016:

The San Diego chapter of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) has taken aim at the Clarion Project’s National Security Analyst Ryan Mauro, whom they refer to as an “anti-Muslim conspiracy theorist” and “Islamophobe.”

CAIR, which has been declared a terrorist organization by the United Arab Emirates, and was named by federal prosecutors as an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terror-funding operation, is calling on the San Diego Police Department (SDPD) and other law enforcement agencies in California to prevent officers who attend the “Symposium on Islamic Terrorism” taking place in San Diego between August 24-25 from receiving credit.

In a letter to San Diego Police Department Chief Shelley Zimmerman, CAIR-San Diego Executive Director Hanif Mohebi wrote: “We urge you to ensure that SDPD personnel are warned of the conspiracy theories promoted by the featured speaker, that no taxpayer dollars go to pay for attendance and that any officer who attends in his or her private capacity does not receive continuing education credit.”

Both Mauro and Mohebi spoke exclusively with Breitbart News on Friday.

Mohebi told Breitbart News, “I don’t think that thy should be given credit for attending. It is exactly like if KKK is proving training and then officers go there and get credit for professional development.

“I’m kind of surprised that people who are putting this together are actually OK with this. For me, it is like bringing the head of the KKK to speak about blacks and then claiming that it’s OK. You cannot have a head of KKK come and train the police on blacks. It just doesn’t work,” Mohebi said.

“CAIR is working overtime in trying to influence anyone they can to stop me from speaking and punish anyone who comes to this event at all,” Mauro told Breitbart News. “If police officers attend this event, they will try to get the officer’s education credits taken away.”

He added, “the press release attacks me for talking about the ‘No Go Zones’ on Fox. But what they’re referring to — and this is telling — is the Jamaat ul-Fuqra villages within America. So they are attacking me because they are defending ul-Fuqra which is a ferociously antisemitic cult with a history of terrorism.”

Jamaat ul-Fuqra, which is described as a Pakistani militant group, is known in the United States as “Muslims of America.” It was reportedly founded by a Pakistani named Sheikh Mubarak Ali Gilani; a Sufi cleric.

In its press release, CAIR writes that “Muslim no-go-zones” are a “debunked myth.”

This is not the first time CAIR has targeted Mauro personally. Mauro said he was similarly targeted by CAIR several months ago when he was giving training to police officers in Upstate New York. “They did this in conjunction with the War Resisters League (WRL) — a purely anti-police league.” He said the WRL “even have a ‘No SWAT’ zone” and that both groups’ “statements are filled with deliberate misrepresentations.”

Mohebi told Breitbart News, that Mauro “has proven himself to be an Islamophobe. There have been many agencies that have taken that step to say, ‘Hey we recognize that, and it has been on the release that he simply does not qualify as someone who is not biased.’ I don’t mind if there’s an expert that believes I am wrong. But this is someone who is discredited by Southern Poverty Law Center and keeps saying these things that are not true.”

Mohebi added, “I am afraid, that when professionals from security, whether it’s from SFPD or other law enforcement hear that Muslims are a threat, then the more they see someone like me or others immediately they are thinking this is a threat.”

However, Mauro told Breitbart News, “I include a section about violence directed towards Muslims and the importance of Muslim allies.”

Mohebi told Breitbart News that he had requested the ability to monitor the police training. “I requested the entity that is bringing him to allow us to take part in this to see if there is anything that he says that is not factual. And if we do find something that is not factual, to give us time to clarify. And they did not allow us.”

However, Mauro said, “CAIR is not qualified to be in that session. It’s a law enforcement session and CAIR is not qualified to be there.” The symposium’s website states that the training “is open ONLY to full-time law enforcement. You must present valid law enforcement ID for entry.”

Mauro added: “There is genuine anti-Muslim sentiment out there and I know because I’ve been given info about it by authorities in the past. But groups like CAIR exploit this genuine anti-Muslim sentiment to use it as a political weapon against myself and even other Muslims. If you do not follow groups like CAIR completely, even if you are a a Muslim, they will call you an Islamophobe, and they have done that repeatedly.”

Addressing Mohebi’s analogy of the KKK and religion, Mauro said “The KKK was Christian. But their interpretation sucks. If you want to call the KKK Christian extremists, go ahead, because you need to defeat their ideology just like you need to defeat the ideology of Islamist extremism.”

Also see:

Why We Cannot Defeat the Enemy

20160802_constitution_1_house.govsiteFamily Security Matters, by Eileen F. Toplansky, Aug. 15, 2016:

On August 3, 2016 I was invited to speak on Sean Hannity Radio (Hour 3) concerning my American Thinker piece about Khizr Khan.  The other guest speaker was Richard T. Higgins, who is an outspoken critic about the “faulty strategic assessment that is the basis for current U.S. security” since it is ably enabling our enemies.

Higgins has worked with Steve Coughlin, author of Catastrophic FailureBlindfolding America in the Face of Jihad, and Dr. Sebastian Gorka who is “an internationally recognized authority on issues of national security, irregular warfare, terrorism and democratization and has testified before Congress [.]”

These men have devoted their lives to alerting the American public to the true dangers of Islam.  During the Hannity interview, I explained how Khizr Khan was really symptomatic of a much larger issue — that of hijrah or the deliberate immigration of Muslims to the land of the infidel in order to establish a global caliphate.

As a result of this encounter, Higgins was kind enough to send me his 2010 masters thesis entitled “No Common War” which clearly states that the West’s reliance on technology and science, without taking into consideration the impact of religious zeal, has created a strategic security situation that is being exploited by the Islamic Movement; in other words, the West’s dependence on technology is making us blind to the other non-violent forces of Islam which permeate our society making us ripe for eventual dhimmitude or second-class status in an Islamic society.

In fact, “billions of taxpayer dollars are spent on the development and acquisition of technical solutions to problems, often despite their non-technical nature.”  Higgins  explains that “. . .  while many Muslims may eschew violence, this does not imply that the political threat is neutralized.”   Political warfare from the Islamist perspective concentrates on “collapsing the enemy’s belief system” and it is accomplished in a variety of ways. Until we, as a nation, understand that Islam has developed a myriad of front organizations and has infiltrated our media outlets, as well as our scouting, professional social, and military organizations, we cannot properly defeat them.

As a nation, our security framework does not take the religiously inspired terrorism and its attendant features seriously, believing that the defeat of groups such as ISIS only requires strong military intervention while ignoring the enemy’s true nature, strategy and organization.  Higgins emphasizes that the U.S. needs a new security strategy concept that must account for “religion, non-violent warfare, and the digital operating environment.”  Without comprehending the “theological drivers” of the ongoing Islamic war, the West will be hamstrung in its attempts to overcome this enemy.

The Islamic Movement has developed a deceptive narrative of Islam among non-Muslims as a direct result of digital communication and mass media. They accomplish this through the doctrines of Taqqiya and Slander.  The definition of “slander under shariah or Islamic law is very different than in the U.S. legal system.  Thus, as Claire Lopez explains, “[t]he prohibition on telling harbi (non-Muslim residents of Dar al-Harb, the lands where inhabitants do not live under shariah) anything negative about Islam is meant to keep infidels unaware of the true character and intentions of shariah-promoting Muslims. In fact, telling the actual truth about Islam to non-believers is considered so detrimental to the prospects for shariah Islam to achieve its global domination objectives that Muslims can be subject to punishment if they disclose such things.”  It also “explains why smiling imams in Armani suits with nicely-trimmed beards can be heard speaking in soothing tones to gullible non-Muslims about how shariah is just like the U.S. Constitution, and shariah-adherent Muslims are just like any other citizens of liberal democracies, or Islam really means ‘peace’ – while in Arabic, to Muslim audiences, they don’t hesitate to talk about jihad, suicide bombing, and killing Jews. This is the legally-sanctioned code of silence that is imposed and enforced within Islam and goes hand-in-hand with the Islamic concept of taqiyya (which means deceit or dissimulation).”

In fact, “[i]t is not only forbidden for Muslims to tell anything unflattering about Islam and other Muslims, but it is also obligatory for Muslims to try to get non-Muslims (infidels) to refrain from saying anything about Islam that would deter potential converts or alert others to shariah Islam’s predatory intentions.” Hence, Taqiyya and lying are integral tools for shariah-adherent Muslims to use in dealing with non-believers who do not understand such things.  As a result, members of the clergy, police officers, and government officials who are won over, unwittingly help spread duplicitous messages about shariah Islam inside the non-Muslim society.

So much so, that the West, relying on the concept of freedom of religion is actually creating “self-imposed blinders for U.S. security strategists.”  For example, the fraudulent term Islamophobia now dominates the culture.  Yet this term was created to “leverage the term ‘phobia’ . . . and employ political correctness to silence critics of Islam.” Ultimately it is “intended to frighten sheepish Western politicians.” Hence, we find Andrew Cuomo making the breathtakingly ignorant remark that “shariah is not mainstream Muslim thought” when, in fact, “shariah forms the nucleus of Islam itself.”

As Higgins points out “weapons are powerless against the ‘peaceful’ methods of war.  Guerilla tactics, white and black propaganda, subversion, social and economic manipulation, diplomatic pressure . . . — all of these are immune [.]”  In fact, the key players of the jihadist movement, the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) have managed “to create a counter-factual understanding of Islam by prohibiting criticism of Islam and flattering the West into enforcement of the Islamic Law of Slander upon itself.”  It is truly an amazing feat.  The West refuses to acknowledge that there can be no assimilation of a Muslim population into American society since “Islam transcends their loyalty to the United States.”

