Minneapolis’ Islamic Call to Prayer Ushered in by Communist-Jihadi Cabal in Minnesota

Jacob Frey, working directly with Hamas doing business as the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Dar al Hijrah Islamic Center, approved the Muslim call to prayer over loudspeakers in Minneapolis for the first time in history

Minneapolis becomes only the third city in America to allow the call to prayer like this. The others are Dearborn, Michigan and Paterson, New Jersey.

You can see a brief video of this call to prayer here.

The approval of the call to prayer by Mayor Frey may be the last nail in Minnesota’s coffin, and represents, to the Muslim community, total submission by leaders of Minnesota to Islam.

This great achievement by the enemies of liberty – communists and jihadis – did not happen overnight. Minnesota has a long history of communists in leadership positions willing to pave the way for other “like-minded” revolutionaries, like the jihadis, overrunning Minneapolis-St Paul.

Arvo Kustaa Halberg, also known as Gus Hall, was recruited by his father into Communist Party USA as a teenager and moved to Minneapolis after his studies in the Soviet Union. He spent two stints in federal prison for his activities as a communist. He went on to be the leader of Communist Party USA for over 40 years, until his death in 2000. Hall ran for President in the 1972.1976, 1980, and 1984 U.S. elections.

Hall’s students are still plentiful in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Former Saint Paul Mayor Jim Scheibel (1990-1994) was an Alinsky “community organizater” and a member of the largest Marxist group in the United States – the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA).

Saul Alinsky was the author of the Marxist revolutionaries’ operational handbook, Rules for Radicals, which details how to overthrow the government, and the book is dedicated to Satan. In it, the ground level operator is called a “community organizer.”

Mark Ritchie, Minnesota’s Secretary of State from 2006 to 2014, was identified in a 2008 Huffington Post article written by DSA Member Peter Dreier as one of dozens of elected officials in the United States who started out as “community organizers.” In 1999, Ritchie attended a Communist Party event, at which he was introduced as a “friend” of the Communist party.

Also present at that 1999 Communist Party meeting was Mark Froemke, the man Trevor Loudon has dubbed “The Most Influential Communist in Minnesota.”

Froemke is the President of the Western Area Labor Council (AFL-CIO), which represents union members in 11 North Dakota counties and 7 Minnesota counties. Froemke is also a member of Communist Party USA.

These people, and many like them on city councils and in positions of influence around the Minneapolis-St Paul area, are the advocates for jihadis and the ones encouraging more to enter Minnesota via the “refugee resettlement program.”

On October 24, 2016, after Understanding the Threat (UTT) spent a week traveling across Minnesota speaking to citizens and leaders, we published an article entitled “In This War Minnesota’s Twin Cities Are Lost.” The article detailed the penetration of Minnesota by several subversive Islamic organizations including the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, and others, and the Marxist/communist ties of Minnesota’s leaders.

In the 3 1/2 years since that article, things have only become more dangerous in Minnesota, especially in the Minneapolis-St Paul area.

Let’s look at the key leaders in Minnesota today and how they are supporting and encouraging jihadis in the state.

Minnesota Governor Tim Walz wasted no time bringing terrorists into his camp. After his election in November 2018, his Lieutenant Governor Peggy Flanagan led and set up his transition team, which included the local leader of the designated Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) Hamas doing business as the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), Jaylani Hussein.

But even as a candidate, Governor Walz was courting jihadis. In February 2018, he spoke at an event at the South Metro Islamic Center (mosque) sponsored by the Muslim Brotherhood’s Muslim American Society (MAS-MN). Peggy Flanagan also attended this event.

In August of 2018, candidate Walz attended the Eid al Fitr event which was held at the U.S. Bank Stadium. Is Mr. Walz aware Eid al Fitr celebrates Islam’s first military victory over non-Muslims in battle?

On March 28, 2019, Minnesota’s Governor Tim Walz spoke at an “Islamophobia” conference hosted by the designated Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) Hamas doing business as the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR)

At this conference, he told the audience he wanted to open three new “human rights offices” in Minnesota. Is Mr. Walz aware that the international Muslim world has legally defined the phrase “human rights” as the imposition of sharia on the world? Is he aware the leadership of every Islamic nation on earth, under the banner of the OIC (Organisation of the Islamic Cooperation), served the “Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam” to the United Nations in 1993, which clearly states that Islam views “human rights” only through the lens of sharia?

As if it were scripted and well timed, in April 2019 Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, himself a sharia-adherent Muslim, began publicly discussing establishing a “Task Force on Islamophobia and Anti-Semitism,” which would include leaders from the Muslim Brotherhood’s Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), Muslim American Society (MAS), Hamas/CAIR, and others.

Ellison is very close friends with the leader of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood and U.S. Hamas Nihad Awad, and works closely with other senior U.S. Muslim Brotherhood leaders.

On April 3, 2019, for the first time in Minnesota history, three “faith” leaders offered prayers prior to the State of the State address by Governor Walz. Who represented the Muslims? Muslim Brotherhood leader Imam Asad Zaman of the Muslim American Society of Minnesota (MAS-MN).

This past December (2019), Governor Walz gave his formal consent to allow Muslims to keep resettling in Minnesota.

The Congresswoman representing Minneapolis, Minnesota is a Somali named Ilhan Omar. UTT has written about her several times, including here and here. The fact that she is a Member of Congress is evidence of how lost Minnesota is.

Hours after President Trump announced he would hold a rally at Target Center in downtown Minneapolis on October 10, 2019, Minneapolis Police Chief Medaria Arradondo announced that uniformed officers were not allowed to attend.

This followed a tweet from Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey as seen below.

Below is a photo of Minneapolis Police Chief Medaria Arradondo at his swearing-in ceremony with his son and daughter. The Chief’s son, Medaria Arradondo Jr., has a Sunnah beard and a shaved head. In Islam, a Muslim man shaves his head to draw closer to Allah, and this is often done by male Muslims attending hajj in Mecca Saudi Arabia. The below photo was taken on September 8, 2017, and the hajj that year ended on September 4.

In summary, Minnesota is in a very dangerous situation. Minnesota’s capital has a pro-jihad Attorney General and a pro-jihad Member of Congress. The Governor is working directly with people who are aiding and enabling jihadis.

What happens to truth speakers in this environment?

In January 2020, Catholic Priest Father Nick VanDenBroeke from the Church of the Immaculate Conception in Lonsdale, MN (Rice County) told his flock during his homily the U.S. “should not be allowing large numbers of Muslims asylum or immigration into our country.” He further said that Muslims were the “greatest threat to Christianity and to America” and that “our laws of immigration need to reflect that.”

This priest was accurately assessing the situation based on normative and universally accepted Islamic teachings. Yet Catholic Archbishop Bernard Hebda issued an apologetic statement regarding this event after the designated Foreign Terrorist Organization Hamas doing business as the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) publicly complained and called out Church leaders.

U.S. Islamic schools teach Muslim children that the purpose of Islam is to impose “Allah’s divine law”/sharia on all people on earth through all means necessary, including physical violence.

In fact, what Muslims teach their children in Islamic schools across Minnesota is exactly the opposite of what the non-Muslim leaders in Minneapolis are telling the people of Minnesota about Islam.

Now the question for the citizens of Minnesota is “What do I do?”

This is a war, and as UTT assessed in 2016, Minneapolis-St Paul is lost and deeply under the control of the communists and jihadis. It is likely that at some point in time, the U.S. military will have to retake Minnesota if the citizens are unable or unwilling to do it.

An adequate military analogy is that the capital of Minnesota has an enemy Division headquartered there. The citizens can organize and conduct small harassing and disruption operations inside Minneapolis to slow the enemy’s progress. Another option, or a simultaneous action, might be to organize citizens in the patriotic counties away from the state capital until they have the strength to bring real pressure on the communist and jihadi forces.

One thing is clear – Minneapolis is as overrun as any area of America. Federal government entities are not producing any positive net effects in this war in Minnesota.

It is time for Minnesota’s citizens to choose their course of action. Apathy and inaction are not among the list of choices.

Leaders must rise up, assess the situation, make a plan, and execute the plan.



John Guandolo is a U.S. Naval Academy graduate, served as an Infantry/Reconnaissance officer in the United States Marines and is a combat veteran, served as a Special Agent in the FBI from 1996-2008, and was recruited out of the FBI by the Department of Defense to conduct strategic analysis of the Islamic threat. He is the President and Founder of Understanding the Threat (UTT).


CAIR slams General for “revolting promotion of the anti-Muslim trope that Muslim youth in UK engage in sex crimes”

Netherlands: Man who murdered pro-freedom politician Pim Fortuyn “to protect Muslims” is a free man, no supervision

Germany bans Hizballah activity and designates it a terror organization, raids mosques

Canada: Mississauga amends noise bylaw to allow Islamic call to prayer

Islam prohibits suicide — or so the world has been told for far too long

Denmark: Authorities carry out “co-ordinated police action” to thwart “terror attack with militant Islamic motive”

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

U.S. Won’t Give Gaza Covid-19 Aid That Could Be Used For Jihad Terror Attacks

The relentless war on Israel by Hamas is being answered by the Trump Administration with a relentless war of its own on funding for that terrorist group. That includes a refusal by the Americans to supply Gaza – that is, Hamas – with money to fight the coronavirus. After all, cash intended by donors for PPE (masks, gowns, gloves) and ventilators can be diverted to pay for rockets and terror tunnels.

The latest installment in this campaign to cut funding for Hamas appeared in the New York Post:

The United States Agency for International Development has moved to aggressively block the distribution of coronavirus relief funds to the entire Gaza strip over concerns the money could fall into the hands of Palestinian terrorist group Hamas.

No doubt Hamas thought the coronavirus pandemic would make it hard for the Trump Administration to refuse to give aid to Gaza – which today is the same thing as giving aid to Hamas, the terror group that controls every aspect of life in the Strip. But Hamas was wrong.

The Trump administration is not supporting assistance to Gaza,” a senior administration official with knowledge of USAID plans told The Post. “There is a Hamas government in Gaza. They have indicated no interest in engaging with us, no interest in peace with Israel and in fact they continue — despite having coronavirus cases in Gaza — to fire rockets at the Israelis on a regular basis.”

The issue of Gaza funding came to the fore internally after the United States pledged $5 million to help Palestinian relief services in their fight against the deadly pandemic.

I’m very pleased the USA is providing $5M for Palestinian hospitals and households to meet immediate, life-saving needs in combating COVID-19. The USA, as the world’s top humanitarian aid donor, is committed to assisting the Palestinian people, & others worldwide, in this crisis,” U.S. Ambassador to Israel David Friedman announced in an April 16 tweet.

The plan currently calls for USAID to distribute the funds entirely within the West Bank, ruled by the comparatively more moderate Palestinian Authority and its aging leading Mahmoud Abbas. The funds will be released to a contractor, who would then have discretion to divvy up the cash on the ground as they see fit.

First, notice the derisory sum involved — $5 million. It’s almost breathtaking in its paltriness, and the clear intent to belittle the demands of the Palestinians, with their hands perennially outstretched for ever more aid. Some might describe the sum as deliberately derisory. One is surprised that Mahmoud Abbas didn’t turn it down, in one of his well-known rants, as an “insult to the Palestinian people, and the Palestinian people do not accept insults from anyone.” He may still be nursing a stunned fury: “how dare the Americans offer me so little?” But that’s just the point: the days of big handouts to the Palestinians are over, even during this pandemic. The sum the Americans offered was designed to be just enough to forestall accusations that Washington was unwilling to offer aid “at a time like this,” but the amount shows a clear intent to provide the absolute minimum. Never before have the Palestinians had to deal with an administration like this. They are at their wit’s end.

Of course this $5 million, which is being given to the PA for use in the West Bank, may be supplemented by a subsequent separate sum for Gaza; that will depend on whether the Trump Administration can find a local contractor in Gaza it trusts to distribute aid in the Strip, without any involvement by Hamas. If that happens, the donated sum is likely to be a similarly paltry amount.

Finding a trusted contractor to ensure the money flows exclusively to COVID-19 efforts instead of rockets and terror tunnels in Gaza has proved difficult. The leading contender for the job right now, Catholic Relief Services, has repeatedly expressed interest in distributing cash in the Hamas-controlled territory and has petitioned both the State Department and USAID to release funds previously awarded to them to spend in Gaza.

The CRS puts itself forward as the best candidate to distribute cash to the Palestinians, but obviously the Administration has had grave doubts about the CRS for some time; the State Department and USAID previously refused to release funds that the CRS had been awarded and wanted to spend in Gaza. The Administration is unlikely to change its mind about the CRS now. The problem remains of finding a group in Gaza that can distribute cash to both hospitals and people without involving Hamas. For if the past is any guide, if,Hamas is involved with that distribution, itwill find a way to take a cut for its leaders or to allocate whatever American aid is forthcoming to its members alone.

Catholic Relief Services (CRS), along with other faith-based and U.S. private voluntary agencies, is desperately mobilizing to mitigate the potentially catastrophic impact of COVID-19 in Gaza,” wrote CRS chief Sean Callahan in a March 20 missive to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and USAID administrator Mark Andrew Green. “We are urgently requesting the support of USAID in these efforts. ”

The Catholic Relief pitch to distribute funds has also raised eyebrows among staff at the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem — who raised a number of possible concerns about how the relief organization would allocate funds.

Catholic Relief Services thinks it is beyond reproach, an organization that needs no vetting, as a dispenser of charity with a holier-than-thou halo around its institutional head. Not everyone agrees. Those in the Trump Administration who are familiar with the organization, which in the U.S.and Europe has pushed for more Muslim migrants, has parroted the Pope’s line that “authentic Islam” has nothing to do with Islam, has been enthusiastically involved in interfaith outreach that always ends up with Christians apologizing for their islamophobia and with Muslims accepting the apology –are not enthusiastic about entrusting the CRS with the task of distributing funds to Muslims in Gaza.

USAID should ask up front the entire list of ‘local partners’ and ‘key partners’ who will receive any U.S. taxpayer dollars so that USAID can do thorough and proper vetting of each ahead of time,” embassy staff wrote.

American diplomats in Jerusalem remain impressively unimpressed by the CRS’s pretense of pure motives; they want to know exactly to whom in Gaza CRS intends to give American taxpayers’ money, so that these would-be recipients can be investigated for possible ties to terrorism. Assurances from CRS that it would never support terrorists simply won’t wash.

Here’s one possibility: Washington could provide another $5 million in aid for Gaza, but insist that it be distributed by the one group that would certainly steer clear of Hamas – that is, those who are loyal to the PA. Perhaps the money ultimately intended for Gaza could be sent to the PA in Ramallah, which would then be asked to have its loyalists in Gaza distribute the aid directly to hospitals and sufferers from the coronavirus. Would Hamas try to stop this? Unlikely, given the wrath of Gazans if the terrorist group were to block that infusion of cash. If the PA can resist helping itself to any of that money, and distributes it openly and fairly, it might regain some of its popularity, at the very moment when the mismanagement and greed of Hamas have made that terror group intolerable to many Gazans. Were the PA to be able to renew its rule in Gaza, at the expense of Hamas, which in the last 12 years of misrule has been tried and found wanting, that would be a good thing. The PA is bad, but Hamas is far far worse. It’s a consummation devoutly to be wished.



Minneapolis Neighborhood Begins Broadcasting Islamic Call to Prayer over Loudspeakers

Chicago: Islamic preacher blames Jews for coronavirus and warns Muslims to arm themselves against neighbors

UK government rejects petition demanding release of report on “ethnic background” of Muslim rape gangs

Germany: Islamic State planned to murder ex-Muslim who questioned the teaching of the Qur’an

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Secretary of State Pompeo: West Bank Annexation is Israel’s Decision

It is a great relief to realize that Israel no longer has to endure being bullied on matters of life and death by its American ally, as has happened in the past, especially during the administrations of distinctly unfriendly presidents, including Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama. At last we have an administration that recognizes Israel’s need for strategic depth in the West Bank, and also understands that Israel has the historic, legal, and moral right, should it wish, to annex the entire West Bank.

Here, as reported by Reuters, is Secretary Pompeo’s most recent restatement of this recognition:

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said on Wednesday it was up to Israel whether to annex parts of the West Bank and said that Washington would offer its views privately to Israel’s new government, drawing a warning from Palestinians who vowed not to “stand handcuffed” if Israel formally took their land.

“As for the annexation of the West Bank, the Israelis will ultimately make those decisions,” Pompeo told reporters. “That’s an Israeli decision. And we will work closely with them to share with them our views of this in (a) private setting.”

Secretary Pompeo knows that there are two independent bases for Israel’s claim to Judea and Samaria (which the Jordanians renamed the “West Bank” in order to efface, toponymically, the Jewish connection to the land). The first is the Mandate for Palestine itself. That Mandate was created by the League of Nations for the sole purpose of establishing the Jewish National Home. A review of the system of mandates should prove useful, given how many now overlook the Mandate for Palestine’s intent. When the League of Nations established the Mandates system, following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire after World War I, several mandates were created exclusively for the Arabs. France held the Mandate for Syria and Lebanon, Great Britain held the Mandate for Iraq. Those European powers were responsible for guiding the local populations to achieve independence. In the end, as we all know, the Arabs have managed to acquire 22 separate states, far more than any other people, states where they treat non-Arab Muslims – Kurds, Berbers, black Africans – with contumely or worse. And in many of those Arab states, non-Muslims are often humiliated, persecuted, and sometimes killed.

The territory reserved for the Mandate for Palestine originally extended from the Golan in the north to the Gulf of Aqaba in the south, and from an area east of the Jordan River “out into the desert” to the Mediterranean. The British then unilaterally decided that all the territory east of the Jordan — 78% of the original territory of the Mandate – would be closed to Jewish immigration, so that it would become part of the newly-created Emirate of Transjordan (later the Kingdom of Jordan). What was left in the Palestine Mandate for the Jews was 22% of the territory that was originally to have been included. This was the sliver of land that went from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean, and from the Golan to the Gulf of Aqaba. That Mandatory territory, that was to have formed part of the future Jewish state, included all of what became known as the West Bank.

What did the Mandate itself say about its purpose? Look at the Preamble to the Mandate:

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.

The declaration of November 2, 1917, which is referred to in the preamble, is the Balfour Declaration, which declared British support for the establishment of the Jewish National Home.

Note the phrase, too, about how “nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine.” The drafters quite deliberately left out any mention of “political rights” because, of course, a Jewish National Home, leading to the establishment of a Jewish state, would necessarily impinge on the political rights of local Arabs.

Article 4 of the Mandate makes clear that it is to lead to the creation of a single Jewish National Home, and not to the creation of two states, Jewish and Arab, in the territory west of the Jordan that was ultimately assigned to the Mandate:

An appropriate Jewish agency shall be recognised as a public body for the purpose of advising and co-operating with the Administration of Palestine in such economic, social and other matters as may affect the establishment of the Jewish national home and the interests of the Jewish population in Palestine, and, subject always to the control of the Administration to assist and take part in the development of the country.

The Zionist organization, so long as its organization and constitution are in the opinion of the Mandatory appropriate, shall be recognised as such agency. It shall take steps in consultation with His Britannic Majesty’s Government to secure the co-operation of all Jews who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home.

Article 6 of the Mandate calls on the mandatory authority to “facilitate Jewish immigration” and “encourage…close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands”:

The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.

So to repeat yet again – and it deserves this constant repetition — the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) was always supposed to constitute part of the Jewish National Home. Thus it was intended by the Mandates Commission, headed by the Swiss law professor William Rappard, who was greatly distressed when the British unilaterally ended Jewish immigration east of the Jordan. Had the Jews managed to hold onto the West Bank in the 1948-49 war, it would have become, as the Mandate always intended it to be, part of Israel, every bit as much as Tel Aviv or Haifa or Ashdod. When the Jordanian army seized and held territory west of the Jordan in the 1948-49 war, Jordan emulated the Romans, who had renamed “Judea” as “Syria Palaestina” or “Palestine” to efface the Jewish connection to the land. The Jordanians renamed the parts of Judea and Samaria it now controlled as “the West Bank.”

Jordan was the illegal “occupier” of the West Bank from 1948 to 1967; its only claim was that of military possession. The juridical situation was quite different for Israel, its claim was based on the Mandate for Palestine itself. But, someone might object, hadn’t the Mandates system expired when the League of Nations, which had created the system of mandates, ceased to operate in 1946 and was soon replaced by the United Nations?

No, because by its own charter, the United Nations recognized the continued relevance of the Mandates system. The UN Charter, and specifically Article 80 of that Charter, implicitly recognize the “Mandate for Palestine” of the League of Nations. This Mandate granted Jews the irrevocable right to settle in the area of Palestine, anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.

Professor Eugene Rostow, then the Dean of Yale Law School, explained the significance of Article 80:

This right [of settlement by the Jews] is protected by Article 80 of the United Nations Charter. The Mandates of the League of Nations have a special status in international law, considered to be trusts, indeed ‘sacred trusts.’

Under international law, neither Jordan nor the Palestinian Arab ‘people’ of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip have a substantial claim to the sovereign possession of the occupied territories.

To sum up: the Jewish claim to the “West Bank” is based clearly on the Palestine Mandate of the League of Nations, which gave Jews the right to settle anywhere between the Jordan and the Mediterranean. That right was not extinguished when the League of Nations came to an end. Article 80 of the U.N. Charter recognized the continuing relevance of the Mandate’s provisions. The West Bank always formed part of the territory assigned to the Jewish National Home, where the British were to “facilitate Jewish immigration” and to “encourage close settlement by Jews on the land.” Jordan was an “illegal occupier” of the West Bank from 1948 to 1967. In 1967, through its military victory, Israel at last became able to enforce the claim it had never relinquished. Even though the British had closed off the territory immediately to the east of the Jordan to Jewish settlement, effectively taking it out of the Mandate, the territory from the Jordan River westward to the Mediterranean (and from the Golan in the north to the Gulf of Aqaba in the south) remained, without further alteration, as the territory which was assigned to become the Jewish National Home. That is why Pompeo knows that it is up to Israel alone to decide how much of the West Bank it will annex.



Secretary of State Pompeo: West Bank Annexation is Israel’s Decision (Part 2)

Germany: Three Muslim migrants investigated for gang-raping 19-year-old woman

UK: Muslims threaten to murder singer who converted to Islam for using Qur’anic prayer in music video

Saudi Arabia: Man faces beheading for video of someone stepping on a Qur’an

UK Islamic scholar: Even if wife licks husband’s bloody infected wounds, she won’t fulfill her obligations to him

Pakistan: Muslim cleric says coronavirus pandemic was caused by “immodest women”

Nigeria: Muslims murder four people and destroy 36 houses in raid on farming village

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Trump Orders Navy to Destroy Any Iranian Gunboats That Harass U.S. Ships

My latest in PJ Media:

On Wednesday morning, Earth Day no less, when any responsible president would have been hectoring people about global warming, President Trump had other concerns on his mind. “I have instructed the United States Navy,” he tweeted, “to shoot down and destroy any and all Iranian gunboats if they harass our ships at sea.”

Predictable scorn ensued from the Left. Writer Nick Jack Pappas was just one of the many who focused on Trump’s choice of words, tweeting, “Trump is giving the order to shoot down boats. I didn’t realize Iran had flying boats now.” They ignored the fact that one can shoot a man down without his being able to fly, but anything will do for a dig at the President. Iranian freedom activist and journalist Heshmat Alavi was more focused, tweeting: “The mullahs’ regime ruling #Iran harasses UN [sic] Navy ships for propaganda purposes. Thank you, President Trump, for reminding this regime that the Obama years are gone. And BTW, this regime does not represent the Iranian people.”

Alavi was right. The Iranian mullahs, apparently having forgotten that Barack Obama is no longer President, were at it again just last week. According to Business Insider, “nearly a dozen Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy vessels sailed out Wednesday to harass a collection of US Navy and Coast Guard vessels conducting operations in international waters.”

The U.S. Navy stated that eleven Iranian boats of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps Navy (IRGCN) “conducted dangerous and harassing approaches,” and added that “the IRGCN’s dangerous and provocative actions increased the risk of miscalculation and collision.” The Iranians, said the Navy statement, were violating the “rules of the road.”

This was not, however, a simple traffic dispute. Leftists will no doubt ascribe it to an increase of tensions over President Trump’s targeting earlier this year of Iranian Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani. However, all those who are blaming Trump for ramping up tensions with Iran are ignoring the fact that Iran has been working toward a war with the U.S. for decades, as The Complete Infidel’s Guide to Iran demonstrates in detail.

On November 2, 2015, a commanding majority of the Majlis, 192 of its 290 members, agreed to a statement saying that “Death to America,” which continues to be chanted at every Friday prayer in Iranian mosques as well as at anti-American protests, was not just a slogan: it had “turned into the symbol of the Islamic Republic and all struggling nations.”

A communal desire to destroy the United States and commit mass murder of its citizens is the Islamic Republic of Iran’s very identity.

There is much more. Read the rest here.


CIA agents reveal Bill Clinton stopped them killing bin Laden, signed bill making it illegal to take deadly action

Islamic jihadi who posed with severed head sneaks into Spain as “undocumented” migrant

Indonesia: Islamic Defenders Front breaks up church meeting, threatens worshipers, attacks one

Germany: Muslim migrant screaming “Allahu akbar” kicks 76-year-old man to death, is “mentally ill,” won’t be tried

India: Muslims enraged, put bounty on head of Bollywood singer for tweet critical of adhan over loudspeakers

Pakistan mosques to stay open for Ramadan: “The mosque is a safe place. I am not afraid of the coronavirus.”

In Iran, Another Example of Coronavirus Conspiracy Theorizing

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

$66 Mil, Federal Agents, National Guard Wasted on 2,500-Bed Camp That Averaged 30 Immigrants

Against the advice of frontline agents, the federal government opened a temporary immigration detention facility that was barely used and cost a ghastly $66 million to operate for just five months. During that time the tent encampment situated in a rural west Texas community near the Mexican border housed an average of just 30 detainees, according to a scathing federal audit that blasts the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for the waste. Though it has a 2,500-person capacity, the facility never held more than 66 illegal aliens on any given day, investigators from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) found.

Not only did Customs and Border Protection (CBP) pay a private contractor tens of millions of dollars in facility costs, it spent “about $5.3 million for food services—the preparation and delivery of meals and snacks—it did not need,” the congressional probe reveals. In an enraging example, investigators write that, during the first three months, the government paid for about 675,000 meals despite ordering only 13,428 because there were not enough detainees. The U.S. also “leveraged significant federal personnel resources” that added up to an additional $6.7 million. This includes 75 unarmed guards to monitor the camp around the clock and officers from DHS agencies such as CBP, the Border Patrol (BP), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) as well as soldiers from the National Guard. Investigators did the math and figured that each illegal immigrant detainee that stayed at the camp was guarded by four soldiers, three security guards and at least one CBP agent. The resources “could have been allocated to other missions,” the GAO writes in its report.

Here is a breakdown of the federal officers wasted on this seldom-used immigrant detention camp in addition to the separately paid contract security guards. Twenty-one CBP agents responsible for facility operations, such as detainee intake, welfare checks and transportation, among other things. Eleven BP agents from the El Paso sector, one of the nation’s busiest, 10 CBP officers from the Office of Field Operations and five ICE agents to help coordinate on decisions made about individuals at the facility. On top of all that, 116 Texas National Guard soldiers were deployed to the encampment for logistical support such as meal distribution and monitoring security cameras, among other duties.

The facility in the El Paso County town of Tornillo was once used to detain illegal immigrant minors and was briefly reopened for single adults around the beginning of August 2019. It finally closed at the start of 2020, but not without fleecing American taxpayers. It’s not like the government didn’t have opportunities to shut it down earlier. In fact, initially the camp was only supposed to open for three months at a cost of $47 million and could have been closed based on the numbers—less than 1% of capacity. Instead, the feds extended the deal for two months at a cost of $19 million. “Border Patrol officials in the El Paso sector told us that the sector recommended to Border Patrol headquarters that the facility be closed and resources reallocated elsewhere for other CBP missions, due to the consistently low numbers of individuals held at the facility and the personnel resource requirements to operate the facility,” the GAO report states.

But, as we regularly see in government, there is often little consensus—or cooperation—among agencies, even when they exist under the same umbrella. In this case the DHS, the gargantuan agency created after 9/11 to prevent another terrorist attack. Congressional investigators write that CBP pushed to keep the Tornillo camp open though it was hardly used. The 60,000-employee agency is charged with keeping terrorists and their weapons out of the U.S. while facilitating lawful international travel and trade and apparently it pulled more weight than the frontline BP agents. “In contrast, CBP headquarters officials told us, despite the consistently low numbers of detainees held in the Tornillo facility, they decided to continue operations for the 2,500-person facility because they were operating in an environment with considerable uncertainty related to migrant flow and wanted to prepare for the possibility of increased apprehensions,” the report says.


Judicial Watch: Emails Suggest Obama FBI Knew McCain Leaked Trump Dossier

Judicial Watch Victory: Federal Court Orders Maryland to Release Complete Voter Registration Records

Judicial Watch’s Campaign for Clean Elections

EDITORS NOTE: This Judicial Watch column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

The Birth Of An American Freedom Movement

We may be witnessing the birth of a movement that could be the most important result of the COVID-19 nightmare: the anti-lockdown protests sweeping the country.

Per our usual agreement, the media is totally getting it wrong. It’s not about being able to go to restaurants or movies or even only about going back to work. It’s certainly not about a death cult or not taking the virus seriously.

The protests are, at core, about people who want their rights back — rights that have been snatched in just a few weeks time. It’s driven by people who understand the threat of tyrannical government, and that threat is very, very real. It’s happening right in front of our eyes.

Probably the best face of Orwell’s dystopian 1984 is New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio. Although the Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer is a close second. Mayor de Blasio is calling on residents to report their neighbors to law enforcement for violations of social distancing protocols. And it’s made super easy. Yay! How do you narc out your neighbors who don’t obey government edicts? “It’s simple: just snap a photo and text it to 311-692.” de Blasio said. “We will make sure that enforcement comes right away.”

Wow, wow, wow. Please read 1984. This is *exactly* what Big Brother teaches neighbors and children to do. Everyone is a snitch. People live in terror. In 1984, they disappear if they don’t follow the government line. We’re not there yet. But this is an astonishing step in the Big Brother direction.

Here’s where we are in different places in the country. Governments dumping tons of sand into the skate parks to keep them from being used. Cops patrolling streets with bullhorns to warn people to stay away from each other. Government threatening to turn off the power to your business if you do not close like you’re told. New “laws” that you may not drive from your house, in your car, to another property you own, even if you never leave your car. You may not go to drive-in church services, again even if you never leave your car. You may not go fishing. You may not assemble together in any way. You will be forcefully pulled off a bus without a face mask. Anti-quarantine protests being organized through Facebook in California, New Jersey, and Nebraska, are being removed from the platform on the orders of governments because they violate stay-at-home orders.

These are constitutional affronts of a level not seen since FDR rounded up Japanese-Americans and placed them in internment camps during WWII. Too many Americans have become complacent in our comforts about ceding individual rights to government. Save us! they demand. Take whatever rights you need! Of course if we will not fight for our freedoms, we won’t have them and we won’t deserve them.

So it is heartening to see the respectful, often social-distancing movement of protests across the country, in Seattle, San Diego, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Carolina. These protesters are peaceful and organic, popping up big and small. And while they are demanding the economy be opened back up, they are also demanding that their rights be returned, First Amendment rights such as freedom of religion and freedom of assembly.

