Donald Trump sparks a much needed debate about Islam

CJR: Hey Donald, you need to start using  precise terminology like “Islamic doctrine” or “Sharia” and differentiate between what Islamic doctrine says and what different Muslims believe like your own surrogate has. And it would be a good idea to point to reform movement Muslims like Zuhdi Jasser as moderate Muslims the government should be listening to instead of Muslim Brotherhood front groups like CAIR. Where do you stand on Ted Cruz’s bill to designate the MB an FTO anyway?

Trump Spokeswoman Cites Shapiro To Defend Boss’s ‘Islam Hates Us’ Comments

Daily Wire, by Robert Kraychik, March 10, 2016:

Asked to comment on her boss’s statement about hostility towards America among Muslims, Donald Trump’s campaign spokeswoman Katrina Pierson cited a 2014 article written by Ben Shapiro entitled, “The Myth of the Tiny Muslim Minority.” An accompanying video was also produced.

Joining CNN’s Wolf Blitzer on Thursday, Pierson clarified Trump’s position by highlighting widely-held mindsets among Muslims in both Western and Muslim-majority countries that paint a picture contrary to left-wing narratives of Islamic extremism and radicalism being fringe attitudes among said demographic.

Asked if Trump regrets comments he made on Wednesday night with CNN’s Anderson Cooper, Pierson critiqued the freezing effect of “political correctness” on honest political discussion about Islam and Muslims.

“We also have hundreds of millions of Muslims in the world who agree with these terrorist sentiments and acts,” said Pierson.

“I’ll point to an article written by Ben Shapiro in 2014 titled ‘The Myth of the Tiny Radical Muslim Minority.’ There’s tons of statistics in there, particularly noting in 2013 a Pew Research Poll of Muslims here in the United States where 13% approve of using violence to defend Jihad and 19% approve of Al-Qaeda. So we have a problem, particularly in the United States when you have 250,000 to 570,000 Muslims here in the United States that sympathize with terrorism even though they may not be themselves the ones to engage,” added Pierson.

The comments in question by Trump connected Islam to hatred of America.

“I think Islam hates us,” said Trump. “There’s something there, there’s a tremendous hatred there. We have to get to the bottom of it. There’s an unbelievable hatred of us.”

“In Islam itself?” interjected Cooper.

You’re gonna have to figure that out,” replied Trump.

(comments begin at approximately 9:30 in the video below)

***

Does “Islam” Hate the West?

By Counter Jihad, March 10, 2016:

Donald Trump made a claim during an interview with CNN that he thinks “Islam hates us,” meaning by “us” the West.

COOPER: Do you think Islam is at war with the west?

TRUIMP: I think Islam hates us. There is something — there is something there that is a tremendous hatred there. There’s a tremendous hatred. We have to get to the bottom of it. There’s an unbelievable hatred of us.

The claim is in a way obviously absurd, since a religion is not a living thing with feelings of its own.  A religion is a collection of doctrines, and doctrines do not feel hate.  At the most a religion might be said to be a collection of the people who structure their lives around the doctrines, and it is certainly true that not all Muslims hate the United States.  Some, as members of the media have been quick to point out, have died in the service of the United States.

If the claim is read generously, however, it does point to something important about the clash between Islam and the West.  It is not the feelings of Muslims but the structure of Islam itself that is the root of the clash.  It is in a strange way more correct to say the absurdthing, that “Islam hates us,” than it would be to say the obvious thing, that “Muslims hate us.”

As Jim Hanson, Executive Vice President for the Center for Security Policy said at the recent CPAC conference’s panel on radical Islam, Muslims are not at war with the West.  “The problem is Muslims who believe that sharia, the Islamic totalitarian ideology… is their calling, and they must spread it around the world.”  Sharia, the religious law that governs all aspects of life in the name of Islam, is what roots the conflict with the West.  Sharia argues that democracy is fundamentally invalid because it is a form of man-made law, when sharia adherents believe that only God can make laws.  That is another way of saying that only the revealed laws of sharia may be applied as laws to human beings.  The West’s democratic forms of government are anathema to this understanding of legal legitimacy.  As Hanson says, this same legal tradition requires its adherents to attempt to spread this form of government across the world.

Front Page Magazine recently did an interview with eight leading figures in the Counter Jihad movement.  The author points out that many Muslims of her acquaintance ignore Ramadan or drink alcohol.  Americans, she documents, have not traditionally had any concerns about Islam.  “It is primarily terrorists and Islam-apologists, people like Obama, Zuckerberg, Moore and Hawkins, who are in fact responsible for the current tension. Politically Correct speech codes suppress and demonize necessary conversations about Islam.”  As Ayaan Hirsi Ali pointed out at the same CPAC panel mentioned above, refusals to have those conversations in Holland prevented the assimilation of Islamic immigrants and the addressing of the problematic aspects of Islam itself — of Islam, not of Muslims.

We have to address the fact that Islam, not all Muslims but Islam itself, insists in its legal code that equality under the law is forbidden and sinful.  Women are degraded.  Sexual minorities, and some religious minorities, face the death penalty.  Freedom of conscience is outlawed, and former Muslims who exercise it by conversion must be killed if the law is to be satisfied.  It is not all Muslims who hate us, but Islam has a conflict with the West that can readily spring into hate built into its core.

The Truth about Huma Abedin that Media Matters Doesn’t Want America to See

The Associated Press

The Associated Press

Breitbart, by Lee Stranahan, Jan. 18, 2016:

“Still don’t believe Media Matters functions as a propaganda machine to aid and abet Hillary Clinton’s political aspirations? Just  read its response to a Vanity Fair article titled Is Huma Abedin Hillary Clinton’s Secret Weapon or Her Next Big Problem?

The left-wing attack machine wasted no time in posting an article with false information and smears in order to protect the Clinton campaign.

Hillary Clinton has stated publicly that she helped “start and support” Media Matters, and that organization has consistently come to Clinton’s aid with a consistent campaign of misinformation, half-truths and smears of her critics that can then get repeated by the mainstream media.

The Vanity Fair article must have sent shockwaves through the Clinton camp. It’s rare to read mainstream press criticism of Huma Abedin.

Instead, mainstream adoration for Huma by the media is often so over the top that even other outlets are forced to say something. For example, after Abedin’s husband, disgraced former New York congressman Anthony Weiner, was once again caught sexting with other women as he ran for mayor of New York City, New York magazine published a piece so gushing that it led the Atlantic to write an article titled New York Magazine Has a Crush on Huma AbedinNew Republic chimed in and said that “Abedin always gets good press, but this piece takes it to a new level” and cited this description of Huma as an example of New York’s Silliest/Creepiest Huma Abedin Descriptions:

She wore bright-red lipstick, which gave her lips a 3-D look, her brown eyes were pools of empathy evolved through a thousand generations of what was good and decent in the history of the human race.

Despite the fawning coverage she has received, there are many unanswered questions about Abedin, especially given her complete access to Hillary Clinton, one of the most powerful people in the world, a former Secretary of State and possible future president. As Vanity Fair’ William Cohan writes in his piece:

Over the years Huma has served in several positions, with increasingly important-sounding titles. She has been Hillary’s “body woman,” her traveling chief of staff, a senior adviser, and a deputy chief of staff when Hillary was secretary of state. Now, based in Brooklyn, she is the vice-chair of Hillary’s 2016 presidential campaign.

The Facts about Huma Abedin and Abdullah Omar Nasseef

To his credit, Cohan’s Vanity Fair piece on the secretive Abedin confirms a number of facts that have been reported by conservative media for a couple of years but have been twisted and convoluted by the mainstream media.

For example, the Vanity Fair article flatly lays out the information that Huma Abedin was an assistant editor at a publication called the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs from 1996 until 2008. He writes:

When (Huma) Abedin was two years old, the family moved to Jidda, Saudi Arabia, where, with the backing of Abdullah Omar Nasseef, then the president of King Abdulaziz University, her father founded the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs, a think tank, and became the first editor of its Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs, which stated its mission as “shedding light” on minority Muslim communities around the world in the hope of “securing the legitimate rights of these communities.”

It turns out the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs is an Abedin family business. Huma was an assistant editor there between 1996 and 2008. Her brother, Hassan, 45, is a book-review editor at the Journal and was a fellow at the Oxford Center for Islamic Studies, where Nasseef is chairman of the board of trustees. Huma’s sister, Heba, 26, is an assistant editor at the Journal.

Not one statement is actually controversial because they can all be confirmed by simple research that refers to primary sources. In other words, you don’t need to reference conservative media in any way to determine the truth about the Abedin family and their connections to Abdullah Omar Nasseef.

As the masthead of this 1996 issue of the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs shows, Huma Abedin was an assistant editor at Journal. Down the masthead you can see the name of Abdullah Omar Nasseef.

Because of the smear tactics used by Media Matters and repeated by the mainstream media, this point cannot be stressed enough: this is a primary source showing Abedin was an Assistant Editor of the Journal. It’s not a right-wing theory, a conservative fever dream, Islamaphobia nonsense or anti-Muslim fear-mongering. It’s a fact, a cold hard fact shown on the Journal’s masthead at the site where the Journal itself publishes.

Because it’s such it’s an easily verified fact, it should not be a significant breakthrough that the mainstream publication Vanity Fair published the truth about Huma Abedin’s clear and indisputable connection to the Journal and Naseef.

Read more

Republicans Take a Stand against the PC Jihad at the Terror Debate

jk (1)

Frontpage, by Daniel Greenfield, Dec. 16, 2015:

The Republican debate may have been taking place in Vegas, but over it hung the shadows of the killings in San Bernardino. And many of the Republican candidates stepped up vowing a tougher fight against the Islamic State and other foreign enemies of the United States, including Russia and North Korea.

There were divisions over many of the details, but there was also a consensus that the war had to be won, the military had to be rebuilt and that the truth about terrorism had to be told.

“The war that we are fighting now against radical Islamist jihadists is one that we must win. Our very existence is dependent upon that,” Ben Carson said, after calling for a moment of silence for the victims of the San Bernardino Islamic terrorist attack.

Throughout the debate, Carson made political correctness into his target. America was a patient, he warned, who “would not be cured by political correctness.” He urged us to “get rid of all this PC stuff” and argued that we must do the right thing without worried about being labeled “Islamophobic”.

Specifically referencing the Muslim Brotherhood Memorandum from the Holy Land Foundation trial by name, Carson suggested that one of its tactics entailed using our own political correctness against us.

Ted Cruz agreed that political correctness is crippling our resistance to Islamic terror, stating, “It is not a lack of competence stopping us, it is political correctness.” Referencing the San Bernardino Jihadists who pledged allegiance to ISIS, the Tsarnaev brothers and Nidal Malik Hassan, Cruz warned that, “Political correctness is killing people”.

“Our enemy is not violent extremism,” Cruz said. “It is radical Islamic terrorism. We have a president who is unwilling to utter its name.”

Trump, Cruz and some of the other candidates took a firm and politically incorrect stand against Syrian Muslim migrants. “They’re not coming to this country,” Trump stated flatly. “We will not be admitting Jihadists as refugees,” Cruz said.

Some candidates on the stage disagreed. Jeb Bush warned that such a proposal will push the Muslim world away. “It will push the Muslim world, the Arab world away from us,” he pleaded. Kasich also spoke of “Our Arab friends.” Christie claimed that he had fought Islamic terror “with the Muslim-American community”.

Jeb argued that the United States could not beat ISIS without Muslim aid. “We can’t disassociate ourselves from peace loving Muslims. If we expect to do this on our own, we will fail,” he claimed.

Ted Cruz however pointed out that the head of the FBI had admitted that the Syrian refugees could not be vetted. Christie and other candidates also referenced the FBI statement as a basis for halting the Syrian migrant resettlement program. Rand Paul even noted that every terror attack had occurred as a result of legal immigration. Though there were indeed illegalities in some of the major terror cases.

Cruz positioned immigration as a vital part of the War on Terror. “The front line with ISIS isn’t just in Iraq and Syria; it’s in Kennedy Airport and the Rio Grande”. He also pointed out that even Bill Clinton had “deported 12 million illegal aliens.”

“This is an issue we have to be 100 percent right on,” Rubio conceded, warning of the consequence, “If we allow 9,999 Syrian refugees into the United States, and all of them are good people, but we allow one person in who’s an ISIS killer — we just get one person wrong, we’ve got a serious problem.”

