Investigating Islam

The United West, by Steve Kirby, September 19, 2018:

Folks who are concerned about Islam often ask what they can do.

Here is what you can do:

1) Educate yourselves so that you are able educate others about the reality of Islam;

2) Step out of your comfort zone, look for opportunities to talk about Islam with family, friends, and religious and secular leaders; and

3) Go to events where presentations on Islam are being made and ask the hard questions, based on the information you have gained from authoritative Islamic sources.  When you go to these events, take along some like-minded, knowledgeable friends so you won’t feel all alone.  Hold Muslims and non-Muslims accountable for accurately presenting Islam.

Here is how you can get started.  I spent the latter half of my 31 ½ years in law enforcement as a detective investigating white collar crimes and public corruption.  For each investigation I put together a case file of information.  Below is a link to a case file you can create so that you can investigate Islam yourself, learn about the reality of Islam and then take your case file with you when you talk about Islam and go to Islam-related events:

Investigating Islam: Creating a Case File

Knowledge is power, but only if that knowledge is used!

Steve Kirby

If you wish to join Steve Kirby’s distribution list, please sign up at this link:


Also see the United West’s Webinars:

Mosques playlist:




Sharia Crime Stoppers Webinar, Week 2: THE CURRENT THREAT:


Sharia Crime Stoppers Webinar, Week 3: SHAR’IA LAW AND WOMEN:

Islam Against the West

Bandar Al-Dandani/AFP/Getty Images

American Greatness, By Pedro Gonzalez, September 13th, 2018:

On September 11, 2001, 19 Muslims hijacked four planes and used them to murder 2,977 people. Included in that number are 343 firefighters, 72 law enforcement officers, and nearly 200 military and civilian personnel killed at the Pentagon. Victims could be claimed by more than 90 countries and as many as 10,000 children lost their parents.

As New York burned, thousands of Muslims in the West Bank celebrated the attack with the abandonment of dervishes, shouting “Allahu Akbar” and doling out candy. Much closer to home, Muslims in New Jersey also partook in diabolical festivities.

“Some men were dancing, some held kids on their shoulders,” said retired Jersey City police Captain Peter Gallagher. Though there was more than one celebration, Gallagher cleared 20 to 30 people from one particular rooftop at 6 Tonnele Avenue. “The women were shouting in Arabic and keening in the high-pitched wail of Arabic fashion,” Gallagher told NJ Advance Media.

That we are only now shuttering the office of the Palestine Liberation Organization in our nation’s capital is evidence we value tolerance to our detriment in America.

In 2012, the San Diego, California, chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (a terrorist organizationpartnered with San Diego Unified School District to implement a curriculum designed to combat “Islamophobia” in public schools. As part of the plan, teachers were provided a training book called Teaching Against Islamophobia.

Although teachers are strictly forbidden from so much as uttering the name of Christ in classrooms, Teaching Against Islamophobia provides cherry-picked verses from the Koran with which to edify young minds. The book trains public school educators to inform students, among other things:

  1. “The activities of the American Empire have not been the only forces at work creating an Islamist extremism that violently defies the sacred teaching of the religion[;]. American misdeeds have also played an important role in the process;”
  2. “The ‘hatred and mistrust of the United States in the Islamic world’ is a consequence of ‘right-wing politics,’ ‘geo-political needs of  the American Empire,’ and ‘widespread ignorance among Americans about the U.S. role in the world and in Islamic history;’” and
  3. “‘9/11 in part reflected the rage toward the U.S. pulsing through the veins of many Muslims,’ and ‘the indifference displayed by many U.S. policymakers toward the suffering of everyday people around the Islamic world fanned the flames of this anti-American fury.’[emphasis mine]”

In short, San Diego Unified agreed to allow, without any input from parents, an organization named as an unindicted co-conspirator in a terrorist money laundering scheme to teach students that the blood of September 11 was mainly on the hands of Americans, and least of all on Islam. The program also would have directed resources to assist Muslim students “Learn more about and be proud of [their] faith,” and “Help connect [them] to resources about [their] faith which [they] can share with administrators and teachers.” In the end, it was thwarted only by a massive lawsuit launched by the Freedom of Conscience Defense Fund that forced San Diego Unified to reluctantly put down the Koran. But things have only grown worse.

Ignoring What’s Under Our Noses
“White Americans are the biggest terror threat in the United States,” read the Public Radio International headline in 2015. PRI made this claim by excluding all of the people murdered on September 11, the additional 1,400 who have since died and the 8,000 now suffering from cancer caused by exposure to the rubble. The unimaginative Vox pulled the same stunt in 2017.

But what was the real reason for the September 11 attacks?

We will find that the reason, the only reason, was the same that impelled Nidal Malik Hasan, son of Palestinian immigrants, to murder 13 people at Fort Hood, Texas. The September 11 hijackers also shared a motive with Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and Tamerlan Tsarnaev, both first-generation immigrants, who murdered three people and injured hundreds more. It is the same motive shared by Mohammad Youssef Abdulazeez, who murdered five people, including four Marines, in Chattanooga, Tennessee.

It is, moreover, the same reason that Tashfeen Malik and Syed Rizwan Farook—first- and second-generation Pakistani immigrants—murdered 14 people at a Christmas party in San Bernardino, California. And it’s also the same reason Omar Mateen—son of Afghan immigrants—murdered 49 people in Orlando, Florida; and Sayfullo Saipov, a first-generation Uzbek immigrant, murdered eight people along a Manhattan bike path in New York. Let’s not forget Somali refugee Abdul Razak Ali Artan of the Ohio State University attack.

The reason for all of these attacks upon Americans (to say nothing of what’s happening in Europe) is militant Islam. Islam, when understood as the political ideology and not just a benign religion, has been at war with Christian civilization since its inception.

Christians are regularly reminded of crusades, inquisitions, and witch-hunts, so much so that one would think Pope Urban II had ordered the first crusade only yesterday. Muslims, on the other hand, are strictly exempt from any criticism of their past or present, theirs is the whitewashed religion of peace, now and forever.

When Saipov crushed under his wheels the lives of eight Americans, the good Samaritans at NBC News contacted their on-demand progressive Muslim for comment.

“My biggest concern,” Umer Ahmad told NBC reporters, “is that [Saipov’s] readily identified as a Muslim and then that is extrapolated out to my own faith.” Of little to no concern were the dead and dying.

Whether Ahmad and the Islamophiles would judge that Islam, Ahmad’s “own faith,” was truly responsible for yet another jihad on Americans was of little importance to Saipov. The judgements of the American courts, let alone that of Ahmad, were “not important” to Saipov because they were “not Allah’s judgments.”

A National Madness
Islam remains not merely a material threat, but a formal threat to the confidence of Christian civilization. Islam is used by Marxists to denigrate Christendom—and America, like the nations of Europe, is a Christian society. Indeed, Muslims have enjoyed tolerance in Christian societies, like the United States, that Christians have never known in Muslim societies.

“Are you ready? Okay. Let’s roll.” These were the last words of Flight 93 passenger Todd Beamer to Lisa Jefferson, who alongside with Mark Bingham, Tom Burnett, Jeremy Glick, Lou Nacke, Rich Guadagno, Alan Beaven, Honor Elizabeth Wainio, Linda Gronlund, William Cashman, Sandra Bradshaw, and Cee Cee Ross-Lyles attempted to storm the cockpit and take control of the doomed airplane.

Before pushing for the cockpit, Beamer recited the Lord’s Prayer, Psalm 23, and was joined by the others in prayer. It has been said that our Declaration of Independence was designed, at least in part, after that Psalm. Compare to the hijackers, whose final words are seared into the minds of Americans: “Allah is the greatest. Allah is the greatest.” Yet Western politicians insist that jihad has nothing to do with that terrorism or any that has followed it. What madness!

In view of this madness, are we even worthy of heroes like Beamer? Beamer and his companions sacrificed themselves to save others from a fiery death and the nation from even more potential destruction of its institutions, only to have this nation apologize for their murderers and slander Christians in the same breath. “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam,” to quote our former president, speaking out in defense of Islam after the murder of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans in Benghazi.

What Ails the West
It should be said that while the individual Muslim can, as Michael Anton has said, “accept the distinction between civil and religious law,” in orthodox Islam, “the faith itself does not accept that fact,” and is therefore incompatible with Western civilization. Westerners, then, should heed the warnings of Iranian-born Imam Tawhidi, of the “need to make sure that those coming into the west really want to be part of the west.” Nonie Darwish, daughter of Lt. General Mustafa Hafez, the former head of Egyptian Military Intelligence in Gaza and commander of the Fedayeen that killed hundreds of Israeli civilians, would remind Americans that they “are not doing Muslims (especially the reformists) a favor by constantly treating them as children who should be shielded from reality.” If they want to be good Westerners or Americans, they need to understand and accept this reality.

Failure to heed these warnings is symptomatic of the spiritual rot at the core of the West.

“The National September 11 Memorial and Museum are deeply ugly,” writes Wayne Isaac. “Those two gaping pits, a vision of the abyss, mar that tragic earth. Like gashes that never healed, but rather festered into black necrosis, the 9/11 memorial reveals a sickness; a sickness not of the body but of the soul.” Isaac is on target with his diagnosis.

“That ought to give us pause. On this 9/11, therefore, we all should grapple not only with the tragedy but with our response to it,” writes Isaac. “We must confront our sickness of the soul.”

Isaac is correct, but I believe this is a sickness that has plagued the soul of the whole West, not just America.

Will Westerners find the cultural confidence to reaffirm their roots as Christians? The civilization in which Muslims are a minority, yet enjoy tolerance and even protected status, is only so because it is built upon the precepts of Christian tolerance which must never be confused with the suicidal notion of tolerance with which the Marxist-inspired Left has sought to supplant it. September 11 reminds us of what we stand to suffer if that Christian civilization should perish, or if its denizens never rediscover confidence in their culture.

Content created by the Center for American Greatness, Inc. is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a significant audience. For licensing opportunities for our original content, please contact

On Islam Is on Target

(Photo credit: Islamic State / VOA)

Crisis Magazine, by William Kirkpatrick,, July 12, 2018:

One of the interesting aspects of Fr. James Schall’s refreshing collection of essays, On Islam, is that it provides a chronological record. The first essay appeared in 2003, the last in 2018. This allows the reader to see how our understanding of Islam has changed over those years.

Unfortunately, it hasn’t changed much at all. In 2003 we understood next to nothing about Islam, and in 2018 it’s still next to nothing.

One of Fr. Schall’s main themes is that we must try to understand Islam as Muslims understand it, not as we would like it to be. But instead of adjusting our theories to fit the accumulating facts, we keep trying to force the facts to fit the theory. This, says Schall, is the main reason we have failed to stem the tide of terrorism. We still assume that Islam is a religion like our own and that terrorism is a misunderstanding of genuine Islam.

On the contrary, writes Schall, terrorists are arguably more faithful to the essence of Islam than peaceful Muslims. As he puts it:

The terrorists themselves do claim with considerable historical and doctrinal evidence, on Qur`anic grounds, that they are in fact the true interpreters of Islam.

I don’t mean to oversimplify Fr. Schall’s argument. His essays are chock full of solid philosophical, theological, and historical evidence for his conclusions. But one of his conclusions is that:

advocates of the Islamic State are Muslims who faithfully follow what this religion allows and encourages them to do… To look on them as heretics or aberrations results in policies that only make the Islamic State’s success more likely.

Our insistence on seeing Islam through Western eyes, says Schall, means that we will be blind to the larger picture. Thus, “each bombing, shooting, knifing, or truck-crashing incident” is treated “as an individual problem of some usually ‘fanatical’ or otherwise confused youth acting on his own.” The authorities can’t bring themselves to admit that each incident is part of a pattern—that these actions are motivated by a world view that is shaped by the Koran and the example of Muhammad.

Likewise, the West’s leaders will fail to understand Muslim migration:

The trouble is that such large numbers of young and mostly male Muslims in every Western country are not there simply because they are poor or have been expelled…They are there to expand Islam.

“The purpose of Muslim expansion,” he continues, “is not to assimilate into a new nation and culture but rather to change it so that it conforms to Muslim ways.”

And what is the overall purpose of the expansion? Schall answers with refreshing candor: “Briefly, the assigned mission of Islam is to conquer the world for Allah.” But this simple truth about Islam flies in the face of politically correct and religiously correct notions that all religions are peaceful and opposed to violence. “To conquer the world for Allah?” Religious people, we assume, just don’t think like that. Thus, we convince ourselves that terrorist acts committed in the name of Allah, have “nothing to do with Islam.” “Dealing with Islam,” writes Schall, “is a function of understanding Islam,” and until we admit some very basic facts about Islam we will be unable to meet the challenge of Islam. The result? “I think it very possible, if not likely,” he writes, “that Islam will successfully establish itself in many areas of Europe and America.”

As might he expected, Fr. Schall also addresses the Church’s role vis-à-vis Islam. In an essay on dialoguing with Islam, he suggest that Church leaders, like secular leaders, fail to see Islam for what it is. Instead they prefer to look at it through Catholic eyes and have therefore convinced themselves that the two faiths have very much in common. But, says Schall, “What Islam and the Bible have in common is very little when it comes to doctrine … only with the greatest stretch of the imagination can we say that Muslims believe in the same God as Christians and Jews.” As a result, the dialogue is without resolution because there really is precious little common ground. For example, when Muslim and Catholic dialoguers use the word “peace,” they mean entirely different things. According to Islamic tenets, true “peace” will only come when all the world is Muslim.

Quite obviously, Schall’s position on Islam is at odds with the policies pursued by many in the Church leadership. He asserts that Islam is not a religion of peace, but of conquest. He maintains that terrorists are not misunderstanders of Islam, but are faithful to the plain meaning of the Koran. Moreover, he suggests that many Muslim immigrants to the West are not coming simply to find jobs or escape violence, but to convert the world to Islam.

What, then, does he suggest as an alternative policy? His general prescription is to replace the utopian view of Islam with a more realistic one. A viable Islam policy must be based not on what we wish Islam was, but on what it actually is.   Otherwise, things will continue as they have, and we must face the real prospect of a world converted to Islam.

Among other things, getting real means that Christians must insist that the Koran is not of divine origin. Moreover, they should do what they can to cast doubt about the Koran in the minds of Muslims. Why? Because the Koran is the key motivating force for jihad. The terrorism and the warfare will continue because that is what the Koran commands. The remedy, then, is not to assert that terrorists have misunderstood the Koran, but to assert that the book they follow is not from God:

The first step needed, then, is the affirmation, from the Christian side, that these views are as such false. They cannot be divine revelations.

As long as Muslims continue to believe that the Koran is the direct word of God, then the bloodshed will continue. It should therefore be the aim of Christians to disabuse them of this notion by means either subtle or direct. “What has never really been faced, even by the Church,” says the author, “is the truth content, or lack of it, in the Muslim world view…”

In the context of most current thinking about Islam, what Fr. Schall proposes here is quite radical. On the other hand, it also seems quite realistic. As Pope Francis put it in Evangelii Gaudium, “Ideas disconnected from realities give rise to ineffectual forms of idealism” (232). Unfortunately, the ideas that many Catholic leaders, including Francis, have about Islam seem to be based more on fantasy than reality.

In an essay entitled “On the Fragility of Islam,” Fr. Schall points out that the Koran is Islam’s weakest link. It’s authenticity as a direct revelation from God rests solely on the testimony of Muhammad. There is no other corroborating evidence. To the normal observer, says Schall, the Koran borrows heavily from the Jewish and Christian Scriptures: “Yet, if this historical origin is shown, then the Qur`an is merely the product of a confused effort to rewrite the Scriptures already in existence.”

Fr. Schall hopes that the eventual publication of a critical edition of the Koran by German scholars will make many of these problems evident. Possibly so, but there is already sufficient evidence in any standard edition of the Koran to cast doubt on the authenticity of the revelation. The Koran is almost completely lacking in chronology, continuity, and structure. At the same time it is full of mind-numbing repetition and formulaic prose. It strains credulity to believe that it was written—as Muslim scholars claim—by the Author of Creation.

Fr. Schall’s hope is that when all the many contradictions and incoherencies of the Koran become clear, “Islam may be as fragile as communism”:

Can we expect, as it were, a John Paul II effect, which saw a seemingly unbreakable communism suddenly collapse because its ideas were finally recognized as incoherent and evil?

Schall realizes that Islam is far older than communism and more resilient, and he admits that its fall is unlikely to come as quickly. Nevertheless, there is hope. Until the Iranian Revolution of 1979, there was a good deal of evidence that Islam was losing its hold on the Muslim world. Turkey had become a secular state, and many in Iran, Iraq, Egypt, and other Muslim nations found Western values more attractive than Islamic ones. Sadly, this laxity of faith was the catalyst that spurred the formation of the Muslim Brotherhood, Al-Qaida, and other groups dedicated to returning Islam to its original zeal.

But memories of better, less-Islamic times remain. Recent events give hope that what has happened once can happen again. In the last several months there have been numerous large demonstrations throughout Iran calling for an end to the theocratic regime. And last week in Paris, 100,000 people participated in a “Free Iran” rally. One minor news story is also telling. A recent study of thirty three deradicalization programsin the UK showed that all but two were either ineffective or counter-productive. The two effective initiatives were, “one defying political correctness and tackling difficult issues head-on and the other directly addressing extremism in religious [Islamic] texts.”

The effective initiatives sound rather like the approach Fr. Schall advocates: tell the truth about Islam, and challenge Muslims to look more closely at the problems of the Koran. The ineffective initiatives resemble the ones the Church leadership has been pursuing. No one can accuse them of tackling difficult issues head-on. Indeed the only issues they tackle with gusto are Islamic-approved ones such as the anti-Islamophobia initiative. If Western leaders and Church leaders keep insisting that Islam is fine just the way it is, there will be very little incentive for Muslims to reform their faith or—if it is irreformable—to leave it.

If and when Church leaders come to the conclusion that their current approach to Islam is both ineffective and counter-productive, they will find in Fr. Schall’s gem of a book a clear guide to a more promising direction.

William Kilpatrick taught for many years at Boston College. He is the author of several books about cultural and religious issues, including Why Johnny Can’t Tell Right From Wrong; and Christianity, Islam and Atheism: The Struggle for the Soul of the West and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Jihad. His articles have appeared in numerous publications, including Catholic World Report, National Catholic Register, Aleteia, Saint Austin Review, Investor’s Business Daily,and First Things. His work is supported in part by the Shillman Foundation. For more on his work and writings, visit his website,

Also see:

July 4 Freedom Update from American Patriot Dave Bailey

I haven’t shared an email digest from Dave Bailey in a while. Last month he changed the name from “Islam Update” to “Freedom Update” to foil the apparent server censorship some have experienced. New followers may be interested in subscribing. His commentary analysis is quite astute and well worth your time.

Here is Dave’s comment on the change:

Dear patriot,

Thank you again for taking time to keep up on what’s happening in the world with regard to the Islamist threat. Islam Update is being renamed Freedom Update, and I’d like to explain why. There are two reasons…

First, from a practical standpoint, I had been getting numerous reports that emails being kicked back or filtered out as “spam,” even though the subscribers never did anything to identify Islam Update as spam. It turns out that internet services such as Comcast are doing their own filtering of email regardless of whether users asked for it. This is as serious a threat to our freedom of speech as Facebook’s and Google’s filtering, despite Comcast staying out of the spotlight. Having done some testing with one of Islam Update’s subscribers, we discovered that Islam Update was being filtered on the basis of words in its Subject line, and one of the words that appears to be a trigger is “Islam.” By changing “Islam Update” to “Freedom Update,” I hope to reduce the unwanted spam-filtering that subscribers have been complaining of.

Second, the election of Donald Trump has fundamentally changed the nature of our battle. Previously, we had an administration that absolutely refused to admit the existence of Islamic terrorism, and was appointing Islamists to high government posts. The very fact that Barack Hussein Obama was elected twice with solid majorities was a testimony to the ignorance of the American people, and Islam Update’s mission back then was to turn this ignorance around so that people could start making informed decisions regarding the Islamic threat, instead of being duped by sweet-talking Islamists and sympathizers. Fortunately, with the aid of Islam Update, ACT for America, and many others, the American people have woken up enough to elect a President who openly declared that there was a problem with Islam and talked about limiting immigration from Islamic nations. From his very first day, President Trump has been dismantling the Islam-friendly “deep state” that Obama created and Hillary Clinton would have deepened. With Trump in office instead of Hillary, all of the plans of Islamists and globalists have gone sideways, and they are furious about it.

As a result, Islamists, globalists, and assorted useful idiots have come unhinged in a combination of panic and indignant fury. They realize that their entire program for establishing one world government – whether a global caliphate or not – is hanging in the balance with Trump’s hand on the scales. Because they can’t come straight out and tell the American people the truth about what they are trying to do – destroy America as we know it – they are now waging a cold war against President, using anything they can as a club against him. Therefore, in addition to the usual reporting on Islam-related news, I have started reporting on the outrageous conspiracies and machinations of this “vast left-wing conspiracy” to take down the President and derail his pro-American and anti-Islamist mission.

President Trump is fighting to preserve American freedoms and American sovereignty against a vast and wealthy coalition of interests that seeks to ruin the American experiment and replace it with their own oppressive ideologies. Therefore, even though I will be continuing to focus on the Islamist threat, I will also be reporting on the outlandish attacks on our champion in this fight: President Trump.

For these reasons, Islam Update is now Freedom Update.

God bless, and keep spreading the word… the Left’s fury is a sign that we’re winning!


Dave Bailey is a former professional engineer with an MBA from the Wharton School of Business who worked until 1992 as a researcher for IBM. At that time he left IBM to start a nonprofit organization called Education Transfer, whose purpose was to help middle schools and high schools organize Career Days that would typically bring together approximately 100 local professionals representing students’ career interests to speak with hundreds of students, representing an entire grade level.

By 2001 his organization was serving numerous schools from Delaware to New York, including several schools on Long Island – schools with families that were devastated by the 9/11 terrorist attack. Dave felt a compelling need to understand the Islamic ideology behind that attack and, since retiring from Education Transfer in 2010, he devotes his time to helping others comprehend the forces within Islam that threaten the West.

513J+yl1BsL._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_His first book on the subject, “Dare to Speak: Islam vs. Free Democracy and Free Enterprise,” is available on-line at several websites. His second book, Shock and Alarm: What It was Really Like at the U.S. Embassy in Iraq,” is available for purchase from He co-wrote this book with Hugh Iwanicki, a friend and former emissary at the U.S. Embassy in Iraq.

The following is today’s email. As Dave likes to say, he scours the news so you don’t have to! If you are interested in receiving his his digests just email him at


Freedom Update, by Dave Bailey, July 4, 2018:

There is strength in numbers… Please forward this to others…

July 4 terror plot thwarted in Cleveland, suspect pledged allegiance to Al Qaeda, FBI says: A man who pledged allegiance to Al Qaeda sought to kill members of the military and conducted reconnaissance in downtown Cleveland for a planned attack on July 4 — but the Independence Day plot was foiled after a months-long investigation, federal officials said Monday. FBI Special Agent in Charge Stephen Anthony said Demetrius Pitts, also known as Abdur Raheem Rahfeeq, was arrested at 10 a.m.

Joe Scarborough Just Put His Finger On ‘Plain Sight’ Evidence That Trump Is Taking Orders From Putin

The fake news from the mainstream media never quits… in fact, it just gets more outrageous…

In this case, Joe Scarborough starts with a false premise, which is that President Trump is Putin’s puppet…

He justifies this claim on no hard evidence whatsoever…

His only “evidence” is his gut feel that Trump is insufficiently tough on Putin…

Strange how Scarborough had no such complaint when…

  • Obama told Mitt Romney in a presidential debate that “The ‘1980’s are now calling and they want their foreign policy back”…

… ridiculing Romney’s claim that Russia was our major geopolitical threat…

Next, Scarborough’s echo chamber of guests offered no such counterpoints…

Instead they ran with Scarborough’s claim and concluded that Trump is destroying American primacy in the world…

This is the exact opposite of the truth…

Scarborough and his guests act as if our growing economy, tiny unemployment…

…energy independence, victory over ISIS, and hammering of Russia’s ally Iran didn’t exist…

None of these are mentioned at all

Scarborough is trying to continue smearing Trump with the demonstrably false “Russian Dossier” slander…

…which he alludes to in only the vaguest terms because everyone knows it’s a fake…

The disinformation being fed to the public by the mainstream media is truly shocking…   Dave

Lance Perriman                Independent Journal Review                Jul 3, 2018

During Tuesday’s edition of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” host Joe Scarborough accused President Donald Trump of acting as a puppet to Russian president Vladimir Putin and said the evidence is in “plain sight.”

Scarborough made the stunning allegation Tuesday as NATO allies express concerns over Trump’s growing closeness to Putin, and the president floats strategic plans that line up with Russia’s long-term goals.

“There has been this concern, certainly since we interviewed Donald Trump in December 2015 and he refused to criticize Vladimir Putin, said he was a strong leader and we needed that type of leadership in America,” Scarborough said. “There’s been a concern that he would never criticize Vladimir Putin. There’s been a concern obviously through this investigation that Vladimir Putin must have something on Donald Trump.”

The ‘Morning Joe’ host said the president appeared to be compromised by Putin’s blackmail threats, and he said the evidence was plainly obvious.

“I firmly believe he does have something on Donald Trump, and that’s why he’s never criticized Putin,” Scarborough said.

He said Trump was giving away U.S. national security and threatening longstanding alliances, which align with Russian interests.

“Can you imagine any American president in your lifetime that could do things that were more in Vladimir Putin’s benefit than what Donald Trump has been doing over the past two years?” Scarborough said. “Attacking NATO allies, trying to withdraw troops. talking about withdrawing troops from Europe, talking about withdrawing our commitment to NATO, turning every NATO conference into basically a very uncomfortable situation.”

“Then going off and talking secretly to Vladimir Putin at the G20 last year, setting up — I mean, the list is endless,” he added. “If there is a conspiracy, this conspiracy seems to be in plain sight.”…

The video…

Findings that Russia meddled to help Trump beat Clinton were ‘accurate and on point’: Senate intel panel

It’s possible that Putin did want Trump to win, or rather, Hillary to lose…

…though this claim is still being disputed…

The point here is that there is no evidence that candidate Trump had anything to do with this…

Hillary is responsible for destroying and killing one of Russia’s key allies in North Africa, Muammar Kaddafi

…and Putin was distraught at Kaddafi’s vicious murder

…and also for contributing to the civil unrest in Putin’s ally Assad by shipping Libyan weapons to Syrian rebels who ultimately exploded as ISIS in 2014…

Putin has plenty of reasons for opposing Hillary… but where are the dots connecting Putin to Trump?

