Lawsuit Challenges Constitutionality of Federal Muslim Refugee Program

We told you about the hunt for a brave governor willing to defend the Constitution here last Thursday.  The hunt continues.

States like Tennessee, Alabama, Kentucky and others, CAN stop refugee resettlement in their states.

ERin Mersino

In case you haven’t seen the article, Breitbart reported last week, that the Thomas Moore Law Center has been working since June on a lawsuit to challenge the constitutionality of the federal refugee program as it is being implemented in states like Tennessee, Kentucky, Alabama and others.

Erin Mersino, senior trial lawyer from the public interest firm, the Thomas Moore Law Center will talk about this on the Ralph Bristol radio show, Monday December 7th at 9:05 A.M. EST/ 8:05 CST.

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes America’s Judeo-Christian heritage and moral values, including the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life. It supports a strong national defense and an independent and sovereign United States of America. The Law Center accomplishes its mission through litigation, education, and related activities. It does not charge for its services.

They will represent your state at no charge.

You can listen to the Ralph Bristol show and learn more about how the lawyers at the Thomas Moore Law Center are prepared to stand up to the federal government and defend your states’ rights.

Listen online to the show: http://pro.wwtn-fm.tritonflex.com/page.php?page_id=151 or tune in to WWTN, 99.7 FM.

Meanwhile, according to Michael Patrick Leahy at Breitbart, it looks like Tennessee Republican Governor Bill Haslam is not going to be that brave man.

Is yours a Wilson-Fish alternative state?  Why not see if radio programs in others of these states would do an interview with the Thomas More Law Center (if I can be so bold as to offer them!).  You need to build grassroots pressure on governors of these states (it only takes one) to be the plaintiff in this all important Constitutional test!

Alabama
Alaska
Colorado
Idaho
Kentucky
Louisiana
Massachusetts
Nevada
North Dakota
South Dakota
Tennessee
Vermont

Declaration of Muslim Reform nailed to door of Islamic Center in Washington, D.C.

In the midst of the swirl of events following the Jihad massacre in San Bernardino, a “Summit for 20 Western Muslim Voices for Reform against the Islamic State and Islamism,” was organized in Washington, D.C. At the conclusion a news conference was held at the National Press Club. The press conference capped a two day conference the purpose of which was to publish Declaration of Muslim Reform principles. At the rostrum was an international contingent of reformers from Canada, the U.S., Europe and Pakistan. Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser of the American Forum for Islam and Democracy was the organizer and moderator of the event. A list of the organizations  and participants can be found here. The principles of  the reform declaration,  as published in a Gatestone Institute article, co-authored by  Dr. Jasser and Raheel  Raza are:

  • We reject interpretations of Islam that call for any violence, social injustice and politicized Islam. We invite our fellow Muslims and neighbors to join us.
  • We reject bigotry, oppression and violence against all people based on any prejudice, including ethnicity, gender, language, belief, religion, sexual orientation and gender expression.
  • We are for secular governance, democracy and liberty.
  • Every individual has the right to publicly express criticism of Islam. Ideas do not have rights. Human beings have rights.
  • We stand for peace, human rights and secular governance. Please stand with us!

Watch this You Tube video of the Muslim Reform Summit press conference:

muslim reform declaration

Washington Islamic Center custodian removing Muslim Reform Movement Declaration December 4, 2015. Source: Muslim Reform Movement.

Following the conclusion of the National Press Club event, two women from the group headed  over to Massachusetts Avenue, the location  of the Saudi financed and controlled Washington Islamic Center. They nailed a signed copy of the Muslim reform declaration to its door. That was modeled on the 95 Theses that Martin Luther nailed to the door of the All Saints Church on October 31, 1517 that purportedly sparked  the Protestant reformation. However, within seconds a caretaker came out and tore it off the Center’s door.

The daunting problem that the Muslim reformers face is that normative Islam believes that there is no need for reform since any distortion of the uncreated words of Allah, would be deemed idolatrous. However, given the declarations by  Egyptian President  El-Sisi  in a meeting with leading  Sunni clerics at  Al Azhar University in Cairo on New Year’s 2015, at least one Muslim country leader believes that  Islam is in dire need of reform. He says that is required to combat the apocalyptic pure Islamic terrorism  espoused by the self-declared Caliphate  of the Islamic State.

One of the women who participated in the Washington Islamic Center  event  was former Wall Street Journalist and author of Standing Alone: An American Woman’s Struggle for the Soul of Islam, Asra Nomani.  Normani was a colleague of the late Dan Pearl in Pakistan.  She saw him off in October 2002, never to return, kidnapped and slaughtered by 9/11 Al Qaeda mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed (KSM).  She was also involved in the 2011 investigations that led to KSM being identified as Pearl’s  killer. Nomani is U.S. born, the daughter of Indian Muslims from Mumbai who settled in Huntington, West Virginia. She is a graduate of both the University of West Virginia and American University.

Asra Q. Nomani

Asra Q. Nomani

Nomani  is in league with  other Muslim  and former Muslim women  like Raheel Raza,  Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Irshad Manji and other like minded reformers who believe the effort to reform should be started.  Nonetheless, she is doubtlessly viewed as an apostate, heterodox in the standards of normative Sunni Islam. Having said that she is a fearless defender of personal freedoms for Muslim women reflected in her proposed Muslim women bill of rights. Further she recognizes the problems that both she and the others at the Reform Summit  see as persisting in Political Islam. Sharia that follows of way of Allah demanding devotion to Jihad against unbelievers.

This morning Nomani was paired off against Dalia Mogahed, a former Gallup pollster on Islam ,now director of research for the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding. Mogahed is what the Obama White House considers as an exemplary American Muslim woman, resplendent in her Hijab.

Back in  July 2010, we wrote  about Mogahed’s  appointment by President Obama to the White House Advisory Council on Faith Based  and Neighborhood Partnerships. She is coauthor of the book and film Who Speaks for Islam?: What a Billion Muslims Really Think. She worked  Dr. John L. Esposito, a Georgetown University colleague at the Prince Alaweed bin Talal Center for Muslim Christian Understanding.   At the Jasser contended in a report by The Investigative Project  that Ms. Mogahed’s outreach to radical Muslim groups did not help.

Dalia Mogahed

Dalia Mogahed

The damage is immeasurable to Muslims seeking non-radical alternatives. They are going to say, why bother? The government has chosen sides in the conflict.

Note this exchange among Rich Lowry of the National Review, Dalia Mogahed and Asra Nomani from today’s  NBC Meet the Press transcript:

RICH LOWRY:

Well, it seems to me that this debate, whether Islam is a religion of peace or not, really, it’s irrelevant for outsiders. It’s for Muslims to decide whether it’s a religion of peace or not. And if enough of them do, then you cut off the oxygen to the radicals. But at the moment, the extremists have significant financial popular and theological backing in the Middle East. And that is an enduring phenomenon. And it’s one that is going to require a long, ideological war to win.