All the Republican candidates on stage vowed to be tough on ISIS, but they differed over topics such as the NSA, the treatment of terrorists who are American citizens and regime change.

“If you’re an American citizen and you decide to join up with ISIS, we’re not going to read you your Miranda rights. You’re going to be treated as an enemy combatant, a member of an army attacking this country,” Rubio boldly warned.

“We have to put America’s security first,” Christie urged.

Defying boos over his suggestion that Syria’s access to the internet should be shut down or eavesdropped on, Trump challenged them, “These are people that want to kill us, folks, and you’re — you’re objecting to us infiltrating their conversations?”

Rand Paul stated that Trump’s proposals would “defy every norm that is America”. Trump however retorted, “So, they can kill us, but we can’t kill them?”

Speaking of broadening the scope of the attacks on ISIS, he said, “They may not care much about their lives, but they do care, believe it or not, about their families’ lives”.

Cruz called out Obama’s “photo op” campaign against ISIS of “launching between 15-30 air attacks a day”. He pointed out that, “In the first Persian Gulf War, we launched roughly 1,100 air attacks a day”.

Discussing the need for a decisive conclusion, Carson opined that with his medical background he believed that, “It’s actually merciful if you go ahead and finish the job” in preference to a prolonged conflict.

He laid out a detailed plan for defeating ISIS by destroying their Caliphate, taking their oil and cutting off their command centers. “There will be boots on the ground and they’ll be over here, and they’ll be their boots if we don’t get them out of there now,” he said.

Ted Cruz suggested that Obama’s weakness fueled the perception that ISIS is winning. Jihadists had to face a scenario in which they would know that joining ISIS means “you are signing your death warrant.”

Carly Fiorina called for bringing back the “warrior class” of purged generals who were “retired early because they told President Obama things that he didn’t want to hear”.

There were heated exchanges over regime change in Libya and arming Sunni Islamist militias, some of which are allied with Al Qaeda.

Cruz spoke of searching “searching for these mythical moderate rebels. It’s like a purple unicorn. They never exist. These moderate rebels end up being jihadists.” Kasich however insisted that, “there are moderates in Syria.”

“We are backing people we have no idea who they are,” Trump said.

Cruz scathingly ridiculed the Arab Spring and its Libyan aftermath in which, “We were told then that there were these moderate rebels that would take over. Well, the result is, Libya is now a terrorist war zone run by jihadists.”

He became the second candidate to reference the Muslim Brotherhood when he discussed the coup against Mubarak and the rise to power of the Muslim Brotherhood, a “terrorist organization.”

Instead of being democracy promoters, “we ought to hunt down our enemies,” Cruz argued.

However Rubio contended that Assad is one of our enemies, mentioning his role in bringing the IEDs to Iraq that killed American soldiers and his part in aiding Islamic terror groups such as Hezbollah.

“We need to start thinking about the needs of the American people before we go and solve everybody else’s problems,” Carson cautioned.

Trump argued that the biggest threat we face was not, as Obama said, Global Warming, but “nuclear proliferation.”

“Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are responsible for the growth of ISIS because they precipitously withdrew from Iraq in 2011 against the advice of every single general,” Carly Fiorina said.

“Hillary Clinton has gotten every foreign policy challenge wrong,” she fiercely argued. “When she lied about the terrorist attack in Benghazi, she invited more terrorist attacks.”

There was widespread agreement that Obama and Hillary’s foreign policy was the root cause of the crisis.

“We’ve been betrayed by the leadership that Barack Obama and Hilary Clinton have provided to this country over the last number of years,” Christie asserted, calling Obama a “feckless weakling”.

The Republican candidates were also united in a call for the return of American exceptionalism.

“Barack Obama does not believe America’s leadership in the world is a force for good,” Jeb Bush complained.

“There have always been people in American politics that wanted America to be more like the rest of the world. And In 2008, one of them was elected president,” Marco Rubio said.

While the debate did not settle many of the basic questions of theory and practice in the War on Terror, several candidates agreed that everyone on the stage would be a better president than Barack Obama.

“We’ve opened up a very big discussion that needed to be opened up.,” Trump said early on in the debate. And that may be the best description of this debate that continues, not only in Las Vegas or in San Bernardino, but around the tables of American households all across the country.

Don Lemon Is Wrong About CAIR

d455913e-196d-4a67-9033-7e65be8d909c (1)Town Hall, by Kyle Shideler, Dec. 11, 2015:

CNN Host Don Lemon attempted to invoke the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) as part of his televised ambush of former Reagan official and head of Center for Security Policy Frank Gaffney last night.  Lemon played a clip of Nihad Awad, CAIR’s Executive Director, before asking why Gaffney opposed CAIR. When Gaffney attempted to explain that CAIR was a Muslim Brotherhood organization with ties to Hamas, Lemon flatly denied it saying, “There is no direct knowledge that we had that CAIR has anything to do with the Muslim brotherhood.”

It should be understood from the outset that CAIR’s ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and to Hamas, are absolutely indisputable. Anyone who baldly asserts to the contrary, as Lemon does, is either totally ignorant of the available facts or is lying.

CAIR was founded in 1994 by three men, Nihad Awad, Omar Ahmad, and Rafiq Jaber. All three men were leading members of the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP). IAP is described in documents recovered by the FBI and submitted into evidence at the Holy Land Foundation Trial as an organization of the Palestine Committee of the Muslim Brotherhood in the United States.

A 1991 Memorandum entitled, “A Suggestion to Amend the bylaws of the Central Committee,” and submitted at trial as Elbarasse Search-7 described IAP as the “official organization” representing the “popular side” of the Palestine Committee’s efforts. Remarks listed at the bottom of the page openly describe collecting donations for the “Islamic Resistance Movement” (AKA Hamas) “from the Ikhwan and others.” Ikhwan is Arabic for brothers and used to refer to Brotherhood members.

IAP is also connected directly to the Muslim Brotherhood, the Palestine Committee, and Hamas in the 1992 “Islamic Action for Palestine” memo, introduced into evidence as “Elbarasse Search 5. That memo describes the goal of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee as supporting jihad in Palestine, and in particular Hamas, with “media, money, men and all that.”

Deported Hamas operative, and now Deputy Chairman of Hamas’ Political Bureau Mousa Abu Marzook was  IAP Chairman, and the FBI submitted evidence at trial showing that Marzook had supplied IAP with tens of thousands of dollars.

The U.S Government’s Trial brief for the Holy Land Foundation succinctly described IAP as a “media and propaganda organization” of the Palestine Committee.

CAIR Founder Omar Ahmad, and Nihad Awad both appear in the “Palestine Section” Phone Directory introduced into evidence as “Ashqar Search 1.” Ahmad’s name appears under the name Omar Yahya, an alias Ahmad admitted to using.

In 1993, members of the Palestine Committee and its affiliated organizations held a meeting in Philadelphia that was placed under surveillance by the FBI. The FBI recorded open statements about Hamas, including under the code phrase “Sister Samah.” Hamas spelled backwards, as testified to by FBI Agent Lara Burns.

Burns would also testify that CAIR was formed in the aftermath of the Philadelphia meeting.

Omar Ahmad and Nihad Awad were both present at the 1993 meeting according to the FBI. Omar Ahmad spoke at the meeting (recorded and entered into evidence as Philly Meeting 15E) about working in the media, and said the problem was that the committee had “stopped working underground,” and that deception was needed, “the media person among us will recognize that you send two messages; one to the Americans and one to the Muslims.”

Following CAIR’s creation, the organization’s name appeared on a handwritten document titled, “Meeting Agenda for the Palestine Committee 7/30/94” seized in a search by the FBI and submitted at trial as Elbarasse Search-19.

Looking at the sum total of all of the submitted evidence during the Holy Land Foundation Trial, Federal Judge Jorge Solis declared that, “The government has produced ample evidence to establish connections” between CAIR, IAP and the terrorist organization Hamas.

Shortly after CAIR’s founding in 1994, Nihad Awad, CAIR’s executive director, wasvideotaped publicly declaring support for Hamas.

In response to a CAIR filed amicus brief in the appellate case against

Sabri Benkahla, the government’s brief responded by noting, “…from its founding by Muslim Brotherhood leaders, CAIR conspired with other affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood to support terrorists.”

The Federal Bureau of Investigation responded to a request for information from then Senator John Kyl and other lawmakers about CAIR by saying that it had cut off contact with CAIR’s National Headquarters because “evidence was introduced that demonstrated a relationship among CAIR, individual CAIR founders (including its current President Emeritus [Omar Ahmad] and its Executive Director [Nihad Awad]) and the Palestine Committee.”

The evidence of CAIR’s participation in a conspiracy to support Hamas through its role as a member of the Palestine Committee of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood is unassailable. The evidence that the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood exists as a real and knowable network of individuals and organizations is likewise unassailable.

It can only be either ignored, or responded to by attacking the messenger.

Which is exactly the route CNN and Don Lemon chose to take.

Pamela Geller, Breitbart News: “1001 Muslim Myths and Historical Revisions”

1001_Inventions_ShopBreitbart, by Pamela Geller, July 26, 2015:

CNN last Wednesday ran a viciously mendacious “article” dragging out the “Muslim inventions” myth – yet again.

This is hardly new; I wrote of it in 2012. CNN is pushing a new book that is based on 1001 Muslim Inventions, a traveling museum exhibit that has appeared all over the West to huge acclaim from the likes of Prince Charles. It has indoctrinated hundreds of thousands of children into a rosy and romanticized view of Islam that makes them less appreciative of their own culture’s achievements and more complacent about Islamization in the West.

1001-inventions-800x450

And now we see historical revisionism take on a new life, as history is scrubbed and manufactured Muslim myths are presented as fact. “1001 Muslim Inventions” is almost unfailingly dishonest. It touts surgery as one of the top 10 Muslim inventions, but in reality, surgery began in the Neolithic era and was widely practiced in ancient Greece. Likewise, the coffee plant was discovered in Christian Ethiopia.

Next on CNN’s list is flight: “Abbas ibn Firnas was the first person to make a real attempt to construct a flying machine and fly.” Abbas ibn Firnas was a man who threw on a pair of manmade wings and attempted to fly, but only ended up breaking his back. That makes him the father of the flying machine?

Fourth in CNN’s top ten Muslim inventions is the university: “In 859 a young princess named Fatima al-Firhi founded the first degree-granting university in Fez, Morocco.” The first university? Tell it to the Jews, a people 6,000 years old, with education as the cornerstone of their culture. And Nalanda University of India dates back to the fifth century.

Then comes algebra, and this claim, as well as the others, is utter nonsense. A Muslim, Abu Ja’far Muhammad ibn Musa, is often described as the originator of algebra. But Abu Ja’far lived between 780 and 850 AD; algebra initiated in ancient Babylon, Egypt, and Athens, 2,500 years before Abu Ja’far was born.

Next is optics, which also began long before Islam, in ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia, where lenses were developed by artisans working from theories the Greek philosophers.

CNN even has the audacity to claim music as a Muslim invention, despite the fact that Islamic law forbids music. Are they kidding? Where are the Muslim Bachs, Beethovens, and Gershwins? What about Jewish music, which goes back over 5,000 years? Muhammad wasn’t even a twinkle in his father’s eye.

CNN also claims the toothbrush for Islam, saying that Muhammad, whom they refer to, of course, as “the prophet,” “popularized the use of the first toothbrush in around 600. Using a twig from the Meswak tree, he cleaned his teeth and freshened his breath.”

Muhammad was the first man to use an object to clean his teeth? Color me laughing. In reality, the bristle toothbrush wasn’t invented until 1498, in China. And the crank, the next item on CNN’s list (which was compiled by a crank indeed), dates back to Spain in the fifth century BC. The hospital, the last item on CNN’s list, goes back to ancient Rome.

With the advent of now daily jihad terror plots, arrests, and attacks, the Islamic/leftist machine is in fifth gear. Teen Vogue, the BBC, the Huffington Post, the New York Times,Newsweek and all the mainstream media outlets are churning out lies, myths and Islamic supremacist narratives to counter reality. Damn the truth, full speed ahead.

It’s endless, this sharia scrubbing of history. It’s why our children are not taught true Islamic history in the public schools: the jihadi wars, cultural annihilations, and enslavements or why the hundreds of millions of victims of Islamic wars have disappeared from world history courses.

