09/13/19

Iraq and Syria Growing in Terror Again

By: Denise Simon | Founders Code

CBS News

Billboards with the slogans “Death to America — Death to Israel” have appeared in the Iraqi capital of Baghdad in recent days. There are at least five of the large signs in central Baghdad, some less than a mile from the U.S. Embassy, the Iraqi presidential palace and the national government’s headquarters.

The signs appear to be part of a campaign by Iran, carried out through proxy groups that directly threaten U.S. troops in Iraq, to demonstrate its strength and reach in the region as tension between Washington and Tehran threatens to explode into conflict.

“The billboards erected in the streets of Baghdad are evidence of the government’s inability to control pro-Iranian groups who want to drag Iraq into an international conflict that endangers the country’s future on behalf of Iran,” Atheel al-Nujaifi, the governor of Iraq’s Nineveh province, said last week.

At the end of August, a senior PMU leader made it clear that all Americans in Iraq would become targets in the event of a U.S. war with Iran.

“All those Americans will be taken hostage by the resistance,” said Abu Alal al-Walaei, Secretary General of Kataib Sayed al-Shuhadaa, one of the biggest PMU militias in Iraq. The interviewer was startled by the assertion.

“I will say it again,” al-Walaei said. “All Americans will be hostages of the resistance if a war breaks out because we will stand by the Islamic Republic (of Iran).” He said he wasn’t speaking in his capacity as a PMU leader, but merely as leader of an individual “resistance faction.” More here.

Continue reading

09/11/19

The 9/11 Attacks: Understanding Al-Qaeda and the Domestic Fall-Out from America’s Secret War

Ammo.com

The 9/11 Attacks: Understanding Al-Qaeda and the Domestic Fall-Out from America's Secret WarWith American military personnel now entering service who were not even alive on 9/11, this seems an appropriate time to reexamine the events of September 11, 2001 – the opaque motives for the attacks, the equally opaque motives for the counter-offensive by the United States and its allies known as the Global War on Terror, and the domestic fall-out for Americans concerned about the erosion of their civil liberties on the homefront.

Before venturing further, it’s worth noting that our appraisal is not among the most common explanations. Osama bin Laden, his lieutenants at Al-Qaeda, and the men who carried out the attack against the World Trade Centers and the Pentagon are not “crazy,” unhinged psychopaths launching an attack against the United States without what they consider to be a good reason.

Nor do we consider then-President George W. Bush to be either a simpleton, a willing conspirator, an oil profiteer, or a Machiavellian puppet whose cabinet were all too happy to take advantage of a crisis.

The American press tends to portray its leaders as fools and knaves, and America’s enemies as psychopathic. Keeping the narrative simple – “Black and white,” “good versus evil,” “right and wrong,” etc. – is intellectually easy, even with something as complex as the 9/11 attacks.

Instead, it is our considered opinion that the events of 9/11 and those that followed in direct response to the attacks – including the invasion of Iraq – were carried out by good faith rational actors who believed they were acting in the best interests of their religion or their nation.

This does not in any way absolve the principals from moral responsibility for the consequences of their actions. It does, however, provide what we believe to be a more accurate and nuanced depiction of events than is generally forthcoming from any sector of the media – because we see these principals as excellent chess players who, in the broad sweep of events, engaged in actions which are explicable.

Continue reading

08/2/19

CAIR Islamophobia Report: A First-Class Fraud

By: James Simpson | Center For Security Policy

The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) has jumped in on the effort to paint its opponents as “Islamophobes,” the latest twist in the Left’s never-ending effort to smear opponents with names like “racist,” “xenophobe,” etc. And while this repulsive strategy makes a mockery of the First Amendment and has reduced American political dialogue to infantile, elementary school name-calling, its true goal is to marginalize, deplatform and defund its opponents, especially those that pose a threat to its subversive agenda. This paper exposes for all to see, just how transparently dishonest and hypocritical CAIR and its allies in the Red-Green Axis truly are in this their latest “Islamophobia” report, and links them to the worldwide effort of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation to impose blasphemy laws against anyone who would speak ill of any aspect of Islam.

CAIR Islamophobia Report- A First-Class Fraud PDF

The Left has become increasingly aggressive about silencing its critics. In late June 2019, James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas released its latest undercover video showing Google’s frightening institutional bias and its apparent intention to manipulate public opinion to influence the 2020 elections. Google is just one of many on the Left seeking to mislead, discredit, defame, and silence the Left’s opponents. But they are not alone. In what we have called the Red-Green Axis, Islamic groups in the U.S. and abroad have partnered with the Left to silence anyone who questions any aspect of Islam, including Islamic terrorism. The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) recently published its latest effort in a piece titled Hijacked by Hate: American Philanthropy and the Islamophobia Network.

It would be a joke, but it isn’t funny. “Islamophobia” is the latest in a long list of contrived “phobias” invented by the Left and its Muslim allies to continue the Left’s time-honored vilification tactic. It is an unscrupulous, intellectually dishonest way of dealing with legitimate criticism that has reduced political discourse in the U.S. to infantile, elementary school name-calling. The Left owns this outcome, but the Muslims are catching up.

Continue reading

07/31/19

The Humanitarian Hoax of Islamic Zakat: Killing America With Kindness – Hoax 42

By: Linda Goudsmit | Pundicity

The Humanitarian Hoax is a deliberate and deceitful tactic of presenting a destructive policy as altruistic. The humanitarian huckster presents himself as a compassionate advocate when in fact he is the disguised enemy.

Barack Obama’s infamous June 2009 “New Beginnings” Cairo speech laid the groundwork for eight years of pro-Islamic policies at the expense of Judeo-Christian America. One of Obama’s least understood and most destructive promises made in Cairo involved Islamic terror financing disguised as charitable giving and humanitarian relief. This is how it works.

There are Five Pillars of Islam that govern Muslim life. They are acknowledged, obligatory, and practiced by Muslims worldwide:

1. Shahada – the profession of faith

2. Salat – five times a day prayer

3. Zakat – charitable giving

4. Sawm – fasting

5. Hajj – pilgrimage to Mecca

Zakat, the Third Pillar of Islam, requires Muslims to deduct a portion of their income to support the Islamic community. It is a religious obligation, a mandatory charitable contribution or tax, usually about 2.5% of an individual’s income. Zakat sounds familiar and unthreatening like traditional tithing to churches, synagogues, and temples paid by Christians, Jews, and Buddhists around the world.

Continue reading

07/18/19

Georgia Mosques Teaching Jihad, Imam Says: “There Has Not Been Another 9/11 In America Because Islam Is Winning”

By: Christine Douglass-Williams | Jihad Watch

It is no secret that Saudi Arabia has been funding the spread of Wahhabi ideology in mosques throughout the West. Just under four decades ago, “there were only a 150 or so [mosques] in America. Now there are approximately 3000.” Behind the walls of these mosques, jihad is being taught, as well as Islamic supremacism, and hatred and violence against Christians and Jews. Several studies have shown that such preaching is not an exception; at least 80% of mosques across the U.S. are spreading jihadist ideology.

Last July, Jihad Watch reported that the Turkish government was also using a network of US mosques and Islamic centers to spread “Islamist-nationalistic fervor.”

The New York Post has also reported about Islamic supremacist imams spreading their anti-Semitism from mosques in the US with impunity. This includes threatening the lives of Jews and inciting violence against them.

This alarming news should be enough to institute a government policy of mosque surveillance. Instead, a range of Islamic lobbies, most notably, Hamas-linked CAIR, push the “Islamophobia” subterfuge that stymies effective counter-jihad efforts. So independent investigations and studies continue to be the sole source of research on what is taught in mosques.

One such study is featured in a report which includes the sworn affidavit of a retired U.S. federal agent, counter-terrorism expert and Arabic linguist, Dave Gaubatz, author of the book Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld that’s Conspiring to Islamize America.

Gaubatz wrote this report for The United West after he embarked on a research project between June 26-30 to investigate what was happening inside the Islamic Center of Savannah, Georgia; the Statesboro Georgia Mosque, and Masjid-Jihad, Savannah, Georgia. Gaubatz is no novice at mosque investigations. He “has gone into 300+ mosques across America and over 150 internationally.” His most recent findings can be found in his July 8 sworn affidavit HERE, with special thanks to Mary Wierbicki, Social Media Director with The United West and Co-Founder of Sharia Crime Stoppers, who brought this affidavit to the attention of Jihad Watch.

Continue reading

07/16/19

“If We Don’t Speak Now”

By: Tabitha Korol

“Speak now or forever hold your peace” is based upon the marriage liturgy of the Christians’ Book of Common Prayer. Today it may refer to our self-monitoring for the irrational fear of not being politically correct.

After reading my essay, “An Assumption of Dignity” on the Internet, a reader commented, “I circulated it to our editorial board who found it very moving. However, based entirely on the reality of it not being ‘politically correct,’ I am recommending that it will not be posted on our educational site. That said, given its compelling nature, I will circulate it privately and selectively.”

This poignant communication appears to be from an academic, in a corporate or military milieu, who wants to share it but is constrained by a fear of being classified “intolerant”. In years past, he’d have thought nothing about forwarding and posting the article with his observations on said educational site. Today, in this post-Obama era, he is threatened by the vitriol that would explode were he to dispatch ideas antithetical to those of people who set the political agenda, intimidated by the possibilities that harm would come to his family, and concerned that he could be summarily dismissed from his position if the first two and harassed if the third.

Continue reading

07/11/19

Z is for Zionism

By: Tabitha Korol

Dictionary.com defines itself as “the world’s leading online source for English definitions, synonyms, word origins, audio pronunciations, example sentences, slang phrases, idioms, word games, legal and medical terms, Word of the Day and more. For over 20 years, Dictionary.com has been helping millions of people improve their use of the English language with its free digital services.” Nevertheless, the entry of “Zionism” is fraught with inaccurate examples and a decidedly political bias.

The site casts doubt while also attempting to sound authentic for Zionism – “The belief that Jews should have their own nation; Jewish nationalism.” Zionism is Israel’s patriotism, just as Americanism is America’s patriotism, without the overtones of “belief,” which smacks of invalidation. Wikipedia defines “patriotism” as national pride, the feeling of love, devotion, and sense of attachment to a homeland and alliance with other citizens who share the same sentiments, such as ethnicity, cultural, political or historical aspects. Merriam-Webster defines it as “the love for or devotion to one’s country,” such as Italians’ devotion to Italy or Canadians’ to Canada. The American Heritage Dictionary defines Zionism as “A plan or movement of the Jewish people to return from the Diaspora to Palestine . . . originally aimed at the re-establishment of a Jewish national homeland in Palestine and now concerned with the development of Israel.”

The Bible is, first and foremost, a sacred document, but wherever it touches upon history, it has been proven wholly reliable. It records how a single-family, descended from Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, was established some 3,500 years ago in the land called Israel. These Israelites are the progenitors of those we now know as Jews, after the predominant tribe of Judah. Despite exiles, massacres, at least three attempts at genocide, and a 2,000-year global dispersion, these people have endured as a recognizable people group, sharing the same ethnicity, history, culture, religion, and sacred language, and, in 1948, they finally returned to their ancient homeland, Israel. Although other groups – Assyrian, Babylonian, and  Roman Empires – have passed from history, the Jews miraculously survived multiple attempts at annihilation. Faithfulness to the laws of Moses, recorded in the Torah/Pentateuch, require residency in their ancient homeland and Zionism IS their RETURN to their ancient homeland. The site disgracefully overlooks all these points.

Continue reading

07/11/19

The Humanitarian Hoax of Tommy Robinson’s Conviction: The Death of Free Speech – hoax 38

By: Linda Goudsmit | Pundicity

The Humanitarian Hoax is a deliberate and deceitful tactic of presenting a destructive policy as altruistic. The humanitarian huckster presents himself as a compassionate advocate when in fact he is the disguised enemy.

The conviction of journalist Tommy Robinson is a humanitarian hoax that has destroyed free speech in England and threatens free speech worldwide. What does this have to do with America?

Tommy Robinson is a British journalist who has been reporting on Muslim rape gangs throughout England that have been raping little English school girls with impunity for decades. The savagery of their acts, and that British authorities are covering up this massive atrocity against the innocent, is extremely destabilizing to British society. Civilized people reject the protection of perpetrators at the expense of victims.

For civilized people, Tommy Robinson is the heroic whistleblower who exposed the horror of Muslim rape gangs and their unspeakable acts of barbarity in England. British society experiences enormous confusion and cognitive dissonance because British authorities protect Muslim rape gangs and embolden them by prohibiting the reporting of their heinous acts of savagery. Why is this happening?

Let’s sort this out by examining the reasons in numerical order.

Continue reading

07/8/19

CAIR’s New “Islamophobia” Report: A Partnership with the SPLC

By: James Simpson | Capital Research Center

CAIR’s New “Islamophobia” Report (full series)
A Partnership with the SPLC | Redefining the Terms of Engagement | Padding the Numbers to Foment Panic
 CAIR’s Left-leaning Coalition | The Larger Threat

Summary: The Council on American-Islamic Relations has a history fraught with questionable associations and dubious claims related to Islam and terrorism. In its latest report, CAIR targets numerous nonprofit groups and grantmakers for “funding hate.” But these so-called “Islamophobic” groups are not hate groups at all—unless you use the definition of “hate” promoted by the discredited Southern Poverty Law Center. This careful analysis of CAIR’s report will debunk many of the organization’s central arguments.

“Islamophobia” is the latest in a long list of contrived “phobias” invented by the Left and its Muslim allies to continue the progressive movement’s long tradition of shaming and vilifying its critics. It is an intellectually dishonest response to legitimate criticism that has reduced political discourse to shrill name-calling without substantive debate or justification.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) recent report, “Hijacked by Hate: American Philanthropy and the Islamophobia Network” is a case in point. The report, released in April 2019, claims that “traditional American charities, foundations, and philanthropic institutions are being used to anonymize and funnel money from powerful donors to the Islamophobia Network.”

The existence of an “Islamophobia Network” is dubious on its face, but the report goes on to argue that “Islamophobia” is  a $1.5 billion enterprise that needs to be stopped with education, auditing, and implementing policies to halt the funding of certain nonprofit groups that CAIR deems to be “Islamophobic.”

Continue reading

07/8/19

CAIR’s New “Islamophobia” Report: Redefining the Terms of Engagement

By: James Simpson | Capital Research Center

CAIR’s New “Islamophobia” Report (full series)
A Partnership with the SPLC | Redefining the Terms of Engagement | Padding the Numbers to Foment Panic
 CAIR’s Left-leaning Coalition | The Larger Threat

Summary: The Council on American-Islamic Relations has a history fraught with questionable associations and dubious claims related to Islam and terrorism. In its latest report, CAIR targets numerous nonprofit groups and grantmakers for “funding hate.” But these so-called “Islamophobic” groups are not hate groups at all—unless you use the definition of “hate” promoted by the discredited Southern Poverty Law Center. This careful analysis of CAIR’s report will debunk many of the organization’s central arguments.

What Is Islamophobia?

CAIR doesn’t exactly say. That is actually understandable because it allows them to leave it open to broad interpretation. One of their supporters was honest enough to define the term in a Facebook post (which incidentally escaped the notice of Facebook’s censors, unlike some posts critical of Islam). Here’s a screenshot of the post:

This fairly exhaustive list includes words that the terrorists themselves use to describe their own actions. According to his bio, Esam Omeish is “chief of General and Laparoscopic Surgery” at INOVA Alexandria, Virginia, hospital. He is a former leader of the Muslim Students Association and the Muslim American Society—both prominent Muslim Brotherhood groups. He is also a founding board member of the Dar al-Hijra mosque in Falls Church, VA. Omeish is also director of the Washington Trust Foundation, a holding company for over $5 million in real estate owned by CAIR, which describes its mission as “to support the charitable purposes of the CAIR Foundation.” Would it be “Islamophobic” to call this a conflict of interest?

It must be added that Omeish’s definition parallels that found in U.N. Resolution 16/18Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization of, and discrimination, incitement to violence and violence against persons based on religion or belief. The U.N. signed 16/18 in 2011, the result of a decades-long effort by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC)—comprised of 56 nations and the Palestinian Territories, the second largest intergovernmental organization in the world—to enact blasphemy laws through the U.N. According to 16/18, not only can you not criticize any aspect of Islam, but to do so is tantamount to “incitement to violence.” Hillary Clinton supported 16/18, as did President Barack Obama.

Continue reading