DALIA MOGAHED:

I’m sorry, I’m going to have to disagree with you. They simply do not have ideological, theological, or popular support. And this is a criminal organization that is funding their criminality with things like drug trade and selling oil. They do not have the ideological support that you’re describing at all. In fact, it’s quite the opposite. They’ve had a number of voices from across the spectrum say that what they’re doing is completely un-Islamic. They have no support popularly, in terms of the general public. So–

RICH LOWRY:

But yet they’re still there.

DALIA MOGAHED:

But so are many other terrorist organizations. And their primary victims are Muslims. I think that’s very important.

ASRA NOMANI:

And to that point, I think what speaks loudest and what speaks to your point is the blood that’s spilling from Australia, to now California. I mean, how much blood has to be spilled until we recognize inside of a Muslim community that we do have an ideological problem? And that we do have support? I mean, there are–

DALIA MOGAHED:

I think the blood is spilling in Syria and it’s mostly Muslims–

ASRA NOMANI:

Excuse me. There are hundreds and hundreds of followers of Islamic State around Europe and the U.S. The Saudis are showing this. And all you have to do is look at the conversation inside of our mosques and inside of our communities. And you will hear it. And I hear it. And I have to say that I saw it in 2002, went to Islamabad, Pakistan, and met women who were supporting this ideology. I call them the Taliban Ladies Auxiliary back then. This young woman in California would’ve been a star member of it.

Watch the Meet the Press segment with  Asra Nomani dueling Dalia Mogahed:

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review.

Come on, you can do it! Say “MORATORIUM”

Tashfeen Malik dhsWhere are you Virgil Goode?

Did you see that even the New York Times wrote about the female Islamic terrorist and how there was no way to “vet” her or to “screen” her as she came to live among us.  Any logical person can see that.  There was no d*** data, no biographic and biometric information to tap! And, if asked about any terror connections in personal interviews she certainly did not tell the truth.

So, don’t you wonder why only TEN US Senators can see that and that 89 others are so willfully blind. See our post on Senator Paul’s failed attempt at a moratorium on issuing visas to those coming from jihad-producing countries.

And, here see Daniel Greenfield on the killers yesterday.  If you read nothing else from Greenfield’s post, this is the line every one must grasp:

It’s a matter of simple math that as the population most likely to commit terrorist acts increases, so do the acts themselves.

I went back to our archives to see when I first heard anyone suggest a MORATORIUM on Muslim immigration and want to give a shout-out to former Virginia Congressman Virgil Goode who saw the San Bernardino slaughter coming 9 years ago!  Learn about how the politically correct harpies at the Washington Post treated him then.  His position, in support of a moratorium on legal (Muslim) immigration to America cost him his seat.  We told you more about him here in 2010.

Political correctness is dead! Everyone of you must start saying the ‘M’ word!  MORATORIUM!  Moratorium on Muslim migration to America, NOW!

Thank you Mr. Goode!  Goode is a Trump supporter in Virginia today!

RELATED ARTICLES:

Canada now says it will “welcome” 50,000 Syrians by the end of 2016

Ten reasons there should be a moratorium on refugee resettlement

Terrorism: Time to Take the Gloves Off

Christie swings back at Obama over women refugees comment

Loretta Lynch Must Go

lorettalynchgraphicOn Thursday, Dec. 5, 2015, Attorney General Loretta Lynch threw down the gauntlet in a speech before the Muslim Advocate’s 10th Anniversary dinner in Arlington, Virginia.  Speaking just one day after Muslim terrorists, Sayed Rizwan Farook and his Saudi wife, Tashfeen Malik, murdered fourteen innocent people in an unprovoked terror attack on the Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino, California, Lynch said, “On behalf of our nation’s Justice Department, I am grateful to count you as partners in our work to promote tolerance, to ensure public safety, and to protect civil rights (emphasis added)

She went on to say, “Since becoming Attorney General last February, I have heard from Arab Americans and Muslims who say they feel uneasy about their relationship with the United States government.  Some feel that they have not been afforded the full rights of citizenship.  Others are worried about the safety of their families, communities, and places of worship.  And, too often, Muslims and Arab Americans have told me that they feel as though they are treated by their fellow citizens, by their government, and especially by those of us in law enforcement as though it were ‘us versus them.’  That is unacceptable, and it is inconsistent with what America is all about.”

So if a few Muslims are worried about the safety of their families, their communities, and their places of worship, what is that compared to the fear and dread that radical Islamists have spread among the hundreds of millions of peace-loving people of Europe and North America?  And if Muslims and Arab-Americans feel as if they are the victims of an “us versus them” political and social environment, just who do they think created that atmosphere?  It is not Christians and Jews and other non-Muslims who have rejected Muslims, it s Muslims who have come to our country and have refused to assimilate into our culture.  Not only have they not assimilated into our culture, they have let it be known that it is their intention to obliterate our culture and our form of government from the face of the Earth.

Lynch went on to say, “Muslims and Arab Americans have helped to build and strengthen our nation.  They have served as police officers, teachers, civic leaders and soldiers – strengthening their local communities and safeguarding their country.  And the cooperation of Muslim and Arab-American communities has been absolutely essential in identifying, and preventing, terrorist threats.  We must never lose sight of this.  And, as we work to create a brighter and more prosperous future, we must not fail to heed the lessons of our past.”

No one but an Obama administration toady could ever stand up in public and say with a straight face that Muslims and Arab-Americans have helped to “build and strengthen” our nation, have played a vital role in “identifying and preventing terrorist threats,” and have worked to “build a brighter and more prosperous future” for all Americans.

When asked to comment on the Obama administration’s attitude toward anti-Muslim rhetoric in the days since the Paris attacks, she said, “My message to the Muslim community is that we

stand with you in this.  Where we do see anti-Muslim rhetoric and actions turning into violence, we do take action… We have charged 225 defendants with hate crimes over the last six years… most of those in the last three years.  Since 9/11 we’ve had over 1,000 investigations into anti-Muslim hatred, including rhetoric and bigoted actions, with over forty-five prosecutions…”

She went on to say, “I think it’s important, however, that as we again talk about the importance of free speech, we make it clear that actions predicated on violent talk are not American.  They are not who we are, they’re not what we do, and they will be prosecuted.

Looking directly into the camera, she said, “My greatest fear as a prosecutor, as someone who is sworn to the protection of all the American people, is that the rhetoric will be accompanied by acts of violence…  When it comes to combating these heinous crimes, our message is simple: If you engage in violence fueled by bigotry – no matter the object or nature of your hate – we will bring you to justice.

