Before and After Obama: 10 Signs of a Diminished America

TIM SLOAN, Anthony Behar-Pool/Getty Images

TIM SLOAN, Anthony Behar-Pool/Getty Images

Breitbart, by John  Hayward, January 18, 2017:

The media acted as if Donald Trump’s campaign slogan of “Make America Great Again” was an incomprehensible emotional outburst from people who didn’t realize, or wouldn’t accept, just how great Barack Obama was. President Obama has spent his final months in office giving juvenile speeches full of excuses for why nothing bad since 2009 was his fault, while everything good was his personal handiwork. Why, if you just ignore all the terrorist attacks that happened on American soil over the past eight years, you can believe his carefully-phrased assertion that there haven’t been any terrorist attacks!

In truth, everyone paying attention could see the signs of a diminished America, and they knew exactly what Trump was talking about. A new Gallup poll finds that American believe the country slid backwards in 14 out of 19 policy domains, with the worst deterioration in the national debt, crime, income inequality, and race relations.

The four areas of improvement Gallup found were in the situation for gays and lesbians (Obama’s only truly high mark), energy (which got better despite his policy preferences, thanks to the private sector), climate change (whose partisans scream that it’s getting worse!) and the economy. “Health care” was a complete wash, which is awful, given the amount of money Obama spent on it.

The new administration has its work cut out for it to repair the damage caused by eight years of Obama’s policies in the following ten key areas.

1. Terrorism: Let’s start with terrorism, since Obama has made such a fetish of implying it’s not worse, even though his heavily-lawyered denials merely claim that a highly specific and unusually organized sort of attack hasn’t been taking place. In essence, Obama wants congratulations because the Islamic State hasn’t marched an army across the Rio Grande and sacked San Antonio, or sent a squad of terrorists to take out a shopping mall with signed, dated, notarized orders from Raqqa in their pockets.

Obama’s factoid about zero “foreign-directed terror attacks” is based on the highly contentious notion that soldiers of Allah (even the one who had “Soldier of Allah” printed on his business card, Fort Hood shooter Nidal Hassan) aren’t truly operatives of ISIS or al-Qaeda because they weren’t in constant two-way communication with the terrorist high command. (In Hassan’s case, even that weak excuse falls apart, because he was in touch with jihadi guru Anwar al-Awlaki.)

In truth, the number and frequency of deadly terrorist attacks on U.S. soil grew substantially worse under Obama. The raw number of fatalities under his predecessor, of course, is distorted by the horrific carnage of 9/11.

No one knew what a “lone wolf” terrorist was until Obama came along. The departing President seems to think “lone wolves” are less of a problem than big-ticket, carefully-planned professional atrocities like 9/11… but that’s the exact opposite of what his own intelligence community says. They’re warning that isolated extremists using the Internet to connect with global terrorist ideologies are difficult to spot in advance, and our resources are stretched to the breaking point keeping tabs on them.

The situation worldwide is even worse, with the number of annual terrorist deaths increasing over 400 percent since Obama took office. ISIS happened on Obama’s watch, while al-Qaeda and the Taliban are resurgent. The hellish mess he made of Syria will threaten the security of Western nations for years to come.

2. Cybersecurity: It should be clear by now that information security was, at most, a political annoyance to Barack Obama. His primary concern was controlling the public-relations fallout — keeping cybersecurity disasters off the media radar, because they made his administration look bad. Who can forget how the administration lied about the extent of the Office of Personnel Management data breach, leaving millions of victims vulnerable, while it scrambled to contain the P.R. damage? And remember, the intruders had been creeping around that gigantic, vital government database for a year.

The one-two sucker punch of Obama going nuclear over the menace of Russian hacking and WikiLeaks to delegitimize the 2016 election, and then springing alpha WikiLeaker Chelsea Manning from jail three decades early, should cement his careless and destructive infosec legacy forever — as if supporting his former Secretary of State’s presidential run after she trashed security protocols with reckless abandon wasn’t bad enough.

Obama apologists will say the Internet has become a bigger part of our lives over the past eight years, so it’s natural there would be more information-security controversies.The problem with that excuse is that the big cybersecurity disaster headlines were so often traced directly to administration policies — the OPM hack, the Clinton email scandal, the NSA/Edward Snowden controversy, software vulnerabilities kept secret by the government so it could exploit them, and others. The risky handover of Internet domain control to international control was Obama’s brainstorm.

Not every infosec threat since 2009 is his fault, but the gap between the rhetoric in his speeches and the way he coped with actual cyber disasters is. So is the way online adversaries have been emboldened by his failure to take action against them. We can’t even turn on our smartphones without worrying about Chinese spyware.

“On Obama’s watch, the State Department was hacked, the White House was hacked, the Department of Energy was hacked, and the National Nuclear Security Administration was hacked. A Government Accountability Office report found that cyberattacks against government agencies climbed 35% between 2010 and 2013,” noted Investor’s Business Daily in a November 2016 review of how cybersecurity grew worse under Obama.

IBD went on to quote an Inspector General report that OPM’s cybersecurity situation actually got worse after the attack, in keeping with the Obama tradition of talking big and doing little. His most comprehensive cybersecurity plan was rolled out in April of his last year in office, in an obvious example of passing the buck to his successor.

Read more

Report buried Trump-related ‘hate crimes’ against white kids

Photo: Getty Images

Photo: Getty Images

At least 2,000 educators around the country reported racist slurs and other derogatory language leveled against white students in the first days after Donald Trump was elected president. But the group that surveyed the teachers didn’t publish the results in its report on Trump-related “hate crimes.”

The Southern Poverty Law Center partnered with the American Federation of Teachers, which formally endorsed Hillary Clinton, to circulate the questionnaire among its 1.6 million mostly Democratic members. The survey was sent out to K-12 teachers and administrators who subscribe to its “Teaching Tolerance” newsletter.

The SPLC’s widely cited report — “The Trump Effect: The Impact of the 2016 Presidential Election on Our Nation’s Schools” — reported that 40 percent of the more than 10,000 educators who responded to the survey “have heard derogatory language directed at students of color, Muslims, immigrants and people based on gender or sexual orientation.”

The takeaway was that Trump-supporting white kids have been harassing minorities at the nation’s schools. And SPLC’s schools report, along with a broader report on alleged Trump-inspired hate crimes — “Ten Days After: Harassment and Intimidation in the Aftermath of the Election” — sparked breathless coverage in the New York Times, Washington Post and other major media.

The reports also triggered a statement Friday from the US Commission on Civil Rights, which expressed “deep concern” that “prejudice has reared its ugly head in public elementary and secondary schools.” The panel called for more federal funding to prosecute “hate crimes.”

But the SPLC didn’t present the whole story. The Montgomery, Ala.-based nonprofit self-censored results from a key question it asked educators — whether they agree or disagree with the following statement: “I have heard derogatory language or slurs about white students.”

Asked last week to provide the data, SPLC initially said it was having a hard time getting the information “from the researchers.” Pressed, SPLC spokeswoman Kirsten Bokenkamp finally revealed that “about 20 percent answered affirmatively to that question.”

Bokenkamp did not provide an explanation for the absence of such a substantial metric — at least 2,000 bias-related incidents against white students — from the report, which focuses instead on “anti-immigrant sentiment,” “anti-Muslim sentiment” and “slurs about students of color” related to the election.

“They left that result out because it would not fit their ideological narrative,” former Education Department civil rights attorney Hans Bader said. “It was deemed an inconvenient truth.”

Founded in 1971, SPLC claims to be a nonpartisan civil rights law firm. But it receives funding from leftist groups, including ones controlled by billionaire George Soros. And a review of Federal Election Commission records reveals that its board members have contributed more than $13,400 to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaigns.