The Tea Party was launched over the financial recklessness of the federal government in responses to the financial crisis of 2008. It was at core a fiscal movement, though it broadened some. The fiscal recklessness today is many times larger. But worse are the overall trampling of rights — which is what makes this potential movement so important.

The truth is that a ton of voluntary social distancing and closing was happening long before jackboots like de Blasio decided to crush our rights. Much of the government’s totalitarian response has been unnecessary. And as the virus crests and starts declining, the heavy-handedness is getting worse in areas — such as New York City.

Americans largely don’t need to be told what to do, despite years of schools and colleges teaching us what to think instead of how to think. Common sense still pervades the land. But we need the spine to stand up to an overbearing government.

The anti-lockdown protests are doing just that.

EDITORS NOTE: This Revolutionary Act column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Illinois: Muslim who slashed tires at churches and said ‘I don’t like Christians’ now tries to burn occupied church

“In November 2019, prosecutors said that El Hannouny slashed the tires of 19 cars in the parking lots of the First Baptist and Sts. Helen and Constantine churches. Upon his arrest, he told authorities that he damaged the cars because, “I don’t like Christians,” according to police. Hate crime charges were added in January, and he was released on a $10,000 I-bond with electronic monitoring.”

We see how well that worked. Officials did not and would never dare to address the root causes of El-Hannouny’s hatred, and so he was free to act upon it again. When arrested this time, he didn’t show any sign of remorse: “While El Hannouny was being processed, police said he started spitting at officers, reports said. El Hannouny also wrote a religious slur on the wall of his cell.” Yet he will soon be free again, and will almost certainly target yet another church.

“Man Accused of Trying To Burn Down Occupied Church,” by Lorraine Swanson, Patch, April 16, 2020 (thanks to the Geller Report):

PALOS HILLS, IL — A Palos Hills man already facing hate crime and criminal damage charges is now accused of trying to set fire to an occupied church, reports said. Osama E. El Hannouny, 25, appeared Wednesday before a Cook County judge on charges of arson, hate crimes, criminal damage to property, battery to a police officer and violation of bail bond.

In November 2019, prosecutors said that El Hannouny slashed the tires of 19 cars in the parking lots of the First Baptist and Sts. Helen and Constantine churches. Upon his arrest, he told authorities that he damaged the cars because, “I don’t like Christians,” according to police. Hate crime charges were added in January, and he was released on a $10,000 I-bond with electronic monitoring.

On April 14, police said El Hannouny used leaves to set fire to Sacred Heart Church, 8245 W. 111th St. According to the police report, El Hannouny was caught on video looking through the doors of the church building and noticing that it was occupied. Police said he made numerous trips to pile leaves near the gas main and air conditioning unit. El Hannouny allegedly set the leaves on fire, but firefighters quickly extinguished the flames.

While El Hannouny was being processed, police said he started spitting at officers, reports said. El Hannouny also wrote a religious slur on the wall of his cell, according to the report. El Hannouny allegedly scratched, bit and spit at police when they tried to stop him….


Afghanistan: Muslims shoot and kill six workers at US-run Bagram Airfield

Australia: Sunni Muslims who firebombed a Shi’ite mosque lose appeals against their terror convictions

Killing for Muhammad’s Honor: The Highest Expression of the Islamic Faith

Egypt: Muslims who targeted Christians for jihad massacre planned to strike under cover of coronavirus curfew

Tunisia: Two jihadis arrested for trying to infect police with coronavirus

Germany: Government pays $19,500 to jihad preacher who is classified as a threat and is already on welfare

PBS Backdating and Exaggerating the Muslim Presence in the U.S. (Part 1)

RELATED VIDEO: Corona Virus  – The Muslim Response.

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Iran attack boats harass US Navy and Coast Guard ships in ‘dangerous’ exchange

Iran keeps acting as if Obama were still President, although they have already found out that he isn’t. They are avid for war with the United States, and have been for years.

I wrote it in 2016, but I could have written it yesterday. The Complete Infidel’s Guide to Iran details the Islamic Republic’s militaristic aims, its support for global terrorism, its oppression of its own people, and much, much more, including exactly why Obama’s late and much-lamented nuclear deal was so disastrous.

“Photos show nearly a dozen Iranian attack boats harassing US Navy and Coast Guard ships in ‘dangerous’ exchange,” by Ryan Pickrell, Business Insider, April 15, 2020 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

Nearly a dozen Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy vessels sailed out Wednesday to harass a collection of US Navy and Coast Guard vessels conducting operations in international waters, the US 5th Fleet said in a statement accompanied by a collection of photos.

At the time of the incident, the Navy expeditionary mobile base vessel USS Lewis B. Puller, destroyer USS Paul Hamilton, and patrol ships USS Firebolt and USS Sirocco, together with the Coast Guard cutters USCGC Wrangell and USCGC Maui, were carrying out joint operations with Army AH-64E Apache attack helicopters in the Persian Gulf.

The US Navy has been using the Puller as a landing base platform for the Army helicopters in operations the Navy has said are designed to “enhance the capabilities of US forces to respond to surface threats.” Such threats could potentially include swarms of small boats.

The US Navy said Wednesday that 11 Iranian boats “conducted dangerous and harassing approaches” and that the IRGCN boats crossed the bows and sterns of the US ships repeatedly, at one point closing to within 10 yards of one of the cutters.

The crews on the US vessels issued warnings over bridge-to-bridge radio and sounded their horns and long-range acoustic noise-maker devices, 5th Fleet said in its statement. After about an hour, the Iranian vessels finally responded and moved away from the American ships.

In addition to photos, 5th Fleet released video from the incident.

“The IRGCN’s dangerous and provocative actions increased the risk of miscalculation and collision,” the US Navy said, accusing the Iranian vessels of violating the “rules of the road.”

The US and Iran came close to war earlier this year after the US killed a top Iranian general in a drone strike and Iran retaliated with a missile strike on US forces. While there is currently a decreased risk of immediate armed conflict, tensions persist


Italy: Doctor on migrant transport ship says rescuing migrants more important than coronavirus worries

Yemen: Houthi jihadis say they will kill people who contract coronavirus

Afghanistan: Taliban open fire on youths who were playing cricket, one dead, three others wounded

Mozambique: “We want everyone here to apply Islamic law. We want a government from Allah.”

Italy: Leftist government shuts out Muslim migrants only because coronavirus makes the country unsafe for them

Iran: Islamic Revolution Guards Corps says its new coronavirus detector can identify infected people 100 meters away

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Iowa: Republican candidate calls for redefining Islam as ‘militant cultural imperialism seeking world domination’

Phillips said he has spent time personally studying Islam and believes that when a Muslim swears the oath to the Constitution using the Quran, that negates the constitutional law because they are “sworn to turn this country into an Islamic country.”

Hamas-linked CAIR has already weighed in, calling upon “state and national Republican Party leaders to repudiate the Islamophobic, unconstitutional statements” made by Phillips. That was to be expected, but Rick Phillips’ statement opens up a needed debate on the nature of Islam and the potential impact of jihad and Sharia upon America. The larger question Phillips poses is this: if the normative belief of any religion contradicts the American Constitution, and if a religious practice teaches the supremacy of that faith over America, and in fact views America as part of the House of War (dar al harb), is that religion protected under the American Constitution? In other words, does the Constitution allow for sedition and subversion as long as it is carried out under the auspices of a religion?

Rick Phillips is being attacked as an “Islamophobe,” but the questions he raises have too long been swept under the rug, and they require attention for the survival of America and its values. This does not mean that it is prudent to revoke the religious status of Islam altogether, but his recommendations should lead to further discussion about treason vis-a-vis the general understanding of religious freedom today, the activities of Muslim Brotherhood operatives, the imposition of the “Islamophobia” subterfuge, the tolerance of radical mosques, and much more.

“Republican in Iowa’s 2nd District primary calls for Islam’s religious status to be revoked,” by Ian Richardson, Des Moines Register, April 13, 2020:

A Republican candidate for Iowa’s 2nd Congressional District, whose platform calls for redefining Islam as “militant cultural imperialism seeking world domination,” drew fire Monday for saying he doesn’t believe Islam is protected under the First Amendment.

Pella Republican Rick Phillips told Quad Cities television station WHBF that he believes the founding fathers were specifically talking about Christianity and its denominations when they established the freedom of religion outlined in the Bill of Rights.

“They were not talking about anti-Christian beliefs,” he said. “Now, if a person doesn’t want to believe in Christ, that’s their business. But to say that this First Amendment right includes all religions in the world, I think, is erroneous.”

Reached by the Des Moines Register Monday afternoon, Phillips said he has spent time personally studying Islam and believes that when a Muslim swears the oath to the Constitution using the Quran, that negates the constitutional law because they are “sworn to turn this country into an Islamic country.”

He said former president Barack Obama brought several Muslims into the country and there has been an increasing number of mosques built since 9/11.

“All this is packaged as if it’s harmless, and stuff like that,” he said. “But I really see this as an invasion to install a caliphate — an Islamic form of government — here.”

Both the Council on American-Islamic Relations, a Muslim civil rights and advocacy group, and the Republican Party of Iowa have condemned Phillips’ remarks.

In a news release, Robert S. McCaw, director of government affairs for CAIR, called on state and national Republican Party leadership to “repudiate these Islamophobic, unconstitutional views.”

“The Constitution must protect Americans of all faiths,” he said. “The kind of hatred and anti-American views promoted by Mr. Phillips places in danger both constitutional protections of religious freedoms and the safety of ordinary American Muslims.”

Republican Party of Iowa spokesman Aaron Britt said in an email that Phillips’ comments “are not reflective of the views of the Republican Party of Iowa.”…


Jihad groups celebrate coronavirus as “small soldier of Allah,” deadly jihad attacks increase during lockdown

A Jerusalem Post Mistake Provokes Gleeful Tweets From the Anti-Israel Brigade

France: Muslim migrant threatens cops with knife, is shot dead

UK: MI5 aware of 43,000 terrorist suspects, not 23,000 as previously claimed

India: Muslims attack female doctor at Delhi hospital, doctors hide as Muslim mob tries to break open door

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Don’t trust China: Lessons from Taiwan

Amid coronavirus upheaval, the Chinese government’s evasion and deception has remained constant.

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) alone is responsible for the global pandemic and resulting consequential economic devastation. However, if the medical community had been skeptical of the totalitarian regime –and the World Health Organization (WHO) had not aggressively defended it –the outbreak may not have spread.

Taiwan, kicked out of the WHO in 2017 at Beijing’s behest, was denied access to WHO data. Taiwan’s successful containment of coronavirus was an alternative possibility for the rest of the world; had Beijing’s reports been challenged instead of accepted.

When doctors in Wuhan grew concerned about a new SARS-like virus, but those who tried to warn their colleagues were detained for “spreading misinformation.” Human-to-human transmission was clear to physicians by late December, but Beijing did not report that information to the WHO.

Instead, officials ordered labs to stop testing and destroy virus samples. Multiple labs mapped the genome sequence – information crucial for vaccine development – but the results were not made public. When the Shanghai Public Health Clinical Center published their findings, the center was immediately shutdown with no explanation. Whistleblowers and journalists critical of the CCP’s handling of the crisis have also been detained or disappeared.

Globally, outbreak projections were based on the assumption the virus was only infecting people directly connected to the wet market into late January.

study by the University of Southampton showed if Chinese authorities had acted three weeks earlier than they did—when they were silencing whistleblowers –the outbreak could have been reduced by 95 percent.

Dr. Deborah Birx, the coronavirus response coordinator for the White House, said the US medical community underestimated the coronavirus because of China’s unreliable data.

“The bottom line is, we didn’t know how contagious it was,” Dr. Birx said at a digital town hall event. 

A John Hopkins’ study predicted Taiwan would be the second most infected country. But Taiwan has only 388 cases and 6 deaths, without canceling schools or locking down any major cities. Australia, with a similar population size, has had 6,313 cases and 61 deaths.

“What we learned from SARS was that we need to be very skeptical with data from China,” said Chan Chang-chuan, dean of National Taiwan University’s College of Public Health.

Taiwanese officials boarded planes and inspected passengers of direct flights from Wuhan for symptoms at the end of December. People who had traveled to Wuhan and had symptoms of a respiratory infection were screened. On January 26, Taiwan banned all flights from Wuhan, earlier than any other country and against WHO recommendations.

Taipei warned the WHO of human to human transmission on December 31, but was ignored. The WHO’s willingness to disregard Taiwan in order to flatter Chinese government diktats had a snowball effect as Western experts uncritically accepted WHO’s declarations.

“We would have learned at least six weeks earlier that the outbreak could be successfully suppressed and how to do so [if Taiwan was a member of the WHO],” said Richard Ebright, molecular biologist at Rutgers University. 

The novel coronavirus has brought to the forefront the fundamental challenge of international institutions, which fail to distinguish between free societies and dictatorships. The successful response of Taiwan, a liberal democracy, to the virus serves as a foil to China’s brutal authoritarianism.

The most important CCP objective is to maintain control. Ultimately the party does not care about human rights, or even human lives. To protect itself, the Chinese regime suppressed life-saving information at the cost of 22,071 American lives, a number projected only to grow.


About Morgan Wirthlin

Morgan Wirthlin is the Chief of Staff at the Center for Security Policy. She graduated from Brigham Young University with a degree in Political Science.

View all posts by Morgan Wirthlin 


Center for Security Policy publishes crucial book on the dire state of America’s nuclear weapons

Not a single dollar for the rogue regime in Iran

How the world is being manipulated by COVID-19 propaganda from China

Authoritarian governments flood the information space with lies amidst the pandemic

EDITORS NOTE: This Center for Security Policy column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

American research team discloses undeclared nuclear weapons development site in Iran

In 2018, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu offered proof that the Iran nuclear deal was based on lies. He revealed a cache of documents that demonstrated conclusively that “Iran lied to the world about its nuclear program for years, even after the 2015 nuclear deal with the world.”

Now, “a team of American experts says it has uncovered a previously unknown Islamic Republic nuclear weapons development site in Iran.” The Institute for Science and International Security “says that it has evidence the Islamic Republic operated the nuclear weapons development facility in northern Iran until at least 2011 when it was likely destroyed as Western nations began to investigate the country’s weapons program.”

“It should be remembered in this connection that the concept of taqiyya as such is specifically Shi’ite, developed during the time of the sixth Imam, Jafar al-Sadiq, in middle of the eighth century, when the Shi’ites were being persecuted by the Sunni caliph al-Mansur.”

See more about taqiyya HERE.

Iranian allies have been pressuring the U.S. to ease sanctions amid the coronavirus pandemic, yet it has already been reported that money for domestic interests is being diverted to the jihad terrorist Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

“Research Group Discloses Undeclared Iran ‘Nuclear Weapons’ Development Site,” Radio Farda, April 9, 2020:

A team of American experts says it has uncovered a previously unknown Islamic Republic nuclear weapons development site in Iran.

The Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) called on Tehran on April 8 to acknowledge the previously undisclosed site to international inspectors.

Founded in 1993, the Institute for Science and International Security is led by former United Nations IAEA nuclear inspector David Albright.

ISIS says that it has evidence the Islamic Republic operated the nuclear weapons development facility in northern Iran until at least 2011 when it was likely destroyed as Western nations began to investigate the country’s weapons program.

“Based on documents in the Iran Nuclear Archive, seized by Israel in early 2018, Iran’s Amad Plan created the Shahid Mahallati Uranium Metals Workshop near Tehran to research and develop uranium metallurgy related to building nuclear weapons”, ISIS says.

Amad Plan refers to Iran’s alleged roadmap to developing a nuclear weapon.

“The facility was intended as a pilot plant, aimed at developing and making uranium components for nuclear weapons, in particular components from weapon-grade uranium, the key nuclear explosive material in Iranian nuclear weapon cores,” the institute disclosed.

The site was meant to be temporary until the production-scale Shahid Boroujerdi facility at Parchin was completed….


Bernie Sanders, Muslims, Hindus, and the truth of Kashmir

UK: “counter-terrorism police” investigating the “far right” for stoking “anti-Muslim sentiment” during coronavirus

“We will never Live as Dhimmis”: The Stealth Cultural Jihad in America

The Persecution of Christians in Muslim Countries: The West is Playing with Fire with Mass Muslim Migration

Hamas Threatens to Murder Six Million Israelis Over Ventilators

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

PODCAST: Visit Ground Zero of Virus Response with DHS’s Chad Wolf

Acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf has his hands full with the coronavirus, but there’s one group of people he’s not about to go into disaster relief mode without: clergy. Find out why he made them “essential personnel” as well as the challenges he’s encountered with a full-blown, 50-state emergency.


‘Sunday Is Coming’

VP Mike Pence: There’s ‘Always Hope’

EDITORS NOTE: This FRC-Action podcast is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Notre Dame prof hails Islamic law, asks international law judges to consider “referring to parts of Sharia”

“Notre Dame’s Emilia Justyna Powell, an associate professor of political science and concurrent associate professor of law, an expert in both international law and the Islamic legal tradition, traveled to many Muslim-majority nations to research how the two systems work together in practice.”

Now Powell is on a mission to teach Westerners that Sharia is similar to international law and in some ways superior. For this dubious endeavor she is lavishly featured in the Notre Dame University newspaper. Powell’s canvassing for Sharia has led her to ask “some international court judges” if they “would ever consider referring to parts of the Sharia.”

Powell’s interest in researching Islamic law further is driven, in part, by the bias she sees toward Western law to the point of absolute exclusion of any facets of Islamic law in international law. In fact, some international court judges she interviewed were irritated when she asked if they would ever consider referring to parts of Sharia. “Out of all the religions of the world, we’ve contributed to a large-scale misunderstanding of their legal tradition,” Powell said. “Islamic law and international law share many more similarities than they are given credit for.”

Powell’s skewed view of the Sharia is deceptive, propagandistic and dangerous. There is no comparison between international law (which is democracy-based) and Sharia (which is authoritarian and discriminatory). The violence, human rights abuses and murders committed throughout history in the name of Islam are not an aberration. They are reflections of normative Islam, fully backed by Islamic jurisprudence, which teaches the murder of apostates and gays, the conquest and subjugation of infidels, and the inferiority of women, including the head coverings (Quran 24:31, Quran 33:59) about which Powell fallaciously rambles.  The arrogance displayed by Powell is also an affront to Muslim dissidents who face (and experience) imprisonment (and worse) for opposing the human rights abuses sanctioned by Islamic law. Powell’s potential influence on the young minds who must listen to her propaganda in the classroom is concerning. And she is not unique; in fact, in many colleges and universities today, she is the norm.

“Islamic law and international law share many similarities, Notre Dame Professor says,” by Colleen Sharkey, Notre Dame News, April 8, 2020:

The very term Sharia conjures negative images in the minds of many Westerners, in part due to its association with extremist groups. However, an in-depth look at Islamic law, as practiced in the vast majority of Muslim-majority countries, reveals that it is interpreted in different ways depending on the country, its culture and the very people conducting the interpretation.

Notre Dame’s Emilia Justyna Powell, an associate professor of political science and concurrent associate professor of law, an expert in both international law and the Islamic legal tradition, traveled to many Muslim-majority nations to research how the two systems work together in practice. Her findings were published earlier this year in the volume Islamic Law and International Law: Peaceful Resolution of Disputes.

Powell uses the differences in how women dress in various Muslim-majority countries as an analogy for the various interpretations of Sharia.

“A perfect visualization is women’s head coverings. The Taliban encourages women to cover top to bottom, not even showing the eyes. In Saudi Arabia, sometimes eyes are visible but not much else,” she said. “I was recently in Bahrain where I witnessed a new trend: Women are unzipping their abayas and you can see Western-influenced clothing underneath like jeans, ruffles and lace. Many women don’t wear the hijab scarf there and some only wear it halfway on. But who’s to say which is correct? Bahrain is no less Islamic than Saudi Arabia, for example, just different. People in all Muslim-majority countries interpret and, thus, practice the Muslim faith differently.”

International law itself is based on a broad set of norms agreed upon by people from many different nations and cultures. It is also heavily based on Western law which, itself, has deep roots in Christianity — a religion that originated at a time when Roman law was already well established. “Islam, on the other hand, had no a priori legal system to work with other than unwritten tribal customs,” Powell writes. And, while international law has moved to a more secular model, Islamic law remains based in the writings of the Quran and the sunna as well as ijma (judicial consensus) and qiyas (analogical reasoning).

“However, disconcerting the dissonance between the Islamic legal tradition and international law may appear, there are more similarities between these two legal systems than the policy world and the scholarship take into account,” she writes.

By its broad nature, international law allows for interpretation based on norms in individual countries. And many Muslim-majority states have their own declaration of human rights, she notes.

“Sometimes international law promotes the peaceful resolution of disputes, but does not give specific rules or cite specific laws for how to do so. Countries can mediate, peacefully, via negotiation in compliance with international law. Sometimes Muslim-majority countries will also sign international treaties but place restrictions on them — what are technically called ‘reservations.’”

For example, some Muslim-majority countries use reservations to remove “freedom of religion” clauses, because their religion is inextricably part of their culture, with the assumption (often part of the country’s own understanding of human rights) that many of their citizens are all Muslim. In this way, Powell says, they are complying with some international norms but allowing for their identity to remain intact.

Powell also examines how Muslim-majority nations in different geographical areas use Sharia and work within the international law framework. In general, Powell finds that if an ILS (Islamic Law State) country has a secular court system and their constitution mentions peaceful resolutions of disputes, they possess a more favorable attitude toward international courts.

“The Islamic milieu is not a monolith. In each of the ILS, secular law and Islamic law coalesce to create a unique legal framework. Every one of the ILS is different in how it negotiates the relationship between these two legal forces — the religious and the secular — along with their respective differences in socio-demographic and political characteristics. Historically, every one of the ILS has worked out its own unique answers to the question of the balance of Islamic law and secular law,” she writes.

The examples Powell gathered through interviews shed light on the cultural and religious lenses through which many Muslims view courts….


Taliban say coronavirus is “sent by Allah because of the sins of mankind,” demand medicine and aid from sinners

Tennessee: Man who stabbed and killed three women was “practicing Muslim,” no indication of mental illness

Muslim cleric says “hatred and hostility” toward Jews is “part of our faith”

UK: Former soldier charged with three terror offenses, held in prison for fighting AGAINST the Islamic State (ISIS)

Khamenei: “Fighting over toilet paper is the logical outcome of the philosophy that governs Western civilization”

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

VIDEO: A 35 Minute Interview on Political Islam

Topics include: Islamic Golden Age; the future of Islam; reforming Islam; the slave trade; Islamic dualism, poverty and Islam; why Macron will not be able to create a European Islam; the difference between opinion and facts; what I like about Islam and the difference between our civilization and Islamic civilization.

© All rights reserved.

PODCAST: DHS Chief Chad Wolf Hopes to Have 450 Miles of Border Wall Built by End of Year

Chad Wolf, acting secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, joined The Daily Signal Podcast at the Conservative Political Action Conference earlier this year to detail progress on President Donald Trump’s wall at the U.S. border with Mexico. Read a lightly edited transcript of the interview, posted below, or listen to the podcast:

Plus: Andy Ngo, the journalist who was attacked by Antifa last June, joins the podcast to reflect on socialism versus the American dream. We also cover these stories:

  • American hospitals struggle to keep up amid the coronavirus pandemic.
  • New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo shares reasons for hope as New York faces COVID-19.
  • California loans 500 ventilators to the national stockpile.

The Daily Signal Podcast is available on Ricochet, Apple PodcastsPippaGoogle Play, or Stitcher. All of our podcasts can be foundat DailySignal.com/podcasts. If you like what you hear, please leave a review. You can also leave us a message at 202-608-6205 or write us at letters@dailysignal.com. Enjoy the show!

Rachel del Guidice: We are joined today on The Daily Signal Podcast by Chad Wolf. He’s the acting secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. Chad, thank you so much for being with us today.

In these trying times, we must turn to the greatest document in the history of the world to promise freedom and opportunity to its citizens for guidance. Find out more now >>

Chad Wolf: I appreciate it. Thank you for having me.

Del Guidice: So Chief Rodney Scott, who works at the U.S. Border Patrol, he recently announced that 126 miles of the border has been completed. There are 213 miles under construction and 414 miles on pre-construction. Can you tell us about those landmarks that have been reached?

Wolf: Yeah, it’s very exciting. At the end of this calendar year we hope to have 450 miles built. So that’s [a] new wall system, border wall system. That’s new capability for the Border Patrol agents that they’ve never had before.

So we’re replacing 6-, 7-, 8-foot-high 1970s-era landing mat fence with bollard fencing that’s 8- to 30-feet-high. But it’s not only that physical infrastructure, it’s the cameras, the roads, the lighting, the fiber optic cables. It’s that whole border wall system that gives them capabilities that they’d never had before.

And again, as I go down to the border and I talked to the Border Patrol agents, first thing I asked them was, “What do you need to secure the border?” It’s an effective border wall system is the first thing that they tell me.

Del Guidice: Can you tell us a little bit about all the work that went [into] reaching those landmarks? You all have been busy making this happen. Can you give a little bit of a sneak peek into everything that went into this whole project?

Wolf: Sure. It starts with our operators. So the requirements of where that border wall system will be placed along the southwest border. In what manner? What are the heights, what are the features of it? It all starts with our operators.

So CBP, Customs and Border Protection, takes the operators, takes their input, puts it into what we call our Border Security Improvement Plan, our BSIP. We share that with Congress and then we fund that.

We work with Congress to fund that and I think what’s been actually remarkable from President [Donald] Trump is, as Congress would not fund that or choose to fund it in very small slices, he used the authority that Congress had given him to find additional funding.

So we have about $15 billion today that we continue to build border wall funding. It’s going to include over 700 miles, as I indicated, [we] hope to have 450 [miles] done at the end of this calendar year and we’ll continue to build and continue to work with Congress and others to make sure that that capability and system is where it needs to be along the southwest boarder.

Del Guidce: In your travels to the border as well as throughout the country and all the work that you do, is there a particular story or incident that really captures the severity of the situation and why we need to work on our southern border?

Wolf: Yeah. I was in Tucson on the hundredth mile that we put in, I believe that was in January, and we were in an area that we were replacing what we call Normandy barriers, they’re vehicle barriers.

It’s basically an X, it’s about 4 and a half feet tall. You can jump over it, you can go under it, you go around it very easy. We were replacing that with 30-foot-high bollard wall.

I was talking to the chief there and asking what type of traffic … came through. And that was one of their busiest areas because it was just right across the river. The river is not very large there. And they were saying that individuals would just come over in droves.

What that would require them to do is to surge Border Patrol agents there. And as they did … the adversary would do that for particular reason and then they would sneak in other individuals further down the line.

So we want to make sure that we’re able to make sure we get Border Patrol agents where they need to be. We put up physical infrastructure to funnel them to certain places that are easier to patrol, easier to apprehend individuals. And so that story really hit home to me.

… I’m sure we can show you some photos, as you look at the 4-foot-high wall and then the 30-foot-high, it’s that impedance and denial.

So a lot of individuals talk to me about how walls could be defeated, and I don’t disagree, although this wall was very difficult to defeat. This is all about impedance and denial.

It may take someone seven minutes, eight minutes, 10 minutes, 12 minutes to get above and around that wall. What that allows us to do is [place] the Border Patrol agents waiting for him.

There’s no more hopping the fence in 30 seconds and then getting away into the interior of the country. We have a number of capabilities there that allows that Border Patrol agent be waiting on those individuals that are trying to, again, illegally enter the country.

Del Guidice: I actually was in Tucson about two weeks ago and we met with Sheriff [Mark] Lamb, Pinal County, and he does a lot of work with drug trafficking there.

Something he mentioned when we were talking with him is how a lot of times when Border Patrol is out working, if an illegal immigrant is caught in the desert, they don’t have enough food or water. They call 911, Border Patrol is called. And he said a lot of Americans don’t realize the amount of humanitarian work the Border Patrol does. Can you talk a little bit about that?

Wolf: It’s actually fascinating and, as you said, … humanitarians are what our Border Patrol agents end up being. They do a number of rescues every single day, rescuing individuals that are making this very dangerous journey.

And we have to think about the individuals that are coming across the border. They’re likely being smuggled from a transnational criminal organization that they’ve paid thousands of dollars. They’ve probably been on a very dangerous journey for many, many weeks, maybe even a month.

They come to our southwest border. Those individuals just turn them over. And so you’re in the middle of the desert, and most cases are in the wilderness, … most cases [are] not near a city. And you’re not sure what to do. So you … get lost, you run out of water, you do a number of things. And Border Patrol are out there saving individuals, again, with local law enforcement.

I will say that our local law enforcement, our sheriffs along the southwest border are also on the front lines of this. It’s their communities that these individuals are coming into either legally or illegally that they have to deal with.

But Border Patrol agents every day are rescuing individuals crossing the river, in the desert, running out of water and the like. So it’s an incredible mission that they do.

[They’re] not only protecting the border, protecting the communities along the border, and protecting the American men and women, but also rescuing migrants that perhaps didn’t really know what they were signing up for as they come into the country.

Del Guidice: On the topic of the humanitarian crisis, I know you do a lot of response with human trafficking issues like that. Can you talk a little bit about the response of Border Patrol when it comes to human trafficking?

Wolf: Sure. What we saw last year is a number of growing incidents of human trafficking. And I think where this really hit home for me is [with] an operation that we discovered. Our ICE Homeland Security investigators discovered along with Border Patrol what we call child recycling.

And these were individuals, again, South of the border, that would use a child to come into the country because, the way our law is written, if you come into the country with a child at that time, you were released into the interior of the country.

So what we saw is an individual coming in with a child, we would see that same child perhaps several weeks later with another adult claiming to be their parent. And then a couple of weeks later, same child.

After time we started investigating and looking at this and it was a ring where they would come in and the child would be sent back to central America, Mexico, and again, using that. So it’s very, very disturbing. Obviously, it’s very, very dangerous for that child. And again, it’s exploiting our immigration system.

So ICE, HSI [Homeland Security Investigations], Border Patrol, they deal with that every day. Human trafficking overall is a very big issue for the department. We released our first ever human trafficking strategies two months ago. We continue to look at that and we continue to do more ICE Homeland Security Investigation. That’s what they do. They investigate human trafficking.

I will say some of the laws that we see across this country, particularly in New York, [are] very troubling where we’ve talked about sanctuary policies or the lack of information sharing with DHS and it impacts enforcing criminal laws like human trafficking, where our law enforcement agents don’t have the information they need to do their job. And it’s very dangerous.

Del Guidice: Well, Secretary Wolf, thank you so much for joining us today on The Daily Signal Podcast.

Wolf: Thank you.


Rachel del Guidice

Rachel del Guidice is a congressional reporter for The Daily Signal. She is a graduate of Franciscan University of Steubenville, Forge Leadership Network, and The Heritage Foundation’s Young Leaders Program. Send an email to Rachel. Twitter: @LRacheldG.

A Note for our Readers:

This is a critical year in the history of our country. With the country polarized and divided on a number of issues and with roughly half of the country clamoring for increased government control—over health care, socialism, increased regulations, and open borders—we must turn to America’s founding for the answers on how best to proceed into the future.

The Heritage Foundation has compiled input from more than 100 constitutional scholars and legal experts into the country’s most thorough and compelling review of the freedoms promised to us within the United States Constitution into a free digital guide called Heritage’s Guide to the Constitution.

They’re making this guide available to all readers of The Daily Signal for free today!


EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.