Consequently, to truly destroy the Islamic threat, the West must irrevocably understand the core Islamic legal and  political doctrines which are intended to bring down the West.  The U.S. security strategists still know almost nothing about Islam and what they do know are “lies propagated by the enemy to create a counter-factual understanding of Islam.”

Islam “is a threat to the United States because it is not simply a religion; it is a complete way of life that includes an alternative political system harboring values contrary to the immutable principles upon which the U.S. was founded.”

Read more

Bikini Versus Burkini: ‘The Republic Must Defend Itself’

French PM Manuel Valls (Photo: video screenshot)

French PM Manuel Valls (Photo: video screenshot)

Clarion Project, by Leslie Shaw, Aug. 17, 2016:

In an interview with the Marseilles newspaper La Provence published on Wednesday, August 17, French Prime Minister Manuel Valls weighed in on the burkini controversy, stating that he understands and supports the mayors of Cannes, Les Pennes Mirabeau, Sisco and Le Touquet who have issued decrees banning the wearing of the Islamic swimsuit.

“I understand the mayors who, in the current tense climate, had the reflex to look for solutions and avoid breaches of the peace. I support those mayors who have issued decrees, if they are motivated by the will for communities to live in harmony rather than a political agenda.

“Beaches, like all public spaces, must be protected from contentious religious demands. The burkini is not a new range of swimsuit or a fashion. It is the manifestation of a political project, a counter-society founded on the enslavement of women.

“I do not think it necessary to introduce new laws on this question. Before introducing new laws, we will apply the law forbidding the burka in public spaces. We will reassert this law together with the minister of the interior, the prefects and security forces. Muslim authorities must also condemn the full veil and condemn acts of provocation that lead to violent confrontation.”

Mr. Valls went on to say that behind the burkini “is the notion that women, by nature, are indecent and impure and should therefore be totally covered up. This is incompatible with the values of France and of our Republic. Faced with these provocations, the Republic must defend itself.”

He launched a challenge to Muslims, saying that it is up to them and “their authorities, their families, in their personal, professional and social engagements, to declare that they reject this deadly vision of Islam.”

Speaking of the fight that broke out on the beach at the Corsican village of Sisco last weekend, he appealed for calm. “Generally speaking, people should not take the law into their own hands, all the more so in a period where there is a tendency to make hasty generalizations.”

Questioned about the presence in France of imams who preach hatred in certain mosques, Valls replied, “Firstly, some of them are French citizens. As for those who come from outside France and whose discourse of hate is punishable by law, they should be deported. We have already deported 82 of them.

“All of those who promote a discourse contrary to our values will be prosecuted. There will be no compromise with people who call our Republican political system into question. We also need imams who speak French and who are trained in and share our values.”

Valls also called on French Islam and its institutions to take a stand, concluding that his government “will be merciless against those who treat our Muslim fellow-citizens as scapegoats and who see Islam as being responsible for acts of terrorism.”

This tough talk coming from Valls is not surprising given the public outrage surrounding the burkini issue. It is also intended to steal the thunder of the Republican Party and the National Front, especially since Marine Le Pen is running high in opinion polls coming up to the parliamentary and presidential elections in May 2017.

National Front leaders have been railing against the threat posed by Islamic radicalism for years, if not decades, and that discourse has been vindicated in recent times.

The big question is whether mainstream French Islam – if it exists – will step up to the plate and take a stand against the Salafists who, as Valls himself has said, are increasing their influence over the younger generation of French Muslims. Up until now their silence has been deafening, apart from the odd pious condemnation of terrorism, accompanied by the codicil that it has nothing to do with Islam.

As for the burkini issue, it seems that mainstream Islam does not share the views expressed by  Valls, since the CCIF (Collective against Islamophobia in France) challenged the municipal ban in court and lost.

In a TV interview Marwan Muhammad, CCIF director, accused the government of “colonialism” and attacked the mayor of Cannes for discriminating against and “humiliating” Muslim women who wear burkinis, adding that the current controversy is being used to divert attention away from the mayor’s political failures, including his budget deficit.

Leslie Shaw is an Associate Professor at the Paris campus of ESCP Europe Business School and President of FIRM (Forum on Islamic Radicalism and Management).

Report: British Authorities Still Ignoring Massive Pakistani-Led Child Sex Ring

rotherhamWhy bother rescuing thousands of children from rape if it might mean enduring claims of anti-Muslim racism?

The Federalist, by M. G. Oprea Aug. 10, 2016:

A new investigation by the Daily Express has found that the massive Rotherham child sex exploitation ring whose discovery rocked England two years ago is not only still in operation, but is as strong as ever. Reports from social workers, police, residents, and abuse victims all said the same thing: It’s still happening on an “industrial scale.”

In 2014, an independent inquiry led by Alexis Jay, a former senior social worker, found that men of Pakistani origin had groomed at least 1,400 young girls for sexual exploitation over the previous 16 years. These girls, as young as 12, were variously raped, abducted, tortured, and forced into prostitution. Keep in mind, this happened—and is still happening—in the heart of England, not some far-flung banana republic.

The report, known as the Jay Report, found “blatant” failure by city officials and police who didn’t prosecute the well-known and well-documented crime ring out of fear of being accused of racism. So they hushed it up, ignored it, and blamed the victims themselves.

It now appears that, two years and millions of pounds later, little has been done to eradicate the predatory operation. Despite a follow-up report published earlier this year claiming that the sexual exploitation was being addressed “adequately” and that previous failures were “isolated” events, people the Daily Express interviewed paint a very different picture.

Sex Trafficking Rings Across England

A former social worker who works with the victims said there has been a slight improvement in the city but that the scale of the sexual exploitation is still on an “industrial” level. A lawyer who has represented dozens of the young girls involved added that there are now half a dozen “splinter groups” in the town grooming under-aged girls.

This same lawyer is convinced that similar abuse is going on in towns across England, and that local police aren’t taking parents seriously, just they didn’t in Rotherham for years. This is corroborated by reports that authorities have arrested or prosecuted men, mainly of Pakistani origin, operating similar sex rings in 11 towns in England.

This new development raises a number of concerns, one of which is whether authorities continue their inaction from fear of being accused of racism for going after these groups of predominately Pakistani men. One victim who was interviewed by the Daily Express said she knew several other girls who had gone to the police and were told they were being racist.

More Important: Ending Rape or Ending Whining?

It wouldn’t be surprising if this fear were still motivating officials. In 2015, the group British Muslim Youth called on Muslims in Rotherham to cut ties with the police because, they claimed, all Muslims were being painted with the same brush. The Muslim community would “boycott” Muslims who didn’t join with them. According to the BMY, Islamaphobia had risen to “unprecedented levels” after the Jay report was published in 2014, and Muslims were being “demonized.”

It’s entirely possible that Muslims in general took some unfair heat after a scandal like this. But that doesn’t mean the government and police don’t have a solemn responsibility to speak plainly about and take seriously allegations of criminal activity, regardless of the suspects’ profile.

This line of reasoning always creeps up when criticism of Muslims or Islam arises. Try to talk about the dangers of Islamism and its clear link to terrorism, or the consequences of mass Muslim immigration, and one is liable to be branded a bigot and told one’s making the problem worse by encouraging a backlash against the Muslim community.

The London Times, which first broke the story of one of the victims and her abusers in 2013, was subsequently accused of being racist because it implicated Pakistani men in the scandal. This confirmed the fears of some Rotherham officials that many would not welcome prosecutions and arrests of Pakistanis. These kinds of overreactions from Muslim activists are exactly what scares police and government officials, discouraging them from investigating and prosecuting crimes committed by their Muslim immigrant population.

This Is a Widespread Problem

It isn’t just happening in Britain. The same phenomenon can be seen across the European continent. German officials repeatedly tried to cover up the mass sexual assaults that occurred on New Year’s Eve in cities across the country. First, they tried to keep what had happened out of the news, then insisted it had nothing to do with migrants or men from Muslim-majority countries. When it finally came out that the attackers were, in fact, predominately from the Middle East and North Africa, German officials tried to downplay the extent of the attacks. To the German government’s chagrin, news broke just last month that there were many more assaults than previously thought—more than 1,200 victims and more than 2,000 attackers.

We can get an insight into the motivations behind these kinds of official cover-ups by looking at a less well-known example. In January, a left-wing German politician was raped in a playground by three men speaking Arabic or Farsi. When she reported the crime to the police, she lied and said the men were speaking German. Twelve hours later she went back and told the truth, claiming she hadn’t wanted to create “more hatred against migrants in Germany.”

In all these cases, the truth didn’t conform with the official narrative about Muslim immigration: that everything’s going swimmingly. In reality, the unwillingness of the government, politicians, and police to confront crime committed by the Muslim immigrant population is a sign that Europe has a deep and troubling integration crisis on its hands. Europe can’t integrate immigrants if it doesn’t hold them to the same standards as the native European population.

Equality Under the Law Matters

There are ominous signs this failure of integration is being transferred to the younger generation of immigrants. In the Rotherham case, it appears that it’s no longer just older Pakistani men who are targeting these young girls. It’s now also the girls’ peers.

If European law enforcement agencies give immigrants from Muslim countries special treatment, the consequences on all fronts will only be harmful. It will fuel far-right groups, allow crime to go unchecked, and create more strife between Muslims and non-Muslims. It also infantilizes Muslim communities by treating them as too fragile to be held to the social and legal expectations of their new home.

This failure of integration has been going on for decades and is now reaching a fevered pitch. Europe sowed these seeds of discord long ago and now it’s seeing the fruits. Many immigrants and their families have done just fine in Europe. But as we’re seeing almost weekly, many have not.

Rotherham is a particular disgrace because it shows that once again multiculturalism trumps everything, including the safety of young girls. The shocking revelations about Rotherham two years ago should have resulted in a final repudiation of European political correctness. Sadly, it didn’t. And some of England’s most vulnerable residents are paying the price.

Ibtihaj Muhammad: Meet USA’s America-Hating, Jew-Hating, Racist Olympian & Over-Hyped “Heroine”

ibtihajmuhammadobama

By Debbie Schlussel, Aug. 9, 2016:

Don’t believe the hype about Ibtihaj Muhammad, the US Olympic Team’s fencer, who is being hailed merely because she is Muslim and wears a hijab–the Muslim headscarf of oppression and misogyny. Muhammad is an America-hater, a Jew-hater, and a racist bigot who despises White people.

Barack and Michelle Hussein Obama hail her, merely because she is Muslim and wears a hijab. So does the rest of the media, including hypocritical “women’s” magazines (which teach women to act like sluts and whine about the Republican “war on women” but worship at the altar of the world’s most severely anti-female and subjugating religion). And when the morons who make up the U.S. Olympic Team voted on who would carry the American flag at the Zikalympics opening ceremonies in Rio, Muhammad came in second (which earned her a spot at the front of the pack). These idiots who are great at summer sports, are also great at buying into White guilt over Islam and lacking a critical mass of brain cells.

I don’t know about you, but I’m sick of hearing about Muhammad and how she is some sort of “saint” merely because she is from the religion of terrorists and plane hijackers. I’m sick of hearing the media give this spoiled brat a forum to tell us how “evil” we Americans are, when we subsidized her Life of Riley in which she spends all day practicing fencing. I’m sick of hearing how bigoted we are because she is a Muslim and we paid for her to go to Rio and bask in unearned glory merely because she is involved in a country club sport that nobody cares about or pays to see. And I’m sick of hearing from this bigoted Jew-hater about how “America has work to do.”

Um, Ms. Thang Ibtihaj, you have work to do. A LOT of it. Sadly, courtesy of a lot of people you hate, for the 30 years you’ve been alive, you’ve never had to work a day in your life.

Here are the Cliff’s Notes on Ms. Muhammad you should know. Her parents are converts to Islam, who joined via the racist, bigoted Nation of Islam, which–to date–embraces Black supremacism, Jew-hatred, and White-hatred. But you never hear the media ask her to denounce it. Instead, you only hear the media tell us how much of a “victim” this Islamo-narcissist is to some unnamed “bigotry” she alleged suffers. It’s scary that her father, Eugene Muhammad, was a police officer. Would the New Jersey police department that hired him also hire a member of the Ku Klux Klan? Don’t bet on it. Also, don’t bet on the media asking Muhammad to denounce the Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan’s history of racist, bigoted statements. This is all aside, mind you, from the fact that Islam is the religion that sold Blacks into slavery–something no one ever asks her about.

She is Black, Muslim, and female, so she gets a triple-pass away from and out of any accountability for her deeds and statements. And that’s why she gets away with a lot of bigotry.

For starters, Muhammad is a HAMAS supporter and a believer in jihad. She hates Israel. She hates Jews and supports their genocide. And since she supports HAMAS, why isn’t the media asking her to condemn HAMAS’ “creative” executions of gays–throwing them off high-rise buildings, dragging them alive via motorcycle to disintegrate to blood and guts on the streets, etc.? Why doesn’t the media ask her to denounce HAMAS’ anti-Semitic charter?

ibtihajmuhammadtweetjews.jpg

(Thanks to FB Friend Charles Telerant for the Tip. Join Me on Facebook.)

That “report” has been highly discredited and debunked as a total fraud, by the way.

Sorry, but this Olympic “victim” of bigotry is no victim at all. She’s a perpetrator.

Then, there is her hatred of White people. Check out her tweet about the “history” of Black-White relations. You know–those evil White people who gave this kalbeh a life of privilege from cradle to date. Those White people who funded her full scholarship and free ride to Duke. Those White people who mostly paid the taxes that funded the non-taxable free ride she got from the U.S. Olympic Committee to spend her days fencing and running a “modesty” fashion company (while she wears decidedly immodest gobs of makeup on her face).

ibtihajmuhammadtweetwhites

Muhammad also hates America, which gave her every opportunity imaginable. She criticizes America in every single interview. Sadly, that same America–via the hypocritical, fraudulent minions of imbeciles at the Hillary/Kerry/Obama State Department–continues to throw gobs of cash at this ingrate, making Muhammad a U.S. State Department sports ambassador, traveling the world on your dime for the Empowering Women and Girls Through Sport Initiative.

One wonders what she tells these women and girls, given that she was quoted in USA Today at a news conference about “the state of [America] for Muslim citizens and her experience living as a Muslim in the USA,” saying, “We as a country have to change.” We do? Muslims have more rights in America than in any other nation on earth (except Israel). Maybe that should change, since the Muslim religion has shown its gratitude by flying planes into buildings, shooting up military bases, workplaces, and gay clubs, and beheading co-workers (not to mention trying to blow up planes with underwear).

Why does the media celebrate her donning of a hijab? It’s funny how the liberal media looks the other way and runs scared from making any comment on the sole reason she’s wearing this ridiculous headscarf. It’s about hatred of women. Muslim men believe that everything about women, including their hair might turn a man on and justify his rape of her. Muslim men don’t believe they must reign in their libidinous impulses in any way. Instead, women must cover up every single inch, lest they be mistaken for unwrapped “meat,” open and asking for the raping.

Yet, somehow, this woman’s garb that is the very symbol of male hatred of women is something the most feminist and left-wing in the media celebrate. Because they are hypocrites and frauds.

But we don’t have to be. If you are watching the Zikalympics, you are supporting this crap. The U.S. Olympic Committee and the actual Olympic Games organizers get zillions from the broadcast rights. They are also the same organizations that refuse, still to this day, to memorialize the Israeli Olympic athletes who were slaughtered by Muslim terrorists at the Munich Games in 1972. Instead of remembering these athletes whose lives were taken from them merely because they were Jews, the Olympic Games not only rewarded Muslim Jew-haters with legions of teams, but they now give them an extra team: the official Olympic Muslim Team a/k/a “The Olympic Refugee Team.”

If you are watching the Olympics, that’s what you’re supporting.

And you are supporting the unearned, undeserved hype for a racist, anti-Semitic bigot.

Her name is Ibtihaj Muhammad. And she’s being honored without any achievement of distinction merely because she is a prominent equal opportunity hater in a religion of hate.

Don’t forget . . .

Only Black Muslim Olympians’ Lives Matter.

Also see:

Rio 2016 has thus far been rife with American athletic achievements, with Michael Phelps reclaiming a gold medal in the freestyle relay and swimmer Katie Ledecky smashing a world record in the 400m freestyle. Shortly after Ledecky claimed victory, she cited her Catholic faith as a “very important” influence in her life. The mainstream will never celebrate Ledecky’s profession of faith at the Olympics like they have Muhammad’s.

Watch BUSTED! JEW-HATING ZORRO, Facebook Live with Tom Trento today at Noon

Islam’s “Quiet Conquest” of Europe

Gatestone Institute, by Giulio Meotti, August 10, 2016:

  • “Islam is a French religion and the French language is a language of Islam.” — Tariq Ramadan.
  • In 1989, Dalil Boubakeur, rector of the Grand Mosque of Paris, justified the persecution of Salman Rushdie by Ayatollah Khomeini. Last year, Boubakeur called for the conversion of churches into mosques.
  • In Britain, mainstream Muslim organizations are dispensing “Islamic justice” through more than 85 sharia courts attached to mosques.
  • Civil war in France is what the Islamic State is looking for: unleashing a blind repression so that the Muslim population will show solidarity with the revolutionary minority. Yet, there is still worse possible outcome: that nothing happens and we continue as is.
  • Real “moderate Muslims” are silenced or murdered.

Last month, the Wall Street Journal published an interview with France’s director of domestic intelligence, Patrick Calvar. “The confrontation is inevitable,” Mr. Calvar said. There are an estimated 15,000 Salafists among France’s seven million Muslims, “whose radical-fundamentalist creed dominates many of the predominantly Muslim housing projects at the edges of cities such as Paris, Nice or Lyon. Their preachers call for a civil war, with all Muslims tasked to wipe out the miscreants down the street.”

These Salafists openly challenge France’s way of life and do not make a secret of their willingness to overthrow the existing order in Europe through violent means, terror attacks and physical intimidation. But paradoxically, if the Islamists’ threat to Europe were confined to the Salafists, it would be easier to defeat it.

There is in fact another threat, even more dangerous because it is more difficult to decipher. It has just been dubbed by the magazine Valeurs Actuelles,the quiet conquest“. It is “moderate” Islam’s sinuous project of producing submission. “Its ambition is clear: changing French society. Slowly but surely”.

That threat is personified in the main character of Michel Houellebecq’s novel, Submission: Mohammed Ben Abbes, the “moderate” Muslim who becomes France’s president and converts the state to Islam. And from where does President Ben Abbes start his Islamization? The Sorbonne University. It is already happening: Qatar recently made a significant donation to this famous university, to sponsor the education of migrants.

In France, the quiet conquest has the face of the Union of the Islamic Organizations of France (UOIF), which a Simon Wiesenthal Center report charged with “anti-Semitism, advocacy and financing of terrorism and call to Jihad… ”

Not only does UOIF not encourage the integration of Moslems in France,” the report states, “it actually provides a nursery for the most radical Islamist positions.”

In Italy we have just witnessed the strategy of this “moderate Islam.” The largest and most influential Islamic organization, l’Unione delle comunità ed organizzazione islamiche in Italia (Ucoii), sponsored Milan’s first Muslim councilwoman, Sumaya Abdel Qader, a veiled candidate of the center-left coalition. Qader’s husband, Abdallah Kabakebbji, openly called for the destruction of the State of Israel: “It is a historical mistake, a scam”, he wrote on Facebook. His solution? “Ctrl + Alt + Delete”.

Qader won the race over a real moderate Muslim, the unveiled Somali activist, Maryan Ismail. I met Mrs. Ismail at a pro-Israel forum in Milan. After losing the election, she broke with Italy’s Democratic Party in an open letter: “The Democratic Party has chosen to dialogue with obscurantist Islam. Once again, the souls of modern, plural and inclusive Islam were not heard”.

Take two “stars” of this French “moderate Islam.” The first one is Tariq Ramadan, the grandson of Hassan al-Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, the motto of which is: “Allah is our objective; the Prophet is our leader; the Quran is our law; Jihad is our way; dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.”

Ramadan does not hide in Raqqa or shoot at French citizens. By applying for French citizenship, he would like to become one of them. His office is in the Parisian suburb of Saint Denis; he has written 30 books and he has two million Facebook followers. Ramadan has academic chairs all over the world, he is the director of the Research Center for Islamic Law in Doha (Qatar) and the president of the European Muslim Network. He publicly campaigns for Islam along with Italy’s former prime minister, Massimo D’Alema. Ramadan recently explained his vision for Europe and France: “Islam is a French religion and the French language is a language of Islam”.

Ramadan’s project is not the hoped-for Europeanization of Islam, but the not-hoped-for frightful Islamization of Europe. He opposes the assimilation of Muslims into French culture and society. A few days before the election in Milan, Ramadan was in Italy to endorse the candidacy of Sumaya Abdel Qader.

The second French “star” is Dalil Boubakeur, the rector of the Grand Mosque of Paris. In 1989, Boubakeur justified the persecution of Salman Rushdie by Ayatollah Khomeini. In 2002, he testified for the prosecution against the writer Michel Houellebecq. In 2006, he sued Charlie Hebdo in court, after the publication of the Danish Mohammed cartoons. Last year, Boubakeur called for the conversion of churches into mosques and asked to “double” the number of mosques in France.

Dalil Boubakeur, rector of the Grand Mosque of Paris, last year called for the conversion of churches into mosques and asked to “double” the number of mosques in France. (Image source: TV5 Monde)

In the United Kingdom, mainstream Muslim organizations are dispensing “Islamic justice” through more than 85 sharia courts attached to mosques. Divorce, polygamy, adultery and wife-beating are only some of these courts’ matters of jurisprudence. In Germany, vice-chancellor Sigmar Gabriel criticized Saudi Arabia for financing Islamic extremism in Europe. It is the same kingdom which last year offered to build 200 new mosques in Germany.

Qatar, with its Al Jazeera television megaphone, is also very active in sponsoring Muslim Brotherhood Islamic radicalism all over Europe. The Qatari royal family, for example, in 2015 donated £11 million to Oxford’s St. Anthony’s College, where Tariq Ramadan teaches. Qatar also announced that it was willing to spend $65 million in the French suburbs, home to the vast majority of the six million Muslims in France.

Today in Europe, several scenarios are possible, including the worst. Among them, there is a civil war, which many are beginning to talk about, including Patrick Calvar, the director of domestic intelligence. This is what the Islamic State is looking for: unleashing a blind repression so that the Muslim population will show solidarity with the revolutionary minority. Yet, there is still worse possible outcome: that nothing happens and we continue as is.

The end is more important than the means. The Islamic State has the same goal as most of the members of so-called “moderate Islam”: domination under the sharia. Many supposedly “moderate Muslims”, even if they do not commit violent acts themselves, support them quietly. They support them by not speaking out against them. If they do speak out against them, they usually do so in coded terms, such as that they are “against terrorism,” or that what concerns them about violent acts by Muslims is the possibility of a “backlash” against them.

Violent jihadis, however, are not the only means of transforming Europe, and perhaps are even counterproductive: they could awaken the nations they attack. Soft and more discreet means, such as social pressure and propaganda, are even more dangerous, and possibly even more effective: they are harder to see, such as the West’s acceptance of dual judiciary and legal systems; sharia finance (if there had been a “Nazi finance” system, in which all financial transactions went to strengthening the Third Reich, what effect might that have had on World War II?), and the proliferation in the West of mosques and extremist Islamic websites. Although there are indeed many real “moderate Muslims”, there are also still many who are not.

To conservative Muslims, however, any Muslim who does not accept every word of Allah — the entire Koran — is not a true Muslim, and is open to charges of “apostasy”, the punishment for which is death. According to a leading Sunni theologian, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, based in Qatar, “If they [Muslims] had gotten rid of the punishment for apostasy, Islam would not exist today.”

That is why the late writer Oriana Fallaci once said to The New Yorker: “I do not accept the mendacity of the so-called Moderate Islam”. That is why real “moderate Muslims” are silenced or murdered.

This might summarize the current Islamic mainstream mentality: “Dear Europeans, continue to think about a shorter working week, early retirement, abortion on demand and adultery in the afternoon. With your laws, we will conquer you. With our laws, we will convert you”.

Giulio Meotti, Cultural Editor for Il Foglio, is an Italian journalist and author.

CAIR’s Deceptive Video About Islamist Deception

From CAIR's new video about the Islamic concept of taqiyya (Photo: Video screenshot)

From CAIR’s new video about the Islamic concept of taqiyya (Photo: Video screenshot)

Clarion Project, by Ryan Mauro, Aug. 10, 2016:

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), identified as a Muslim Brotherhood front by the U.S. government, has released a new video through its Michigan chapter that ironically uses deception to allay worries about Islamist deception.

The video featuring CAIR-MI Executive Director Dawud Walid says that “anti-Muslim bigots” who “sow the seeds of distrust about Muslims and Islam” are incorrect in referencing taqiyya, an Islamic doctrine permitting deception. Some Sunnis reject taqiyya as being Shiite in origin, but doctrines of deception nonetheless exist and are used by Islamists from either branch of Islam.

Walid says that taqiyya “gives permission for individuals to conceal some of their thoughts or beliefs due to extremely dire circumstances,” such as a Muslim who worships a false idol under threat of torture or death.

He later says it can only be done for “saving one’s life.” However, since Muslims believe they are part of one ummah or community, it is implied that lying to save another Muslim’s life is permissible.

The problem is that Islamists believe they are working to save other Muslims from “extremely dire circumstances.” And, of course, an Islamist is permitted to lie to protect his own life from repercussions like jail time.

If you think that is an unfair parsing of words, look at what CAIR—the source of this video–has done and said.

The Justice Department identified CAIR as an entity of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood when the Holy Land Foundation was prosecuted for financing Hamas. CAIR was labeled as an unindicted co-conspirator in that trial. The Muslim country of the United Arab Emirates ended its support of CAIR when it banned the Muslim Brotherhood and designated CAIR as a terrorist group.

The FBI wiretapped two of CAIR’s founders at a secret Brotherhood/Hamas meeting in 1993 where the leading participants were recorded explicitly discussing advancing the Islamist agenda through deception. They discussed forming a new non-profit with a clean trail for this purpose. Here is a partial transcript of the exchange:

“Holy Land Foundation leader Shukri Abu Baker: I swear by your God that war is deception. War is deception. We are fighting our enemy with a kind heart and we never thought of deceiving it. War is deception. Deceive, camouflage, pretend that you’re leaving while you’re walking that way. Or do we have to be…Deceive your enemy.”

CAIR founder Omar Ahmad: This is like one who plays basketball; he makes a player believe that he is doing this while he does something else…UI. I agree with you. Like they say; politics is a completion of war.

Holy Land Foundation leader Shukri Abu Baker: Yes, politics—like war—is deception.”

This exchange 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.

Dawud Walid, the CAIR official in the video about deception, has a history of inflammatory statements that include repeated deceptive characterizations of law enforcement, including accusing the FBI of “basically cultivating and inciting people towards extremism” and “manufacturing their own terrorism suspects to give the appearance that they’re actually doing something tangible in the so-called ‘War on Terrorism.’”

He has also accused the U.S. of undermining the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and made comments disparaging Independence Day and Memorial Day, including being quoted by another CAIR official as suggesting fallen U.S. troops should not be honored. You can read more in our profile of CAIR’s Michigan chapter.

This deception is justified by Islamist doctrine beyond the concept of taqiyya.

The Reliance of the Traveler is an authoritative manual on sharia law endorsed by Al-Azhar University (the top school of learning in Sunni Islam), the U.S.-based Muslim Brotherhood front International Institute of Islamic Thought and the Fiqh Council of North America, a section of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA). It teaches that Muslims first preference should be to tell the truth, followed by “employ[ing] words to give a misleading impression,” followed by lying if it is for a “praiseworthy aim.”

In such cases where the objective cannot be achieved truthfully, it is “obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory.” Accompanying examples include lying to an “oppressor” about where a Muslim is located or lying to someone who is trying to stop a Muslim from performing an obligatory act.

In word and in deed, CAIR has shown us that it believes in using deception for its cause. The latest video is a deceptive attempt to make you unconcerned about the deception it practices.

Muslim-American Olympian Criticizes her Country

muslimolympics_1470557862401_3289875_ver1.0_640_360

How Ibtihaj Muhammad describes life in America for Muslims.

Front Page Magazine, by Joseph Klein, Aug. 9, 2016:

A Muslim-American woman competing in the 2016 Olympics in Rio, Ibtihaj Muhammad, made history as the first American Olympic participant to wear a hijab while competing. The fencer won her first round, then lost in a second round. She is due to take part in a team competition later on during the Olympics. However, with all the media attention she has received to date for wearing the hijab and speaking out as a Muslim advocate against her country’s treatment of Muslims as well as against Donald Trump, you would think she had already won the gold.

Rather than focus on the fact that she was representing America as part of Team USA, Ms. Muhammad chose to distance herself from her fellow Americans. Before the competition even began, she complained about not feeling safe in America because she was a Muslim. She has been whining about how she feels threatened because of her faith, and has politicized the Olympic Games with derogatory comments regarding Donald Trump’s candidacy for president.

Considering that “anti-Semitic crimes accounted for roughly 60 percent of religious hate crimes last year,” according to a 2015 Washington Post report, and “anti-Muslim crimes now make up about 13 percent of religiously-motivated hate crimes,” the Jewish-American Olympic competitors would have had more reason to speak out about not feeling safe in America. However, they are in Rio to compete for the gold on behalf of their country, not to trash it.

“I wish that, not just my life, but the lives of Muslims all over the world were a little bit easier, particularly in the United States,” Ms. Muhammad was quoted by the Associated Press as saying after arriving in Rio for the competition.  (Emphasis added.) “I’m hoping that with my first-time appearance as a member of Team USA here at the Olympics, I’m hoping that the rhetoric around the Muslim community will change.”

This is a woman who had the opportunity to meet with President Obama and even offer the First Lady a fencing lesson. Indeed, Ibtihaj Muhammad has lived the American dream. She graduated from a top school, Duke University, where she attended on a scholarship. To fund her ambitions to become a world class fencer, she worked as a substitute teacher and fencing coach. She also founded her own clothing line Louella. And she has gotten some big name corporate endorsements. She missed qualifying for the 2012 Olympics, but continued working hard to make the 2016 team, which, to her credit, she succeeded in doing.

Explaining her primary motivation for going after a spot on the 2016 team, Ibtihaj Muhammad focused on her attachment to the Muslim community, not simply on the honor to represent America. She said, “When I heard that there had never been a Muslim woman on the U.S. team to wear the hijab, that is when I made this conscious decision to go for 2016.” She added: “I am excited to represent not just myself, my family and my country – but also the greater Muslim community.”

 If Ms. Muhammad were truly interested in representing “the greater Muslim community,” she should use her celebrity status to speak out against the atrocious living conditions of women in Saudi Arabia, Iran and other Muslim majority countries.

Did Ms. Muhammad by chance have the opportunity to speak with any of the very few female competitors from Saudi Arabia, for example? That devout Muslim country discriminates against its own female population, all under the banner of Islam’s sharia law. It is allowing just four women athletes to compete in the Olympics this year, after having received an ultimatum from Olympic authorities in 2012. At home in Saudi Arabia, women are not even allowed to attend national team competitions as spectators, let alone participate in any tournaments or state organized sports leagues of their own. “Our society can be very conservative,” said Prince Fahad bin Jalawi al-Saud, a consultant to the Saudi Olympic Committee. “It has a hard time accepting that women can compete in sports.”

More generally, there is strict gender segregation in Saudi Arabia. And merely wearing a hijab head cover would not be enough to keep a woman out of trouble for dressing too immodestly.

In commenting on the recent spate of Islamic terrorism, Ms. Muhammad blamed it on an “unhealthy situation” caused by “(M)isunderstanding of religion, of what different societies need in order to thrive.” It would appear that Ms. Muhammad has a basic misunderstanding of the doctrines in her own religion that have fueled violent jihad around the world.

As an example of political correctness run amok, there was mounting pressure on Michael Phelps, who was elected by his teammates to serve as flag bearer in the opening ceremonies of the Olympics, to decline the honor in favor of Ibtihaj Muhammad, who came in second in the voting. Various media outlets called for Phelps to yield. Perhaps the most ridiculous article was a CNN op-ed piece addressed to Phelps by W. Kamau Bell, in which the author says that “America has enough tall, successful, rich white guys hogging the spotlight” and that “Muhammad carrying the flag would be nearly a one-stop inclusion shop.”

The Olympics should be all about sports competition for the top prize based on merit. It should not be about religious faiths or domestic politics. Phelps, the most decorated Olympian of all time, earned the honor to carry the flag on behalf of the United States. Muhammad has not earned that honor, unless being Muslim, wearing a hijab while competing and trashing her country constitute the new standard of “excellence.”

Joseph Klein is a Harvard-trained lawyer and the author of Global Deception: The UN’s Stealth Assault on America’s Freedom and Lethal Engagement: Barack Hussein Obama, the United Nations & Radical Islam.

Also see:

Information Dominance: A Snapshot of the War

“I say to you that we are in a battle, and that more than half of this battle is taking place in the battlefield of the media.”

2005 Letter from Dr. Ayman al Zawahiri, current leader of Al Qaeda

Understanding the Threat, by John Guandolo, Aug. 7, 2016:

As UTT has reported on numerous occasions, for both the Global Islamic Movement and the Marxist/Socialist movement, the primary focus is in the information domain (propaganda, deception operations, etc).

For the Global Islamic Movement’s leading edge – the Muslim Brotherhood – their methodology is “Civilization Jihad” by OUR hands. They get our leaders and key organizations to do their work for them.

Getting the U.S. State Department to write the constitutions for Iraq and Afghanistan (2005) which created Islamic states under sharia – thus fulfilling Al Qaeda’s objectives in those nations – and getting a four-star U.S. general (Petraeus) to go on international television to condemn a U.S. citizen for exercising his First Amendment rights to burn a book (the Koran) – thus enforcing the Islamic law of “Slander” – are two simple examples.

At the Democratic National Convention, Khizr Khan played his role knowing full well there would be a predictable response from Mr. Trump.  A response for which our enemies were prepared.

AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite

AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite

Republican leadership and people in the Trump campaign did not even have fore-knowledge of Mr. Khan’s participation in the convention and, thus, did not do their due diligence or conduct a basic background investigation on Mr. Khan to prepare for a response.

They were operationally blind.

Mr. Trump made statements regarding Mr. Khan and his wife, and the trap was sprung.  It was not Hillary Clinton nor the Democrat Party that fired the first salvo at Trump Headquarters.

Mr. Trump was hammered by Gold Star mothers, the VFW, Republican leaders, and others.  This was a home run for the enemy.

This is warfare in the information domain.  This is “political warfare,” and is never done willy nilly.  It has purpose, and is a part of a larger strategy.

There is also an abundance of evidence Mr. Khan is an agent of a foreign power (Pakistan) who just conducted an extremely well-executed information operation against a U.S. Presidential candidate.

All the players responded as predicted, and all patriotic Americans should be gravely concerned.

If the Trump campaign does not figure this out quickly, his supporters will be separated, pitted against each other, and dissipated.  The enemy is engaging in the information warfare battlespace, and the Trump campaign appears oblivious to it.

In 2012, Michele Bachmann courageously led the charge in Congress and put forth evidence from the largest terrorism trials in American history revealing massive Muslim Brotherhood penetration of the federal government.  She called for key Inspector Generals offices to investigate.

The attack on her came from Senators Marco Rubio and John McCain, and other prominent Republican leaders.

Civilization Jihad by OUR hands.

Khizr Khan is a suit-wearing jihadi.  He adheres to sharia, and believes in submitting the world to sharia (Islamic law).  Mr. Khan has written clearly that sharia must be followed to the letter and the Koran “is the absolute authority from which springs the very conception of legality and every legal obligation.”

This is, by the way, in direct contradiction of American law and government, the foundation of which are the “Law of Nature” and “Nature’s God,” not sharia.  Americans should know this the next time Mr. Khan waves a copy of our Constitution in our faces.

For more on “Sharia” see the UTT article HERE.

If we are to truly understand the threat we face from the Global Islamic Movement and the Marxist/Socialist movement, we must know their primary battlefield is in the media, not on a piece of open ground on which tanks and troops engage each other.

Largest Christian charity infiltrated by Hamas

Hamas terrorists

Hamas terrorists

WND, by Leo Hohmann, Aug. 5, 2016:

Mohammed El Halabi, an employee of World Vision, the world’s largest evangelical Christian charity, has been charged in Israel with funneling tens of millions of dollars to the military wing of Hamas, a designated international terrorist organization affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood.

The arrest was made June 16, according to the Israeli daily Haaretz, but a gag order on the case files was lifted Wednesday and Halabi was indicted Thursday. The indictment reveals details of how Hamas infiltrated Federal Way, Washington-based World Vision, a global Christian outreach active in nearly 100 countries.

Halabi, director of World Vision’s Gaza branch, was detained at the Erez crossing in Israel as he was headed back to Gaza on his way home from “routine meetings,” several Israeli news outlets were reporting.

Halabi was being held since June “without access to legal counsel or family visits,” which is normal procedure in Israel for prisoners charged with terrorist-related crimes.

Last Friday, when El Halabi’s detention had been extended until Aug. 2, World Vision’s eastern Jerusalem office released a statement calling for his release:

“World Vision stands by Mohammad who is a widely respected and well-regarded humanitarian, field manager and trusted colleague of over a decade. He has displayed compassionate leadership on behalf of the children and communities of Gaza through difficult and challenging times, and has always worked diligently and professionally in fulfilling his duties.”

But Halabi only used his “humanitarian” mask as cover for his Islamist work, according to the prosecution’s presentation Thursday in Beer Sheva District Court.

The prosecutor described him as a Hamas activist who has been using his high position in the charity to systematically divert millions of dollars to the military arm of Hamas, financing, among other things, the digging of terror tunnels, the Jewish Press reported.

The secret terrorist funding, according to Thursday’s indictment, was taken out of donations and resources that had been dedicated to humanitarian assistance for Palestinians living in the Gaza Strip. The indictment includes 12 counts of security violations of passing information to the enemy, membership in a terror organization, funding terrorism, participation in an unlawful association, and contact with foreign agents.

Hamas has controlled the Gaza Strip since Palestinian elections were held in 2006.

Hamas is the Palestinian wing of the Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist organization whose goal is to inspire Muslims worldwide to return to the roots of their faith as spelled out in the Quran and create a global caliphate under Shariah law.

The fact that the Brotherhood has infiltrated the world’s largest international Christian aid group, World Vision, confirms the worst fears of Brotherhood experts such as Dr. Mark Christian, a former imam with family ties to the Brotherhood who left his native Egypt in 2003.

“From the Brotherhood’s point of view there is nothing better than to deceive and get involved with organizations that make it look like they are going to help the poor kids of Gaza when in reality no kid is getting helped and it is all going to the terrorist actions to kill Jews,” said Christian, who heads up the Global Faith Institute based in Omaha, Nebraska.

Christian said World Vision started out in 1950 as a great organization focused on helping missionaries out in the field “and to really do the good work of Christ.”

But the organization started changing in the 1970s, he said.

“And I think that is a key dividing line in history,” Christian said. “That’s when you started seeing Christian leaders becoming more accepting of other religions, and the Muslim Brotherhood around that same time started to internationalize their mission of spreading Islamism around the world and they discovered they could deceive a lot of these naïve Christian leaders.”

World Vision today has an annual budget of more than $2 billion and its top executive, Richard Stearns, was paid a salary of $380,000 in 2013, among the top nonprofit salaries in the country that year.

“And you see the direction of the organization itself change from a Christian missionary organization to now more of a global anti-poverty agency that says ‘yeah we are doing this great work but we are not going to evangelize the world,’ and you see that reflected in their generic slogans that appeal to the donors but is not really doing the work of Christ and the Great Commission,” Christian said.

World Vision’s slogan is “Our vision for every child, life in all its fullness; our prayer for every heart, the will to make it so.”

Read more

Also see:

How to do Dawah – A Guide

d642b0_70ec316a6f78445f918e867394e136fc-mv2

We Need to Talk About Islam, by Harriet Taylor, August 1, 2016:

Having studied the methods of those operating Dawah stalls, I have compiled a short training manual of Handy Hints for those who wish to ‘Do Dawah’. It also acts as a self-defence manual for those interacting with their friendly neighbourhood High Street Dawah stall.

1. Have large banners proclaiming in massive letters that Islam has nothing whatsoever to do with any violence, with terrorism, with suicide bombings. This will draw people in, especially those anxious to believe that stuff about Islam being a religion of peace.

2. However, your main goal is to convert people. So, have one leaflet about terrorism, but make sure that all your other leaflets and books are just all about Islam. It’s just a bait-and-switch to get them hooked.

3. When a person approaches the stall, quickly establish what religious faith they are, if any. You can use this base from which to argue. For added impact, if they say they are atheist, say you used to be an atheist, if they say they are Christian, say you used to be Christian. Then, if the person is Christian or Jewish, you can say that Moses and Jesus are prophets in Islam, and claim that Islam is just a continuation of their religion, only better. If the person is an atheist or agnostic, simply throw any accusation you like at Christianity, and say that Islam has the perfect solution. They will eagerly believe whatever crap you tell them about how awful Christianity is.

4. If the person knows little about the origins of Islam, explain that Islam is a peaceful religion and that Mohammed only fought the occasional skirmish after being attacked and persecuted viciously by marauding and jealous Jews. You can litter your spiel with references to ‘pagans’ and ‘Jews’ at random, because most people won’t know enough about the history to be able to call you out on that.

5. If the person is ignorant of the Quran and other Islamic texts, you can tell them more or less anything – they came over because they were eager to believe that Islam is a religion of peace, so say that the Quran gives rights for women, that it prohibits the taking of innocent life, that Allah is merciful, that Islam tolerates other religions, and so on and forth.

6. If the person seems to know something of the historical origins of Islam, then any time they bring up a relevant fact, cast scorn upon it. Helpful strategies include, ‘I never heard of that battle’, ‘Mohammed was persecuted by the pagans,’ ‘What year did that battle take place?’ ‘What are your sources for that?’ ‘That’s not in Islamic history you must be reading it somewhere else’. (NB, we’ve found from experience that ‘You must agree the pagans deserved to be punished’ does not work terribly well with contemporary Westerners.) If the person mentions sex slavery, say, ‘but there were no battles prior to Medina so how could there have been sex slaves then?’, distracting your questioner by completely ignoring the obvious point that this implies that there were sex slaves later and does not actually answer the question about sex slaves at all.

7. If the person refers to facts about the life of Mohammed, offer them a booklet you have handy purporting to be a biography of Mohammed. If the person proclaims, ‘That’s not a full biography of Mohammed, it’s really short, what’s been left out?’, then look stunned, and say repeatedly, ‘This is Mohammed’s biography’, pointing to the chapter headings which all refer to how peaceful he was.

8. If the person seems to have read the Quran, tell them that ‘I never heard of that in the Quran, what chapter and verse is that?’, or ask, ‘What translation of the Quran do you use?’, recoil at their reply and snort, ‘That is a terrible translation, full of errors.’

9. If the person mentions abrogation, deny there is such a doctrine. If they do not mention abrogation, then claim that any awkward verses they mention are abrogated.

10. If, worse still, they have read more about Islam, and mention the hadith, reel backwards in surprise and (a) either deny that what they claim is in the hadith is really there, asking them for the precise reference; or (b) deny that the hadith is reliable; or (c) brazen it out and say, ‘yes, of course you go to hell for splashing urine on your clothes, Allah demands basic cleanliness’.

11. If a woman complains that Mohammed said that most of the inhabitants of hell are women, reply, ‘Yes, and do you know why they are there?’ If she correctly replies, ‘because they were disobedient’, just nod gravely and look at her meaningfully. She should get the message.

12. This strategy is multi-purpose for Christians, Jews, and atheists. Explain how the Bible’s prophets behaved appallingly, so how can they be examples to follow, unlike Mohammed who was perfect. Use the example of King David, who behaved atrociously. In an emergency situation where a know-it-all type replies that, ‘Actually, David isn’t held up by Jews and Christians as perfect, in fact, the story of the prophet Nathan shows the reverse: that David’s adultery with Bathsheba was an example NOT to follow’, then either a) cast doubt on their account or b) wave it to one side and insist that Jews and Christians consider David perfect, since he was a prophet. Be vague about whether you think David really was perfect and the Biblical story about his improper conduct is false, or whether you think David really was imperfect and Jews and Christians are wrong to aspire to emulate his conduct. After all, you never heard the story of Nathan before so you are getting confused. Don’t let them see your confusion.

13. Insist that the Bible has to be interpreted literally as absolutely true, so that all episodes of violence are problematic, whereas any tricky passages in the Quran are to be interpreted carefully and in a modern context, and none are actually violent. If the person points out that the Quran is meant to be eternal and for all time, so how can it be interpreted for the modern day, just wave your hand sneeringly and make out like they are dim.

14. You may find Christians and Jews trying to say ‘No, Abraham did not take Ishmael out to the mountain to sacrifice, he took Isaac’. Raise your eyebrows in complete surprise, and say that this is because the Bible is full of error. (Your surprise may be either feigned or real, depending on how ignorant you actually are about the Bible.) Don’t pause to consider how a few moments ago you were insisting that the Bible passages referring to violence be taken as literal truth, in case the person spots the inconsistency.

15. If the person asks about connections with Islam and violence, then deny that there has ever been any link with violence and claim that ISIS and Al Quaeda are abominations. If the person says, ‘But how come there are so many terror groups who “misunderstand Islam”, what about Boko Haram, Al Nusra Front, Al Shabab, the Taliban, Hezbollah, etc, etc,’, just shake your head and start talking about violence in the Bible. If need be, in extreme cases, mention the Crusades.

16. If the person goes on to ask how come Mohammed himself committed so many acts of violence, including having people murdered and tortured, shout loudly and insistently that they are insulting your prophet who did no such actions.

17. Lastly, if the person is still arguing with you, just carry on winding them up until they get exasperated. Then you can literally turn your back on them, and say that you refuse to talk to them if they are ‘going to be like that’.

Your training is complete.

Creeping Sharia in Health Care

d1-copyAmerican Thinker, by Carol Brown July 28, 2016:

Islamic supremacy is arriving in medical settings using stealth means, or what is often referred to as creeping sharia. Common themes include Muslim health care workers refusing to uphold infection control protocols, Muslim medical students refusing to study topics they deem forbidden according to Islamic law, Muslim visitors in hospitals ignoring hygiene guidelines to protect patients, and hospitals bending over backwards (or is it forwards?) to accommodate Muslim demands above and beyond anything done for members of any other religious or demographic group. Also covered are outright acts of violence perpetrated by Muslim men who attack hospital personnel.

Islamic supremacy + dhimmitude = the end of civilized societies. Before I begin the (by no means exhaustive) list of how this equation is playing out in health care settings throughout the West, I’d like to share a personal story.

Shortly after the 9/11 Islamic terror attacks I had occasion to speak with a Muslim doctor who lived down the street from me. At that point in time I was completely ignorant about Islam and was, in fact, still a leftist (though wouldn’t be for much longer).

The doctor, a meticulously groomed, soft-spoken, modern-appearing man made it clear that, among other things, he believed that Muslim females become “mature” when they turned nine and therefore can be married at that age. I ignored the alarm bell that went off in my head when he made that statement. Of course I’ve long since realized that this highly educated doctor who worked at a prestigious hospital had sanctioned, at the very least, child rape (in keeping with the teachings of his prophet, the king of all pedophiles, Mohammed).

And therein lies the rub with Muslim doctors, as with all Muslims. If they are good Muslims and follow the teachings of the Quran, their values will necessarily be in direct conflict with our own.

So with that in mind, let me begin our tour through Islamic supremacy in medical settings right here in the United States.

An Islamic medical association operating in this country was identified by the Muslim Brotherhood as one among several “organizations of our friends” — friends that could help the MB advance their goal of destroying America from within. Part of the association’s oath includes: “We serve no other God besides [Allah] and regard idolatry as an abominable injustice.”

Islamic supremacy also asserts itself through lawfare as when a Muslim medical student who was dismissed due to poor academic performance sued the medical school on grounds of discrimination. Another case involved a Muslim health care worker who was fired because she refused to get a flu vaccine (required in hospital settings to protect patients) claiming the vaccine violated her Islamic faith because it contained a pork by product and that the entire affair violated her civil rights.

In addition to lawfare there are many other ways Muslims push for specialaccommodations such as Muslim doctors and advocacy organizations calling on health care personnel to be more knowledgeable about Muslim traditions so they can better meet the needs of their Muslim patients.

And so hospitals across the country are implementing an array of services for Muslim patients,  including halal meals, alternatives to medications that contain alcohol and/or pork derivatives, gowns for women designed to protect their modesty, early morning and late night appointments during the month of Ramadan, hiring more Muslim chaplains, handing out Qurans to the parents of Muslim children after they’re born, providing prayer rugs, hosting Iftar events, and setting up prayers rooms exclusively for Muslims who often find existing multi-faith prayers rooms offensive and/or inconvenient.

One town in Illinois proposed a “Muslim-centric” medical facility replete with many of the features noted above as well as Arabic-speaking staff, private rooms to ensure a Muslim standard of modesty, and space for ritual foot baths. The state rejected the plan but it was resubmitted without any references to sharia law.

There has also been a proliferation of medical outreach programs for the Muslim community along with “sensitivity training” for medical staff who are expected to become so well versed in the array of Muslim patients’ needs that they can discern differences between the needs of a Muslim from Pakistan compared to a Muslim from Saudi Arabia.

The Muslim-as-victim meme rears its head as well, such as the idea that Muslims “don’t have access” to healthcare, as was recently asserted by the vice president of cultural competence at a medical center in Brooklyn, NY.

And when Muslims do access health care, special demands may be made as when a Muslima in New Jersey went to an emergency room complaining of chest pain and insisted on a female (corrected) technician after she was told she’d need an electrocardiogram. No male technician was available and she was informed of her options. She decided to sit and wait. After several hours her husband requested she be transferred to a different hospital. The couple then sued, claiming the Patient’s Bill of Rights entitled the Muslima to her demands.

The issue of Muslima patients demanding same-sex health care professionals in emergency situations is one I expect to escalate, as is happening in Europe. But first, let’s take a quick detour to Canada where medical professionals bannedvirginity tests and the issuance of “chastity certificates” (popular in the Muslim culture) after the discovery of four dead Afghan women who were victims of “honor killings.” Elsewhere in Canada on a maternity ward where shared rooms arranged four beds with privacy curtains in between, a Muslim couple received greater levels of privacy than were afforded to others when their demands ejected at least one non-Muslim couple out of the ward and into a much more costly private room that the couple had to pay for.

In Europe the situation is even more dire. And pervasive.

In the UK, an 87-year-old Alzheimer’s patient was forced to wait for care after she fell because the Muslim charge nurse withheld assistance until he finished his prayers. This delay in care lasted five to ten minutes. The patient died shortly thereafter.

Meanwhile, in at least one British hospital, staff were turning the beds of Muslim patients up to five times a day so patients could face Mecca while they pray. Then staff turned them back when the patients were finished. Staff were also expected to provide Muslim patients with running water so they can wash their feet before prayer.

And then there is the issue of traditional Muslim attire, much of which doesn’t meet standards for infection control. The National Health Service requires staff providing direct care to patients to be in short sleeves to reduce the risk of transmitting increasingly deadly pathogens from one patient to another. Since many Muslim women consider it immodest to expose their forearms, some have refused to do so for proper hand-washing or scrubbing in prior to surgery. So the NHS developed disposable sleeves for Muslim health care workers who have direct patient contact.

Naturally the tale above would not be complete without the Muslim-claiming-discrimination story as when a British radiographer who was faced with having to choose between losing her job or complying with the dress code, chose Islam over her job, then complained about having to make the choice. Meanwhile, the Islamic Medical Association in the UK upheld the Islamic tenet that Muslim women out in public must be covered, stating: “No practicing Muslim woman — doctor, medical student, nurse, or patient — should be forced to bare her arms below the elbow.”

But it doesn’t stop there. (It never stops when it comes to Islamic supremacism.) Some Muslimas working in hospitals in the UK also want sterile hijabs to wear in the operating room and a private place to scrub in so their modesty can be protected. Some Muslim health care workers also refuse to use alcohol-based hand sanitizer because they claim it is forbidden according to Islamic law.

And what of British Muslims studying to work in health care? Well, some have refused to attend classes or learn about anything that conflicts with the teachings of the Quran, such as material on evolution and health issues related sexual promiscuity and/or alcohol consumption. The commitment to avoid all things alcohol-related also impacts patient safety when Muslim visitors to hospitalsrefuse to use anti-bacterial gel before entering patient wards, ignoring signs posted throughout British hospitals asking visitors to use the gel in order to reduce the spread of infection. (Of note, there is nothing in Islamic law that would suggest Muslims cannot use alcohol-based sanitary gels and it appears that some Muslims are using this as a point of leverage to assert supremacy. See here,here, and here.)

The final exhibit of the UK tour is a Muslim dentist who insisted his female patients wear hijabs, keeping a stash of head scarves in his office to give them. He abandoned at least two patients in acute pain who refused to don the hijab and on at least one occasion provided lesser quality care to a patient’s son when the mother agreed to wear the hijab but apparently didn’t answer a question about her son’s prayer habits in a way that pleased the dentist. Of note, the dentist’s younger brother is an Islamic extremist who stated that the 9/11 terror attack served “the pleasure of Allah.”

Throughout Europe it has also become increasingly common for Muslim men to physically attack male doctors. In some cases, women are denied urgently needed medical care because their spouses are adamant that they be attended to by a female, or not be attended to at all.

In France, a newborn’s father called the midwife a “rapist” then broke into the locked delivery room after seeing a nurse remove his wife’s burqa so she could give birth, hit the nurse in the face, and demanded she put the burqa back on his wife. In another case a Muslim male physically attacked a gynecologist who stepped in to assist with his wife’s complicated delivery. A few months prior to that, another doctor was attacked by a knife-wielding Islamist.

In Belgium, when a Muslim woman needed an emergency c-section, her husbandblocked the door to the operating room because the anesthesiologist was a male. After being told no female anesthesiologists were available a two-hour stand-off ensued after which time an imam was called upon who allowed the doctor to administer an epidural through a tiny opening in the woman’s burqa. A female nurse performed the surgery while the anesthesiologist remained outside the room shouting instructions to another nurse who was monitoring the anesthesia. An organization of anesthesiologists stated there have been other such incidents involving Muslim patients and their families.

In Sweden, it’s more of the same. When a male doctor answered an urgent call to assist with a mother who was bleeding heavily after giving birth, the woman’s husband screamed at him to leave the room immediately. When the doctor refused, the husband and the brother-in-law physically attacked him.

In addition to Muslim males becoming enraged if a male health care provider attends to their wife, there other things that may set them off. (Like just about everything.) And so a Turkish Muslim went on a violent rampage in a Catholic hospital in Germany because there were too many crosses on the walls.

Barbarism meets the West. (And I haven’t even touched upon the abject madness that has unfolded in hospitals across Europe as invaders invade en masse, here,here, and here.)

As the Muslim population in a society increases, expressions of Islamic supremacy become more and more aggressive. How it manifests in health care settings is just one of many ways in which the West is slowly and steadily being taken down by those who embrace an ideology that mandates nothing less than world domination.

Hat tips: Atlas Shrugs, Jihad Watch, Islam in Europe, Fox News, NY Times, Washington Post, Fox News, Boston Herald, Front Page Magazine, Discover the Networks, BBC, Daily Mail, Metro UK, Telegraph, The Guardian, Nursing Times, Modern Health Care, Middle East Forum, Islam in Europe, Islamist Watch, The Whig, The Age, Religion News, Europe1, Lancet, Society for Human Resource Management, Wikipedia, and Daniel Pipes whose 2007 comprehensive overview of the subject matter provided a wealth of material

Kassam Warns Open Borders Crowd Over Murderous Migrants: ‘You Can’t Be Social Justice Warriors If You’re Dead’

Rachel Megawhat/Breitbart London

Rachel Megawhat/Breitbart London

Breitbart, by Liam Deacon, July 26, 2016:

In the wake of the seemingly endless terror attacks by migrants and Muslims in France and Germany, Breitbart London Editor-in-Chief Raheem Kassam has slammed open border activists.

Mr. Kassam confirmed he has “exactly” been warning that “following the mistakes of Europe will result in an American catastrophe and people will die” when presenter Sean Hannity asked him about his stance on his radio show.

“That is what I said about what’s happened in Germany, and we warned about it last year; we warned about it in Belgium; we’ve warned about it in France, and it is coming to fruition,” he said.

“Let me tell you something: it’s very hard to fight for social justice if you’re dead,” Mr. Kassam added, slamming powerful liberal open borders activists such as George Soros who encouraged the “migrant crisis” from the Middle East.

“And the most galling element of it,” he continued, “is that we have the BBC, and the New York Times, and Sky News, and all of these other guys who are basically saying: ‘well, a backpack killed these people, a machete killed them’.

“No. These are Syrian migrants who have faked being refugees. Some of them have been turned down in terms of asylum status, and they happen to have bomb-making knowledge and explosives at the same time?

“I want to know how these people got into the country and how they weren’t screened out, when their asylum application failed, and immediately deported,” he said, asking: “Why was this man still in the country?”

Some shocking allegations were also made on the show, pertaining to the possible Islamist infiltration of U.S. authorities.

“I agree with [Richard Higgins], that there is an NGO presence that is deeply entrenched in the U.S. establishment,” said Mr. Kassam after Mr. Higgins claimed that America’s domestic counter-terrorism strategies and part of its foreign policy are influenced by the Muslim Brotherhood.

Mr. Higgins is a former leader inside the Department of Defense who managed programmes at the Combating Terrorism and Technical Support Office (CTTSO) and Irregular Warfare Section, and was appearing alongside Mr. Kassam on the show.

Mr. Hannity had asked why President Obama is insisting 10,000 “refugees” from the Middle East are brought immediately to America, and why Democratic nominee Hilary Clinton advocates increasing numbers by “500 per cent”.

“Why are they so willing to gamble with the lives of Americans considering this has now happened at least a dozen times?” he asked.

“I think that they’re so keen to have them coming in here because their Muslim Brotherhood advisers are telling them that is best for the West,” said Mr. Higgins.

“We see Muslim Brotherhood influence through NGO organisations as well as affiliated with United Nations elements on the ground in Syria [and] on the front end of the vetting process in Syria – which is why you see 99 per cent of the people coming out are actually Muslims, not the Christians, not the ones being most persecuted,” he said.

“They’re on the back end here in the United States, coordinating their reception… once they arrive both in Europe and then here in the United States,” he added.

A Multi-Culti Thomas Jefferson

506px-Liberty_Bell_2008

Islamists and progressives both want the Founders to have said something different than what they really said.

CounterJihad, by Bruce Cornibe, July 16, 2016:

When reflecting on the rich history of the city of Philadelphia, one might think of William Penn, Benjamin Franklin, the Liberty Bell, the Declaration of Independence, and the U.S. Constitution.  The timeless principles of freedom and liberty speak not only to the Philadelphian but also more broadly to the American.  Because of Philadelphia’s significance and contribution to America, its history has become a major target of revisionism.  Despite having different motivations, Liberal-progressives and Islamists both share the common goal of turning our founding fathers into advocates of multiculturalism.

For Islamists it’s all about making the founding fathers supportive of Islam, and of course they mean political Islam.  Philadelphia City Councilman Curtis Jones, Jr. is helping create that narrative by hosting an event in Philadelphia’s City Hall July 26, with Denise Spellberg, author of the controversial book titled Thomas Jefferson’s Qur’an: Islam and the Founders.  David F. Forte, Cleveland State University professor of law, lays out two important themes asserted in the book that reveal Spellberg’s prejudices: 

1) that the founders’ references to “imaginary Muslims” led them to include other minorities, such as Jews, Catholic Christians, and Deists, as full citizens, and 2) that America is now in the grip of “Islamophobia,” and many Americans are attempting to “disenfranchise” Muslims from their rights as full citizens.

The ‘Islamophobia’ campaign has propagated a lot of nonsense, from ‘Islamophobia’accelerating global warming to the rewriting of a more ‘inclusive’ American history as Spellberg’s book seems to indicate.  To think that Jefferson and the founding fathers included political Islam when they championed religious liberty is ridiculous.  Religious liberty and Islamic law are incompatible because Islamic law prohibits and punishes beliefs that are in opposition to Islam.  This multiculturalist narrative Spellberg is trying to sell is similar to that advocated by the Muslim Brotherhood linked Congressman Keith Ellison (first Muslim Congressman).  Ellison was the one who took his oath of office by swearing in on the Quran owned by Thomas Jefferson, and tries to insinuate that because Jefferson owned a Quran it helped mold his views on religious liberty and toleration.  A 2007 Seattle Times article reports Ellison’s take on swearing in on the Quran:

“It demonstrates that from the very beginning of our country, we had people who were visionary, who were religiously tolerant, who believed that knowledge and wisdom could be gleaned from any number of sources, including the Quran,” Ellison said in a telephone interview Wednesday.

“A visionary like Thomas Jefferson was not afraid of a different belief system,” Ellison said. “This just shows that religious tolerance is the bedrock of our country, and religious differences are nothing to be afraid of.”

In reality, Jefferson not only had some unflattering things to say about Islam but also got a taste of radical Islam from a conversation with the Ambassador of Tripoli at the time:

The Ambassador answered us that it was founded on the Laws of their prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every musselman [Muslim] who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.

Besides Philadelphia City Councilman Curtis Jones, Jr. who are some of the other supporters of the event with Spellberg in Philadelphia?  Of course, the Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is one of the backers of the event. The Muslim Brotherhood in North America is dedicated to “destroying Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated.”  CAIR has even given Spellberg an awardthat epitomizes her work that’s being used for the Islamist cause:

I-CAIR Faith in Freedom Award from the Council American-Islamic Relations, Cleveland, Ohio Chapter, “For promoting a better understanding of the history of religious freedom in America and for writing Muslims back into our nation’s founding narrative through the extraordinary and illuminating scholarly work, Thomas Jefferson’s Qur’an: Islam and the Founders,” May 11, 2014.

Militant Islam Monitor.org provides information about some of the other event sponsors such as:

…They include Emerge Pac, the Universal Muslim Business Association, Masjid Masjidullah and ICPIC. The Islamic Cultural Preservation And Information Council which receives funding from the PA Council on the Arts among others.http://icpic.co/. EmergePac is a subsidiary of EmergeUSA which is headed by stealth Islamist lawyer Khurrum Wahid.”Emerge USA, despite its patriotic sounding name, has an extremely radical agenda based on terrorism and bigotry shrouded in the guise of political advocacy. The main individual behind Emerge USA is Khurrum Wahid, a South Florida attorney who has built his name on representing high profile terrorists. They include members of al-Qaeda and financiers of the Taliban. According to the Miami New Times, Wahid himself was placed on a federal terrorist watch list in 2011.

The contact for the event is Imam Salaam Muhsin, who recently spoke at CAIR-Philadelphia’s Interfaith Press Conference after the Orlando massacre.  The sponsors have a long list of Islamist ties to say the least.  On the event/luncheon flyer it is also noted that it occurs during the week of the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia, advertising for their liberal fan base.  This progressive/Islamist alliance is working together to reinterpret our nation’s founding fathers (and founding documents) in order to change the American narrative to fit their multiculturalist vision for the U.S.  For the Islamists it’s all about using multiculturalism to insert political Islam/Sharia into society under the guise of religious liberty.

Paul Sutliff on the Islamic “Long March Through the Institutions”

Huma and Hillary

The Rebel, by Victor Laszlo, July 16, 2016:

This is the first part of a two part interview with author and educator Paul Sutliff. Paul discusses infiltration of the US government by Muslim Brotherhood entities in this segment.

This is the second part of the interview with Paul Sutliff. Paul explains the US Government’s use of the office of Countering Violent Extremism to assist the Muslim Brotherhood, and of all things, fund mosques.

Paul recently appeared as a guest on Blog Talk Radio discussing the CVE and Islam in the United States.

The Rebel has published several articles on the Countering Violent Extremism policy previously from a more academic point of view, featuring interviews with retired US Army intelligence officer, Stephen Coughlin.

Rather than reducing the level of terrorism, these so-called “Countering Violent Extremism” policies seem to be part of the strategy of Islamic infiltrators to increase the influence of groups like the Muslim Brotherhood in the West, in tandem with UN resolution 16/18. 

Paul is the author of two booksCivilization Jihad and the Myth of Moderate Islam, and Stealth Jihad Phase two. American Colleges.

Paul’s website is here.