Many of the inventions the Muslims take credit for are the inventions of the peoples, countries and lands they conquered. The booty from their conquests wasn’t only tangible gold, women, and monies, but intellectual theft as well.

The first Arabic-language medical treatise was written by a Christian priest and translated into Arabic by a Jewish doctor in 683. The first hospital was founded in Baghdad during the Abbasid caliphate — not by a Muslim, but a Nestorian Christian. A pioneering medical school was founded at Gundeshapur in Persia — by Assyrian Christians. The bottom line: the inventions and discoveries attributed to the Muslim world were actually stolen from conquered peoples.

CNN, by spreading this nonsense, shows itself yet again to be more interested in politically correct fiction than news. “1001 Muslim Inventions” is not history, but propaganda – and par for the course for the mainstream media these days.

Pamela Geller is the President of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), publisher of PamelaGeller.com and author of 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 here. Like her on Facebook here.

CNN Interviews Pamela Geller

CGXKDHVW0AEV_6kCenter for Security Policy, June 4, 2015:

Freedom fighter Pamela Geller was reportedly the target of a second murderous plot at the hands of jihadists incubated in shariah-adherent mosques in America.  Her interview with Erin Burnett of CNN yesterday was must-see TV — both for Ms. Geller’s unwavering and courageous determination to stand up for liberty in the face of Islamic supremacists’ efforts to snuff it here and globally, and for the latest, appalling example of media submission to those efforts provided by Ms. Burnett.

And Robert Spencer was also interviewed:

Obama Downplays Terror Threat: We Can’t Play ‘Whac-A-Mole Wherever a Terrorist Group Appears’

Washington Free BeaconFebruary 1, 2015: 

Barack Obama does not believe the Islamic State is a threat to the United States.

“What I do insist on is we maintain a proper perspective and that we do not provide a victory to these terrorist networks by overinflating their importance and suggesting in some fashion that they are an existential threat to the United States and world order,” Obama said.

The president has been under intense scrutiny for how he has handled the Islamic State. His downplaying of their threat to national security, calling them a “JV squad” has provider fodder for Obama’s critics. In his interview with Fareed Zakaria, the president offered a line of thinking that could not be any more different than that of his predecessor.

“It means we don’t approach this with strategy of sending out armies and playing Whac-a-Mole wherever a terrorist appears,” Obama said. “It drains our economic strength and puts
enormous burdens on our military. What’s required is a surgical, precise response to a very specific problem.”

Obama did not specify what that surgical, precise response was, exactly. By contrast, President George W. Bush sounded a stronger, more defiant tone when speaking of terrorist
groups.

“Our war on terror begins with al-Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated,” Bush said to a joint session of Congress on September 20, 2011.

Persecuting Steve Emerson While Jim Clancy Gets A Pass

Birmingham cartoonIsraellyCool, by Richard Behar, Jan. 17, 2015:

Longtime terrorism expert (and former CNN investigative correspondent) Steve Emerson has been tortured in the New York Times and other major media outlets after identifying a large city in the UK (Birmingham) as “totally Muslim, where non-Muslims just simply don’t go.” He not only issued an apology to every resident of Birmingham for this misstatement on Fox News, he announced a donation to a children’s hospital in the city. Commentators and journalists make errors, but few ever apologize for them. Indeed, the Times story smearing Emerson as a “self-described” terrorism expert (the piece was co-written by Robert Mackey, who has a distinguished record of anti-Israel bias) had three errors in it that the paper had to correct.

Now the paper of record should step forward and issue a fourth correction. When you call someone “self-described,” what you are really doing is calling him or her a kook. Tell that to all the government officials (including two former FBI counterterrorism officials and a former counterterrorism chief of the NSC) who have praised Emerson for his expertise on the subject of terrorism.

In fact, if its reporters were being honest, the Times would note that the contributions Emerson has made to our knowledge about terrorism since he founded the Investigative Project on Terrorism in 1995 are enormous. Prior to IPT, he won the George Polk award—one of the highest honors in journalism—for a documentary titled “Jihad in America: The Grand Deception.” Two of his books—one on the bombing of Pan Am 103—garnered praise in reviews in the Times itself. And the late Abe Rosenthal, the legendary managing editor of the Times, once noted about Emerson: “His investigative work on radical Islamic fundamentalism is absolutely critical to this nation’s national security. There is no one else who has exhibited the same expertise, courage and determination to tackle this vital issue.” (Rosenthal, with his famous temper, must be spinning in his grave over the “self-described” smear that the paper’s current editors published about Emerson.)

However, Emerson has lambasted the Times on many, many occasions when the newspaper failed its readers on the topic of terrorism. And going after the Times too vigorously can exact a price. Thus, it’s not unreasonable to wonder if some of the paper’s writers and editors were salivating at this opportunity to waterboard him and Fox at the same time.

Let’s put aside the fact that there are definitely some parts of Birmingham that can be dangerous places for non-Muslims to go at night — something the Times may or may not choose to inform its readers about. The question I have is why CNN international correspondent Jim Clancy hasn’t received “The Emerson Treatment” from the Times and other major outlets — following a bizarre Twitter exchange last week, in which he accused Israel and Zionist propaganda of being partially responsible for the Paris attacks. He also tweeted, “The [Hebdo] cartoons NEVER mocked the prophet. They mocked how the COWARDS tried to distort his word.” In yet another tweet, he referred to someone as a “cripple,” prompting a disability inclusion organization to call on CNN to apologize for the disparaging remark.

Today, in the wake of his Twitter meltdown, Clancy announced that he’s leaving CNN after 34 years of service – no reason given, and with no apologies to anybody. So far, the only media outlets that have reported on his departure: Jewish publications; Rush Limbaugh; Mediaite and the like. Knock knock, New York Times, anybody home?

Richard Behar is the Contributing Editor, Investigations, for Forbes Magazine, and is writinga book about Bernie Madoff. He’s recently published a revealing first look at the Madoff information he’s uncovered.  He’s not doing cartwheels over the current state of investigative journalism, but is an eternal optimist. www.richardbehar.com Twitter: @beharjournalist

Also see:

Qatar Awareness Campaign – CNN

10444640_541029836027957_3198265898780002919_n
Jeffrey Zucker

CNN Corporate Office Headquarters
1 CNN Center
Atlanta, GA 30348 USA

Dear Mr. Zucker:

This letter is being sent to you on behalf of the Qatar Awareness Campaign Coalition.  The purpose is to inform you and the public of the activities of the state of Qatar.  CNN regularly solicits the opinion of policy experts and fellows from Brookings Doha, which receives millions of dollars in funding from Qatar.  CNN.com also featured a prominent ad for the Qatar Foundation.

