George Soros, Karl Popper, and Podsnap by Hugh Fitzgerald

George Soros has just pledged $15 million to fight “hate crimes.” Who could object to this? Well, I could, and you could, if by “hate crimes” Soros means truthful statements about what Islamic texts — Qur’an and Hadith and Sira – contain. But those texts and teachings of Islam do represent a menace to all non-Muslims, and it would be folly not to recognize this. And I could object, and you could, if Soros means to exclude as “hate crimes” (or “hate speech” precedent to “hate crimes”) a Muslim quoting those exact same texts because, in his view, if made by a Believer, they cannot possibly be “hate speech.” For if they were, that would mean that the texts of Islam itself would have to be called into question, and that – according to the Defenders of the Faith such as George Soros – can simply never be. A Muslim reports, for example, that the Qur’an says that Muslims are the “best of peoples”(3:110) and non-Muslims the “most vile of creatures.”(98:6) This is both accurate and, for George Soros, not a “hate crime.” But when some non-Muslim reports that Muslims say that the Qur’an says that “Muslims are the best of peoples” and “non-Muslims the most vile of creatures,” George Soros and the Muslim groups he funds regard those statements as whipping up hatred against Muslims; that is, they constitute a “hate crime.” For Soros, what the Muslim quotes in such a case says hardly matters; Soros long ago made up his mind that these passages don’t matter or don’t exist or are being taken out of context or surely have to be interpreted differently, and in any case, who cares about such remarks except for those Islamophobes always trying to sow distrust and hate.

Soros has, through his Open Society Foundation, shown a deep interest in defending Muslims and in deflecting attention from Islam’s texts. His foundation has consistently given grants to organizations, such as the Muslim Advocates, that seek to water down anti-terrorist measures, and to constrain the effectiveness of domestic intelligence in monitoring likely terrorists, and has been responsible for forcing the NYPD to end some of its most effective programs, including its monitoring of mosques. After the Dec. 2, 2015 attack in San Bernardino, for example, the Open Society’s Muslim grantees did not express horror at the attack by a Muslim couple on their Infidel fellow workers, but rather, according to a hacked document, immediately “mobilized to counter anti-refugee and anti-Muslim immigration sentiment.” The policy agenda of the Open Society Foundation is to insist that the main source of “hate crimes” in the United States is a never clearly-defined “Islamophobia,” which vague term is used to describe and consign to the outer darkness all criticism of Islam, to suggest that Islam itself is always and everywhere beyond criticism, which – given the observable behavior of Muslims in the United States and all over the world – becomes more ludicrous every day. Can anyone with a straight face still maintain that all those who are made anxious, angry, fearful about Islam, because of what has happened in Paris and Nice, in Brussels and Amsterdam, in London and Madrid, in Moscow and Beslan, in Beijing and Bali, in New York and Washington and Boston, at Fort Hood and in Chattanooga and San Bernardino (you can fill up notebooks with the list of nearly 30,000 attacks by Muslim terrorists, following the texts of Islam, that have been committed since 9/11/2001) are merely hate-filled Islamophobes?

Soros has not listened to, much less heeded, the testimony of that growing number of ex-Muslims who actually grew up within Islam, and in the West found both the intellectual freedom and physical security (though that security is relative; most must live under constant guard for fear of their former coreligionists), to find their way out of Islam and have chosen to sacrifice their safety in order to alert the non-Muslim world about the teachings and texts of Islam. These ex-Muslims are particularly worrisome because they are thoroughly versed in what Islam teaches, cannot be bullied into backing down by claims they “don’t know what they are talking about,” and offer from the inside an authentic view of Islam and of Muslims, which may be unflattering, but also happens to be true. If Soros were truly interested in “reforming” Islam – assuming that such a difficult and doubtful undertaking might improve matters – then surely one would want to publicize and to promote Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Wafa Sultan, Nonie Darwish, Ibn Warraq, Magdi Allam and others like them. Soros has never been interested sin these witnesses; for him there are only victimized Muslims and Islamophobes. Yet these ex-Muslims are as valuable now as, decades ago, were defectors from the K.G.B. who alerted the West to the full menace of Soviet Communism.

When Ayaan Hirsi Ali, for example, writes that on September 11, 2001 she was horrified by the news of the attack on the World Trade Center, but not at all surprised, because she knew from her own Muslim upbringing of the intense hatred of Infidels to be found in Islam, does Hirsi Ali’s remark constitute “hate speech”? When Wafa Sultan or Nonie Darwish or Magdi Allam describe in similar terms the passages of murderous hatred toward non-Muslims to be found in the Qur’an and Hadith, and that they were constantly subjected to when they grew up in Muslim environments in Syria and Egypt, shouldn’t George Soros want to support them in their commitment to warning the West? Soros has taken his stand: he will do nothing to encourage the truthful study of Islamic texts, and will instead do everything he can to avoid having the American public be made aware of, for example, this telling — if oft-repeated — list of Qur’anic passages pertaining to Infidels:

Qur’an 2:191 “Slay the unbelievers wherever you find them”
Qur’an 3:21 “Muslims must not take the infidels as friends”
Qur’an 5:33 “Maim and crucify the infidels if they criticize Islam”
Qur’an 8:12 “Terrorize and behead those who believe in scriptures other than the Koran”
Qur’an 8:60 “Muslims must muster all weapons to terrorize the infidels”
Qur’an 8:65 “The unbelievers are stupid, urge all Muslims to fight them”
Qur’an 9:5 “When the opportunity arises, kill the infidels wherever you find them”
Quran 9:123 “Make war on the infidels living in your neighbourhood”
Qur’an 22:19 “Punish the unbelievers with garments of fire, hooked iron rods, boiling water, melt their skin and bellies”
Qur’an 47:4 “Do not hanker for peace with the infidels, behead them when you catch them”

Soros does not want to acknowledge such passages. I suspect at this point nothing could induce him to read the Qur’an and Hadith. He doesn’t want to know for certain what he suspects he might find. He wants, rather, to live in a comfortable cocoon of high-minded ignorance, where he is flattered sycophantically by the recipients of his largesse, and can remain happily convinced that for some reason he can’t quite fathom, all over the world, Christians and Jews, Hindus and Buddhists, atheists and agnostics, are engaged in an effort to persecute defenseless Muslims in an orgy of Islamophobia. For Soros, there is only one way to bring about the heavenly kingdom, or some reasonable facsimile thereof, which is for non-Muslims to recognize, and reject, the “climate of fear” they have created for Muslims, a fear for which there is no discernible reason. Never mind the Muslim clerics who speak openly about deliberately leaching on Infidel societies, with Muslims helping themselves to a proleptic Jizyah both from the receipt of every possible welfare-state benefit they can get, and by property crimes, also seen as a kind of Jizyah, against Infidels. Never mind the skyrocketing statistics on Muslims committing sex crimes on non-Muslims (women, men, children of both sexes). Never mind those Muslims who speak openly of how they are using demography as a weapon of Jihad – outbreeding while battening on their helpless hosts, so that with each year their percentage of the population inexorably rises.

Here is Hirsi Ali in a 2007 interview in the London Standard:

Just like Nazism started with Hitler‘s vision, the Islamic vision is a caliphate — a society ruled by Sharia law – in which women who have sex before marriage are stoned to deathhomosexuals are beaten, and apostates like me are killedSharia law is as inimical to liberal democracy as Nazism.” In this interview, she said, “Violence is inherent in Islam – it’s a destructive, nihilistic cult of death. It legitimates murder.

Islam – not “Islamism” –is a cult that you can be born into, or join, but once in you can’t get out; the punishment for apostasy is death. It is both a fanatic and a fighting faith, where Infidels are likened to animals, women and homosexuals can be beaten or killed, and those who leave the faith killed for defecting from the Army of Islam. Could George Soros allow himself to recognize the simian similarities between Islam and the Nazism from which he just barely escaped? Does George Soros think that apostates are not killed, that women are not beaten (or killed) for sex outside marriage, that homosexuals are not killed simply for being homosexuals? Does he think the murderous depiction of Infidels, and especially of Jews (for being the firmest in their opposition to Muhammad) is simply made up?

And why does Soros promote campaigns that spread false Islamophobia on social media? There is so much of this already going around, these anti-Muslim “hate crimes” designed to elicit sympathy for Muslims that turn out to be hoaxes, that Soros need hardly bother. The latest example is the story about one Abdul Aziz Usmani, a 7-year-old whose father claimed he was repeatedly beaten up by fellow students on a school bus in Cary, North Carolina, though neither the bus driver nor any of the other students noticed anything awry, and furthermore, the boy bore no signs of any injury, nor reported any attack, until his father did. Liza Luten, a spokesman for the school, told BuzzFeed news: “[The principal] interviewed seven students sitting near this child, and none of the students, nor the bus driver, witnessed any type of altercation or incident.” When [the family] originally shared the information, they didn’t share any information about religion or race, and just that their child was bullied.

The police investigated, and concluded that it was a charge without merit, one more pretend-hate crime. Robert Spencer has also noted the case in New Jersey of a Muslim who was convicted of a murder that he had tried to depict as an “Islamophobic” attack, and another in California of a man convicted of killing his wife, an attack he tried to blame on “Islamophobia.” And then there was the woman who said she was called a terrorist and her cheek slashed in Manhattan, who later admitted she made up the story. If you click on each word here — CAIR and other Muslims have on many occasions not hesitated — you will have ten more examples of claimed anti-Muslim “hate-crimes” that turned out to be hoaxes. And tomorrow, or next week, there will be still more to add to the list.

Does George Soros allow himself to know anything about this long catalogue of “hate crimes” where there was no crime, or where the crime in question was indeed committed, but by Muslims? A moment’s thought would tell him that if he really cared about the reputation of Muslims, he would want to do whatever he could to put a stop to these false reportings. For when they are finally revealed (as so many of them have been), they only earn Muslims still more suspicion and contempt. But Soros will have none of that. He prefers simply to ignore the whole lengthening list of fabricated hate crimes, and instead, dwells in a phantasmagoric world where Muslims live in constant fear of attack. Nor is there convincing evidence of such fear. Instead of cowering, Muslims appear quite aggressive throughout the Western world in pushing their own agendas: demands for prayer rooms in schools and workplaces, insistence upon wearing hijabs that violate longstanding dress codes, prayer times that interrupt the work day schedule, rewriting of history in school textbooks — wherever they sense Infidel weakness, demands are made.

George Soros seems strangely unaffected by the rise of antisemitism in Europe. Though he escaped from the Nazis by the skin of his teeth, he appears unwilling to recognize the source of the new wave of antisemitism in Europe – the burgeoning population of Muslims. One wonders if he is aware of the description of the Jews in the Qur’an as the “descendants of apes and pigs,” the people who were most firm in their opposition to Muhammad, and who even were responsible — see the Sira — for poisoning Muhammad. Here is the conclusion to a 700-page treatise, Jews in the Qur’an and the Traditions, by Grand Sheik Tantawi, Sunni Islam’s leading cleric, and the head of Al-Azhar University in Cairo:

[The] Qur’an describes the Jews with their own particular degenerate characteristics, i.e. killing the prophets of Allah, corrupting His words by putting them in the wrong places, consuming the people’s wealth frivolously, refusal to distance themselves from the evil they do, and other ugly characteristics caused by their deep-rooted lasciviousness … only a minority of the Jews keep their word. … [A]ll Jews are not the same. The good ones become Muslims, the bad ones do not.

Descriptions of Jews by prominent Muslim clerics are quoted by Robert Spencer in an omnium-gatherum article on the persistence of antisemitism in Islam:

The grand sheikh of Al-Azhar, Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi, the most respected cleric in the world among Sunni Muslims today, has called Jews “the enemies of Allah, descendants of apes and pigs.” Saudi sheikh Abd al-Rahman al-Sudayyis, imam of the principal mosque in the holiest city in Islam, Mecca, said in a sermon that Jews are “the scum of the human race, the rats of the world, the violators of pacts and agreements, the murderers of the prophets, and the offspring of apes and pigs.” Another Saudi sheikh, Ba’d bin Abdallah al-Ajameh al-Ghamidi, made the connection explicit: “The current behavior of the brothers of apes and pigs, their treachery, violation of agreements, and defiling of holy places … is connected with the deeds of their forefathers during the early period of Islam—which proves the great similarity between all the Jews living today and the Jews who lived at the dawn of Islam.

The steady rise in anti-Semitic attacks in Europe has been attributed, by European authorities, to Muslims who have taken to heart what the Qur’an and Hadith have to say about Jews. Why should we not believe that as the Muslim population grows in the United States, there will not be the same rise in hate crimes by Muslims against Jews here, too? Or should we believe, as some fondly do, that there is something unique about “American” Muslims – uniquely tolerant, as opposed to Muslims elsewhere in the world, even though all Muslims read the same Qur’an, the same Hadith, the same Sira? Doesn’t the less aggressive behavior, so far, of American Muslims reflect only the fact of lesser numbers, of their constituting 1% rather than 3% or 5% or 10% of the population?

It is too bad that George Soros, with his willingness to deploy millions to work his will, remains adamantine in his refusal to look at the evidence of Muslim “hate speech” that then gives rise to “hate crimes.” It is too bad that he has decided that it is Muslims who need to be protected from a potential wave of violence from “Islamophobes,” though there has been no such wave, not in North America, and not anywhere in the Western world. It is too bad that George Soros does not recognize that the charge of “Islamophobia” is a Muslim invention, designed to silence all criticism of Islam, and misleadingly characterizing as “irrational hatred” the criticism of Islam that is solidly based on a familiarity with the contents of the Qur’an, Hadith, and Sira.

George Soros fancies himself more than merely a supremely enlightened Maecenas. He thinks of himself as a philosopher, keeper of the flame of the late Karl Popper who, like Soros, was of Jewish descent and, like Soros, escaped the Nazis in time. Popper’s most influential work for Soros was his “The Open Society and Its Enemies.” But whatever Soros learned from that work of political philosophy, he seems not to have taken to heart the single most celebrated remark of Popper, made in 1945, after the final defeat of the Nazis: “Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.” Soros may have learned, or thinks he learned, a great deal from Karl Popper,but he did not learn this. And because he is more than tolerant of the most intolerant and fanatical force now bestriding the earth, he has made himself one of the enemies of the “open society” that Popper championed.

But there is one personage whom Soros, in his willful blindness about Islam, does resemble. That is Dickens’ Mr. Podsnap:

…Mr Podsnap settled that whatever he put behind him he put out of existence. There was a dignified conclusiveness–not to add a grand convenience–in this way of getting rid of disagreeables which had done much towards establishing Mr Podsnap in his lofty place in Mr Podsnap’s satisfaction. ‘I don’t want to know about it; I don’t choose to discuss it; I don’t admit it!’ Mr Podsnap had even acquired a peculiar flourish of his right arm in often clearing the world of its most difficult problems, by sweeping them behind him (and consequently sheer away) with those words and a flushed face. For they affronted him.

“I don’t want to know about it; I don’t choose to discuss it; I don’t admit it” – that is George Soros, on Islam. He fancies himself a disciple of Karl Popper. But when it comes to “clearing the world of its most difficult problems,” he turns out to be, though he would be outraged at the suggestion, merely, and maddeningly, an avatar of Mr. Podsnap.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Jihad at Ohio State University: Man who attacked with knife and car “tentatively identified” as Somali Muslim

Muslim cleric: Happiness over Israeli fires “is in keeping with the Sharia”

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on Jihad Watch.

Jihad At Ohio State, A Multiculturalism Perk

Jihad broke out on the Ohio State Campus Monday morning when an 18 year old Somali refugee, Abdul Razak Ali Artan, decided to mow down as many students as possible by running a car over a curb into a group of helpless pedestrians.

If that wasn’t bad enough, he emerged from the car with a butcher knife slashing up to nine people before being shot dead by a heroic police officer. Wonder if Black Lives Matter will have a problem with this shooting, since the suspect was a person of color?

Fortunately the only death was that of the perpetrator, Artan, the third year logistics management student, who left Somalia in 2007 with his family. According to an NBC report, “ he lived in Pakistan and then came to the United States in 2014 as a legal permanent resident of the United States,”

Those injured were taken to local hospitals, eight were treated for non-life threatening injuries, and one was in critical condition following the horrendous attack.

All the predictable signs of main stream media reporting that normally accompany an obvious jihadi attack were evident from the get go. For example: the suspect was not named, the motive for the attack was unclear, and the investigators will look into it to see if it might possibly be a terrorist attack.

It is interesting that an article from PJ media just came out before Thanksgiving predicting this kind of attack with a vehicle and a knife. The article references an Islamic State Magazine called Rumiyah that gives explicit instructions for lone jihadists. The article states,

“Vehicles are like knives, as they are extremely easy to acquire. But unlike knives, which if found in one’s possession can be a cause for suspicion, vehicles arouse absolutely no doubts due to their widespread use throughout the world,”

In addition,

“It adds that cars are one of the ‘safest and easiest’ weapons as well as ‘most successful in harvesting large numbers of the kuffar [disbelievers].’”

I wonder if the FBI will even be knowledgeable about this magazine? Chances are not very likely as agents were certainly blinded to important intelligence gathered by Phil Haney about links to Mateen after the Orlando jihadi attack in which 50 people were killed.

But we can all rest assured that our DHS Secretary Johnson will be right on top of it as he leads his FBI agents to take part in this investigation. He will most likely try to find any other reason besides one linked with Islam as the motive for today’s vehicular attack. The signs already scream Islamic terrrorism.

The Latern, a local on campus newspaper just happened to interview Artan back in August. He was upset that there were no prayer rooms for Muslims at Ohio State. He said,

“I wanted to pray in the open, but I was kind of scared with everything going on in the media. I’m a Muslim, it’s not what the media portrays me to be. If people look at me, a Muslim praying, I don’t know what they’re going to think, what’s going to happen. It’s the media that put that picture in their heads so they’re just going to have it and it, it’s going to make them feel uncomfortable.”

You can bet that if Obama says anything at all, it will totally skirt the fact of the jihadist’s refugee status. No, he’ll focus on social media that isn’t being controlled when it comes to what is printed about Islam or say something about how there better not be any backlash on the Muslim community.

Counsel for American Islamic Relations (CAIR) will certainly come out for a presser to push the victim-hood of Muslims in this country and will blame the poor Somali for going “crazy” after being so afraid of Donald Trump and his hideous policies that will certainly harm the Muslim population.

We’ve all been here numerous times. We know the left and Islamic playbook.

And once again we, the sane Americans, will look on yet another Islamic terrorist attack on our soil as a result of having multiculturalism stuffed down our throats, having to stomach immigration policies that continue to force a non-Western people into the hearts of our communities. Many of the Islamic immigrants do not share our love of freedom but want to force their ideology on us no matter what the cost to Americans’ life or limb.

From the sound of Artan’s admission, he wasn’t comfortable here. So was this the best country for him and his family to be brought to? Or would another Muslim country have suited him better?

Mike Gonzales, a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation, states this in a recent article about saving our national identity,

“multiculturalism poses a clear and present danger in the age of international terrorism because it makes life easier for radical recruiters. We all need to be part of something bigger than ourselves, especially young men. If we no longer imbue our people with patriotic fellow feeling, someone else will come along with another message.”

And that is what is happening over and over again. These young men infused with the Islamic ideology are wanting to prove themselves as something of worth. They see our country as an enemy and they hate us. They are simply taught this if brought up in an Islamic country, and we aren’t teaching about our great and amazing heritage of freedom in the school system

Sadly, it didn’t take long for the young Artan to prove to Americans that they should have had suspicion when looking at him. He has played out in reality what the media may have been saying about him, possibly that just as Hunington’s Clash of Civilization’s states,

“Relations between groups from different civilizations however will be almost never close, usually cool, and often hostile.”

RELATED ARTICLE: Dr. Sebastian Gorka: OSU Attacker a Disciple of Anwar Al-Awlaki, Who Is More Dangerous Today Than Bin Laden

The Motive of the Muslim Terrorist in Ohio has been Confirmed

During my career as a U.S. Federal Agent and as an Islamic counter-terrorism professional for three decades plus, I want to clarify for all how the motive for a crime is determined. As we all know the reason a person acted in a certain manner, which concluded in a crime, is the motive. Our media, politicians, and our law enforcement seem to struggle for extended periods of time over what the motive was for a Muslim who committed an act of Islamic terrorism. Whenever a Muslim (pure advocate of Shariah law) does anything, and I stress anything, his/her motive is for the advancement of Islam worldwide and under Sharia law.

In the case of the Muslim Islamic terrorist who committed an act of terrorism today at the Ohio State University, he carried out the act of injuring people for the advancement of Islam. Allegedly he was not satisfied with the lack of Islamic prayer rooms at OSU. Law enforcement and others are misleading patriots by suggesting this is the reason he tried to kill people. Islam and shariah law demand their followers to fight any form of perceived oppression because Prophet Mohammed (a false prophet) advocated for Islam to one day rule the world. In order to achieve this goal Muslims are taught to fight, humiliate, cause stress, and misery to non believers of Islam at all places and at all times. By doing this Islam is advanced one step further toward a worldwide caliphate.

America and the world will continue to see more attacks at our schools, because Islamic terrorists opine the hearts of the American people and all innocent people are their children. They feel if they (Muslims) destroy the hearts of innocent people, they will destroy their will to live and will bow to the order of Islam.

Wake up innocent patriots worldwide. Islam and pure Muslims who advocate Islam and Shariah law are your enemies.

You can no more tame a rattle-head snake than you can a Muslim who has accepted Islam and the love of a false prophet (Mohammed) who hates Christians and Jews, and who has flooded our world with violence and wars since his unfortunate birth over 1400 years ago.

RELATED ARTICLE: Dr. Sebastian Gorka: OSU Attacker a Disciple of Anwar Al-Awlaki, Who Is More Dangerous Today Than Bin Laden

RELATED VIDEO: Ohio State Terror Attacker a Somali Refugee

VIDEO: Communists Protest at Donald Trump’s Florida home

The election of Donald Trump as the next President of the United States has brought together two unlikely opposition groups, Muslims and Communists. This Green/Red Alliance centers their solidarity in the hatred of Trump and the hatred of pro-American national security policies and support for “Palestine.”

Listen carefully to this group of protesters at Donald Trump’s Florida home as it is inevitable that they will grow in size and social chaos.

Southern Poverty Law Center wants to silence James Simpson because…

….the SPLC has got to keep the donations flowing in (they have fat salaries to pay)!

Many of you are familiar with author/investigator James Simpson and may even have read his monograph that followed mine at the Center for Security Policy.
red-green-book-cover

A prolific writer and speaker, Simpson travels to many towns and cities to explain to the public how the UN/US Refugee Admissions Program works.  This week he is scheduled to speak in Michigan, but the Southern Poverty Law Center would be all too happy to shut him down with their usual name-calling strategy—don’t like the message, call it racist, bigoted, Islamophobic and scare the audience away.

Here is Leo Hohmann at World Net Daily telling us what all the fuss is about in Trump country—Michigan!

It doesn’t take much to get one’s self branded a racist in Michigan these days.

Donald Trump pulled off an upset win in the state that has gone Democrat in the previous two presidential elections, but that hasn’t stopped the entrenched establishment from demonizing those who hold Trump-like views on immigration.

The Southern Poverty Law Center is teaming up with local Detroit media to paint a Maryland-based journalist as an anti-Muslim “extremist” and “Islamophobe” simply because he has produced fact-based research on the U.S. government’s refugee resettlement program.

James Simpson has been invited to speak at the annual Business Roundtable Breakfast in Oakland County, one of several counties in Michigan that have been pummeled with refugees from the Middle East over the last eight years of the Obama administration.

Oakland County Executive L. Brooks Patterson, who won re-election in a landslide on Nov. 8, has been a vocal critic of the refugee program, threatening to sue the administration for violating the Refugee Act of 1980. Under Obama, the feds have distributed thousands of refugees into Oakland County without advance notice to Patterson and other local government officials. Once the federal month that follows the refugees runs out, Oakland County taxpayers are left holding the bag for the education and welfare of the refugees.

But the SPLC’s attack stance has now frightened away one of the Roundtable event’s main sponsors, the Fifth Third Bank.

SPLC is the same organization that tried to label former GOP presidential hopeful Dr. Ben Carson an “extremist” only to remove the post from its website and apologize after an intense nationwide backlash in 2015.

[….]

But the newest source of the media-made controversy in Michigan is Simpson, author of the 2015 book“The Red-Green Axis: Refugees, Immigration and the Agenda to Erase America.”

Simpson has been invited by Patterson to speak at the annual economic forum on Dec. 1. Simpson is a research fellow at Frank Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy in Washington, D.C. The SPLC was used as the source of the negative stories about Simpson that appeared in the Detroit Free Press and the Detroit Metro Times.

There is a lot of important information in Hohmann’s article, continue reading here.

If you missed it, see SPLC calls yours truly a top anti-Muslim extremist here.

Once again it is about money!

The ‘non-profit’ SPLC rakes in millions every year by scaring people with tactics like these.

If they made reasoned arguments about why we are wrong about the UN/US Refugee Program and why mass immigration is good for America (and American workers!), for instance, they simply couldn’t make enough money to pay the fat salaries  (Form 990 page 8) they pay their executives and staff.

screenshot-73

This is from their 2014 Form 990. Notice the last line in my screenshot. They have 21 employees making over $100,000 a year so they need to haul in a lot of money each year!

One more thing!

Order your advance copy of Hohmann’s book to be released in January 2017 (see the SPLC rage!):

Stealth Invasion: Muslim Conquest Through Immigration and the Resettlement Jihad

VIDEO: Crossing the Line | Full Measure

The 2,000 mile southern Border of the United States remains a battle zone, clearly unsafe, and definitely not secure. Only those in elected office who have an ideology other than securing National sovereignty push a vastly different narrative. To compound an already complex set of issues, corruption and integrity issues within the Customs and Border Protection are also a serious security threat. Recruiting and maintaining quality officers and agents is a monumental undertaking, and this agency, like the entire National Security apparatus needs cleansing top to bottom side to side. The task of the incoming Secretary of Homeland Security will prove multifaceted and complex requiring immediate review and intervention beginning on January 20, 2017, just after Donald Trump takes the Oath of Office for the Presidency.

The investigative report you are about to see demonstrates the sobering facts of my statements. The assignment to secure our borders is difficult and acutely complex on many levels. Washington policies meant to obfuscate, neuter and cripple protection and border security have taken a very damaging toll on America; in many ways our fellow citizens have not even begun to realize the devastating costs. Sharyl Atkinson once again has shown what a terrific investigative journalist she is, and we are fortunate to have someone with her experience and credentials to shed light on the underworld happenings within Customs and Border Protection. Make no mistake, Customs and Border Protection is the largest federal law enforcement agency in the United States, and there is a “cancer” in this organization that needs to be eradicated, and now! But also make no mistake that some mighty fine officers and agents with exemplary integrity work tirelessly and fearlessly waging a war that is incredibly dangerous, and personally taxing on them and their families. These professionals who are serving and protecting with honor deserve better. America deserves better.

I am humbled to receive insights and various reports and matters of intelligence from outstanding Border Patrol Officers, past and present. These men and women of integrity and service want their organization cleaned up and equipped to fight the good fight to which they signed-up and pledged to fight preserving our country from enemies foreign and domestic.

Please look at the report below.


Crossing the Line

By Full Measure Staff

Securing the southern border is a top priority for President elect Donald Trump. Just how big, and what form the promised Wall will take remains to be seen. Already, there’s an army of federal agents guarding the line between the US and Mexico. Their top priority: keeping terrorists and their weapons out. Full Measure explores the risk of border agents getting corrupted and crossing the line to the dark side.

Customs and Border Protection is the largest federal law enforcement organization in the U.S.

Sixty-thousand employees secure more than 100-thousand miles of borders and coastline, but to criminal drug cartels all that security looks a lot like opportunity.

FBI Supervisory Special Agent Jeffrey Veltri: We have a number of adversaries south of the border, whether it’s Mexican drug trafficking cartels, as well as alien smuggling organizations, who actively seek to corrupt U.S. government employees to facilitate their criminal enterprises.

Read more…

President-Elect Trump — Where He Stands on Radical Islam

Policies to watch once Trump has a perspective from the Oval Office: opposition to the nuclear pact with Iran and not arming Syrian rebels.

Donald Trump, president elect of the United States, spoke out on the campaign trail against radical Islam. Trump opposed the Obama administration’s pressure on former Egyptian president and U.S. ally Hosni Mubarak to resign. That resignation paved the way for the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood across the Middle East. Expect President Trump to support anti-Islamist regimes in the Arab world and those individuals in America.

Trump has also said he would shut down extremist mosques in America, which would be a welcome policy to stop radicalization of America’s Muslims. He will need an expert team of legal experts to accomplish that goal since opponents will argue that the line between freedom of speech and religion and incitement to violence is razor thin.

Policies to watch once Trump has a perspective from the Oval Office will be his stated opposition to the nuclear agreement with Iran and his opposition to regime change and arming the rebels in Syria.

Below is the platform that Trump campaigned on:

Domestic Islamists

  • Shut down mosques that preach extremism
  • Would revoke the passports of Americans who travel abroad to join the Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL). Initially advocated a temporary ban on all Muslim immigration and has since scaled it back to only Muslim countries with major terrorist activity. In his national security speech in June, he proposed using ideological vetting such as support for extremist beliefs or links to extremist groups (not necessarily terrorists) in deciding who gets to enter the U.S. He cited polls showing high levels of support for Sharia governance in countries like Afghanistan.

Egypt & the Muslim Brotherhood

  • Opposed the Obama Administration’s pressure on Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak to give up power.

Intelligence

  • Supports enhanced interrogation of terror suspects (considered torture by critics).

Iran

  • Opposes the nuclear deal with Iran, calling it “terrible,” but “loves the concept” of a good deal.
  • Thanked by the wife of an American pastor imprisoned in Iran for bringing attention to his captivity.
  • Endorsed airstrikes on Iran’s nuclear program in 2007.

ISIS, Iraq & Syria

  • Only candidate to support Russia’s military intervention in Syria against rebels fighting ISIS, as well as ISIS and Al-Qaeda.
  • Opposes involvement in the civil war and arming rebels.
  • Opposes a policy of regime change towards the Assad dictatorship.
  • “I say that you can defeat ISIS by taking their wealth. Take back the oil. Once you go over and take back that oil, they have nothing. You bomb the hell out of them, and then you encircle it, and then you go in. And you let Mobil go in, and you let our great oil companies go in. Once you take that oil, they have nothing left.”
  • “I would hit [ISIS] so hard. I would find you a proper general, I would find the Patton or MacArthur. I would hit them so hard your head ,would spin.”
  • U.S. should not get involved in Syria by supporting the rebels or launching airstrikes in retaliation for the Assad regime’s use of chemical weapons.
  • Opposed the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.
  • Opposed the invasion of Iraq and any policy aimed at removing Saddam Hussein from power.
  • U.S. should take Iraq’s oil and reimburse the countries who were involved in the 2003 invasion and give $1 million to the family of every U.S. soldier who died in Iraq.

Libya

  • Would only support military action in Libya against the Muammar Gaddafi leadership if the U.S. gets to take the country’s oil.

Gulf States

  • Would force Saudi Arabia and other countries to pay for the U.S. military presence that protects them.

Military Spending

Would increase military spending to foster deterrence.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Call for Muslim Immigration Ban Now Off Trump’s Website

ISIS Warns of End of US Following Trump Victory

Muslim Community Ponders a President Trump

Vice President-Elect Mike Pence — A Balance to His ‘Boss’

Migrants looking for economic opportunity and running from gangs/violence are NOT refugees

Immigration activists are urging Obama to release them all before January 20th!

Next time you hear the Left whining about Jeff Sessions, Kris Kobach and Steve Bannon remember that President Barack Obama had Cecilia Muñoz (La Raza), and senior White House adviser Valerie Jarrett by his side for nearly 8 years working day and night to change U.S. immigration policy and seed your towns with diversity. Now the pendulum swings back!

They are surging north by the tens of thousands since Trump won the Presidential election on November 8th. See news at Drudge yesterday, here.   And it isn’t just Mexicans and Central Americans, as Pamela Geller told us here two days ago, that want to get in to America before Donald Trump is inaugurated.

President Barack Obama, flanked by Cecilia Muñoz, director of the White House Domestic Policy Council, left, and senior White House adviser Valerie Jarrett, speaks in the Roosevelt Room of the White House in Washington, Monday, June 24, 2013, during a meeting with CEOs, business owners and entrepreneurs to discuss immigration reform. Obama hosted the meeting to discuss the importance of commonsense immigration reform including the Congressional Budget Office analysis that concludes immigration reform would promote economic growth and reduce the deficit. Sitting next to Obama are . (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

Cecilia Muñoz (La Raza), Barack Obama and senior White House adviser Valerie Jarrett

Most are NOT REFUGEES! although most will be requesting asylum (and most are being cared for on the taxpayer’s dime).

While we focus so much energy on the UN/US Refugee Admissions Program, the asylum portion of the Refugee Act of 1980 is going berserk!  The Open Borders activists have latched on to it in order to make up for the numbers they might lose in the normal refugee program. I mentioned it recently when I wrote about Doris Meissner.

In the normal process we write about all the time, refugees are selected abroad and flown here on your dime (they are supposed to repay the airfare, but no one, outside the government, knows how much they do repay).

With asylum seekers, they get here on their own either by crossing the border illegally or illegally overstaying a visa and then requesting asylum, which is supposed to offer protection from PERSECUTION.

In either case legitimate “refugees” must prove that they fear persecution if returned home, according the 1951 Convention on refugees….

Article 1 of the Convention, as amended by the 1967 Protocol, defines a refugee as this:

“A person who owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it..”

What has been happening is that the definition is being expanded (really by the Open Borders lobby and their media mouthpieces) beyond the idea of persecution to include anyone who is running from anything that makes them unhappy!

Bloomberg: Let all asylum-seekers go free before January 20th:

Now, back to the article that caught my eye a few days ago at Bloomberg (where else!): Obama being urged to let all asylum-seekers go free.  But, remember! most of the tens of thousands of Unaccompanied Alien Children who entered the US illegally are already free to roam America!

Immigration advocates are asking the Obama administration to release thousands of detained Central American women and children who want asylum in the U.S., citing concerns that Donald Trump will deport them after his inauguration in January.

Representatives of groups including the Women’s Refugee Commission and the American Immigration Lawyers Association met with White House officials last week to discuss a host of immigration issues, including the fate of about 4,000 Central American detainees, some as young as two years old, who have fled violence in their home countries. They’re housed in jail-like facilities in Texas and Pennsylvania, some for more than a year, as they wait for the government to process their asylum pleas.

Immigration advocates want the president to either end the practice of detaining families altogether, as they’ve been requesting for years, or direct Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials to release families with a notice to appear before a judge on their own recognizance.

They are NOT refugees! But, see here below, that the media calls them that already. In order to be a refugee they must make an asylum claim and be granted asylum!  In most states they are not eligible for welfare until the asylum claim has been approved.

The plight of the Central American refugees, who fled violence and gangs in their home countries, is one of several 11th-hour immigration conundrums Obama faces as he prepares for Trump to enter the White House. The Republican campaigned on promises to crack down on undocumented immigrants and to build a wall on the Mexican border, and immigration advocates fear a government that has struggled under Obama to humanely handle a crush of asylum-seekers at the southern border will turn markedly more hostile under his successor.

More here if you care to read it!

The vast majority of so-called ‘refugees’ invading Europe now are claiming asylum and are not legitimate refugees, and shouldn’t be referred to as ‘refugees’ until their claims have been approved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

German court: Syrian ‘refugees’ may not be refugees by definition

Maine immigration lawyer: we are too old and too white!

Trump invites Hungarian PM Orbán to visit him in Washington

Orbán is an outspoken foe of mass Muslim migration into Europe, and of Europe’s Islamization.

viktor-orban-hungary

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán

“Trump Invites Hungarian PM Orbán to Washington D.C.,” by Chris Tomlinson, Breitbart, November 25, 2016:

U.S. President-Elect Donald Trump has invited Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán to visit him in Washington D.C.

The Prime Minister said that Mr. Trump then praised the Hungarian government and called the people of Hungary “brave freedom fighters” during a telephone conversation on Thursday night, Hungarian paper Magyar Hirlap reports.

Mr. Orbán also noted that Trump congratulated Hungary for its economic success in recent years saying that he has called the nation’s achievements over the past six years “outstanding”.

After being invited to Washington D.C., Orbán said: “I told him that I hadn’t been there for a long time as I had been treated as a ‘black sheep’, to which he replied, laughing, ‘Me too’.”

On Mr. Trump’s open attitudes toward Hungary, the prime minister said: “He is much more interested in success, efficiency and results than in political theories,” adding: “This is good for us, as the facts are with us. The economic cooperation has always been good, only the ideologies presented obstacles.”

One of the first European politicians to come out in support of Trump, the maverick Hungarian leader has been a fierce opponent of the migrant policies of German Chancellor Angela Merkel and the European Union’s plans to redistribute migrants across the political bloc.

In an exclusive interview with Breitbart Londonshortly after the Hungarian migrant referendum, spokesman for the Hungarian government Zoltán Kovács said the Obama administration had left the country feeling abandoned. “My first-hand experience, the experience of the government, [is that] the U.S. has lost interest, and probably with it, knowledge about the region. Europe in general, but most certainly about Central Europe,” he said.

While Mr. Orbán had come out in support of Mr. Trump, Kovács was more cautious than to offer an official governmental endorsement, but did at the time note that the migrant policies of Trump and the Hungarian government aligned.

“If it’s about migration, which seems to be the most acute challenge we face, it’s definitely true that Mr. Trump and the conservative philosophy on migration is a lot closer to us,” he noted.

Hungary, along with neighbours Slovakia, the Czech Republic, and Poland, constitute the Visegrad 4 group, who have been a major bloc in opposition of mass migration within the European Union. The V4 now look to the presidential elections in Austria for another potential ally in the anti-mass migration Freedom Party (FPÖ) candidate Norbert Hofer….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Netherlands: Authorities thwart Amsterdam mosque members plot for jihad massacre at synagogue

Egypt: Muslims attack Christian village on rumor of church opening, block road so fire trucks can’t enter

The Ideological Litmus Test for Immigrants

There has been considerable and legitimate debate over the rightness and efficacy of profiling criminals. Where is the proper balance between good, proactive policing and infringing on Americans’ civil liberties?

But can the same two-sided case be made for profiling visitors and potential immigrants to our country? Not at all. Certainly no case can be made with the same arguments, starting with the fact that they are not American citizens.

Here’s why an ideological test is legitimate and responsible for immigrants and visitors.

  1. It is well accepted that nations have the right and responsibility to control their borders and control who comes and who goes.
  2. Two reasons they have a responsibility to do so are to ensure that people do not enter who want to foment insurrection and topple the legitimate government, or who are known criminals and pose a threat to the population. No one argues that latter, few would argue with the former.
  3. In the case of insurrection, that means that an ideological component must be at work for a nation protecting itself and citizenry. If a person is known to want to create a rebellion against the United States of America, for instance, there will be some sort of ideology driving that desire. And the government has not only a right, but a duty, to keep that person out of the country.
  4. Any ideology that seeks to replace the United States Constitution and its enumerated rights for citizens is by definition an ideology seeking to wholly replace the government of the United States that is derived from that Constitution, and is therefore an ideology of insurrection and subversion.
  5. Sharia law, just as a for instance, is a religious form of government. The Arabic term sharīʿah means a body of religious law derived from prophecy — as opposed to human legislation derived through democracy. Sharia law is set through religion and is governed by religious leaders. As such, it is antithetical to nearly every portion and amendment in the United State’s Constitution — the structure on which the legitimate government of the United States is built. Sharia law is therefore ideologically incompatible with the country and believes in the eventual overthrow of the government by some means.
  6. Therefore anyone who believes in Sharia law for the United States should not be allowed entrance to the country as a visitor or an immigrant.

The same reasoning can be applied to other ideological positions, such as being an anarchist or Mexican “Reconquistas” who believe that the entire Southwest United States should be conquered in some fashion by Hispanics.

This does not mean that if you disagree with an amendment of the U.S. Constitution or oppose with laws and policies you cannot come in — unless your ideology would lead you to criminally oppose them. And it would not apply to heads of state. But if any known or stated ideological belief leads to the overthrow of the United States government, then the government actually has a mandate to keep out people who hold those ideologies.

It is not bigotry. It is not a question of freedom of religion. It is not an affront to freedom of speech. And such ideological profiling does not apply to American citizens. But it is totally defensible as a required filter for visitors and potential immigrants for the sake of American citizens and visitors.

EDITORS NOTE: Here is the Naturalization Oath of Allegiance to the United States of America,

“I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.”

This column originally appeared in The Revolutionary Act.

Trump has power to stop refugee flow, will he slow the flow of our tax dollars to UN?

All over the country, as we have been reporting, refugee advocates are having pow-wows and crying sessions about what Donald Trump might do about refugees on January 21st.

Many of those advocates have gotten comfortable, and felt safe in their jobs, through several Presidents including Bush, Clinton, Bush and Obama, but all that is expected to change.

This is a story from New Hampshire Public Radio (Clinton country) where experts try to predict what is coming.

ruxandra-paul

Asst. Professor Ruxandra Paul (Amherst)

The first quotes are from Chris George from the New Haven, CT resettlement agency. We told you about him here last week.  He is hoping we still take in Obama’s last wish—110,000 this fiscal year.

Asst. Professor Ruxandra Paul (Amherst): Trump on solid ground to cut flow of refugees, but she worries that other countries will follow suit. However, one thing never mentioned is that we are far and away the world leader in PERMANENTLY resettling refugees, most countries, including most European countries, do not admit permanent refugees.

Then we hear from a law professor who argues that we have given Presidents too much power.  As far as the Refugee Act of 1980 goes, the crafters of the law (all Dems) gave the President power. Congress was expected to “consult” and weigh in, but that body has until very recently ignored its role.

(Only Senator Sessions held a required hearing on Obama’s plan, the House has been silent under Rep. Trey Gowdy’s chairmanship of the immigration subcommittee.)

New Hampshire Public Radio:

“A president can exercise the highest level of authority, when it comes to border control or foreign policy,” says Sudha Setty from Western New England University Law. “So in terms of setting that refugee ceiling for future fiscal years, future President Trump does have the authority to set that ceiling very low.

Setty said Trump’s freedom to exercise sweeping decisions, like banning Muslims from entering the U.S. continues a disturbing trend of the last two administrations.

“The lesson of the last 15 years has been that we have given the president a tremendous amount of power.And we have not put into place a lot of accountability measures when it comes to anything that is deemed to be national security or terrorism or national security related, and that’s not changing any time soon.”

Next up is another assistant professor with a little nugget that is useful.  The UN High Commissioner for Refugees gets $1.5 BILLION a year from us (and not mentioned here is the fact that the UN is choosing most of our refugees).

Amherst College Political Scientist Ruxandra Paul is watching both sides of the Atlantic right now. She says if U.S. leadership changes direction on its decades long commitment to refugee resettlement, more global uncertainty is sure to come.

“Donald Trump has been suggesting that the US has contributed too much and that allies from western Europe are not covering their share of the burden.”

Last year the U.S. gave the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) more than $1.5 billion. The European Union next in line, followed by several European countries, gave in the hundreds of millions. [We gave a half a billion here just in July—ed]

From a legal perspective President Donald Trump will be on solid ground if he chooses to lower the refugee ceiling. If he does, Paul says, it’s possible other countries will do likewise.

Nikki Haley?

haley-graham1

Nikki Haley (right) with Senator Lindsey Graham

In light of that bit of information, that the UNHCR gets $1.5 billion a year from us, is Nikki Haley going to be tough enough and would she be able to deal with the refugee issue which The News & Observer, a North Carolina paper, says is one of four major UN issues she will have to confront?

Ambassador to the UN is not a little out-of-the-way job and will depend greatly on who Trump picks for the Secretary of State which she will be reporting to! Placing Haley there is not putting her in a place to simply keep enemies close. A deputy assistant job in the Labor Department would have been a better fit.

If Trump does go hardline on refugees and wants the UN funding cut would Haley resign and cause him a PR embarrassment down the road?  I think she would (and the likes of Senator Lindsey Graham will be cheering her on from the sidelines as they prepare for 2020)!

Here The News & Observer ponders the question about refugees:

Trump wants to end Muslim migration to the U.S. until terrorist threats are addressed, banning refugees fleeing violence in countries like Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. This policy directly violates international law, which stipulates that other countries have an obligation to take in people seeking refuge from persecution in their home country and cannot bar refugees based on origin. [Trump (we hope) will follow US law which gives him the power to limit refugee flow, not international law!—ed]

Although Haley opposes Trump’s outright Muslim ban, she was among 30 governors who demanded Syrian refugees not be resettled in their states, citing security concerns. A spokeswoman for the governor said last year that until refugees can be properly vetted “it’s not appropriate for them to be sent to South Carolina or any other state.” [Just words and they all knew it!—ed]

guterres-un-symbol

Incoming U.N. Secretary General Antonio Guterres

Refugees are not allowed into the country until they pass a series of background and health checks, a process that can take up to two years. Governors can’t legally stop refugees from being resettled in their states. [For the umpteenth time, the Syrian screening has been reduced to 3 months and we do admit refugees with TB and other diseases.—ed]

Incoming U.N. Secretary General Antonio Guterres is likely to resist any American efforts to dismantle refugee programs. He formerly served as the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees and is a strong advocate for wealthy countries doing their fair share to help the most vulnerable. He will take office Jan. 1.

This last makes me wonder (again) whether the Trump transition team has any idea of what they are up against at the UN and how those of us who voted for Trump feel about the ‘world body.’

Endnote:  If you were digesting your Thanksgiving meal and didn’t read my post last night, here it is. Islamists say their long game is to take America down through immigration and out-breeding us!

RELATED ARTICLE: Students at William and Mary pushing for refugee resettlement for Williamsburg, VA

Al-Qaeda now favors immigration and ‘outbreeding non-Muslims’ to destroy U.S.

“Muslim terror groups had a much bigger plan to crush America than just through attacks like 9/11. Instead, the plan is to fill the country with like-minded Muslims through the country’s easy immigration laws and by having babies, and then using the U.S. legal and welfare system to turn the country into a system like Iran.”

“Warming to the topic, KSM smiled and said the media, either on purpose or without realizing it, would promote Islam’s cause and champion tearing down the measures put in place to protect the American people after 9/11. He said the media would promote al-Qaeda’s cause by framing the war against Islam (his characterization, not mine) as morally wrong, impossible to win, and fraught with unacceptable losses. He said the media’s response was one of Allah’s ‘gifts,’ one of the ways Allah preordained for Americans to set aside those things which kept us safe and prevented attacks in the immediate aftermath of 9/11.”

This is so close to what actually happened that it sounds like prophecy-after-the-fact. Or maybe Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is an unusually insightful human being. In any case, this is exactly what is happening.

“9/11 mastermind: Al Qaeda favors ‘immigration’ to defeat USA,” by Paul Bedard, Washington Examiner, November 23, 2016:

The jailed architect of 9/11 revealed that al Qaeda’s plan to kill the United States was not through military attacks but immigration and “outbreeding nonmuslims” who would use the legal system to install Sharia law, according to a blockbuster new book.

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed also predicted that intelligence officials using so-called “enhanced interrogation” techniques such the waterboarding he experienced would eventually come under attack from weak-kneed U.S. politicians and media.

In Enhanced Interrogation, CIA contractor James Mitchell tells for the first time about his role interrogating al Qaeda principals, many like KSM still jailed at Guantanamo Bay. He details accounts of waterboarding and other interrogation sessions of the nation’s most notorious enemies.

None more so than Mohammed. Among the most facinating aspects of the book are chatty discussions between KSM and Mitchell long after the waterboarding and before he was delivered to the prision at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where he clammed — and lawyered — up.

In his book, Mitchell is not pushing for a return to waterboarding, especially for run-of-the-mill battlefield prisoners. He does, however, back aggressive interrogation the worst terrorists trained or willed to not cough up any secrets because he said it worked….

Snippets obtained by Secrets from the book set for release next Tuesday from Crown Forum show that Muslim terror groups had a much bigger plan to crush America than just through attacks like 9/11.Instead, the plan is to fill the country with like-minded Muslims through the country’s easy immigration laws and by having babies, and then using the U.S. legal and welfare system to turn the country into a system like Iran.Consider this passage in the book, Enhanced Interrogation: Inside the Minds and Motives of the Islamic Terrorists Trying to Destroy America, where KSM reveals the plan to Mitchell:

“It would be nice,” he said, if al Qaeda or like-minded Islamists could bring America to its knees with catastrophic attacks, but that was unlikely to happen; “not practical” is the wording he used. From his perspective, the long war for Islamic domination wasn’t going to be won in the streets with bombs and bullets and bloodshed. No, it would be won in the minds of the American people.

He said the terror attacks were good, but the “practical” way to defeat America was through immigration and by outbreeding non-Muslims. He said jihadi-minded brothers would immigrate into the United States, taking advantage of the welfare system to support themselves while they spread their jihadi message. They will wrap themselves in America’s rights and laws for protection, ratchet up acceptance of Sharia law, and then, only when they were strong enough, rise up and violently impose Sharia from within. He said the brothers would relentlessly continue their attacks and the American people eventually would become so tired, so frightened, and so weary of war that they would just want it to end.

“Eventually,” KSM said, “America will expose her neck to us for slaughter.”

Since the attacks, and during President Obama‘s two terms, Muslims from several countries that harbor terrorists have flooded into the U.S. And Obama has promised to open the borders for Syrian refugees whose backgrounds are difficult to investigate. President-elect Trump has vowed to reverse Obama’s plans.

In talks with the terrorist, Mitchell said that KSM discussed waterboarding and other interrogation techniques and said that if the tables were turned, “he would do the same thing to protect his way of life.”

He also predicted the downfall of the techniques and persecution of those involved.

From the book:

KSM wagged his finger professorially at us and warned, “Soon they will turn on you.” He prophetically predicted that the press and some members of my own government would turn on me and Bruce and others like us who took aggressive action to prevent the next 9/11 attack and save American lives.

Warming to the topic, KSM smiled and said the media, either on purpose or without realizing it, would promote Islam’s cause and champion tearing down the measures put in place to protect the American people after 9/11. He said the media would promote al-Qaeda’s cause by framing the war against Islam (his characterization, not mine) as morally wrong, impossible to win, and fraught with unacceptable losses. He said the media’s response was one of Allah’s “gifts,” one of the ways Allah preordained for Americans to set aside those things which kept us safe and prevented attacks in the immediate aftermath of 9/11.

KSM said, “Your own government will turn on you. Your leaders will turn on you. They will turn on you to save themselves. It will play out in the media and strengthen the hearts of the brothers. It will recruit more to Allah’s cause because the press coverage will make the U.S. look weak and divided.”

RELATED ARTICLES:

One Year After Paris, What The West Still Needs To Learn About Islamic Terror

9/11 Mastermind says the goal of Al-Qaeda is to takeover America through immigration

Amsterdam mosque leaders suspected of jihad terror activity

Austin, TX “Support Our Muslim Neighbors” event tries to “ease anxiety of local Muslims following Trump’s election”

The ‘Hate-Crime’ Victims Of Trump Who Weren’t by Jamie Glazov

To gain power, totalitarian movements always portray themselves as victims. And while they are in the process of abusing, they cry in front of the world posing as the abused. They stage “hate-crime” attacks against themselves because hate crimes are their political and cultural capital. When those hate-crimes don’t exist, they must be invented.

We are witnessing precisely this phenomenon at this very moment in regards to the myriad hoax “hate-crimes” that anti-Trump forces are manufacturing out of thin air and blaming on Trump supporters. The media are bolstering the entire hallucination process, with CNN leading the way.

Central to the whole narrative is the supposed “Islamophobic” anti-Muslim crime-wave sweeping the nation. The rumors spread and the media regurgitates the lies without any evidence to back them up. And then, after the hoaxes are debunked one by one, the media is, by that time, bored and no longer interested.

The latest “Islamophobia” counterfeit involves a Muslim student at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette (ULL). The Muslima alleged that her hijab and wallet were stolen by two white Trump supporters who were shouting racial slurs. The woman’s accusation incensed leftists and Muslims across the nation and the world, prompting the ACLU of Louisiana to issue a statementdenouncing both the incident and, of course, Donald Trump. The investigation into the incident involved several law enforcement agencies, including the FBI. The Washington Post, New York Times and CNN, meanwhile, ate the story up.

But what happened to this Muslima’s story under tough police questioning? Well, the ULL student eventually broke down and admitted to police that she had fabricated the entire thing. By that time, of course, the media wasn’t too interested in such an innocuous little detail.

Recently, The Huffington Post reported on an incident of “Islamophobia” under the headline “Islamophobia Just Drove This Boy And His Family Out Of America.” It was all so heartbreaking and unjust. The one little problem with the story, however, was that it never happened.

Trump supporters, meanwhile, are supposedly involved in a lot of other evil than just attacking Muslim women on campuses and driving little Muslim boys out of America:

A gay Canadian filmmaker, Chris Ball, was alleged to have been beaten up by Trump supporters on election night in Santa Monica. It was upsetting, but it turned out the incident never really happened at all.

An image also recently went viral online that purported to show KKK members in North Carolina celebrating Donald Trump’s victory. It was really awful. And it was also confirmed to be a hoax. The proof of the hoax, however, didn’t go viral.

Many other hoaxes of Trump-induced terror are being debunked as we speak.

All of these “hate-crime” fabrications made up by the anti-Trump forces are nothing new. They are a completely natural ingredient of how totalitarians operate and, hence, how the Unholy Alliance of the Left and Islam operates. Shillman Fellow Daniel Greenfield explains this phenomenon in the context of the Left:

“The left is a victimhood cult. It feeds off pain and fetishizes suffering as a moral commodity to be sold and resold in exchange for political power.”

Greenfield calls this leftist charade “victimocracy” and labels its foot soldier the “cry-bully” who is, in reality, the “abuser-victim.” This monster, Greenfield writes, is

“the abuser who pretends to be a victim. His arguments are his feelings. He comes armored in identity politics entitlement and is always yelling about social justice or crying social justice tears. If you don’t fight back, the cry-bully bullies you. If you fight back, the cry-bully cries and demands a safe space because you made him feel unsafe.”

Thus, because now the Unholy Alliance maniacs feel “unsafe” because they didn’t get their way in the election, it becomes very clear why it’s crucial for them to play the victim – and, most importantly, to fabricate “hate-crimes” being perpetrated against themselves. Greenfield explains:

“If cry-bullies can’t safe-bait you, they will manufacture threats by faking hate crimes against themselves or phoning in bomb threats to validate their need for a safe space in which no one is allowed to disagree with them. Surviving their own fake crimes turns cry-bullies into social justice heroes.”

Islamic supremacists play a key part in this story. And since the Left controls our culture and boundaries of discourse, it makes complete sense that the media, instead of focusing on how the Muslim community should make Americans feel safe by repudiating Islamic texts that inspire and sanction violence against unbelievers, instead amplify the narrative that it is Muslims who are afraid and that it is non-Muslim Americans who need to make Muslims feel safe. Leading scholar of Islam Robert Spencer explains this charade, unveiling why Muslim Brotherhood front groups such as the CAIR need there to be hate crimes against Muslims so badly:

“The Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) wants and needs hate crimes against Muslims, because they’re the currency they use to buy power and influence in our victimhood-oriented society, and to deflect attention away from jihad terror and onto Muslims as putative victims.”

This is why the Muslima at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette fabricated the “hate-crime” against herself. And it is also why her lie is only the latest example in a long list of so many other Muslim counterfeit stories.

Just to list a few of the typical and notorious incidents:

In February 2016, a Michigan Muslima, Said Chatti, was arraigned in Dearborn’s 18th District Court for making a false police report about an “Islamophobic” plot to bomb Dearborn FordsonHigh School, a majority-Muslim high school. She contacted the Dearborn Police Department and claimed that an “anonymous” friend of hers overheard a group of individuals plotting to blow up the school to retaliate against the November 2015 terrorist attacks in Paris. When the police presented her with the evidence of the holes in her story, she admitted it was a false report.

In December 2015, a 37-year-old Muslim man, Gary Nathaniel Moore of Houston, was charged with first-degree arson for setting a Houston mosque on fire on Christmas day – a mosque where he himself was a regular, having attended it for five years, coming five times per day to pray seven days per week. Using surveillance video from multiple businesses nearby, investigators were able to identify Moore and a search warrant of his home recovered a backpack and clothing similar to that which was seen in surveillance footage, as well as half of a two-pack of charcoal lighter-fluid bottles that seemed to match another lighter fluid bottle found inside the mosque.

In March 2012, we beheld the murder of Muslima Shaima Alawadi. At first reported as a “hate-crime,” it then turned out to be an honor murder. The media and Unholy Alliance were extremely vocal and indignant while the murder was a hate-crime, even staging a campaign, “One Million Hijabs for Shaima Alawadi.” But once the murder turned out to be an Islamic crime, Shaima turned out not to matter to even one of the activists who had, at one point, made so much noise and howled so many cries of indignation.

The list goes on and on: a Muslim woman in England was proven to have lied to police about claiming to have been punched in the face for wearing a hijab; a Muslim woman in Dearborn dropped a lawsuit against police after video proved she was lying when claiming they forced her to remove her hijab; a supposed “hit-and-run” on a Muslim woman in Brussels blamed on “far right” anti-Islam demonstrators turned out to be perpetrated by a Muslim named “Mohamed.”

Many more of these Muslim victimization fantasies and lies have been documented by Robert Spencer in his special report, “The Top Anti-Muslim Hate Crime Hoaxes of 2014,” and in his recent video, Yet Another “Islamophobic Hate Crime” Hoax.

And so, we come to see that faking hate-crimes is a long and standard tradition of the cry-bully, and the Unholy Alliance is the premier cry-bully of our modern age. With Trump’s victory now a reality, the Left/Islam forces are foaming at the mouth and gnashing their teeth.

And while they set fires and break windows, brutally beat young girls for liking Trump, break the faces of those they think look like Trump and injure police officers, they cry and whine because they are the real victims of real hate-crimes. But, as the evidence reveals, these are the hate-crimes perpetrated by the Trump supporters who might have been — and inflicted on the victims who weren’t.

Reprinted from Daily Caller.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump’s CIA nominee Mike Pompeo promises to roll back Iran deal

Jamie Glazov Moment: Steve Bannon, Keith Ellison and the Left’s Ugly Record on Anti-Semitism

‘Everyone talks about Brussels or Paris having cells. We have a cell here in Minneapolis!’

“Everyone talks about Brussels or Paris having cells. We have a cell here in Minneapolis.” Davis said that “six to 10” jihad supporters had attended previous hearings and noted that “some defendants gave them signals.” Two defendants, Mohamed Farah and Abdirahman Daud, “flashed index fingers pointed upward as they faced the gallery on their way out, an apparent symbol of ‘tawhid’ that symbolizes an Islamic concept of ‘oneness of God’ but is also a popular symbol used by ISIL supporters.”

What was happening was clear to anyone who is informed, but so few people are. Kudos to Judge Davis for telling it like it is.

“Terrorist cell is alive in Minneapolis, U.S. judge in ISIL case says,” by Stephen Montemayor, Star Tribune, November 19, 2016:

In sentencing nine young Somali-Minnesotans on terror conspiracy charges this week, U.S. District Judge Michael Davis closed a chapter in the federal government’s long, extraordinary investigation of ISIL recruitment in Minnesota.

But the full story is far from over.

In nine hearings over three days before a courtroom packed with the families of the young men who sought to give their lives to ISIL, Davis repeatedly underlined a clear message: There is a terrorist cell in Minneapolis and it is still alive today.

Each day, Davis sought to extract acknowledgment from the young men that they were “terrorists,” and left no doubt as to his thoughts on whether they were simply misguided youths.

“Everyone talks about Brussels or Paris having cells,” Davis said one day, then, raising his voice: “We have a cell here in Minneapolis.”

Saying the Minnesota public had “danced around” the issue, Davis described the cell’s size as being between nine to 20, including those sentenced last week and others killed abroad.

Later in the week, he raised eyebrows in the courtroom by telling one defendant that he noted “six to 10” supporters who attended previous hearings and insisted that “some defendants gave them signals.”

“I know they’re out there,” Davis said. “The community knows they’re out there.”

Federal prosecutors seemed to share Davis’ conviction. In an unusual development on Wednesday, they asked that two defendants, Mohamed Farah and Abdirahman Daud, be returned to the courtroom after their hearings were finished. Prosecutors said both men flashed index fingers pointed upward as they faced the gallery on their way out, an apparent symbol of “tawhid” that symbolizes an Islamic concept of “oneness of God” but is also a popular symbol used by ISIL supporters.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Priebus on Islam: “Clearly there are some aspects of that faith that are problematic”

Trump’s CIA nominee Mike Pompeo promises to roll back Iran deal

DHS Loses Thousands of ‘Keys to the Kingdom’

President-Elect Donald Trump’s campaign promise to build a wall to separate the United States from Mexico resonated with many Americans and galvanized their support, which ultimately enabled him to win the election.  These voters want to prevent narcotics and illegal aliens and the criminals and terrorists among them from flowing freely into the United States.

Indeed, that porous border must be made secure.  However, simply securing that problematic border would not end the immigration crisis.  Indeed, the lack of security along the southwest border had nothing to do with the ability of the 9/11 hijacker-terrorists to enter the United States nor did that border play a role in the great majority of terrorists who have entered the United States prior to the attacks of 9/11 or after those deadly attacks.

While illegal immigration represents a huge multi-faceted challenge and, indeed threat, to America and Americans, the multiple failures of the legal immigration system is no less problematic.

Many politicians have said that after the Trump administration secures the southwest border and removes the estimated two to three million criminal aliens that we should then consider how to address the remaining millions of illegal aliens.  In reality, in addition to removing the criminal aliens the Trump administration must take immediate and decisive steps to address the abject lack of integrity in the legal immigration system that is utterly unable to deal with its current workload let alone deal with any further increases of applications.

Green Cards, also known as Alien Registration Receipt Cards, are issued to provide reliable documentation that attests to aliens granted lawful immigrant status.  These cards serve many purposes including providing prima facia evidence of the bearer’s identity as well as his or her immigration status that enables that individual to be lawfully employed in the United States.

Green Cards also enable aliens to enter the United States through ports of entry not unlike a passport.  Green Cards can also serve as required ID to enable the bearer to board airliners and have access to corporate and government office buildings and facilities.

In a very real sense, given the multitude of lawful uses for these documents, Green Cards represent the “Keys to the Kingdom” and consequently have serious national security implications.

On November 21, 2016 OIG (the Office of the Inspector General) of the DHS (Department of Homeland Security) issued a press release on the continuing failures of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to address numerous deficiencies in the process by which Green Cards are issued.

The relatively bland title of the press release, “DHS OIG Finds USCIS Continues to Struggle to Ensure Proper Green Card Issuance” does not convey the true seriousness of the egregious examples of incompetence and ineptitude reported upon in that press release or the actual report of the investigation conducted by the OIG, “Better Safeguards Are Needed in USCIS Green Card Issuance: (OIG 17-11).”

To begin with, here is the full text of the press release:

A new Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General (DHS OIG) report concludes that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) continues to struggle to ensure proper Green Card issuance. The audit was conducted as a follow-up to a March 2016 report where where the DHS OIG disclosed that USCIS had sent potentially hundreds of Green Cards to the wrong addresses.

In fact, the problem was far worse than originally thought. Over the last 3 years, USCIS produced at least 19,000 cards that included incorrect information or were issued in duplicate. Additional mistakes included over 2,400 immigrants approved for 2-year conditional residence status being inadvertently issued cards with 10-year expiration dates. The agency also received over 200,000 reports of cards potentially misdelivered, or not being delivered to approved applicants.

The majority of the card issuance errors were due to the flawed design and functionality problems in the agency’s Electronic Immigration System (ELIS). The delays and cost overruns of the ELIS system have been documented in previous OIG reports. Although USCIS conducted a number of efforts to recover the inappropriately issued and missing cards, its efforts to address the errors have been inadequate.

“It appears that thousands of Green Cards have simply gone missing. In the wrong hands, Green Cards may enable terrorists, criminals, and undocumented aliens to remain in the United States,” said Inspector General Roth. “It is vital that USCIS ensure better tools and procedures are in place to mitigate such risks.”

The preceding paragraph contained in the OIG press release noted that “In the wrong hands, Green Cards may enable terrorists, criminals, and undocumented aliens to remain in the United States.”  Yet efforts to flag those cards at ports of entry through the computer system employed by CBP (Customs and Border Protection) Inspectors, have not been consistently implemented.  Consequently, aliens improperly issued those cards may still be able to use them to enter the United States.

The press release referenced a previous report issued in March 2016.  That report, “USCIS Automation of Immigration Benefits Processing Remains Ineffective” was also given a nondescript title that downplayed the national security implications of these failures.

These problems are not new but are decades old and have been getting increasingly worse as USCIS is forced to adjudicate a growing avalanche of applications for various immigration benefits including applications filed by aliens for political asylum, lawful immigrant status and even United States citizenship.

In fact, I testified at a hearing conducted by the House Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security on March 19, 2002 when it was discovered that two of the 9/11 terrorists, Mohammed Atta (the ringleader) and Marwan al-Shehhi had been granted authorization to attend flight school in the United States six months after the terror attacks. The topic of that hearing was, “INS’S March 2002 Notification Of Approval Of Change Of Status For Pilot Training For Terrorist Hijackers Mohammed Atta And Marwan Al-Shehhi.”

The hearing created a media circus and was covered by C-SPAN.  The C-SPAN video is worth watching.

Every member of Congress that participated in that hearing was indignant about this unbelievable failure of the immigration system.

However, virtually none of the promises made during that hearing, nearly 15 years ago, has been kept to this very day, allowing history to repeat itself over and over again.

Aliens who seek to naturalize are supposed to be subjected to a thorough investigation to determine if they possess, “Good Moral Character.”  however, those investigations are rarely, if ever conducted.  Indeed, even face-to-face interviews of these applicants have often been dispensed with.

I addressed the significance of the naturalization process in terms of national security in my article, “The Immigration Factor – Naturalized U.S. Citizen Added to FBI’s Most Wanted Terrorists List.”

Additionally, these disturbing reports focus purely on the multitude of failures of the mechanics of the system for issuing Green Cards to aliens but do not address the issue of aliens who commit fraud.

On May 30, 2013, UPI posted a report about an alleged former member of Hezbollah successfully immigrating the United States by allegedly concealing his terrorist background as noted in this headline, “Immigrant allegedly failed to reveal Hezbollah membership.”  That immigrant was ultimately naturalized and held a security clearance.

On December 6, 2014 Fox News published a report, “Saudi-born US naval engineer allegedly gave undercover agent info on how to sink carrier” that focused on how Mostafa Ahmed Awwad was educated in the United States and became a naturalized U.S. citizen, agreed to provide an FBI undercover agent with the plans of the Gerald R. Ford, a 13 billion dollar aircraft carrier that was still under construction.  Allegedly Awwad even told the undercover agent where the ship would be most vulnerable to being sunk by a missile strike.

On February 11, 2014, a hearing was conducted by the House Judiciary Committee on the issue: “Asylum Fraud: Abusing America’s Compassion?”

On December 12, 2013, an additional hearing was conducted on the issue: “Asylum Abuse: Is it Overwhelming our Borders?”  This hearing focused on the impact on our borders when, in reality the asylum abuse impacts each and every state.

Of course limiting the hearing to the issue of only “our borders” coincides neatly with the myth that all that our nation needs to do in preparation for a massive amnesty program, likely involving tens of millions of illegal aliens, is to “secure our southern border.”

I wrote about this issue in my February 5, 2015 article, “The ‘Secure Our Border First Act’ Deception » Why it’s no solution to the immigration crisis.”

Donald Trump has promised to “Drain the Swamp” as he referred to the filth and corruption of our current political system.  All Americans should be cheering him on.  However, he must also turn his attention to another “swamp” the Department of Homeland Security or, as I have come to refer to it, the “Department of Homeland Surrender,” especially where all of the immigration components of that horrifically overwhelmed and inept agency are concerned.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in FrontPage Magazine.