“You’re Living Under the Sharia, and You Don’t Even Know It”

05af84ef275dce4f1cc31034ddc245c8123baaf8Gates of Vienna, by Baron Bodissey, Aug. 25, 2016:

As we reported on Monday, last Sunday the American Freedom Alliance sponsored a conference in Los Angeles, “Islam and Western Civilization: Can they Coexist?” Among the most prominent speakers at the event were Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer. Below is a video of their back-to-back speeches.

Many thanks to Henrik Clausen for recording this video, and to Vlad Tepes for uploading it:

Also see:

HuffPo Columnist Lies, Downplays Sharia Law to Make It Acceptable

GettyImages-72166261-640x418Breitbart, by Pamela Geller, Aug. 9, 2016:

Maryam Khan Ansari, who is identified as an “attorney and writer,” published a ridiculous piece in the Huffington Post Saturday: “What Is Sharia Law And Should You Be Scared? Why is Sharia such a scary word?”

Sharia is a scary word because sharia is scary.

The supremacist tenets of sharia law inform the creed apartheid, gender apartheid, Islamic Jew-hatred, codified bigotry, misogyny, free speech prohibitions and homophobia inherent in Islamic law. Sharia is scary because it is punitive, supremacist, racist and misogynist.

But Ansari says it’s scary because “for starters, it’s short and easy to pronounce. When you add the word ‘creeping’ in front of it, it starts to look even creepier. Especially since American people know very little, or nothing, about Islam, according to a Pew Research Poll.” She adds: “The word ‘Sharia Law’ has Americans conjure up images of guys with turbans.”

No, sharia law conjures up the images of girls murdered in honor killings, beheadings, slaughters of gays, non-Muslims, apostates, and secular Muslims, whippings, floggings, amputations, and public hangings commanded in Islamic law. “Guys with turbans”? Hardly.

It further erodes Ansari’s argument that she evokes the Sikhs. Sikhs have been brutally persecuted under the boot of Islam. Her article includes a picture of the actor and fashion designer Waris Ahluwalia, who is not a Muslim and follows a different religion called Sikhism. Waris is Sikh. I repeat, Waris is not Muslim, he is Sikh. But he wears a turban, so for Ansari’s purposes he must be Muslim, and he probably follows Sharia Law. Except that again, he is Sikh, not Muslim.

It gets worse. Ansari goes on: “But wait a minute― does anyone actually know what Sharia Law even is? I’m a lawyer and I’m Muslim, so people think I’m supposed to know Sharia Law. I bet many people probably think I follow it, simply because I’m a Muslim.

So, I thought I’d take the opportunity to set the record straight on Sharia Law. After all, who better to explain it than a Muslim lawyer?”

After that build-up, you would expect her to do what she promised to do: “set the record straight on Sharia Law.” Instead, she says: “I don’t know squat about Sharia Law. I don’t think many Muslims do. Yeah, you heard me. I’m a lawyer, I’m Muslim… And I still couldn’t tell you what Sharia law is all about.”

A Muslim who doesn’t “know squat about Sharia Law” is hardly fit to write about it, let alone attack those who oppose the most brutal and extreme ideology on the face of the earth. Muslims who don’t practice or “know squat” about sharia law are not the problem. Muslims who seek to impose it are the problem. Muslim countries that enforce are the problem.

Maryam Khan Ansari defending Khzir Khan puts her foot in her mouth, because Khan is a longtime proponent of sharia law and knows a lot about it. Journalist Paul Sperry reports:

In 1983, for example, Khan wrote a glowing review of a book compiled from a seminar held in Kuwait called “Human Rights In Islam” in which he singles out for praise the keynote address of fellow Pakistani Allah K. Brohi, a pro-jihad Islamic jurist who was one of the closest advisers to late Pakistani dictator Gen. Zia ul-Haq, the father of the Taliban movement.

Khan speaks admiringly of Brohi’s interpretation of human rights, even though it included the right to kill and mutilate those who violate Islamic laws and even the right of men to “beat” wives who act “unseemly.”

Ansari keeps piling it on: “Sharia Law is a very complicated body of law (imagine, like, a very difficult to understand Tax Code) and it isn’t something that the average Muslim can understand in depth. And like American law, it doesn’t come from just one book. It comes from many different sources. So like American law, only (some) properly trained legal people can make sense of it.”

Nonsense. Everywhere sharia law is practiced, the penalties are the same: stoning for adultery, death for apostasy, amputation of the hand for theft, death for criticism of Islam. Everywhere sharia is implemented. It really isn’t complicated.

Ansari’s second “myth” is: “All Muslims believe in Sharia Law.”

No one believes all Muslims believe in sharia law. If that were the case, no Muslim who sought to impose it should be admitted into the USA. But we do see sharia being imposed here in America – with speech restrictions (under the guise of restrictions on “hate speech”), the Islamization of the public square, the Islamization of the public school, the Islamization of the workplace, and the Islamization/mosqueing of the neighborhood.

Islamic scholars know what sharia is. Islamic theologians know. And when they don’t, they consult Al Azhar scholars – Sunni Islam’s most prestigious institution. One principal English-language source for the content of Islamic law is Reliance of the Traveller: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law. Dr. Alan Godlas, Associate Professor of Religion at the University of Georgia, calls it a “carefully translated manual of the proper practice of Islam (shari’a) according to the Shafi’i mad’hab. It has been an essential book in the library of any serious English speaking Muslim or scholar of Islam since its publication in 1991.”

Ansari also insists that Muslims don’t want to impose sharia in the U.S.:

Now, I’m sure there are some crazies out there who want to impose Sharia Law on everyone. There are a lot of crazy people of all races and religions. But just because they’re nuts, it doesn’t mean that they can actually make it happen. In fact, anyone who thinks that Sharia Law will ever take over the U.S. Constitution is a different kind of crazy. And crazy people, while scary, really can’t make the leadership of a country change.

More lies. Muslims fiercely work to impose the blasphemy laws under the sharia. The Muhammad cartoons are the most obvious example. All over the Muslim world, secular thinkers, poets, writers, journalists, bloggers, and cartoonists have been targeted for death because they were critical of Islam. How many Muslims stood with us in Garland, Texas? Zero.

As a modern Muslim woman, Maryam Khan Ansari should work to oppose the most brutal and extreme ideology on the face of the earth and free the millions oppressed, subjugated and slaughtered under the boot of sharia. Instead, she is a slave to it, advancing gruesome, unforgivable lies in order to disarm the American people in the face of the gravest threat to our freedom that we have ever faced.

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.

Pamela has more here

Did the FBI “Egg On” Violent Jihadi Killers?

49013556.cachedJust the facts.

CounterJihad, Aug. 5, 2016:

In Garland, Texas, an outgunned and off-duty traffic cop engaged and killed two jihadi killers wearing body armor and carrying rifles.  The killers had come under a vow to the Islamic State (ISIS), there to punish a collection of Americans for the crime of displaying cartoons depicting the alleged prophet of Islam, Muhammad.  Under common and longstanding interpretations of sharia, Islam’s understanding of the will of God for human beings, depicting their prophet is a kind of blasphemy that merits death.  The Garland event was organized by free speech advocates including Pamela Geller, who wanted to assert that their natural right to free speech was not limited by any religious law.

Now it turns out that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) may have had eyes on at least one of these killers before the act — and, more than that, may have egged him on.

“Tear up Texas,” the agent messaged Elton Simpson days before he opened fire at the Draw Muhammad event, according to an affidavit (pdf) filed in federal court Thursday.

“U know what happened in Paris,” Simpson responded…

The texts were included in the indictment, released Thursday, of Erick Jamal Hendricks of Charlotte, North Carolina. He was charged with conspiring to provide material support to ISIS. The 35-year-old tried to recruit other Americans to form an ISIS cell on secret compounds and introduced an undercover agent to one of the Draw Muhammad attackers, according to the FBI.

But Hendricks did more than make a connection. According to the court papers, he asked the undercover officer about the Draw Muhammad event’s security, size, and police presence, during the event, according to an affidavit filed in court.

The affidavit does not specify what the undercover responded to questions about size and security.

“If you see that pig [Pamela Geller] make your ‘voice’ heard against her,” Hendricks allegedly told the undercover agent[.]

A number of questions are raised by this indictment.  For one, it does seem as if the FBI was right on top of this jihadist plot against American lives — and yet took no steps to actually stop it.  Instead, a lone and outgunned police officer found himself face to face with heavily armed assassins.  It was his heroic actions that saved the day, but this took place in the context of a substantial risk to his life brought on by the failure of the FBI to move aggressively in spite of evidence of a planning process and stated intent.

Indeed, every major U.S. attack was linked to FBI investigation before it happened, according to Seamus Hughes, deputy director of the Program on Extremism at George Washington University.

Another question that is raised is what the proper limits are for encouraging violence as an FBI agent.  “Tear up Texas” sounds like an incitement, but it is not clear precisely what is being incited.  Even leaving aside how blatant incitement to violence has to be to violate limits, there is a question about whether or not there even ought to be limits in FBI sting operations.  If it became known that FBI agents could not incite violence, for example, jihadist cells could simply make that a test for potential members.  The FBI needs broad leeway, potentially, in order to avoid having their undercover officers exposed.

There are additional concerns about whether entrapment itself is a valid way for investigations to proceed.  In Georgia in 2012, for example, the FBI arranged an entrapment sting targeting outlaw motorcycle clubs.  The charges would not have even been legal in Georgia itself, where the police are not allowed to charge you for committing a crime that you only committed because a government agent provoked it.  However, Federal law allows its agents to entrap people into crimes much more readily than Georgia’s state law.  Since the Department of Justice brought Federal charges, the entrapment itself was not problematic for the law.  Nevertheless, ultimately courts threw out all the charges on the grounds that the FBI was unreasonably involved in provoking the crimes.

Civil liberties activists, as well as Muslim groups, have raised concerns like this against the use of FBI stings in jihad cases.

[T]he FBI’s program has come under fire from American liberal organizations. According to the New York Times, “defense lawyers, Muslim leaders and civil liberties advocates say that F.B.I. operatives coax suspects into saying and doing things that they might not otherwise do — the essence of entrapment.”  The FBI says that it has a thousand open cases into homegrown radicals motivated by a foreign terrorist organization.

In the eyes of the organizations cited by the Times, that’s evidence not that the danger is great but that the FBI is overreaching.  Tom Nelson, a Muslim lawyer in Portland, had what they described as a blunt message for fellow Muslims.

“Avoid the F.B.I. like the plague,” he said. “They’re definitely not an ally.”

ISIS investigations are nevertheless best-case arguments for entrapment stings because they are marked by two additional concerns.  ISIS propaganda has proven able to radicalize people to violence very quickly.  There is not the same time frame as in a true entrapment case, in which the FBI is in control of whether the crime ever occurs or not.

Secondly, once people turn their hearts to jihadist murder, the world is full of targets and opportunities for them to carry it out.  As the recent truck attack in Nice, France shows, there is no guarantee that a radicalized agent won’t act even in the absence of access to guns, or bombs, or even things we ordinarily think of as weapons.  The most deadly attacks have often been carried out with vehicles, whether the truck in Nice or the airliners on  9/11.

Thus, the FBI’s program is dogged by serious questions, and yet arguably necessary in jihadist cases given these special concerns.  Stay tuned to CounterJihad, where later today we will have an analysis piece by a security expert exploring the proper limits.

Also see:

Fourth DEADLY Jihad Attack in Germany in a Week

merkel-migrationBy Pamela Geller on July 25, 2016:

This was the fourth violent attack in Germany in the past week. Ansbach is home to a whole lot of American families whose US Army soldiers are stationed at Ansbach, Katterbach, Oberreichenbach et al.?  The jihad bomber’s backpack filled with explosives. One dead and dozens injured.

2500 were attending the music festival the Muslim terrorist had originally targeted. Fortunately, the jihadi was stopped at entrance.

Bavarian Interior Minister Herrmann said the Ansbach bomber pledged allegiance to ISIS leader al-Baghdadi in video found on his phone.

If Obama succeeds with his Muslim immigration plot, we can expect the same bloodshed and murder here.

Islamic attacks in Germany this past week:

Munich shooter SHOUTED “ALLAHU AKBAR” TARGETED, EXECUTED CHILDREN in Munich McDonald’s before rampaging through mall killing 10, police now hunting three

Knife Jihad: MACHETE WIELDING Muslim “refugee” KILLS woman, injuring two others in Reutlingen, Germany

“Slaughterhouse” Muslim AXE Attacker Shouted “ALLAHU AKBAR” During Rampage on German Train, Had ISIS Flag

***

Also see:

Federal Government Authorizes Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube to Censor “Anti-Islam” Speech; Lawsuit Filed

3320334677Center for Security Policy, July 13, 2016:

Today, the American Freedom Law Center (AFLC) filed a federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, challenging Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) under the First Amendment.

Section 230 provides immunity from lawsuits to Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, thereby permitting these social media giants to engage in government-sanctioned censorship and discriminatory business practices free from legal challenge.

The lawsuit was brought on behalf of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer, and Jihad Watch.

As alleged in the lawsuit, Geller and Spencer, along with the organizations they run, are often subject to censorship and discrimination by Facebook, Twitter and YouTube because of Geller’s and Spencer’s beliefs and views, which Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube consider expression that is offensive to Muslims.

Such discrimination, which is largely religion-based in that these California businesses are favoring adherents of Islam over those who are not, is prohibited in many states, but particularly in California by the state’s anti-discrimination law, which is broadly construed to prohibit all forms of discrimination.  However, because of the immunity granted by the federal government, Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube are free to engage in their otherwise unlawful, discriminatory practices.

As set forth in the lawsuit, Section 230 of the CDA immunizes businesses such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube from civil liability for any action taken to “restrict access to or availability of material that” that they “consider to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected.”

Robert Muise, AFLC co-founder and senior counsel, issued the following statement:

“Section 230 of the CDA confers broad powers of censorship upon Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube officials, who can silence constitutionally protected speech and engage in discriminatory business practices with impunity by virtue of this power conferred by the federal government in violation of the First Amendment.”

Muise went on to explain:

“Section 230 is a federal statute that alters the legal relations between our clients and Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, resulting in the withdrawal from our clients of legal protections against private acts.  Consequently, per U.S. Supreme Court precedent, state action lies in our clients’ challenge under the First Amendment.”

David Yerushalmi, AFLC co-founder and senior counsel, added:

“Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube have notoriously censored speech that they deem critical of Islam, thereby effectively enforcing blasphemy laws here in the United States with the assistance of the federal government.”

Yerushalmi concluded:

“It has been the top agenda item of Islamic supremacists to impose such standards on the West.  Its leading proponents are the Muslim Brotherhood’s network of Islamist activist groups in the West and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), which co-sponsored, with support from Obama and then-Secretary of State Clinton, a U.N. resolution which called on all nations to ban speech that could promote mere hostility to Islam.  Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube are falling in line, and we seek to stop this assault on our First Amendment freedoms.”

AFLC Co-Founders and Senior Counsel Robert J. Muise and David Yerushalmi, along with the plaintiffs in this case, Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer, will hold a Press Call from 2:00-2:30 p.m. on Wednesday, July 13.  To access this press conference call, dial (641) 715-3655 and enter code 111815.

Also see:

CAIR’s ‘Islamophobia’ List Is a ‘Hit List,’ Say Critics

Screenshot

Screenshot

Breitbart, by Neil Munro, June 23, 2016:

Americans are being marked for murder whenever their names appear on the annual list of so-called “Islamophobes” posted by the jihad-linked Council on American Islamic Relations, say two Americans on CAIR’s 2016 enemies list. 

“This is a hit list,” said Nonie Darwish, a former Egyptian Muslim, now living in America. CAIR “should be held legally responsible for inciting violence against us,” she said, after citing several Muslims and non-Muslims who have been personally targeted by Muslims sharing CAIR’s Islamic ideology.

“They want to shut us up by putting us in a position of fear,” said Zuhdi Jasser, founder of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, which is pushing for modernization of Islam in the United States. “Not only does their list put our lives at risk, but it is full of false information [and] they’ve never called us.”

At least two of the people cited in the report have been targeted for murder by jihadis. Pam Geller, who is described by the new report as “Islamophobe Pamela Geller,” has survived two plots attempts because the Muslim attackers were successfully killed by police. Similarly, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, an ex-Muslim and a former legislator in Holland, has a security detail to protect her from attacks. 

CAIR’s report “is certainly intended to be [incitement],” said David Yerushalmi, a lawyer at the American Freedom Law Center. “But it is not [punishable] incitement under First Amendment principles,” partly because judges requires an “imminent” threat to justify a charge of incitement, he said.

CAIR’s new report is titled “Confronting Fear“, and it was slated for publication June 14. But on June 12, the release was delayed six days because a Muslim murdered 49 Americans in a gay nightclub in Orlando, Florida.

The report lists a series of domestic enemies of Islam, its portrays them as mentally ill phobics, and also conflates occasional attacks and vandalism against Muslim people and buildings with various forms of democratic criticism of Islam. For example, comedian Bill Maher is on the list.

The group defines “Islamophobia” as “a contrived fear or prejudice fomented by the existing Eurocentric and Orientalist global power structure.”

The problem, say Jasser and Darwish, is that CAIR’s message will reach people who believe that opponents of Islam deserve death. In fact, Pam Geller, a favorite hate-figure at the CAIR, has been the subject of at least two jihad plots. Two gunmen were killed by thefirst attack in May 2015. A second man, who carrying a knife, was killed by FBI officers in Boston in June 2015.

Other critics, such as Robert Spencer, who runs JihadWatch.com, has received myriad death threats from believers in Islam.

Islam’s politicized ‘sharia law’ endorses the murder of Islam’s critics and of ex-Muslims — repeatedly, endlessly, forcefully — and its recommendations are deemed divine commandments by numerous killers and would-be killers.

For example, the Koran — which observant Muslims say is a list of verbatim commands from their deity, Allah — tells Muslims to “Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture – [fight] until they give the jizyah [penalty tax] willingly while they are humbled.”

Islamic scriptures say that Islam’s reputed founder, Muhammad, personally ordered or supported the death of many enemies, including at 10 critics and poets, who were the pre-modern equivalent of modern journalist and writers — such as the machine-gunned cartoonists at the Paris-based Charlie Hebdo magazine. Traditionalist or orthodox Muslims says Muhammad is a perfect model of behavior and should be emulated by Muslims.

Because of this theological hostility to criticism, “I cannot go to any Islamic majority country — I would be killed on the street, and the killer would be called a hero,” said Darwish.

CAIR is extending those threats into the United States, she said. “The culture of Al Capone is the culture of Islam — when you put up a list of Islamic foes, this is a hit list,” she said.

In Western democracies, where law and religion both condemn violence, people can criticize and be criticized without the intimidating fear of violence, she said. With CAIR’s enemies list, “the difference is that you have a whole Islamic theology behind, the sharia law that [CAIR] support[s], that condemns people to death if they dissent,” she said.

If a journalist [criticizes] Republicans or Democrats, he does not have a whole legal system to condemn him to death. What makes CAIR different is that they support a legal system, they support HAMAS, they support the Muslim Brotherhood, and just by their affiliation and support of sharia law, the show they agree to the death penalty for apostates and blasphemers, and … by making a list for their sharia lovers and supporters, they are making it easy for their followers to find the blasphemers and apostates.

U.S. court documents and news reports show that at least five of CAIR’s people — either board members, employees or former employees — have been jailed or repatriated forvarious financial and terror-related offenses.

Breitbart has also published evidence highlighted by critics showing that CAIR was named an unindicted co-conspirator in a Texas-based criminal effort to deliver $12 million to the Jew-hating HAMAS jihad group, that CAIR was founded with $490,000 from HAMAS, and that the FBI bans top-level meetings with CAIR officials. “The FBI policy restricting a formal relationship with CAIR remains … [but] does not preclude communication regarding investigative activity or allegations of civil rights violations,” said an Oct. 2015 email from FBI spokesman Christopher Allen.

The United Arab Emirates has included CAIR on its list of Muslim Brotherhood groups. CAIR has posted its defense here.

For Jasser, CAIR’s hate list is also a threat to the many members of his pro-modernity Islamic coalition who don’t want to be linked to anti-Islamic activists. “We are a modern [classic] liberal islam that believes in universal declaration of human rights [and] we reject theocratic islam,” he told Breitbart. “Our brand is about loving Islam and loving America,” he said.

“Our board members are devout Muslims, our families go to the mosque, we are celebrating Ramadan now, and for us to described under ‘Islamophobia’ … is the greatest smear I can think off… and that’s the intention,” Jasser said.

“There’s no doubt that CAIR is all about monopolizing the voice of Islam [in the United States], and the way they prevent any debates is the term ‘Islamophobia’ … they want to prevent any criticism of Islam,” he said. It “is their way of making a blasphemer’s list — they use it as a way to shame anyone who would question the need for reform,” he said.

But CAIR is safe from a lawsuit or criminal charges unless there’s testimony from a whistleblower or an email showing CAIR officials linking their claims with hopes that someone else launches a violent attack, said Yerushalmi.

Racketeering lawsuits likely won’t work either, he said, because the court has restricted their use to criminal gangs and drug-sellers, he said. “I don’t think you get a RICO case unless an individual or a group of individuals who were physically [harmed] or their business were harmed ….[and] where you can show CAIR’s fingerprints,” he said.

CAIR’s press aide, Ibrahim Hooper declined to comment. 

CAIR’s list of “Islamophobic” actions include many normal examples of civic criticism of Islam’s doctrines. For example, the report slams comedian Bill Maher, saying ;

Maher acts as the liberal counterpart to Fox News when it comes to broadbrush attacks on Islam. While discussing Boko Haram’s kidnapping of a large number of female students in 2014, Maher asserted, “There’s no mention here of connecting this to the religion, which is always what I am seeking to do because I think that’s the elephant in the room. And that in the religion at large, women are seen as property, second-class at best, often property.”

Geller: Islam Is ‘The Real Problem,’ And Liberals Are Taking Advantage Of The Bloodshed

pamela-geller-cartoonDaily Caller, by John Griffing, June 22, 2016:

AUSTIN, Texas – In the aftermath of the tragedy in Orlando, Pamela Geller — an outspoken critic of Islam — says that liberal Democrats are using Islamic violence against their fellow citizens to achieve total political control.

“Islam is indeed the real problem,” Geller insists, and she says Donald Trump is “the first presidential nominee since John Quincy Adams even to come close to speaking honestly about this threat.”

“The enemy of my enemy is my friend sums it up well,” Geller told The Daily Caller. “They [Islam, liberals] both hate America and Israel. They both hate Western civilization. So they make common cause,” Geller continued.

Geller believes the consequences of such an unholy alliance to be “no less ominous than the death of free societies on earth,” and likens the actions of the vocal liberals capitalizing on the terror attack in Orlando to opening Pandora’s box.

“All infidels,” will suffer, Geller said, “The Islamic imperative is to subjugate all infidels under the hegemony of Islamic law — those on the left as well as those on the right.”

The left shares many of the same goals as Islam, said Geller. “They [the left] hate freedom, and everything that goes with it. The left and Islam both share a totalitarian, violent and supremacist imperative.”

Former DHS official Phil Haney claimed recently that President Obama is “deliberately dismantling America’s defenses,” and charged Obama and other defense officials with dereliction of duty.

Said Haney: “It’s an abrogation of the basic responsibility of any elected official…to protect Americans from threats both foreign and domestic.”

“And as long as we stand by and allow the administration to misinform us and disinform us, then we’re going to see the same results we’ve seen so far over and over again.”

Previously, Haney claimed that he was ordered by the Obama administration to “scrub records of Muslims with terror ties.”

As Haney claimed back in February 2016, “I was ordered by my superiors at the Department of Homeland Security to delete or modify several hundred records of individuals tied to designated Islamist terror groups like Hamas from the important federal database, the Treasury Enforcement Communications System.”

In spite of Geller’s belief that many on the political left are attempting to use radical Islam to catalyze “change,” she applauds those who recognize the dangers of Islam to traditional liberal value — ideas like equal protection, free speech, and separation of church and state.

Geller praised famous liberal comedian and talk show host Bill Maher for his intellectual honesty and courage in standing up to Islam.

Referencing Maher’s remarks on Jerry Seinfeld’s Comedians in Cars, where he said, “The left is so tolerant, they’re tolerating intolerance,” Geller approved, saying, “Maher is absolutely right in this.”

“Islam is the most intolerant, supremacist, violent, misogynistic and anti-Semitic ideology on the face of the earth – now being brought to the US under the guise of ‘tolerance’,” Geller said.

Unlike many of her colleagues in the conservative movement, Geller does not believe that “radical Islam” or “radicalization” are the central problem – she believes it is the religion of Islam itself, which she points out, commands death for nonbelievers and death for homosexuals.

Orlando is Islam “in its truest form,” said Geller. “Muhammad said that gays must be killed. Muhammad is the supreme example whom all Muslims must obey. So killing gays is indeed the faith itself.”

Geller seeks to differentiate between other faiths and Islam, debunking the notion that “all faiths are the same,” and morally equivalent. She said that becoming less tolerant, more violent and more deceptive “are taught in the Qur’an, so they are the essence of what it means to be a ‘better Muslim.’”

The mainstream media, Geller insisted, are “lying” on a “massive scale.”

“The political and media elites are lying to us constantly about Islam. It is no wonder that so many Americans are ignorant and complacent about the jihad threat,” said Geller.

“But because Islam is indeed the real problem, Trump is so popular. He is the first presidential nominee — or presumptive nominee at this point — since John Quincy Adams even to come close to speaking honestly about this threat.”

On the mainstream media’s insistence that Islam is a religion of “peace,” Geller has some stern words. “Here’s the thing: the enemedia has to admonish us constantly about how Islam is a religion of peace because it so obviously isn’t,” exclaimed Geller.

“They keep having to club us over the head with this so that we ignore what we see in the daily headlines — Orlando is just the latest example. They’re banking on no one actually reading the Qur’an and Hadith, because if they did, the lies would be exposed.”

Geller also believes the events in Orlando have awakened a sleeping giant in the gay community.

“Certainly, it has created a rift in the gay community. A good rift: the gays aren’t all marching in lockstep with the leftist agenda. Look at the recent statements of Milo Yiannopoulos and other gays who have come out against the jihad and the Muslim migrant invasion.”

Pamela Geller: Trump Is Right, and He Must Win

Branden Camp/Getty Images

Branden Camp/Getty Images

Breitbart, by Pamela Geller, June 15, 2016:

The post-jihad denial that we see in the wake of every Islamic attack since 9/11 has made possible the wild successes of Islamic groups that are waging jihad in the cause of Islam.

After every jihad terror attack, Islamic supremacists and their paid shills in the media unleash relentless, vicious attacks upon those of us who oppose jihad. Never do we hear or see them go after the Islamic texts and teachings that fuel this war.

A case in point was a Salon article published Tuesday: “Donald Trump’s war with Islam: A campaign rooted in pernicious religious discrimination,” by Simon Maloy. Maloy said that the Orlando jihad massacre gave Trump “the opportunity he needed to define the campaign he intends to run: a campaign that casts the Muslim faith and its practitioners – both inside and outside the U.S. – as antagonistic to American interests.”

He accused Trump of running a campaign “that casts the Muslim faith and its practitioners – both inside and outside the U.S. – as antagonistic to American interests.” Trump’s speech in the wake of the Orlando jihad massacre was, according to Maloy, “a relentlessly ugly diatribe that unambiguously embraced the pernicious and anti-American idea that a person’s religious faith makes them a threat to national security.”

The idea that the depraved left sees the murdered nightclub-goers as an “opportunity” for Trump is as vicious as the attack itself. Trump sounded a warning, and he was right to do so. It was not Donald Trump who made Islamic jihad “antagonistic to American interests”; the jihad doctrine itself is antagonistic to American interest and freedoms. How many thousands have to die in the cause of Islam?

In his speech, Trump said that he would “suspend immigration from areas of the world when there is a proven history of terrorism against the United States, Europe or our allies, until we understand how to end these threats.” He is right. After the Boston Marathon jihad bombing, my organization, the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), called for the following:

— AFDI calls for immediate investigation into foreign mosque funding in the West and for new legislation making foreign funding of mosques in non-Muslim nations illegal.
— AFDI calls for surveillance of mosques and regular inspections of mosques in the U.S. and other non-Muslim nations to look for pro-violence materials. Any mosque advocating jihad or any aspects of Sharia that conflict with Constitutional freedoms and protections should be closed.
— AFDI calls for curriculum and Islam-related materials in textbooks and museums to describe the Islamic doctrine and history accurately, including its violent doctrines and 1,400-year war against unbelievers.
— AFDI calls for a halt of foreign aid to Islamic nations with Sharia-based constitutions and/or governments.
— AFDI denounces the use of Sharia law in any Western court or nation.
— AFDI advocates deportation hearings against non-citizens who promote jihad in our nations.
— AFDI calls for an immediate halt of immigration by Muslims into nations that do not currently have a Muslim majority population.
— AFDI calls for laws providing that anyone seeking citizenship in the United States should be asked if he or she supports Sharia law, and investigated for ties to pro-Sharia groups. If so, citizenship should not be granted.
— AFDI calls for the cancellation of citizenship or permanent residency status for anyone who leaves the country of his residence to travel for the purpose of engaging in jihad activity, and for the refusal of reentry into his country of residence after that jihad activity.
— AFDI calls careful investigation of Muslims resident in non-Muslim country who have obtained naturalized citizenship or permanent residency status, to ensure that that status was not obtained under false pretenses.
— AFDI calls for the designation of the following as grounds for immediate deportation: fomenting, plotting, financing, attempting or carrying out jihad attacks; encouraging or threatening or attempting to carry out the punishments Islamic law mandates for apostasy, adultery, blasphemy, fornication or theft; threatening or attempting or carrying out honor murders, forced marriage, underage marriage, female genital mutilation, or polygamy.
— AFDI calls for the U.S. and other free nations to have jihad, as it is traditionally understood in Islamic jurisprudence to involve warfare against and subjugation of non-Muslims, declared a crime against humanity at the U.N., or to withdraw from the U.N. and have its headquarters moved to a Muslim nation.
— AFDI calls for legislating making illegal the foreign funding of Islamic Studies departments and faculty positions in our universities.

How many people would be alive today had American politicians heeded our calls? Instead, we are blacklisted, smeared, libeled, and defamed, while pro-jihad groups are feted on Capital Hill.

But Maloy complained that Trump’s focus was “on Muslims exclusively – not radicalized Muslims, but every Muslim person outside the U.S. He referred to the expanded admittance of refugees from Syria as potentially ‘a better, bigger version of the legendary Trojan Horse.’ Per Trump, Hillary Clinton, as president, would ‘be admitting hundreds of thousands of refugees from the Middle East with no system to vet them, or to prevent the radicalization of their children.’ It’s all fearmongering based on lies and prejudice.”

Such idiocy is without peer. ISIS has vowed to send jihad killers to the west via migration. They are coming — why let them in? No, not all migrants are Muslim soldiers, but enough are to cause unimaginable death and destruction. Would you eat from a bowl of M & M’s if you knew two of them were laced with cyanide?

Muslims groups such as the Hamas-tied Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) have urged Muslims not to cooperate with law enforcement. Muslim groups have demanded that law enforcement agencies dismantle counterterror programs. Muslim groups demand adherence to sharia in the language used in counterterror training material: the Department of Homeland Security issued guidelines just days before the Orlando jihad massacre forbidding agents from using the words “jihad” and “sharia” in connection with terrorism because doing so offended Muslims.

Maloy is likewise interested in policing language to avoid offending Muslims, saying of Trump’s immigration proposal: “It’s reprehensible, and it’s the kind of language that results in people getting hurt… If your goal is to promote the radicalization of a population within your own borders, having a major party presidential candidate talk about them all as if they’re criminals is an excellent way to go about it.”

No. What is reprehensible is how viciously the lapdogs for jihad blame the victim — led by the scrubber-in-chief in the White House. They call upon the targets to change their behavior, to subjugate themselves to Islam. Maloy is saying that Trump has to change his language or else Muslims will become “radicalized.” Last year, the mainstream media likewise said that the jihad assassination attempt on my free speech event in Garland, Texas was my fault, that I was taunting Muslims. Were the gay revelers in the Pulse nightclub last Saturday night taunting Muslims? Based on that flawed logic, yes. Our very way of life taunts sharia-adherent Muslims.

Jihad terror attacks present a unique opportunity for Islamic supremacists and jihadis. First, the kill, which is a great victory in the cause of Islam. The successful jihad attack attracts more Muslims and converts to the cause.

Secondly and most importantly, terror-tied groups like CAIR, their lapdogs in the enemedia, and pro-Islamic politicians like President Obama use the slaughter to push, proselytize, lie, deceive, and talk, talk, talk up Islam (while denigrating all other religions) on every major media news channel.

Trump is right. He was wrong about Garland, but he surely gets it now. And this is why he is so wildly popular — because finally, someone with a huge platform is calling out the enemedia and the dhimmi press, and giving them the long overdue, much-needed middle finger they so richly deserve.

Trump must win in order for this nation to survive. Trump must win if we are to prevail in this worldwide war against freedom.

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.

Also see:

Pamela Geller: Facebook’s Assurances Of Neutrality ‘Utterly Hollow’

Geller-speaking-moments-before-the-Garland-Shooting-e1433506916264-640x479Breitbart, by Allum Bokhari, June 12, 2016:

Islam critic and American Freedom Defence Initiative President Pamela Geller slammed Facebook in an interview with Breitbart this evening, rejecting their pretenses of political neutrality and urging conservatives to fight back.

Geller’s 50,000-strong Facebook group, “Stop Islamization Of America” was removed from Facebook earlier today, despite being active for over five years, due to allegedly “hateful content.” A few hours later, her own Facebook account received a 30-day ban after she made a post criticizing President Obama for his response to the Orlando shootings.

fb

The timing of Facebook’s sudden burst of censorship – just a day after the Muslim terrorist Omar Mateen carried out the deadliest terror attack on U.S. soil since 9/11 – is hard to ignore. It also casts doubt on the social network’s claims to political neutrality, which the company repeatedly pushed during last month’s “Trending News” scandal.

In an interview with Breitbart, Geller emphasized the need to fight back against Facebook:

AB: Facebook say they took down your page because of their rule against “hateful, obscene, or threatening” content. What’s your response?

PG: It is not hateful, obscene, or threatening to oppose jihad terror such as we saw in Orlando last night. Truth is not hateful or obscene. What is hateful, obscene and threatening is that Facebook is moving to silence everyone who speaks honestly about the motivating ideology behind such attacks.

AB: Why do you think they took the page down now, of all times?

PG: They are in full damage control mode. Orlando showed jihad for what it is. They’re committed to obscuring that knowledge and making sure people remain ignorant and complacent about the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat.

AB: They’ve also banned your own account, for thirty days. Is this the first time that’s happened to you? What are they so afraid of?

PG: No, it has happened before, when I get too close to truths they want to cover up. They’re afraid these truths will get out, and that people will start acting to remove the feckless and traitorous leaders who got us into this fix. They are blocking and banning me now, especially now, when people are looking past the media myths provided by terror-tied groups like Hamas-CAIR.

AB: Facebook spent much of last month assuring the public that they aren’t biased against conservatives. What are we to think of those assurances, in light of what happened today?

PG: They’re utterly and absolutely hollow.

AB: How should critics of Islam respond to this? Protest? Boycott Facebook? Seek out other platforms?

PG: By continuing to speak the truth. Yes, protest. Yes, establish other platforms. But Facebook is too large to be ignored, or to be hurt by a boycott. Facebook quislings must be called out. If voices of freedom and truth leave it, we will have no significant platform. Better we keep up the pressure on Facebook to stop trying to silence conservatives.

AB: Do you think Facebook’s ban on “hateful” content will ever encompass Islamist content on the platform?

PG: Never. As far as the left is concerned, Islamic jihad, Jew-hatred, misogyny, et al aren’t hateful until non-Muslims report on them. Then they still aren’t hateful – only the reporting by the non-Muslims is.

You can follow Allum Bokhari on Twitter, add him on Facebook. Email tips and suggestions to abokhari@breitbart.com.

Prosecutors: ISIS Ebook Helped Inspire Aborted Attack on Pamela Geller

1(480)IPT, by John Rossomando  •  Apr 22, 2016

An Islamic State (ISIS) ebook, “How to Survive in the West: A Mujahid’s Guide,” may have contributed to a plot by two accused Islamic State (ISIS) terrorists from Boston to behead free-speech advocate Pamela Geller, federal prosecutors say. Boston policekilled a third conspirator on June 2 before they could carry out their attack against Geller.

David Dawoud Wright, Usaamah Abdullah Rahim and Nicholas Rovinski answered ISIS’s call to commit terrorist acts in Western countries beginning in January 2015, a superseding indictment issued Thursday said. The three were inspired by the terrorist organization’s online magazine Dabiq and also looked to “How to Survive in the West” for guidance in forming a sleeper cell after it appeared in March 2015.

Wright wrote organizational documents for a “Martyrdom Operations Cell” in April 2015. He also researched firearms, tranquilizer guns and law-enforcement capabilities. His search queries included: “what is the most flammable chemical;” “Which tranquilizer puts humans to sleep instantly;” and “how to start a secret militia in [the] US.”

Most of these topics are also found in “How to Survive in the West.”

Rahim communicated with several ISIS members abroad, including Junaid Hussain, also known as “Abu Hussain al-Britani.” Hussain was a British hacker who helped ISIS recruit jihadis and identify targets in the West prior to his death in a drone strike last August.

By May, the plotters wanted to behead Geller, who was organizing a draw Muhammad contest in Garland, Texas. Geller was targeted for murder in a May 6 ISIS fatwa. Hussain told Rahim to kill Geller because she had insulted Muhammad, and Rahim passed along Hussain’s instructions to Wright. He also told Rahim to carry a knife if the “feds” tried to arrest him.

The plot moved away from Geller and the group allegedly discussed attacking closer to home. Rahim was killed by police in June after intercepted conversations indicated he was about to attack police officers. Hussain hailed Rahim as a “martyr” on Twitter.

Independent of this plot, Geller was targeted by two other ISIS-inspired terrorists, Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi. Both men were killed by a Garland traffic police officer during a shootout.

“How to Survive in the West” also includes instructions to kill anyone who depicts Muhammad in a manner Muslims find blasphemous.

“Allah is asking us; why don’t you fight a people who broke their covenant of peace (with the Muslims) first, then reviled our religion (by promoting insulting pictures of Prophet Muhammad) and started (Arabic: bada’*) the attack against you first?” a passage from How to Survive in the West said. [Emphasis original.],” “How to Survive in the West” says.

Disturbingly, Rovinski continued to support ISIS from behind bars after he was arrested. Prosecutors say Rovinski reaffirmed his support for Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in August. He also tried to recruit other prisoners to commit terrorist acts.

Catholic School That Invited Pro-Jihad Speaker Doubles Down

St-Petersburg-Bedier

By Pamela Geller, April 8, 2016:

Read the letter the quisling principal sent to parents, justifying his invitation to have a terror-tied CAIR speaker address the children at his Catholic school.

Father Rosin, where is the invitation for Wafa Sultan, Ibn Warraq, Haider Elias (Yezidi leader) or any voice for the victims of jihad to speak?

April 8, 2016
Catholic School That Invited Pro-Jihad Speaker Doubles Down

By Pamela Geller

In mid-March I published an article in World Net Daily about an incident at St. Petersburg Catholic High School in St. Petersburg, Florida, Last month, the entire student body was called together to hear a deceptive presentation on “Islamophobia” from the notorious Ahmed Bedier, who openly supports the jihad terror group Hizb’allah and has worked for the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). Now the principal of St. Petersburg Catholic High, Fr. Richard Rosin, is making a clumsy attempt at damage control. He sent parents this letter — and some of them sent it to me:

Dear Parents/Guardians:

You may have heard that Ms. Pam Geller of Breitbart media has written a scathing and erroneous article about St. Petersburg Catholic High School. The article attempts to address the assembly held on Thurs. Feb. 18, 2016.  It is important to allay any fears that this article has created.

The principal is sloppy and intellectually lazy: my name is Pamela Geller and the piece to which he is referring didn’t run in Breitbart News, but in World Net Daily. And while he claims that my article was “erroneous,” you’ll see that he doesn’t in his entire letter give a single example of any erroneous claim I made.

A few months ago some students came forward who were concerned about the media coverage of the Islamic people. The impression that seems to be prevalent in the media is that all Muslims are terrorists. The students recognized that such an irrational, global portrayal is not in concert with our Catholic faith nor our mission to educate the whole person.

“The media coverage of the Islamic people” were news reports of jihadi attacks — and many of those attacks involved the slaughter of Christians living under Islamic rule. They were oppressed and slaughtered because they were Christians. Is this how the good Father Rosin should respond and educate his young people?

And where did these students see media reports claiming that “all Muslims are terrorists”? That’s ridiculous. The media bends over backwards to make sure that Americans think that terrorism has nothing whatsoever to do with Islam, and that peaceful Muslims are victims of “backlash” after terror attacks.

Meanwhile, one of my sources at the school has informed me it was just one student who thought this deceptive assembly would be a good idea, and she reportedly pressured the administration to get it approved. In the end, however, everything that occurs at that school is the responsibility of the principal. I wonder if anyone even vetted this Fr. Rosin. Not only was it a disgrace to subject these Christian kids to this propaganda, but it could have potentially been very dangerous.

After considering the request to present an appropriate and correct view of Islam, the administration agreed to have an assembly. Upon the recommendation of a well respected member of the clergy of the Diocese of St. Petersburg, who previously had our speaker make a presentation to his parish as part of an interdenominational dialogue, we asked Mr. Bedier to speak to our students.

A correct view of Islam? From a former representative of terror-tied CAIR, an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorist funding trial in our nation’s history? If Fr. Rosin really wanted to present an accurate view of Islam, he should have Ibn Warraq, Wafa Sutlan, Nonie Darwish, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Robert Spencer — not a former representative of a group with multiple links to Hamas, and which has been designated a terrorist group by the United Arab Emirates. Why didn’t the principal invite to the school one of the Catholic priests from the Middle East whose flock has been decimated by Islamic jihadis?

Beginning with the Baron Bulletin of Feb. 5, 2016, I indicated that we would be having the assembly on Islam. The assembly was published on our calendar. As always, parents were invited to attend. In fact, I had hoped more parents would be in attendance to share this information with their child and have a meaningful discussion.

After the assembly, our teachers spent time in classes discussing the assembly.  By all accounts from the teachers, the discussions were very productive.

If this is true, all the teachers are as clueless and intellectually subjugated about this foremost issue of our time as Fr. Rosin is.

Additionally, St. Petersburg Catholic High School recorded the presentation. This was done so that any parent who wished could view the presentation for discussion with his/her son/daughter. There were a few parents who requested the link to this video.

While there is some disagreement about a few comments Mr. Bedier made, I did not find anything to be inappropriate in the presentation for our students. The Superintendent of Schools for the Diocese of St. Petersburg has reviewed the presentation and found nothing inappropriate for our students.

Nothing inappropriate? As I showed in my original article on this, Bedier minimized, downplayed, and dissembled about the jihad threat. He falsely exaggerated Muslim achievements, played moral equivalence games in claiming that there were Christian terrorists as well as Muslim ones (with his one example being Tim McVeigh, who is supposed to be equivalent to the perpetrators of 28,000 jihad attacks since 9/11), and gave students an incomplete and misleading picture of the doctrinal differences between Islam and Christianity – even as Muslims are persecuting Christians to a degree unparalleled for centuries.

After the assembly it was discovered that Mr. Bedier posted a picture of our students on his Facebook page. We were not aware he would do so and in our continuing effort to protect the privacy of our students, we requested he remove it.

More dishonesty. Bedier took the picture during his presentation and said that he was going to post it to social media. So then Fr. Rosin was shocked to find it on Facebook?

Read more 

2000 ‘ticking time bombs’ in US – and counting

New American mosque opens every week and many preach jihad.

WND, by Leo Hohmann, April 3, 2016:

  • In Germany, following a wave of Islamic immigration, one political party is considering a call for shutting down all of the country’s mosques in a desperate bid to prevent terrorist attacks, rape sprees and other acts of violence and Muslim domination.
  • In the U.S., President Obama marked the new year by visiting a mosque and has invested a great deal of effort to downplay the connection between Islam and terrorism, while leading Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has proposed temporarily halting all Muslim immigration.
  • A growing chorus of U.S. politicians, pundits and scholars are calling for closer monitoring of U.S. mosques, the number of which has grown exponentially since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people on U.S. soil.

Experts on Islamic terrorism are calling the estimated 2,500 to 3,100 mosques in America “ticking time bombs.”

Every state now has at least one. California and New York lead the way, each with more than 500 mosques, followed by Texas with just over 300.

As the number of mosques increase, so do acts of Islamic terror in the U.S.

FBI Director James Comey told Congress recently that his agency is stretched to the limit trying to keep up with nearly 1,000 active ISIS investigations in all 50 states, and that does not include probes tied to al-Qaida, al-Shabab or other Islamic groups.

While the FBI is able to foil the vast majority of Islamic terror plots, last year was particularly bloody with jihadist shootings in Chattanooga that killed five U.S. servicemen and another attack that took 14 lives at a Christmas party in San Bernardino.

Jihadist knife attacks at a restaurant in Columbus, Ohio, and on the campus of University of California at Merced have recently injured at least a dozen others, some critically.

And everyone is jittery after what happened in Brussels, Belgium, last month.

Of the thousands of mosques in America, nearly 80 percent of them have been opened since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

There are now as many as 3,000 mosques in America and nearly 80 percent of them have been opened since the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

There are now as many as 3,000 mosques in America and nearly 80 percent of them
have been opened since the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

Listening to politicians in Congress and on presidential stump speeches, Americans might get the idea that ISIS is to blame for all of this violence. It uses the Internet to “poison the minds” of young Muslims, they say. But seven Islam experts and former Muslims contacted by WND say it’s not that simple and the problem goes beyond ISIS.

The root of the problem, they all agree, lies in the mosque.

Dr. Mark Christian, president and founder of the Global Faith Institute, which seeks to educate Americans about the true nature of mainstream Islam, says about 80 percent of the roughly 2,800 U.S. mosques are controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood, an organization whose stated goal is to bring the nations into compliance with Shariah law.

“You have a new mosque opening every week in America,” says Christian, a former child imam who grew up in Egypt the son of a Muslim Brotherhood operative before fleeing his homeland and converting to Christianity as a young adult.

Christian, now 44 and living in Nebraska under the threat of a fatwa, said the FBI and other U.S. intelligence agencies don’t understand the source of Islamic violence. They have focused for years on learning about the ties of individual Muslims to groups like al-Qaida or ISIS when in fact they should be going to mosques and learning about the Quran and hadiths. All the answers are there, in the texts and in the mainstream Islamic interpretations of the texts, if they would only look.

So what are people being taught in the overwhelming majority of mosques?

Read more with quotes from Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer, Andrew Bostom and John Guandolo

Pamela Geller and Brigitte Gabriel discuss jihad on The Sean Hannity Show

HannitySean Hannity Show, March 28, 2016:

Brigitte Gabriel, Terror Expert & Founder and CEO of Act for America and Pamela Geller, President of the American Freedom Defense Initiative and Editor & Publisher of Atlas Shrugs, and co-author of the new book The Post-American Presidency, Obama’s War on America and Stop the Islamization of America – They are there to address the following events happening around world:

The attacks in Brussels and the search for 8 remaining ISIS terrorists

The attack on Christian women & children celebrating Easter in Pakistan

The commitment of Obama to bring in more unvetted refugees

The truth about political correctness and radical Islamic terrorists

President Obama is calling for more openness to refugees in the aftermath of the Brussels terror attacks, urging Americans to continue leading by “example” when it comes to immigration policy.

“As we move forward in this fight, we have to wield another weapon alongside our airstrikes, our military, and our counter​-​terrorism work, and our diplomacy. And that’s the power of our example,” the president said in his weekly address on Saturday.

Donald Trump and Counter-Jihad

gty_donald_trump_face_cf_160112_12x5_1600 (1)American Thinker, by Danusha Goska, March 20, 2016:

Counter-jihadis are frustrated people. We see truths that others ignore. Jihad’s death toll increases daily. We hope for a turning point, perhaps a charismatic public champion or a social media icon to propagate our movement.

The perfect public relations gimmick can change the landscape overnight. Relatively few people were thinking about, or donating money for research to cure amyotrophic lateral sclerosis in spring of 2014. By summer of 2014, a social media fund-raising gimmick called “the ice bucket challenge” inspired millions to participate in raising $115 million for ALS — five times more than had been raised the year before. Counter-jihad needs that moment: when the landscape changes, and millions join the cause.

One might think that high-profile jihad attacks, such as 9-11, or ISIS’ sexual enslavement of girls, might create a public relations tsunami, bringing leaders into the counter-jihad camp. Alas, the opposite has occurred. “Islam is peace,” President George W. Bush said six days after 9-11, speaking in a mosque, accompanied by CAIR. “ISIL is not Islamic,” said Barack Obama on September 10, 2014.

In 2010, a New Jersey Muslim man who had raped and tortured his arranged, teenage wife was exonerated by a New Jersey judge, on the grounds that the husband’s behavior was consistent with Islamic belief and practice. Also in 2010, Derek Fenton was fired from New Jersey Transit for burning three pages from a Koran. In both cases, Americans applied sharia’s standards. In spite of these events in his own state, Governor Chris Christie insisted that any question of sharia in the U.S. is nonsense. “This sharia law business is crap. It’s just crazy. And I’m tired of dealing with the crazies.”

Americans, beneficiaries of the freedom of speech as granted in the first amendment, inheritors of Western Civilization and its emphasis on truth as the highest value, now engage in the same process of decoding of news items that slaves of the Soviet system used to resort to. We hear of an explosion, a stabbing, a plot or a decapitation – the 2009 Fort Hood shooting, the 2014 decapitation in Moore, Oklahoma, the July, 2015 shootings in Chattanooga, Tennessee, the November 2015 UC Merced stabbing – and we all wonder when and if we will learn the suspect’s name. The name is not released for hours or days. Officials rush to insist that the incident was not terrorism, but, rather, workplace violence.

Tremendous resentment, confusion and frustration are building up. People are angry. People are afraid. People don’t know whom to trust.

But wait! There’s good news. Very good news. The rhetorical landscape has slowly changed since 9/11.

Fifteen years ago, there were far more people who were eager to play the cultural relativism card and excuse away jihad and gender apartheid. As time has gone on, more and more people, in spite of the PC indoctrination that permeates schools, churches, politics and media, have concluded that there is something about Islam that poses a challenge. People are eager to learn more. When I give talks about Islam, audiences grant me a uniquely intense level of focus and concern. Audiences are much more likely now than in the past to have self-educated, and to know the differences between Islam and other world faiths, and to be able to refute standard-issue apologias for jihad.

The gap still exists, though, between average people’s openness and awareness and the elite. Political correctness demonizes and punishes people who speak the truth about Islam. Heroes like Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Geert Wilders must wear Kevlar and be surrounded by armed guards. Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller are targeted and slandered by the incorrectly named Southern Poverty Law Center.

Speech could be used to work out solutions the problem jihad and gender apartheid present. Speech could be used to release resentments, frustrations, fear, and rage. But political correctness suppresses speech. Politically correct suppression of the truth about Islam combined with public frustration and fear are tinder, kerosene, and a match, all waiting for the spark. This volatile situation could be exploited by a demagogue.

The freedoms Americans cherish depend on a stable civil society. When people feel afraid, and conclude that there is no one at the steering wheel – that leaders are shirking their duties – people become willing to surrender their freedom and dignity to an authoritarian who will promise them safety and order. Such an authoritarian might target not only low-hanging fruit like innocent Muslims, but non-Muslims, as well. Authoritarians don’t like free speech – or freedom of assembly or association. Authoritarians begin by targeting one population as their scapegoats, but they eventually bring the hammer down on everyone. We’d all suffer. The revolution eats its young.

On December 7, 2015, at a rally in Mount Pleasant, South Carolina, a Republican presidential candidate stated of himself, “Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what the hell is going on.”

At a November 12, 2015 rally, Trump said that his opponents were saying, “Trump doesn’t have a plan for ISIS! …I’m gonna win… I said to my wife, I have to tell ’em about my plan, because otherwise I’m not gonna win. They’ll think I have no plan… I would bomb the shit out of them.” The audience laughed and cheered.

In a March, 2016 debate, Trump said he would torture “these animals over in the Middle East” and “take out” their families. When informed that his plan would require military members to commit war crimes, Trump insisted, “They’re not going to refuse me. If I say do it, they’re going to do it. I’m a leader. I’m a leader. I’ve always been a leader. I’ve never had any problem leading people. If I say do it, they’re going to do it. That’s what leadership is all about.”

In a March 9 interview with Anderson Cooper, Trump said, “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…You’re going to have to figure that out. OK. You’ll get another Pulitzer, right? But you’ll have to figure that out. But there’s a tremendous hatred. And we have to be very vigilant. We have to be very careful. And we can’t allow people coming into this country who have this hatred of the United States.”

Some counter-jihadis see Trump as our champion and his statements as the “ice bucket challenge” moment when counter-jihad finally goes viral. They are mistaken.

Trump receives a gargantuan proportion of media attention. When Trump opens his mouth about Islam, he becomes the de facto face and voice of counter-jihad to millions of media consumers. Donald Trump’s statements about Islam and Muslims have tarred counter-jihad with the mark of buffoonery, intellectual flaccidity, and uninformed xenophobia. That is exactly how Islam-apologists want to depict counter-jihad: as uneducated yahoos eager to hate, without any reason other than their own uninformed bile, the next “other.”

Look again at Trump’s statement on immigration. Look at the timing. Ask yourself if Donald Trump had made any significant contribution to counter-jihad before that moment.

Robert Spencer is the one indispensable hero of counter-jihad. In a July 30, 2015 essay, Spencer identified Trump as “a blowhard and boor,” and “the poster child of American decline.” Spencer described Trump’s rhetoric as savage, stupid and clumsy. He called Trump “a foe of the freedom of speech.” Trump’s campaign, Spencer wrote, is “an Oprah show of celebrity worship, lurid grandstanding, logorrheic superficiality, and tabloid scandalmongering.” Spencer pointed out that Trump had insulted counter-jihad heroine Pamela Geller.

“I watched Pam earlier,” Trump said, “and it really looks like she’s just taunting everybody. What is she doing drawing Muhammad? I mean it’s disgusting. Isn’t there something else they could be doing? Drawing Muhammad? …They can’t do something else? They have to be in the middle of Texas doing something on Muhammad and insulting everybody? What is she doing? Why is she doing it? It’s probably very risky for her – I don’t know, maybe she likes risk? But what the hell is she doing?”

Pamela Geller has shown that Trump has extensive business dealings in the Muslim world. There’s nothing wrong with doing business with Muslims; we all do, as participants in the petroleum economy. The problem is this. Trump had not been part of the counter-jihad movement. Suddenly he made his December 7 announcement about Muslim immigration. Why? Because on December 2, 2015, in San Bernardino, California, jihadis Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik murdered fourteen innocent Americans and wounded twenty-four others. Trump made his immigration announcement five short days later. He exploited a tragedy to boost his presidential campaign.

It doesn’t matter if he is exploiting a tragedy to advance himself, as long as he is advancing the cause of counter-jihad, you may be thinking.

Look again at Trump’s statement on Muslim immigration: “Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what the hell is going on.” He actually referred to himself as “Donald J. Trump.” That sounds silly and pompous. Trump’s verbal faux pas may not matter to Trump’s base. Polls have shown that Trump supporters tend to have less formal education. Trump’s “savage, stupid and clumsy” rhetoric, as Robert Spencer called it, does matter to millions of others – other people who could and should be on the counter-jihad team. Trump put his own name first in an important policy announcement. This policy, if enacted, would have an impact on America’s character and America’s perception around the world. Beginning such a pronouncement with his own name, and never offering any justification or support, sounds like the speech pattern of an egotist, a potentate, a petty dictator, not a serious thinker.

An intelligent case can be made for a moratorium on Muslim immigration. That case can be made with facts. One might simply ask, “How does it benefit America to allow more Tashfeen Maliks, more Mohamed Osman Mohamuds, Tamerlane Tsarnaevs, Faisal Shahzads, and Mohamed Attas to enter the United States? Have a look at the photo of eight-year-old Martin Richard, murdered in the Boston Marathon Bombing. What can you say that justifies his death? We know that most Muslims are not active jihadis, but we have no way of differentiating. Other immigrants from other groups offer all the benefits of immigration that Muslims do without the risks. There is currently a worldwide resurgence of jihad, and there are terrorist groups from Boko Haram in North Africa to ISIS in the Middle East to the Caucasus Emirate in Russia to MILF in the Pacific. During a previous war, Democratic president Franklin Delano Roosevelt issued presidential proclamation 2525 suspending naturalization based on nationality alone. Let us have a serious discussion on this matter.”

Instead of a reasoned argument that might win over those on the fence, Trump issued a fiat, leading with the name of the great man superseding and ignoring all reason. It’s a Trump-centric, anti-intellectual, Constitution-is-so-superfluous-we-need-not-mention-it approach. This great-man, fact-free approach does not serve counter-jihad.

Trump’s chat with his wife, ending with his decision to “bomb the shit out of them,” is similarly not helpful. Perhaps Trump has not noticed, but we have bombed the shit out of them. A 2013 study estimated that the Afghanistan and Iraq wars would eventually cost the U.S. six trillion dollars. That’s a lot of bombs and American blood. Muammar al-Gaddafi, Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar are all dead. Jihad still menaces.

Trump said, “I would just bomb those suckers. And that’s right, I’d blow up the pipes. I’d blow up the refineries. I’d blow up every single inch. There would be nothing left, and you know what, you’ll get Exxon to come in there, and in two months, you ever see these guys how good they are, the great oil companies? They’ll rebuild that sucker brand new. It will be beautiful. And I’d ring it, and I’ll take the oil. And I said I’ll take the oil.” Is Trump running for president or the latest Marvel Comics superhero?

Note these three words: “I’d ring it.” Trump’s magic ring would consist of American troops stationed on the ground in the Middle East, between Iran and Saudi Arabia. Trump says that he will take the oil. In fact, in this scenario, it would require massive American troop presence to take the oil. Trump’s answer to the question of American energy independence is blood for oil. How many American soldiers would die to make Trump’s id-fueled fantasy of omnipotent revenge real? Which Trump supporter will be first to volunteer to die to sustain the illusion that Trump is a serious person saying serious things?

Any real approach to jihad must involve two features: energy independence that eliminates our funding of jihad through our petroleum purchases, and vast cultural change. Right now discussion of jihad and gender apartheid is controlled by cultural relativism. This cultural relativism is a religious dogma among politicians, journalists, academics, elementary and secondary school teachers, and even Christian clergy.

Cultural relativism is a cultural phenomenon that has a beginning and that can have an end. A hundred and seventy years ago, an Englishman, Charles James Napier, could say of the Indian custom of sati, or burning of widows, “This burning of widows is your custom… But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their property… Let us all act according to national customs.” Napier insisted that Western culture was superior to the custom of sati. He insisted on enforcing Western custom on Indians.

That kind of boldness died out in the post-World-War-II era. Nazism, followed by the Civil Rights Movement in the U.S., overwhelmed the West. Suddenly, Westerners felt an overwhelming sense of shame. Cultural relativism, an idea advanced by anthropologist Franz Boas in the early twentieth century, became dogma.

Of course Nazism and Jim Crow were evil and deserved to die – but they were not the alpha and the omega of Western Civilization. We need to be proud of, and to cherish, what we have gotten right. If Franz Boas were alive today, he would be horrified at how far we have taken cultural relativism.

Young people need to be educated in the gifts of Western Civilization. Our guide must not be arrogant, ignorant chauvinism, but objective reality. Just one such reality: high sex ratios. Throughout the Muslim world, there are more men than women. Females die off at a rate disproportionate to the West. These statistics hold true even in wealthy Muslims nations. Dead women and girls: that’s an inescapable reality. Compilations of the worst countries for women, citing UN statistics on literacy, life expectancy, and safety, generally list Muslim countries as among the worst. That’s reality.

The Koran contains many verses calling for jihad. Mohammed was a warriorwho ordered targeted killings of innocent people. Islam spread through violent conquest. These are objective facts.

Mention any of these facts on a college campus, or in a church meeting, or in an article to be published in a mainstream newspaper, or while running for office, and risk opprobrium. The schoolmarms of PC insist that you attribute unhappy facts about Islam to the evils of colonialism. Or that you say that Christians are worse. Or that you say that, with time, Islam will “reform.” Authentic counter-jihadis are not raving about “bombing the shit” out of the “animals” in the Middle East. Counter-jihadis are changing America so that we can speak the truth. We can’t defeat what we can’t name; we can’t defend what we don’t value.

“Islam hates us”: Islam is a belief system, and as such it cannot hate. The correct sentence would be, “Islam teaches hatred of non-Muslims.” Trump is a billionaire, born with a silver spoon in his mouth. Bill and Hillary Clinton attended Trump’s wedding to his third trophy bride. Even so, Trump’s fourth-grade speaking style convinces fans that Trump is an outsider, a man of the people. Trump’s fans also love Trump’s egotism. When asked who he consults on foreign policy, Trump replied, “I’m speaking with myself, number one, because I have a very good brain and I’ve said a lot of things… my primary consultant is myself and I have a good instinct for this stuff.” People who aren’t Trump fans won’t take a grown man seriously who can’t speak a coherent sentence in his native language about an important topic, and who doesn’t take the time to learn objective facts that exist outside his own ego. Human lives are at stake, and Trump can’t even be bothered to speak English correctly or consult with an adviser. Why give such a self-indulgent slow learner the nuclear codes?

When Anderson Cooper pressed Trump to support his assertion about Islam’s hate, Trump could not. When Trump brings massive attention to counter-jihad and then speaks foolishly, conspiracy theorists can be forgiven for wondering if Trump is not a mole for the other team. Every camera in the world is focused on Trump. Every microphone is pointed at him. What a dropped ball, what a missed chance, what a setback.

In 2013, Robert Spencer was interviewed by the BBC. The interviewer asked Spencer to support his critique of Islam. Spencer immediately, and without hesitation, recited several violent and hateful Koran verses and hadiths. He did so calmly and authoritatively. He did not then – nor has he ever – call Muslims “animals” or recommend that we “bomb the shit out of them.”

Anyone listening to Spencer’s BBC interview would rapidly learn that the problem is not Western racism or imperialism but jihad, jihad as taught in the Koran and hadith. Spencer’s intellectual acumen, his lack of hate, and the courtesy he showed his interlocutors put the focus on jihad, not on any alleged Western racism.

Trump has a huge and unshakeable fan base. As Trump himself said, “I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters.” Outside the fan base, Trump has the highest negative ratings ever recorded. Now is the time for counter-jihadis to reach out to, to convince and to recruit, mainstream Americans. Now is the time to harness facts to overturn the cultural relativism. We cannot squander this historical moment to allow buffoonery to become the face of counter-jihad.

Pro-jihad hatemonger addresses Catholic school kids

Students of St. Petersburg Catholic High School listen to presentation by Ahmed Bedier.

Students of St. Petersburg Catholic High School listen to presentation by Ahmed Bedier.

WND, by Pamela Geller, March 15, 2016:

Despite the continuing Muslim genocide of Christians in the Middle East and Africa, American Catholic leaders continue not only to turn a blind eye to jihad terror and the persecution of their fellow Christians, but are actively aiding and abetting the forces that are persecuting them. Last month, the entire student body of St. Petersburg Catholic High School in St. Petersburg, Florida, was called together to hear a deceptive presentation on “Islamophobia” from the notorious Ahmed Bedier, who openly supports the jihad terror group Hezbollah and has worked for the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).

Bedier’s address was ostensibly about fighting the supposedly rising level of “Islamophobia”; he also offered what he presented as a primer on Islamic culture. In it, he blamed the U.S. for ISIS, claiming that the bloodthirsty caliphate arose because we bombed innocent civilians in Iraq. He also called out Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, white people, Jews, Ted Cruz, Donald Trump and Ben Carson – all as examples of Muslim-haters – while proselytizing for Islam.

Bedier compared a Jewish podiatrist with Osama bin Laden, claiming that this podiatrist had weapons in his house and was planning to attack an Islamic center. He didn’t address the disparity between this one alleged attacker and bin Laden’s worldwide terror network. He dismissed the jihad terror group ISIS, which controls a territory larger than Great Britain and has attracted 30,000 foreign jihadis to its ranks, as “a few people.” He blamed the rise of ISIS on Syria’s Assad, claiming that when people demonstrated for freedom, Assad bombed the protesters and insisted that we are overstating the threat of Islamic terror groups, especially ISIS. We are spending too much on security and war, he said, and declared that we should be spending that money on alleviating poverty.

The real problem, said Bedier, is anti-Muslim bigotry. “Islamophobia,” he said, is all over TV, and no one is challenging it. He said that “Islamophobia” is just like anti-Semitism and the same thing will happen: We’ll have a Holocaust. He didn’t mention that FBI statistics show that anti-Semitic attacks are much more common than attacks on innocent Muslims. Nor did he address the Islamic texts and teachings jihadis use to justify violence.

Bedier also falsified history, claiming falsely that “Muslims were here even before America was founded.” He said that “some of Columbus’ navigators were Muslims – because he was from Portugal, and Portugal and Spain were controlled by and were led by Muslims for over 700 years until the Inquisitions happened. You can read more about that.” And if you do, you’ll discover that no Muslims accompanied Columbus. And to be completely accurate, it must be noted that Muslims did in fact play a role in early America – America fought its first and second foreign wars against the Barbary Pirates, who were Muslim jihad raiders, as memorialized in the Marine Hymn, “to the shores of Tripoli.” The first mosque wasn’t established in the U.S. until 1915, and relatively few mosques were founded before the 1960s, when the great hijrah to the West began in earnest.

Bedier’s lies didn’t stop there. He said that when the Muslims ruled Spain from the 700s until the 1490s, they allowed the Jews and Christians to worship freely: “The society could continue to be a Catholic society. Now compare that to what happened when the Europeans came to America.” He said that in contrast to how good the Muslims in Spain were to the Jews and Christians, it took a couple of hundred years for the Europeans to exterminate the Native Americans and eliminate them from their lands. He said: “Now they are limited to casinos.” This is nonsense. In reality, Jews and Christians could only live in peace in Muslim Spain if they submitted to Muslim hegemony, paid the jizya tax, and accepted the humiliating and discriminatory regulations that ensured their second-class status.

Bedier asked the 350 assembled students if they thought it would be fair to be called terrorists because of what Timothy McVeigh did, falsely connecting McVeigh with Catholicism and Christianity, which of course is erroneous since McVeigh was not a Christian at the time of the Oklahoma City bombing. And besides, no one is calling all Muslims terrorists anyway. He also showed the students pictures of Ahmed the Clock Boy in handcuffs, telling the kids how the incident of his fake clock/bomb and arrest showed anti-Muslim bigotry. He claimed that three Muslims had been murdered in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, by an “Islamophobe,” when actually the killer was a deranged man who was enraged over a parking dispute.

“Islamophobia” is not limited just to Trump and Carson, Bedier said. It also comes from the media. He challenged what he claimed were false media portrayals of Islam: Shariah, he said, is basically a code of ethics. He didn’t mention that it’s a code of ethics that calls for stoning for adultery, amputation of the hand for theft, the denial of equal rights to women and non-Muslims, and restrictions on speech. He claimed that there was no compulsion in Islam and that women were not forced to cover their heads. Tell that to Aqsa Parvez, who was murdered by her father and brother for refusing to wear the hijab – and the innumerable other girls and women who have been similarly victimized. By contrast to this supposed freedom from compulsion in Islam, he claimed that “secularism is a religion in Europe” and that Europe imposes its secularism on people of faith.

When he was asked if Muslim women have to walk a certain distance behind men, Bedier answered: “This is some of the stereotypes. If the women do happen walk behind the man, it’s not a protocol thing, it’s just the men are silly and they walk ahead. I see a lot of white guys walking ahead and their girls way behind. It doesn’t mean that he read that is a protocol somewhere or he’s following his teachings, he’s just being a guy. So it’s their male chauvinism. Yes, it exists worldwide. It’s not because of the faith; it’s because men are not being gentlemen.” This was ridiculous: He was relying on the ignorance of his audience, counting on them not to know how Islam institutionalizes the subjugation of women.

Bedier claimed that the only difference between Muslims and Christians is the status of Jesus. “Jesus is a part of our faith,” he said. “Muslims believe in Jesus, son of Mary” and that Jesus was born of a virgin. “We don’t believe it because it’s popular,” he said, “we believe it because it is written in the Quran.” He said that the Quran was the only sacred book (other than the New Testament) that confirms that Mary is from G-d – that Mary is the mother of Jesus, that there was a virgin birth, and that Jesus is from G-d.

In a dig at Jews and Judaism, Bedier said: “As much as Ted Cruz and others would like to talk about Judeo-Christian values, you realize the Jewish faith did not accept Jesus Christ as the messiah, right? You understand that? If the Jewish people accepted Jesus as the Messiah then they would be Christian, correct? So for us, we accept Jesus and the message of Jesus; the difference is that we don’t view Jesus as divine or part divine, meaning we don’t believe Jesus is one with G-d in the Holy Trinity.”

Bedier said that Muhammad was the founder of Islam, but that in the Quran G-d talks about Jesus five times more than he talks about Muhammad. “We believe that Mary is highly regarded. We have an actual chapter in the Quran called Mary. My daughter is named Miriam after Mary. Mary is very loved in the Quran by Muslims; we just don’t see her as divine or that she somehow delivered G-d’s Son. We highly respect Jesus. We follow his teachings and we believe Jesus will return before the end of times. We don’t believe Muhammad is going to return at the end of times, we believe that Jesus will actually return before the end of times and will unite the believers together.”

This was open proselytizing for Islam, especially in light of the fact that the students had certainly not studied Islam’s critique of Christianity or been given any ways to counter it.

In sum, his presentation (unsurprisingly) was pure propaganda and completely one-sided, and nothing short of a disgrace. No one should be surprised by that. Bedier has a long history of extremely controversial associations. According to Discover the Networks, as far back as 2002, Bedier was the outreach director for the Islamic Society of Pinellas County, “a mosque whose website features material calling for violence against Jews. Moreover, he has cultivated relationships with organizations and individuals connected to anti-Israel terrorist groups overseas, including Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), and Hezbollah. In February 2003, Bedier began working as communications director for the Florida chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). This was subsequent to CAIR’s involvement in the funding of Hamas, which had taken place prior to December 2001, at which time Hamas’ American financing wing, the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), was shut down by the U.S. government. Also in February 2003, the Tampa-based terrorist and former University of South Florida professor Sami al-Arian was taken into custody by the FBI – indicted for his leadership role within Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Bedier became Al-Arian’s ‘unofficial spokesman,’ holding press conferences where he voiced concern about the government’s treatment of the professor, and allowing his radio program to be used as a propaganda vehicle for al-Arian’s family and his PIJ colleagues.”

On his radio show, Bedier has given considerable airtime to guests who praised the jihad terror group Hezbollah.

Bedier’s association with CAIR is significant. It is a matter of public record that CAIR is “an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terror funding case – so named by the Justice Department. CAIR operatives have repeatedly refused to denounce Hamas and Hezbollah as terrorist groups. Several former CAIR officials have been convicted of various crimes related to jihad terror.

It is disgraceful that a Catholic school would host such an event, but not surprising. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) recently launched a “National Catholic-Muslim Dialogue,” partnering with pro-Shariah groups linked to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood: the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA). The pope insists that the Quran teaches peace. St. Petersburg High School is just following along.

Still, its leaders should have more discernment and moral courage. The principal of St. Petersburg High School is Father Richard Rosen; his phone number is (727) 344-4065. Politely contact him and ask him why he allowed someone with so many ties to terror as Bedier to address the school. I called, but Rosen would not take my call. I was referred to Sister Marie Daniel, the school’s marketing director, who confirmed that Bedier’s presentation did happen and said she would try to have someone get back to me. No one did, of course.

If Rosen had had the courage to take my call, I would have asked him these questions:

1. When you invited Bedier, were you aware of his connections with CAIR, and of CAIR’s connections to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood – established by the Department of Justice?

2. When you invited him, were you aware of his work as a spokesman for Sami Al-Arian, an admitted leader of the terror group Palestinian Islamic Jihad?

3. When you invited him, were you aware that he has featured supporters of the terror group Hezbollah on his radio show?

4. If you were not aware of those connections when you invited him, would you invite him again now that you know of them?

5. What were your impressions about what Bedier said? Do you endorse his message – particularly his claim that “Islamophobia” is a legitimate problem, rather than a term invented to intimidate people into thinking it wrong to oppose jihad terror?

6. Do you plan to bring in a spokesman to discuss the reality of the global jihad threat or the Muslim persecution of Christians? If not, why not?

I hope Rosen will answer these questions. His students, and their parents, deserve answers, rather than Islamic proselytizing followed by stonewalling.

Also see: