by, Rami Rustom | Islam Watch
Most people think terrorism is a new phenomenon since the term terrorism was only recently used a lot in the media. But actually it’s much older than that. The term was first used in 1795 during the French Revolution, but that’s not a good way to figure out how old the phenomenon is. I mean, just because a word is 200 years old doesn’t mean that the idea the word refers to is 200 years old.
What is terrorism?
To figure out how old terrorism is, we need to know what it is, in other words, how to recognize it. According to a few dictionaries I checked, terrorism is the systematic use of violence in order to bring about political change.
So there are three parts to this. The act is violence, the goal is political change, and there is a coordinated effort among a lot of people to commit the acts of violence. One thing that is missing here is why these people would think that political change would occur. Well, it’s because they know that with fear comes capitulation. In other words, if I fear that my actions will bring about punishment, then I may change my actions in order to avoid the pain of the punishment. So really the goal is two fold – there is a means, and an end. The end is political change. The means is fear.
So terrorism is a systematic effort of a population to commit violence against another population with the goal of instilling fear so that they change their political actions.
How old is terrorism?
Now back to the question of how old terrorism is, let’s go back in history to look for cases that meet this definition. One case that comes to mind, and I’m sure this isn’t the oldest case, is Islam during Muhammad’s life. Most Muslims who don’t know the history think that Islam spread by voluntary conversion but actually it spread by the sword. Kingdoms were given a choice, convert to Islam and come under the rule of Muhammad, or die by the swords of Muslims. And most kings did not capitulate to Muhammad’s demands, so what resulted was Islamic invasions of those kingdoms. So Muhammad instituted a systematic approach of using violence in order to make these kingdoms into provinces of his own kingdom, which is political change. So Muhammad was a terrorist. Not the first terrorist, but definitely one of the worst in history — if we’re counting most deaths as the worst.
To be clear, had those kingdoms provoked the Islamic nation, then we could say that Muhammad retaliated in self-defense. But that’s not what happened. Muhammad sent envoys with his letters to these kingdoms unprovoked.
So terrorism is at least 1,400 years old, but really the fundamental idea underlying terrorism is much much older than that, and it pervades our societies a lot more than most people realize. Terrorism, at its most fundamental level, is an involuntary act with the goal of changing the mind of the victim (involuntarily). To help clarify this issue, let’s consider the alternative way of “helping” someone to change their mind. The only other way is voluntarily. Which raises the question: How do people change their minds voluntarily? The answer is simple, by discussion.
Why do people resort to terrorism?
In any given disagreement between two or more people, in order for agreement to be reached, all parties involved must find an idea that everybody involved agrees to. Otherwise, they are still in disagreement. Now, in a society where dissent is considered ok, if a disagreement does not end with agreement, then nobody involved retaliates against another with violence, and so they “agree to disagree”. That means that they still disagree about the issue they were discussing, but they agree on the narrow matter of leaving that disagreement alone. But, in a society where dissent is not ok, if a disagreement does not end with agreement, then one or more of the individuals involved may commit violence in order to force the dissenters to “change” their minds. Note that I put “change” in quotes because they don’t actually change their minds, and instead what they do is change their behavior in an effort to prevent retaliation from the terrorist.
Now that we’ve established the fundamental difference between terrorism and non-terrorism, let’s consider how pervasive this idea is in our societies. Who do you know that tries to “change” other people’s minds involuntarily? Parents. Parents often will punish their kids for disagreeing with them, as a means of causing them to “change” their minds. But as I said earlier, they don’t actually change their minds, and what actually happens is that they change their behavior in an effort to avoid the pain of punishment. Parents will also raise their voices, as a means of reminding the child of the punishment that will be delivered if the child doesn’t “change” his mind. Now, whether or not the parent intends to raise his voice as a means of instilling fear doesn’t matter. The act of raising one’s voice when somebody disagrees with you was designed to cause someone to involuntarily “change” their mind. So just because the parent doesn’t see it that way, doesn’t mean that the child is not fearful of his parent. My point is that what matters is whether or not the child is scared from the parent’s voice being raised, rather than whether or not the parent intends to instill fear.
I suspect that terrorism, defined as the act of instilling fear in order to “change” someone’s mind, is older than human civilization.
What’s the solution to terrorism?
So what’s the solution to terrorism? Well, as I said before, some societies embrace dissent, while other’s don’t. So what’s the critical difference between them? The difference is the tradition of criticism. If the people in a disagreement have a good attitude towards criticism, then they will enjoy their discussion. And if they don’t, then they won’t. More importantly, having a good attitude towards criticism means understanding that disagreement between people is common and ok. Dissent is good. Criticism is good. But to understand this, one must understand what criticism is, and what is its purpose.
A criticism is an explanation of a flaw in an idea. If the criticism is true, then the idea it targets is rendered false. Now I’ve made this sound pretty simple, but it’s a lot more complicated than this. For one thing, people are fallible, which means that we can be wrong about any of our ideas. So this means that we can be wrong about our criticisms too, since criticisms are themselves ideas. For this reason, it’s important to keep even our criticisms open to criticism.
So how does criticism work? In other words, what does criticism do to ideas? Well, when we have an idea, and if we find a flaw in it, then that idea is rendered false. But that doesn’t mean that everything about that idea is wrong. As far as we know, some parts of the idea are right, everything except the flaw. So one way to move forward is to create a variation of the original idea, by changing the flawed part such that the new variation doesn’t have the known flaw. So in this way, the criticism, together with the brainstormed variation, acts as a means of evolving the idea from flawed to less flawed.
So criticism is necessary for our ideas to evolve. Criticism is necessary for the evolution of our knowledge. With each criticism and the correction that follows it, we are evolving our knowledge. This is an important and fundamental feature of how evolution works. And it’s the same feature that genetic evolution has.
Genetic evolution works by variation and selection. Genes are created by mutation, which results in variations of the precursor genes, and then the fit genes are selected for when the hosts of the unfit genes die due to having unfit genes. Analogously, ideas are created by variation, and then the good ideas are selected for when the bad ideas are criticized.
Human knowledge is created by guesses and criticism, analogous to how genetic knowledge is created by variation and selection. So criticism is a good thing. It is required in order for our knowledge to improve. Without criticism, our knowledge stays static. Without criticism, our knowledge can’t evolve.
Now the tradition of criticism is not a new thing. The ancient Greeks had it, though they lost it later. The tradition of criticism sprang up again in the 1500′s or so, resulting in what we now call The Enlightenment. The Enlightenment was many things, and science was one of them. Science has a strong tradition of criticism. Scientists expect to have their ideas criticized by other scientists, and they try their best to make their theories more criticizable, so that flaws can be more easily found.
The Enlightenment resulted in a boom of knowledge growth, one that we are still experiencing today. It started in Italy, but many other cultures have adopted this tradition of criticism since then, and so they too have joined The Enlightenment era.
For terrorism to stop, people must adopt the tradition of criticism. For a society to stop forcing it’s will on other societies, that society must adopt the tradition of criticism. Analogously, for a parent to stop terrorizing his children, he must adopt the tradition of criticism.
Ahmadiyya Muslim Caucus on Capitol Hill. Photo courtesy of: Jews News
by, Meghan Drake | The Washington Times
A small branch of Islam often persecuted and called heretical by larger Muslim groups has always found friends on Capitol Hill. Now, America’s Ahmadiyya Muslim community is getting official representation through a new House caucus to be officially unveiled Friday.
The new Ahmadiyya Muslim Caucus will represent the estimated 15,000 to 20,000 Ahmadis living in America, a small percentage of the nearly 3 million Muslims living in the United States.
President Obama has stood up for Ahmadis at the recent National Prayer Breakfast, and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat, has championed the religious group’s cause in the face of reports of persecution in Pakistan and elsewhere in the Islamic world. Now, the group will have a caucus to represent the global Ahmadiyya community.
“We are talking on the global level to wherever people are being persecuted and prosecuted for their faith,” said Naseem Mahdi, missionary-in-charge and national vice president of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community USA. “We will not take the selfish approach that we will only talk about the rights of Ahmadiyya Muslims. We will talk about the rights of every human being, especially the rights of every believer.”
The Ahmadiyya Muslim community was founded out of a movement began by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad in 1889 in the Indian city of Qadian, and is currently headquartered in London,* where its spiritual leader, Hadhrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad, resides. Ahmadiyya Muslims say they are the largest single largest Muslim group worldwide united under one leader.
Ahmadis believe in basic Islamic principles, but differ from mainstream Muslim theology in recognizing Ahmad as a prophet and messiah and arguing that Jesus died of old age. Because Ahmad believed himself a reformer of Islam, his followers see themselves as the propagators of the most perfect form of the Muslim faith.
Frank Griffel, professor of Islamic studies at Yale University, said although many mainstream Muslim communities view them as apostates, Ahmadis believe they are true followers of Islam.
“They are adamant that they are valid members of the Muslim community and protected by Islamic law in their worship,” Mr. Griffel said.
Severe persecution against the Ahmadiyya community has been seen in Pakistan, Indonesia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and other countries.
The formation of the caucus comes at a time where many American Muslim leaders are encouraging more political participation from members of the faith. There are two Muslim members of Congress Democratic Reps. Keith Ellison of Minnesota and Andre Carson of Indiana.
“We want to represent this country in a perfect way,” MD Rabbi Alam, American Muslim Political Action Committee founder and chairman, said.
Although many are doctors, engineers and professors, he said many U.S. Muslims do not understand the mechanics of local government and politics.
The new caucus boasts bipartisan leadership: Reps. Frank Wolf, Virginia Republican, and Jackie Speier, California Democrat, will serve as co-chairs. Last June, Mr. Wolf was awarded the 2013 Ahmadiyya Muslim Humanitarian Award.
The Council of American-Islamic Relations, a leading Muslim advocacy organization, welcomed the idea of the caucus, but said the involvement of Mr. Wolf, a leading voice for human rights on Capitol Hill, raises questions about the group’s agenda.
“While the Council on American-Islamic Relations supports the concept of a congressional Muslim caucus, we question Rep. Wolf’s involvement and genuine concern for issues of importance to our community given his long history of working with anti-Muslim fringe groups and causes,” Robert McCaw, CAIR government affairs manager, said.
Mr. Wolf noted the numerous trips he has made to defend the religious liberties of Muslims and his authoring of the International Religious Freedom Act.
by, Ryan Mauro | The Clarion Project | h/t Creeping Sharia
How can the government use chaplains from a group that they know is extremist and involved in terror funding? U.S. Military Hiring Muslim Brotherhood Chaplains – Again!
The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity, is proudly announcing that the U.S. military is again using their chaplains for active-duty service after a 15-year lull.
ISNA has a well-documented extremist history. In 1991, the Muslim Brotherhood listed ISNA as one of its main fronts. Declassified FBI memos said ISNA is a component of the Muslim Brotherhood, who sees its “work in America as a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within.”
In 2007, the U.S. government labeled ISNA a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity and an unindicted co-conspirator in a terrorism-financing trial involving the Holy Land Foundation funneling money to Hamas. The label was upheld in 2009 because of “ample” evidence linking ISNA to Hamas. Last year, ISNA’s Canadian affiliate lost its status as a charity because of its accounting discrepancies and links to Pakistani terrorists.
The two chaplains endorsed by ISNA are Sgt. Mustapha Rahouchen, who will be used by the U.S. Army, and Captain Rafael Lantiqua, who was chosen by the U.S. Air Force.
In April 2013, the Clarion Project broke the story that the U.S. Air Force Chaplain Corps had paid ISNA almost $5,000 for two advertisements in its magazine. When we contacted the Air Force about ISNA’s ties to the Brotherhood, we received the following response:
“The Islamic Society of North America is one of many religious organizations recognized by the Department of Defense that satisfy the ecclesiastical requirements to endorse qualified religious ministry professionals to serve as chaplains within the Military Departments.”
This story speaks to the broader threat posed by Islamist involvement in Muslim chaplain programs.
The Muslim chaplaincy services for the military and prisons were started by Abdurrahman Alamoudi, who was convicted in 2003 on terrorism-related charges. He later admitted that he was a secret member of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood.
ISNA is one of the groups that the U.S. military trusts to certify Muslim chaplains. The military’s former endorsing agent was Dr. Louay Safi, an unindicted co-conspirator in the trial of Palestinian Islamic Jihad leader Sami al-Arian. Safi, like Alamoudi, later admitted to having been a Brotherhood operative.
Safi wrote in 2003, “The war against the apostates [non-believers of Islam] is carried out not to force them to accept Islam, but to enforce the Islamic law and maintain order.”
He continued: “It is up to the Muslim leadership to assess the situation and weigh the circumstances as well as the capacity of the Muslim community before deciding the appropriate type of jihad. At one stage, Muslims may find that jihad through persuasion or peaceful resistance is the best and most effective method to achieve just peace.”
In 2004, he said that the “assertion by ‘world leaders’ that the war on terrorism is not a war on Islam is nothing but a piece of propaganda and disinformation that was meant to appease Western Muslims and to maintain the coalition against terrorism.”
He was later suspended from working on U.S. military bases because of a criminal investigation. Safi is now working with the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood.
Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, a Muslim activist opposed to Islamism who served in the U.S. Navy, wrote in 2010 that a friend of his in the U.S. Army recently told him of his troubling interaction with an active-duty Muslim chaplain.
His friend asked the imam what his response would be if a Muslim soldier asked him if Islam prevented him from participating in combat against fellow Muslims. The answer should have been easy: Serve your country as you swore to do. Instead, the imam said he’d tell the soldier that he’s not qualified to answer the question and to ask ISNA.
Former Defense Department Inspector-General Joseph Schmitz was alarmed enough by loopholes in the system of vetting chaplains that allowed extremist organizations like ISNA’s involvement that hewrote a letter in 2010 describing his efforts to close them. He revealed in 2004 that he urged the Pentagon to adopt a policy that would prevent extremist groups, Muslim or otherwise, from involvement in the chaplaincy program.
He said that a policy should disqualify groups that support violent sedition, have an endorsing agent with a criminal history, are on a terrorism watch-list or have leaders convicted on terrorism-related charges. The Armed Forces Chaplains Board rejected his advice because it was “legally problematic.”
Here’s what’s really “problematic”: The U.S. government says ISNA is a Muslim Brotherhood entity and labeled it an unindicted co-conspirator in a terrorism trial. That same government is using ISNA to pick military chaplains and is a top outreach partner of the U.S. government.
Fadi, a Syrian Christian Beheaded by Muslims for Wearing a Cross on His Necklace. Photo courtesy of: Shoebat.com
by, Theodore Shoebat | Shoebat.com | Fides News Agency
A Muslim gang in Syria seized a young Christian man and as soon as they spotted his Crucifix, they violently decapitated him and shoved his crucifix through his chest.
Here is the heart wrenching video of the victim’s mother recalling the deplorable and sadistic murder of her beloved son.
The police arrested the five terrorists who committed the murder (two of whom were not Syrian) and when they told the mother that they caught the killers of her son, she replied, “May the Lord forgive them.”
by, WND | h/t Creeping Sharia
The Justice Department has enough incriminating evidence to file terrorism charges against the Council on American-Islamic Relations and its founders but has chosen not to indict the Washington-based group and its leaders at this time, a veteran FBI agent reveals in a shocking new book.
“There is enough evidence to indict CAIR, but the government chose not to do so at this time,” said former FBI official John Guandolo, author of “Raising a Jihadi Generation: Understanding the Muslim Brotherhood Movement in America.”
He suggests the government balked at throwing the book at CAIR for political reasons.
CAIR has cultivated a number of political supporters, mainly among leading Democrats in Washington – including senior White House officials. Secret Service entry logs show CAIR officials have visited the White House several times during the Obama administration.
Despite its designation as an unindicted terrorist co-conspirator in 2007, the Muslim pressure group in recent years has successfully lobbied for changes in federal policies dealing with the war on terror. For example, CAIR took credit for helping persuade Attorney General Eric Holder to prohibit religious profiling in terror cases, a decision his department is expected to announce formally soon. It also played a key role in the Pentagon’s recent decision to change long-standing uniform rules to allow military personnel to wear Islamic beards and head coverings.
Moreover, a controversial new rule issued earlier this month by the departments of State and Homeland Security to relax U.S. immigration for Palestinian and other foreign “refugees” who have provided “limited” material support to terrorists also dovetails with CAIR lobbying.
Under the Bush administration, the Justice Department implicated CAIR in a criminal conspiracy to raise money for Hamas, a U.S.-designated terrorist group.
CAIR co-founder Omar Ahmad, aka Omar Yehya, was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the 2007-2008 Holy Land Foundation case. He and CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad remain under FBI investigation, senior FBI officials have confirmed in letters to Congress. Until their ties to Hamas are resolved, the FBI says it will not formally recognize CAIR as a Muslim outreach partner or meet with CAIR officials. The FBI has effectively banned CAIR pending the outcome of the probe.
Starting in the fall of 2008, Guandolo said, “the FBI cut off all ties with CAIR because of their ties to Hamas.”
He explains that CAIR was created in 1994 by the U.S. branch of Hamas, known as the “Palestine Committee,” to function as the “political arm” of the Palestinian terrorist group. A year before founding the front group, Ahmad and Awad had attended a secret meeting with “senior leaders of Hamas” at a Philadelphia hotel that was bugged by the FBI. An internal FBI memo written by the former head of the FBI’s counterterrorism division describes “all attendees” of the meeting – including Ahmad and Awad – as “Hamas members,” Guandolo points out.
“CAIR was the fourth organization created by Hamas to recruit jihadis, raise money and gain media favor for Hamas in America,” Guandolo said, adding that phone books, organizational charts, secret manifestos written in Arabic and other documents the FBI has seized indicate Awad and Ahmad were in leadership positions in the U.S. Palestine Committee prior to the creation of CAIR.
“CAIR is Hamas,” Guandolo flatly states.
Since 9/11, several CAIR officials – including senior officials working in the group’s national office located within blocks of the U.S. Capitol – have been convicted or deported on terrorism-related charges.
CAIR denies any ties to terrorism and slams Guandolo as an “Islamophobe” who seeks to deny constitutional rights for Muslim-Americans.
In a headline posted on the home page of its website, CAIR maintains that Guandolo once said “mosques have no right to exist,” but that claim disappears when visitors click on the headline and go to the full statement. CAIR never sources or supports the claim.
Guandolo says it’s a typical “smear tactic” of CAIR.
A graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy as well as the U.S. Army Ranger School, Guandolo joined the FBI in 1996 after resigning his commission in the Marine Corps, where he served as a commander in Iraq and Bosnia.
After the 9/11 attacks, Guandolo was assigned to the counter-terrorism division of the FBI’s Washington field office where he investigated U.S. front groups for the radical Muslim Brotherhood and its Palestinian branch, Hamas. In 2006, Guandolo developed the FBI’s first counter-terrorism training program focusing on the global Islamic jihad movement. He was designated a “subject matter expert” by FBI headquarters.
In 2007, Guandolo was presented the “Defender of the Homeland” award by U.S. Sens. Joseph Lieberman and John Kyl. Before resigning from the FBI in December 2008, Guandolo twice received the United States Attorneys Award for Investigative Excellence. He served on the bureau’s SWAT team as well as its surveillance unit.
He now works as a counter-terrorism and security consultant for law enforcement, the intelligence community and the military. He also teaches at the Joint Forces Staff College and the U.S. Army War College.
In 2011, Guandolo delivered a three-day seminar on counter-terrorism to members of the FBI’s National Joint Terrorism Task Force and several other federal agencies at Marine headquarters in Virginia.
On the left is the Armenian Catholic Church of the Martyrs in Raqa, Syria on September 16, 2013 with the cross. On the right is the same church on September 28, with the cross removed and the ISIL Islamic flag on top. (AFP Photo/Mohammed Abdul Aziz). Photo courtesy of: Yahoo News
by, AFP | Yahoo News
A jihadist group in Syria said Wednesday that Christians in the city of Raqa will have to pay taxes and hold religious rituals behind closed doors, under a set of rules.
The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), listed 12 rules which made up an “agreement” with Christians in the northern city to provide “protection.”
The terms, bearing the stamp of ISIL which controls Raqa, were distributed on jihadist forums.
They include a provision that Christians must pay a “jiziyeh” tax, as imposed in early Islam on non-Muslim subjects.
It said wealthy Christians must pay up the equivalent of 13 grams (half an ounce) of pure gold, that middle-class Christians pay half that sum, while the poor pay a quarter.
The agreement also demands Christians “do not put on display a cross or anything from their book, anywhere on Muslims’ path or markets” and that they should not “use megaphones to make their prayers heard.”
Christians must also refrain from “holding any of their rituals… outside the church.”
The jihadist group demands that Christians follow “rules imposed by ISIL, such as those relating to modesty in clothing.”
ISIL is rooted in Al-Qaeda in Iraq, which also imposed the jiziyeh tax on Christians after the US-led invasion of 2003.
Raqa was once home to some 300,000 people, and less than one percent were Christian. Many Christians fled the city after ISIL started attacking and burning churches.
ISIL also said that Christians “must not restore any monasteries or churches… in their city or elsewhere in the vicinity.”
Christians must not carry arms, it said, warning that offenders of the rules would suffer “the fate that the people of war and rebellion faced.”
ISIL is accused of holding scores of people prisoner, including peaceful activists, rival rebels, foreign journalists and aid workers.
It is facing an all-out war by rival anti-regime forces in other parts of Syria.
by, Aaron Dykes and Melissa Melton | Truth Stream Media | h/t Alt-Market.com
The Declaration of Independence boldly states:
“When a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”
Thomas Jefferson, writing on behalf of the independent-minded colonists in 1776, backed up the Declaration’s conclusion with numerous examples of British tyranny, stating: “To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.”
Compare them to the United States and global system we live under today.
Are we now free? Examine the balance of power between individuals, endowed with natural rights by God, and government, Constitutionally bound to only limited powers, as well as the leading corporations of the private sector.
A 1946 national archive film released by Encyclopedia Britannica titled “Despotism” outlines several yardsticks for measuring the balance of power of a free society and that of an outright a despotism, according to scales of respect, power, economic distribution and information. Concentrated power and wealth, centralized information and monopolistic or oligopolistic control in any one of these areas tends to negatively affect the others, and renders freedom a mere illusion.
“Look beyond fine words and noble phrases,” the analyst in the archive film warns. The rhetoric of freedom in America or anywhere else on planet Earth is irrelevant if the power, wealth and opportunity resides in the hands of just a few, or worse a single entity. By any yardstick, society today is very far gone; the once free United States of America is far down the path of dictatorship, though it keeps wrapped in the stars and stripes of the flag and the lofty words of its founding ideals.
Now what? It is the duty of free people to seek and demand a better society once again.
by, Investor’s Business Daily
Immigration: As President Obama offers asylum to “minor” terrorists providing “limited” material support to terrorism, he’s slamming shut the door on thousands of Christians fleeing terrorism in Muslim lands like Egypt.
In another end-run around Congress, President Obama has unilaterally eased immigration requirements for foreigners linked to terrorism.
He ordered the State Department and Homeland Security to ignore a post-9/11 law barring entry to those giving political or charitable aid to Hamas and other known terrorist groups.
A dozen years after the horrific attacks on our nation by foreign Islamic terrorists, the Obama administration has decided a little support to foreign Islamic terrorists is OK.
Treasonous as it sounds, the president is following through on a little-noticed overture he made to Muslims in his Cairo speech of 2009, when he suggested he’d relax enforcement of material support laws involving “zakat,” or Islamic charitable giving.
He basically apologized for the Bush administration’s locking up the founders of the largest Muslim charity in America for sending millions to “zakat committees” linked to Hamas.
Of course, his move weakens, yet again, America’s security. By exempting five kinds of limited material support for terrorism, Obama instantly purges more than 4,000 suspects from the U.S. terror watch list and opens our borders up to both them and their families.
Not to worry, Homeland Security says, it’ll run additional security checks before letting them in.
Oh? Like the checks run on the Tsarnaev family, who also got into the country on asylum claims? Those security checks?
Forgive the survivors and the families of those who died in the Boston bombings if they’re not reassured.
Taking a chance on foreign nationals already suspected of aiding and abetting terrorists only puts Americans at greater risk. Yet the president is ordering immigration authorities to ignore red flags.
He suggests too many innocent Muslims seeking a better life here, including Palestinian “refugees,” have been “unfairly” excluded by Draconian post-9/11 immigration laws. Says who? Islamist lobbyist groups, such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations, who claim Palestinian terrorists are “freedom fighters”?
At the same time Obama opens the floodgates to them, he’s closing our borders to Christians fleeing persecution by Muslims in Egypt, Iraq and other Mideast countries.
Displaced Palestinians have plenty of places they can resettle in the Mideast.
The options for Christians, on the other hand, are limited. The U.S. may be their best chance for refuge from violence and for religious freedom.
Yet the State Department has rejected virtually all of the 20,000 asylum applications from Coptic Christians trying to escape Egypt since the toppling of its pro-American regime.
Meanwhile, it’s welcoming terrorist supporters pushed out by Cairo’s renewed military crackdown on the Brotherhood.
Thanks to Obama’s new rule, these escaping Islamist troublemakers will be able to set up shop inside America and practice their jihadism with virtual impunity.
If the president doesn’t like rampant rumors he’s a “secret Muslim,” or that he’s doing the bidding of his Muslim Brotherhood-tied brother Malik, he should stop making sympathetic gestures that feed them.
Louis Farrakhan, racist Muslim and anti-Semitic Jew hater. Photo courtesy of: AP/Paul Beaty and The Times of Israel
by, JTA | The Times of Israel | h/t Blazing CatFur
Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, saying “I don’t hate Jewish people,” denied he was anti-Semitic during an address to the group’s annual convention.
Farrakhan, who is known for his diatribes against the Jews, in his three-hour speech on Sunday night in Detroit compared himself to auto magnate Henry Ford, saying that Ford was “a great man who was called an anti-Semite.”
“I feel like I’m in good company,” Farrakhan told a crowd of about 18,000 at Joe Louis Arena, the Detroit Free Press reported.
“I don’t hate Jewish people … what I hate is evil,” he also said, adding that “Satan is in control of Hollywood,” as well as TV, the media and money.
Responding to Farrakhan’s speech, Heidi Budaj, Michigan regional director of the Anti-Defamation League, told the Detroit Free Press, “Expressing pride for being called anti-Semitic is shameful. A person in this day and age should be ashamed to say that.”
Farrakhan also reprimanded Muslims for fighting among themselves in the Middle East, saying they were killing each other for “America” and the “European infidel.”
He said that if the United States launched a war on Iran, “we ain’t fighting. We’re not killing no Muslims for these infidels.”
Farrakhan also touched on other topics, such as the African-American community separating from the rest of the world in order to better their lives and reinvesting in Detroit.
Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam on Jews:
by, Brandon Smith | Alt-Market | h/t French News & Flaming FurBalls
As I have confessed in the past, in my early years I found myself active in the Democratic Party and the general liberal methodology. I had no understanding of the concept of the false left/right paradigm. I had no inkling of the dangers of globalism and central banking. I had no concept of decentralization or non-participation. I had never even heard of libertarianism. I knew only that George W. Bush was a criminal (and I was right), but the problem went far deeper than the GOP. I was astoundingly ignorant of the bigger picture.
However, what I did have going for me was an almost violent sense of nonconformity. I hated collectivists, yet I found myself surrounded by them while working within the leftist culture. It was the insanity of self-proclaimed “liberals” that taught me the true nature of the facade of politics. When I realized that the Democrats were essentially the same corrupt entity as the neoconservatives, everything in my life changed.
One aspect of liberalism with which I am now very familiar is political correctness. I didn’t understand it at the time, not until I stepped outside the cultism of it and looked in from a wiser place. It always bothered me, but I couldn’t quite grasp why until later. Then, it hit me like a revelation. Political correctness was not a political ideology. No, it was a religion, a full-fledged spiritual con, a New Age ghetto of frothing mishmash that is sociological voodoo. And the leftists were eating it up like steak night at an all-you-can-eat buffet.
These people were rationally retarded. Every idea they proposed they merely parroted from books and articles they had read. They were like malfunctioning automatons trapped in a cycle of discontented social criticism. Their desperation to invent meaning in the midst of their irrelevant lives made me feel ill. If they could not find a legitimate cause to champion, they would create one out of thin air and defend it relentlessly, regardless of how shallow it truly was.
When I outline my analysis of economic destabilization within the United States or I write about the rise of the police state, I am driven by a fundamental sense of concrete concern. There are indeed real problems in the world, swirling in a storm of obvious factual conflicts. But the warriors of the PC culture don’t see any of it. Rather, they fantasize about injustices that don’t exist, trespasses that are ultimately fictional. They imagine themselves champions of some greater purpose that, in the end, doesn’t matter.
Recently, I read a news story about a “transgendered teen” in Maine. When the boy was in the fifth grade, he decided to dress as a girl and demanded to use the girl’s bathroom at his public school, despite having the biological apparatus of a male. This story was international news, folks! Why? I can’t say, except that the mainstream media have made a point to focus on “gender optional” issues as if they represent some kind of civil rights uprising.
The issue perfectly illustrates the disturbing nature of politically correct culture.
Teachers at the school did not deny the student the use of restroom facilities. In fact, they allowed him to use the teacher’s bathrooms to avoid any confusion. The Maine Supreme Judicial Court, on the other hand, had other ideas. It ruled that the school’s refusal to allow theboy to use the girl’s facilities constituted a violation of the State’s anti-discrimination law. The ruling has been heralded as a massive victory for the politically correct narrative.
Now, let me make one thing clear: I could not care less about this boy’s sexual orientation (if he even has one). I do think the very idea that a fifth-grader at about the age of 10 is sexually conscious enough to develop a sense of gender dissuasion is absurd. Children who haven’t even experienced puberty yet, proclaiming they are transgendered? Utter nonsense. I find it far more likely that the student’s PC-obsessed parents influenced him to come to such a decision despite his naivety.
That said, a person’s sexual proclivities are not my concern. In fact, I have no interest whatsoever in the infatuations of any individual. That is a personal matter. I do not judge such people on their attractions. I do, though, judge people on how they handle their infatuations. What happens when someone wears his sexuality on his shoulder like a fashion accessory? Why is that even necessary? Is it not rather mentally backward for any person to base his public persona solely on his carnal compulsions? Do I dance around on the sidewalk bellowing to strangers how much I love the curves of women? Do I require a sociopolitical legal apparatus to vindicate my existence? Do I feel the need to shame gay people into publicly embracing my straight man’s libido? No, I do not.
The PC culture demands that we, as individuals, openly accept the sexual orientations of anyone and everyone; otherwise, we are labeled prejudiced monsters. It is not enough that we object in a logical manner. No, we must fall to our knees and thank the stars for the very existence of gender chameleons.
In the end, the psychological gender position of any particular person does not overrule his biological features. A child with a penis is a boy. Period. He will never be a girl. Ever. Not without surgical aid. And even then, he will never have the ability to give birth, which is the very hallmark of femininity. (Sorry, feminists, but that’s how it goes.) A boy, no matter his mental orientation, does not belong in a girl’s lavatory. The privacy rights of the girls outweigh the gender confusion of the boy. If I were a girl (why not play some gender games since everyone else is), I would beat the living hell out of any boy gallivanting in a dress in a bathroom I was using and make sure he never dared come back. And, by extension, if I were a rather mischievous boy with an aptitude as a peeping tom, why not dress up in a tutu in the hopes of getting a glimpse of the forbidden while being legally protected by the State?
The warped conflicts that arise, though, are not the creation of the child in question. A fifth-grader has no concept of gender rights or political correctness. This issue was a creation of the PC cult and its acolytes. These people don’t actually care about the children they involve in their legal dramas. They exploit them, with every intent to abandon them once they have chiseled their agenda into the gray matter of every American.
What truly motivates these people? Why do they do what they do? I think my experience with leftists makes me a well-positioned observer of the psychology of the culture. Here are the hidden thought processes I have witnessed while dealing directly with the PC army.
The History of Political Correctness (Complete)
One of the unfortunate side effects of religion is that proponents often use it as a means to feel superior to others. I have seen it in Christianity as much as I have seen it in any other belief system. It is the primary reason why I refuse to subscribe to organized and establishment-sanctioned spiritualism. Religion should be a personal experience first and foremost, not an easy way to fit in with the collective. Communing with others who share one’s beliefs should be secondary. Hypocritically, politically correct adherents often criticize Christians for their collectivist elitism while suffering from the same problem themselves.
PC culture allows participants to pretend as though they have some greater understanding of the world, an elevated knowledge of life that makes them superior to the uninitiated. It is important to understand that when a person pursues the methodology of zealotry, he doesn’t do it to make the world a better place; he does it to feel better about his place in the world.
The politically correct are so violent in the assertion of their ideals because they crave the subjugation of the mainstream and a recognition of their “rightness.” They don’t want people to “accept” their beliefs as tolerable. They want people to adore their beliefs as supreme. They want every man, woman and child to reinforce their ideals without question.
The malfunction of this philosophy is that zealots are never finished. They must always find new ways to feel superior to others. So they continuously engineer new taboos and new sins, no matter how ridiculous, so that they can forever look down upon the laymen. Because of this, there will never be an end to PC law. It will go on forever, labeling numerous social interactions and stances as “aberrant” — never satiated and never satisfied.
The young are always searching for ways to feel wiser than the old. This is just the natural way of things, at least in America. Now, I know from ample experience that age does not necessarily denote intelligence. I’ve met plenty of idiotic people who had decades of time to learn from their mistakes but didn’t. But the young, many of whom lack time and struggle, have a terrible tendency to either pretend that they have “seen it all.” Or they pretend that the very atmosphere of the day somehow gives them a greater insight than generations past. The reality is that most of them know very little of import. This attitude comes from a philosophy called “futurism” (popular with the Nazis and the Soviets), which holds that all the beliefs and discoveries of the past mean nothing compared to the beliefs and discoveries of the present. This ideology is alluring to the young, because it gives them a way to feel intellectually dominant over older and more “ignorant” people who are “behind the times.”
Political correctness is basically an appendage of futurism. By labeling elders as social bigots and products of a barbaric era who don’t understand the “lingo” of the PC elite, liberalism draws in and collectivizes the fledgling left. Younger generations are given a cultural avenue toward high priesthood, a right of passage usually reserved for the aged. They get to skip ahead past all the trials and tribulations of life and announce their deep awareness of the so-called greater good.
The values of forefathers past become archaic scrawlings of racist and prejudiced cavemen who could never appreciate the “brilliance” of today’s academia. The inherent freedoms of natural law that have existed since time began are nothing more than obstacles to them, standing in the way of a new and better world where they have somehow outsmarted human instinct and centuries of history.
The very foundation of political correctness is solidified in a desire for the perpetual reinforcement of one’s worldview. PC people need every other person around them to sing the praises of their pure virtues. If I happen to disagree with the idea of gender bending, for instance, as some kind of socially persecuted subculture that needs overt government protection, then I am, of course, labeled a hateful Neanderthal. If I stand in opposition to the concept of victim group status in general, in which the state demands that designated “minorities” be given special treatment regardless of the status of the individual, then I become a racist political fossil ignorant of the bigger picture. You see, if you disagree with PC culture in any way (even if that way is rational), you cannot win. To refute political correctness is to refute the god of the New Age; and to refute their god, even with concrete logic, is blasphemy.
This kind of blind faith in political correctness lends itself entirely to collectivism. The average person begins to think that without a viable appreciation of the philosophy, he may be left out or cast aside. Most people do not know how to function without the approval of others. Therefore, even if a father happens to have a healthy skepticism over the idea of a make-up wearing fifth-grade boy waltzing into his daughter’s school bathroom, he is likely to keep his mouth shut, because to speak out would be a risk to his position within the group, or the community.
The prevalence of PC philosophy is not subtle. I have always found it interesting that political correctness seems to consistently support the demands of the state. Our system smothers children with it in public school, our workplaces are rife with the propaganda for fear of lawsuits and colleges are veritable breeding grounds for the PC oligarchy. Politically correct culture goes out of its way to constantly test others to make sure they are also true believers.
The truth is some discrimination is healthy, and some discord is needed for a society to remain balanced. As long as we don’t allow our disagreements to end in the physical harm of others, then those disagreements are our natural-born right. If you are a racist (this goes for non-whites as well), that’s fine. Just don’t act out your racism in a violent way around me, or I will have to put you down permanently. If you have a distaste of homosexuality (or asexuality, as seems popular nowadays), then whatever, I don’t care. You shouldn’t have to have organizations like GLAAD (formerly the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) in your face attempting to force you to put on a smile for gaydom, coordinate man-on-man heavy-petting protests in your favorite restaurant (Chick-fil-A) while you’re trying to eat a damn sandwich, push boys into the girl’s bathroom, or trying to shut down your favorite TV shows because the stars happen to share your views (“Duck Dynasty”).
Now, PC proponents will argue that the very existence of bigotry does harm to society as a whole, and it must be educated out of individuals. Frankly, I see that kind of utopian fascism as a far greater threat to society as a whole than bigotry ever will be.
Look at where we are today because of the PC nightmare! We have a Nation on the verge of industrial and economic collapse, partly because companies are forced by law or persuaded by government subsidies to hire people with victim group status, even if they are unqualified, while ignoring highly qualified people who just happen to have lighter skin. We have children not even old enough to discover their own inherent character being clinically diagnosed with “gender dysphoria” by a psychiatric community of quacks, which conjured most PC terminology out of thin air. We have boys who are told that they are stunted for acting out their natural male impulses and girls who are told that true femininity is weakness and that they should act more masculine. We have a mainstream culture that coddles and infantilizes young adults, young girls who think promiscuity is the key to womanhood and that motherhood is disgusting (which I find rather ironic), and young men who have no testicular fortitude and no clue how to take charge of their own lives.
The American family unit has been completely destroyed. We have women who are ashamed to set aside careers to raise children because feminism frowns upon “breeders” who bring down the whole gender. We have men who abandon their children and refuse to take responsibility. And we have a weak-minded population addicted to collective affirmation and unwilling to think outside the box for fear of being shunned and shamed. Honestly, I can’t see a single redeeming quality to political correctness other than the fact that those people who espouse it do so loudly and obnoxiously, making it easier for me to identify and avoid them or to take special note of them as an obvious zombie threat in an America swiftly declining into mundane oblivion.
by. Ben Shapiro | Breitbart
Last week, Reporters Without Borders dropped America in the World Press Freedom Index 2014 from 33rd to 46th. James Risen of The New York Times rightly explained, “I think 2013 will go down in history as the worst year for press freedom in the United States’ modern history.” And he’s right. The violation of press freedoms has been egregious under this administration, even as the press fetes President Obama as an honest and effective commander-in-chief.
Selective Access. President Obama has regularly granted special access to reporters who give him preferential coverage. CBS’ Steve Kroft admitted as much after a late-2012 interview with the President during which CBS clipped Obama’s explicit refusal to label Benghazi an act of terror: “(Obama) knows that we’re not going to play ‘gotcha’ with him, that we’re not going to go out of our way to make him look bad or stupid.”
Michael Lewis, author of Moneyball, got special access for a profile of Obama for Vanity Fair – but Obama insisted on redlining his quotes. Lewis explained that “the White House insisted on signing off on the quotes that would appear.” A reporter from the San Francisco Chronicle was threatened for covering an anti-Obama protest. As early as 2008, candidate Obama was kicking dissenters off planes after their outlets endorsed John McCain.
Targeting Reporters. In May 2013, the Associated Press dropped the bombshell that the Department of Justice had grabbed phone records for its reporters and editors of the course of two months. Records for 20 telephone lines belonging to the AP and reporters for it were seized between April and May of 2012. Those seizures affected over 100 journalists.
The AP’s President and CEO Gary Pruitt stated, “There can be no possible justification for such an overbroad collection of the telephone communications of The Associated Press and its reporters.” Fox News’ James Rosen was also targeted by the DOJ after running a story about North Korea nuclear development. His State Department visits were tracked and his movements were followed. His parents’ phone records were even grabbed.
In its first report on press freedom in the United States, the Committee to Protect Journalists warns President Obama has ushered in a paralyzing climate of fear for both reporters and their government sources. Among the cases it details: Six government employees — plus two contractors, including Edward Snowden — have faced felony criminal prosecutions since 2009 under the 1917 Espionage Act for leaking classified information to the press, compared just three such prosecutions in all previous U.S. administrations.
The Department of Justice has also secretly subpoenaed and seized Associated Press reporter’s phone logs and emails, and New York Times reporter James Risen was ordered to testify against a former CIA officer who provided leaked information to him, or go to jail. We speak to the report’s author, Leonard Downie Jr., former executive editor of The Washington Post. He spoke with dozens of journalists who told him officials are “reluctant to discuss even unclassified information … because they fear that leak investigations and government surveillance make it more difficult for reporters to protect them as sources.”
Placing FCC Monitors in Newsrooms. Last week, FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai revealed in the pages of the Wall Street Journal that the FCC will be sending employees into media workplaces to monitor how and what stories are chosen. The goal: to “ferret out information from television and radio broadcasters” concerning “the process by which stories are selected.”
Pai explained, the FCC “plans to ask station managers, news directors, journalists, television anchors and on-air reporters to tell the government about their ‘news philosophy’ and how the station ensures that the community gets critical information.” Reporters will also be asked whether their stories were killed by management in an effort to elicit “specifics about how editorial discretion is exercised, as well as the reasoning behind the decision.”
Refusing to Answer Questions. President Obama held fewer press conferences than any president since Reagan. He held ten less than George W. Bush, 54 less than President Clinton, and 64 less than George H.W. Bush. And during those press conferences, questions were largely scripted and chosen. He held just 107 Q&As with the press during his first term, as compared with 354 by George W. Bush. In fact, Obama considers tough questions “unfair,” as he told Bill O’Reilly during his pre-Super Bowl interview.
Refusing to Comply With Freedom of Information Act Requests. According to Bloomberg News, Freedom of Information Act compliance under the Obama administration has been abysmal. Bloomberg reported that “19 of 20 federal agencies did not comply within 20 days to a request for travel expenses made under the Freedom of Information Act.” Obama’s record on FOIA requests in his first two years was worse than George W. Bush’s in his last three – an odd pattern, given that administrations tend to tighten up on transparency as time goes on. When Obama was given an award for open government, it was not open to the press.
Here are Obama’s stats: 38.4% denied in 2009, 37.7% denied in 2010, 35.3% denied in 2011. In his last three years, Bush’s stats were 23.5%, 24%, and 40.6%. In 2009, the Obama administration asked Judicial Watch to praise the administration’s transparency, but then refused to hand over Secret Service logs Judicial Watch requested. The Obama administration has said that documents about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not subject to FOIA.
The White House Propaganda Machine. The White House infamously put restrictions on journalists taking some videos and photos of the President, but has simultaneously released administration-produced content that is little more than propaganda. In November 2013, news organizations sent the administration a letter protesting the treatment: “As surely as if they were placing a hand over a journalist’s camera lens, officials in this administration are blocking the public from having an independent view of important functions of the executive branch of government.”
The Obama administration’s actions, the letter stated, have “a direct and adverse impact on the public’s ability to independently monitor and see what its government is doing.” The letter asked news organizations to stop using White House produced photos. The White House banned independent photos of events including a meeting between Obama and black faith leaders and between Israeli and Palestinian negotiators and Vice President Joe Biden, as well as a meeting with Hillary Clinton. AP executive editor Kathleen Carroll stated, “are now recorded only by photographers who work directly for the White House, resulting in images that are little more than visual press releases.” The White House also prefers to use non-profit group Media Matters to distribute its spin on the news.
Prosecution of Whistleblowers. The Obama administration is the leakiest administration in history. The IRS leaked information about a conservative 501(c)3’s donors; Joe Biden leaked the identity of the team responsible for killing Bin Laden; the Obama administration leaked information about Israeli national security repeatedly in order to prevent an Israeli strike on Iran, among other major leaks. But when it comes to prosecuting press members for cooperating with whistleblowers, the Obama administration’s use of the Espionage Act has been historically heavyhanded.
In 2009, the Justice Department initiated an investigation into James Rosen, after which Attorney General Eric Holder lied, “With regard to potential prosecution of the press for the disclosure of material: that is not something I’ve ever been involved in, heard of or would think would be wise policy.” Overall, the administration has used the Espionage Actsix times to prosecute whistleblowers. Leonard Downie of The Washington Post wrote in October 2013, “The war on leaks and other efforts to control information are the most aggressive I’ve seen since the Nixon administration.”
The Obama administration has been curtailing press freedom – but that hasn’t ended the press’ drool-cup worship for their beloved president. Despite occasional flare-ups, the relationship between the Obama White House and its press lackeys remains strong. Which is not only a testament to the tyrannical tendencies of the Obama administration, but to the cowardice of those who cover it.
Former FBI agent John Guandolo’s counterterrorism seminar is taking fire from a Muslim group. Photo courtesy of: Watchdog.org
by, Kenric Ward | Watchdog.org
CULPEPER, Va. – The Culpeper County Sheriff’s Office is hosting a counterterrorism program conducted by a controversial formerFBI agent – and catching flak for it.
John Guandolo, the presenter, was branded a ”notorious anti-Muslim conspiracy theorist” by the Council on American-Islamic Relations.
CAIR urged Culpeper Sheriff Scott Jenkins to disinvite Guandolo and distance his department from the “Jihadi Networks in America”program, which is billed as “Advanced Counterterrorism Training.”
Sheriff Jenkins told Watchdog.org that 20 staffers from his office will attend the seminar Feb. 25-27 at the Culpeper campus of Germanna Community College.
Tickets are $225 per person. Because his department is hosting the event, Jenkins said staffers would “receive a discounted rate.” He did not specify the savings.
As for Guandolo, Jenkins said “his expenses are his responsibility.”
Sheriff Scott Jenkins says Sheriff’s Office staffers will attend the counterterrorism seminar at a discounted rate.Photo courtesy of: Watchdog.org
Gearing his Culpeper program to “law enforcement, U.S. military and national security pros,” Guandolo told Watchdog that the conference is closed to the media and general public. He said he will conduct a public program in Fairfax in March.
The Southern Poverty Law Center, a liberal activist organization that monitors so-called “hate groups,” has its sights on Guandolo.
“It’s hard to believe that the Culpeper County Sheriff’s Office would knowingly associate itself with such a disreputable character,” said the SPLC’s Josh Glasstetter.
Guandolo, who authored the book, “Raising a Jihadi Generation,” describes himself as a “counterterrorism expert.”
But Corey Saylor, director of Washington, D.C.-based CAIR’s Department to Monitor and Combat Islamophobia, counters:
“Mr. Guandolo has a lengthy record of anti-Muslim extremism and unprofessional behavior. His views on Islam are the equivalent of historical anti-Catholic and anti-Semitic falsehoods. Guandolo offers only his own prejudiced and inaccurate conspiratorial views, not solid counterterrorism training.”
Glasstetter alleged that Guandolo “regularly attacks the U.S. government, claims that the director of the Central Intelligence Agency is a secret Muslim agent for the Saudi government and says that American Muslims ‘do not have a First Amendment right to do anything.’”
Former FBI Agent: US Infiltrated at Highest Levels
FBI documents obtained by Clarion confirm the find and show the U.S. government’s concern about its links to terrorism.
by, Ryan Mauro | The Clarion Project | h/t Halal Pork Shop
A Clarion Project investigation has discovered a jihadist enclave in Texas where a deadly shooting took place in 2002. Declassified FBI documents obtained by Clarion confirm the find and show the U.S. government’s concern about its links to terrorism. The investigation was completed with help from ACT! For America Houston.
The enclave belongs to the network of Muslims of the Americas, a radical group linked to a Pakistani militant group called Jamaat ul-Fuqra. Its members are devoted followers of Sheikh Mubarak Ali Gilani, an extremist cleric in Pakistan.
Muslims of the Americas
The organization says it has a network of 22 “villages” around the U.S., with Islamberg as its main headquarters in New York. The Clarion Project obtained secret MOA footage showing female members receiving paramilitary training at Islamberg. It was featured on the Kelly File on FOX News Channel in October. A second MOA tape released by Clarion shows its spokesman declaring the U.S. to be a Muslim-majority country.
A 2007 FBI record states that MOA members have been involved in at least 10 murders, one disappearance, three firebombings, one attempted firebombing, two explosive bombings and one attempted bombing. It states:
“The documented propensity for violence by this organization supports the belief the leadership of the MOA extols membership to pursue a policy of jihad or holy war against individuals or groups it considers enemies of Islam, which includes the U.S. Government. Members of the MOA are encouraged to travel to Pakistan to receive religious and military/terrorist training from Sheikh Gilani.”
The document also says that, “The MOA is now an autonomous organization which possesses an infrastructure capable of planning and mounting terrorist campaigns overseas and within the U.S.”
Other FBI reports describe the MOA in similar ways, with a 2003 file stating, “Investigation of the Muslims of the Americas is based on specific and articulate facts giving justification to believe they are engaged in international terrorism…”
MOA members believe the holiest Islamic site in the country is located at their Islamville commune in South Carolina. Other MOA entities include the International Quranic Open University, United Muslim Christian Forum, Islamic Post, Muslim Veterans of America and American Muslim Medical Relief Team.
Terror Enclave: “Mahmoudberg, Texas”
The MOA compound in Texas, described by the FBI as an “enclave” and “communal living site,” is in Brazoria county along County Road 3 near Sweeny. It was discovered by the FBI due to a tip from an informant in New York.
The MOA referred to its Texas commune as “Mahmoudberg” in online instructions for a parade in New York in 2010. A posting on an Islamic message board in 2005 advertised a speaking engagement in Houston by someone from Mahmoudberg.
According to the reports, the commune is seven to 10 acres large, is in an “extremely wooded area” and two or three trailer homes moved there in December 2001. However, ACT members visited the area as part of Clarion’s investigation and interviewed one nearby local who confidently said it is closer to 25 acres in size and spoke of a presence dating back to the late 1980s.
“The area is so rural it is quite common for residents to shoot firearms for target practice or hunting on private property without interference from law enforcement,” one FBI report states.
Locals told the ACT members that they have shells found in the area of MOA’s ‘Mahmoudberg’ enclave in Texas heard gunfire coming from the commune.
Shells found in the area of the Muslims of the Americas’ ‘Mahmoudberg’ enclave in Texas
The FBI reported in 2007 that one commune resident used to be a leader at the MOA commune in Badger, California. The site was called“Baladullah.” In March 2001, one of the Baladullah members was arrested for transporting guns between New York and South Carolina. Another was charged with murdering a police deputy that caught him breaking and entering a home.
Interviewed residents all agreed that the MOA members are private, yet when the ACT members were spotted in the area, they were immediately and repeatedly approached. At one point, a commune resident gave them a final warning to leave, despite the fact that they were not trespassing or harassing MOA members.
“It was definitely very threatening and menacing,” an ACT member told me.
Multiple sources confirmed that one resident of the commune is a police officer. According to a nearby neighbor, one of the MOA members used to drive trucks for the U.S. Army in Kuwait.
The commune is also linked to a non-profit called the Muslim Model Community of Texas. Members travel to Houston to worship at the MOA Dawah Center that is linked to another organization called First Muslims of Texas.
The 2002 Shooting Incident
One of the MOA members was shot and killed by another member on February 7, 2002 between 11-11:30 p.m. according to the FBI documents and a police report.
The victim was Salminma Dawood, also known as Terrance C. Davis III. His death was reportedly an accident, having been shot by another MOA member who “returned gunfire to unknown individuals who were harassing the MOA commune.”
Law enforcement reported encountering about a dozen African-American males at the scene, approximately five of whom lived at the commune. The investigators saw an estimated seven women and children who also resided there.
The police were denied access to the trailer homes and were not allowed to directly interview the women, who covered their faces in their presence. Communication with the women had to be done by passing notes through a male intermediary.
Locals told the ACT members that government investigators had visited the area a few times and the commune residents refused to talk to them. According to one local, two ambulances were denied entry earlier this year until the police intervened. A search of the Brazoria county criminal records shows that two residents of Mahmoudberg were arrested in April 2013 and charged with “interference with public duties.” The trial is pending.
More MOA Activity in Texas
The MOA presence in Texas is not limited to the Mahmoudberg commune near Sweeny. As mentioned, the MOA utilizes a dawah(outreach) center in Houston for activities. The declassified FBI documents show that the extremist group has been in Texas since the 1980s.
On October 11, 1991, a federal search warrant for three suspects was issued after a MOA/Jamaat-ul-Fuqra bomb plot in Toronto was foiled. A nearly 45-acre “compound” about 70 miles south of Dallas was raided. The location may have been near Corsicana, as another FBI document mentions that about seven MOA members purchased property in that area.
The suspects managed to flee on October 5-6 before the raid took place. Their children also suddenly disappeared from school. The feds found four mobile homes, three military, general-purpose tents and six vehicles. Loose ammunition, books on counter-terrorism techniques and weaponry and various items with “Jamaat Fuqra Land” written on them were discovered.
They also found surveillance photos of a post office building and the Greenhead Station in Los Angeles, leading authorities to suspect that attacks on these sites were planned.
MOA activities in Texas continued after the October 1991 raid. Two FBI documents from 1992 mention that MOA members in the state were using false aliases, social security numbers and birth certificates.
Why is MOA Allowed to Operate?
The FBI documents obtained by the Clarion Project clearly identify MOA as a terrorist organization. The Department of Homeland Security privately agreed in 2005, listing Jamaat ul-Fuqra (and specifically MOA) as a possible sponsor of a terrorist attack on the U.S.
So why is MOA/JUF allowed to operate in the country?
The answer is that the State Department has not designated MOA/Jamaat ul-Fuqra as a Foreign Terrorist Organization. The group is thus permitted to organize in the U.S. until that happens. Yet, the State Department has also recognized the group’s terroristic agenda.
In 1998, the State Department’s Patterns of Global Terrorism reportdescribed Jamaat ul-Fuqra as an “Islamic sect that seeks to purify Islam through violence.” It said that Fuqra members engaged in assassinations and bombings in the U.S. in the 1980s and still live in “isolated rural compounds” in the country.
A State Department spokesperson was asked in January 2002 about why MOA stopped appearing in the Department’s annual terrorism reports. The answer was as follows:
“Jamaat ul-Fuqra has never been designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization. It was included in several recent annual terrorism reports under ‘other terrorist groups,’ i.e., groups that had carried out acts of terrorism but that were not formally designated by the Secretary of State. However, because of the group’s inactivity during 2000, it was not included in the most recent terrorism report covering that calendar year.”
It has not appeared since. Yet, here we have FBI documents from as late as 2007 discussing the terrorist threat posed by MOA.
It’s long past due that the State Department be forced to address this obvious threat. The State Department must designate Jamaat ul-Fuqra as a Foreign Terrorist Organization before it’s too late.
Investigators inspect the apartment of a Syrian Christian family stabbed to death in the Egyptian city of Alexandria. (Photo courtesy of: al-Masry al-Youm)
6-Year-old Girl Found Stabbed to Death by Muslims
by, Dalit Halevy | Arutz Sheva 7
ALEXANDRIA, Egypr: Four members of a Christian family of Syrian origin living inAlexandria, Egypt, were stabbed to death Monday. A man was seen walking out of their apartment holding a black plastic bag.
The father of the family, 44, who was employed in one of Sharm el-Sheikh’s hotels, was found stabbed in the stomach, the chest and the shoulder. His 35-year-old wife was stabbed in the neck, and so was the husband’s 43-year-old sister. Their six-year-old daughter was also found murdered.
The attackers started a fire in the kitchen, in an apparent attempt to set the entire apartment aflame and destroy evidence.
The large Christian community in Egypt, which numbers about 10 million people, has increasingly been coming under attack from Muslims in the last few years. Many Christians have been murdered and wounded, and over 100 churches, homes and businesses owned by Christians have been attacked, with some being burned down.
The Egyptian regime has blamed the Muslim Brotherhood and other radical Islamist forces for these attacks.
Christian children injured from bombings in Nuba. Photo courtesy of: Free South Sudan Media Center
The Islamic Genocide of Christians in Sudan
by, Our Sudan Correspondent | Morning Star News | h/t ICC
The Sudanese Air Force bombed more civilians in South Kordofan state this week, murdering a Christian man and injuring a 13-year-old girl, an area source said.
As part of what area Christians believe is President Omar al-Bashir’s campaign to rid the country of Christianity and the ethnic Nuba people, a government jet on Monday (Feb. 10) dropped three bombs on Damardago village, killing a Christian identified only as 30-year-old Timotuos, the source said.
Timotuos was a member of the Sudanese Church of Christ, as are two others who sustained burns and other injuries in the bombing, 13-year-old Zaienab Jebril Turomba and 27-year-old Salim Kuku, according to the source, who requested anonymity. There is no military installation near the area, but Sudan has been bombing civilian populations it believes support the rebel Sudan Revolutionary Front (SRF) since 2011.
Sudan has ramped up bombings in the past few months; the 93 bombs dropped on civilian areas in December was more than the those of October and November combined, according to online news portal Nuba Reports. In January Sudan dropped at least 120 bombs on civilian populations, according to Nuba Reports, run by aid worker Ryan Boyette, who remained in South Kordofan after his Christian humanitarian organization was forced to evacuate when military conflict escalated in 2011.
The December spike in bombings came as civil war broke out in South Sudan, driving people in South Sudan refugee camps to return to Sudan.
“The ongoing violence threatens to permanently strand the displaced peoples between two civil wars,” according to Nuba Reports.
A Christian girl murdered by Muslims in Sudan. Photo courtesy of: Shoebat.com
Many of the bombs have hit Buram County, which includes the road to South Sudan’s Yida refugee camp, the news site notes.
On Jan. 27, bombing of Gendolo village in the Yabus area of Blue Nile state killed a Christian girl, 11-year-old Turki John Adam, and seriously injured her mother, Mamata Yama Bolu, according to ReliefWeb, a service of the U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs.
Sudan’s new Sukhoi-24 fighter jets, supplied by Belarus, are able to drop parachute bombs with more accuracy than standard bombs, according to Nuba Reports.
On Monday (Feb. 10) Sudan dropped a total of nine bombs in the Dar area of Buram County, South Kordofan, where there are no military installations. On Sunday (Feb. 9), worship services were disrupted in Heiban, in South Kordofan, when a Russian-made Antonov plane dropped six bombs that hit houses on the edge of town; the homes had already been deserted, the source told Morning Star News.
“The situation in the Nuba Mountains is very bad,” he said.
On Saturday (Feb. 8), Sudan dropped six bombs on the predominantly Christian area of Aberi in Dalami County, South Kordofan, at 11:30 a.m., the source said. Previously bombs have targeted markets and homes, but this time the bombs hit fields and houses, the source said, without reports of casualties.
A bomb attack on Nov. 17 killed two children in south Kordofan. On March 19, 2013, two civilians were killed and 12 seriously wounded when government planes dropped bombs on them (see Morning Star News, March 27).
Since April 2012 Sudan has dropped 1,491 bombs on civilians, according Nuba Reports. Since South Sudan split from Sudan in a 2011 referendum, Nuba people in Sudan’s South Kordofan state believe the government’s goal of quashing rebels is also meant to rid the area of non-Arabs and Christianity. Bashir has said post-secession Sudan will adhere more exclusively to Islam and Arabic culture.
Thousands of civilians have taken refuge in Nuba Mountain caves in South Kordofan, which borders South Sudan. The Nuba people have longstanding complaints against Khartoum – including neglect, oppression and forced conversions to Islam in a 1990s jihad – but as Sudanese citizens on the northern side of the border, they were never given the option of secession in the 2005 peace pact between northern and southern Sudan.
The rebels in the Nuba Mountains were formerly involved with the southern Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) forces fighting Khartoum before the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA). The growing rebel movement in the Nuba Mountains has sparked tensions, and Sudan reportedly bombed civilians in the South Sudan state of North Bahr El Ghazal on Nov. 20-22, 2012, killing seven.
Fighting between Sudan and South Sudan broke out in June 2011, when Khartoum forcefully attempted to disarm the SPLA-N in South Kordofan by force rather than awaiting a process of disarmament as called for in the CPA. When the CPA was signed in 2005, the people of South Kordofan were to vote on whether to join the north or the south, but the state governor suspended the process.
In a non-binding referendum in late October 2013, 99.9 percent of the people of the Abyei Area in South Kordofan voted to become part of South Sudan.
U.S. Taxpayer Funded Persecution of Christians: 2013 Report
by, J. Schuyler Montague | sharia unveiled
Open Doors / World Watch List recently released their annual list of the “Top 50 Nations” that persecute Christians. According to their findings, 9 of the top 10 countries on the list and 37 of the top 50 are Islamic nations. And this is nothing new when compared to previous years. What is new is that 2013 saw a doubling in the rate of Christian persecution by Muslims and 2014 is projected to be even worse. North Korea took the #1 position again for the 12th year straight and Syria moved up to the 3rd position.
We are not going to list all 50 here.. but this is a sample:
Country: $ Amount: Persecution Ranking:
Syria 1 Billion (+) 3
Iraq 2.045 Billion 4
Afghanistan 2.505 Billion 5
Pakistan 2.227 Billion 8
Sudan 460 Million 11
Nigeria 599 Million 14
Ethiopia 351 Million 17
Vietnam 103 Million 18
Egypt 1.563 Billion 22
Columbia 331 Million 25
Jordan 670 Million 26
India 96 Million 28
Palestinian Territories 440 Million 34
Kenya 459 Million 43
Indonesia 180 Million 47
Bangladesh 199 Million 48
Foreign aid to the far majority of these countries should end immediately. Every dollar we give should come with certain conditions attached:
1. Financial aid should only be given to countries for humanitarian purposes such as food, clothing and shelter. The money should also be managed and dispersed internally by representatives from the U.S.
2. There should be a 100% itemized accounting of every dollar spent by a foreign nation.
3. There should be a 365-day consecutive period without any persecution of religious minorities prior to the first dollar being sent.
4. The money should only be dispersed quarterly, not annually. At the first sign of persecution, the money should be frozen.
5. No foreign aid should be provided to any nation that engages in state-sponsored terrorism or permits terrorist organizations to operate inside their borders.
6. Prior to any foreign aid being given to a nation, all persons imprisoned for their faith should be released.
Jihad Migrating to Red States — With Obama’s Blessing
by, Nonie Darwish | Front Page Magazine | h/t Blazing CatFur
President Obama has unilaterally changed the immigration law to allow asylum-seekers and refugees who provided “limited material support” to terrorists, to immigrate to the US. This is happening at a time when force is being used in Egypt — and elsewhere in the Middle East — against the Muslim Brotherhood, the Salafis, terrorists and their sympathizers. This is a time when Islamists have few places to go to in the wide-open desert atmosphere of the Middle East, except perhaps to join the mess in Syria and Iraq, or otherwise reform and become ordinary citizens.
Obama could not have picked a worse time to ease immigration requirements for those linked to terror, and who have nowhere else to go and have suddenly found themselves, after the counter-revolution in Egypt, as targets for imprisonment, contempt, or even shooting.
Islamists are now undoubtedly celebrating Obama’s decision to ease the pressure on immigration of terror-linked individuals. Indeed, where else can they go to practice their fanaticism and find newly found respectability and hospitality? To America.
By weakening immigration laws that protect Americans from Islamic terror, Obama is now sending the wrong message both to his own citizens and to the Muslim world. He is basically saying that he does not mind taking in fleeing terrorists and their sympathizers. And he does not seem to care at all about appearances or if he this casts more suspicion on his reputation, despite the constant rumors we all know about, that he is a secret Muslim and that his brother Malik has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.
What is also strange is the US State Department is not welcoming fleeing Christians in the Middle East as they should. Most of the visa applications submitted by the desperate and oppressed Egyptian Christians are denied. It was reported that only about 800 to 900 applications were approved by the US for Christian Egyptian immigrants out of 20,000 applications.
This also comes amidst accusations and rumors in Egypt that President Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton are aiding terrorists and conspiring with the Muslim Brotherhood. One would think that the US would be happy that the Egyptian government and others are clamping down on radical Muslim groups who are ruining the lives of the ordinary citizens in the Middle East. But instead, the Obama administration changes immigration laws for their “eyes only” to welcome escaping Muslim troublemakers whose activities are now unwelcome in Egypt.
Obama is doing this not only amidst claims that he is supporting the Muslim Brotherhood, but he also appears to the Muslim world as responding positively to the radical Sunni Cleric Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who recently called on the US government to wage jihad for Allah, to help support the “freedom fighters,” meaning terrorists, in Syria, and adding that “Allah willing, your [US] aid will increase.” This is the first time in history that a radical Muslim leader publicly asks America to join in the jihad for the sake of Allah.
This is also the same administration that revoked the asylum visa already granted to a German Christian family by a Memphis immigration judge. Obama’s Department of Justice is forcing the deportation of a peaceful Christian German family that seeks refuge in the US to home-school their children. It is the same administration that is allowing the illegal immigrant relatives of Obama to live in US public housing and that granted Obama’s Kenyan brother a 501c3 non-profit status within 30 days of his application, while patriotic Tea Party citizens have not received theirs yet after a three and four year wait.
Reverse discrimination is being practiced in the open by the Obama administration against Christians, whites and other patriotic citizens like Dinesh D’Souza and the Tea Party.
To the savvy analyst of Muslim culture, Obama’s immigration policy is clearly supporting the Islamic jihad agenda and helping to transplant jihadists’ activities in a new unsuspecting land. It is aiding the spread of the “Religion of Peace” propaganda in our public schools and making the questioning of Muslims taboo even for our homeland security. This administration is creating a new generation of Americans that is being indoctrinated at a similar level of indoctrination that is occurring to Arab kids in the Islamic Middle East. All the while, the Islamists to claim their supposed victim-hood as an excuse for their belligerence and dominance. And they use and abuse US fears of being called racist or Islamophobic every time an American objects to Islam as oppressive. This way they can build mosques everywhere, including on the ruins of 9/11, while churches are being destroyed in the Middle East.
One can’t help but marvel at how easy America has capitulated after only one major terror attack.
The reckless and dire situation regarding Islamic immigration and penetration — and putting certain foreign interests ahead of American citizens — has really gotten out of hand. Most sane-minded Americans are frozen, defeated and helpless. America, with Obama’s blessings, is slipping away and surrendering to the Islamic invasion. And if anyone objects, they are called the “R” word: Racist.
In whose best interest is Obama working for? Not even the liberals should celebrate this. While pacifying the radical left with the failed Obamacare and other environment and energy projects, the president keeps them busy defending him against the big bad Republicans. What need does the US meet when it welcomes in those who had some connections with terror groups? Who is America pandering to or targeting to give asylum to? Why gamble with the safety, security and peace of American citizens to that extent?
If this situation continues, the American people will wake up one day with Muslim-only zones across the US, women and gays harassed and persecuted in every US city that will be prone Chechnya-style terrorism and calls for a separatist movement. This is the history of Islam repeating itself wherever it goes.
It is time for a Tahrir ‘freedom’ square movement in America against the progressives who put Obama in office.
Iranian Naval Warship Fleet Headed Towards U.S. Coast.
by, Reuters | Yahoo News
An Iranian naval officer said a number of warships had been ordered to approach U.S. maritime borders as a response to the stationing of U.S. vessels in the Gulf, the semi-official Fars news agency reported on Saturday.
“Iran’s military fleet is approaching the United States’ maritime borders, and this move has a message,” the agency quoted Admiral Afshin Rezayee Haddad as saying.
Haddad, described as commander of the Iranian navy’s northern fleet, said the vessels had started their voyage towards the Atlantic Ocean via “waters near South Africa”, Fars reported.
Fars said the plan was part of “Iran’s response to Washington’s beefed up naval presence in the Persian Gulf.”
The Fars report, which carried no details of the vessels, could not be confirmed independently.
In Washington, a U.S. defense official, speaking on condition of anonymity, cast doubt on any claims that the Iranian ships were approaching U.S. maritime borders. But the official added that “ships are free to operate in international waters.”
The United States and its allies regularly stage naval exercises in the Gulf, saying they want to ensure freedom of navigation in the waterway through which 40 percent of the world’s seaborne oil exports passes.
U.S. military facilities in the region include a base for its Fifth Fleet in the Gulf Arab kingdom of Bahrain.
Iran sees the Gulf as its own backyard and believes it has a legitimate interest in expanding its influence there.
Iranian officials have often said Iran could block the Strait of Hormuz, at the mouth of the Gulf, if it came under military attack over its disputed nuclear program, and the Western war games are seen in the region as an attempt to deter any such move.
Fars said the Iranian navy had been developing its presence in international waters since 2010, regularly launching vessels in the Indian Ocean and the Gulf of Aden to protect Iranian ships from Somali pirates operating in the area.
:گزارش به فارسی - Report in Persian: