Geller: Who Is Behind the Internet Thought Police?

Graeme Robertson/Getty

Breitbart, by Pamela Geller, June 8 2018:

Just who is behind the policing of our thought online?

An article, “What the Red Pill Means for Radicals,” published on June 7 in the ironically named publication Fair Observer might have passed unnoticed as yet another uninformed, biased and ideologically motivated attack on all who ever get labeled “extremists.” The piece is so riddled with non-sequiturs and wild generalizations that it seems almost cruel to rip it to shreds.

But the author is Bharath Ganesh. A little online research reveals that Ganesh is currently working at the Oxford Internet Institute — at the esteemed Oxford University — on a research project funded by the European Union to devise ways to disrupt the “far right” online. The project in question is under the banner of the Vox-Pol Network of Excellence, which “is designed to comprehensively research, analyse, debate, and critique issues surrounding violent online political extremism (VOPE).”

This research group is only interested in violent extremism – according to their website. “The qualifier ‘violent’ is therefore employed here to describe VOX-Pol’s interest, which is in those that employ or advocate physical violence against other individuals and groups to forward their political objectives. The extremist nature of the politics in which VOX-Pol is interested is thus not decided upon by project participants, but by the decision of those involved in particular types of politics to advocate or employ violence to advance their goals.”

Note the claims – utterly disingenuous, as it turns out – that the labeling of certain people or groups as “violent extremists” is entirely due to their own behavior; in other words, don’t worry, folks, it’s all scientifically objective.

This research is being used to advise companies who host online platforms, such as Facebook, as well as governments, on how to stamp out online radicalization – using strategies such as working out ways of preventing people from seeing material posted that is deemed unsuitable in some way, or offering them alternative “nice” things to look at. This is a seriously important issue. The people and political powers behind such initiatives are manipulating behavior online and literally controlling how people think and get information. They are the appointed guardians of the online hoi polloi.

But who guards the guardians?

For if Dr. Ganesh is in charge, we have some very worrying questions to ask. One could start from the observation that the article is certainly not an academic piece, and gives no concrete evidence for any of the sweeping claims it makes about the so-called “alt-right” and the “manosphere”; nor does it, as any academic should do, attempt to test ideas and consider alternative explanations. (Oddly enough, this makes it rather like the groups it claims to criticize.)

And the label of “violent extremist” turns out to be used very generously. Ganesh makes wild leaps and inferences. He talks of Darren Osborne, the perpetrator of the vehicular attack on Finsbury Park Mosque. This was a heinous crime, and should rightly be condemned. But why did Osborne do this, according to Ganesh? The attack “was executed after he had become indignant after watching a BBC broadcast on child sexual exploitation and turned to social media to make sense of it. He found a narrative from British counter-jihad groups closely aligned with the alt-right, such as Britain First and the founder of the English Defence League Tommy Robinson.” The British counter-jihad movement is thus swept into the same group of violent extremists as Osborne, because Ganesh “knows” they encouraged him.

The BBC broadcast was the drama based on real life, Three Girls, which showed real-life events of three of the (very many) victims of the Rochdale Muslim rape gangs. Ganesh somehow knows precisely what went on in Osborne’s mind. Rather than thinking that it was outrage at the behavior of the gangs of Muslim men of Pakistani background who abused the girls portrayed in Three Girls that caused Osborne to lose his mind and commit his terrible crime, Ganesh blames Obsorne’s act on the likes of Tommy Robinson. Yet Robinson explicitly fights AGAINST political violence. What “narrative from British counter-jihad groups” can one find which suggests driving vehicles into innocent Muslims standing outside a mosque? I’m sure if there was any, Ganesh would, as a researcher at an elite institution, be able to find it. But there is none offered – only surmise and Ganesh’s mindreading techniques. I suppose if you’re paid to fight online extremism, you’d better find it, or you’re out of a job and short of academic publication.

We have also the ridiculous idea that Tommy Robinson is “alt-right.” He, in fact, describes himself as a centrist – he’s said he agrees with Labour on some things, the Tories on other things, and he left the EDL precisely because he didn’t like the infiltration by the far right. He shows no hint of racism or of white supremacism.