We urge to you read the information below, which includes evidence that Qatar is arguably the preeminent sponsor of terror in the world today.  It is a benefactor of the genocidal armies of ISIS, al Qaeda, and Boko Haram; it is involved in Taliban narcotics trafficking through a relationship with the Pakistani National Logistics Cell; and profits from operating a virtual slave state.  

Qatar is involved in terror operations from Nigeria to Gaza to India to Syria to Iraq

So the public understands why this letter is addressed to you, the president of CNN, here are some facts pertaining to CNN’s involvement with Qatar.

  • Following the overthrow of the pro-Muslim Brotherhood government of Mohamed Morsi, who simultaneously backed and supported Qatar, the CNN Global Public Square blog featured an interview with Gregory Gause III, professor of political science at the University of Vermont and non-resident senior fellow at the Brookings Doha Center. Gause expressed disapproval of the ouster of the government of Morsi, a close ally of Qatar.
  • In August 2014, during the Israel-Gaza war, the CNN Global Public Square blog featured an op-ed by Sultan Barakat, Director of Research at Brookings Doha. Barakat was especially critical of Israel, which he accused of “disregard for basic civilian infrastructure” in Gaza, and stated that Israel “clearly prefers an underdeveloped ghetto to a viable foreign country [in Gaza].”
  • CNN.com featured a special advertising page for the Qatar Foundation. This ad linked to “a 30-minute monthly feature program … that seeks to capture the dynamism and broad range of cultural diversity in … the Middle East.”  The Qatar Foundation, with the Emir of Qatar, established the Al-Qaradawi Research Center. Yusuf al-Qaradawi is the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood and a vocal supporter of violent jihad.

In light of Qatar’s consistent and vocal support for the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas, we ask that you consider the attached sourced report on Qatar’s activities.  The links cited are vetted and credible sources.  We hope you take the time to verify the truth of the statements for yourself.

After doing so, the Coalition of the Qatar Awareness Campaign calls on you to exert due influence on the Qatari government to cease any type of involvement in all forms of Islamic terrorism, slavery, and drug trafficking!

Sincerely,

Lt. Col. Allen B. West (US Army, Ret) – AllenBWest.com

Charles Ortel – Washington Times

Frank Gaffney, Jr. – Center for Security Policy

Pamela Geller –  Atlas Shrugs

Paul E Vallely, US Army (Ret) – Chairman, Stand Up America

Robert Spencer – Jihad Watch

Walid Shoebat – Shoebat.com

**

& the entire Qatar Awareness Campaign Coalition.

Qatar Research Report: http://www.stopqatarnow.com/p/research-report.html
Sign the Petition! Visit www.stopqatarnow.com
Facebook: Stop Qatar Now
Twitter: @stopqatarnow

** Select signatures as of 9/27.  The Qatar Awareness Campaign Coalition is comprised of more than 25 journalists, national security experts, publishers, and independent researchers. To view all Coalition participants, please visit the Campaign’s website.

CC: Allison Gollust, SVP CNN PR Worldwide

Terror Expert Accuses CNN of ‘Biasly’ Editing Her Contentious Segment About Muslim Extremism

By Billy Hallowell:

Author and terrorism expert Brigitte Gabriel is accusing CNN of “completely editing” and misrepresenting her views during a prerecorded interview that aired on Sunday’s “Reliable Sources.”

Gabriel clashed with Linda Sarsour, director of the Arab American Association of New York, during the segment in question, battling over purported “fear-mongering” and Gabriel’s views on Islamic extremism.

Waging allegations of selective editing on her Facebook page Sunday, Gabriel said that some of her explanations during the discussion were axed in an effort to fit an agenda.

“It was discouraging that Reliable Sources, a CNN show about media bias, biasly edited this pre-taped interview between me and Linda Sarsour,” she wrote. “They edited the discussion down to fit their usual pro Islamist bias.”

BG

She continued: “They couldn’t publicly let me dominate the debate, therefore the best parts were left on the cutting room floor, including irrelevant and hostile comments by Linda Sarsour — when my logical arguments were going against her.”

Gabriel then shared some of the sentiments she claims were cut out of the discussion, noting that she had highlighted there are currently 44 conflicts between Muslims and non-Muslims raging across the globe. Sarsour, she said, was so angry that at one point she reportedly called Gabriel a “bigot,” forcing host Brian Stelter “to stop her.”

While Gabriel claimed CNN filmed for 30 minutes, the appearance ended up being 11 minutes long, though it is not uncommon for media outlets to tape and then pare down segments to fit programmatic needs.

In the final clip that aired Sunday, Gabriel is seen echoing recent comments she’s made about Islam, questioning where moderate Muslims are in addressing rampant extremism around the globe. The initial comments came in response to a Muslim student’s question at a Heritage Foundation forum about Benghazi.

“The moderate Muslims, they can organize. Where are their collective voices?,” she asked. “Where are the voices of the moderate Muslims speaking when girls kidnapped by Boko Haram disappear and we still do not know where they are?”

Sarsour responded that there are many moderate Muslims that speak out, but suggested that they aren’t always given media coverage.

“There are people out there that stood up on Boko Haram, on terrorism, on 9/11. There are national Muslim organizations who continue to day in and day out put out statements,” Sarsour said. “Is the media covering it? I don’t have control over the media to cover these stories.”

But she wasn’t done there. The activist seemingly took Gabriel’s comments personally, adding: “And I don’t have to prove to anyone that I am an American, born and praised in Brooklyn, New York, and that my parents chose to come to the United States.”

Watch the heated clash below:

 

Read more at The Blaze

Returning Syrian War French Jihadi Suspect Arrested in Brussels Jewish Museum Attack

Brussels jihad attackNER, By Jerry Gordon:

Reuters reported French authorities have arrested a Muslim émigré Jihadi in Marseilles with a Kalashnikov assault rifle and another weapon in his possession.  The suspect 29 year old Mehdi Nemouche was arrested yesterday and identified as a returning Jihadi from Syria.  Nemouche lived in the northern French city of Roubaix,

Reuters noted the following:

French media reported that he was suspected of having stayed in Syria with jihadist groups in 2013.