The “Russian Dossier” was created to manufacture them, but they turned out to be fake…

Why would someone go through the trouble of inventing false evident if real evidence existed?   Dave

Gregg Re              Fox News             July 3, 2018

Findings by the intelligence community that Russia meddled in the 2016 presidential election to help Donald Trump win were “accurate and on point,” according to an unclassified report and accompanying statement by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence released Tuesday.

The committee’s findings came after a lengthy review of the “sources, tradecraft and analytic work underpinning” a January 2017 intelligence community assessment.

The FBI’s and CIA’s “analytical disagreement” with the NSA over whether Russia sought to bolster the Trump presidential campaign was “reasonable,” the report also said.

While the FBI and CIA had “high confidence” that Russian President Vladimir Putin aspired to help Trump’s election chances by denigrating opponent Hillary Clinton, the NSA had only “moderate confidence” in that assessment, according to the January 2017 analysis.

The disagreement among agencies “was reasonable, transparent, and openly debated among the agencies and analysts, with analysts, managers and agency heads on both sides of the confidence level articulately justifying their positions,” the Senate intelligence committee’s findings said.

In a statement, Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr, R-N.C, said the panel’s review was ongoing.

“The committee has spent the last 16 months reviewing the sources, tradecraft and analytic work underpinning the intelligence community assessment and sees no reason to dispute the conclusions,” Burr said.

“The committee continues its investigation, and I am hopeful that this installment of the committee’s work will soon be followed by additional summaries providing the American people with clarity around Russia’s activities regarding U.S. elections.”

Whether Russian authorities sought to meddle in the 2016 election to help Trump prevail has been a key point of contention between House and Senate intelligence committees.

In May, Senate Intelligence Committee leaders backed the 2017 intel community report that formally accused Russia of trying to interfere in the election to the Trump campaign’s benefit.

“The Russian effort was extensive, sophisticated and ordered by President Putin himself for the purpose of helping Donald Trump and hurting Hillary Clinton,” top Senate committee Democrat Mark Warner said in a joint statement at the time.

A TOTAL WITCH HUNT!!! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 10, 2018

On Tuesday, Warner said the committee’s review had confirmed those findings.

“As numerous intelligence and national security officials in the Trump administration have since unanimously re-affirmed, the ICA findings were accurate and on point,” Warner said.

But on the other side of Capitol Hill, Republicans on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence have disputed the  conclusion that Putin wanted to help Trump.

GOP members of the House panel have cited “significant intelligence tradecraft failings” in the intelligence community’s findings, saying it is inappropriate to conclude that Russia acted specifically to assist Trump.

“We disagree with the narrative that they were trying to help Trump.” – Rep. Mike Conaway, R-Texas

“The bottom line: The Russians did commit active measures against our election in 2016, and we think they will do that in the future,” Rep. Mike Conaway, R-Texas, said in March. “We disagree with the narrative that they were trying to help Trump.”

Accusations of political bias at the highest levels of the DOJ and FBI have roiled Washington, with Republicans accusing investigators of targeting the White House for political reasons.

But some key Republicans said that it seemed Russia was, in fact, trying to help Trump win. In a statement earlier this year, Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., said it was “clear based on the evidence” that Putin wanted Clinton to lose in November.

Other top administration officials, including Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, have signaled that they agree that Russian actors wanted Clinton to lose.

Did Mueller prevent 9/11 families from suing Saudi Arabia? 15 of the 19 Sept. 11 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia. Ever since the attacks, the family members of victims have been pursuing financial compensation from Saudi Arabia’s government. But one of the biggest obstacles to that compensation was FBI director, and now special prosecutor, Robert Mueller.

MSNBC Host Cheers at the Thought of a Recession Finally Hurting Trump’s Approval Numbers: ‘Good’

Julio Rosas                 Fox News               Jul 2, 2018

While discussing how the economy has not taken a nosedive over Donald Trump being president and his higher than predicted approval ratings, MSNBC host Nicolle Wallace cheered at the thought of a recession hurting Trump’s support among his voters.

“What stuns me is why the markets have not reacted to the lack of stability,” Wallace’s guest, presidential historian Jon Meacham, said. “They’re beginning to on the tariffs. But remember, that’s what everybody said.”

He pointed to how President Richard Nixon lost support: “I continue to believe the reason his approval rating has a four in front of it is what I keep thinking of as the 401(k) Trumpists. Their numbers are up. They don’t pay as much attention to all of this as we do, which is probably healthy for them. Without this prosperity, and a friend of mine pointed out this morning that it wasn’t until Nixon’s recession that the Watergate stuff drove.”

“You think that’s where the bottom falls out?” Wallace asked.

“I think so,” Meacham replied.

“Um … OK. Good,” Wallace said as the panel laughed…

The video…

Columnist Says Sarah Sanders, Others Deserve Harassment for the Rest of Their Lives

Sam Dorman                Independent Journal Review               Jul 2, 2018

When Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) called on others to continue harassing Trump administration officials, she got a sharp rebuke from House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). But some in the media apparently agreed with Waters.

While appearing on “AM Joy” on Sunday, Washington Post columnist Jennifer Rubin argued that White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders and others deserved a lifetime of harassment. Her comments came after Sanders announced that a Virginia restaurant asked her to leave because of her support for the Trump administration…

The video and more…

NBC News star Andrea Mitchell slammed for citing wrong law when attempting to bash White House

Brian Flood                  Fox News                   July 3, 2018

NBC News’ Andrea Mitchell was called out by a former Office of Government Ethics director for citing the wrong law.  (2017 NBCUniversal Media, LLC)

NBC News star Andrea Mitchell is under fire for citing the wrong law when attempting to attack the White House amid its Twitter feud with Democratic Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris.

On Monday, the White House targeted Harris and Warren individually on Twitter, accusing Harris of “supporting the animals of MS-13” and Warren of “supporting criminals moving weapons, drugs and victims across our nation’s borders.”

Mitchell attempted to defend the Democratic leaders, but it didn’t go so well.

“Re: White House tweets attacking Senators: Section 1352(a) of Title 31: No part of the money appropriated by any enactment of Congress shall … be used directly or indirectly to pay for any … written matter … intended or designed to influence in any manner a Member of Congress,” the NBC star tweeted.

Law & Crime reporter Ronn Blitzer wrote that the statute Mitchell named has “nothing to do” with the situation and “doesn’t even include the language she quoted.”…


Justice Department covers up possible spy ring scandal in Democratic congressional offices

Frank Miniter                   Fox News                July 3, 2018

In an incredible sweetheart plea deal, Imran Awan – a former IT aide to Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., and other congressional Democrats – pleaded guilty Tuesday to one count of making a false statement on a home equity loan.

I sat flabbergasted in the courtroom in Washington as the plea agreement was entered.

I spent the last year interviewing hundreds of people and chasing leads for my upcoming book –titled “Spies in Congress” – about the alleged spy ring believed led by Awan that may have operated in the offices of more than 40 Democratic members of Congress.

If not for my extensive research on this case, I might have assumed the government just couldn’t find enough evidence to make a solid case against Awan on more serious charges than bank fraud.

When I asked Justice Department prosecutor J.P. Cooney why the government made this odd plea deal he just smiled and waved me away as he told me to ask the Justice Department Office of Public Affairs. The office declined to answer my questions.

Shockingly, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia issued a news release about Awan’s plea agreement that made no mention of his IT work for Democrats in Congress, no mention of Wasserman Schultz, and made his case sound like a minor local criminal matter of little interest to anyone. It was headlined: “Virginia Man Pleads Guilty to Making False Statement on Application for Home Equity Loan.”

Ho-hum, right? Actually, nothing could be further from the truth.

Awan is due to be sentenced Aug. 21 and could get off with no jail sentence, according the plea agreement. Prosecutors said they would not recommend jail time – in effect, giving Awan a get-out-of-jail-free card.

Just like that, the Department of Justice is making an important case go away as if nothing much happened.

Awan’s wife, Hina Alvi, is having all charges against her dismissed as part of the agreement.

Awan, as a part of this plea agreement, also “will not be charged” for any other nonviolent crimes he may have committed in Washington prior to the agreement, according to this deal.

The plea deal agreement even exonerates Awan by saying in part that “the Government agrees that the public allegations that your client (Imran Awan) stole U.S. House of Representatives (‘House’) equipment and engaged in unauthorized or illegal conduct involving House computer systems do not form the basis of any conduct relevant to the determination of the sentence in this case.”

But there is so much more to this case. Even on the simple theft of government equipment there is a lot there for prosecutors. One of Awan’s former tenants, a retired U.S. Marine, even found and turned over to authorities several computers and smart phones with government markings on them that he found in Awan’s rental property.

There is also internal U.S. House of Representatives’ paperwork detailing some of what went on in the offices Awan and his associates who did contract IT work for congressional Democrats.

Internal House Inspector General findings have also determined that Awan copied the emails of up to 44 Democratic House members and other personal data and backed them up to a server that reportedly went missing and to a Dropbox account.

Awan, his wife and other relatives and friends were also all paid exorbitant salaries for working as IT contractors for members of Congress for years – even though many of them didn’t have any expertise in IT and even though they didn’t undergo background checks.

It is also likely that a few of Awan’s associates didn’t even show up to earn all the money they were paid. Still, no charges have been filed against Awan or his brothers relating to alleged thefts, possible espionage and for providing false information (an image of the Democratic House Caucus computer server) to Capitol Police.

It is actually very hard to sum-up all that this group of IT aides (who are almost all from Pakistan) did and the crimes they might have committed…


Democrats really do want to disarm us…

Funny how they never mention gun-controlled Chicago, whose plague of shootings is with illegal guns

Dem Gubernatorial Candidate Suggests Banning AR-15s Is Not Enough After Shooting: We Have to Look at Shotguns. Ben Jealous, the Democratic gubernatorial candidate in Maryland, said banning firearms like the AR-15 may not be enough to stop shootings. He said it’s time to look at shotguns following the shooting at the Capital Gazette newspaper office in Annapolis.

Senior Palestinian Official Dismisses US Peace Plan as a ‘Dead End’

“American ideas or deals that bypass the Palestinian leadership’s position on Jerusalem, statehood and refugees will only lead to a dead end,” Abu Rudeineh said of Trump’s peace plan. 

What the Palestinian Authority is really protesting is its being denied the opportunity to…

…make demands and extract concessions without giving an inch…

…make agreements and then refuse to fulfill their side of them…

…berate Israel and the United States at the negotiating table…

…and claim victimhood before a sympathetic global audience for months on end…   Dave

United with Israel               Jun 24, 2018

A senior Palestinian official rejected the American peace plan even before seeing it.

Nabil Abu Rudeineh, spokesman for Palestinian Authority (PA) head Mahmoud Abbas, said on Saturday that “American ideas or deals that bypass the Palestinian leadership’s position on Jerusalem, statehood and refugees will only lead to a dead end.”

Reacting to the current tour of the region by US Senior Advisor Jared Kushner and Special Representative for International Negotiations Jason Greenblatt and their meetings with Arab and Israeli officials in an effort to advance a comprehensive diplomatic solution, Abu Rudeineh said that “the American delegation should abandon the illusion that creating false facts and falsifying history are going to help it sell those illusions.”

He said that “the right address for achieving a just and lasting peace that cannot be bypassed, neither regionally nor internationally, is the Palestinian decision-maker represented by President Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinian leadership supported by the legitimate international community and the Arabs, who made this clear to the American delegation.”

“Despite the burden of regional issues, there are things that cannot be weighed with gold and humanitarian aid, or solutions that try to cut from a more-than-100-year-old historical conflict,” he added.

On Friday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met with Kushner and Greenblatt in Jerusalem.

“The teams discussed advancing the peace process, regional developments, and the security and humanitarian situation in Gaza,” a statement by Netanyahu’s office said.

After visits to Jordan, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia, Greenblatt and Kushner were expected to provide details of the US-sponsored peace plan to the Israeli premier, with an eye to jump-starting negotiations with the PA, which has maintained a boycott of the Trump administration since its recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and the subsequent US embassy move.

While Abbas has repeatedly rejected Washington’s role in the peace process since the Trump Administration’s recognition of Jerusalem as the Israeli capital, King Abdullah II of Jordan met with Kushner and Greenblatt on Wednesday, declaring that the “US has an important role” in future talks between Israel and the Palestinians.


Arab leaders ready to bypass Abbas to push Trump’s peace plan: Arab nations will be ready to back Trump’s Israeli-Palestinian peace initiative with or without the cooperation of the Palestinian president.

Top Palestinian negotiator accuses Trump team of trying to ‘bring down PA’: Amid ongoing meetings in Jerusalem between the US’ Mideast peace delegation and Israeli leaders, Saeb Erekat promoted the Palestinian boycott of the Trump administration, which he says seeks to undercut PA leadership.

Jerusalem mufti: Trump seeks to ‘liquidate Palestinian cause’. In a holiday sermon on Friday, the grand mufti of Jerusalem took aim at the US administration, leveling serious accusations in the run up to a regional visit by US envoys Jared Kushner and Jason Greenblatt.

Abbas seeks unity with Hamas to oppose Trump’s peace deal: Palestinian sources told Asharq Al-Awsat that unity would foil purported attempts by the US, under the aegis of the Trump administration’s peace initiative, to drive a wedge between Hamas and the PA or separate the Gaza Strip from the Palestinian government based in Ramallah.

WATCH: Facebook Bans ‘Imam of Peace’ for Slamming Terrorists

Did Facebook banish a moderate Muslim leader from its platform for criticizing the Hamas terror group?

In the court of Facebook, there is no appeal process for the “Imam of Peace”…   Dave

United With Israel             Jun 13, 2018

Mohammad Tawhidi, a reformist Muslim religious leader and imam from Australia, was banned from Facebook for making a sarcastic remark about the Hamas terror group. Facebook went to great lengths to bar his message of peace by blocking his profile and unpublishing his fan page.

Tawhidi uses his Facebook page to criticize radical Islam and has some 100,000 followers. We must ensure that Tawhidi is heard around the world. Share his words of peace!

The video…

There is something to be said for Facebook and Twitter after all…

That is, as long as their gatekeepers don’t tip the scales for Islamists…

Israel foils over 200 terror attacks by monitoring Facebook, Twitter: By patrolling social media, Israel’s law enforcers and security personnel have managed to catch Palestinian terrorists before they could carry out attacks.

Arabs involved in 95% of shootings in Israel: A TV news report based on police data revealed that though Arabs make up just 20% of the population, they are involved in 95% of shootings in Israel.

WATCH: Muslim Cleric Claims World Cup a Zionist Plot to Distract Arabs from Gaza

So crazy…

Turkish PM: Israel cheated in Eurovision contest to fuel religious war: Claimed the Eurovision was rigged in Israel’s favor so that the contest would be held in Jerusalem and trigger a religious war.  

Ahead of elections, Turkish president, opponent outdo each other bashing Israel: While Erdogan has become one of the most vocal detractors of Israel in the Muslim world, his main contender claims the Turkish leader is too soft on the Jewish state. 

While the points made in this video are true, there is an even larger truth:

Devout Muslims put Islamist ideology above reality in general

It is their inability to see the world as it is that holds them back…

Everything that does not comply with the worldview of Islam’s unholy scriptures gets tossed…

To Muslims steeped Islamic ideology, it is as if Muhammad vilified the Jews and expelled them from Arabia yesterday

They adopt his hatred as their own…

And if the Quran says that meteors are lamps being thrown by angels at devils, then that’s what they are!

What’s Holding the Arab World Back? What’s holding the Arab world back? Why, by nearly every measure, are Muslim nations so far behind the West economically, culturally and scientifically? Bret Stephens, Global View columnist for the Wall Street Journal, explains.

Canada’s most populous province bans ‘anti-Semitic’ Quds Day rally: Ontario Premier Doug Ford announced a forthcoming ban on the annual Quds Day march, which “calls for the killing of an entire civilian population in Israel.”

Two asylum seekers suspected in rape and murder of Jewish girl in Germany: Two Middle Eastern asylum seekers are the suspects in the rape and murder of a 14-year-old Jewish girl in Germany.

Analysis: Jews paying price for Germany’s immigration policy. The brutal murder of a German-Jewish girl reminded Germans that their liberal immigration policy is at odds with the fight against anti-Semitism and the defense of liberal values.

Minister: Death threats caused Argentina to cancel soccer match in Jerusalem. “It’s not Jerusalem or Haifa. It’s not BDS. These are real threats,” Minister of Sports and Culture Miri Regev declared.

UN report: Debris from missiles that hit Saudis came from Iran: The United Nations concluded that debris from ballistic missiles launched from Yemen into Saudi Arabia contained Iranian-manufactured components and bore hallmarks of Iranian missiles.

As Sunni, Shi’ite rift widens, Jordan recalls ambassador from Iran: Jordan will not send a new ambassador to Iran following its “interferences in Arab affairs” and policies “that harm the principle of good neighborliness.”

Belgian authorities arrest couple for bomb plot: Authorities say the married couple that was planning to bomb that Iranian opposition rally in Paris.

Angela Merkel’s Future in Doubt as German Interior Minister Offers to Resign Over Migrant Policy

David Rising            Associated Press              July 2, 2018

(BERLIN) — A resolution to Germany’s government crisis proved elusive Sunday after the head of the Bavaria-only Christian Social Union in Angela Merkel’s conservative bloc offered his resignation rather than back down from his stance against the chancellor’s migration policies.

A nearly eight-hour meeting of the CSU in Munich was put on hold after the party’s leader, Interior Minister Horst Seehofer, made his offer to resign both from Merkel’s Cabinet and as head of the CSU.

After further talks with a smaller group of CSU officials seeking to change his mind, Seehofer said he had agreed to meet again with Merkel’s party before he made his decision final.

“We’ll have more talks today with the CDU in Berlin with the hope that we can come to an agreement,” Seehofer told reporters just before 2 a.m. Monday. “After that, then we will see.”

Officials of Merkel’s Christian Democrat party broke off their own separate meeting in Berlin about an hour earlier, saying they would resume at 8:30 a.m.

If Seehofer does step down, it is not immediately clear what effect the move would have on a three-week impasse between Merkel and her CSU partners, which has centered on his resolve to turn away some types of asylum-seekers at Germany’s borders.

Merkel has insisted on Europe-wide solutions to handling the waves of foreigners trying to reach the continent and the standoff could spell the end of her fourth government.

Merkel maintained earlier Sunday that a plan to regulate immigration that European Union leaders approved Friday and other agreements she hashed out with several key countries would accomplish what Seehofer seeks.

“The sum total of everything we have agreed upon has the same effect” as what Seehofer has demanded, Merkel said in an interview with ZDF television. “That is my personal opinion. The CSU must naturally decide that for itself.”

But the German news agency dpa reported that Seehofer told the meeting of CSU officials that he thinks the measures do not adequately accomplish his goals. Seehofer did not comment on that during his brief statement to journalists after his party’s meeting…


That settles it… It’s time to send the “Syrian refugees” home…

Syrian government calls on refugees to return home

Robert Spencer: The History of Jihad from Muhammad to ISIS

The Rebel, by Jon Cardillo, May 1, 2018:

On last night’s episode of Off The Cuff Declassified, Author and Director of Robert Spencer joined me to discuss his newest book The History of Jihad: From Muhammad to ISIS.

Using eyewitness accounts from people on the scene, Robert addresses the claim that Christians, Jews, and Muslims once coexisted in peace.

Topics explored in this book include the Ottoman invasion of Europe, the fracturing of Christianity during the Protestant Reformation, and the temporary alliance of the British and Ottomans.

WATCH my interview with Robert to hear more about the popular myths surrounding Islam that he seeks to debunk.

Sword and Scimitar: A Look into Raymond Ibrahim’s New Book

Front Page Magazine, by Jamie Glazov, May 28, 2018:

Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Raymond Ibrahim, an author, public speaker, and Middle East and Islam specialist. He is currently a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and a Judith Friedman Rosen Writing Fellow, Middle East Forum. His new book is Sword and Scimitar: Fourteen Centuries of War between Islam and the West.

Frontpage: Raymond, welcome to Frontpage interview.

Ibrahim: Good to be back Jamie, thank you.

FP: Congrats on your new book coming out. Introduce us to it.

Raymond Ibrahim: Thanks, Jamie.  The book’s title is Sword and Scimitar: Fourteen Centuries of War between Islam and the West.  As indicated by the title, it is a military history between Islam and the West, narrated around their eight most decisive clashes, the first and last of which occurred more than a millennium apart.  But while the eight battles/sieges form the centerpieces of the book’s eight chapters, the bulk of the narrative chronologically traces and tells the general (but much forgotten) story of Islam and the West, most of which of course revolved around warfare—with all the attendant death, destruction, slavery, and geopolitical demarcations and map rearrangements.

FP: Quite a fascinating and original approach.  How and when did you get this idea?

Ibrahim:  Well, we can say I began working on portions of this book some twenty years ago—since around 1998-99, when I first started doing academic research for what became my MA thesis (in History): a close examination, including through the original Arabic and Greek sources, of the battle of Yarmuk—the first major military encounter between Islam and the Eastern Roman Empire in 636 (highlighted in Chapter 1 of the book).

Since then, I’ve continued to study the historic clash between the West and Islam, writing sporadic but relevant articles—for example on the Second Siege of Constantinople and the Battle of Tours—and of course working on and fine tuning Sword and Scimitar.

FP: While the book is obviously historical, it also clearly has crucial contemporary relevance and significance. Can you talk a bit about that?

Ibrahim: Sure Jamie, thank you. Although the book and its narrative revolve around historic warfare, it offers, as you observe, many lessons of contemporary relevance.  Take for example the question of whether the behavior of Islamic groups such as the Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL) is Islamic or not.  Those many “experts” who insist ISIS is just a gang of “terrorists” who have “nothing to do with Islam” will be hard pressed to explain why over a millennium of leading Muslims—caliphs, sultans, emirs, ulema and jurists of the highest order—have said to and done in Europe the same exact things ISIS says and does to “infidels” today.

The book also documents a little known fact: that what we today call “the West” is really the westernmost remnant of what was a much more extensive civilizational block that Islam permanently severed. Over the centuries, nonstop jihad and terror saw three-fourths of the post-Roman Christian world become Islamic, leaving the remaining quarter—Europe proper—in a permanent state of embattlement.  It is, incidentally, for this reason that tiny Europe’s self-identity did not historically revolve around ethnicity or language—hence why such a small corner of the Eurasian landmass (Europe) still houses dozens of both, some widely divergent, while much larger landmasses are homogenous—but rather religion: it was the last and most redoubtable bastion of Christendom not to be conquered by Islam.

The book should further bring Westerners up to speed with Muslims, at least when it comes to the latter’s frequent (and to Western ears, cryptic) referencing of history.   For example, when Yasser Arafat made a peace treaty with Israel in 1994 that was criticized by fellow Arabs and Muslims as offering too many concessions, the Palestinian leader justified his actions by saying, “I see this agreement as being no more than the agreement signed between our Prophet Muhammad and the Quraysh in Mecca”—that is, a truce that Muhammad abolished on a pretext once he was in a position of power and able to go on the offensive.

Similarly, many of the otherwise bizarre and obscene things ISIS says to the West—“American blood is best, and we will taste it soon,” or “We love death as you love life,” or “We will conquer your Rome, break your crosses, and enslave your women”—are verbatim quotes spoken by the historic jihad’s greatest practitioners  Whereas many of the world’s Muslims make the connection and appreciate the deeper meaning behind the words and deeds of their politically active coreligionists, the West remains oblivious of the deliberate continuity.

In short, unlike most military histories—which no matter how fascinating are ultimately academic—Sword and Scimitar offers several contemporary lessons.  It further sets the much distorted historical record between the two civilizations straight and, in so doing, demonstrates once and for all that Muslim hostility for and terrorization of the West is not an aberration but a continuation of Islamic history.

FP: Tell us about your research method in writing this book and your extremely impressive utilization of primary sources.

Ibrahim: As mentioned, because I’ve been working on this book—even if sometimes only in my head—for about two decades, I managed to create a thoroughly comprehensive bibliography, as well as make copies of several older manuscripts during my years working at the African and Middle Eastern Division of the Library of Congress.  I also utilized sources in and translated from other languages—particularly Arabic, including by providing to my knowledge never before translated excerpts of the historic clash.

And yes, firmly believing that history’s Muslims and Christians had a much better idea of why they were fighting and dying, I certainly did focus on primary sources (probably well over half of the book’s one-thousand endnotes cite primary source quotes).  Their words—separated by centuries and continents—evince a remarkable continuity that is alone significant.

That said, and because the oft-made boast of relying “only on primary sources” is all too often an excuse for not grappling with all the existing literature—that is, for not doing one’s homework (primary sources, especially if limited to translations, are usually only an iota of what is available)—I tried to supplement and balance the narrative with the interpretations and observations of authoritative historians, that is, secondary sources.

FP: When will Sword and Scimitar formally be published and are there any other interesting tidbits you can tell us?

IbrahimAugust 28 is the book’s official release date [pre-order here from your preferred distributor].  Because it deals with topics that fascinated me decades before I began writing about contemporary Islam, I can honestly say that I “went all out” with this book: as mentioned, it contains over one-thousand endnotes from some 220 books and monographs; 37 relevant photos (from epic paintings to modern atrocities) and a comprehensive, general map, tracing the historic struggle between Islam and the West.

My publisher, Da Capo, is moreover not only a leader in military history, but a member of the Hachette Book Group—the third largest publisher in the world—thereby positioning the book to receive suitable coverage and dissemination.

It’s also an honor that America’s premiere military historian, Victor Davis Hanson, has provided the book with an excellent foreword; similarly, a number of historians and professors in fields germane to the book—published scholars on the crusades, the Reconquista, Medieval Islam and jihad—have endorsed it.

Ultimately it’s my hope that Sword and Scimitar ends up being what I spent years working on it to be—something of a magnum opus, one that, while vividly bringing the past to life, goes a long way to make sense of the present.

FP: Thanks so much for joining Frontpage Interview, Raymond. And congratulations on this new exciting and educational read.  We wish you all the best with it.

Ibrahim: Thank you, Jamie.


Here is an excerpt from the book: