On Defining Religion

(Image source: Brent Payne/Flickr)

(Image source: Brent Payne/Flickr)

Gatestone Institute, by Nonie Darwish, February 12, 2017:

  • What the West does not understand is that Islam admits that government control is central to Islam and that Muslims must, sooner or later, demand to live under an Islamic government.
  • The majority of the world does not understand that much of the American media is in a propaganda war against the Trump administration simply because he names Islamic jihad and would prefer to see a strong and prosperous America as a world leader rather than to see a dictatorship — secular or theocratic — as a world leader.
  • Islam claims to be an Abrahamic religion, but in fact Islam came to the world 600 years after Christ, not to affirm the Bible but to discredit it; not to co-exist with “the people of the book” — Jews and Christians — but to replace them, after accusing them of intentionally falsifying the Bible.
  • Islam was created as a rebellion against the Bible and its values, and it relies on government enforcement to do so.
  • Political and legal (sharia) Islam is much more than a religion. Is the First Amendment a suicide pact?

Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) said that President Donald Trump’s 90-day ban on immigration from seven predominantly Muslim countries is “a religiously based ban,” and “if they can ban Muslims, why can’t they ban Mormons.” This has become the position of the Democratic Party and the mainstream media, which has influenced not only the American public but has convinced the majority of the world that America is “bad.” How can we blame the world, and even a good segment of American citizens, for hating America when such disingenuous and misleading claims are aired to the world from US officials and broadcast by American television channels?

The majority of the world does not understand that much of the American media is in a propaganda war against the Trump Administration simply because he names Islamic jihad and would prefer to see a strong and prosperous America as a world leader, rather than to see a dictatorship — secular or theocratic — as a world leader. He ran as a Republican; meanwhile, Democrats and the mainstream media refuse to engage in respectful and legitimate debate on the most vital threat to Western civilization in the twenty-first century: Islam. Truth has become irrelevant; people seem to prefer a political game of tug-of-war to sway public opinion against the Trump Administration, and, presumably, to elect Democrats forever. That is how the system is set up.

Political discussions on television have become extremely frustrating; they have turned into shouting matches and name-calling at the least informative levels. Television hosts often become instigators and participants in the shouting matches. The thinking is apparently that the louder they get, the more attractive the program will be. Meanwhile everyone is talking at once; the viewer cannot hear anyone, so the program could not be more boring.

Under the US Constitution, freedom of religion is protected. and Islam has been welcomed inside the West on that basis as one of the three Abrahamic religions. According to Western values and the Western understanding of the word, “religion” is supposed to be a personal relationship with God, where free will is of utmost importance; the believer has authority only over himself or herself when it comes to religious laws or punishing sins (such as leaving the religion or committing adultery) — quite different from criminal laws intended to protect society. Western values also allow followers of a religion the freedom to proselytize, but never by resorting to government enforcement.

Bottom line, the Western definition of religion is in harmony with the Biblical values of the human rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and that all human beings are created equal under the law. It is considered a basic Western value to view God, family and country as a top priority.

Now let us compare these values to Islamic values:

  1. Muslim citizens have the right to punish other citizens with humiliating, severe, cruel and unusual punishments such as death, flogging and amputation, for sinning against Allah, the Quran or Islam. Those “crimes” include leaving Islam, being a homosexual, or committing adultery. And if the Islamic government does not enforce such punishments, any Muslim on the street has the right to apply the punishment against another Muslim and not be prosecuted. That is why apostates, such as myself, cannot visit any Muslim county; the fear is not only from Islamic governments but from anyone on the street.
  2. Being a Muslim is not a personal relationship with God, as it is under the Bible, but is enforced by the state at birth. When a child is born in Egypt to a Muslim father, the birth certificate is stamped “Muslim” and all government-issued documents as well. A child must learn Islamic studies in school and practice Islam throughout his life. In Egypt, the twin sons of a Christian divorced mother were forced to take Islamic studies and become Muslim just because their originally-Christian father converted to Islam. Today, in Egypt, I am still considered Muslim and such a status could never change if I ever lived there again.
  3. Islamic law and leaders rely on government enforcement — under penalty of death — to keep Muslims within Islam and to convert the minority Christian population into Islam. Islamic sharia law, obliges Islamic states to enforce religious law, and if the Muslim head of state refuses to follow religious law, sharia permits the public to use force to remove the head of state from office.
  4. Islam claims to be an Abrahamic religion, but in fact Islam came to the world 600 years after Christ, not to affirm the Bible but to discredit it; not to co-exist with “the people of the book,” Jews and Christians, but to replace them — after accusing them of intentionally falsifying the Bible. Islam was created as a rebellion against the Bible and its values, and relies on government enforcement to do so.

The tenets above are just a few of the differences in values between Islam, the Bible and the Western concept of religion. What the West does not understand is that Islam admits that government control is central to Islam, and Muslims must demand to live under an Islamic government sooner or later. That might explain the reason for the eternal violence in nearly all Muslim countries, between government being in the hands of a religious theocracy or of the military. Islam, as it is practiced today, has violated all Western definitions of religion and values.

Political and legal (sharia) Islam is much more than a religion. Is the First Amendment a suicide pact?

Nonie Darwish, born and raised in Egypt, is the author of “Wholly Different; Why I chose Biblical Values over Islamic Values.”

American Security and Islamic Reform

muslims

The government must vet aliens for sharia-supremacist ideology.

National Review, By Andrew C. McCarthy — February 11, 2017

‘Do you think Islam needs reform?”

Wouldn’t it be interesting, wouldn’t it get us to the crux of the immigration debate, if our best news anchors — I’m looking at you, Chris Wallace and Bret Baier — would put that question to every major politician in Washington?

Instead, the press is asking not just the wrong question but one that utterly misses the point, namely: “How many terrorist attacks have been committed by immigrants from this handful of Muslim-majority countries?” It is the same wrong question posed by the imperious federal judge in Seattle who suspended President Trump’s temporary travel ban on aliens from those countries — seven of them. It is the same wrong question that animated the incorrigible Ninth Circuit appeals court in upholding this suspension — and intimating along the way that Trump, and by implication all who fear for the future of our country, are anti-Muslim bigots crusading against religious liberty (the Ninth Circuit being notoriously selective when it comes to protecting religious traditions).

Does the Trump administration realize it’s the wrong question? I wonder. Instead of attacking the question’s premise, the administration undertakes to answer it. It seems not to grasp that the security argument is not advanced, much less won, by compiling a list of terrorist plots.

Let’s try this again.

Islam does need reform. This is critical to our national security for two reasons that bear directly on the question of which aliens should, and which should not, be allowed into our country.

First, reform is essential because the broader Islamic religion includes a significant subset of Muslims who adhere to an anti-American totalitarian political ideology that demands implementation of sharia — Islamic law. This ideology and the repressive legal code on which it rests are not religion. We are not talking about the undeniably theological tenets of Islam (e.g., the oneness of Allah, the acceptance of Mohamed as the final prophet, and the Koran as Allah’s revelation). We are talking about a framework for the political organization of the state, and about the implementation of a legal corpus that is blatantly discriminatory, hostile to liberty, and — in its prescriptions of crime and punishment — cruel.

Islam must reform so that this totalitarian political ideology, sharia supremacism (or, if you prefer, “radical Islam”), is expressly severable from Islam’s truly religious tenets. To fashion an immigration policy that serves our vital national security interests without violating our commitment to religious liberty, we must be able to exclude sharia supremacists while admitting Muslims who reject sharia supremacism and would be loyal to the Constitution.

Second, sharia supremacists are acting on a “voluntary apartheid” strategy of gradual conquest. You needn’t take my word for it. Influential sharia supremacists encourage Muslims of the Middle East and North Africa to integrate into Western societies without assimilating Western culture. The renowned Muslim Brotherhood jurist Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who vows that “Islam will conquer Europe, conquer America,” urges Muslim migrants to demand the right to live in accordance with sharia. Turkey’s sharia-supremacist president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, admonishes that pressuring Muslims to assimilate is “a crime against humanity.” The Organization of Islamic Cooperation, a bloc of 57 Muslim governments that purports to speak as a quasi-caliphate, promulgated its “Declaration of Human Rights in Islam” in 1990 — precisely because what the United Nations in 1948 presumptuously called the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is neither “universal” nor suitable to a sharia culture.

Voluntary apartheid does not require insinuating terrorists into migrant populations. It requires insinuating assimilation-resistant migrant populations into Western countries. Those populations form sharia-supremacist enclaves, which (a) demand the autonomy to conduct their affairs under Islamic law as a challenge to the sovereign authority of the host country, and (b) become safe havens for incitement, radicalization, paramilitary training, fundraising, and jihadist conspiracy — the prerequisites for terrorism.

The problem is not that our “See No Islam” policies may be letting some small percentage of trained terrorists into the country (although that is certainly a problem). The main problem is that we are creating the conditions under which anti-American enclaves can take root, the Constitution can be undermined, and today’s young Muslim teenager becomes tomorrow’s radicalized jihadist.

RELATED: Weeding Out Terrorist Immigrants Isn’t Enough

We cannot grapple with these challenges if we are intimidated into silence by such questions as whether a “Muslim ban” is being proposed; whether heightened scrutiny would be tantamount to a “religion test”; how many refugees or aliens from this or that Muslim-majority country have been charged with terrorism crimes; whether Muslims would be disproportionately affected by immigration exclusions; and whether a ban on a few Muslim-majority countries can be justified if most Muslim-majority countries are exempted.

Such questions are designed to make vetting Muslims seem inconceivable. They are meant to exhaust you into conceding: “If we have to fret so mightily about the potential impact of immigration laws against Muslims, how could we possibly contemplate examining Muslims directly to sort out sharia supremacists from pro-American Muslims?” You are to pretend that there is no obvious subset of Muslims who are hostile to our country. You are to assume that screening for hostile Muslims would be illegal because to ask about Islam would offend religious liberty — but because you know there are hostile Muslims, you silently hope the authorities have figured out some sneaky, roundabout way to screen for them without appearing to screen for them.

Enough of that. We need to move beyond the “are we targeting Muslims” nonsense and get to the critical question: How do we embrace our Islamic friends while excluding our sharia-supremacist enemies?

Here’s a suggestion: Bring our Muslim friends, loud and proud, into the process.

The only people who may have more interest than we do in Islamic reform are Islamic reformers: courageous Muslims who embrace American constitutional principles of liberty and equality. And at great risk to themselves: Under the supremacist view of sharia, those who depart from Islamic-law principles set in stone a millennium ago are apostates, subject to the penalty of death. You’re not supposed to question that, though, because it’s, you know, “religion.”

How about we stop consulting with the Muslim Brotherhood and other sharia supremacists who tell us Islam is just fine as is, even as its aggressions mount? How about we bring the reformers very publicly into the vetting process, to help the administration tell the good guys from the bad guys? To help the administration show that it is not Muslims but anti-American totalitarians that we seek to exclude.

It is the reform Muslims who tell us that Islam can separate sharia from spiritual life and that pro-Western Muslims do exactly that. It is the sharia supremacists who are outraged by the very suggestion that reform is possible, let alone necessary. If we continue taking our cues from the latter, it means that their noxious political ideology is part and parcel of Islam, and therefore that screening to keep that ideology out of our country is a violation of First Amendment religious liberty.

In other words, if you’re unwilling to say that Islam needs reform, then we can’t vet . . . and we are doomed. On the other hand, if Islam does need reform, isn’t it imperative that we identify the Muslims who resist reform — the sharia supremacists who seek not to join but to radically change our free, constitutional society?

— Andrew C. McCarthy is as senior policy fellow at the National Review Institute and a contributing editor of National Review.

Frank Gaffney Applauds Trump Administration for Moving Towards Terrorist Designation for Muslim Brotherhood

KHALIL MAZRAAWI/AFP/Getty Images

KHALIL MAZRAAWI/AFP/Getty Images

Breitbart, by John Hayward, February 8, 2017:

Center for Security Policy President Frank Gaffney said it was an “incredibly important step” for the Trump administration to consider formally designating the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization.

“I hope he’ll do it, and I hope he’ll do it soon,” Gaffney said. “The reason simply being that the Muslim Brotherhood, in many ways, is the leading edge of the global jihad movement worldwide. It’s gotten a pass, in particular in American administrations of both Republican and Democratic stripes since 9/11, I’m sorry to say, by virtue of the fact that they putatively eschewed violence as a means of accomplishing the end-state they seek – which is the imposition of this barbaric totalitarian ideology or doctrine or program. Call it what you will; they call it sharia.”

Gaffney added that the Brotherhood seeks to impose sharia law “worldwide, not just on Muslims, but non-Muslims alike.”

“The truth of the matter is that they do not eschew violence,” he contended. “They use it where they believe they can effectively. One prime example, of course, is their Palestinian franchise known as Hamas. But the idea that we’re going to somehow get along with – let alone do what the Obama administration did in particular: empower, legitimate, fund, even arm the Muslim Brotherhood, in the case of its time and power in Egypt – is simply madness.”

“I’m very heartened that the president has seemingly taken stock of this outfit, recognizes that they are a sharia supremacist program that, in fact, has provided sort of the ideological impetus behind all of the other jihadist enterprises around the world, even of the Shiite stripe. They’ve been motivators and inspiration, and in some cases actually contributed materially to them. So the same objectives of al-Qaeda, of the Islamic State, of Boko Haram, and so on, are being practiced and espoused and sought by the Muslim Brotherhood. They’ll just use stealth and subversion, including in countries like ours, where they don’t feel they’re strong enough to use violence. They should be designated as a terrorist organization for all those reasons, and I hope will be,” he said.

SiriusXM host Alex Marlow asked Gaffney what steps should be taken to ensure the Muslim Brotherhood receives this designation.

Gaffney said it was a “fairly straightforward proposition,” requiring President Trump to instruct Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and as-yet-unconfirmed Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin to “designate the Muslim Brotherhood on respective lists administered by their departments.”

He also pointed to legislation introduced by Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-TX) that would call on the administration to either designate the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization or explain in detail why it refuses to make such a designation.

Gaffney offered a “hat tip” to Breitbart News for its prominent mention in Wednesday’s New York Times article about the potential terrorist designation of the Muslim Brotherhood, including a pull quote from Gaffney’s Breitbart News Daily interview last week.

“I’m afraid that generally speaking, they are exemplars of the fake news and fake narrative,” he said of the New York Times. “In fact, they did an unbelievable hit piece on the president and Steve Bannon and Mike Flynn, and a sort of drive-by shooting on me last Thursday.”

“It’s really time that we get our heads around the nature of this problem internal to our country and designate the Brotherhood abroad, of course, but also take steps to stop and shut down their operations in this country, which I consider to be at least as dangerous as what the violent jihadists are up to,” said Gaffney.

Marlow played a clip of Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly explaining that vetting on the foreign end of our immigration system is insufficient and that action should be taken before terrorists slip through the system and make something go “boom.” He argued before Congress that these points justified President Trump’s executive order for a temporary pause in immigration from seven problematic countries.

After reinforcing the point that Trump’s order is not a “Muslim ban” and does not mention Muslims or Islam at all, Gaffney backed Kelly’s contention that the nations affected by the executive order are “either actively hostile to us, like Iran, for example, or they’re failed states.”

“What we’re dealing with is the possibility that those who seek to do us harm will take advantage of the lousy vetting, if you will – to the extent you can call it that in such places – to insinuate people into this country to do us physical harm,” he warned. “They’ve said they want to do that. That’s most especially true of, as you know, the Islamic State.”

“But here’s the kicker for me: the problem we’re confronting is that we have people who seek not only to do us harm when they can, killing Americans where they can, but who want to replace our system of government – who, as Donald Trump famously said, don’t share our values,” he added. “I think the vast majority of the American people get that we don’t need more of those sorts of people in our country. So a pause that enables us to take stock and figure out are there better ways to evaluate such applicants, to differentiate between people who will be coming here to make America great again, to be part of the American Dream, and so on – as opposed to people who seek to destroy our country. That’s, I think, a no-brainer.”

Marlow noted that in addition to defending the immigration executive order, Kelly conceded there were problems with its implementation, particularly the surprising speed with which the order went into effect. Kelly took responsibility for these problems, saying he wanted to implement the order quickly enough to keep potential security risks from slipping into the United States before its provisions took effect.

“I’m just going to tell you, I don’t think it would have mattered if this thing went off without a hiccup,” Gaffney said. “And as it was, the number of people who were inconvenienced or otherwise, it seems, improperly handled, was trivially small. The problem is that whatever Donald Trump does, the Left, the Islamists in this country, the media, the Democratic Party – which now seems to be primarily about all of the above – were going to seize upon it and beat the dickens out of him.”

“I think, to Secretary Kelly’s credit – and he’s not the Defense secretary; he’s the Homeland Security secretary – but to his credit, he took the hit for whatever the hiccup was. But it was not the problem,” he said.

“As you’ve pointed out, Alex, and I think rightly so, we’ve got to be clear about this: to the extent that amalgamation of interest groups has, as its express purpose, destroying the presidency of Donald Trump, they will seize upon any and every opportunity to do it. In this case, they’re doing it in a way that is simply indifferent to the security concerns of the American people, and I think will further alienate them from those people,” said Gaffney.

Breitbart News Daily airs on SiriusXM Patriot 125 weekdays from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. Eastern.

LISTEN:

Also see:

Sharia Commands Muslims To Lie To Non-Muslims

Understanding the Threat, by John Guandolo, February 5, 2017:

KORAN  98:6

The Koran says non-Muslims are the worst of all creatures (98:6), so it should be no surprise the Koran and the Sunna (example of the Islamic prophet Mohammad) allow and oblige Muslims to lie to non-Muslims.

screen-shot-2017-02-05-at-11-07-16-pm-768x507

All authoritative Islamic law (sharia) obliges jihad until the world is under Islamic rule.

Therefore, when Muslim leaders are speaking to non-Muslims about Islam, there is a high probability they are lying.

It is not just a few “radicalized” Muslims who want sharia and all that goes with it.

At the Norway Peace Conference, the founder of Islam.net and host of the conference Fahad Qureshi polled the audience of hundreds of Muslims who unanimously raised their hands indicating they want sharia to be the law of the land to include stoning for adultery, death penalty for homosexuals, and everything that comes with it because their law comes from Allah in the Koran and the example of their prophet Mohammad.

Qureshi stated, “These are general views that every Muslim actually has.  Every Muslim believes in these things.  Just because they’re not telling you about it or just because they’re not out there in the media doesn’t mean they don’t believe in that.”

A 2013 Pew poll reveals most Muslims want sharia to be the law of the land, and most of the Muslim world believes there is only ONE version of sharia – not the “thousands of interpretations” Islamic advisors to the U.S. government have lied about for the last 15 years (and beyond).

Specifically, a sampling of 10 countries/areas of all the Muslim areas polled – Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Egypt, Pakistan, Indonesia, Iraq, Jordan, Morocco, Nigeria, and the Palestinian Territories – reveals out of 785 million Muslims living in these areas, 617 million told the Pew pollsters they want to live under sharia (Islamic law).

For those of you without calculators handy, that is 79% of the Muslim world.  That is a big number.  So is 617 million Muslims, and that’s just a sampling of the world’s Muslims.

The majority of the Muslim world wants the sharia that:  commands pagans to convert to Islam or die; commands Christians and Jews to convert to Islam, submit to sharia and pay the non-Muslim poll tax, or die; calls for apostates to be killed; identifies woman as property; and commands jihad as perpetual warfare until sharia is the law of the land over the entire world.

This is also the sharia that obliges Muslims to lie to non-Muslims.

As UTT’s own Chris Gaubatz experienced in his recent encounter with a sharia scholar and Imam from Texas, they will lie to your face and then feign offense when you call them out on their lies.

See the video HERE.

screen-shot-2017-02-05-at-11-20-54-pm-768x473

Think about this the next time an Islamic scholar, leader of an Islamic organization, the local Imam, or any prominent Muslims are talking to you about Islam.

Gaffney: Sanctuary Cities Are ‘Magnet’ for Illegals, Don’t Make Us Safer

AP

AP

Breitbart, by John Hayward, February 1, 2017:

Frank Gaffney, Center for Security Policy president, praised President Trump’s first Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch, on Wednesday’sBreitbart News Daily.

“He seems like a most impressive man,” Gaffney told SiriusXM host Alex Marlow.

Following a clip Marlow played, Gaffney said, “The law is not my area of expertise, needless to say – but he, I believe, has epitomized over his distinguished career an approach to judicial practice which that clip you just ran spoke to: that it is not the role of judges to make the law. It is to apply the law, to assure the equitable application of the law.”

“That’s a refreshing change from what we’ve been seeing a lot of from the bench, including the Supreme Court, of late,” Gaffney continued, “a necessary corrective, especially in regards to replacing one of the most eminent, most capable, and most important checks on that practice, namely Antonin Scalia, who Judge Gorsuch is being called to replace on the Supreme Court, of course.”

Marlow asked Gaffney about the spectacle of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) throwing Breitbart News reporter Neil Munro out of an event that was supposedly dedicated to “tolerance” and “inclusion.”

“A couple of quick points on this, Alex,” Gaffney said. “One, among the governments that has tied the Council on American-Islamic Relations, CAIR, to terrorism is the United States government. In fact, in the Holy Land Foundation trial – 2007-2008, largest terrorism financing trial in the country’s history – CAIR was identified by an FBI agent, based upon wiretaps conducted by the FBI back in the day when it did that sort of thing, of a meeting. It turned out to be the founding meeting of this organization CAIR, and it involved representatives of a group the Brotherhood itself has identified as a part of their organizations, the Islamic Association for Palestine, on the one hand, and representatives of Hamas. What the federal government contends in court, and four different federal judges affirmed, was that CAIR is Hamas.”

“So there’s that. And then there’s this point that you’ve made, and I think it’s apt, that the most intolerant people on the planet, bar none, are the jihadists – who seek often in this country, doing business as the Muslim Brotherhood, the parent organization of Hamas, including the Council on American-Islamic Relations, that everybody must be very tolerant of them,” he continued.

“It’s absurd. It’s obscene. And unfortunately, to the extent that these guys have gotten away with it for this long, under, I’m sorry to say, Republican and Democratic administrations, they have managed to become influential in our policy-making process, to the point where we are largely, willfully, blind to the real threat that they represent,” he warned.

“So yes, I do hope that this is another of the things that Donald Trump will attend to here shortly, namely designating the Muslim Brotherhood as what it is: a terrorist organization, which I hope will speak volumes about the Council on American-Islamic Relations and other front groups operating in this country under its banner,” he said.

Marlow referenced Dr. Zuhdi Jasser’s appearance on Breitbart News Daily the previous day, in which he denounced the Left’s use of Muslims as pawns in its identity-politics games.

“Zuhdi’s a remarkable man, and I am very proud to have him as a friend,” Gaffney said. “I think he’s absolutely right about that. I think the corollary, of course, is that the Islamists are using the Left, as well. They’re using them as cover for what is, according to the Muslim Brotherhood’s own secret plan – written back in 1991 as a report to Cairo, the mothership, the headquarters, not meant for our eyes, called the ‘Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal of the Group.’ People can go look at it, download it for free at SecureFreedom.org. It is a fascinating read.”

“What it makes very clear is the Muslim Brotherhood’s mission in our country is destroying Western civilization from within, by the hands of what you might call the infidels,” he said. “Among the infidels that are most helpful to them, if you’re trained as I was in fighting the old Soviet Communists, think of them as ‘useful idiots’ or ‘useful infidels,’ the term that Daniel Pipes has coined. But whatever they are, they are helping the Islamists in their efforts to take us down, and the Islamists are helping the Left in doing just that. They have a very different vision of what should come next, of course, but they are making common cause.

“And it is bizarre, since among the pillars of the Left, let’s recall, are groups like feminists – as we saw in the streets of Washington and elsewhere recently – and Jews, and homosexuals, and people of various minority faiths, people who leave their faiths. These are all, especially Muslims, regarded as, you know, the enemy by this so-called ‘Religion of Peace.’” he pointed out.

“I want to emphasize, there are people like Zuhdi Jasser who don’t agree with this, that don’t practice sharia, as we’ve talked about often, that animates this very intolerant, misogynistic, and anti-Semitic, and anti-American, anti-constitutional program of the Islamists. But it is really appalling that the Left is helping, in so many ways, normalize and socialize and otherwise advance this toxically anti-American agenda. It’s what we see, of course, most immediately in this effort by Donald Trump to stop – these are my words, but I think this is what it is, at the end of the day – to stop importing more jihadists into the United States. The vast majority of the American people support it,” Gaffney said.

Marlow moved to the subject of President Trump’s executive order on immigration by playing a comment from House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi to the effect that “sanctuary cities” enhance American security because they attract a large number of illegal aliens who can serve as confidential informants to the police when other illegal aliens commit crimes.

“I think what we’re watching is an effort to defy common sense,” Gaffney commented. “Most of us who have common sense recognize that bringing more people into this country who aren’t just violent jihadists who want to blow things up, or shoot people, or rape people for that matter…I’m just worried, frankly, as I said earlier, about the people who have been engaged in what I think of as kind of ‘pre-violence’: the sharia supremacists who seek to build the infrastructure that supports a violent kind of jihad, that insists that people don’t assimilate into our country, don’t become like Zuhdi Jasser, part of the American fabric and dream.”

“They’re a problem, and we don’t need more of them,” he contended. “I think that’s what Donald Trump is trying to do with his pause and trying to assess how do we enhance our vetting process? How do we keep those kinds of people out?”

Gaffney said that goal was “eminently sensible” and scoffed at the efforts of people like Pelosi to “cast themselves as the people who are protecting us by preventing the police from being able to identify and remove folks as part of an overall law-enforcement effort, who are engaged in that kind of behavior.”

“To suggest that somehow we’re all going to be safer if we actually keep the magnet for people coming here illegally – some of whom, I have to say, are engaged in probably actual or pre-terrorist activity – this is a ridiculous position to strike,” he said. “I think Donald Trump is absolutely right to insist that we shut down these sanctuary cities, that we insist that our cities and our states enforce the law, not undermine it to possibly great detriment of public safety and even the national security.”

Skirt-Wearing Jihadi Sherifa Zuhur Exemplifies the Battle Ahead for America

Understanding the Threat, by John  Guandolo, January 30, 2017:

UTT had an interesting exchange on twitter this weekend with Sherifa Zuhur, an apologist for America’s enemies – specifically, terrorist organizations.

screen-shot-2017-01-30-at-12-57-51-am-768x440

Amid the social upheaval in response to President Trump’s travel ban from seven Islamic countries, fomented by the hard left Marxist/socialist groups and their anti-American counterparts – jihadi groups like Hamas (doing business as CAIR), ISNA, and others – UTT feels it is important to share this experience publicly because Americans need to know what they are up against and what to expect as this war in America goes forward.

The exchange began in response to UTT’s (@UTT_USA) tweet:  “No surprise – SecState Madeleine Albright sides w/ our enemy & not America…”  Albright publicly stated she is ready to register as a Muslim in response to President Trump’s call to ban Muslim immigration into the United States from certain nations.

UTT’s Vice President Chris Gaubatz received a response from Zuhur (@SherifaZuhur) which read:  “Chris, Muslims aren’t your enemy,” to whit Mr. Gaubatz (@CAIRvGaubatz) responded with: “Agreed; only Muslims that adhere to Quran & Sunnah as embodied in the shariah.”

Zuhur then responded with: “Then that’s all of us.”

Your words not ours Ms. Zuhur, but thanks for making UTT’s point that it is a requirement for all Muslims to adhere to sharia which calls for jihad until the entire world is under Islamic rule.

UTT does not teach all Muslims are the enemy of the United States.  However, 100% of our enemy in the Global Islamic Movement state they are Muslims waging jihad to establish a global Islamic state (caliphate) under sharia.  The delineating factor is sharia.  Not every person who self-identifies as a Muslim wants to live under sharia or follow sharia, but 100% of our enemy in this war does.  100% of authoritative sharia obliges jihad, and defines jihad as “warfare against non-muslims.”  The problem is two-fold: (1) Any Muslim who does not want to follow sharia can decide to follow sharia at any time – especially when threatened with violence from other Muslims;  (2)  Sharia obliges Muslims to lie if the goal is obligatory, and jihad is obligatory.

Therein lies the problem – there is simply no way to determine which Muslims are our friends and which are not.  In fact, the only Muslims who are potential friends of the United States are those who do not follow the Quran and Sunnah, as embodied in the sharia, which makes Ms. Zuhur’s reply all the more telling. 

UTT would not waste your time in sharing this exchange if that were the end of the story.

Dr. Sherifa Zuhur is not just some random Muslim on twitter who defends sharia and designated terrorist groups.  Zuhur is a former professor (2006-2009) at the U.S. Army War College’s Strategic Studies Institute who continues to be accepted in academic circles and was recently at the University of California at Berkley.

In April of 2008, Zuhur published a monograph called, “Precision in the Global War on Terror: Inciting Muslims through the War of Ideas.”  In this publication, Zuhur warns against attacking the ideology of groups like Al Qaeda, the Taliban, Salafists, and the Muslim Brotherhood because that would necessarily be attacking Islamic ideology.

Exactly.  In this regard, UTT agrees because Al Qaeda, the Taliban, Boko Haram, ISIS, the Muslim Brotherhood, and all jihadi organizations on the planet draw their doctrine from sharia.  It is the basis for why they act – and they tell us so.  And so does Dr. Zuhur.

Sharia does not exist in a vacuum.  Sharia comes from the Quran and the Sunnah, and last time UTT checked, the Quran and Sunnah are wholly Islamic.  As we say at UTT – it’s all about sharia.

The following are direct quotes (in bold) from Dr. Zuhur’s monograph followed by UTT’s comments:

“To restore justice, Muslims want the shari`ah, Islamic law, to be implemented and that, in turn, must be utilized with justice. This contrasts with radicals who think that violence is the only means to secure real social and political change, even if they also are motivated to implement shari`ah.”

The Global Islamic Movement has many lines of operations including suit/skirt wearing jihadis like ISNA, CAIR, ICNA, MAS, MSA, Dr. Zuhur and others who point to the violent jihadis and say something to the effect of “Well, at least we are not Al Qaeda or ISIS. We’re moderates.”  The violent jihadis use their attacks and threats to drive weak Western leaders/nations into the arms of the suit/skirt-wearing jihadis.

“Bin Ladin and Zawahiri generally refer to bona fide religious concepts. But, my point is that Sayyid Qutb possessed religious and philosophical credentials that should not be ignored. To blame him for global jihad is a convenient way of discounting the impact of other salafists (from the Wahhabist sect), and further implying that the violent radical leaders who followed him read or understood his earlier proposal that an Islamic society could be created through a “social revolution” and education. It is also a significant way of discrediting the Muslim Brotherhood.”

Not much comment needed here.  Dr. Zuhur admits the leaders of Al Qaeda are correctly sighting sharia in furtherance of what they are doing.  In addition, neither Al Qaeda nor ISIS have misquoted sharia in furtherance of their actions.

“To bin Ladin, the Muslim-only policy at Mecca and Medina extends to the entire country of Saudi Arabia, indeed to the entire Arabian peninsula. What policymakers should understand is that quite a number of other Muslims agree with bin Ladin’s views.”

Many muslims do agree with the views and objectives of Osama bin Laden as well as ISIS, the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamic organizations/groups, because these are commands from allah repeated by their prophet Mohammad as “perfect” behavior for all Muslims to follow.  Did we mention Al Qaeda is a terrorist organization?

“U.S. Government agencies, the defense community, and security research centers have made far too much of the Caliphate. By denouncing it, they are trouncing on Muslims’ idealized history and institutions.”

Muslims who want a caliphate here in the United States – which according to Dr. Zuhur is all Muslims – are enemies of the United States.  America is a Constitutional Republic and Americans will keep it using all means necessary.  Muslims who want to live under a caliphate can go to sharia-governed lands in ISIS-held territory.  Working to establish one here is a violation of federal law, and an act that constitutes war against our Constitution and way of life.

“Those media spokespersons most often vilifying terrorists with the label “Islamofascist” often go on to identify this phenomenon with those who wish to follow shari`ah (Islamic law) and live within a Caliphate, as if these two very important Islamic institutions are proof of poisonous terror and fascism. The overwhelming majority of Muslims would disagree with this vilification of their holy law and historic form of government.”

Since ALL jihadi organizations (Al Qaeda, ISIS, the MB, et al) continue to state publicly and in their internal documents their end goal is a global caliphate under sharia law and that it must be achieved via any means possible including political warfare and violence, and since Dr. Zuhur is defending that position, how are rational readers able to discern between Dr. Zuhur’s position and ISIS’s position?

“Apostasy is a crime pertaining only to Muslims. It should not—according to classical interpretations of Islamic law—be prosecuted unless the apostate admits his denial of faith. In other words, accusations of apostasy are not supposed to discourage Muslim opinion and expression.”

Sharia states the punishment for apostasy is death and the former professor at the U.S. Army War College agrees it should be prosecuted as such.

“The actions of the American organization, the Council on American- Islamic Relations, which seeks to protect Muslims from discrimination or violence, have been labeled “a cover for terrorism,” and so on. This allows for conflation of anti-Americanism, and Arab non-salafi groups with Islamist, and violent Islamist groups.”

This is utter nonsense.  CAIR is Hamas.  Hamas is a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization by the United States Government. 

Dr. Zuhur is one of a long line of jihadis and jihadi apologists in the military university system and on U.S. campuses teaching “Middle East Studies” and related topic.

Is it any wonder that, with professors like Dr. Zuhur, the U.S. national security apparatus, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff under the Bush and Obama administration never identified our enemy, or even took the time to study the enemy threat doctrine –  sharia?

Should we be surprised that Dr. Zuhur has sided with the Al Qaeda, ISIS, or the Muslim Brotherhood – specifically Hamas (dba CAIR) – in opposing President Trump’s ban on immigration from seven Islamic countries?

We at UTT are not surprised, and you should not be either.  It is important for Americans to understand that as President Trump, his cabinet, and the U.S. national security apparatus begin to dismantle the jihadi network here in the US, they will be opposed by the hard left Marxist/socialist groups, their allies in the media, and by the jihadis themselves.

There will be more crying Senators on television, hard-left/jihadi marches in the street funded by our enemies, and demonstrations allegedly about equal rights and equal treatment but actually excuses for violence, upheaval and revolution.

DULLES, VA - JANUARY 28: J.D. People protest and welcome arriving passengers at Dulles International Airport in Virginia, January 28, 2017. The protest follows the executive order of President Donald Trump to bar all refugees coming to the US and Muslims from seven countries. (Photo by Astrid Riecken For The Washington Post via Getty Images)

DULLES, VA – JANUARY 28: J.D. People protest and welcome arriving passengers at Dulles International Airport in Virginia, January 28, 2017. The protest follows the executive order of President Donald Trump to bar all refugees coming to the US and Muslims from seven countries. (Photo by Astrid Riecken For The Washington Post via Getty Images)

Americans must know this is coming, get educated and get prepared.  Support the bold leaders in the new administration and beware of the establishment types who are already coming to the defense of our enemies.

This war will be won at the local level.  Educate your elected officials and hold them accountable.  Ensure your pastors speak truthfully about this threat and begin educating their flocks.  Encourage your law enforcement leaders to get trained by UTT so they can map out the jihadi networks in their area and dismantle them, proactively find jihadis in your neighborhood, and defeat this enemy from the ground up.

The Controversy over Syrian Refugees Misses the Question We Should Be Asking

Syrian refugees cross into Hungary, September 1, 2015. (Aris Messinis/AFP/Getty)

Syrian refugees cross into Hungary, September 1, 2015. (Aris Messinis/AFP/Getty)

National Review, By Andrew C. McCarthy — November 28, 2015:

Pro-Hezbollah Mullahs at San Jose’s Saba Islamic Center Promote Burning and Beheading Gays

‘Moulana’ Nabi Raza Abidi of Saba Islamic Center, San Jose, California. Nabi Raza is a staunch supporter of the grand Khomeinist mullahs Ruhollah Khomeini and Ali Khamenei. Nabi Raza also audaciously promotes Hezbollah in the United States, in the very heart of Silicon Valley! (via http://hezbollahwatch.tumblr.com/)

‘Moulana’ Nabi Raza Abidi of Saba Islamic Center, San Jose, California. Nabi Raza is a staunch supporter of the grand Khomeinist mullahs Ruhollah Khomeini and Ali Khamenei. Nabi Raza also audaciously promotes Hezbollah in the United States, in the very heart of Silicon Valley! (via http://hezbollahwatch.tumblr.com/)

By Lee Kaplan

Last December, the following announcement appeared on one of the Facebook pages of the Shia Association of the Bay Area (Saba Islamic Center), an extremist Khomeinist organization based in San Jose, California:

“Community Event of Support and Friendship Between Catholics and Muslims, Moulana Abidi and the Saba boards will be hosting Bishop McGrath from the Catholic Church, Imams from bay-area Mosques and Civic Leaders who will gather to offer joint prayers and start mutual dialog for solidarity of the two communities in serving humanity and support justice for all. Bishop McGrath leads over forty Catholic churches in Santa Clara County. This event will mark the first of many events expressing mutual understanding, support and friendship between Muslims and Catholics.

‘When: Monday Jan 16th 2016 (Martin Luther King Day)
Where: Saba Center, 4415 Fortran Court, San Jose CA 95134”

Bishop Patrick Joseph McGrath will no doubt unknowingly be used to put a good face on a bad association by urging his Catholic followers to recognize an Islamist organization that is the antithesis of what his Church seeks to promote when it comes to tolerance and peace. The Bishop will be declaring “solidarity” in the name of his 40 churches with the leaders and educators at Saba’s mosque and madrassa (school).

Saba recently inaugurated its new high school, Saba Academy, right in the heart of the Silicon Valley. Many observers of Saba view this development with alarm, as the Association’s activities have been persistently linked to extremism. Indeed, Saba and its imams, including Rafic Labboun (a.k.a. Wilhelm Dyck) and Nabi Raza Mir (a.k.a. Nabi Raza Abidi), have been shown to support Hezbollah. Labboun was jailed for a time for credit card fraud in a scheme the FBI thought was related to funding the terrorist group. He later was caught trying to flee the U.S. by the FBI with a fake Belizean passport using the identity taken from a dead baby. Homeland Security, Eric Holder and Hillary Clinton tried to keep Nabi Raza Mir from reentering the U.S. after he visited Iran due to suspicions of terrorist links but he was finally readmitted after multiple lawsuits filed by the National Lawyers Guild.

Hamza Sodagar and Farrokh Sekaleshfar, two Khomeinist “superstar mullahs” on the Islamist lecture circuit, are frequent speakers at Saba Islamic Center where Saba Academy’s curriculum is taught. Alarmingly, both mullahs justify the execution of gays under Sharia law.

Both men have lived, lectured and studied in Qom back in Iran. Qom is considered a holy city among Shiite Muslims. Sodagar, while in Qom, filmed a biography in which Sodagar calls Ali Khamenei, the present Supreme Leader of Iran and follower of the late Ruhollah Khomeini, the man who started the Iranian revolution against the West, a role model. He also has lectured on a letter from Khamenei where he discusses the obligations of youth in the West and how they should not be corrupted by the “Zionist controlled media [the Jews].”

Sekaleshfar has been seen lecturing repeatedly at a mosque in Cardiff, Wales next to a portrait of Ayatollah Khomeini, something always displayed at Shiite events back in the Middle East, but not inside the U.S. due to the hostage crisis and animus between the U.S. that followed with sanctions and Khomeini’s dubbing the U.S. “the Great Satan.” His Facebook is packed with praises of the late Supreme Leader of Iran, and Sekaleshfar is his best promoter. In a newsletter sent from Qom, Sekaleshfar admonishes Muslim youth outside Iran to follow Khomeini’s edicts and advice if they are to be good Muslims:

“These people have undergone and tolerated a vast array of sanctions during the last 30 years. What have you done for them? How have you contributed in the solidification of the masses in Iran? There are many Muslims struggling worldwide today, but strengthening the people of Iran has an extra significant bonus, i.e. strengthening Islamic Rule and Propagation worldwide.” This is a call to promote jihad and the Absolute Velayat-e-Faqih regime of Ruhollah Khomeini and is posted under a picture of the late Ayatollah in the newsletter (page7).

Sodagar has spoken at schools as far away as Canada’s York University, and even in the UK, but he appeared on a regular basis at Saba where he lectured about Sharia-compliant methods of executing homosexuals:

“For homosexual men, the punishment is one of five things. One, the easiest one maybe, is chop their head off, stop their heart. Two, burn them to death. Three, throw them off a cliff. Four, tear down a wall upon them. Five, a combination of these things.”

Public outcry over killing gays elicited a response from Sodagar. He explained he does not advocate executing gays in places where it is illegal, but rather in places where Islam is the law of the land. While such an explanation might mollify fears in non-Muslim communities, it nevertheless does not alter what Sodagar is preaching; Sodagar, a U.S. citizen, was born in Washington, D.C., but spent 14 years studying Shiite Islam in Iran, a country that routinely executes gays in public. Fluent in English, Sodagar lectures throughout the English speaking world – advocating the execution of gays as being part of God’s will.
.
Farrokh Sekaleshfar also tours the world spreading the word of Islam and has spoken at St. Louis University and the University of Michigan about how to deal with homosexuals. Sekaleshfar also denies that he advocates genocide against gays where it is illegal, yet he has lectured at the University of Michigan in 2013 that “death is the sentence” for homosexuals and that executing them is an act of “compassion,” since “earthly punishment will gain them leniency in the afterlife.”

Sekaleshfar offered the same religious rulings at the Husseini Islamic Center near Orlando, Florida. A few weeks later, Orlando suffered a terrorist attack on a gay nightclub, carried out by Omar Mateen, which left 49 people dead and is listed as the greatest mass shooting in U.S. history. It isn’t clear if Mateen, a confused fan of Hezbollah, Al Qaeda and ISIS, who was previously investigated by the FBI, attended Sekaleshfar’s lecture in Orlando. Like Sodagar, Sekaleshfar was not born in Iran or another Islamic country, but in England and he holds a medical degree from Imperial College in London and has studied Islam extensively in the Middle East.

Sekaleshfar was deported from Australia while on a speaking tour there after he said in an interview with ABC that he had made his comments in an academic setting, and he regretted that they had been made public. He said he advocated the death penalty only for homosexuals who have anal sex in public in a country that abides by Islamic law.

Both these mullahs live and link back to the Khomeinist regime in Iran and promote the Iranian revolution against the West here in America. At SABA they are an inspiration. The facts that a mullah advocated genocide against gays in Orlando not long before the massacre at a gay nightclub while another preaches the same ideas illustrate the threat posed by such imams when speaking to the Islamic community, something Bishop McGrath may not know before he goes there with all his parishes to show “solidarity.”

Lee Kaplan is an undercover investigative journalist who has been published and on radio and television internationally. He has appeared as a contributing editor or regular columnist at FrontPage Magazine, Israel National News, Canada Free Press and IsraCampus. He is also a senior intelligence analyst and communications director for the Northeast Intelligence Network. He is a fellow at Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld’s American Center for Democracy and a member of the advisory council at the Intelligence Summit.

FBI Correct: Sharia Adherent Muslims Have Mental Issues

Understanding the Threat, y John Guandolo, January 9, 2017:

Five (5) people are dead and 13 others wounded after Esteban Santiago shot them with a handgun inside the baggage claim area of the Fort Lauderdale (Florida) Airport Friday (1/06/2017).

estabon-santiago

The FBI got one thing right:  like all sharia adherent muslims, Santiago is not mentally aligned with civilized society.  Santiago’s family said he “lost his mind,” and says he has never been the same since he came back from Iraq.  This may all be true.

But it begs some questions.

Isn’t it interesting how jihadis who have been investigated by the FBI with no action taken, wind up killing and/or wounding Americans in places like Little Rock, Boston, New York, San Bernadino, Orlando, and elsewhere, and are then dubbed “mentally ill?”

They are never dubbed “Islamic jihadis” or “Islamic terrorists.”

santiagobeardsantiagoPhotos of Santiago show him with a sharia compliant beard, wearing an olive drab keffiyeh flashing his index finger, the same sign ISIS and others jihadis flash demonstrating their belief in Islamic Tawheed, the oneness of allah.

Santiago told the FBI he heard voices telling him to watch ISIS videos, and the FBI determined that qualified him for the title “mentally ill.”  Muslims around the world teach their children jihad must be waged against non-muslims until Islam rules the world.  They teach this because it is what the Koran commands and what Islam’s prophet Mohammad commanded and worked for as well.

Crucifixion, beheadings, amputations, whipping and other punishments are a part of sharia because allah commands them in the Koran.

Considering all this, it is not unreasonable for sane people to consider adherents of sharia mentally unstable or insane, even though they are sincerely following doctrinal Islam.

It is worth noting that Esteban Santiago was sane enough to know that when he ran out of bullets at the Fort Lauderdale airport he should lay on the ground to keep from getting shot by police.

Identifying the Threat

maxresdefault-1-868x488AIM, by Retired Adm. James A. Lyons

On 13 December 2016, Israeli Ambassador to the United States, Ron Dermer received the prestigious Freedom Flame Award presented annually by the Center For Security Policy (CSP) for his unswerving commitment to freedom and democracy. The CSP is headed by Frank Gaffney, who has been a staunch voice in promoting freedom and democracy for the Western world, but also for Israel which finds itself in a sea of hostility.

Gaffney and the dedicated team of professionals at CSP, in their fight to protect our Constitution, have always put principle foremost in their efforts. This fact was recognized by Ambassador Dermer in his acceptance remarks. Separately, Ambassador Dermer was criticized by the left-leaning Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) for accepting the award because the SPLC considers Gaffney and the CSP to be anti-Muslim.

What SPLC principally objects to is the CSP’s exposure of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) penetration in all of our government agencies including the White House. This should be of great concern to all Americans since the MB creed is to destroy America from within (Civilization Jihad) by our own miserable hands and replace our Constitution with the seventh century draconian Islamic “Shariah Law.” This point is not debatable, since facts supporting this claim were introduced as evidence in the Holy Land Foundation HAMAS terror funding trial in 2008 in Dallas, Texas. Two principal MB front groups, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) were designated (among others) as un-indicated co-conspirators in that trial. The Obama White House frequently uses these two MB front groups to deflect any linkage of Islam to terrorist acts.

Ambassador Dermer then went on to address how, in his view, the main terrorist threat we face today, what he called is “militant Islam.” This was more than surprising as it implies that there is some “non-militant” or “moderate” version of Islam. While it is true that all Muslims do not adhere to the scriptures in the Quran, there is only one Islam; one doctrine; one Islamic law (Shariah); and one scripture–the Quran!

Muslims do not consider Islam a religion but more “a complete way of life.” Furthermore, according to that doctrine, the law and scriptures in the Quran, as affirmed by all senior scholars of Islam since the 10th century, jihad (warfare against non-Muslims per Islamic law) is obligatory for all Muslims. This is true for all time until the world is dominated by Allah (Q 8:39).

Many Western leaders have failed to comprehend the supremacist hostility of Islamic doctrine and are delusional to the point that they believe that there is some version of Islam that can co-exist with Western values. They are quick to point out that not all Muslims are terrorists. True, Muslims are individuals and some will be more devout or faithful or obedient than other Muslims. But that doesn’t matter because it has no bearing whatsoever on the core doctrine of Islam which includes the obligation to support jihad. Therefore, even though individual Muslims may be fine upstanding human beings, friendly, and embracing our culture, that has no bearing on the core principles of Islam.

All four major schools of Sunni Islam and the principal Shiite one are in agreement about all major elements of Shariah, including death for adultery, apostasy, homosexuality and sometimes slander. They also all agree on the commitment to jihad, Jew-hatred and Islamic supremacism. Jihad on the part of both Sunnis and Shiites has continued non-stop since Muhammad led the migration (hijra) to Medina in 622 A.D. Therefore, what we are witnessing today in Europe and here in the U.S. is nothing more than the continuation of the jihad launched by Muhammad following the hijra. Alexis de Tocqueville wrote in 1838, “Jihad, holy war, is an obligation for all believers….The state of war is the natural state with regard to the infidel….These doctrines of which the practical outcome is obvious are found on every page and in almost every word of the Koran….The violent tendencies of the Koran are so striking that I cannot understand how any man with good sense could miss them.” Amen! Jihad is not something unique to the 20th or 21st century. It has only been suppressed when confronted resolutely by both political and military force.

While President al-Sisi of Egypt, speaking before all the leading Sunni clerics at al-Azhar University, called for a reformation of Islam on 1 January 2015, unfortunately, his call has no standing with the leading Sunni clerics. He is viewed by them as a political/military leader, not a scholar or jurist of Islam. In fact, it may be said that Islam already has been through three major “Reformations”: these were led by the 1st Caliph Abu Bakr in the Ridda—or Apostasy—wars; Ibn Wahhab in the 1700’s; and now the Islamic State and Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, whose name tells you whom it is he emulates. These reformations have been more in the sense of “purification and returning to Mohammad’s true intent” than making Islam compatible with Western values.

Until it is understood by Western leaders that Islam is a totalitarian ideology bent on world domination, masquerading as a religion, we will not be successful in defeating this threat. The current migrations to America and Europe must not only be stopped but reversed. Islam cannot coexist with Western values and must be confronted resolutely, both politically and militarily.

Retired Adm. James A. Lyons was commander in chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet and senior U.S. military representative to the United Nations. Lyons is a member of the Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi.

‘Real Housewives of ISIS’

real-housewives-of-isis

Geller Report, By Pamela Geller – on January 4, 2017

The BBC created a short video designed as a fake trailer for a show parodying Real Housewives – ‘Real Housewives of ISIS.’

I, for one, do not think it funny. Not for the reasons that Muslims and leftists don’t. Leftists and most especially Muslims don’t think it’s funny because they see it as mocking Islam and many support the work of ISIS. Insulting, mocking or criticizing Islam is punishable by death which is why I have been targeted for assassination multiple times by devout Muslims.

I don’t think it’s funny because the oppression, subjugation, misery, and slaughtering of millions to impose Islam across the world is happening now. The blood in Istanbul still stains the streets. Berlin, Nice, San Bernardino, Paris, Copenhagen, Orlando, Ohio State, Garland, NYC, Jerusalem, Brussels, Munich, Nairobi, etc — it’s too fresh, the flesh and the bone.

And yes, while Charlie Chaplin was funny and phenomenal as Hitler in The Dictator, his film was a warning in 1940. And Hogan’s Heroes was funny because we had already won the war.  But the films of the mid-forties about the Nazis were dead serious and rightly so. America was in the thick of it then just as ewe are now. And like the Europe is really in the throes of war.

I guess we should applaud the BBC for evening attempting such a thing because they are as much the problem as the ideologies they protect — jihad and sharia. Still it is something.

WATCH: LEFTISTS AND MUSLIMS HAVE MELTDOWN AFTER BBC AIRS PARODY ‘REAL HOUSEWIVES OF ISIS’

The Rebel, January 4, 2017:

The BBC did something no one expected and amusingly mocked the Islamic State and women who travel to Syria in a clip from their show Revolting.

The short video is designed as a fake trailer for a show parodying Real Housewives. There’s actually some fun shots thrown at Islamists, feminists, and the religion of Islam itself. It’s borderline politically incorrect, which means it’s way funnier than anything the CBC has ever done.

However, some on the left don’t like this one bit. On Facebook Aftab Bashir wrote, “Let’s make satire about British soldiers being killed in Iraq and let’s ridicule their widows and children coz its all a bit of a laugh ain’t it.”

In a follow up comment, Ebrahim Dar-wa said, “Funny for non Muslims but we don’t take this as a joke. Even though ISIS is made up by the West a lot of views are based on religion so this is attacking Islamic values.”

Another user, Hannah Berry wrote, “How about instead of putting in the money to make this you could actually send the money out to help those suffering in places like Allepo.”

More Muslims whined saying “Disgraceful and distasteful. The BBC is normalising Islamophobia through comedy” and “So a show depicting hijab wearing women as terrorists. How do you think this will help the Muslim women living in west suffering daily attacks from ignorant, hateful people? This is really sick.”

While these may seem like minority Muslim opinions, you’d be surprised. A poll released last year found that 23 per cent of British Muslims support the introduction of Sharia law. And that’s not all. 39 per cent of Muslims, male and female, say a woman should always obey her husband.

Propaganda THEN and NOW

Understanding the Threat, by John Guandolo, January 4, 2017:

On January 5, 1919 Germany’s National Socialist Party (NAZI) formed as the German Farmers’ Party. When the Nazi party took over power in Germany in 1933, Adolf Hitler created the Ministry of Propaganda and Public Enlightenment under the rule of Joseph Goebbels.

The Nazi’s ability to turn public opinion through its control of the media, film, education, and the like gave it momentum inside Germany to do much of its work to prepare for war and brutally slaughter the “unwanteds” inside that nation.

How does a nation get to the point it is willing to allow millions to be killed in the ways the Nazis did?

It begins with propaganda.  The Nazis and Communists were masters of propaganda.  And so are the leaders of today’s Islamic Movement.

In the war of narratives, the Islamic Movement seeks to present the image that the “moderate” muslims are a much better option than the violent jihadis of ISIS, Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hizbollah, et al, thus driving American leaders into the arms of “suit-wearing jihadis” with whom they can and do work.

The problem is that both sides are hostile enemies of the United States.

The enemy’s success in the propaganda/information campaign can easily be identified by the fact that 15 years after 9/11/01 America’s leaders still think there are different definitions of “jihad” in Islamic Law (sharia) – one of the many results of a long propaganda campaign by our enemy.  This particular one pounds the drum stating the “Islam means ‘peace’.”

It is a matter of fact that ISNA (Islamic Society of North America), ICNA (Islamic Circle of North America), MAS (Muslim American Society), MSA (Muslim Students Association), MPAC (Muslim Public Affairs Council), and many other Islamic organizations are a part of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Movement in the United States with the mission of waging “civilization jihad” to destroy western civilization and replace our government with an Islamic government.

It is a matter of fact that CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations) is a Hamas organization, meaning it is a terrorist organization, and it is a fact that CAIR’s leader, Nihad Awad, is the driving force behind the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Movement here.  Awad created the USCMO (U.S. Council of Muslim Organizations) comprised of many of the prominent Muslim Brotherhood organizations with him, Nihad Awad, at the head (functionally if not practically).

And these are the organizations behind the major propaganda operations in America today.

The following is a mere sampling of propaganda/information operations currently underway inside the United States:

coexist2

Campaign:  “COEXIST” bumper sticker.

Details:  Produced, in part, by International ANSWER, a hard-left organization whose “Steering Committee” was created 3 days after 9/11 and includes the National Muslim Students Association.

Purpose:  Moral relativism.  To show Islam is no different from Judaism or Christianity and simply wants to “coexist” (not assimilate) with the rest of society.

muslim-day

Campaign:  Muslim Day at State Capitals

Details:  Sponsored by Hamas (dba CAIR).  This is a day when muslims flood state capitals to, in their words, “meet state legislators, discuss issues of concern and help bring about positive social change.”

Purpose:  A show of force and intimidation at state capitals to give the impression muslims can win or lose elections for state legislators, and therefore, state legislators should submit to their demands.


Campaign:  Paid trips to Saudi Arabia for Members of Congress.

Details:  Saudi Arabia and their representatives take Member of Congress overseas to Saudi Arabia on 10 day trips to show legislators how “progressive” the Kingdom is towards business and other parts of its society.

Purpose:  To show Members of Congress a facade of the true Saudi Arabia so they have a favorable impression of the nation and will be softer on their actions when legislative matters involving the Kingdom arise.  It pits those who speak factual truth about Saudi Arabia’s support for terrorism, sharia, and anti-American efforts against the Congressmen’s newfound personal experience in the Kingdom.

The same campaign exists at the state level for trips to Turkey sponsored by Turkish Muslim Brotherhood organizations such as the Turquoise Foundation, Holy Dove Foundation, and others.

myjihad

Campaign:  “My Jihad”

Details:  This series of videos, billboards, signs, and advertisements produced by Hamas (dba CAIR) shows muslims sharing about their various forms of jihad – doing their homework, helping others, and other such things.

Purpose:  To give the impression that jihad is defined as anything but “warfare against non-Muslims” to establish the power of Islam despite the fact all Islamic law defines it as such.


Campaign:  After “terrorist attacks” Americans should be most concerned with “backlash” against muslims

Details:  Following attacks against U.S. citizens by muslim jihadis, leaders from the Islamic community speak on television telling America they fear for their lives because of the constant backlash against them from non-Muslims despite the fact FBI information reveals this phenomenon does not exist.  U.S. Olympic fencer Ibtihaj Muhammad, who wore a hijab during the Olympics, publicly stated, “I don’t feel safe in America.”

Purpose:  To get our law enforcement, national leadership, and citizens to focus on protecting the Muslim community instead of the seeing that the problem is IN the Muslim community.

 

screen-shot-2017-01-05-at-2-04-56-am

 

Campaign:  Interfaith Outreach/Family of Abraham

abra

Details:  Primarily led by ISNA and ICNA, the Interfaith Outreach movement targets churches and synagogues of all denominations to come together under the belief that Judaism, Christianity and Islam share one God and three Abrahamic faiths.  They adjust their message for Catholics, protestants, and other denominations to get the message to strike home more effectively.

Purpose:  To subvert religious institutions which are the backbone of American society. It should be noted that by the very fact Christian organizations engage in interfaith outreach with the Muslim Brotherhood, they have to surrender their core doctrinal beliefs to meet muslims at a place which often puts them in positions of heresy.  This furthers the MB’s broader strategy of destroying the non-muslim citizens’ faith in their religious leaders.


Campaign:  Muslim Jewish Advisory Council

Details:  Formed by the AJC (American Jewish Committee) and ISNA, this organization purports to be designed to fight Islamophobia and anti-semitism.  It should be noted that in the US v HLF, the U.S. government identified ISNA as the “nucleus” of the Islamic Movement in North America and a financial support entity for Hamas, a designated terrorist organization which calls for the destruction of Israel.

Purpose:  To further subvert the Jewish community, and its leadership around the narrative that both Jews and Muslims are being persecuted.  The muslim intent is for Jewish leaders to protect the Muslim community from the kind of persecution similar what happened to Jews in Germany during World War II.  It appears to be working as many Jewish leaders and organizations in America today openly support and defend Muslim Brotherhood/Hamas leaders and organizations – the very people who seek their destruction.

shariah_billboard

Campaigns:  Sharia / Islam: Got Questions? Billboards.

Details:  Billboards around the United States have been used to promote Sharia and Islam and give citizens a means to ask questions.  These campaigns, as many of the billboards openly state, are sponsored by ICNA.

Purpose:  To normalize Islam and Sharia in our society in preparation for Islam to rule our society under Sharia.


Campaign:  Control Hollywood’s Depiction of Muslims in Film and Television

Details:  Hamas (dba CAIR) and the Muslim Public Affair’s Council (MPAC) in Los Angeles work diligently to ensure muslims are only portrayed in a positive light in both TV shows and film.  They have strong-armed producers, even before films were in production, based on the scripts.  One example: “Sum of All Fears” – storyline was originally muslim terrorists but, because of pressure from CAIR, the antagonists were portrayed as Nazis in the film.

Purpose:  To ensure Americans only see Islam in a positive light and to keep the factual teachings of Islam – “Fight and slay the unbeliever wherever you find them…” (Koran 9:5) – from ever coming to light.


Campaign:  Amazon commercial with Priest and Imam

Details:  Amazon released a commercial just prior to Thanksgiving Day 2016 depicting an older priest and imam hugging each other and sharing time together as close friends.  They both use amazon.com to purchase gifts each other (knee pads) to make it easier when they pray.  The commercial ends with the two praying in their respective places of worship using their knee pads.

Purpose:  This commercial was made in partnership with Amazon, ICNA, and the MCB (Muslim Council of Britain).  Since the MCB is one of the top two largest MB organizations in Britain, and ICNA is part of the MB Movement in North America, we know there is a nefarious purpose for this commercial.  The Muslim Brotherhood does not do willy nilly.  This commercial is meant to affect long-term attitudes in the West with regards to relations with the muslim community.  It portrays the Islamic culture as being relatively the same as Western culture and easy to get along with, completely ignoring the diametrically opposed ways of life between the two.


Campaign:  Islamophobin Gum

Details:  Hamas (dba CAIR) created a gum and a campaign to back it up which is humorously supposed to cure Islamophobia.

Purpose:  To ostracize anyone who speaks truth about Islam and to make it easier for people to accept the growing influence of Islam in our society.

These are but a few examples of the propaganda being poured out onto American society today.

To be clear, easily identified enemies of the United States are behind these propaganda campaigns, and many others. With a large percentage of U.S. media supporting the jihadis in the United States, there is no major counter-messaging to this nonsense.

Propaganda is necessarily made up of lies.  Truth is the only answer.

Only citizens armed with the truth about what Islam is can defend our society from the growing cancer of Islam here, and reach out in wisdom and love to free muslims from a system which necessarily enslaves them.

For more truth, join UTT at http://www.UnderstandingtheThreat.com.

Mosques in America: A Guide to Accountable Permit Hearings and Continuing Citizen Oversight

2769299001

Center for Security Policy, December 15, 2016:

(Washington, D.C.): Communities that face new mosque construction in residential neighborhoods confront a series of vexing questions. These include:  What overarching state and federal laws apply?  What is the role that local zoning planners must play? What oversight opportunity may exist for local residents? And how might communities take a constructive approach to investigating and holding accountable potential venues for Islamist radicalization?

In response to these and other pressing local concerns, the Center for Security Policy is pleased to announce the publication of a practical primer for assessing mosque land use applications.  Entitled Mosques in America: A Guide to Accountable Permit Hearings and Continuing Citizen Oversight, this new book provides much-needed insights into the local planning process and the federal law that governs religious land use applications.

Written by constitutional law attorney Karen Lugo, Mosques in America describes how citizens can work through and complement legal land use regulatory procedures.  It profiles two exemplary case studies that demonstrate the contrasting approaches taken recently by Bloomington, Minnesota.  These examples – one involving an Islamic organization and the other an evangelical Christian congregation – provide insights into the local planning process, as well as the policy priorities that may guide local procedures.  The city’s disparate handling of these similar applications demonstrates the potential for strikingly unequal treatment that religious facilities may experience as in this case, the Christian one was subjected to intensive scrutiny and ultimately rejected, while officials gave the other, Islamic one a series of passes – even after it began violating agreements post-approval.

A particularly important contribution is the guide’s illumination of the vague and confusing standards presented in the federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Person’s Act (RLUIPA) that have contributed to inconsistent results. Ms. Lugo concludes that, under the Obama Justice Department, a growing number of recent interventions in Islamic cases are tipping the scales:

RLUIPA was passed to put religious organizations on equal footing with each other and with secular assembly uses.  It is not intended to be an affirmative- action mechanism.

Federal law under the RLUIPA provides strong protections for religious practices including the siting of a worship and gathering site. On the other hand, those residing in surrounding neighborhoods deserve realistic predictions, including those concerning attendance levels and expected frequency and hours of events.

Ms. Lugo’s guide also offers helpful information to citizens about the land use application hearing process – a procedure that is supposed to afford communities with quasi-judicial hearings, forums meant to provide the careful attention to facts required to achieve accurate findings.

Particularly important is the valuable guidance provided in Mosques in America about how the public can constructively engage with mosques and mosque leadership outside of “city hall” proceedings.  She commends in this connection the efforts of reformist Muslims and suggests as a metric for assessing potential radicalization in accountable dialogues with mosque leadership the standard set by the constitutionally aligned “Declaration of the Muslim Reform Movement.”  It explicitly embraces separation of mosque and state, equal rights for women, free speech, and freedom of religion (including the choice to have no religious affiliation or to forsake a religion).

On the occasion of the publication of Mosques in America, Frank J. Gaffney, the President of the Center for Security Policy, observed:

Karen Lugo is one of the foremost experts in the United States on matters involving religious land use applications.  She has monitored citizen efforts across the country as they hold accountable both local officials and applicants who navigate the complex legal and political terrain associated with religious land use applications in America.  Her new guide will enable vastly larger numbers of citizens and communities to benefit from her counsel.

Mosques in America: A Guide to Accountable Permit Hearings and Continuing Citizen Oversight is available for purchase in Kindle and paperback format at Amazon.com.

pdf

photoshop-ccscreensnapz006

Are Mosques Muslim “Churches?”

Understanding the Threat, by John Guandolo, December 11, 206:

“But is the mosque only for prayers?  No.  The mosque is the center for all Islamic activity as it used to be in the mosques of the Prophet in Medina.  In these mosques, not only prayers took, place, but it was a school of knowledge where companions used to study the Quran and ask questions.  It was a place for the Government to receive delegations from foreign countries.  It was a treasury from which charity work was done and it was a war-room where decisions and planning for wars imposed on Muslims were made.”  A Quote from Islam-USA.com on Mosques

dic

The $110 million Diyanet Islamic Center of America opened in April 2016 in Lanham, Maryland.  The opening was hosted by Turkish President Ergodan

Many people in the West are significantly confused about the true nature of a mosque.

To understand what a mosque is, one must first understand what Islam is. To be a “muslim” is to be one who submits to Islam. To submit to Islam is to submit to the law of Allah – sharia.  100% of all sharia mandates jihad until the world is under Islamic rule (sharia).  Jihad is only defined in sharia as “warfare against non-Muslims.”

The mosque is the center of all life in the Islamic community.  Islam defines itself as a “complete way of life (social, cultural, military, political, legal and religious)” and the mosque is the center of all things social, cultural, military, political, legal and religious.

In a video HERE, former Islamic scholar and professor of sharia, Sam Solomon (name he uses since his conversion to Christianity), details a mosque is the center of Islamic government and much more than a place to pray.

According to Islam, the perfect example for all mankind is Mohammad.  The koran says so.

“And thou (Mohammad) standest on an exalted standard of character.”  Koran 68:4

“Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern of conduct for any one whose hope is in Allah and the Final Day, and who engages much in the Praise of Allah.”  Koran 33:21

Why do Muslims step their right foot into the mosque first? Because Mohammad did it.

Why is it unlawful for Muslim men to wear gold? Because Mohammad forbid it.

Why is it okay for a 60 year old Muslim man to marry a 7 year old girl? Because Mohammad married Aisha when she was 6 and consummated the relationship when she was 9.

Why is it okay for Muslims to war against non-Muslims? Because Mohammad said it and Mohammad did it.

How did Mohammad use the first mosque in Medina?  It was used for: social gatherings; for legal rulings; for teaching Islam; for storing food, water, ammunition and weapons; for housing jihadis; for planning battles; and it was the place from which jihadi was launched.

Mosques are the center of the Islamic State, and the places from which Islam enforces its will on the community and on the world.

This is why all over the world, military and security services continue to find weapons and explosives in mosques, and the mosques teach jihad is obligatory for the muslim community.

The mosques our military went into in Iraq and Afghanistan had weapons.

The mosques recently raided by European security officials had weapons or evidence of weapons and/or explosives training.

As a matter of fact, UTT’s Chris Gaubatz went into mosques around the United States posing as a Muslim and discovered most of them advocate violence and have literature advocating/supporting violence against non-Muslims.

The “Mapping Sharia” research project conducted between May 2007 and May 2010, reveals 51% of U.S. mosques advocate violence and another 30% have texts that support violence.

The Center for Religious Freedom (Freedom House) published a report in 2005 – with Former CIA Director R. James Woolsey as its Chairman – revealing a large number of mosques in America are owned and funded by the government of Saudi Arabia, and teach American muslims they must wage jihad against non-Muslims, hate non-Muslims, and they can never truly be “citizens” of a non-Muslim state, among other things.

Canadian officials publicly admit “extremist” literature calling for violence against unbelievers is “common” in mosques in Canada (Aug 2016).

Here are some other noteworthy news stories affirming mosques are not simply places of worship for Muslims:

After the jihadi (“terrorist”) attacks in Tunisia in the summer of 2015, the Tunisian government moved to close 80 of the 100 remaining mosques there.  The head of Tunisia’s association of imams said police searches uncovered weapons in 40 mosques around the country in 2014.

The largest mosque in Madrid was a jihadi recruitment center run by a former prisoner at the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba U.S. facility for terrorists (Dec 2014).

One of the largest mosques in Switzerland was raided because the Imam instructed his followers that Muslims who do not attend mosque and pray should be killed (Nov 2016).

Netherlands authorities thwarted a plot centered at a mosque to massacre Jews at a local synagogue (Nov 2016).

Germans raided and closed a Mosque for teaching ISIS Ideology – ie Islam (Dec 2014).

The Oklahoma Mosque attended by jihadi Alton Nolen, who beheaded his co-worker, taught attendees they must establish a caliphate under sharia and destroy the US (Sep 2014).

Russian officials arrested the Imam of a Mosque and found explosives there (Jan 2016).

At two separate mosques in Afghanistan in (March 2014) and (April 2016) Muslims blew themselves up in the mosques while making explosives.

Danish police found machetes in mosque they raided (June 2014).

A large mosque in Gaza was struck by Israeli military officials because it contained weapons (July 2014).

mosques

In April 2015 the Imam of the Grand Mosque called for an all out war against all Shiites and Christians. This Imam is one of the most respected leaders in the Islamic world.

The chairman of Al Azhar (who is ranked #1 among the 500 most influential muslims on the planet) calls for jihad against unbelievers.  Al Azhar University is the oldest and most respect school of Islamic jurisprudence in the world.

This might explain why in Denmark only 14% of mosques distance themselves from ISIS and ISIS ideology (April 2015).

For more information see UTT’s article “What is the Purpose of Islamic Centers/Mosques in America” from January 2016.

UTT Asks You to Consider 3 Simple Action Items:

  1.  Know the threat.  Use UTT as a resource for research.
  2. Bring the UTT 3-Day law enforcement program “Understanding and Investigating the Jihadi Network” to your area so those charged with protecting you know this too.
  3. Ensure your pastors and rabbis are sharing this truth with their flocks so as to protect them and the broader community.

And, as always, ensure your local leaders know CAIR is Hamas so when CAIR starts yapping to con your leaders into believing they are friendly, your leaders will know better and treat them like the terrorists they are.

UTT Throwback Thursday: General Petraeus Wages Civilization Jihad

Understanding the Threat, by John Guandolo, December, 8, 2016:

This week the Federalist published a scathing article about General Petraeus raising questions about his criminal actions by mishandling classified information, the possibility he is an agent of foreign powers – namely the Islamic governments of Saudi Arabia and UAE, as well as Kazakhstan – and that he favors silencing Americans’ right to free speech over offending Muslims.

petraus

The latter is where UTT will focus today’s Throwback Thursday article.

In an Op-Ed on May 13, 2016, General Petraeus spent a lot of time defending Muslims and their feelings, yet did not seem concerned about the liberties of Americans – specifically our right to free speech and expression without being beheaded, crucified or shot dead, as Muslims are prone to do.

Specifically, the General wrote:  “Those who flirt with hate speech against Muslims should realize they are playing directly into the hands of al-Qaeda and the Islamic State.”

Actually, if at some point since 9/11 General Petraeus had taken a few hours to study the enemy’s basis for all of their actions – sharia – and understood the driving force in the Global Movement – the International Muslim Brotherhood – has a strategy focused on getting our leaders to do the Muslim Brotherhood’s bidding for them, he might actually see that HE is one of those stooges doing the enemy’s bidding for them.

It’s called “Civilization Jihad by OUR hands.”

When the United States government wrote the Constitutions for Iraq and Afghanistan which created Islamic Republic’s under sharia thus giving Al Qaeda the objectives for which they were fighting, that was Civilization Jihad by OUR hands.  We did the enemy’s bidding for them.

When General Petraeus scolded a Pastor in America for burning a Koran (Sep 2010), that is Civilization Jihad by OUR hands – specifically, the General was enforcing the Islamic law of Slander by ensuring an American citizen would not take an action that would offend Muslims.

See the new 2 minute UTT video HERE on this very topic.

General Petraeus wrote in his May 2016 Op Ed:  “I fear that those who demonize and denigrate Islam make it more likely that it will be our own men and women who ultimately have to shoulder more of this fight.”

Actually sir, the commanding general not knowing his enemy is far more dangerous to the troops than those who speak truth about – and thereby offend – Muslims.

Know the threat. Understand the Threat.