‘We’re All Muslims Deep Down,’ Says … Boston Police Commissioner

Boston Police Commissioner William B. Evans

Boston Police Commissioner William B. Evans

PJ Media, by Robert Spencer, March 1, 2016:

Politicians insisting that the latest Islamic jihad attack has nothing to do with Islam have become a familiar feature of the mainstream media landscape, but last Saturday, Boston Police Commissioner William B. Evans went them all one better.

Speaking at the Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center, Evans declared:

We’re all Muslims deep down. We all yearn for peace.

Evans thus went farther than Barack Obama, John Kerry, David Cameron, and all the other Western politicians who insist that Islam is a religion of peace. For Evans, Islam is not just a religion of peace, but the religion of peace: to be a Jew, a Christian, a Hindu, a Buddhist, or an atheist would not make one yearn for peace.

This is taking pandering to dizzying new heights, and that wasn’t all: this wasn’t the police commissioner’s first visit to the Islamic Society of Boston. He went there last December — right after two Muslims murdered fourteen people at a Christmas party in San Bernardino. He made that visit in order to make sure that the local Muslims weren’t jittery after that attack:

I don’t think we can tolerate bigotry toward the Muslim population. They’re an important part of our city. I just want to reassure them that we’re here for them.

Muslims acting avowedly in the name of Islam and jihad committed mass murder of non-Muslims, and in the wake of that attack, the Boston police commissioner took it upon himself to reassure … Muslims. However he went about doing this reassuring, it is certain that he never asked members of the Islamic Society of Boston why so many Muslims don’t yearn for peace at all, but seem instead to relish war.

Nor is he likely to have asked Islamic Society of Boston members what they were doing about that, and why they had no program designed to teach young Muslims why they should reject the understanding of Islam held by the Islamic State, al-Qaeda, and other jihad groups.

And there is clear need for such a program at the Islamic Society of Boston. Worshippers there have included:

— The Boston Marathon jihad murderers, Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev– Aafia Siddiqui, who is serving an 86-year sentence for trying to kill American soldiers

— Tarek Mehanna, who is serving seventeen years for aiding al-Qaeda

— Ahmad Abousamra, who before he was killed in an American airstrike was thought to be a principal architect of the Islamic State’s social media presence

— The Islamic Society of Boston’s founder, Abdurrahman Alamoudi, was once a major player in Washington and the nation’s most prominent moderate Muslim. Now he is serving a twenty-three year sentence for charges including fundraising for al-Qaeda.

ISB leaders insist, of course, that the Islam they teach there is as peaceful and benign as William Evans imagines it to be, and that the Tsarnaevs and Siddiqui and Mehanna and Abousamra misunderstood these soft and cuddly teachings and fell victim to “extremists” who “radicalized” them on the Internet.

Were Evans to have the wit, unwillingness to be fooled, and investigative persistence that should be required to get the job of Boston police commissioner, he might ask his friends at the ISB to explain why the true, peaceful Islam they supposedly teach there couldn’t withstand a challenge from the twisted, hijacked violent Islam that allegedly snares Muslims left and right as soon as they open their browser.

Instead, he told them that we are all Muslims deep down. To that, his Muslim audience must have happily agreed, since a hadith depicts Muhammad saying:

Every child is born on Islam, but his parents make him a Jew and a Christian, just as a beast is born whole (Sunan Abu Dawud 4714).

This belief that all people are born Muslim leads to the common practice of referring to converts to Islam as “reverts”: they are not adopting a new religion, but simply returning to their true and original religion.

Evans’ ISB audience must have wondered why the commissioner, if he really believes that yearning for peace makes one a Muslim deep down, doesn’t follow through, convert to Islam, and join the ISB himself. But whether he does or not, they can rest assured that he will not be watching out all that closely for any new Tsarnaevs or Mehannas or Abousamras who may be active there.

He knows that the only thing going on in the Islamic Society of Boston is a lot of yearning for peace. What could be more wonderful?

Also see:

Police in Rotherham Turned Blind Eye to Islamic Child Rape Ring

rotherham-sign-640x481Police protected the rapists, but they in return were protected from on high

Counter Jihad, Feb. 25, 2016:

The Times of London reports on new evidence of police complicity in a child rape ring being run by Pakistani Muslims in Rotherham, England.  The ring groomed and then raped children for a decade and a half before it was broken up.  The authorities were repeatedly informed, as early as 2002, but agents did not want to risk their careers in an environment of intense pressure not to seem racist or critical of Islam.  There was a Home Office investigation into charges that Tony Blair’s government had known of the ring as early as 2001, but did nothing because it conflicted with “his government’s efforts to pacify Muslim communities.”  Some 1,400 children were raped over the ensuing 16 years.

Now the Times tells us that the police hadn’t just been warned, they knew and were sometimes complicit.

“Corrupt police and an influential politician fuelled a culture of impunity that allowed three brothers to ‘own’ the town of Rotherham and abuse children until their crimes were exposed by The Times. One officer had sex with under-age girls, passed drugs to the sex-grooming gang and tipped them off when colleagues were searching for missing children, a court was told. Another helped to broker a deal in which one brother returned an abused girl to police after receiving an assurance that he ‘wouldn’t get done’. The jury was told that Jahangir Akhtar, the former deputy leader of Rotherham council, also took part in the handover at a petrol station. Mr Akhtar, the former deputy chairman of South Yorkshire police and crime panel, was a relative of Arshid, Basharat and Bannaras Hussain, who behaved for years ‘like a pack of animals’ to pursue dozens of young girls before demanding sex, often with threats of violence.”

This sounds like a story of intense local corruption, and it is.  It sounds like a story of the failure of the police to uphold their most basic oath, and it is that too.  But it is also a story of the ways in which these criminals could rely upon protection from the highest levels of the British government.

The former Prime Minister of England, Tony Blair, is being investigated for having known about the ring as early as 2001.  Blair’s administration suppressed investigations into the ring because it would conflict with his Muslim outreach efforts — outreach efforts being advised by Muslim Brotherhood affiliate groups.  Even today, Tony Blair’s religious charity is accused of ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.  The culture of not questioning Islam or Muslims from on high made possible these corrupt police, who in turn made possible a child rape ring in the heart of England.

Follow the links.  They are links to the most famous newspapers in Britain:  the Times, the Guardian, the Independent, the Daily Mail.  Believe your eyes.

Fmr. FBI Counterterrorism Agent: We’ve Received ‘Nearly Zero Help’ from U.S. Muslim Community Since 9/11

farook_malik_ohare-e1449500020660Breitbart, by Tony Lee, Dec. 7, 2015:

Though President Barack Obama claimed that America must “enlist Muslim communities” to combat terrorism in his Sunday evening Oval Office address, former FBI Counterterrorism Agent John Guandolo said on Monday’s Breitbart News Daily (6AM-9AM EST on Sirius XM Patriot channel 125) that since 9/11, “we collectively have received nearly zero help from the Muslim Community.”

Guandolo, who pointed out on Friday’s Breitbart News Daily that a “vast majority” of U.S. mosques and Islamic centers are a part of a much larger “jihadi network,” told host and Breitbart News Executive Chairman Stephen K. Bannon that though Muslim community leaders “certainly give the air as if they are helping,” if one looks at the “major Islamic organizations, the major Islamic centers in the United States,” they have “condemned all of the counter-terrorism policies and they’ve gotten the government to kowtow to them, to turn only to them for advice.”

“And what advice do they give them?” Guandolo asked. “That Islam doesn’t stand for this and that everything you’re doing is the reason for what happened—9/11 is your fault because of your policies.”

As Breitbart News reported, Los Angeles CAIR director Hussam Ayloush said last week just days after the San Bernardino terrorist attacks that America is “partly responsible” for the San Bernardino terrorist attacks because “some of our foreign policy” is “fueling extremism.”

Last night, Obama said that “if we’re to succeed in defeating terrorism we must enlist Muslim communities as some of our strongest allies, rather than push them away through suspicion and hate.”

Guandolo said he doesn’t necessarily agree with the idea that “we have to work with the Muslim community in order to solve this problem here in the United States,” but “if you are going to work with the Muslim community, the U.S. government” should not be “exclusively working with Hamas, Muslim Brotherhood entities without exception” like it is doing now. Guandolo named the Muslim Public Affairs Council, the Islamic Society of North America, the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), and the Muslim American Society.

“Those are who they’re working with and others that are Muslim Brotherhood or ideologically directly aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood,” he added, pointing out that Attorney General Loretta Lynch spoke at the Muslim Advocates—another such organization—last Thursday.

Guandolo said Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson is speaking about Muslim civil rights on Monday evening at The Adams Center in Sterling, Virginia, which is associated with the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA). He said evidence presented at the Holy Land terrorism-funding trial revealed that ISNA is “the nucleus of the Muslim Brotherhood here” and “directly funds Hamas leaders and organizations overseas.” He also pointed out that the Holy Land Foundation, the largest Islamic charity in America, was a “Hamas organization at the time it was indicted and Hamas is an inherent part of the Muslim Brotherhood.”

He said it will be nearly impossible to so successfully combat terrorists “so long as the U.S. government… emboldens and empowers Muslim Brotherhood organizations here.”

“If you expect FBI and others to aggressively pursue them, it’s not going to happen because our leaders — President, Secretary of State, national security adivsers, generals at the Pentagon—are are turning to their advisers who in fact are Muslim Brotherhood leaders to say what should we and what shouldn’t we do,” he said.

Guandolo said “it gets down to the local ground level where our behavior becomes insane and we do things like” tell FBI agents to take their socks off while arresting people at mosques so “you’re arresting somebody in your socks. It’s not only insane but there’s an officer-safety issue as well.” He added there was absolutely “no real logic about what happened in San Bernardino” when the F.B.I. allowed the media to rummage through the home of the San Bernardino terrorists and said “this kind of mindset” entered the FBI because of Muslim leaders who are advising the federal government on Islam and terrorism.

Bannon mentioned that this mindset dates back to the Bill Clinton and George W. Bush administrations and Guandolo said during the Clinton administration in the early 1990s, the Muslim Brotherhood published their “strategic plan for North America and then their implementation manual which implements the plan” in order to start “the real forward push to get their plan implemented.” He said those documents were discovered in a 2004 raid of a Hamas leaders’s home in Annandale, Virginia.

Guandolo also informed listeners that the Muslim Brotherhood has been in the United States since the 1960s because the “very first Islamic organization in America”—the Muslim Students Association—was created by the Muslim Brotherhood in the 1960s in order to “recruit Jihadis on college campuses and on every major college campus in America.”

According to Guandolo, “if you even hint at shutting them down, then you’re immediately a racist or an Islamophobe.”

“The story that is told in between is the story of an Islamic network in the U.S. that was not just established by random Muslims coming here,” he said.

He also called out Saudi Arabia for being the top financier of Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, and al-Qaeda projects in the United States. Guandolo said these organizations build lavish mosques that can hold thousands of people in areas where there are only 12 Muslims because their strategy is to claim ground “up to three miles around the mosque.” He said the Saudis help these organizations purchase homes in the area at substantially above-market prices in order to “occupy that space around that mosque.”

Guandolo runs the understandingthethreat.com site and is the author of Raising a Jihadi Generation.

Listen to the interview below:

Maine city recruiting Somalis as cops

Somali community in Lewiston, Maine.

Somali community in Lewiston, Maine.

WND, By Leo Hohmann, 06/10/2015:

One of smallest cities that has received thousands of Somali refugees over the years is Lewiston, Maine. But, unlike the Minnesota Muslims from Somalia, this group appears to fly under the radar.

Minnesota’s U.S. attorney, Andrew Luger, publicly declared in April that the state has a “terror recruitment problem,” as hundreds of young Somalis have been investigated for ties to terrorist organizations overseas.

But in Lewiston, there is a recruitment of a different sort going on.

Lewiston’s police chief, Michael Bussiere, made news this week when he told Reuters he was focused on recruiting Somalis to work as cops in his department.

It’s part of his “diversity” program to make the local police force look more like the community it serves, he said.

And, with the help of the U.S. State Department’s refugee resettlement program, Lewiston has gone from one of the whitest cities in America to an increasingly diverse one.

“One place in Lewiston where that growing diversity is not evident is the city’s 82-member police force, but Chief Michael Bussiere aims to change that amid an intense national debate over race and policing,” Reuters reports.

The Lewiston-Auburn area now has a Somali population of 7,000, which accounts for nearly 10 percent of its total population. They arrived in the U.S. either as refugees or were born in the U.S. as children of refugees.

About a quarter of Bussiere’s officers will become eligible to retire in the next few years, so he figures to have quite a few openings.

“We have to think about who is living here now and who’s going to live here 10 years from now,” he told Reuters reporter Scott Malone. “We need a department that is reflective of the demographics of the community it serves.”

Lewiston, a city of 36,000 people that spent decades struggling through job losses from mill closings and a shrinking population, may seem an unlikely place for such a rebirth given that Maine is among the whitest U.S. states, Malone reports.

But, according to U.S. Census data, 8.7 percent of Lewiston’s population identifies as black or African-American, a rate higher than any other city in the state and more than seven times the 1.2 percent state average.

And the Somali population is exploding not just in Lewiston. It has spread to nearby Auburn and Portland.

Many Somalis originally came as refugees to larger cities, Atlanta in particular, but then moved to Maine after hearing that it had a wider array of subsidized housing available and also was easier to get on the welfare rolls. This is called “secondary migration” when a refugee is assigned to one city but then moves elsewhere after arrival in the U.S.

The Somali influence in Lewiston is visible along the city’s main downtown corridor, Lisbon Street. Shops offer Halal meat and brightly colored African clothing.

Muhidin Libah, head of a local Somali Bantu community organization, is among those Somalis who moved to Lewiston and attended one of the Lewiston Police Department’s recruiting meetings last month. He told Reuters he was surprised by the outreach effort.

“People were thinking, to be a police officer, you have to be born in the U.S. … you have to be white,” Libah told the news agency. “They never thought they could be a police officer.”

The diversity program takes on heightened meaning in light of race riots in U.S. cities such as Ferguson, Missouri, Baltimore and Cleveland after police killings of unarmed black men. All of the cities where violence has flared have been criticized by activists for having police forces that are “too white.”

Reuters followed that theme in its article.

“Right now America is trying to reconnect with the idea of police,” John DeCarlo, an associate professor at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York and a former chief of police in Branford, Connecticut, told the news agency. “When we look like our communities, when we embrace the values of our communities, it increases the legitimacy of the police department.”

“When you’re trying to live in a place, then you need to look like that place,” Zam Zam Mohamud, who serves on Lewiston’s school board, told Reuters. “If we have Somali police officers, Somali lawyers, Somali judges … That is a sign the community is assimilating, people are feeling comfortable.”

Mohamud, 40, said she would encourage her children, in their early 20s, to consider a career in law enforcement.

Read more

Also see:

US Embassy in Indonesia Makes Independence Day Sharia Compliant

390717_2102228974583_2036546133_nCSP, by Jim Hanson, June 10, 2015:

In the world at large, perception is reality. Moving our national holiday out of misplaced deference to a month long Islamic holiday gives the world a perception of US weakness. It was totally unnecessary since Muslims fast sunrise to sunset, and we could have simply held the event after dark. Some people see this as respectful and wonder what the bother is. But honor cultures, like Islam, see things differently and this appears as submission to them. Not a good thing when we are negotiating with Iran and losing a war to ISIS.

Also see:

 

The Failed Tactic of Flattering Islam Won’t Go Away

Palestinian_militant_with_rifle-450x338Frontpage, May 11, 2015 by Bruce Thornton:

The recent attack in Texas against a “draw Mohammed” event ended up with two dead jihadis and widespread criticism of event organizer Pamela Geller for “inciting” or “provoking” the assault on our First Amendment right to free speech. The hypocrisies and ignorance behind such criticism have been amply documented, including by some on the left. But there’s another argument against actions and events like Geller’s that needs dismantling. This is the received wisdom that we should avoid criticizing Islamic doctrine or Mohammed because it will alienate moderate Muslims who otherwise would help us against the so-called “extremist” jihadists.

Geraldo Rivera on Fox News invoked this rationale in his hysterical attack on Geller for “spewing her hatred and making us all look like the intolerant jerks they are saying we are in the Middle East and elsewhere.” In other words, most Muslims dislike the jihadis, who have “hijacked” and “distorted” their faith, and want to support our efforts against them. But they are put off by our “insults” of Mohammed and our “intolerance” of the wonderful “religion of peace,” all of which serve to “recruit” new jihadists. Even Bill O’Reilly and Laura Ingraham skirted this notion, advising against making any image of Mohammed, and thus in effect ratifying the legitimacy of the shari’a law against any representation of Mohammed, good or bad.

Consistent with this notion that flattery and respect can change Muslim behavior, many in the foreign policy establishment, including conservatives, have for decades counseled flattering “outreach” to Muslims as a tactic in winning the “hearts and minds” of the supposed large majority of Muslims angry at the jihadists’ “distortions” of their faith. Even before 9/11, Bill Clinton’s Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, called Islam “a faith that honors consultation, cherishes peace, and has as one of its fundamental principles the inherent equality of all who embrace it.” Even after 9/11 confirmed Islam’s traditional theologized violence and intolerance, George Bush claimed in his first address after 9/11 that Islam’s “teachings are good and peaceful, and those who commit evil in the name of Allah blaspheme the name of Allah.” In 2005, administration officials encouraged this tactic of false flattery as a way “to support the courageous Muslims who are speaking the truth about their proud religion and history, and seizing it back from those who would hijack it for evil ends.”

Of course Obama, who has serially groveled before Muslims and praised Islam, has continued this sorry practice. After his administration blamed the Benghazi murders on an obscure Internet video, he lectured that “the future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam.” The 2 gunmen in Garland Texas obviously agreed.  His quondam Secretary of State and now presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is on record extolling Islam’s “deepest yearning of all––to live in peace.” How is that going in Nigeria, Yemen, Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan? Worse of all, training materials used by our military and security services have excised any mention of jihad, which Western infidels have redefined as “a quest to find one’s faith in an external fight for justice,” as the New York Times put it in 2008. So Obama identifies the 13 slaughtered at Fort Hood to the traditional jihadist cry of “Allahu Akbar” as victims of “workplace violence.” Never mind the Koranic command to “slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush”––exactly what various jihadi outfits are doing today across the Middle East, and tried to do in Garland Texas.

Two decades of such flattery and admiration have failed to prevent nearly 26,000 violent jihadist attacks since 9/11, for they are based on Western bad ideas rather than on an accurate understanding of Islamic doctrine and the Muslim mentality. Behind our delusions is the peculiarly arrogant assumption that traditionalist Muslims––by which I mean those who take seriously the doctrines and precepts of their faith has practiced for 14 centuries––do not have their own motives and aims, but can only react to our bad behavior. Besotted by our own materialist superstitions and failure to take religion seriously, we reduce jihadist behavior to material and psychological causes: wounded self-esteem, resentment of “colonial” and “imperial” crimes, disrespect of Islam, or the lack of jobs, political freedom, or even sexual access to women.

Thus despite consistent polling data showing widespread Muslim support of illiberal shari’a law and its draconian penalties like death for blasphemy, we won’t accept that millions of Muslims actually believe what the Koran, Hadith, and 14 centuries of jurisprudence teach about the superiority of Islam and their right to use violence in order to bring the whole world under the sway of the superior social, economic, and political order that shari’a represents. In the guise of “respecting” Muslims, then, we patronize them as little more than children who can only “act out” violently in the face of injustice instead of “using their words.” Having reduced our own faith to holidays and comforting slogans, we simply can’t believe that Islam endorses violence and cruelty in the name of Allah, or that otherwise loving and kind people, as bin Laden was said to have been by all who knew him, can at the same time slaughter and brutalize innocents in pursuit of spiritual aims. No, either they are “crazy” or “evil,” or they are traumatized by our bad behavior.

This dubious pop-psychological assumption is usually accompanied by a catalogue of the historical crimes against Muslims perpetrated by the West, from the Crusades to the wars against the Taliban and Saddam Hussein. These depredations, so the story goes, also fuel anger and resentment, and help to incentivize otherwise peaceful Muslims into turning jihadist. But this narrative is belied by the facts of history. For what history tells us is that the record of Muslim conquest, occupation, colonizing, slaving, raiding, and killing of Christians far surpasses the alleged crimes of the West against Islam. We recently marked the centenary of the Ottoman genocide against the Christian Armenians, Assyrians, and Chaldeans, a crime being duplicated today by ISIS in northern Iraq. Recently our historically challenged president whined about the Crusades and the Inquisition, with nary a word about the centuries of Muslim invasion, occupation, colonization, and brutal suppression in Christian Spain, Sicily, the Balkans, and Greece.

Or what about the 1066 pogrom in Granada, the alleged paradise of “pan-confessional humanism,” as an ignorant Wall Street Journal editorial claimed a few years back. Those tolerant, humanist Muslims slaughtered 5000 Jews, equaling the toll of dead during the whole existence of the Inquisition. But can anyone name one Muslim religious leader in the Middle East who has publicly and consistently apologized in Obama fashion for these 14 centuries of slaughter? Who has justified our defensive wars in the region as an understandable reaction to that history? Who has chastised Muslims for destroying and desecrating churches, and blamed them for inviting violent reactions? Muslim Turkey won’t even own up to its copiously documented slaughter of 1.5 million Armenians. If anyone has a historical grievance that justifies payback, it is Christians and Jews.

Finally, if Western insults and crimes against Muslims are really the reason jihadists want to kill us, why do they let Russia off the hook? No Christian power has killed more Muslims or occupied more Muslim lands than has Russia, from the siege of Izmail in 1790, when 40,000 Muslim men, women, and children were slaughtered, to the invasion of Afghanistan, which killed a million, to the brutal wars against Muslim Chechnyans, which killed at least 100,000. Or how about the 10 million Muslim Uighurs oppressed by China and forbidden to fully practice their faith?  Is Russia or China the “Great Satan”? Are they the constant targets of jihadist attack and thundering denunciations by the mullahs of Iran? Are “moderate” Muslims “alienated” by their behavior and rushing to join the jihad against them?

The obvious answer is no, for the simple reason that Russia and China are contemptuous of such juvenile psychological blackmail, pursue their national interests without regard for criticism by the “Muslim community,” and respond with brutal force to violent attacks. Meanwhile the U.S. has rescued millions of Muslims in the Balkans, Kuwait, Iraq, and Afghanistan from brutal dictators, ethnic cleansing, and psychotic autocrats, yet is deemed “Islamophobic” because we exercise our Constitutional rights in our own country. Worse yet, we grovel and apologize and demonize those like Pamela Geller who practice their right to free expression at a private function, and we vainly believe despite all evidence that if we just act nice to Muslims and join them in demonizing their critics, they’ll ignore their spiritual beliefs, the traditions of their faith, and the model of Mohammed and his credo to “fight all men until they say there is no god but Allah.”

To paraphrase Cicero and Orwell, there are some things so stupid that only rich, arrogant Westerners will believe them. If we let this president continue to predicate his dealings with Iran on this same delusional belief in the power of flattering engagement and “mutual respect,” we will soon find out the high cost of this stupidity.