An Israeli couple and a French woman were killed on May 24 when a man entered the Jewish Museum in busy central Brussels and opened fire with a Kalashnikov rifle. A Belgian man remains in critical condition in hospital.

French President Francois Hollande confirmed a suspect had been arrested and said France was determined to do all it could to stop radicalized youths from carrying out attacks.

“We will monitor those jihadists and make sure that when they come back from a fight that is not theirs, and that is definitely not ours … to make sure that when they come back they cannot do any harm,” Hollande told reporters.

The message “to these jihadists is that we will fight them, we will fight them and we will fight them”, he said.

Hollande has said previously the attack was motivated by anti-Semitism.

A spokeswoman for the Belgian federal prosecutor’s office confirmed a suspect had been arrested in Marseille but declined to give further details. Prosecutors scheduled a news conference in Brussels for 3 p.m. (1300 GMT).

“This is a relief,” Joel Rubinfeld, head of the Belgian League against Anti-Semitism, told BFM TV.

“But this is also worrying us … it is  crucial that countries who have citizens who have gone to Syria take all necessary measures to make sure this does not happen again.”

Police released a 30-second video clip from the museum’s security cameras showing a man wearing a dark cap, sunglasses and a blue jacket enter the building, take a rifle out of a bag and shoot into a room before calmly walking out.

Belgian officials have said the shooting was probably a terrorist attack. Some security experts suggested it may have been the work of a hitman rather than an anti-Semitic “lone wolf”.

One of the Israeli victims, Emmanuel Riva, had previously worked for Nativ, a government agency that played a covert role in Jewish migration from the former Soviet Union, an Israeli official said.

Miriam Riva, his wife, had also worked in the past for the prime minister’s office, the official said.

Dr. Jill Bellamy van Aalst had posted  recently on concerns in Holland regarding returning Syrian Jihadis and bio warfare threats to public health in the EU.   Just yesterday , we learned the identify of an American  Jihadi suicide  truck bomber killed in Syria,  was a resident in Florida,  Moner Mohammad Abu-Salha.who went by the name of Abu Hurayra Al-Amriki, “the American”.   Abu Huraya was a companion of the prophet Mohammed.  The American was killed in a massive Al Nusra suicide truck bombing operation in Idlib, Syria.  Al Nusra is the ‘official’ Al Qaeda resistance group active in the Syria Civil war opposition.

Syrian war American  AQ Suicide Bomber, Floridian Moner Mohammad Abu-Salha

Syrian war American AQ Suicide Bomber, Floridian Moner Mohammad Abu-Salha

FBI Director Comey said in a CNN report, “There’s going to be a diaspora out of Syria”. “And we are determined not to let lines be drawn from Syria today to a future 9/11.”  With the arrest of the French suspect in the Belgian Jewish Museum attack and disclosure of the American AQ martyr, the Syrian civil war has generated international concerns about the threat of returning jihadi veterans posing domestic threats as trained home grown terrorists. As witnessed by the events in both Syria and Belgium, those threats pose a clear and present danger in both the EU and here in the US.  In retrospect, President Obama’s declaration during the 2012 campaign that “bin Laden is dead and Al Qaeda is on the run” appears premature, at best, if not dangerously myopic.

Was Malaysian Air Flight #MH370 a Deliberate Criminal Terrorist Act?

By Jerry Gordon:

When we posted on the disappearance of Malaysian Flight 370, we speculated that  the Boeing 777 -200ER Aircraft with 239 souls on board, including 12 crew, might have been a criminal act  perpetrated by a trained terrorist or a suicidal pilot, as was the case with the  tragic 1999 Egyptian Air Flight 990. At that time we noted that the aircraft had been picked up by Malaysian military radar on a flight path 200 miles northwest of Penang in the Malacca Straits. Experienced aircraft accident investigators dismissed that alleged debris in the South China Sea, detected from satellite imagery by the Chinese civil aviation authorities, were too large to result from impact. The relatively shallow sea depth is less than 150 feet.

The latest Malaysian civil aviation authority press conference has confirmed that the 180 degree u turn was the result of a deliberate action by technically competent perpetrators or perhaps akin to Egyptian Flight 990, either the Malaysian Air Flight Captain or his co-Pilot. The radar and automated air control system pings detected via Inmarsat, PLC appeared to corroborate a new flight path that could follow waypoints used for international flights from Kuala Lumpur to the Middle East. After all Malaysia is a predominately Muslim country with significant minority overseas Chinese and Indians. Thus, the Middle East flight may have been the traditional air route for Muslim pilgrims on the obligatory Haj to Mecca. The new analysis by both US and Malaysian experts suggesting possible flight paths across the Andaman Sea and Indian Ocean or due south of the Malacca Straits across the Aceh peninsula of Indonesia skirting the Australian coast west of Perth may confine the search areas looking for debris. Unlike the shallow South China Sea, the Indian Ocean depths with trenches at more than 33,000 feet in places would make spotting debris difficult and would likely mask any pings from aircraft flight recorders.

Watch this CNN report on questions regarding the flight crew of Malaysian Air Flight 370:

cnn

There may be the increasing likelihood that Flight 370, despite its violent maneuvers after seizure of the controls, ranging as high as 45,000 feet in altitude to a low of 23,000 feet, flew on for upwards of six plus hours. That would have placed the flight within possible landing fields that could accommodate the Boeing wide body jet. The Boeing 777 200ER at takeoff carries more than 31,000 pounds of aviation fuel which itconsumes at an hourly rate of 2,100 pounds. That gives Flight 370 a possible range of  over 5,200 miles. The aircraft requires a takeoff distance of 10,000 feet with a full load of both fuel and passengers.

Former USAF General Thomas McInerny suggested on a Fox News report that the perpetrators may have been heading to landing fields and areas in Pakistan or Iran, given the operating characteristics of the Boeing 777. He told Fox News, “I could envision that terrorists could use it, fill it up with explosives, and attack a U.S. aircraft carrier.”“Put on board a nuclear weapon – a prototype on it – hit Israel, the United States.”

Read more at New English Review including some history on terrorism activities in the region and Malaysia.

Also see:

Jihad: “Spreading Like Wildfire”

map-2-al-qaeda1By Brigitte Gabriel:

Just over a week ago, Senator Diane Feinstein and Representative Mike Rogers, chairs of the Senate and House Intelligence committees respectively, warned America that we are not safer today from the threat of Jihadist terrorism than we were several years ago. We told you about their discussion on this matter on CNN’s Sunday morning news show, State of the Union, in an email bulletin last week, but it is worth reviewing their appearance again.

It turns out that Feinstein and Rogers aren’t the only Democrat and Republican who agree that the threat from Jihadist terrorism is worse today than it was years ago—and that the threat is actually getting worse.

On Sunday, The Washington Times reported that members from both sides of the aisle are skeptical of the Obama administration’s portrayal of President Obama as a great “terrorist fighter.”

Some members of Congress are resentful of the administration promoting what they see as a “false narrative” of Obama as the hero that killed Osama Bin Laden, while Al Qaeda grows and spreads. Other members of Congress are concerned that Al Qaeda and other Jihadist terror groups are active in more safe havens today than ever before with more Jihadi warriors fighting in more places than ever before.

Given that Al Qaeda was able to launch the September 11th, 2001, terrorist attacks from a single safe haven in Afghanistan, the proliferation of Jihadist terrorism in more places than ever is rightly seen as a threat to US national security.

For instance, Rep. Michael T. McCaul of Texas, who chairs the House Homeland Security Committee, told CNN on Sunday that Al Qaeda and Jihadist ideology was “spreading like a spider web, like a wildfire through Northern Africa and the Middle East.” He also reported that the threat to America has become greater in recent years, despite assurances from President Obama, particularly during politically-tainted presidential campaign speeches.

We cannot emphasize enough how dangerous it is for the President of the United States to be spreading a false narrative about the status of our enemies in the war on terrorism.

First, by claiming repeatedly that Al Qaeda is “on the path to defeat” and “on the run,”  when the available evidence suggests that Al Qaeda is growing stronger, Obama is encouraging Americans to let down their guard. Not just ordinary American citizens, but our first responders as well. Leadership is more important to a war effort than any other form of endeavor and our nation’s leaders’ words matter.

We aren’t talking about a few isolated incidents of exaggerations or misstatements either. As CNSNews reported in November of 2012, just two months after the terrorist attack in Bengahzi, Libya, which resulted in the deaths of 4 Americans, Obama was almost constantly stating that Al Qaeda was being “decimated”.

This brings us to the second negative impact of the Obama administration’s false narrative. By repeatedly claiming that Al Qaeda is defeated, the president is almost daring the Jihadists to prove him wrong. Early on in Operation Iraqi Freedom, President Bush was criticized for uttering the words “bring it on,” when asked about the Jihadist insurgents in Iraq. But that quip was nothing compared to Obama’s repeated claims that Al Qaeda is through. It has rightly been compared to “spiking the football,” and is no doubt viewed as a taunt by Al Qaeda.

By saying that Al Qaeda is on the path to defeat when they are clearly growing stronger in more safe havens than ever before, Obama is waving a red cape in front of a bull. It might be okay if Al Qaeda was in fact close to defeat, but taunting a strong Al Qaeda could result in Americans paying the ultimate price for Obama’s boasts.

At ACT! For America, our role as the largest, fastest growing grassroots national security organization is to ensure that our leaders act and speak responsibly and that our fellow citizens are educated about the threats that America faces. All of us need to make certain that our elected officials know that we will not tolerate cavalier, irresponsible rhetoric when it comes to the war effort. We must thank our fighting men and women for the victories that they fight for, but we must never let down our guard for the sake of political expediency.

 Also see:

Expert Testimony: Global al-Qaeda, Affiliates, Objectives, and Future Challenges

House and Senate Intel Committee Chairs: “America LESS safe” “Shariah motivates enemies”

By John Guandolo:

In statements that can only be described as stunning, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Congressman Mike Rogers (R-MI), both of whom chair the Intelligence Committee in their respective chamber, admitted that America is “Less Safe” than it was two years ago. The comments were made in a joint interview with the two leaders that aired on CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday morning.

While Feinstein’s and Rogers’ comments were focused exclusively on kinetic attacks (bombings, shootings, etc.), not the massive jihadi network in the United States, they make it clear that the number of threats is significantly higher and the number of actual jihadi attacks worldwide is much greater than only 24 months ago.

These facts raise some serious questions and bring to light fundamental failures by our government.

  • Why is the number of jihadi attacks around the world increasing at a time when the United States is ending the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq?
  • Senator Feinstein made a powerful statement when she said there is “a real displaced aggression in this very fundamentalist jihadist Islamic community, and that is that the West is responsible for everything that goes wrong and that the only thing that’s going to solve this is Islamic Sharia law.”
  • During the interview, Congressman Rogers said, “I absolutely agree that we’re not [safer] today, for the very same reasons. The pressure on our intelligence service to get it right to prevent an attack is enormous.”

The leaders of both of our intelligence committees in the United States Congress are on the record admitting that we are less safe and jihadi attacks are increasing rapidly. Our enemy seeks to impose Islamic Sharia Law and that’s their stated objective. Our intelligence service is under “enormous” pressure to prevent attacks.

download (30)As has been documented previously here, and in my new book Raising a Jihadi Generation, we have a massive jihadi network in the United States led by the Muslim Brotherhood. All training on the Muslim Brotherhood and Sharia Law for the men and women who need it the most in the FBI, DHS, Joint Terrorism Task Forces, and others, has all been completely shut down by the leadership of the FBI, DHS, and military.

The pieces now fall into place: Our Intel Committee chairs have stated: the objective of the jihadis (the imposition of Sharia); that the threat is increasing greatly; and that our intelligence service in under enormous pressure to prevent attacks. Yet, all training dealing with understanding these issues has been shut down and therefore the key issues cannot be discussed within the very agencies charged with protecting us.

Mrs. Feinstein and Mr. Rogers may want to ask the agencies charged with protecting America how they expect their employees to defend against an obvious threat that they have commanded their employees not to know.

Also see Republicans and Democrats Agree: America is Not Safer Today by Brigitte Gabriel

Guest Column: Turkey’s Democratic Reforms Aren’t All That Democratic

by Abigail R. Esman: