10/15/17

Islamic terrorist murders Coptic priest

By: Dr. Ashraf Ramelah | Voice of the Copts

We are not without sympathy for the Muslim Egyptian who is under pressure, indeed coercion towards a Sharia fundamentalism that’s touted today in Egypt – in particular by the powers-that-be from Al-Azhar Institute, the Muslim Brotherhood factions and the fundamentalist Salafi remnant currently influencing believers.  It is difficult to be patient with the slow process of expunging or relegating these influences and the long-haul of reform (if in fact the effort to do so actually exists in Egypt today as we are told) when the outcome of Sharia brainwashing is so gruesomely apparent in crimes such as last Thursday’s bludgeoning to death of Coptic Christian Orthodox Monsignor Samaan Shehata.

In an indisputable act of jihad by a Cairo Muslim named Ahmed Saayed Al Sunbaty wielding a sword in the streets of Al Marg in Egypt’s capital city, two Orthodox priests, Father Beeman Muftah and Monsignor Samaan, became the targets of this jihadist.  On Thursday, October 12, the two priests were visiting Cairo to raise funds for the poor villagers of Bani Sweef (Al Minya). They departed from a store (a construction steel seller) and returned to their car where the Monsignor realized he forgot his cell phone in the store. Father Beeman asked their driver, Gerges Kamel, to accompany the Monsignor on his return to the store in order to retrieve it.

Mr. Kamel gave the following firsthand account:

There was water in the street dividing us.

I followed him separated by water, and suddenly I saw a man carrying a sword begin to follow Monsignor Samaan who began running toward the store. At the store entrance, the attacker reached the Monsignor and stabbed him in his side. Monsignor fell to the ground. At that point, the killer stabbed him again in the neck, slaughtering him. The murderer then hit him in the skull and then carved a cross with the same tool into Monsignor Samaan’s forehead.

The driver continued to say that the street was filled with pedestrians who were present at the scene, but no one intervened. The jihadist ran off but not before tossing onto the Monsignor’s body a handwritten note from his pocket. It all happened in four minutes.

Ahmed Saayed Al Sunbaty was apprehended by citizens with the police who by then were a few meters away from the carnage.  The Monsignor remained alive for another half hour waiting for an ambulance to navigate Cairo’s streets. It arrived one hour after he died. Some say dispatchers work slowly when an emergency call comes in for Christians. Mr. Kamel estimated that the Monsignor’s life could have been saved.

Rumors began to circulate about the attacker’s mental state with labels such as “mentally unstable” and “out of his mind,” which is often heard when Copts are the victims of attacks and a legal case for “insanity” begins to build. But this time, eyewitnesses, including the priests’ driver, Mr. Kamel, emphasized seeing a very deliberate and wholly conscious actor. Later, Al Sunbaty admitted under preliminary interrogation that his action was intentional and fulfilled his desire to get rid of infidels. This is confirmed by the hand written message Al Sunbaty threw down onto his mutilated victim. It stated, “Praise be to Allah. The operation was successful.”

Al Sunbaty’s neighbors told reporters that he lives in the area where he murdered the Monsignor and is well-known for his devotion to Islamic jihad, often directing insults to Christians. In general, Copts rekindled the ire of jihadists when they became one of the forces favoring removal of the former Muslim Brotherhood ruler, President Morsi. Copts were labeled as enemies for their political views after June 30, 2012 and hostility toward Copts proliferated throughout radio and television broadcasts until today.

Reaction to the incident has brought only silence as of yet from Islam’s highest governing authority with its Sunni Muslim Institute located in Cairo. The Institution of Islamic scholars is obstinate when it comes to the slightest reforms and least of all to jihad, one of the major pillars of Islam. As of this writing, no statement has come from President Al-Sisi who normally garners praise from Copts.

Coptic Bishop Rafael addressed government authorities in a statement making mention of the increase of frequency of jihad since churches began to burn in 1972, the very year Monsignor Samaan was born, adding that it demonstrates how poorly the state is handling religious crimes and the extremism of a culture which needs to change by a huge effort yet to begin. Defective security monitoring, prosecution of victims instead of the perpetrators, releasing the guilty without penalty when arrested; all foster the system of religious jihad, stressed the Bishop.

The late Monsignor Samaan, who entered the priesthood in 1998 and was promoted to Monsignor in 2016, was laid to rest within a day of his murder. At his funeral, Bishop Rafael addressed parishioners, “We are all ready to die for the Christian faith.” Not a soul could disagree. Referring to terrorists, the Bishop said, “The blood of our martyrs is the seed of the Church – each murder by a terrorist flourishes our Church – sadly they [terrorists] do not understand that.”

Agreement came from Germany, where Pope Tawadros II resides temporarily for therapeutic reasons, in his statement expressing the Monsignor’s final reward for a purposeful life and death: “celebrating with heaven, receiving another martyr to paradise of joy…he joined the procession of victory like his predecessors of the Church…” Indeed.

Voice of the Copts offers condolences to all who knew and loved the Monsignor. Our prayers and sympathies go to Monsignor Samaan’s family and congregation. We hope and pray as well that President Al-Sisi is enabled and directed by the Almighty to work toward equality throughout Egypt’s system of justice, end anti-Coptic rhetoric, and begin genuine reform within Islam despite the very discouraging signs we see — all as a foundation to build a better future for Egyptians.

10/13/17

Trump Sanctions IRGC, Iran’s Terror History

By: Denise Simon | Founders Code

For a list of sanctions placed on Iran, Hezbollah and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, go here.

Today, President Trump delivered his talk about formally decertifying the JCPOA and naming all of the IRGC a terror organization, finally. This is a significant decision and it puts countries like Iraq, Yemen, Syria and Lebanon on notice to purge all IRGC from their territories.

Earlier this week, the Trump administration was laying the groundwork as it related to Hezbollah by offering a reward for 2 Hezbollah leaders.

None of these actions are without future conflict and militancy by Iran. Just in recent days, the Iranian militia in Iraq it appears has been planting advanced EFP’s, where one did in fact kill an American military soldier that was on a major road in Salahuddin province, north of Baghdad.

“It was a classic ambush spot,” White said of the assault site, adding that the penetrator used was steel. Operation Inherent Resolve spokesman Army Col. Ryan Dillon did not cast blame on any particular actor on the battlefield telling the Washington Post, “investigations are continuing into the type and quality of the bomb to better determine where it originated. To say whether or not ISIS did it or not — we have not determined that yet. We are not ruling anything out.”

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Marine Gen. Joseph Dunford told Congress in 2015, “I know the total number of soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines that were killed by Iranian activities, and the number has been recently quoted as about 500,” in a reference to EFP use in Iraq.

“What makes E.F.P.’s so deadly is that they form “slugs” at detonation that maintain their shape over distances of over 100 yards or more, traveling at speeds of nearly a mile per second. This allowed insurgent forces to hide these weapons far from the road, better camouflaging them and making them far more deadly,” The New York Times explained in 2013. More here.

Related reading: Trump Decertifying and Re-tooling Iran Nuclear Deal

Treasury Designates the IRGC under Terrorism Authority and Targets IRGC and Military Supporters under Counter-Proliferation Authority

10/13/2017

WASHINGTON – Today, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) designated Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) pursuant to the global terrorism Executive Order (E.O.) 13224 and consistent with the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act.  OFAC designated the IRGC today for its activities in support of the IRGC-Qods Force (IRGC-QF), which was designated pursuant to E.O. 13224 on October 25, 2007, for providing support to a number of terrorist groups, including Hizballah and Hamas, as well as to the Taliban.  The IRGC has provided material support to the IRGC-QF, including by providing training, personnel, and military equipment.

Additionally, today OFAC designated four entities under E.O. 13382, which targets weapons of mass destruction proliferators and their supporters, for their support to the IRGC or Iran’s military.

“The IRGC has played a central role to Iran becoming the world’s foremost state sponsor of terror.  Iran’s pursuit of power comes at the cost of regional stability, and Treasury will continue using its authorities to disrupt the IRGC’s destructive activities,” said Treasury Secretary Steven T. Mnuchin.  “We are designating the IRGC for providing support to the IRGC-QF, the key Iranian entity enabling Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s relentless campaign of brutal violence against his own people, as well as the lethal activities of Hizballah, Hamas, and other terrorist groups. We urge the private sector to recognize that the IRGC permeates much of the Iranian economy, and those who transact with IRGC-controlled companies do so at great risk.”

IRGC

The IRGC was designated today for the activities it undertakes to assist in, sponsor, or provide financial, material, or technological support for, or financial or other services to or in support of, the IRGC-QF.  The IRGC, which is the parent organization of the IRGC-QF, was previously designated pursuant to E.O. 13382 on October 25, 2007, in connection with its support to Iran’s ballistic missile and nuclear programs, and pursuant to E.O. 13553 on June 9, 2011 and E.O. 13606 on April 23, 2012, in connection with Iran’s human rights abuses.

The IRGC has provided material support to the IRGC-QF, including by providing training, personnel, and military equipment.  The IRGC has trained IRGC-QF personnel in Iran prior to their deployments to Syria, and has deployed at least hundreds of personnel from its conventional ground forces to Syria to support IRGC-QF operations.  IRGC personnel in Syria have provided military assistance to the IRGC-QF, and have been assigned to IRGC-QF units on the battlefield, where they provide critical combat support, including serving as snipers and machine gunners.

Additionally, the IRGC has recruited, trained, and facilitated the travel of Afghan and Pakistani nationals to Syria, where those personnel are assigned to, and fight alongside, the IRGC-QF.  The IRGC also has worked with the IRGC-QF to transfer military equipment to Syria.  The IRGC used both IRGC bases and civilian airports in Iran to transfer military equipment to Iraq and Syria for the IRGC-QF.

Further, while it is group think to bid Senator Corker good riddance, there is yet a fact that Corker introduced in 2015 INARA, legislation that Trump is advancing and included in his talking points regarding Iran.

Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015

(Sec. 2) This bill amends the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 to direct the President, within five days after reaching an agreement with Iran regarding Iran’s nuclear program, to transmit to Congress:

  • the text of the agreement and all related materials and annexes;
  • a related verification assessment report of the Secretary of State;
  • a certification that the agreement includes the appropriate terms, conditions, and duration of the agreement’s requirements concerning Iran’s nuclear activities, and provisions describing any sanctions to be waived, suspended, or otherwise reduced by the United States and any other nation or entity, including the United Nations; and
  • a certification that the agreement meets U.S. non-proliferation objectives, does not jeopardize the common defense and security, provides a framework to ensure that Iran’s nuclear activities will not constitute an unreasonable defense and security risk, and ensures that Iran’s permitted nuclear activities will not be used to further any nuclear-related military or nuclear explosive purpose, including any related research.

The Secretary is directed to prepare a report assessing:

  • the Secretary’s capacity to verify Iran’s compliance with the agreement,
  • the adequacy of the agreement’s safeguards to ensure that Iran’s permitted activities will not be used to further any nuclear-related military or nuclear explosive purpose, including research; and
  • the International Atomic Energy Agency’s capacity to implement the required verification regime.

In preparing a report the Secretary shall assume that Iran could:

  • use all measures not expressly prohibited by the agreement to conceal activities that violate its obligations under the agreement; and
  • alter or deviate from standard practices in order to impede verification efforts.

The foreign relations committees shall hold hearings and briefings to review an agreement during the 30-day period following the President’s transmittal of such agreement.

The congressional review period shall be 60 days for an agreement, including all materials required to be transmitted to Congress, that is transmitted between July 10, 2015, and September 7, 2015.

The President may not waive, suspend, reduce, provide relief from, or otherwise limit the application of statutory sanctions with respect to Iran or refrain from applying sanctions pursuant to an agreement prior to and during the transmission period and during the congressional review period.

The President may not waive, suspend, reduce, provide relief from, or otherwise limit the application of statutory sanctions with respect to Iran or refrain from applying sanctions pursuant to an agreement for:

  • 12 days after the date of passage of a congressional joint resolution of disapproval, and
  • 10 days after the date of a presidential veto of a congressional joint resolution of disapproval.

Specified deferrals, waivers, or other suspensions of statutory sanctions are excepted from such prohibitions.

It is the sense of Congress that:

  • the sanctions regime imposed on Iran by Congress is primarily responsible for bringing Iran to the table to negotiate on its nuclear program;
  • these negotiations are a critically important matter of national security and foreign policy for the United States and its closest allies;
  • this Act does not require a vote by Congress for the agreement to commence;
  • this Act provides for congressional review, including for approval, disapproval, or no action on statutory sanctions relief under an agreement; and
  • even though the agreement may commence, because the sanctions regime was imposed by Congress and only Congress can permanently modify or eliminate that regime, it is critically important that Congress have the opportunity to consider and take action affecting the statutory sanctions regime.

An action involving statutory sanctions relief by the United States pursuant to an agreement or the Joint Plan of Action:

  • may be taken if, during the review period, Congress enacts a joint resolution stating that Congress favors the agreement;
  • may not be taken if, during the review period, Congress enacts a joint resolution stating that Congress does not favor the agreement; or
  • may be taken if, following the review period, there is not enacted any such joint resolution.

The President shall keep Congress fully and currently informed of all aspects of Iranian compliance with respect to an agreement.

The President shall:

  • within 10 days of receiving information relating to a potentially significant breach or compliance incident by Iran submit it to Congress;
  • within 30 days after submitting such information determine whether it constitutes a material breach or compliance incident and report that determination to Congress as well as Iran’s action or failure to act that led to the material breach, actions necessary for Iran to cure the breach, and the status of Iran’s efforts to cure the breach; and
  • at least every 180 days thereafter report to Congress on Iran’s nuclear program and compliance with the agreement.

The President shall keep Congress fully informed of any initiative or negotiations with Iran concerning Iran’s nuclear program, including any new or amended agreement.

The President shall, at least every 90 days, determine whether the President is able to certify that:

  • Iran is fully implementing the agreement,
  • Iran has not committed a material breach of the agreement,
  • Iran has not taken any action that could significantly advance its nuclear weapons program, and
  • suspension of sanctions against Iran is appropriate and proportionate to measures taken by Iran with respect to terminating its illicit nuclear program and vital to U.S. national security interests.

It is the sense of Congress that:

  • U.S. sanctions on Iran for terrorism, human rights abuses, and ballistic missiles will remain in place under an agreement;
  • issues not addressed by an agreement on Iran’s nuclear program, including compensation for Americans held in captivity after the seizure of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, Iran, in 1979, the freedom of Americans held in Iran, the human rights abuses of the government of Iran against its own people, and the continued support of terrorism by the government of Iran, are matters critical to ensure justice and U.S. national security, and should be addressed;
  • the President should determine the agreement in no way compromises the U.S. commitment to Israel’s security, nor its support for Israel’s right to exist; and
  • in order to implement any long-term agreement reached between the P5+1 countries and Iran, it is critically important that Congress have the opportunity to review any agreement and take action to modify the statutory sanctions regime imposed by Congress.

If the President does not submit such certification or has determined that Iran has materially breached an agreement, Congress may initiate within 60 days expedited consideration of legislation reinstating statutory sanctions against Iran. Sets forth House and Senate provisions regarding such expedited consideration.

Nothing in this Act shall be construed as:

  • modifying the President’s authority to negotiate, enter into, or implement executive agreements, other than the restrictions on implementation of the agreements specifically covered by this Act;
  • allowing any new waiver, suspension, reduction, or other relief from statutory sanctions with respect to Iran under any provision of law, or allowing the President to refrain from applying any such sanctions pursuant to an agreement during the period for congressional review;
  • revoking or terminating any statutory sanctions imposed on Iran; or
  • authorizing the use of military force against Iran.

10/6/17

Was Vegas an FBI Sting Gone Bad?

By: Cliff Kincaid

Why is there no motive for the Vegas massacre? Why did Stephen Paddock have a secret life?

It is terrible to contemplate, but the possibility that Stephen Paddock was an undercover federal operative or informant cannot be ruled out. He may have been either set up or used by ISIS and/or a federal agency in a scheme that backfired.

The feds may have thought they were going to catch ISIS in the act of preparing a major terrorist attack. ISIS terrorists may have thought Paddock was one of them but realized at the last minute that it was a set-up. So they claimed him as one of their own.

Perhaps he did convert to Islam after trying to get local Jihadists to buy his weapons.  Or perhaps they thought he did, and he used his “conversion” to convince them he was one of them.

In short, Paddock may have approached potential terrorists with offers of weapons and bomb-making material. Or they may have approached him.

Those of us who have been around Washington D.C. for a while know that the FBI has been rocked by scandals of all kinds and a series of failures, ranging from Ruby Ridge to Waco to 9/11. Because these scandals involve death, stonewalling, and cover-up, the agencies cannot be trusted to investigate themselves.

For someone with even elementary knowledge of government incompetence and corruption, it doesn’t take a lot of imagination to consider the possibility that Paddock was a government informant or operative in a scheme that backfired.

We can anticipate there will be obligatory denials.

Reports indicate that the materials found in Paddock’s car included 1,600 rounds of ammunition, fertilizer that could be used to make explosives and 50 pounds of the explosive substance Tannerite. He had 23 weapons in the hotel room and had reportedly bought 33 guns in the past year. This guy was the perfect operative to be used in undercover stings. He had everything they needed to carry out major terrorist acts.

Paddock was a one stop shop for terrorists. He had the guns and the bombs. He was a one-man Weather Underground.

WND reporter Leo Hohmann reports that Paddock “not only worked directly for the [federal] government for nearly a decade but then worked another year-and-a-half for federal weapons contractor Lockheed Martin.” What this means is that he would have been known to the feds and could have been recruited by them. He could have been told he could atone for his bank-robbing father.

Perhaps he was a “lone wolf” who somehow “snapped.” But his arsenal, designed for a small terrorist army, and his “secret life,” have led to speculation Paddock was part of a gun-running and bomb-making operation similar to the federal Fast and Furious scandal in the Obama Administration. In this case, however, the targets were Islamists, not Mexican drug traffickers.

The Fast and Furious scandal involved the U.S. sending weapons to Mexico that were used by drug cartels to murder a federal border agent, Brian Terry. What if Paddock was part of another such operation, launched under former President Obama, to entrap alleged terrorists? President Trump’s new FBI director, Christopher Wray, has only been on the job for about two months, and may not have been able to review or stop it.

If the FBI had been able to stop the massacre, breaking into the hotel room at the last moment before the carnage, the Bureau would have looked like heroes in the eyes of the public. It would have managed to achieve some good publicity after the debacles involving Director James Comey, the Hillary email scandal, and Russia-gate.

But something went dramatically wrong. Either way, if he was an operative or not, he was able to assemble a small arsenal of weapons in a hotel room. Didn’t anybody notice? Or was he being protected by authorities who thought they were going to nab members of a terrorist cell?

All the facts are not in, but we know that one analysis of FBI undercover “sting” operations found they are now used in two of every three prosecutions involving people suspected of supporting ISIS, the Islamic State. The New York Times said, “…agents have helped people suspected of being extremists acquire weapons, scope out bombing targets and find the best routes to Syria to join the Islamic State, records show.”

You can see how dangerous this can be. These operations involve federal agents actually participating in the planning of terrorist acts and acquiring weapons.

What if Paddock, under government orders, set up his machine gun nest in the Mandalay Bay, hoping to entice some ISIS terrorists into the room and “catch them in the act.” Perhaps he thought the feds would burst in at any moment to stop it. Perhaps he had converted to the Islamist cause. In any case, in assembling this arsenal, he could easily have worked with others to make it all happen.  Who were those others? That’s the big question.

One theory, therefore, is that the FBI blew it. They didn’t get there in time.

His recruitment by the FBI or another federal agency would have been a closely-guarded secret. His family and girlfriend would not have known about it. They would claim ignorance of his “secret life.”

These are difficult matters to consider. Perhaps that is why the White House is pandering to the “gun control” crowd with talk of banning so-called “bump stocks” for semi-automatics. This is how Washington avoids the topic of corruption in federal agencies. This will become a “bipartisan” feel-good moment.

We don’t have all of the pieces of the puzzle and, if something like this did happen, there will be great resistance to knowing and understanding the facts. But the involvement of the FBI and other federal agencies in the ongoing “investigation” means that they will take command and control and be in a position to engineer a cover-up regarding any ties Paddock may have had with them. This is how the Swamp works.

They will leave the puzzle in scattered pieces, to be assembled by courageous journalists and political leaders independent of the Swamp. That is, if there are any left.

10/1/17

Michiganistan – The Sharia Crime Canary

Michigan is evidence that Islamic immigration leads to more than unassimilated communities – it leads to the normalization of Sharia-proscribed behavior that is criminal like FGM and honor killing.

The entire country can learn a lesson – Michigan Audio Report.

How can local law enforcement avoid the pitfalls of pursuing those lawfully practicing Islam, while aggressively prosecuting those Shariah-adherents engaged in criminal activity like no-fault rape and deadly terrorist attacks?

Law-abiding citizens are now beginning to realize that local law enforcement desperately need to acquire previously-unavailable Sharia training. That is why communities are partnering with Sharia Crime Stoppers in their mission to provide under-the-radar certified Sharia training directly to local law enforcement, thereby preparing them to better protect themselves and the citizens they have sworn to safeguard.

Sharia Crime Stoppers Video

Sharia Crime Stoppers can be contacted at [email protected] for more information on under-the-radar certified law enforcement training provided at no cost except for travel expenses.

10/1/17

Al-Azhar Deep State Strikes At Egypt’s Constitutional Free Speech

By: Dr. Ashraf Ramelah | Voice of the Copts

In June this year, Justices Alito and Kennedy of the U.S. Supreme Court agreed in their separate opinions for Matal v. Tam that there is no “hate speech” exception to the first amendment of the constitution. In other words, “hate speech” is free speech. In that same month, Egypt’s parliament found a new hate speech bill placed before them for review. It is likely Egypt’s legislators will not take their lead from the United States but follow the footsteps of Germany, United Kingdom, The Netherlands, France and Denmark, to turn the bill entitled, “Combating Hatred and Violence” into law. The vote is scheduled to take place in the near future.

However, before any vote takes place, the Egyptian parliamentarians must address the origin (the writers) of the introduced bill. The bill — which has 16 articles in three sections — was not written by any member of the elected body but by an outside entity. Committing an unconstitutional and illegal action, the Al-Azhar Institute wrote and submitted to parliament the proposed “hatred” bill. Egypt’s parliament is currently aiding and abetting the illegality by considering the proposed bill. Next, they will buckle under the same pressure to rubber stamp it. Just watch.

To be clear, Al- Azhar Institute has no representation, honorary or otherwise, in the Egyptian parliament. This was enumerated a long time ago when Nasser allowed the Islamic religious institute to expand its teachings to the university level in science and technology. And before doing so, Nasser established Law No. 103 in 1961. Still current, Law No. 103 restricts Al- Azhar Institute’s role to a religious/cultural one (meaning not political) and defines it as “the renewal of Islamic culture, removing abstractions and impurities from it.”

A hate speech law crafted by Al- Azhar may, in its own view, be very effective in “renewing” Islamic culture for, rest assured, it will favor Islam above the others. The language of the drafted bill is generic and abstract with the intent to exact that favor. Vagueness is subject to interpretation by those in charge. For example, the proposed bill states it is, “Protecting the community from attempts to indoctrinate false concepts that may emerge among its members and affect the facts of their religion in a manner that incites hatred.” “Community” is not defined, and this makes non-Muslim segments jittery. Are the indoctrinated “false concepts” affecting the “facts of their religion” pertaining to truths spoken about Islam and Sharia? — Probably.

At a time when Al- Azhar Islamists are under much criticism, the ambiguity of the bill, if passed, will muzzle thinkers and intellectuals and stifle expression more so than now. With this maneuver, Al- Azhar ar shows that its aim is to govern behavior and gain more power over personal lives.

Nothing short of a move to reverse Egypt’s constitution regarding free speech, Article 4 of Al- Azhar’s “Combating Hatred and Violence” bill incorporates an end to any opposition to the proposed bill once made into law and, in this case gets very specific: “It’s not permitted to invoke freedom of opinion and expression, criticism, freedom of information, publication or creativity against any statement or action involving anything contrary to the provisions of this law.” To the contrary, Article 65 of the current 2014 Constitution states that “Freedom of opinion is guaranteed and everyone has the right to express his or her opinion by speech, writing, photography or other means of expression and publication.” The two are at odds.

A thousand years old, Al- Azhar has an institutional memory of the freedoms’ and rights’ environment for centuries in Egypt prior to Nasser’s decision to nationalize personal property and pour the proceeds into the coffers of Al-Ahzar. Tipping the scales in this way set up society for the battle against freedoms and human rights. In response to the negative popular reaction in May 1879 to the emerging abuses of political and religious powers, Egypt’s 1923 Constitution came about 45 years later. It stated that the Egyptian parliament is the only “legislative authority” and that no religious institution can have that same role — referring to Al- Azhar Institute and the Coptic Orthodox Pope. Although the 1923 Constitution is now expunged, this point, fortunately, carried over to the current 2014 Constitution.

With its aggressive overreach (an unsolicited and illegally proposed “hate” bill) to increase the presence of Islam throughout a diverse population (secularists, liberals, atheists, Christians of various denominations and Muslims), the Al- Azhar deep state unveiled its true intentions. Instead of reviewing its own internal policies regarding religious teachings and preaching, which would alleviate oppression in Egypt and around the world as well as pressure on the devout, it rides the trend rising in Europe to suppress free speech and ingrain 7th century doctrine.

The powerful Al- Azhar deep state is shoring up its position to hold and penetrate fundamentalism in many ways, building momentum over time. After rejecting Al-Sisi’s plea for reform of Islamic doctrine and ignoring the possibility of school textbooks revision, Al- Azhar Institute created the kiosk project to disseminate religious edits (“fatwas”). Shortly after, Al- Azhar vocalized its contempt for Tunisia’s modernization of ancient religious traditions, and most recently remained silent on the Egyptian state’s campaign against female genital mutilation (FGM). Furthermore, Al- Azhar has never condemned ISIS or any act of Muslim terrorism against Christians in or outside of Egypt.

09/16/17

Two Coptic churches re-open; two meetings held: Are they related?

By: Dr. Ashraf Ramelah | Voice of the Copts

On Sunday, September 10, two Coptic churches were re-opened by an executive order made by President Al-Sisi. One of them was the St. Mary Church of Al-Furn village in Al Minya diocese, which was illegally shut down by Egyptian police recently in the final days of the Virgin Mary fast.

Bishop Makariuos of Al Minya diocese issued a statement to announce this good news. He indicated that Al-Sisi issued an executive order to local law enforcement to re-open the two churches on the eve of the new Coptic year.

The bishop further added that Copts of Al Minya and Abu Kurkas are thankful to the Egyptian president for his response and the attention given to their petition concerning the shutting down of their churches.

Their gratitude goes to the Interior Minister, the Governor of Al Minya and the head of Al Minya security as well as the National Security Service.

Muslim neighbors are congratulatory

The bishop’s statement did not ignore that Muslim residents of the town seemed grateful for the re-openings. Muslim villagers had been used as scapegoats by police authorities for the closings. Concerning the latter, a Voice of the Copts’ member emphasized that many Muslims came to the church to congratulate the priest and congregation. A celebration entailed almost three hundred Christians in the first mass and took place with great joy and tears of happiness.

Two high level meetings took place

The Al Ahzar Grand Imam visited Germany, and Al-Sisi met in Cairo with the United States delegation of Anglican Churches – two events that took place within hours of the order given to re-open the churches. The re-openings could be seen as timed to serve the purpose of “substantiating” messaging.

In the same time frame, the executive level meetings immediately followed the order to re-open the churches. Therefore, the matter is subject to speculation. The future will tell. If this proves to be the beginning of more re-openings to come then we know this gesture by the Al-Sisi government is meant to be consistent with Article 46 of the Egyptian Constitution, which permits freedom of worship.

Why now and why only two churches when so many need to re-open?

Grand Imam 

Al Tayeb, the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar Institute, was invited to participate in the Roads of Peace International Conference where he delivered a speech on Sunday, September 10. In his speech, the Imam condemned the recent aggression against Muslims in Myanmar ignoring the “plank in his own eye” regarding the plight of Coptic Christians his own country. Perhaps he thought he had a right to do so because of the church re-openings in Egypt preempting his critics.

President Al-Sisi

At the same time in Cairo, President Al-Sisi met with a delegation from the National Council of American Churches. The meeting’s agenda was about how to confront extremist thinking and terrorism. During that meeting, Al-Sisi confirmed that Egypt will uphold the concept of citizenship and consolidate the culture of pluralism (the acceptance of others). He further confirmed the absence of discrimination in Egypt on the basis of religion and that all citizens enjoy the same rights and all the same duties to the homeland – after all, “Egypt’s churches were now being re-opened.”

Voice of the Copts joins in the celebration with gratitude

Christian Copts are truly grateful for the return of two church properties no matter what the motive. It is not new that Coptic issues are exploited for political purposes.

If the Egyptian president is sincere in his talk to the American delegation, then we should expect to see an effort to restore more churches in the near future. This would include re-opening and returning all the remaining closed churches and reconstructing churches destroyed by terror attacks. The latter would benefit by a new law for the construction of all worship buildings with equality in mind.

The right to practice your faith is granted by the Egyptian constitution, and we at VOTC join Bishop Makarious and the Copts of Al Minya and Abu Kurkas in their joy and happiness!

We thank the Egyptian authorities for re-opening churches that were illegally closed down. We hope that more executive orders to restore remaining churches will be made sooner than later.

09/11/17

Tunisian Gender Reforms Countered In Egypt By Female Coptic MP

By: Dr. Ashraf Ramelah | Voice of the Copts

Under the Al-Sisi government, Copts expect the religious scholars of Al-Ahzar Institute to reform Islam. A good beginning would look like this: removal of violent-oriented content from school textbooks, moderate preaching from imams who are Al-Ahzar-certified, and the advancement of women’s rights under Sharia-Islamic law (indirectly affecting Copts who are pressured to follow it.) Are these expectations warranted? No, not likely. Recently, a campaign was launched inside Egypt by Al-Ahzar Institute’s leaders against the civilizing reforms announced by President Al-Sibsi of Tunisia last month on the occasion of Tunisia’s Women’s Day.

Broadcasting through Egyptian TV, “fatwa” kiosks in subway platforms, and mosque assemblies, Al-Ahzar reacted quickly to refute every provision of President Al-Sibsi’s daring proposals in order to prohibit any influence of Tunisia’s enlightenment from seeping into the eager minds of Egyptian citizens. Al-Ahzar scholars flatly denounced the call by Tunisian president for equality in inheritance for Tunisians, proving Al-Ahzar’s convictions are calcified and committed to the 7th century. While the Tunisian Mufti endorsed Al-Sibsi’s discourse and suggestions, Al-Ahzar’s vehement condemnation in a statement issued on Sunday, August 20, said this: “The provisions of inheritance” in Islam are “categorical and meaningful.”

On August 13, the women of Tunisia were addressed by Tunisian President Al-Sibsi who invited all citizens to support the rights of women and spoke of advancing their status in society. He gave a green light to activate total equality between men and women in all fields. In particular, Al-Sibsi promoted equality of inheritance – to dissolve the Sharia stronghold in which a female inherits only half the portion of a male sibling — and that Muslim women should be allowed to marry non-Muslim men (another stickler in the Quran and the Sharia which only gives permission for Muslim men to marry non-Muslim women.)

While the apoplectic reaction by Al-Ahzar was far from hopeful for Egyptians looking for modernization, the knowledge that at least one Islamic government somewhere in the Islamic world is willing to move toward the 21st century without bulking in the face of Egypt’s religious scholars and Sharia authorities might after all bring some satisfaction and even hope to the people of Egypt.

Taking a bold stand to reject the Sunni Institute’s oversight and give credence to nation-state borders over Al-Ahzar’s borderless jurisdiction of Islamic religious governance, Mr. Burhan Besis, a Tunisian leader from the political party in power, said, “The proposals of Sibsi are issues of concern to our Tunisian society, and no one has the right to enter this debate.” He added that Tunisia must fortify debate between Tunisians without any “external interference.”

Nonetheless, Abbas Shoman, the Al-Ahzar Institute deputy, opposed to the western-leaning definitions of freedom and equality undergirding such reforms, offered further backwardness to Egyptians when he disagreed with the Tunisian president: “The calls for a settlement between men and women in inheritance are unfair to women.” Shoman’s voice was joined by a comment from Dr. Amr Hamrush, a member of Egypt’s Religious Committee of the House of Representatives, who said, “These are religious matters, and their violation violates Islamic Sharia law.”

Egyptians are resisting the deep state by weighing in on this matter. Remarks made in social media in the following posts by Sharef Al Shubashy defied Al-Ahzar’s authority: “Bravo Tunisian leader, who bravely confronts the stream of religious extremists through religious reform to keep abreast of modern times,” adding, “Putting forward this initiative leads to move stagnant water and gives an opportunity to the forces of progress…”

Tunisia has put teeth to its talk as far back as 2014 with a parliament of 31 percent women — perhaps building on the legacy of its first leader, Bourguiba, who upon Tunisia’s independence personally removed a hijab from a woman to make his point during one of his public events. Finally, just a few weeks ago, this parliament passed a bill to combat violence against women in a long-awaited step to enhance the protection of women victims in all fields. There actually is hope for real reform in Tunisia. But Egypt is another story.

Today, Egypt’s parliament includes 87 women (14 percent), and surprisingly, one of them stood firm with Al-Ahzar’s objections to Tunisia’s liberalism, vocalizing her opposition. More surprisingly, she is a Coptic Christian. Showing favor for the status quo in her criticism , Faika Fahim, an Egyptian MP, went so far as to proclaim that Tunisia’ s reform of Islamic Sharia was actually Tunisia “calling for a ‘new religion’.” It is important to note that Fahim has been conspicuously silent on a very recent campaign in Egypt being promoted in advertising spots by the Egyptian government calling to end the practice of FGM (female genital mutilation).

An ideal representative for Egypt’s Coptic families and women’s issues in particular, Fahim chose instead to pry into the internal dictates of Al-Ahzar’s religious matters when it would have been better to remain silent and removed. This proves she can be an appeaser with little integrity. On the other hand, if she had gone to bat on behalf of human rights rather than against them and defended Tunisian ideas, she would have been condemned by the deep state and silenced. So Copts lose representation either way.

In at least a few Islamic-majority countries right now secular norms for divorce and abortion as well as fundamental human rights of free speech and equality are vying with the icy grip of Islamic legalism. Morocco’s thinkers and intellectuals are asking for open debates about rights for women and debating whether sex education should be offered in schools — emphatic that these remain internal decisions. India’s court rejected the traditional Islamic “verbal” divorce (unfavorable to women) and now requires divorce to be brought before the courts.

Islamic-majority countries wishing to adopt updated policies have a choice between humanism and Islamism. Outside of Egypt, Al-Ahzar Institute could now be losing power over religious legal issues that are arousing concerns in Islamic countries. What could be in jeopardy is the Institute’s centuries-long oversight operating without geographical borders to steer government policy and govern religious practice, one and the same. On the other hand, in Egypt, Al-Ahzar is the deep state and remains in charge of political Islam.

09/10/17

Can’t we talk? No, we can’t

By: James Simpson | Bomb Throwers

There is a new film out by Pamela Geller, Can’t We Talk About This? Those were the last words spoken by Theo Van Gogh as he was being murdered at 9 in the morning on a main thoroughfare in Amsterdam. I urge you to watch and support this film.

Van Gogh was a good friend of Pam’s. He had just completed a short film with Ayaan Hirsi Ali, titled Submission. It describes the treatment of women under Islam. Mohammed Bouyeri, a  Moroccan-Dutch Muslim, took offense at the film and shot Van Gogh as he was riding to work on his bike. Bouyeri then stabbed Van Gogh, cutting his neck in an attempt to behead him. He used a second knife to pin a note on Van Gogh’s body.

The note was addressed to Ali and others, including Jews, Netherlands politicians, and a long list of the usual suspects. Fraught with misspellings, the five-page letter started:

Dear miss Hirshi Ali,

Since your appearance in the political arena of the Netherlands you are constantly engaging in terrorizing Muslims and Islam with your remarks. You are not the first at this and will also not be the last who has joined the crusade against Islam.

With your defection you have not only turned your back on the Truth, but you also march along the ranks of the soldiers of evil. You mince no words about your hostility against Islam, and for this your masters have rewarded you with a seat in parliament.

They have found in you a companion in their crusade against Islam and Muslims.

A companion who gives them the “gunpowder” so they don’t have to do the dirty work…

Did you catch that? Hirsi Ali is terrorizing Muslims by talking about her treatment at their hands.

Right.

I would like to believe Mr. Bouyeri is just a maladjusted lunatic, but unfortunately he represents a familiar mindset and temperament among Muslims. A September 7th Time magazine interview quotes Yahya Cholil Staquf, one of Indonesia’s most influential Islamic leaders. What he says is so important I have reproduced a few of the Q & As here. It is especially important given Time magazine’s reach and its liberal readership:

Q:  Many Western politicians and intellectuals say that Islamist terrorism has nothing to do with Islam. What is your view?

A:  Western politicians should stop pretending that extremism and terrorism have nothing to do with Islam. There is a clear relationship between fundamentalism, terrorism, and the basic assumptions of Islamic orthodoxy. So long as we lack consensus regarding this matter, we cannot gain victory over fundamentalist violence within Islam.

Q:  What basic assumptions within traditional Islam are problematic?

A:  The relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims, the relationship of Muslims with the state, and Muslims’ relationship to the prevailing legal system wherever they live … Within the classical tradition, the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims is assumed to be one of segregation and enmity.

Perhaps there were reasons for this during the Middle Ages, when the tenets of Islamic orthodoxy were established, but in today’s world such a doctrine is unreasonable. To the extent that Muslims adhere to this view of Islam, it renders them incapable of living harmoniously and peacefully within the multi-cultural, multi-religious societies of the 21st century. (Emphasis added)

I put that last sentence in italics because in my Red-Green Axis presentations, I stress the inability of many Muslim refugees to assimilate. In fact, their goal is not assimilation but conquest. The interview continues:

Q:  A Western politician would likely be accused of racism for saying what you just said.

A:  I’m not saying that Islam is the only factor causing Muslim minorities in the West to lead a segregated existence, often isolated from society as a whole. There may be other factors on the part of the host nations, such as racism, which exists everywhere in the world. But traditional Islam — which fosters an attitude of segregation and enmity toward non-Muslims — is an important factor. (Emphasis added)

Here again, Staquf reinforces my assertion that Muslims do not want to assimilate.

Leftists and establishment Republicans (but I repeat myself) claim that terrorist groups like ISIS are un-Islamic – that they have somehow “hijacked” an otherwise peaceful religion. National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster asserts this in his defense of Islam. (Note: my exposé of McMaster reveals much more about this horribly unacceptable Trump advisor). Staquf has a blunt answer to this belief (italicized portions are my emphases):

Q:  So the call by radicals to establish a caliphate, including by ISIS, is not un-Islamic?

A:  No, it is not. [ISIS’s] goal of establishing a global caliphate stands squarely within the orthodox Islamic tradition. But we live in a world of nation-states. Any attempt to create a unified Islamic state in the 21st century can only lead to chaos and violence … Many Muslims assume there is an established and immutable set of Islamic laws, which are often described as shariah. This assumption is in line with Islamic tradition, but it of course leads to serious conflict with the legal system that exists in secular nation-states.

Any [fundamentalist] view of Islam positing the traditional norms of Islamic jurisprudence as absolute [should] be rejected out of hand as false. State laws [should] have precedence.

I cannot reproduce more of this interview here. Suffice it to say there are many more gems and I urge you to read the whole thing. I can only imagine the Time reporter’s pique at these repeated assaults on his idiotic, politically correct, left-wing presumptions. So as you might imagine, he had to get at least one swipe in against conservatives. He did so with his last question. But he got bitch-slapped on that one too: 

Q:  I would guess that you and I agree that there is a far right wing in Western societies that would reject even a moderate, contextualized Islam.

A:  And there’s an extreme left wing whose adherents reflexively denounce any and all talk about the connections between traditional Islam, fundamentalism and violence as de facto proof of Islamophobia. This must end. A problem that is not acknowledged cannot be solved.

“This must end. A problem that is not acknowledged cannot be solved.” So here we have a very influential Muslim confirming everything we “Islamophobes” say about CAIR, the Muslim Brotherhood, and the whole Red-Green Axis infrastructure. Amen brother! We are sick of being called Islamophobes for telling the truth by spineless cowards afraid of their own shadows.

In her documentary, Can’t We Talk About This? Pam Geller communicates this message in her inimitably convincing manner. This is a must-see film, available for viewing on Vimeo now.

This message needs to get out.

Editor’s note: The idea that Islam can be viewed through the political lens of left versus right is a highly dubious proposition. See this article I wrote in 2013. -MV

09/8/17

Hiding In Plain Sight: New Hampshire Mosque Preaches Terrorism

By: James Simpson | Bomb Throwers

Muslims pray at Id Kah Mosque on Eid ul-Fitr, 2010 (photo: Preston Rhea, https://www.flickr.com/photos/prestonrhea/5016463525)

A concerned New Englander recently arranged for the assessment of the Islamic Society of New Hampshire’s (ISoNH) mosque in Manchester in that state. He had noticed a disproportionate number of military-age males visiting the mosque and heard from many local women who said they were frightened by the attitudes some of these men expressed toward them. The results of the man’s research were more frightening.

P. David Gaubatz, co-author of Muslim Mafia, was hired to assess this mosque. He is a former Air Force Office of Special Investigations (OSI) federal agent who specialized in Islamic counter-intelligence and counter-terrorism. According to his book, he worked and lived in the Middle East for decades and was the first civilian federal agent in Iraq at the start of Operation Iraqi Freedom (March 2003). That year he led a 15-man team to extract family members of the Iraqi lawyer who helped save Army Private First Class Jessica Lynch. He has investigated over 280 mosques in the U.S. alone and uses a rating system developed by a former Islamist, Tafik Hamid.

U.S. Islamists and their allies in the American Left have long sought to discredit this rating system as contrived nonsense created by Islamophobes, but that very effort calls into question their motives, expertise, and integrity. Tafik Hamid is a former member of Jamaa Islamiya (also known as al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya or, in English, Islamic Group),  — an Egyptian organization branded a terrorist group by the U.S. government, the United Kingdom, and the European Union. Al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri was a member of this group, as was Omar Abdel-Rahman, the so-called “blind sheikh” convicted as the mastermind behind the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Hamid has long since abandoned his radicalism and has become a widely-recognized Islamic reformer.

The rating system is based on numerous factors readily observant by how strictly the mosque conforms to Islamic standards and how aggressively it promotes Shariah (Islamic law). For example, are men and women allowed to worship in the same room? What kind of dress is mandatory, e.g. must women wear a niqab or hijab? Can they get away with a modern form of hijab? How does the imam dress? Details like rings worn and style of pants indicate the imam’s devotion to Wahhabism or other Islamic sects and to Shariah itself.

The imam’s dedication to Shariah is especially important because Shariah is a doctrine of political dominance and conquest, and Muslims who promote it are likely to promote jihad as a means to impose it.

The system also rates the mosque based on messages taught in sermons. For example, does the mosque promote the killing of gays, killing for apostasy, stoning women for infidelity, and Shariah-sanctioned slavery?

Gaubatz found that ISoNH was strictly observant and promoted all these ideas and more. Using a 1 to 10 rating scale, with 10 being the worst, Gaubatz assigned a grade of 10 for Shariah compliance and 9 for jihadist potential. He concluded:

The ISoNH is a Sunni/Saudi and Pakistani front for Islamic based terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda and ISIS. This mosque had very violent materials inside for worshippers that advocate the overthrow of America and physical Jihad against U.S. and Israeli targets. This is based on the mosque having the same Islamic manuals in their possession that Islamic terrorist groups utilize for their training. The ISoNH had material written and edited by a convicted Islamic terrorist supporter (Ali Al Timimi). The Imam and mosque worshippers were extremely Shariah compliant. ISIS and Al Qaeda would find this mosque acceptable for their training and education of Mujahideen fighters (Islamic terrorists).

Some of the literature referred to is shown in the below graphic:

A Brief Illustrated Guide to Understanding Islam was edited by twelve Islamic “scholars.” I have circled two names. Ali Al-Timimi — whom Gaubatz referenced — is now serving a life sentence for terrorism. Sheik Jamal Zarabozo is considered “too extreme” even for some Islamists as he advocates stoning to death for “heretics.”

Another brochure promoted at the mosque is Jihad in Islam. This 33-page document makes clear that the goals of Islam are to subjugate the world. Under the heading What Jihad Really Is? (sic) it states:

In reality Islam is a revolutionary ideology and programme which seeks to alter the social order of the whole world and rebuild it in conformity with its own tenets and ideals. ‘Muslim’ is the title of that International Revolutionary Party organized by Islam to carry into effect its revolutionary programme. And ‘Jihād’ refers to that revolutionary struggle and utmost exertion which the Islamic Party brings into play to achieve this objective…

…Islam requires the earth—not just a portion, but the whole planet—not because the sovereignty over the earth should be wrested from one nation or several nations and vested in one particular nation, but because the entire mankind should benefit from the ideology and welfare programme or what would be truer to say from ‘Islam’ which is the programme of well-being for all humanity. Towards this end, Islam wishes to press into service all forces which can bring about a revolution and a composite term for the use of all these forces is ‘Jihad’. (p. 5)

Many U.S. mosques are little more than meeting places and training centers for Islamic terrorists. For example, the Tsarnaev brothers and many other terrorists regularly attended the Islamic Society of Boston. Why is it still open?

Officials at all levels of government, including within many police forces, have been gripped by a fever of political correctness that virtually guarantees we will remain blind to the danger such mosques pose until it is too late.

Former Manchester Ward 2 Republican State Rep. Greg Salts read aloud from Gaubatz’s report on the Manchester mosque at a recent public meeting of the local Board of Mayor and Aldermen. The response from elected officials was predictable. Instead of seriously considering Gaubetz’s warning, they acted offended, using the familiar slur popularized by the Southern Poverty Law Center, “hate speech.”

Following are some of their comments as published in Manchester’s Union Leader:

Alderman Chairman Patrick Long: “Personally this hate talk has no place in this city, that’s just my opinion.”

Alderman-at-Large Dan O’Neil: “There is no need in the city of Manchester for hatred. I know this board won’t stand for it; our citizens won’t stand for it.”

Manchester Chief of Police Nick Willard: “What [Gaubatz] wrote in this piece of paper is slanderous. I do not believe the mosque is a hotbed for terrorism. I don’t trust this gentleman’s research. I think he is trying to sell a book. I think the guy is a crackpot and I don’t believe we have those issues in this city.

As quoted in the newspaper, Gaubatz responded:

I get that same reaction a lot of the time. They don’t want to admit they have a problem in their area and it took an outsider to find it and identify it.

Gaubatz added to those remarks during a telephone interview for this article:

In response to Chief Willard’s ill-considered remarks I say this: ‘Chief Willard is a poor excuse for a senior law enforcement officer.  He has no clue what to look for in a mosque. The tax payers of his community deserve a Chief who supports them and not mosque leaders who support the teachings of ISIS. Finally, I do not receive any royalties for my book, so it is both ignorant and insulting to dismiss my report as an effort to sell books. It was provided for the benefit and as a warning to the Manchester community. What does the Chief care more about, Manchester or the mosque?’

At every level, we see daily demonstrations of how corrupt and incompetent our “leaders” have become. This is a situation that cannot stand. We still have the vote. I hope it can save us from these useful idiots for Islamism before the terrorism being contemplated in many corners throughout the U.S. strikes yet again.

I am not holding my breath.

09/7/17

Sharia Crime Stoppers

American Justice for Sharia Crimes

The fundamental transformation enacted by the Red-Green Axis has been successful to the point where almost everything is the “new normal”, even the criminal components of Islamic Law, Sharia.

The criminal defense for Female Genital Mutilation being a “religious practice” is an example of the creeping “new normal”, as is the phenomenon of “no-fault rape of uncovered women” or the killing of young girls for being “too westernized”. These and other Shariah-mandated crimes must be prevented, prosecuted, and punished.

Shariah Crime Stoppers is a forthright campaign demanding that the American justice system effectively deal with the criminal aspects of Sharia. Police and prosecutors must be trained in Sharia, and citizens must demand that the full force of American law be applied once again within in their communities, despite political pressure to the contrary.

Sharia Crime Stoppers activities are underway in several states where sheriffs and police chiefs have taken action to train their officers in the specifics of Sharia. This certified training is provided by experts in the field; it is offered, without fanfare, at no charge other than travel and lodging expenses

Send Sharia Crime Stoppers an email [[email protected] with the Subject line = Cost-Effective Law Enforcement Training] to obtain the training course curriculum and to connect your local sheriff and/or police chief with one of the instructors.

Schedule the new Sharia Crime Stoppers presentation “What Women Should Know about Sharia” [in-person or via the Internet] to educate women and to encourage them to contact their local law enforcement agencies to discuss their need for the training that the federal government has withheld from them for the last decade. Use the above email to inquiry about scheduling a presentation with the Subject line = “What Women Should Know about Sharia”.

Links to video excerpts from the presentation will be posted here as they are developed:

  What Women Should Know about Sharia Presentation

  • Male Supremacy – Part 1
  • Rape Culture – Part 2
  • Honor Killings – Part 3
  • Child Marriages/Forced Marriages – Part 4
  • Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) – Part 5
  • Police Response – Part 6

http://securemichigan.org/
American Justice for Sharia Crimes