Lynch challenged her Muslim audience, saying, “Often, you learn of incidents before law enforcement and I encourage you to report these incidents to the Justice Department.  I assure you: each and every report of a potential hate crime is taken seriously and, as our record of recent activity makes clear, we will investigate and prosecute violations of federal law whenever we can.  Last year, two Tennessee men were sentenced to more than 14 years in prison after pleading guilty to spray painting swastikas and the words ‘white power’ on a mosque – and then starting a fire that destroyed the mosque.  And last month, an Illinois man was sentenced to one year in prison after he pleaded guilty to sending a threatening e-mail to a mosque.”

Either the attorney general has failed to notice that, in recent years, nearly every act of violence stemming from hateful rhetoric has originated in the Muslim community, or she was delivering a stern message to the Muslim community that, unless they behave themselves, they would find themselves praying to Allah five times a day from behind prison walls.  However, being Barack Obama’s principal legal henchman, it’s pretty obvious to all concerned, Muslims and non-Muslims alike, that her thinly-veiled threats were directed toward non-Muslims.

Reaction to the attorney general’s threat was swift and predictable.  Radio talk show host Joe Walsh, a former congressman from Illinois’ 8th Congressional District (suburban Chicago) produced the below YouTube video describing exactly how he feels about Muslims and challenging the attorney general to have him arrested.

In his video, he said, “You come out today and you say you’re going to prosecute Americans who use anti-Muslim speech.  That doesn’t happen in this country.   I can say what I want about Christians, Jews, and Muslims.  I think Islam has a real “fricking” problem, alright?  There’s a cancer in Islam.  And if they’re not gonna’ learn to assimilate, I don’t want them in this country.

“You got a problem, Loretta Lynch, with me saying that?  Then throw me in jail.  Here… I’ll give you a perfect opportunity.  I think Islam is evil.  I think Islam’s got a huge problem.  I think most Muslims around the world are not compatible with American values.  I don’t want ‘em here.  So, what?… you’re worried about a backlash against Muslims?”

“Fourteen Americans were killed three days ago and you come up the next day and say you’re greatest fear is anti-Muslim backlash.  Well, you know what?  I hope there is a backlash.  There should be a backlash.  I’m going to encourage a backlash.  And you know what, Loretta Lynch?  If that bothers you, prosecute me.  Throw me in jail.”

In a written follow-up, Walsh argued that “most Muslims around the world are (either) terrorists, support terrorism, and/or support Sharia Law.”  He went on to say, “Any Muslim that is a terrorist or supports terrorism should be killed.  If ‘moderate’ Muslims don’t speak out against terrorism, they are our enemy and we should call them out and kick them out of this country.”

Directing his final words to Loretta Lynch, he said, “Is that ‘anti-Muslim rhetoric’ that edges toward violence?  Go ahead and prosecute me.  I dare you.”

As sharply divided as liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, are on these issues, one wonders how those liberals and Democrats who support the Obama administration’s policies on Muslim immigration would react when posed with a problem that brings the question of life-or-death a bit closer to home.

Since the San Bernardino attack, conservatives have attempted to put the Muslim immigration question into a context that even liberals can understand.  For example, on June 13, 2014, CNN reported that more than 4,000 pounds of rib-eye and other fresh beef, produced by the Fruitland American Meat Company in Jackson, Missouri, were subject to recall because of a fear that the meats could contain mad cow disease.  The meat in question was distributed by the Whole Foods distribution center in Connecticut, which services all of New England, one restaurant in New York, and one restaurant in Kansas City, Missouri.

With the understanding that northeastern liberals and Democrats appear quite willing to go along with Obama’s plan to import more than 100,000 Muslims each year because of the belief that only five out of every 100 (5%) of the world’s Muslim population are radicalized, how much of the suspect meat would New Englanders purchase if they were assured that no more than 5% of the meat was contaminated with mad cow disease?  If, as an inducement, Whole Foods reduced the price of prime filet mignon and rib-eye steaks to 50ȼ per pound, would New Englanders and New Yorkers be willing to take a chance?

For the Obama base, the low information voters of America, conservatives have restated the question in terms that even they might understand.  They were asked, “If you were presented with a bowl of 100 M&Ms and told that five of the 100 pieces were toxic (poisonous), how many pieces of candy would you eat?”  Even they, accustomed as they are to accepting “freebies,” would have sense enough to decline.

When Loretta Lynch was before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee for confirmation in April 2015, most conservatives held high hopes that she would be a welcome change from her lawless predecessor, Eric Holder.  However, all hope were dashed when Lynch refused to assure senators that, under her leadership, even the president of the United States would be required to obey the law and to uphold the U.S. Constitution.  What a disappointment she has been.  She must go.

And as for me, I’m with Joe Walsh.  If I can’t criticize radical Islamists, then come get me.

Is this a picture of: 1.) A disgruntled employee or 2.) A dead soldier of the Islamic State?

When President Obama’s Department of Defense cannot name the enemy how can his Department of Justice?

It is really sad to see the FBI, formerly the worlds premiere investigative agency reduced by President Obama to a stumbling, bumbling risk-averse group of highly trained, frustrated men and women.

Obama and his Department of Justice (DOJ) have handcuffed these excellent agents with “rules of engagement” that, a priori, rule out establishing an investigative predicate that puts Islamic jihad attack as the most logical operational theory upon which to conduct the investigation.

Nope, not in Obama’s Islamic theater of the absurd which says:“whatever just happen with those two Muslims shooting, killing and bombing a bunch of innocent people, it had NOTHING to do with Islam.”

In the old days, good gumshoe cops would look at two killers dressed for combat, with redundant weapons and ammo, combined with deadly bombs, dedicated to Islam and simply say “well, boys, we got ourselves some Muslim terrorists,” now let’s go solve this case. As they begin their unfettered investigation based upon the most reasonable theory they would eliminate “Muslim terrorists” when the facts dictated such a decision

This is the exact opposite of how America now operates.

Today, due to the Obama restrictive and destructive “rules of investigative engagement” our law enforcement agencies have to assemble a 1000 piece terror attack jigsaw puzzle with 500 of the pieces missing from the box.

If any agents complain about the missing pieces, they are condemned by terrorist groups like CAIR, written up by their superiors, admonished by the President and ISIS laughs all the way to the Caliphate.

For the observant thinker this is “rules of engagement deja vu,” all over again. We have seen this Obama mess, the inability to see Islamic Jihad (even when it shoots us right in the face) on the battlefields of the Middle East, Africa and Asia. Down range, our war-fighters are so restricted by Obama’s Department of Defense (DOD) that elite special operators like the U.S. Navy SEALs, Army Rangers and Delta, are now required to become “experts” in drinking tea with the enemy.

Drinking tea with the enemy…and you ask why we can’t figure out what happened in San Bernardino? 

Unquestionably, GROSS INCOHERENCE.

In an effort to turn this sinking ship around, The United West and a team of experts are producing an investigative documentary about the cover-up of the shoot down of SEAL Team Six, on helicopter Extortion 17, August 6, 2011, Afghanistan. Our goal, in addition to honoring our thirty fallen heroes is to change the absurd, destructive combat “rules of engagement,” so that our war-fighters can fight wars to win!

Maybe, just maybe, our movie can even impact the absurd, destructive investigative “rules of engagement,” so that our great men and women fighting the SAME jihadis on the home front will have a better chance to win this very long and very deadly war.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image of San Bernardino shooter Syed Farook on the street is courtesy of TMZ.com. To learn more about FALLEN ANGEL: Cover-up of the Shoot Down of SEAL Team Six click here.

VIDEO: Geert Wilders — Turks not welcome in Europe

Do you recall what we said when the EU caved on negotiations with Erdogan granting his Islamist government 3 billion Euros to fund those Syrian refugee camps from which hundreds of thousand have fled to enter the EU and broken borderless Schengen system. Among that stream of refugees and migrants were two suicide bombers who claimed lives in the November 13th Paris massacres. To top things off, the bureaucrats in Brussels agreed to accession negotiations and easy Visas for entry. I said that Geert Wilders, leader of the Dutch Freedom Party would be among the first to object.

As night follows day, Wilders has issued this YouTube video with Turkish subtitles saying that Erdogan’s Islamist government is unwelcome in Europe and that Turkey is not European.

We note that the latest Maurice de Hond political polls in The Netherlands show that if a snap election was held to day that Wilders PVV (Freedom Party) would claim 39 seats in the Hague Parliament and that current PM Rutte’s ruling VVD party in the coalition would drop from 20 to less than ten seats. Thus indicating that the majority of the Dutch polity are responding to his arguments about stopping mass Muslim immigration, denying citizenship and ejection of returning Dutch ISIS fighters, asserting national sovereignty over borders and focusing priorities on domestic health and pensioner needs.

A recent Dutch Metro interview with Wilders asked, if he was chosen to head a ruling coalition in the event of a snap or the next general parliamentary election whether the PVV might have qualified cabinet members. That is an indication that the mainstream Dutch media is taking seriously, his inexorable rise in the polls. Perhaps that message will also get through to the Hague Public Prosecutors and the Judge who will preside in the Kafkaesque ” fewer Moroccans” show trial in early 2016. Kol Hakavod to one of Israel’s best friends in the not so friendly EU with its ridiculous BDS ‘labeling’ nonsense.

Geert Wilders tells Turks: Turkey not welcome in Europe

Today, PVV-leader Geert Wilders released a video, subtitled in Turkish, adressing the Turkish people. Your country does no belong in Europe and will never be…

Note Wilders’ response to this Question from the December 1, 2015 Metro interview: Question: What will be the milestones of a Wilders cabinet?

Wilders: We do not have a two-party system, so we will have to deal with other parties. But a Wilders cabinet will reclaim Dutch national sovereignty. We want to be masters again of our own currency, our own laws and our own borders. And yes, this means that we will have to exit the European Union. Last year, we had this scenario researched. Provided that one keeps access to the single European market, an EU exit will cost money in the first year, but will be beneficial from the second year on. The British research bureau Capital Economics researched this and, according to its NExit report, this scenario is realistic. Other countries are dependent on transit through the Netherlands and, if they do not allow us access to the internal market, it will also be negative for them. It would be great if, like Switzerland, we would again be able to make our own decisions. I want the Netherlands to be a proud and sovereign country again and I believe that, in order to have a true democracy, one needs a nation state with a common culture, identity and flag.

People need to know who they are; Europe costs us a lot of money, while we hardly have anything to say.

RELATED ARTICLE: President Jimmy Carter Banned Iranians from coming to the United States during the Hostage Crisis

San Bernardino: Another Muslim Slaughter, Another Cover-Up

In FrontPage today I explain why mainstream media reporters don’t even need to show up for work. They can file their stories beforehand.

Syed Rizwan Malik

Syed Rizwan Malik

The San Bernardino jihad massacre is the latest jihad atrocity, but it’s just like the last one, and just like the next one: it has played out in exactly the same way that the last jihad atrocity did, and in just the same way that the next one will play out as well. Mass killings by “radicalized” Muslims are followed by earnest statements from the President and the mainstream media that we must not rush to judgment, that the motive of the shooters was unclear, that we need gun control, that we need to address the real threat of climate change, that Muslims fear “Islamophobia,” and so on. It’s always a new massacre, but it’s always the same story.

Surely by now mainstream media reporters don’t even need to roll out of bed to file their stories. How much legwork does it take to write, “Syed Farook and Tashfeen Melik murdered 14 people at a Christmas party in San Bernardino; yes, Farook was a devout Muslim, but authorities are searching for a motive; moderate Muslims condemned the attack and said they feared anti-Muslim backlash”? Change the names and date, change the number of victims and the place, and they’ve filed that story dozens of times. They can just take out their last New York Times or CNN piece on the Paris jihad attack, change the details, hit send, and pour a cold one.

A few years ago, a couple of writers for Salon.com showed up at a panel at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) on which I was speaking, and were deservedly ridiculed after they were caught writing their story before the panel had even begun. But you can’t really blame them for trying to save some time: their story was going to be the same “Racist Bigoted Islamophobes Say Egregiously Evil Things” no matter what anyone on the panel really did say, so why not get a head start on the writing?

Tashfeen Malik

Tashfeen Malik

With San Bernardino, and every jihad attack, it works the same way. The media trims the facts to fit the Procrustean bed of their narrative, such that, in this case, most of the American public will likely never hear that San Bernardino jihad murderer Syed Farook had been “radicalized”; or that he had been in touch with Muslims being investigated for jihad terror activity; or that he spent his free time in the mosque, memorizing the Qur’an.

If they do hear about such things at all from the mainstream media, their significance won’t be explained: no one on CBS or NBC or ABC or PBS or NPR or in the New York Times or the Washington Post will remind his or her audience that the Islamic State and other jihad groups consider themselves to be at war with the United States, and have explicitly and repeatedly called upon Muslims in the U.S. to commit mass murder of American civilians. Would anyone have wondered about the motive of a German national who slaughtered fourteen Americans on U.S. soil in 1943? Of course no one would have, but that was a long time ago. Now we are engaged in a great ignored war, a war that only one side is fighting, a war in which enemy combatants are tried in civilian courts – as if they were criminals, not enemy soldiers — by a government that desperately wishes to maintain the illusion that there is no war at all.

This play has played to rapt audiences in Boston and Fort Hood, and all over the country. It is so familiar that all the players hit their marks with the nonchalant and unthinking precision of the overtrained. But it needs to close. The endless proclamations after every jihad attack, that it has nothing to do with Islam, and that Muslims are the real victims, are not only ludicrous; they’re offensive. The mainstream media and the Obama Administration have insulted the intelligence of Americans long enough. Their denial and willful ignorance are endangering us all, as they continue to behave after every jihad attack that their primary duty is not protecting Americans, but protecting Islam’s image.

San Bernardino has so far been just another production of this dreary little play, but it still has a chance to be much more than that. If Americans see the real lessons of San Bernardino and no longer accept this nonsense we are being fed; if we demand of our elected officials and presidential candidates that they must speak the truth about this threat we are facing, and formulate realistic ways to counter it, or their political careers will be over; if we no longer accept this endless portrayal of Muslims as beleaguered victims of “Islamophobia” after every murder of non-Muslims by Muslims – then San Bernardino could be a defining moment.

But for that to happen, people would have to be informed as to the true parameters of this issue, and those who are charged with informing them are instead doing all they can to spread disinformation. So San Bernardino will fade in memory once it is replaced by the next jihad carnage. And that one won’t have anything to do with Islam, either. Journalists can get their stories ready now, so that when that carnage comes, they can just fill in the requisite blanks and be the first to file. In fact, they better have five or ten jihad attack story templates ready. They’re going to need them.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Reuters: “Muslim Americans fear demonization of Islam after mass shooting”

Chris Hayes, MSNBC absolutely baffled as to SB jihadi murderer’s motive

‘I pledge allegiance to the Islamic State’

“MASS SHOOTING: San Bernardino female attacker pledged allegiance to ISIS, officials say,” by Vince Cestone, CNN, December 3, 2015:

UPDATE – Friday 7:31 AM As the San Bernardino attack was happening, investigators believe the female shooter, Tashfeen Malik, posted on Facebook, pledging allegiance to ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, three U.S. officials familiar with the investigation told CNN.

The posting was by Malik made on an account with a different name, according to one U.S. official. The officials did not explain how they knew Malik made the post.

WATCH the above video to hear a first responder’s account of the shooting, as well as the full Thursday night press conference.

SAN BERNARDINO (CNN, KRON) — Syed Rizwan Farook — who along with his wife, Tashfeen Malik, carried out the San Bernardino shooting massacre — apparently was radicalized and in touch with people being investigated by the FBI for international terrorism, law enforcement officials said Thursday.

Farook’s apparent radicalization contributed to his role in the mass shooting of 14 people Wednesday during a holiday party for the San Bernardino County health department, where Farook worked, sources said. The names of the victims were released Thursday evening.

Still, the radicalization wasn’t necessarily the only driver behind the carnage, as workplace grievances might have also played a role. President Barack Obama hinted as much Thursday when he said that the attackers may have had “mixed motives.”…

RELATED ARTICLE: Video: Robert Spencer on Hannity: the SB jihad attack and jihad denial

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is courtesy of ABC News.

United Nations Agenda 2030 — A Primer by Sharon Shaw

Late last month, here, we mentioned that the United Nations-driven Agenda 2030 now involves the use of ‘refugees’ migrating around the world as an important tool for The Agenda.

On September 27, 2015, Obama presented remarks at the UN Agenda 2030 closing session. His drive to pour third world refugees into your towns and cities is a major objective of this agenda and so, as we have reported, he is pretty darn angry at any of you trying to impede the directives he has been given from on high. See his speech here.

A reader, Sharon Shaw, from Kentucky has been following the issue closely and has offered to provide us with a series of informational pieces to help bring us all up to speed on the larger agenda designed to destroy individual freedom, and diminish American sovereignty and power as decisions for our future would be made at an international level.

This is not in the realm of conspiracy theories, they are right up front about it.  So, maybe if we have that understanding from the beginning we won’t waste a lot of time asking, is it happening, why is it happening and just get to work defeating them!

Agenda 2030 is Agenda 21 on steroids, she says!

Here is Sharon ….

Agenda 2030:  Interpreting the components

You will likely be hearing more about the UN’s Agenda 2030 in the upcoming months.  What is it?  It is the UN’s Agenda 21 on steroids.  Agenda 21 was presented to 178 world leaders at the UN Earth Summit in 1992.  The US was among the participants and the President, George H.W. Bush and his administration began adopting parts of the agenda into American laws and lives.

President Clinton, in 1993, signed Executive Order 12852 to create the President’s Council on Sustainable Development in order to “harmonize” US environmental policy with UN directives as outlined in Agenda 21.

Fast forward to September 2015:  The UN holds another world summit with hundreds of world leaders “Transforming Our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.”  It is basically Agenda 21 revised, but its intentions are much more far-reaching to change the planet according to UN guidance.  Posing as an altruistic plan for the good of all mankind, this plan is designed to rob individuals of freedoms through its mandates and to take individual countries’ sovereignties away.

What does all this have to do with refugee resettlement?  The two go hand-in-hand, literally one supporting the other so to speak.  The main goal, as stated by the UN, is sustainable development.  Although there are 17 goals included in Agenda 2030,

What is sustainable development?  According to its authors, the objective of sustainable development is to “integrate economic, social and environmental policies in order to achieve reduced consumption, social equity, and the preservation and restoration of biodiversity.”  Authors of Agenda 2030 insist that every societal decision be based on environmental impact, focusing on three components; global land use, global education, and global population control and reduction.

In the Agenda 2030 document, under the heading “The New Agenda”, para. 29:

“We recognize the positive contribution of migrants for inclusive growth and sustainable development. We also recognize that international migration is a multi-dimensional reality of major relevance for the development of countries of origin, transit and destination, which requires coherent and comprehensive responses. We will cooperate internationally to ensure safe, orderly and regular migration involving full respect for human rights and the humane treatment of migrants regardless of migration status, of refugees and of displaced persons. Such cooperation should also strengthen the resilience of communities hosting refugees, particularly in developing countries. We underline the right of migrants to return to their country of citizenship, and recall that States must ensure that their returning nationals are duly received.”

This statement boldly defines the “open borders” policies adopted by the European Union, policies which, as currently evidenced, have failed miserably.  At its core, Agenda 2030 is a methodology utilizing refugee resettlement as a tool for this “new universal Agenda” (quote from Agenda 2030 preamble).

Stay tuned for our next article exploring Agenda 2030 as we delve into its components and what it means for our country, and, indeed, all nations.

Thank you Sharon!

We have an entire category here at RRW entitled, Comments worth noting/guest posts where you will find this archived for future reference.

Related information:  I’m finding that few people even know about Obama’s Task Force on New Americans which was finalized back in April.  Here is the report which lays out very clearly how Obama is changing America by changing the people and how that fits very nicely with plans coming down from the United Nations level (and whoever runs the UN!). 

One final thought….every time there is a slaughter of innocents by devout Muslims (who don’t want the UN agenda! They have their own!), as we saw in San Bernardino this week, it sets the UN/Obama agenda back as more Americans wake up to the migration piece of the plan to control us. I think that is why we don’t see a normal sad emotional response from our dear leader.  I believe deep down he is feeling it’s another setback to The Agenda because more Americans will be wakened and objecting to the transformation of their cities!

Don’t forget!  If you want to stop the migration this is where we start…..

Action Alert:  Call your members of the House and Senate at 202-224-3121 and ask them to vigorously oppose the Refugee Resettlement funding contained in the Omnibus Spending Bill that will be voted on by 12-11-15! Please call by this Friday, Dec. 4th.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of United States President Barack Obama addressing the 70th session of the United Nations General Assembly at U.N. headquarters, Monday, Sept. 28, 2015. AP Photo/Mary Altaffer.

Syed Farook and San Bernardino: MSM narrative fails, Muslim CAIR steps in

mass-shooter-syed-farook-islam-in-america-religion-of-peace-933x445

As America reacted to Wednesday’s horrific mass shooting at the Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino, California, in which 14 people were killed and 17 wounded, some mainstream media were racing to craft their preferred narrative.

That narrative creation process was in high gear throughout the early afternoon, while the situation was still quite “fluid,” as some would say. At about 3:20pm, MSNBC was reporting that a Planned Parenthood clinic was “only a few blocks away.” After Twitter erupted with ridicule once people began checking their Google Maps, Bloomberg Business tweeted at 4:29pm,”San Bernadino [sic] shooting happened less than two miles from a Planned Parenthood health clinic.”

Bloomberg’s “less than” qualifier was “less than” sufficient to convince anyone the attackers were somehow targeting PP. Aren’t all map apps and GPS more accurate than within a two mile radius?

Calls for gun control from President Obama and Hillary Clinton failed to address why San Bernardino’s gun-free zone status did not prevent the shooting.

By mid-afternoon EST, the Liberal narrative had failed, and details were beginning to leak out.

The facts released thus far present a complex scenario with the main suspect, Syed Farook, having possible connections to a person investigated for terrorism a few years ago, and having travelled recently to Saudi Arabia.

RT France was first to report the chief suspect’s name, Syed Farook. NBC followed a few hours later, citing multiple sources. Soon after, the New York Daily News had interviewed Syed Farook’s father, who described the suspect to be a “very religious” Muslim.

Over at CNN, ex-CIA analysts were describing the assault as having “the hallmarks of the sort of attacks you see in the Middle East,” multiple shooters, IEDs, etc.

The Daily Beast seems to be the first news organization to locate and approach the Farook family’s home in Corona CA:

Farook lived at a home with his wife and children in Corona, California. The Daily Beast knocked on the home’s door and was met by a man who said, “My name is Farook.” When asked if he knew Sayed, the man said, “Of course I know him but I have nothing to say.” When asked about Syed being named as a suspect, he said, “I have nothing to say.” […]

Five minutes after he answered the door, Farook got into a white car and drove away, answering questions again with, “I have nothing to say.”

The Daily Beast contacted Farook’s sister, Saira Khan, by phone on Wednesday shortly after the shooting. She said the media was jumping to conclusions on identifying the suspect and said that her brother was at work. Khan said she would try to get in touch with her brother and pass along his contact information.

Some additional pieces to the puzzle have emerged:

CNN reports that Farook had “abruptly left” the holiday event for county employees. And from the Wall Street Journal: “Government records show Mr. Farook, a U.S. citizen, traveled to Saudi Arabia last year.” (Thanks to Breitbart News for these links.)

The NY Times reports on possible international connections:

One senior American official said that Mr. Farook had not been the target of any active terrorism investigation, and he was not someone the bureau had been concerned about before Wednesday’s shooting. Other officials said the F.B.I. was looking into a possible connection between Mr. Farook and at least one person who was investigated for terrorism a few years ago.

There were also accounts by investigators that one of the attackers had recently had a dispute with fellow employees, according to law enforcement officials who did not want to be identified.

Chief Burguan confirmed that someone left the party after a dispute, “but we have no idea if those were the people that came back.”

This last assessment seems at odds with CNN’s reporting cited above.

At the late evening press conference, however, Fox News reports, “I’m now being told…[police] are going on the premise there wasn’t a disagreement…he was there to case the location.”

MSNBC relates a survivor’s account:

The shooters who opened fire in a conference room at a California center for the developmentally disabled Wednesday didn’t say anything before they started spraying the room with bullets, the husband of a woman who was shot but survived said.

Salaheen Kondoker’s wife, Annie, an environmental engineer who works for San Bernardino County, was inside the conference room when gunfire erupted at around 11 a.m. local time.

“They just started shooting … they didn’t yell or say anything beforehand,” Salaheen Kondoker said his wife told him.

News reporting continued late into the evening at a San Bernardino police press conference, with tantalizing bits of evidence being tweeted. From Raheem Kassam at Breitbart:

20-21 officers in shootout with suspects, both dead. First suspect Syed Rizwan Farook, 28. Second is Tashfeen Malik, 27.

“There was a relationship” between Farook and Malik…
“It really looks like we have 2 shooters…”
“We have not ruled out terrorism…”
“Based upon what we’ve seen… how they were equipped… there had to be some level of planning”
Journalist asks if any connection to ISIS: “I’m not gonna weigh in on that one” says police spox
“We have multiple addresses for [the suspects]…”

Did political correctness enable the shooter’s plot to be carried out? Will Carr of Fox News tweeted this:

@KNX1070 reporting a neighbor did not call authorities about suspicious activity bc she did not want to racially profile

CAIR steps in

Once Syed Farook’s name was released as one of the suspects, CAIR-LA immediately scheduled a press conference. The full text of CAIR-National’s press release can be read here. The key statement reads:

“We condemn this horrific and revolting attack and offer our heartfelt condolences to the families and loved ones of all those killed or injured,” said CAIR-LA Executive Director Hussam Ayloush. “The Muslim community stands shoulder to shoulder with our fellow Americans in repudiating any twisted mindset that would claim to justify such sickening acts of violence.”

Breitbart reports Farook’s family was “in shock”:

At the CAIR press conference, Syed Farook’s brother-in-law Farhan Khan is present and delivers a statement. “I have no idea why he would he do something like this. I have absolutely no idea. I am in shock myself.” Khan does not answer questions from reporters. Executive Director of CAIR-LA says “We unequivocally condemn the horrific act that happened today.”

The reaction of some to the CAIR presser is that it seemed odd:

Toby Harnden: Weird weird weird @CNN right now. No mention of Islam & then live to CAIR presser w multiple people saying it’s nothing to do with Islam.

toddstarnes: Not quite what to make of that CAIR presser….Odd.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Obama on SB: “We do not yet know why this terrible event occurred”

San Bernardino-area man didn’t report suspicious activity for fear of being called racist

VIDEO: Demons At Our Door

When evil knocks on our doors, Americans have a power no other people on the planet share:

The full-throated right to defend our families and ourselves with our Second Amendment.

The National Rifle Association fights for the protection of these liberties. The NRA is Freedom’s Safest Place.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Obama on SB: “We do not yet know why this terrible event occurred”

San Bernardino-area man didn’t report suspicious activity for fear of being called racist

California Nightmare: Political Correctness Kills in San Bernardino

Daniel Greenfield of the David Horowitz Freedom Center wrote a truly reflective article below, one professionals in law enforcement, threat assessment, and counter-terrorism fields will study, and elected officials should.

We are not ready. 

We as a nation simply are still not ready to face the truly ugly tenants of Islam that clearly teaches and applauds the attacks seen in Paris and San Bernardino.  We are not ready to accept that jihadists have been traveling into America for a number of years now, through southern borders many elected officials love to proclaim secure and so very closely monitored.  The “official/unofficial” policy of the current national administration and its’ many departments and agencies is that Islamic Terrorism does not exist, much less here in America.  If you mean a defined army in dedicated assaults much like WWII or Korea, and partially in Vietnam, I would agree.  But covert operations, special small teams, even individuals dedicated to carry-out atrocities against the Great Satan (America) are far more difficult to defend against.  People embedded in our neighborhoods that we see at the local park or grocery store, or work at the same factory, business complex or Walmart who, in reality, are terrorists hiding in plain site is what is here now, and still coming.

Adding to the complexity is that the Islamic State has been encouraging jihadist world-wide to act on their own, not to travel to Syria to practice jihad or receive training.  Islamic followers so already inclined can launch attacks where they live, and select their own targets.  ISIS will provide online and covert training, instructions on IEDs, and even financing.  An example is this latest attack where the couple amassed sophisticated equipment, weaponry, well over 5,000 rounds of ammo, and at least 15 pipe bombs with triggering capacity.  Add to this their tactical gear, belts capable of carrying extra implements, and Go cameras to record their successful Jihad, plus a detailed plan to carry-out their heinous actions.  Counter-terrorism, threat assessment, and law enforcement on the front lines know all this; yet, elected officials in varied offices work terribly hard to use soft and denying language to dispel the reality that America is under a massive assault that will not be disappearing any time soon.

The threat is here in our communities, and it is quite real. 


Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

When the Redlands Tea Party Patriots objected to the resettling of Syrian Muslim migrants in their community, CAIR accused them of “paranoia and phobia is rooted in a combination of ignorance and bigotry.”

But  “paranoia and phobia”  are the modern condition that the free world has found itself living in. Islamic terrorism can strike anytime  and  anywhere  from  a  Paris  concert  hall to a San Bernardino County facility where disabled children were being helped. Its ignorance to ignore that and bigotry to defend it. “What will be done to ensure the safety of our community?  Our biggest concern is the safety of our family, our children  and  our  grandchildren,”  Victoria  Hargrave  of  Redlands    Townhall had asked.

It was a good question. As the country watched police charge towards a home in the Redlands, it has become an even better question.  The shooter, Sayeed Farouk, was described by his father as a religiously devout Muslim. “He was very religious. He would go to work, come back, go to pray, come back.”  Neighbors say that he “grew a beard and started to wear religious clothing.  The long shirt that’s like a dress and the cap on his head.”  And at some point his “religiosity” took him down the familiar path of Jihad.  Neighbors knew something was wrong, but were afraid that they would be accused of Islamophobia if they reported it. Officially the motive of this religiously devout Muslim couple in carrying out a terrorist attack is still unknown. The evolving media narrative is that familiar standby of “workplace violence”. The sort of workplace violence involving an attack by multiple terrorists wearing body armor and throwing pipe bombs shortly after an argument at a party.

If you believe this version of the  “workplace violence”  story, the shooter stormed out of a party and 20 minutes later had managed to round up multiple heavily armed attackers to avenge his party argument.

It’s certainly a story. Even if it isn’t a very good story. And yet it’s a story that we keep hearing over and over again.  It begins with lies and ends with body bags.  Everything possible was done to deny Nidal Hassan’s terrorist motivations in the Fort Hood Massacre.   His attack was deemed workplace violence.   Even his own attempts to explain that he supported the terrorists were shut down so that he was reduced to smuggling messages to get his story out.  And despite multiple statements by Hassan that he was a terrorist, the official story is still workplace violence.   Right after the shooting, it was some strain of airborne PTSD that had somehow transmitted itself from American veterans to the Muslim employee who had never seen combat until he began killing them.

There are always excuses.

The Times Square bomber had financial issues.   The Tsarnaev terrorists were poorly adjusted. Once the media digs into Farouk’s life, it will no doubt find that he had financial issues, was poorly adjusted and may have even been suffering from some mysterious form of airborne PTSD.  Obama and the media would like to make this story about “gun violence”.   But guns don’t shoot themselves.   There is a hand that pulls the trigger and a mind whose foul purposes that hand serves.  Gun violence is not a mechanical problem.   It is not a hardware problem of guns going off at random.   It is not a biological problem of fingers randomly twitching on triggers. It is a problem of the mind.  Behind each massacre, there is a mind. And it is that mind, its ideas and its beliefs, that kills.

San Bernardino is home to what is described as a “growing Muslim population” and that growth comes with terrifying growing pains.  This latest attack appears to be one of them.  It’s a matter of simple math that as the population most likely to commit terrorist acts increases, so do the acts themselves.

Two months ago, Marilyn Snyder of the Redlands Tea Party Patriots wrote of “the runners and spectators of the Boston Marathon who never imagined that refugee jihadists were stealthily plotting their demise — just because they were not Muslims.”  Most people in San Bernardino County did not expect that anyone was plotting to kill them. They did not think that one evening the events from far-off France would suddenly be taking place where they lived.  And yet that is the new reality.  Islamic terrorism can strike anywhere and everywhere.  “While it is impossible to prevent death delivered by madmen who kill because of religious extremism, it is possible to put in place federal policies that limit the influx of Muslim extremists through the wide-open refugee doors of the Obama administration,” Marilyn wrote.  That remains true.

Sayeed Farouk, like Nidal Hassan, did not suddenly fly over here from Syria. But that only makes it more vital that we prevent the next attack and the next massacre by closing the doors and keeping our country safe.

We cannot bring back the dead, the victims of the long horrifying roll of Islamic terror that stretches back for thousands of years, but we can protect the living.  The left approaches this as a mechanical problem, but it’s an ideological problem. It’s a conflict between two sets of ideas and two sets of worldviews. It is a war between those who believe that men must be ruled by the dead will of Mohammed and his brutal successors and those of us who believe in the freedom of our founding documents and the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  It is not a war that we will win through appeasement or disarmament. And we can begin to fight back by protecting ourselves and our country.  “We Redlanders and all Americans need to stand up with “common sense and judgment” with an emphatic “No!” to Syrian refugee resettlement. It’s time to bar the doors against jihadi infiltration,” Marilyn wrote.  From Redland to Paris, it’s time that we did the right thing, for our towns, our cities and our country.

ABOUT DANIEL GREENFIELD

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

White House: Obama Thinks Gun Control Will Deter Terrorists

San Bernardino-area man didn’t report suspicious activity for fear of being called racist

RELATED VIDEO: Demons at our door

California Shooting: The Debate Starts Here

With the investigation of the California shooting in its primary stages, what we do know about this horrific attack is that it was highly planned. The shooters were prepared: in dress — they donned “assault-style clothing” (described as dark, tactical garments) and body armor; with weapons — they chose AK-47 Kalashnikov semi-automatic rifles (or the equivalent) plus pistols; and with ammo – they were carrying multiple magazines and had planted explosive devices resembling pipe bombs.

Without ruling out other motives, law-enforcement officers say the facts of this case point to a terrorist attack. What we do know is that Syed Rizwan Farook, one of the shooters, “was very religious,”according to his father.

He had travelled to Saudi Arabia and returned with this wife, who he had reportedly met online.

A neighbor said Farook lived with his wife, mother and baby and “sounded really happy. I did notice there were lots of packages being dropped off and he was in the garage working on stuff.”

Larson had assumed they were Christmas packages, perhaps unaware of Farook’s religious beliefs. She says in retrospect she wonders if they were the munitions and other elements he needed for the attack.

Fellow workers say Farook was quiet and didn’t socialize with them. Those same workers had recently made a baby shower for him sometime after his now six-month-old child was born.  In a list of workers and their salaries at the facility where Farook worked, he is listed as an environmental specialist with a salary of over $50,000.

Less is known about his wife, Tashfeen Malik, Farook’s accomplice and fellow shooter.

In the wake of the attack, U.S. President Barack Obama and Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders and Martin O’Malley all immediately called for gun-control laws, not venturing into the territory of what makes another human being want to cause so much death and destruction with a gun.

Republican candidates initially offered prayers for the victims and their families, as well as law-enforcement officers in harm’s way. At a speaking engagement, Ben Carson pointedly asked, “What happened to our country?  Where did that come from?  I will tell you where it did not come from.  It did not come from our Judeo-Christian values.  It came from something else.”

If, indeed, the shootings turn out to be an Islamist terror attack, Carson’s questions need to be answered. The current administration’s policy of denying the ideological underpinning of the world’s current battle with worldwide terror is as dangerous as it is ridiculous.

Having an unidentified elephant in the room, a lurking “that-who-will-not-be-named” presence wreaking havoc in the lives of hundreds of thousands of people does not make it go away. On the contrary, it only empowers it.

By limiting the conversation to the voices of those recruiting and building a movement fueled by Islamist ideology, we have taken away one of our prime weapons to fight it: Our ability to refute it and offer an alternative.

Young people, possibly 28-year-old Farook and his 27-year-old wife, do not get radicalized in a vacuum. To borrow a common proverb, it takes a village. With the advent of modern technology and social media, that village has become global.

The fact that Islamist extremists have managed to influence and terrorize so much of the world is a testament to that fact.

Clarion Project is dedicated to having that conversation.

Radicalization in mosques is a number-one factor in swaying the opinion of young Muslims. See Clarion’s Islamist Organizations in America project and see if there is a radical mosque near you.

Watch the trailer below to our upcoming short film “By the Numbers: The Untold Story of Muslim Opinions and Demographics.” Look for the release of the film on December 10.

RELATED ARTICLES:

ISIS Credits Itself on Twitter for San Bernardino Massacre, Threatens More

France Shuts Down Three Radical Mosques

Al-Aqsa Mosque Preacher: West Carried Out Paris Attacks

FBI Tracking 48 ISIS Suspects 24/7 in America

By the Numbers: Watch Trailer to Clarion’s New Short Film

Don’t get hung up on screening! It’s the 2nd generation Muslim migrants we must worry about

There is so much talk about the screening process for Muslim refugees that I’m afraid we are losing sight of the fact that it’s the second generation (can you say San Bernardino slaughter) that we should be concerned about.

Realistically, how are we going to stop those Islamic terrorists (to save our children and grandchildren)?

There is only one way and it starts with halting all Muslim migration to America and then it requires a ruthless surveillance of all those in here already (like it or not!  Trump is right!) until any vestige of the Islamic supremacist mindset is stamped out.

This week’s issue of the Weekly Standard reminds us of the huge US Somali population (growing by the hundreds each month), that has been the seed community from which ISIS, and before that, Al-Shabaab has been drawing its new recruits.

From the Weekly Standard (Minnesota Men indeed!).  Hat tip: Judy

If you get your news from the headlines, you can be excused for thinking that “Minnesota men” pose a special risk of taking up the terrorist jihad at home and abroad. As the Wall Street Journal reported this past April, for example, “U.S. charges six Minnesota men with trying to join ISIS.” The “Minnesota men” featured in such headlines are almost invariably drawn from Minnesota’s swelling population of Somali Muslim immigrants. The state—mostly the metropolitan Twin Cities area—is home to 35,000 such immigrants, the largest Somali population in North America.

Starting in the 1990s, the State Department directed thousands of refugees from Somalia’s civil war to Minnesota. As Kelly Riddell pointed out in the Washington Times this past February, in Minnesota these refugees “can take advantage of some of America’s most generous welfare and charity programs.” Riddell quoted Professor Ahmed Samatar of Macalester College in St. Paul: “Minnesota is exceptional in so many ways but it’s the closest thing in the United States to a true social democratic state.” After a dip in 2008, the inflow of Somalis has continued unabated and augmented by Somalis from other states. If it takes a village, Minnesota has what it takes.

Continue reading here as the Weekly Standard chronicles several important cases in Minnesota.

And, do you know why the number dipped in 2008?  That was the year that the US State Department basically said ‘oopsie! we admitted thousands of Somalis illegally who had lied on applications to get in.’   Consequently, the resettlement of Somali families was put on hold for a couple of years!

How many Somalis have we resettled?  And, why are we still bringing them in by the thousands each year?

So, how many did we admit in the last 25 years or so?  Go to this post we wrote in 2008 (and updated through the years).

In the first six weeks of FY 2016 we have already admitted another 827 Somalis (surely the number has passed the 1,000 mark in recent days).

You must call your US Senators and Member of Congress today, tomorrow and maybe early next week!  It is not just about the Syrians!!!  And, it’s not just about making sure the ones coming in are ‘screened’ when evidence tells us it’s not mom and dad who we should fear, but their children as the second generation is not assimilating, but become more devout (aka radicalized!).

Action Alert:  Call your members of the House and Senate at 202-224-3121 and ask them to vigorously oppose the Refugee Resettlement funding contained in the Omnibus Spending Bill that will be voted on by 12-11-15! Please call by this Friday, Dec. 4th.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of a combination of undated photos showing Somali nationals, from left, Mahamud Said Omar, Abdifatah Yusuf Isse, Salah Osman Ahmed, and Omer Abdi Mohamed. Nine people convicted in a government investigation of terror recruitment and financing for an al-Qaida-linked group in Somalia are to be sentenced in U.S. District Court in Minneapolis. Authorities say more than 20 young men have left Minnesota to join al-Shabab since 2007. AP Photo/file.