Bader says SPLC has an agenda to derail the Trump administration before it starts.

“These flawed SPLC reports will be cited by left-wing special interests to try to block the confirmation of moderate and conservative people to posts such as attorney general by falsely making it look like America’s schools and streets are pervaded by bigotry,” Bader said.

Last week, SPLC held a press conference in Washington to demand Trump “reconsider” his picks for White House advisers and attorney general, and “disavow” his immigration policies.

Richard Cohen, president of the Southern Poverty Law CenterPhoto: Getty Images

Richard Cohen, president of the Southern Poverty Law CenterPhoto: Getty Images

New York Post, by Paul Sperry, December 5, 2016

“His own words have sparked the barrage of hate that we are seeing,” SPLC President Richard Cohen maintained. “He has been singing the white supremacist song since he came down the escalator in his tower and announced his candidacy.”

Cohen tied Trump to a number of hate crimes, which he warns will only “spike” once he’s inaugurated. He noted his center recorded 867 alleged anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim and anti-black hate crimes in the 10 days following Trump’s Nov. 8 win.

But the SPLC acknowledges that it has not independently verified any of the claims. It collected most of them on its website, many anonymously.

The group won’t use its $315 million in assets to investigate the “hate crimes,” or at least help alleged victims file police reports or provide them counseling or other assistance, but it has offered “sympathy.”

“We wrote back to every submission that provided an email address to express sympathy and encourage them to report the incident to local authorities,” Bokenkamp said.

Bader pointed out that most of the anti-minority “hate crimes” and “hate incidents” cited by SPLC do not legally constitute hate crimes, and many involve constitutionally protected speech.

“It is simply ridiculous that SPLC treats ‘build the wall’ as hate rhetoric,” he said. The center counted people mentioning “build the wall” as 467 incidents of hate.

“Alas, these days the SPLC is mainly a fundraising machine,” said Gail Heriot, a US Commission on Civil Rights member who voted against Friday’s resolution. “The more it can persuade its donors that hate groups have penetrated every nook and cranny of American society, the more money it can raise. Now it wants us to believe that the election has unleashed unprecedented waves of hatred and violence among schoolchildren. Let’s stop and take a deep breath before we assume that’s true. The SPLC has no credibility with anyone — on the left or the right — who is familiar with its methods.”

While there no doubt are legitimate reports of hate crimes against minorities — and even one is too many — hyping such incidents recklessly fans the flames of anxiety among such communities. And suppressing reports of crimes against Trump supporters gives a one-sided and misleading view of post-election discord.

Paul Sperry is a former Washington bureau chief for Investor’s Business Daily and the author of “Infiltration.”

Khizr Khan No Constitutional ‘Expert’; Passed Bar at Age 60

Khizr Khan, father of fallen US Army Capt. Humayun S. M. Khan waves as he stands near the podium before speaking during the final day of the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia , Thursday, July 28, 2016. (AP Photo/Mark J. Terrill)

Khizr Khan, father of fallen US Army Capt. Humayun S. M. Khan waves as he stands near the podium before speaking during the final day of the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia , Thursday, July 28, 2016. (AP Photo/Mark J. Terrill)

Breitbart, by Paul Sperry, Aug. 12, 2016:

Khizr Khan, the Gold Star father who lectured Donald Trump about the Constitution at the Democratic National Convention last month, has been touted by the media as a constitutional expert, on par with a Supreme Court Justice. However, far from being a constitutional expert or even a seasoned attorney, the 66-year-old Pakistani immigrant only recently obtained a license to practice law.

On August 1, Chris Matthews of MSNBC likened Khan to Justice Anthony Kennedy (emphasis added):

MATTHEWS: When you pulled out that Constitution the other night and said,
Here, read it, basically, to Trump, did that remind you of the fact you had
to learn it?

K. KHAN: Of course. Of course. Read it page to page. I – that was not
the plan, to pull out the Constitution.

MATTHEWS: You have it there?

K. KHAN: What I – what I…

MATTHEWS: Where`d you get that, by the way?

K. KHAN: Well, look – look at its condition.

MATTHEWS: It’s all marked up.

K. KHAN: It’s marked up because I read it. And this 14th Amendment, equal
protection of law, is my favorite part of the Bill of Rights.

MATTHEWS: That means that your children…

K. KHAN: Exactly.

MATTHEWS: … get all the rights of somebody who`s been here 20
generations.

K. KHAN: Exactly. And I did not realize up until I was in the cab to the convention that I had this in my pocket. We talked – I was to say that when you read the Constitution, look for the word liberty and equal protection of law. So I`m putting my coat on, and I touched this, and here it is. So I said, If I pull it like this, it will be this. So I had to place it in this form so when I pull it, it comes like this. We practiced.

MATTHEWS: You`re like Justice Kennedy because Justice Kennedy, Anthony  Kennedy, who Ronald Reagan appointed, is the swing vote, you know, and he uses the liberty clause and the equal protection clause for all of his recent big decisions.

But the hype is more about Khan’s use as a political pawn than his actual qualifications.

A résumé posted on his website (removed from the Internet last week) lists court admission and bar membership for New York state only.

A spokeswoman for the New York State Office of Court Administration in Albany, N.Y., said that Khan was admitted to the New York bar on June 22, 2010, which means he became eligible to practice law just six years ago — at the age of 60. He is not listed as a member of any other state bar.

No citations appear in court databases for Khan as attorney of record, based on a search of federal and state court filings through PACER and Lexis.

Nor does Khan appear to have published academic papers or law journal articles about constitutional law. In contrast, Khan’s academic papers touting Sharia law have been cited in dozens of Islamic law articles and have been used in college syllabi for Islamic law courses as recently as 2013.

Sharia law, the barbaric legal code enforced by Saudi Arabia, Iran, and the former Taliban government of Afghanistan, is at odds with most of the individual freedoms and rights protected by the U.S. Constitution.

Other media outlets, such as the Washington Post, have been keen to point out that Khan is a “a Harvard-trained lawyer.”

While Khan did graduate from Harvard in 1986, he did not obtain a typical law degree, but instead earned an LL. M. — a one-year international program tailored to foreign students. He has a similar degree from the University of Missouri-Kansas City. The LL. M. coursework is separate from the three-year law program required to earn a Juris Doctor, or J.D., which is the formal law degree that most licensed attorneys obtain.

“It is most often pursued by students who obtained a law degree in another country,” explained Harvard Law School spokeswoman Michelle Deakin in an interview.

In fact, 97% of students enrolled in the graduate program that accepted Khan are foreign nationals.

Like others applying to the program, Khan submitted a law degree from another country — Pakistan. He received his basic training at the University Law College of Punjab University in Lahore, Pakistan. The LL.B., or “bachelor of laws,” which Khan earned there is a two-year program no longer offered in the United States.

Furthermore, University Law College is a small college where courses are taught by professors trained in British as well as Sharia law, the brutally oppressive Islamic legal code that Khan, a devout Muslim, has said supersedes “all other juridical works.” In fact, Khan is a world-renowned expert on Sharia, not the Constitution.

Khan’s alma mater is run by vice chancellor Mujahid Kamran, an anti-Semitic 9/11 denier who in 2013 published a book that blames the Saudi-sponsored 9/11 attacks by al-Qaida on “Zionists,” and trashes the U.S. as a complete dictatorship. His book, 9/11 and the New World Order, was published by the University of Punjab.

In September 2012, Karmran posted on his website excerpts from his forthcoming book, claiming: “Currently 95% of the U.S. media is owned by only six corporations, whose top echelons are dominated by Zionists allied with the banking cabal. With the US military and intelligence apparatus in their control, with their ownership of the media, and with their control of academia, it is easy for them to direct assassinations and false flag operations, such as the murder of JFK and 9/11.”

Added Kamran: “9/11 was an inside job. It was not carried out by Osama Bin Laden or the al Qaeda.”

In September 2013, while promoting his 9/11 book on campus, Kamran was quoted in the Pakistani press saying “that the cabal [of Zionists] wanted to establish a global government and install microchips in every human being in order to control them.” He also claimed “that Nato airplanes had flown the families of Al Qaeda leaders including Aiman Al Zawahri and some members of the Bin Laden family to Central Asia to destabilise the region,” and “that Nato was sponsoring terrorist and suicide attacks in Pakistan.”

The media have also implied that Khan practiced law while working at the law firm of Hogan & Hartson in Washington. Instead, he managed information technology services, or IT, for litigators during his 1998-2007 employment at the Hogan & Hartson firm (now Hogan Lovells), a predominantly Democrat shop with ties to the Clinton Foundation. His job apparently involved pre-wiring the projectors, monitors and laptops, and video conferencing equipment for lawyers making graphic presentations in court. He also helped lawyers search and managed electronically stored records.

After leaving Hogan & Hartson, Khan opened what he described on his business website as a “law office” in New York to, among other things, represent clients seeking E2 and EB5 immigration visas — a practice that Trump’s proposed moratorium on Muslim immigration would throw into jeopardy.

Khan and his wife lost their son when his Iraq post came under attack in 2004. U.S. Army Capt. Humayan Khan was posthumously awarded the Purple Heart and Bronze Star.

Democrats are now actively recruiting Khan to run for political office and appear in Clinton campaign ads attacking Trump and his policies. They hope to exploit the media-manufactured narrative that it took a Muslim immigrant-turned-“Harvard-trained lawyer” to school Donald Trump on the U.S. Constitution and put him in his place.

Khan did not return phone calls or emails seeking comment.

Paul Sperry is a former Hoover Institution media fellow and author of Infiltration: How Muslim Spies and Subversives Have Penetrated Washington.

Also see:

University Spikes Lecture Due to ‘Hateful’ Chalk Messages Criticizing Terrorists

Nonie-Darwish-facebook-photo-640x480

Breitbart, by John Hayward, April 21, 2016:

It’s yet another story of politically-correct lunacy involving a university losing its collective cookies over chalk writings, but this time the “hateful” speech isn’t Donald Trump’s name.

It’s the question: “Why do terrorists hate America?”

That message, repeated in chalk advertisements and flyers, is the reason Wingate University in North Carolina cited when revoking the funding for a lecture by Nonie Darwish, a former Muslim of Egyptian descent. She is the author of several books, including Now They Call Me Infidel: Why I Renounced Jihad For America, Israel, and the War on Terror, and most recently The Devil We Don’t Know: The Dark Side of Revolutions in the Middle East.

An administrator for Wingate University emailed Young Americans for Freedom, organizers of the event, to say that chalk advertisements for the lecture were of “extreme concern.”

“Concerns have also come to my attention regarding ‘flyers’ that have been posted around campus and although I have not seen them personally, this in conjunction with the concern of a number of individuals that have reached out to me is yet again concerning,” the administrator added.

Evidently not a matter of concern was the administrator’s admission that she hadn’t even seen the concerning messages that made her concerned enough to pull the plug on the concerning lecture this uncertain number of unnamed individuals expressed their concerns about.

The flyers and chalk drawings in question included the title of Darwish’s lecture: “Why Terrorists Hate America and the West.”

“We do not promote and/or associate hate with a Faith Lyceum event,” the administrator declared — an interesting standard, given that the Lyceum program compares itself to Aristotle’s lectures, boasts of airing “big ideas,” and claims to be a program “designed to expose students to ideas and opportunities they don’t have in the classroom.”

“I am requesting that you immediately remove all flyers that promote this event as a Lyceum and would ask that you remove all chalk advertisements as well,” the administrator told the YAF. “With this no longer being a Lyceum, I also am no longer able to fund this event and ask that you please plan accordingly.”

The Wingate YAF denounced the administrator’s decision as “cowardly” and “stepped in to pay the additional cost in order to ensure that students at Wingate University will have the opportunity to hear Nonie Darwish speak.”

“There are constant attempts to silence us by many Islamic organizations. We are the No. 1 target of jihadists and ISIS sympathizers who are now in all fifty states,” Darwish told Fox News just a few weeks ago, when discussing the fatwa (Islamic religious edict) that has been issued for her death.

She said “we” because the Fox report discussed five other women sentenced to death by Islamist edicts. One of them, cartoonist Molly Norris, was literally erased from society by a tidal wave of death threats, and a fatwa from Al-Qaeda guru Anwar al-Awlaki, because she drew unpublished images of Mohammed that were leaked onto the Internet. “There is no more Molly,” her erstwhile publisher Seattle Weekly wrote, by way of bidding her farewell when she went into hiding.

Apparently the jihad sympathizers Darwish spoke of are active at Wingate University, and their “concerns” are taken very seriously by the administration.

Islamic Groups Push ‘World Hijab Day’ To Undermine Western Opposition

Getty

Getty

Breitbart, by Dr. Susan Berry. Feb. 2, 2016:

Some non-Muslim women in the United States and other countries voluntarily donned the “hijab” on Monday to show “solidarity” with Muslim women.

World Hijab Day is part of a major effort supported by radical Muslim Student Association (MSA) to foster empathy toward Muslims and Islam in America.

“People see a veil, the hijab, but people don’t understand why we wear it,” said Doha Medani, a sophomore at North Carolina State University (NCSU), reports The Technician, the school’s newspaper. “My hijab is how I represent myself to the world: as a Muslim, first and foremost,” Medani said.

“The first thing people see … is my hijab. It makes it clear to the world, or whoever else, that I’m Muslim… it tells people a lot about who you are,” she added.

The campaign, however, is spurring protests from Americans. For example, two Muslim women penned a December op-ed at the Washington Post in which they say the hijab campaign is intended to hide Islam’s sexist political agenda, and urged Americans to stand against Islam’s ideological oppression of women.

“Journalists and media outlets must stop making the mistake of defining hijab as ‘headscarf,’ furthering a sexist propaganda campaign to equate the two,” wrote Asra Q. Nomani and Hala Arafa.

In the name of ‘interfaith,’ well-intentioned Americans are getting duped by the agenda of Muslims who argue that a woman’s honor lies in her ‘chastity,’ pushing a platform to put a headscarf on every woman,” the Muslim women added. “Please do this instead: Do not wear a headscarf in ‘solidarity’ with the ideology that most silences us, equating our bodies with ‘honor.’ Stand with us instead with moral courage against the ideology of Islamism that demands we cover our hair.

Hijabs are tight or loose headcloths that leave the face uncovered. They’re a less restrictive version of the face-hiding burkas imposed on Afghans women, or the eye-revealing niqabs forced on Saudi women, including Saudi journalists.

Advocates of the Hijab campaign downplay their Islamic political goals, and instead portray their campaign as a women’s solidarity event.

“It’s like a ‘Walk a day in their shoes’ type of thing, for women to wear the hijab and see what happens, how things around them change when they are viewed as a Muslim woman — to step into that and get that perspective,” said NCSU senior Hoda Abrahim. “So you can empathize in a way, or just better understand it.”

At NCSU, the school’s MSA and Women’s Center jointly allowed non-Muslim women the opportunity to wear the hijab and share their stories about their experience.

World Hijab Day was billed as “an open invitation to Muslims and non-Muslims to experience the hijab for a day.” Ads for the event were clearly aimed at attacking negativity toward Muslims and proposals to limit their immigration due to concerns about terrorism from Islamic jihadists.

“Before you judge, cover up for a day,” read one ad. “Covered by choice, not force,” another read, tying to countering the widespread view that Islam oppresses women. Yet another featured a woman in a hijab with the message, saying “Beautiful, confident, empowered.”

The Penn State Berks MSA hosted “World Hijab Day” and advertised a “free scarf for female attendees, a tutorial on how to wear the hijab, and a free lunch for all who attend.” Participants were asked to wear the hijab for the entire day and send their stories about their experiences to the school’s MSA president, reports Penn State News. A prize was awarded to the woman who submitted the most “engaging submission.”

At Texas A & M, biology junior Salam Yamak told The Battalion, “Anytime you sit down with someone and you have a conversation and you show them what your religion is all about should be casual like this,” she said about marking the day. “It creates a better environment and so we can better show the true nature of Islam.”

“Whenever you have Islamophobia or any other group that is seen as different it’s because of people not having enough knowledge or having enough experiences with Muslim people,” Yamak added.

Similarly, chemical engineering senior Danielle Gore said Islamophobia must be fought through dialogue that shows how peaceful Islam is as a religion.

“Especially for people who have only seen negative portrayals of Islam in the media and that’s what this holiday [sic] is for, to create a dialogue and to ask questions and to humanize a group of people who have been dehumanized,” he said. “Even if we do get some crazy people who yell things at us when we’re walking around campus we have definitely seen the goodness come out from our fellow Aggies by showing us support, despite the rhetoric that’s been created.”

In their anti-hijab-day op-ed, Nomani and Arafa argued that the event hides a political goal.

“Muslim special-interest groups are feeding articles about ‘Muslim women in hijab‘ under siege,” the authors say. “Staff members at the Council on American-Islamic Relations [CAIR], which has pressed legal and PR complaints against U.S. companies including Disney World and Abercrombie & Fitch, have even called their organization ‘the hijab legal defense fund.’”

federal judge concluded in 2009 that “the government has produced ample evidence to establish the associations of CAIR… with Hamas” the jihad-group based in Gaza that shoots rockets in Israeli towns and communities. Since then, FBI leaders have sharply reduced any connection to the group, which has also been and has been declared a terrorist organization by the United Arab Emirates.

According to the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT),

Islamic extremism is on the rise on college and university campuses across the United States. The spread of radical Islamism on campuses has proven to be an effective tool to garner support and gain legitimacy, exploiting the right of free association with academic institutions. International and domestic groups that advocate extremist or radical causes frequently host lectures and other events on campuses to shore up support and recruit members. Indeed, universities are a fertile field for radicals searching for the next generation of activists and sympathizers.

“The Muslim Students Association (MSA) of the United States and Canada was incorporated in January 1963, when members of the Muslim Brotherhood came together at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign with the goal of ‘spreading Islam as students in North America,’” states IPT.

World Hijab Day was launched in 2013 by Nazma Khan, a New York resident who hoped to change the image of the hijab as a sign of oppression of women of Islam. The day has been especially marked on college and university campuses.

Among World Hijab Day’s “endorsers” is Felixia Yeap, an ex-Playboy bunny and ex-Playboy model, who writes in support:

I support world hijab day because I have heard enough stories of why hijabi women are being bullied and mocked just because they wear a hijab. I have been and still am being sarcastically mocked and insulted just because I chose to be a full time “hijabster” despite the fact that I have not reverted yet. Thanks for coming up with this 1st Feb!

“Revert” is the Islam term for “convert,” and illustrates the orthodox Islamic claim that everybody is born a Muslim, but many are led away from the Islamic lifestyle, or “deen,” by their parents and non-Islamic societies.

***

Egypt 1958, Muslims laughed at Muslim Brotherhood idea to impose hijab on women (themuslimissue.wordpress.com)

One of our Canadian readers Canada Uber shared this evidence of Islamic devolution from Egypt in 1958. Muslims are more backward today than decades ago.

Egyptian President Nasser giving a speech in 1958 followed by the laughter from the whole crowd when he describes the Muslim Brotherhood’s plans to make all women in Egypt wear a hijab.

The subtitles are in yellow and a little hard to read.

The last line is absolutely priceless.

As we have said many times in the past, with the testimony of elderly Muslims, the hijab was introduced by terrorist organizations. Wherever you find the hijab, you find the support of terrorism. The fully covered garbage sack or “beekeeper’s costume” has nothing to do with culture or religion but is a rape shield which entitles Muslim men to beat, rape or kill women should they not comply to their orders. And as our readers have observed, the hijab (fully covered burka) is a weaponized articles of clothing designed to make an influential or intimidating political statement.

Yale Establishes Islamic Law Center Thanks to $10M from Saudi Sharia-Banker, Alleged Bin Laden Financier

Amr Dalsh / REUTERS

Amr Dalsh / REUTERS

Breitbart, by JORDAN SCHACHTEL, Sep. 13, 2015:

Saleh Abdullah Kamel, a Saudi banker who is now worth billions of dollars thanks to his success with Sharia-compliant financing, has donated $10 million to Yale University as part of a successful effort to build an Islamic Law Center at the Ivy League school.

“Mr. Kamel’s extraordinary generosity will open up exciting new opportunities for Yale Law School and for the entire university, said Yale President Peter Salovey. “The Abdullah S. Kamel Center for the Study of Islamic Law and Civilization will enhance research opportunities for our students and other scholars and enable us to disseminate knowledge and insights for the benefit of scholars and leaders all over the world.”

Professor Anthony Kronman, a new co-director of the Islamic Law Center, said of the school’s new addition:

“The contemporary challenges of Islamic law are broadly relevant to political events throughout the entire Islamic world and those are developments that are watched by a much larger audience of people who in many cases have not much knowledge at all of the history and traditions of Islamic law.”

“It’s the responsibility of universities to teach and instruct and that obligation applies with particular force where an issue or a subject tends to be viewed in an incomplete or inadequate or even caricatured way. There the responsibility to teach and enlighten is even stronger,” he added.

Noticeably left out of the press release is the fact that Mr. Kamel’s Dallah Al Baraka Group, for which he is the Chief Executive, has been investigated by U.S. officials for bankrolling al-Qaeda’s operations worldwide.

Moreover, the bank was founded by former al-Qaeda chief Osama Bin Laden along with a group of Sudanese jihadists, the State Department has alleged, according to the Wall Street Journal.

And in the 1998 New York City trials of al-Qaeda members, witnesses testified that Mr. Kamel’s bank had previously transferred hundreds-of-thousands of dollars to al-Qaeda to help them buy an airplane, the report stated.

Additionally, Kamel’s father’s name appears on the “Golden Chain,” a list of alleged al-Qaeda funders that was confiscated by Bosnian authorities after raiding an al-Qaeda front group in 2002.

The new Yale Islamic Center becomes the latest of many Saudi-funded influence operations on American university campuses throughout the continental United States. Some more notable Saudi-funded campus outfits include the $20 million Prince Alwaleed Islamic Studies Program at Harvard University and the $20 million Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown University. More Saudi-backed Professorships and Islamic Centers have made their way to Columbia University, Rice University, the University of Arkansas, University of California in Los Angeles, the University of California/Berkeley, and countless other institutions.

Also see:

University president Peter Salovey added that the gift, announced once day before the anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks, was particularly timely because of the “changing relationship between the United States and states in the Middle East.”

Students can’t remember 9/11, blame Bush and oil

57Published on Sep 10, 2015 by YAFTV

As time passes, students on our nation’s campuses continue to become further removed from the 9/11 attacks given their ages in 2001. This year’s freshmen were only four years old that day. YAF visited the campus of George Mason University to see how much students know about the attacks and whether they think their professors should do a better job of educating them.