The writer of this shoddy article is working at one of the most elite universities in the world, on research funded by the European Union, and giving advice based on this sloppy thinking to those who are in charge of manipulating and policing the communications and information we have online.

We have to ask. Is it simply a coincidence that Tommy Robinson is now in prison, and that a “researcher” who presents such a misleading account of Robinson is currently actively engaged in consultation with Oxford University and the European Union in advising how to disrupt Robinson’s activities, reinforcing the lies and misrepresentations about him to those in power?

There’s more. Bharath Ganesh’s profile tells us this: “During his Ph.D., Bharath was also a Senior Researcher at Tell MAMA, a national project dedicated to mapping and monitoring anti-Muslim hate in the United Kingdom. He has given evidence in the Houses of Parliament on governance, extremism, gender, and hate crime and authored a number of reports in this area.”

Is it simply a coincidence that this “researcher,” prior to coming to Oxford University, worked for Tell Mama, that factory for the production of bogus claims about Islamophobia?

Who runs the Internet runs the world. Is this a partnership between Europe’s governments, the Internet giants, and Islamic influence?

Pamela Geller is the President of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), publisher of The Geller Report and author of the bestselling book, FATWA: Hunted in America, as well as The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America and Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance. Follow her on Twitter or Facebook.

***

Michigan churches join Muslim prayers against ‘gun violence’, stage symbolic school ‘walkout’

Leo Hohmann.com, by Leo Hohmann, April 20, 2018:

Parents, pastors, politicians and educators will join a Muslim imam at a mosque Friday in Oakland County, Michigan, to pray and discuss how to make their schools and community safer in an era of mass school shootings.

The Muslim Unity Center, a mosque in the wealthy Detroit suburb of Bloomfield Hills, is hosting an “Interfaith Prayers and Symbolic Walkout Vigil” April 20 that feeds off of the anti-gun fervor created in the wake of the mass-shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland that killed 17 students in February.

Imam Shaykh Mohamed Almasmari

The Muslim Unity Center, led by Shaykh Mohamed Almasmari, will host the event at 6 p.m., after its Friday afternoon Jummah or “call to prayer.”

Almasmari is heavily involved in the interfaith movement in Michigan. He has an outreach program, featured on the mosque’s website, called Building Bridges with our Neighbors.

A regular part of his presentations to Christian churches is a segment on “Islamophobia and its impact.”

“Islamophobia” is essentially a Western version of the Islamic blasphemy laws, where non-Muslims are not allowed to speak critically of Islam without incurring severe social penalties. Actual violence against Muslims is rare in the United States, and many such claims have turned out to be fake. [See Fake Hate Crimes, by Kevin Williamson, National Review, March 5, 2017]

In the wake of Donald Trump’s election as president, the Council on American-Islamic Relations has made a huge priority of promoting Muslim Americans as persecuted religious minorities struggling to survive as victims in the oppressive society of America.

Many Christian writers and thinkers, from journalist Rod Dreher all the way up to Pope Francis, seem to have bought into the oppressed Muslim theme.

Churches helping resettle Muslim refugees

Pastors of at least two Christian churches in Oakland County — First Presbyterian Church of Birmingham and Christ Cranbrook Episcopal Church — plan to join Shaykh Almasmari at his mosque Friday for interfaith prayers.

Christ Cranbrook works with Samaritas, a partnership of Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services with Episcopal Migration Ministries, to help resettle refugees into southeastern Michigan, according to the church newsletter.

Michigan has been a popular destination for refugees making hijra, an Arabic term for migration, from the Islamic world with the help of government contractors like Samaritas. The state has received 32,401 refugees from Muslim-majority nations since 2002, resettled primarily by Catholic Charities and Samaritas, according to data at the U.S. Refugee Processing Center.

Rabbi Mark Miller from Temple Beth El in Bloomfield Hills, the oldest Reform [liberal] synagogue in Michigan, is also scheduled to participate in Friday’s interfaith prayers to Allah, as are the township supervisors of Bloomfield and West Bloomfield townships, and the superintendents of four public-school districts.

The prayer vigil, symbolic walkout, and panel discussion will be followed by a “Stand Up Against Bullying Lecture,” according to the official flyer [see below]. A discussion about bullying of Muslim students is likely to come up.

“These events typically like to attach themselves to the issue of the day, and then bring it back to Muslim oppression in some way,” said Philip Haney, a retired Homeland Security officer and co-author of the book “See Something Say Nothing.”

Haney was in Bloomfield Hills just last week giving a presentation at Bloomfield Hills Baptist Church on the deception of the interfaith movement.

Haney’s research includes details on the latest national push called the Alliance of Virtue for the Common Good, in which 400 Christian, Jewish and Muslim faith leaders met Feb. 7 in Washington D.C. to declare their mutual respect. The alliance, initiated by the Muslim Shaykh Abdullah bin-Bayyah in cooperation with the Dallas, Texas-based ministry of Rev. Bob Roberts, is modeled after the Islamic prophet Muhammad’s seventh-century outreach to his non-Muslim contemporaries. The Alliance of Virtue has the backing of the Parliament of World Religions and its February conference in Washington was reportedly attended by a surprising number of evangelicals.

Rabbi Mark Miller of Temple Beth El in Bloomfield Hills, Michigan, with Imam Shaykh Mohamed Almasmari at an interfaith event in 2016. They will be participating in another interfaith prayer event on April 20, 2018 in Bloomfield Hills, Michigan.

President Trump’s newly appointed ambassador for international religious freedom, Sam Brownback, made his first public speech at the February conference and declared his support for their work, saying “this is the big one.”

“For pastors who sign onto these types of agreements, we are way past the point where they can claim ignorance as an excuse,” Haney said. He reminds them that Islam denies the Trinity, denies that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, denies His death by crucifixion, denies his resurrection and denies his future second coming as the Christian Savior.

“If that were all you knew about Islam, it’s more than enough,” Haney said. “Why would you go into the mosques and pray with the imams [to Allah]?”

The “common word” that forms the basis of the three-faith alliance is that “we all worship Allah,” Haney said. He cautions Christians to take Islamic beliefs about Jesus into consideration before coming to the conclusion that Allah is the “same God” they worship.

Schools support interfaith event at mosque

Friday’s event at the Bloomfield Hills mosque has the support not only of several churches and at least one synagogue but also the local public schools.

Bloomfield Hills School District is promoting the event on its website, as is the nearby Birmingham school district website and the Walled Lake school district website. The school districts describe the event as including interfaith prayers with Muslim, Christian and Jewish leaders as well as a “community conversation” designed to “educate” the public and “raise awareness and increase involvement around building safe schools and communities in the wake of the Parkland shooting and in light of remembering the many victims of gun violence across the country.”

This is just one of the many interfaith events sweeping the nation.

In Missoula, Montana, the First Presbyterian Church hosted a “Celebrate Islam Week” event the week of April 9-14.

The mission was to spread tolerance and understanding through the “aromas of shared food,” according to Imam Jamal Rahman, who has been organizing such events for years.

“These personal connections are critical. We can coexist with differences. People are starting to realize you simply have to honor and celebrate diversity,” Imam Rahman of Seattle told the Missoulian.

Last Monday’s feast was the second annual event organized by Missoula-based Standing Alongside America’s Muslims, or SALAM (which means “peace” in Arabic).

Teamed with a liberal Reformed rabbi and a pastor from the ultra-liberal United Church of Christ, Rahman has been giving talks wherever he can find a church or synagogue that wishes to learn about Islam [which means submission not peace].

At the April 20 event in Michigan, “interfaith leaders from across different religious communities will offer a prayer for the future,” according to the promotional media on the school-system websites.

Interestingly, I could find no mention of Friday’s interfaith event on the Unity mosque’s website, but I did find an anti-Trump video titled “Moses’ Mother vs. Pharoah; Trump vs. Muslims; Faith & Reliance on Allah.” In the video Imam Almasmari compares the Pharoah’s harsh treatment of Moses’ family to the “oppression” of Muslims today in America under Trump. He urges his congregants to “do whatever we can do, to speak out against injustice and speak out against oppression.”

Watch Almasmari preaching about the oppression of American Muslims under Trump in video below.

Dick Manasseri, an Oakland County resident and spokesman for Secure Michigan, said interfaith cooperation with mosques has broad support in Michigan, especially among left-leaning churches.

“Basically, part of what they are celebrating here is the death of people at the hands of the enemy which in their mind is the white American gun-owning Trump voter,” he said. “They are just masterful at this, taking current event news and putting it into the perspective of Muslim oppression. They are highlighting domestic terrorism. Domestic terror is a plus for them. Remembering Parkland and remembering Las Vegas works well in this regard. The targeting of conservative Christians as white supremacists, racists and Islamophobes is more aggressive than ever in Michigan. This notion that all the bad people are domestic terrorists is just another way of saying ‘Bible-believing Christians.’”

In January LeoHohmann.com reported that the FBI’s Detroit office hosted one of its quarterly BRIDGES outreach meetings at which the FBI emphasized domestic terrorism and Islamophobia as a bigger problem than Islamic terror.

“This is just them hopping on that same theme that the federal govt continues to give them,” Manasseri said of the interfaith event at Muslim Unity Center.

Republican Patrick Colbeck is the only gubernatorial candidate in the upcoming primaries from either party  who has gone on record in favor of protecting Michigan’s women and children against the spread of Sharia principles, such as honor violence and “women as property,” Manasseri said.

************************************************

Leo Hohmann is a veteran journalist and author of the 2017 book “Stealth Invasion: Muslim Conquest through Immigration and Resettlement Jihad.” If you appreciate this type of original, fact-based and independent reporting, please consider a donation of any size to this website. We accept no advertising and are beholden to no one.

Notorious lefty & Islamic groups to protest Trump’s ‘Muslim ban’

Alec Perkins Flickr

Conservative Review, by Jordan Schachtel, Sept. 1, 2017:

A coalition of leftist and fringe Islamic groups are coming together next month to protest President Trump’s so-called “Muslim Ban.”

President Trump is currently battling the judiciary to enact the immigration order, which has the stated purpose of stopping the unchecked flow of migrants and refugees from several terror-tied countries. The courts have thus far succeeded in delaying the moratorium, as the appeals process makes its way to the Supreme Court.

On October 10, the Supreme Court will take up the case. On the same day, the “No Muslim Ban Ever” rally will be held outside the Supreme Court building, and it’s hosted by the following entities, according to the event’s Facebook page:

Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)

CAIR was founded by members of the Muslim Brotherhood jihadist group with the purpose of raising funds and diplomatic ammunition for the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas. Moreover, its co-founder has publicly announced his support for Hamas. Several CAIR leaders have in the past been convicted of and jailed for supporting terrorist organizations. The group was listed by federal prosecutors as an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorism financing trial in American history. Additionally, the United Arab Emirates has listed CAIR as a terrorist organization. CAIR now takes pains to represent itself as a civil rights organization.

National Iranian-American Council (NIAC)

NIAC is a non-profit group based in Washington, D.C. that claims to represent the Iranian-American community. However, many have accused its Swedish-Iranian leader and the organization as a whole of being a front for the interests of the Ayatollah’s regime in Tehran. This viewpoint is shared by much of the Iranian dissident community. NIAC worked with the Obama Administration to push through one of his signature agenda items in the Iran nuclear deal.

Women’s March

What started as a somewhat mainstream opposition group to protest the Trump administration has devolved into a domestic terrorist-supporting entity that pushes far-left causes. One of its core leaders is Linda Sarsour, a terrorist-apologist community organizer who frequently traffics in anti-Semitic conspiracy theories.

New York Immigration Coalition (NYIC)

NYIC is a left-wing umbrella group that represents the interests of around 200 organizations. NYIC receives funding from George Soros’ Open Society Foundation and many other far-left outfits.

People Power (a project of the ACLU)

The ACLU extension describes its mission as “organizing the people’s power to resist” the presidency of Donald Trump. The group offers “Resistance Training,” and supports “action to defend sanctuary cities, resist deportation raids, oppose the Muslim Ban, maintain Planned Parenthood funding, and support other priorities.”

MPower Change

MPower Change is a “Muslim Grassroots Movement” works on promoting “social, spiritual, racial, and economic justice.” One of its three core leaders is the aforementioned Linda Sarsour, who this week exploited Hurricane Harvey to fundraise for Big Labor.

MoveOn.Org

A progressive organization that has raised cash for far-left Democrats who seek higher office. MoveOn is funded in part by George Soros and other wealthy leftist mega donors.

The intersection of Leftism and Islamic radicalism

Far-left groups continue to find allies in fringe Islamic organizations in their continuing attempts to defeat the Trump administration’s policies. These outfits would almost certainly clash on issues like Sharia law and leftist domestic policies that would create friction with fundamentalist Islamic ideals. But for now, they have united for what they deem the greater good of bringing down the current administration.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali Calls Out the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Blasphemy Enforcement

Front Page Magazine, by Daniel Greenfield, Aug. 24, 2017:

And that’s exactly what it is.

There’s been a consistent pattern of groups fighting “Islamophobia” including ex-Muslims and even Muslim liberals on their hit list. There’s a limited amount of fuss when it happens. And then it dies down again. But the real story is why it happens. It happens because the act of policing “Islamophobia” is really about enforcing Islamist agendas and their codes.

And like their ISIS cousins, the top priority of Islamists is purging Muslims for heresy and blasphemy. When the Southern Povert Law Center got into the Islamophobia business, it began enforcing blasphemy.

Now Ayaan Hirsi Ali challenges the corporations, like Apple, and George Clooney, for enforcing SPLC’s Islamophobia policing and the wilful blind eye that the group turns toward Islamism.

I am a black woman, a feminist and a former Muslim who has consistently opposed political violence. The price for expressing my beliefs has been high: I must travel with armed security at all times. ..

Yet the S.P.L.C. has the audacity to label me an “extremist,” including my name in a “Field Guide to Anti-Muslim Extremists” that it published on its website last October.

In that guide, the S.P.L.C. claims that I am a “propagandist far outside the political mainstream” and warns journalists to avoid my “damaging misinformation.” These groundless smears are deeply offensive, as I have dedicated much of my adult life to calling out the true extremists: organizations such as Al Qaeda and ISIS. Yet you will look in vain for the S.P.L.C.’s “Field Guide to Muslim Extremists.” No such list exists…

Like neo-Nazis, Islamic extremists despise liberalism. They deny the equality of the sexes, justify wife-beating and, in some cases, even the enslavement of female unbelievers. The Islamic State and groups like it regularly murder gay people in the most heinous ways. Islamic extremists are also virulently anti-Semitic, like the Nazis before them. And like today’s American Nazis, they brandish swastikas, chant slurs and peddle conspiracy theories.

The terrible consequences of Islamic extremism are on display on a weekly basis around the world. In the days after Charlottesville, five men in Barcelona used a van and knives to kill 14 and injure scores of innocent people. Another Islamic extremist went on a stabbing rampage in Finland. In wealthy societies like the United States, most plots to kill in the name of Islamist supremacy are foiled. But poorer societies in the developing world lack the means to do that, which is why the majority of victims of the extremists are in countries like Afghanistan, Iraq, Nigeria, Pakistan and Syria….

It is not surprising that, when I point out such facts, I am viciously attacked and threatened by those who are dedicated to Islamic extremism. But it has always struck me as odd that so many supposed liberals in the West take their side rather than mine, as happened three years ago, when Brandeis University rescinded their offer to me of an honorary degree. I would have expected a civil-rights organization supposedly committed to justice to speak out against those who would oppress women, gays and people of other faiths. But the S.P.L.C. has nothing to say about Islamic extremists; only about their opponents.

They are only “supposed liberals”. Actual liberals don’t support

1. Beating people they disagree with

2. Domestic coups

3. Islamic theocracy

Leftists these days do. The left has made its dirty deal with Islamists. And is incapable of intelligently defending it. And the SPLC, which is absurdly sloppy, is even less capable of doing so. It’s simply going to double down on the “protecting Muslims” meme. In this case, that means protecting them from an ex-Muslim black woman. And shouting that they oppose hate.

And the corporations will go on virtue signaling because until they get a different signal from the left, donating to the SPLC is the “right thing” to do. And no amount of facts or argument will change their mind.

But it’s all a reminder that the Southern Poverty Law Center is in bed with Islamists. It’s allied with Islamic Supremacists and their hatred for women, gays and all non-Muslims. And when corporations fund the SPLC, they’re funding the suppression of Muslim and ex-Muslim critics of Islamism.

Also see:

Radical mosque’s ‘community organizer’ arrested in Boston

Islamic Society of Boston | WikimediaCommons

Conservative Review, by Jordan Schachtel, Aug. 21, 2017:

A Guardian contributor associated with a radical Boston mosque was among the 33 protesters and rioters arrested in Boston this weekend for disturbing a peaceful free speech event.

While Boston officials maintain that the event was largely a peaceful counter-demonstration, the “counter-protest” to the free speech gathering was rife with leftist agitators, who routinely harassed conservatives and engaged in violence against opposition voices. Plenty of evidence of intimidation and violence was on display.

Ayesha Kazmi, who has written several articles for the far-left UK-based publication the Guardian, was arrested on charges of disturbing a public assembly, resisting arrest, and disorderly conduct.

Writing for the Guardian, Kazmi covered the Boston Marathon bombings, the Occupy Wall Street movement, the “militarisation of policing,” and the civil rights of Muslims in the U.S.

Today, she works as a “community organizer” and assistant to the executive director of the Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center (ISBCC), which is a hotbed for domestic terrorist recruitment.

The mosque’s executive director, Yusufi Vali, has in the past insisted, “My team and I have never personally come across any individual in our congregation seriously considering any fanatical ideology,” but the facts beg to differ. From the beginning, the ISBCC has been plagued with the most radical elements of Islamist ideology.

The Islamic Society of Boston was founded by Abdurahman Alamoudi, who was later sentenced to 23 years in jail for supporting an al-Qaida plot. The mosque was also closely affiliated with Yusuf al-Qaradawi, a global Muslim Brotherhood leader who has endorsed suicide bombings against U.S. soldiers. Several convicted terrorists once worshipped there. This includes the Boston Marathon bombers and Aafia Siddiqui, who plotted an al-Qaida attack on New York City.

Kazmi’s arrest is just one of many examples highlighting the “unholy alliance” between far-left groups and radical Islam, which seek a common cause in attempting to undermine the American way of life.

Jordan Schachtel is the national security correspondent for Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @JordanSchachtel.

Why Did the US Senate Ignore Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Asra Nomani?

Asra Nomani (L) and Ayaan Hirsi Ali testimy before the Senate. (Photo: Twitter)

Clarion Project, by Elliot Friedman, June 19, 2017:

Islamist ideology was discussed as a root cause driving extremist terrorism in a Senate hearing on Wednesday, but you wouldn’t know it from the questions asked by the committee.

The Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs held a hearing to discuss “Ideology and Terror: Understanding the Tools, Tactics, and Techniques of Violent Extremism.”

Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Asra Nomani, two brave female activists who have been at the forefront of the struggle against the dangerous ideology of Islamism, were invited to speak. Both women are from Muslim backgrounds and have extensive personal and academic experience with the intricacies of Islamism.

They told Congress that unless the political ideology of Islamism is called out, targeted and eliminated, terrorism will continue both in general and, more specifically, as a national security threat to the United States of America.

“We face an ideology of extremism from within the House of Islam,” Nomani stated. “Why, 15 years after the 9/11 attack, haven’t we found victory against terrorism? Why, after the killing of Osama bin Laden, haven’t we declared Islamic terror dead? It is because terrorism is fueled by Islamism, an ideology of political Islam, and we have wasted millions of dollars to design counter narratives without dealing with a very simple and fundamental truth. We must destroy and eliminate the narrative of Islamism.”

Hirsi Ali was just as blunt. “Political Islam is not just a religion as most Western citizens recognize the term ‘religion,’ a faith; it is also a political ideology, a legal order and, in many ways, also a military doctrine associated with the campaigns of the Prophet Mohammed,” she said.

Political Islam rejects any kind of distinction between religion and politics, mosque and state. Political Islam even rejects the modern state in favor of a caliphate. My central argument is that political Islamimplies a constitutional order fundamentally incompatible with the U.S. constitution and with the ‘constitution of liberty’ that is the foundation of the American way of life.”

She went on to make it even clearer, adding, “There is no point in denying that political Islam as an ideology has its foundation in Islamic doctrine.”

But Democratic senators on the committee didn’t want to hear it.

“Anyone who twists or distorts religion to a place of evil is an exception to the rule,” simpered Senator Claire McCaskill. “We should not focus on religion.”

Yet neither Nomani nor Asra made their testimony about religion. Both made it abundantly clear they were talking about the political ideology of theocracy, something that is by no means unique to Islam, although it is of course a particular problem “within the House of Islam” (as Nomani put it) at the moment.

Theocracy, self-evidently, has something to do with religion, since it seeks to impose religion as a system of government. But it is still a political ideology, the existence of which does not tar the non-theocratic members of the same faith (in this case Islam) with the same brush of involvement.

None of these plainly obvious facts impacted the hysteria which greeted the testimony.

Rather than ask Hirsi Ali and Nomani any questions, Democrats on the committee preferred to focus their discussion on questioning the former director of the U.S. Counterterrorism Center, Michael Leiter, who, coincidentally, had been invited by Democrats on the committee.

“Muslims honoring of sharia is not inherently in tangent with living in constitutional democracies anymore than it would be for Christians or Jews who also seek to honor their religious traditions while still complying with civil authority,” he said.

Clearly it isn’t. But it certainly is unconstitutional to seek to impose sharia as a system of government, which is what Islamists want.

In general, the continual denial of the existence of Islamist political ideology, which has something (but not everything) to do with religion is utterly baffling. If it were some harmless issue, like an obscure rule in golf which had incorrectly fallen into abeyance, or steadfastly insisting that “irregardless” is a word, then we could all laugh and then forget about the folly.

But this isn’t a harmless misunderstanding. It’s a very serious category error which misdiagnoses a huge and global problem. We saw the chilling effects yesterday in London. A man screaming, “I want to kill all the Muslims” rammed his van into a crowd outside a mosque, killing two.

Clearly people aren’t going to wait for the outcome of lengthy committee hearings to make a decision about what is responsible. If politicians can’t clearly delineate exactly what the ideology driving global terrorism is and explain how it is related to but distinct from Islam, fools and fanatics will assume it’s Islam in general and take the law into their own hands.

If you’re really interested in preventing that, then we have to be honest about the situation and start working to diffuse it, instead of trying to protect Islam’s reputation.

Ex-Muslim activist Yasmine Muhammed said it best on Twitter. Addressing Michael Leiter she said, “No disrespect, but you’ve been at the job a long time, and things are only worse. Maybe listen to @AsraNomani and@Ayaan.”

Indeed. As the poet and songwriter Bob Dylan said, “Your old road is rapidly aging. Please get out of the new one if you can’t lend your hand, for the times they are a-changin’.”

***

Asra Nomani talks with Tucker Carlson who was moved by the NYT article she wrote with Ayaan Hirsi Ali: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/22/opinion/kamala-harris-islamism-senate-hearing.html

Also see:

Ayaan Hirsi Ali on the Preaching of Islam and the Left’s Alliance with Islamists (Pt. 1)

Published on May 8, 2017 by The Rubin Report

Ayaan Hirsi Ali (Human Rights Activist) joins Dave Rubin to discuss the challenge of Dawa (the preaching or proselytizing of Islam), the left’s alliance with Islamists, intersectionality, the indoctrination occurring on college campuses, and more. *This episode was filmed on location, not in The Rubin Report studio.

***

Ayaan Hirsi Ali on Sharia Law and Political Islam (Pt. 2)

***

Ayaan Hirsi Ali on Female Genital Mutilation and “Islamophobia” (Pt. 3)