VIDEO: ‘Obama is the most radical President ever’

Thursday evening, a retired U.S. Marine Corps Colonel approached me and asked if I had interviewed a soft-spoken professor. He had viewed a YouTube video that had been sent to him from a Facebook page. I smiled and told him, that the person he referred to in YouTube video was Dr. Richard L. Rubenstein, a contributing editor and esteemed colleague at the New English Review.

I also explained that Dr. Rubenstein is a noted Jewish theologian, an ordained Rabbi from the Jewish Theological Seminary. Dr. Rubenstein also holds a Master in Theology (S.T.M.) from Harvard Divinity School and was awarded a Ph.D. from Harvard University in History and Philosophy of Religion. Further, he is a Lawton Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Religion at Florida State University where he taught for 25 years and is a President Emeritus and Life Trustee of Bridgeport University in Connecticut.

I further explained to my  friend that  Dr. Rubenstein  is the author of seminal works concerned with the aftermath of the holocaust, After Auschwitz; History, Theology and Contemporary Judaism,  and history of surplus populations, The Cunning of History. Of increasing importance is Dr. Rubenstein’s, Jihad and Genocide that presents a stark warning to co-religionists and all Infidels of their fate under the Qur’anic doctrine and Islamic Shariah law. More about Dr. Rubenstein’s several careers, lengthy publications list and honorary degrees can be found here.  Dr. Rubenstein recently celebrated his 91st birthday in January 2015. He lost his beloved wife and guiding light, Dr.  Betty Rogers Rubenstein, after 47 years of marriage in 2013.

The video my friend referred to was one of a series of interviews we did at the 2010 NER Symposium with the able assistance of a team from The United West, J. Mark Campbell and Alan Kornman, fellow counter-jihad activists.  Samples of their fine work during the 2010 NER Symposium can be found here. When the YouTube video of Dr. Rubenstein’s interview and provocative comments about President Obama were posted back in 2010, it literally went viral, reaching over a million hits within a few weeks.

My curiosity about my friend’s comments about Dr. Rubenstein’s 2010 interview prompted me to do a Google search.  After finding the Facebook page he referred to I noted the tens of thousands of views it had recently received. Dr. Rubenstein’s comments about President Obama were prescient in retrospect when he first made them in 2010. They are relevant given the myopia on display by the National Security echelons in the Oval Office and the President’s recent press conference remarks.

Criticism has arisen with the President’s referring in a Vox.com interview to “randomized attacks” against unidentified Jewish victims at a kosher supermarket in Paris. Then there is  the public consternation over  the lack of a strategy  that begs the necessity  of defining the nature of the threat  to “degrade and defeat” the Islamic State that lies bestride  war torn Syria and Iraq like a Jihadist colossus. An Islamic State that has attracted tens of thousands of foreign Jihadists flocking to its doctrinal cause of promoting the Salafist exemplar, the Prophet Mohammed of 14 Centuries ago.   That is following the way of Allah, Jihad, seeking ultimate Islamic domination of the globe by slaughtering thousands of religious minorities, Christians, Jews and Buddhists as captives in the Middle East and attacking hapless victims in the West.

Watch Dr. Rubenstein’s prescient NER interview of 2010:

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

The U.S. should not police the Middle East — Stay out of Kuwait!

Once again we do not learn that sticking our noses into Muslim civil wars and onto Muslim lands is against the Constitution of the United States and brings only more chaos and instability in the world. Our Founding Fathers stated clearly not to interfere with foreign affairs unless they are a threat to the United States. So now as Congress mulls America’s war with the Islamic, more than 4,000 Fort Carson soldiers are preparing to leave for Kuwait, where they will take over as America’s largest ground force in the troubled region. Why? So let me get this straight, we are going to borrow more money from Communist China to add another few billion to the $18 trillion+ debt to ship over 4,000 combat troops to Kuwait to do what? As Senator Rand Paul (R-TN) asked, “How can we project power from bankruptcy court?”

Why are we in Iraq? Why are we in Kuwait and Afghanistan? What is the strategic, operational and tactical mission of sending our boys and girls into these God forsaken countries.

Why did we liberate Kuwait from Saddam Hussein in 1991? Why did we set up “No Fly Zones” for 12 years over Muslim lands costing U.S. tax payers trillions of dollars? Why do we keep sticking or noses into Muslim business? How many Dutch, Danish French and German troops are en-route to Kuwait? Zero. We need to be more concerned with the Muslims in this country not in the Middle East.

This is Jordan’s war, this is Saudi Arabia’s war this is not America’s war. Americans are getting beheaded. Stay home! Let the Muslim armies deal with the Islamic State.

The question is where are the Saudi military? Why are they not fighting this battle against the evil savages in the Islamic State. They are once again letting Americans pay the price like they did in Desert Storm. Osama Bin Laden offered his Mujahedeen to kick Saddam out of Kuwait but the Saudi’s used our boys and girls instead. Thus the war against America began and down came the World Trade Center.

Saudi Arabia has 233,500 frontline fully trained combat troops with 25,000 troops in reserve status. They have 1,095 tanks, 7,202 armored fighting vehicles AFG’s, 440 towed artillery pieces, 72 MLRS Multiple Rocket Launchers, 229 jet fighters, 229 fixed wing support aircraft, 182 transport aircraft, 195 helicopters, 12 attack helicopters, 55 Naval ships including 7 frigates and 4 corvettes. The Saudi Defense Budget is $56,725,000,000. They have $696,500,000,000 in gold bullion, with a labor force of over 8 million people and 13 million people ready and able to take up arms against the Islamic State. Source: Global Fire Power.

So Saudi Arabia is more than combat ready to deal with the Islamic State. Jordan has given it some effort but only because of a Jordanian pilot burned alive in a cage… we have lost thousands and thousands of military troops and for what ?

My message to the Congress is this. Bring our boys and girls home from these Muslim lands. Let the the Saudi government, that helped fund 9-11, take care of this mess. Congress must release the 28 classified documents from the 9-11 commission and lets see who in the Saudi government wrote the checks and deposited the money to fund 9-11.

We Americans are sick and tired of being the worlds policeman when in fact we need to get back to Constitutional governance. Let the Muslims kill each other…. leave us out of it… its not our civil war. The only weapon we should be dropping is a tactical nuke on Iran’s long range nuclear ballistic missile sites. Oh and save one for North Korea after we take care of Iran…. let us then read about it on the Drudge Report.

As for President Obama he is of no consequence, he has no power. The power now rests with the Congress and John Boehner but he is weak.

Focus on John Boehner boys and girls…. he is the problem now.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Sisi Vows Response to ISIS for Killing Egyptian Christians

Betsy McCaughey: Obama Betrayal: Effort to Snatch $10 Billion From Veterans

Anti-Defamation League ‘Shocked and Outraged’ by Danish Attacks

VIDEO: Fighting Radical Islam with Flash Mobs in a Casablanca, Morocco Mall

flaks mob moroco

La Vache Qui Rit Maroc – Flashmob Morocco mall.

This Flash Mob event takes place in one of the Islamic countries in the Middle East that has been one of the U.S.’s staunchest Islamic allies since the 1940s.  There are many other Islamic countries who are allied and have supported the United States for over 60 years like Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, Bahrein, Oman, Qatar, Lebanon, and the United Arab Emirates.

The West can’t possibly prevail against ISIL’s Radical Islamic Terrorists and Iran without the cooperation and  support of the America’s Middle East allies.

The rapidly growing number of ISIL Radical Islamic Terrorists facing the civilized world stood at 50,000 at last count; but it was recently reported that their numbers may have increased substantially by the reported arrival 20,000 new recruits—5000 of whom have allied passports; they will have easy access to U.S. Ports of Entry.

Another events in June 2014: Flashmob SAAD LEMJARRED au Morocco Mall

The Lack of a U.S. Military Draft has Increased the Use Of Military Force

The title of this column sounds counter intuitive. A column titled “10 Arguments In Support Of Bringing Back The Draft” by J. Francis Wolfe demonstrates otherwise. Wolfe found that U.S. Presidents and the Congress have deployed U.S. military personnel abroad 6.5 times more in the 40 years after elimination of the draft than the 40 years before.

I was in the U.S. Army when the decision was made by Congress to eliminate the draft. My take on this political decision was that the United States has always had a military that reflected the nation. Many believe to this day that citizen soldiers are necessary to the national security of America.

The elimination of the draft was a mistake and Congress can rectify that mistake, if it has the political will to do so. The draft provided three key functions to our youth:

  1. It gave the youth an opportunity to serve the nation – service above oneself was the ideal. Today’s youth lack a purpose in life because they cannot understand what doing something to serve the nation means.
  2. Those in the military learned team work, punctuality, how to abide by rules and present themselves properly while in uniform. These are traits sought out by companies both large and small in employees.
  3. The military provided a vast number of marketable skills to America’s youth. Skills such as: maintenance of vehicles and aircraft, how to render first aid (corpsmen), plumbing, electrician, radio operator, computer operator, how to drive or fly a variety of military vehicles, the safe use of weapons, cooking, and on and on. Today some technical high schools try to fill this gap but not to the extent nor to the high standards of the U.S. military.

Wolfe’s Argument #5 – The Lack Of A Draft Has Increased Military Force, states:

In the 40 years before the draft was eliminated (1933–1973), the U.S. sent military personnel abroad on 27 different occasions. In the 40 years since (1974–2014), the military has been deployed abroad 175 times. While several influencing factors relate to the use of the military abroad, politicians seem to have fewer reservations sending a volunteer army abroad rather than one composed of draftees.

Rangel, the most senior member of the US House of Representatives, weighed in on this notion, saying that the presence of an all-volunteer military has shaped the political decision-making process, noting, “Too few of the country’s leaders have a personal stake in the well-being of the Armed Forces, and the outcome is predictable. Since the end of the draft in 1973, every president, Democrat and Republican alike, has approached warfare with the mind-set of invading, occupying, and expanding our nation’s influence. It was this attitude that got us into the unnecessary and costly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and that threatens to mire us in deadly wars in the future. We make decisions about war without worry over who fights them. Those who do the fighting have no choice; when the flag goes up, they salute and follow orders.”

The Ten Arguments in Support of Bringing Back the Draft are:

  1. Future Politicians Would Understand The True Cost Of Conflict
  2. Near-Total Support For Wars The U.S. Chooses
  3. Reinforcing Full Membership In The Political Community
  4. National Service Can Be Broadly Defined
  5. The Lack Of A Draft Has Increased Military Force
  6. The Shared Experience Would Unite Classes And Cultures
  7. Reduction Of Adverse Effects On Mental Health
  8. No More Circumvention Of Congressional Approval
  9. Increased Attention Toward Foreign Policy
  10. The Draft Connects Civilians With The Military

Click here to read Wolfe’s rational on each of these arguments.

Obama’s Dangerous Iran Nuke Deal

The February 10th Wall Street Journal editorial asked “Has the U.S. already conceded a new era of nuclear proliferation?” and concluded that “Mr. Obama is so bent on an Iran deal that he will make any concession to get one.”

As we should know by now, President Obama has no negotiating skills and even less understanding of the world the U.S. used to lead by virtue of its military power and democratic values.

If he succeeds in getting a deal, absent Congress doing anything about it, the Wall Street Journal says it will result in “a very different world than the one we have been living in since the dawn of the nuclear age. A world with multiple nuclear states, including some with revolutionary religious impulses or hegemonic ambitions, is a very dangerous place.”

Yes, but. We already live in such a world and the real question is whether, absent their “revolutionary” rhetoric, shouting “Death to America!” and “Death to Israel!” do those at the top levels of the Iranian ruling structure want to risk having their nation destroyed if they were ever to use nuclear weapons?

No nation on Earth has done so since the U.S. ended the war with the Japanese Empire with two atom bombs rather than put at risk the lives of our troops in an invasion. Why do we think Iran would use their nukes if they acquired them?

The short answer is that the United Nations has passed six resolutions to deny Iran the capability of developing a military nuclear program and the current negotiations, the P5+1, while led by the U.S., are joined by Russia, China, France, the United Kingdom and Germany.

Cartoon - Iran Threat to US

For a larger view click on the image.

Nations in the Middle East and around the world are inclined to think the Iranian leadership would use such weapons. Obama is intent on ignoring their judgment.

If you want to know why Iran continues to be involved in negotiations to restrict its nuclear weapons agenda, you need to know that the U.S. will release $11.9 billion to Iran by the time the talks are concluded in June. That’s the figure cited by our own State Department.

On January 21, the U.S. released $490 million, the third such payment since December 10. For sitting at the negotiations table, Iran will secure $4.9 billion in unfrozen cash assets via ten separate payments by the U.S. It had received $4.2 billion in similar payments under the 2013 interim agreement with the U.S. and was given another $2.9 billion by the Obama administration last year in an absurd effort to get them to agree to end their effort to become a nuclear power.

In a sense there are several Iran’s. There is the Iran of the Supreme Leader and the Revolutionary Guard, both committed to the Islamic revolution that brought the present day Iran into being in 1979. They value having a nuclear weapons capability no less than the U.S. or other nations do.

Then there are the Iranian realists who would far prefer a detente between the U.S. and Iran because they believe it would be in both our interests. These are the voters who elected Hassan Rouhani in 2013 to replace Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who has served in office from 2005. They represent some 70% of its citizens would want peace, trade and normal relations with the U.S. Their leaders, however, have thoughts of hegemonic power in the Middle East to advance Shiite Islam.

The problem is that many of the Iranian leadership do not speak in terms other than an utter contempt for the U.S. and with an outspoken enmity for any nation that opposes the expansion of Islam. In late January, one of its newspapers, Kayhan, reported that “Professors, students and employees at the Imam Sadeq University, condemning the insults against the prophet of Islam by Charlie Hebdo…demand closure of the French embassy in Tehran.”

The demonstrators carried placards read, “I am not Charlie, I am the innocent child of Gaza”, “Death to America”, “Death to Israel”, “Death to Britain”, “Death to France”, ‘Death to Wahabism” and comparable signs all indicative of Iran’s hostility to any response to the terrorism it has sponsored for decades since the Islamic Revolution was initiated there in 1979.

On January 23, Iran’s Foreign Minister, Mohammad-Javad Zarif, addressed the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, saying “I do not believe that ten years of confrontation will have had any benefits for anyone. Ten years of sanctions has yielded 19,800 contrifuges, exactly that which the sanctions wanted to halt.”

There is no question that sanctions and the long negotiations have reduced Iran’s capacity to create nuclear weapons agenda. The current negotiations, however, are signaling an abandonment of that policy.

At Friday prayers in late January, Hojjat al-Eslam Zazem Sediqi told those in attendance “Our statesmen should know the enemy, should know with whom they are dealing and negotiating with…You are speaking with wild beasts which do not show mercy to (anyone) young or old, and who insult the Prophet, the most sacred of sacred.”

The Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDC) maintains a constant monitoring of Iranian news media and government outlets. The reported news out of Iran paints a picture of fire-breathing zealots against a moderate political class and population. The question is whether the zealots will have the final word.

On January 28, Ali Alfoneh, a FDC senior fellow, authored a policy brief that concluded that “Even in the unlikely event that Iranian President Hassan Rouhani and his negotiating team reach a nuclear agreement with international negotiators, its implementation may well fall to the Islamic Revolutionary Corps…The IRGC’s vociferous opposition to nuclear concessions and improving ties with the West raises serious questions over whether future Iranian governments will uphold any nuclear deal that the current one signs.”

There are two major power centers in Iran, the Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, and the IRGC. Rouhani is routinely referred to as “a moderate.” As Alfoneh noted, “Meanwhile, Rouhani’s cabinet is torn between public demands for jobs and human rights, the creeping infiltration of the IRGC, and the Supreme Leader’s dogged attempts to maintain the status quo at all costs.”

In late January, the Democrats on Capitol Hill, led by Robert Menendez (D-NJ) gave Obama another two months to reach a deal before they vote for new sanctions. In the House, progressives are urging their colleagues to hold off moving any legislation that would tighten economic penalties on Iran. At this point, the only thing that has worked has been sanctions and the return of frozen funds, a form of bribery.

Meanwhile, Iran has taken credit for the training and arming of Shiite rebels who overthrew the leadership in Yemen. Iran also supports the Hezbollah in Lebanon that is threatening Israel from the area of the Golan. In reprisal for a recent attack, Israel responded with an air strike that killed an Iranian general. None of this helps position Iran as a potential peaceful partner.

This is why John Boehner, the Speaker of the House, has invited Israel’s Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, to address a joint session of Congress. He did so without consulting the White House, but we should keep in mind that Obama released five Taliban generals from Gitmo without consulting Congress.

Netanyahu will spell out what he has said in the past. A nuclear Iran is an existential and a potentially catastrophic threat to Israel. He will likely point out that it is a threat to Saudi Arabia and all the other nations in the Middle East and worldwide.

The question is whether we are dealing with rational people leading Iran or not. In the end, we are asked to assume that even the Supreme Leader and the Revolutionary Guards want to live, want their children and grandchildren to live, and want their nation to continue. That is what Obama is betting on. The problem with that is that Islam puts a high value on martyrdom.

© Alan Caruba, 2015

VIDEO: ‘Defeat Jihad Summit’ Challenges Islamic Supremacism — and the Obama ‘strategy’

Yesterday, an extraordinary gathering of freedom-fighters in what might best be described as the War for the Free World convened in Washington, D.C.  Their purpose was to anticipate and rebut the thesis of President Obama’s “Countering Violent Extremism Summit” next week – namely, that the United States faces hostile forces whose identity, motivations and capabilities are defined by an opaque euphemism: violent extremism.

Sen. Ted Cruz at Defeat Jihad Summit:

Gov. Bobby JIndal at Defeat Jihad Summit:

Newt Gingrich at Defeat Jihad Summit:

Gen. Jerry Boykin at Defeat Jihad Summit:

The “Defeat Jihad Summit” was sponsored by the Center for Security Policy and brought together present and former, domestic and foreign political leaders, senior military officers, national security professionals and other experts on Islamic supremacism and its guiding doctrine, shariah.  Among the noteworthy participants in this roundtable discussion were:

  • Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal
  • former U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey
  • former House Speaker Newt Gingrich
  • U.S. Senator Ted Cruz
  • Representative Steven King
  • Representative Mike Pompeo
  • Representative Scott Perry
  • Admiral James “Ace” Lyons (U.S. Navy, Ret.)
  • Lieutenant General William “Jerry” Boykin (U.S. Army, Ret.)
  • Leading 9/11 family member Deborah Burlingame
  • Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders
  • Danish free speech advocate Lars Hedegaard
  • Britain’s Lord Malcolm Pearson
  • Israeli Amb. Yoram Ettinger
  • former Muslim Nonie Darwish
  • Muslim reformer Dr. Zuhdi Jasser
  • Australian pastor Mark Durie
  • former Representative Pete Hoekstra

Highlights of the Summit included:

  • A discussion of the nature of our jihadist enemies and the mainstream – not extremist –character of their inspiration: the politico-military-legal shariah doctrine derived from the sacred texts, institutions and authorities of Islam.  There was widespread agreement that we must understand and be able to name our foes, not pretend that they and their motivations are unknowable.
  • The global jihad takes various forms including: the violent kind; civilization (or cultural, stealthy and subversive) jihad; institutional jihad (employing entities like the multinational Organization of Islamic Cooperation and the United Nations under the OIC’s influence); individual jihad (its perpetrators are mistakenly being described as “lone wolves”); and material support (which, under shariah, is prized as highly as the service of those who take up the sword).
  • America urgently needs a strategy for countering all such jihadist endeavors – one that brings to bear all instruments of national power to achieve a decisive correlation of forces and our victory.  We face a truly existential threat from the global jihad movement, as do other nations of the Free World now under assault for sharing our values and love of liberty.
  • The National Security Strategy unveiled last Friday by President Obama’s National Security Advisor, Susan Rice, and the draft Authorization for the Use of Military Force being proposed by the administration are wholly inadequate.  The former compounds the inadequacies of the President’s “lead-from-behind” approach with an even more passive one: “strategic patience”; the latter appears calculated to fail and to embolden, rather than defeat, the Islamic State or any other foe.
  • Instead, the summit discussed an alternative, modeled on the counter-ideological strategy President Reagan laid out in his National Security Decision Directive 75 – his administration’s plan to destroy Soviet communism.  Speaker Gingrich, Senator Cruz, General Mukasey and a number of the other speakers recommended this plan of action – dubbed the “Secure Freedom Strategy” (full document HERE; highlights HERE) – as a point of departure for the debate now getting underway regarding President Obama’s proposed AUMF.

The Center for Security Policy’s President, Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., moderated the nearly six-hour summit.  Afterwards, he commented:

The participants in the Defeat Jihad Summit have rendered a real public service. Their insights, analyses and recommendations concerning the threat from shariah-adherent Muslims and the need to empower and join forces with others in the Muslim community who eschew that brutally repressive ideology create the basis for a far more sound, effective and durable national security strategy.

The Center for Security Policy looks forward to working with them and all those benefiting from the live-streaming and other products that will disseminate the fruits of this summit, far and wide.

About the Center for Security Policy

The Center for Security Policy is a non-profit, non-partisan national security organization that specializes in identifying policies, actions, and resource needs that are vital to American security and then ensures that such issues are the subject of both focused, principled examination and effective action by recognized policy experts, appropriate officials, opinion leaders, and the general public. For more information visit www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org

An Iranian Standoff

The problem with punishing bad behaviour on the international stage is that the punishment needs to be unanimous and be kept water-tight. It is a demonstration of how poorly things are going with Iran that not even the United States can currently keep its message together.

The Iran team negotiating with the P5+1 have reportedly been boasting in private that the Americans are ‘begging’ them for a deal on the country’s nuclear project. And so it seems. Republicans in the Senate are currently insisting that they will vote in support of the Kirk-Menendez bill which would impose sanctions on Iran if – and some say ‘when’ – the current negotiations fail. But President Obama has said that he will veto any such move. It is not uncommon of course for there to be a stand-off between the President and the Senate but this is an uncommonly serious stand-off and one that is likely to have uncommonly serious repercussions.

The problem appears to come down to the reading of intentions. The Republicans, along with many Democrats in the Senate, realise that Iran is stringing its international negotiating partners along. They suspect, with a good deal of previous experience to back them up, that Iran is buying time – allowing its economy and nuclear project to recuperate and get back on track even as they pretend that they are coming to a solution on this very matter. The President, by contrast, is working on a fixed time-table. With less than two years left in office he appears to be in a great hurry to clear up this thirty-five year long problem on his watch. He is clearly persuaded by the notion that he is to Iran what Nixon was to China – the visionary who can mend relations by taking them out of the deep-freeze.

The problem is not only that Iran is no China and Obama no Nixon – the problem is that the Iranians are not working to the President’s personal electoral timetable. Even though they know he is. And here is where the bigger problem lies. It has been the international mantra throughout these talks that the only thing worse than no deal is a bad deal. But it seems that the President has this the other way around. For him the only thing worse than a bad deal is no deal. It is the only explanation for his consistent efforts to allow the Iranians to buy more time and threaten his own side when they raise the matter of punishing the Iranians with sanctions for their intransigence.

We are used to seeing China, Russia or some rogue state break the international consensus on sanctions. But seeing the US President willing to do so is another matter entirely and heralds a world which will be infinitely more dangerous by the time he leaves his office than it was when he walked into it.


dr alen mendoza hjsFROM THE DIRECTOR’S DESK 

Another week passes in the Ukraine conflict. And another supposed ceasefire has been agreed in Minsk with both government and rebel forces solemnly swearing their agreement to its terms, due to commence at 2200 GMT on Saturday night, with representatives of the great powers looking on. Yet already we are hearing reports that shelling of government positions has taken place in Donetsk and Luhansk – hardly the ideal way to prepare for a moratorium on conflict, as various Ukrainian politicians have sarcastically put it. Once again, doubts about Russia’s intentions towards its neighbour have resurfaced.

So why is this ceasefire different to all other ceasefires? The short answer is that it is likely not to be. Despite the detailed clauses worked out between the parties stretching out to the end of 2015, and the promise of monitoring by international observers, this ceasefire will stand or fall by one thing alone: Mr Putin’s mood. If the Russian President decides he has had enough of meddling in Ukraine’s affairs, then he will cease and desist from helping the so-called rebels. If he hasn’t…

Germany’s Chancellor Merkel has promised further EU sanctions will be imposed if Russia reneges on the deal, but it is clear the incremental pattern of punishments imposed thus far will do little to discourage Putin. It hasn’t to date after all.

So if we are serious about checking Russia’s ambitions, a much more radical departure needs to be considered. The EU and US should announce that a Russian failure to honour the ceasefire will lead to every single senior Kremlin official and Russian parliamentarian from Putin’s party being placed on the sanctions list. The howls of rage at this threat to their continued prosperity may well be the only thing that can divert Putin from the course he has placed Russia on. If so, it is a gambit worth trying.

Dr Alan Mendoza is Executive Director of The Henry Jackson Society

Follow Alan on Twitter: @AlanMendoza

Are We Seeing History Repeat Itself?

“Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it” is the famed quote of George Santayana, a Spanish philosopher (1863-1952). I am beginning to think that the world is making its way toward a future that repeats the horrors of the last century’s wars and earlier times when Europeans battled Islam to free Jerusalem, to protect their homelands in Europe, and to eject Muslims from Spain.

Islam as DominateIn his book, “Jihad in the West: Muslim Conquests from the 7th to the 21st Centuries” historian Paul Fregosi documented the history of Islam and its attacks on European nations, characterizing jihad as “essentially a permanent state of hostility that Islam maintains against the rest of the world.” It is a Muslim sacrament, a duty they must perform.

Occurring at the same time is the agenda of the global environmental movement and on February 4 Christina Figueres, the executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, said “This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves; which is to intentionally transform the economic development model, for the first time in human history.”

“This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for the, at least, 150 years, since the industrial revolution.” (Italics added)

Figueres was wrong. The objective of the 1917 Communist revolution that began in Russia and Mao’s “Great Leap Forward” (1958-1961) was the same that is now being openly embraced by the United Nations in 2015. The result of both was the death of millions.

Humanity is under attack from an Islam that intends to impose its barbaric seventh century Sharia law and from the environmental movement’s intention to end capitalism and replace it with the income distribution central to Communism.

Both spell a terrible future for the people of the world.

Communism in 20th CenturyThe President of the United States is devoted to pursuing both of these goals as the defender of Islam and the opponent of “income inequality.” We have twenty-two months to survive Barack Obama’s remaining time in office.

Obama was first elected on the promise to end the U.S. engagement in conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. After many years Americans welcomed the prospect of ceasing the loss of lives and billions those wars represented. With the rise of the Islamic State (ISIS) they are now seeing the true price of that policy. Just because we don’t want to fight a war doesn’t mean our enemy will cease to pursue it.

We are at a critical moment in time because it is evident that Obama wants to provide Iran the opportunity to build its own nuclear weapons arsenal. It is a time as well when the military capability of the U.S. has been diminished to what existed before the beginning of World War II. All of Europe and much of Asia would have fallen under the control of Nazi Germany and the Empire of Japan if the U.S. had not stepped up to the task of defeating them.

Relentlessly, Obama has done everything he can to reduce the size of our military fighting force and the ships, planes and other weapons needed to protect our security or support that of our allies. He has withdrawn the U.S. from its position of global leadership and left behind allies that no longer trust us and enemies who no longer fear us.

Raymond Ibrahim of the Middle East Forum wrote on February 5 that “approximately 100 million Christians around the world are experiencing the persecution by Muslims of all races, nationalities, and socio-political circumstances.”

At the same time, we are witnessing a new exodus of Jews from Europe, mindful of the Holocaust in the 1940s. According to the Pew Research Center, as of 2013 the Jewish population worldwide was approximately 14 million. Just over 6 million reside in Israel, another 6 million are U.S. citizens, and the rest are in Europe and elsewhere around the world. What has not changed from the last century, however, is the level of anti-Semitism and it appears to be on the rise.

What we are witnessing is a full-scale attack on the West—Christianity and Judaism—and upon Western values of morality, democracy, and freedom.

Whether it will erupt in a new world war is unknown, but if history is a guide, we are moving in that direction.

© Alan Caruba, 2015

RELATED ARTICLE: Sadomasochism and the Jihadi Death Cult

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of a line of naked crucified Christian Armenian girls by Muslims in 1918. Image courtesy of the Armenian Genocide Museum-Institute.

Who Is to Blame for the Chapel Hill Murders? The Anti-Muslim Hate Crimes Industry?

Over at PJ Media, I explore what’s behind the growing hysteria to get the Chapel Hill murders of three Muslims labeled a “hate crime”:

Muslims are under siege in the U.S. — don’t you know that? Roving bands of Islamophobes routinely harass and threaten innocent Muslims, and a well-heeled Islamophobia Network spends millions to demonize and vilify Muslims in the American public discourse. Things have gotten so bad that pious Muslim women fear to wear their hijabs in public – and when they do, they’re spat upon and worse. The climate of fear and hatred that the Islamophobes have so assiduously whipped up culminated in the horrific murder last Tuesday of three Muslims in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, by a psychopath seething with hatred for Muslims.

That’s the way numerous leftists and Muslims see life in Barack Obama’s America, but in reality, that scenario is almost wholly false. A psychopath really did murder three Muslims in Chapel Hill last Tuesday, but the rest is pure leftist myth-making, providing an illustrative example of how the Left and the mainstream media ignore inconvenient facts and bend others in order to further their chosen narrative.

Who is Craig Hicks?

The problems with this narrative are many. From the looks of his Facebook page, Hicks is hardly the right-wing, anti-Muslim Islamophobic redneck of their hysterical fantasies; instead, he is a hardcore leftist and fan of the Huffington Post and the Southern Poverty Law Center. Those two are among his huge and revealing list of “Likes,” which shows him much more preoccupied with Christianity than with Islam. He likes the atheists Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and Bill Maher, all of whom have criticized Islam, but his page includes none of their statements about Islam. He likes many anti-Christian groups but no groups that are critical of Islam, and he even likes a group called “Obama Backs Mosque Near Ground Zero: ‘This is America,’” praising Obama for supporting the Ground Zero Mosque.

Other “Likes” from Hicks’ Facebook page include Bill Nye The Science Guy; Sarah Silverman; Penn & Teller: Bullshit!; Stop the World, the Teabaggers Want Off; LGBT / Atheist Alliance; Scary Bible Quote of the Day; World Atheists: Lets Kick Islam and Christianity out of Africa; Merry christmyth; Pass The 28th Amendment – Complete Removal Of The Church From The State; The Rachel Maddow Fan Page; Pissing Off The Religious Right; Keep your Bible out of our Vaginas; Mitt Romney Sucks; Separation of Church and State; Still here? Silly Christians; Jesus McChrist; Denying Evolution Won’t Make Your God Any More Real; Dogs Against Romney; The Atheist’s Bible Commentary; Organization for Educating Misinformed Tea Party Patriots; GOPHypocrisy; Liberals Against Conservative Propaganda; Arrest the Pope and Tax Religion; Not wasting my Sundays at church; Network for Church Monitoring; Dominionism is destroying America; Christians vs. Atheists; Americans United for Separation of Church and State; Stop The Westboro Baptist Church!; and many, many more. Oh, and Gun Toting Liberal.

He likes no anti-Islam groups, and his Facebook page contains no criticism of Islam other than one comparison of “Radical Christians” and “Radical Muslims.” From the looks of all this at least, if Craig Hicks had been planning to commit a hate crime, it seems much more likely that he would have targeted “right-wingers,” Republicans, evangelical Christians, etc., than that he would have targeted Muslims because they were Muslims.

What’s more, Hicks’ wife has said:

I can say with absolute belief that this incident had nothing to do with religion of the victims’ faith, but it was related to a longstanding parking dispute that my husband had with the neighbors.

These killings were over parking, not Islam

The Chapel Hill Police said the same thing: these killings were over parking, not Islam. Karen Hicks added that her husband “often champions on his Facebook page for the rights of individuals. … He believes everyone is equal – doesn’t matter what you look like or who you are or what you believe.” U.S. Attorney Ripley Rand stated Wednesday:

“The events of yesterday are not part of a targeting campaign against Muslims in North Carolina,” and that there was “no information this is part of an organized event against Muslims.”

It is demonic madness to murder people over a parking space, but it is not the seismic event that the cold-blooded murder of three Muslims solely because they were Muslims would be. And so many decided to go with the old adage from The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance: “When the legend becomes fact, print the legend.”

The father of one of the victims insisted: “This was not a dispute over a parking space; this was a hate crime. This man had picked on my daughter and her husband a couple of times before, and he talked with them with his gun in his belt. And they were uncomfortable with him, but they did not know he would go this far.” He said his daughter told him: “Honest to God, he hates us for what we are and how we look.”

Is the sky falling on accusations of Islamophobia?

Curious that Craig Hicks would seethe with such hatred for Muslims that it would move him to murder, and yet never mention this hatred to his wife of seven years or give a hint of it on his Facebook page, where so many of his hates were on abundant display. Nonetheless, it was time to turn the legend into fact: Nihad Awad of the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) thundered:

Based on the brutal nature of this crime, the past anti-religion statements of the alleged perpetrator, the religious attire of two of the victims, and the rising anti-Muslim rhetoric in American society, we urge state and federal law enforcement authorities to quickly address speculation of a possible bias motive in this case.

Duke professor Omid Safi (who is so nakedly dishonest that he once claimed that I had threatened to kill himassumed that speculation was fact as he lamented:

There is a tendency to say, “This is a nice place, these eruptions of violence don’t belong here.” And yet here we are. This is, in all of the heartbreak and violence and sadness, where we are.

Islamic supremacist activist Linda Sarsour said the murder “sends a message to other young people in the Muslim community that the fear is valid.” Abed Ayoub of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) linked the killings to the filmAmerican Sniper (which Craig Hicks actually probably hates):

It may not be directly linked to the film, but the overall way that Islamophobia and anti-Arab sentiment are moving in this country is portrayed in the words of those who watched American Sniper. The film gave us a look into how these individuals were feeling and for the first time we were getting raw, real messages – and they were frightening.

Read the rest here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

David Cameron on Denmark attack: “Free speech must always be protected”

University of Texas-Arlington: Muslim student admits she made up story about being threatened at gunpoint

“Palestinian” government wants role in probing “terrorist” Chapel Hill murders

Lars Vilks Free Speech Event Turns Deadly in Copenhagen

Vilks Self Portrait

Lars Vilks self-Portrait.

Today’s deadly assault by a masked gunman who sprayed more than 200 rounds of automatic fire into a Café in Northern Copenhagen. The exchange of gunfire by  the gunmen with Danish security police  took the life of one 40-year old man at the Free Speech, Blasphemy and Islam  event  where both Swedish Artist Lars Vilks the honoree and the French Ambassador were present. They were unhurt in the attack. Three security police were injured in the shootout at the Krudttønden Café.

Listen to this BBC recording of a speaker at the Krudttønden Café when gunfire sent everyone to the floor. According to a later reports from AFP, Reuters and BBC:

A  second, perhaps related, incident, close to Copenhagen’s main synagogue in the city center, saw a 55-year old  Jewish man shot in the head, who subsequently died of  wounds,  and two policemen were  injured, police said in a statement early Sunday.  The BBC reported  “early on Sunday, police said they had shot dead a man  who opened fire on them near a railway station in the neighborhood of Noerrebro where they had been keeping an address under observation.”

Danish Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt described the assault as “a terrorist attack”, while the United States branded it “deplorable”.

French ambassador to Denmark Francois Zimeray, who had been present at the debate but was not hurt, told AFP the shooting was an attempt to replicate the January 7 attack on the Charlie Hebdo magazine in Paris which killed 12 people.

“They shot from the outside (and) had the same intention as Charlie Hebdo, only they didn’t manage to get in,” he said by telephone from the venue.

We interviewed  Vilks when he appeared at Rabbi Jonathan Hausman’s Massachusetts synagogue in 2010 during a tour of the US under the auspices of the International Free Press society.  He discussed several attacks on him, including   a firebombing attack by jihadis at his home in Sweden. This followed the publication in 2007 of his Mohammed as a roundabout dog sketches and assault against him at an Uppsala University lecture.   We noted his raison d’être for the Mohammed cartoon:

Vilks created the Mohammed sketch for an exhibition in Sweden entitled “Dog in the Roundabout.” He explained that Sweden’s road/highway system is dotted with roundabouts (rotaries). Often, parks are created in such rotaries or there is simply open area in which people take their dogs for walks. In 2006, there was a national competition to create dogs in roundabouts. With his artist’s eye, Vilks drew dogs in the roundabout. He then began to play with different forms of dogs…solid form, blurry form, different sizes, dogs in different settings, interchanging the body of a dog with the head of a man, Mohammed. Vilks has stated that this series of drawings stirred the ire of the Muslim world. The catalyst for his sketches was the growing violence and changes in Swedish cities caused by Muslim immigrants who displayed unbridled anti-Semitism and anti-Western animus.

Vilks_cartoon

Vilks cartoon Mohammed as roundabout dog.

See a separate interview with Vilks in our collection, The West Speaks. Today’s fatal attack at the Krudttønden Café unfortunately reminds us that blasphemy under Sharia can result in death.

Update from Nidra Poller in Paris:

Now the Danish police are saying there was just one gunman. They have published CCTV photos of him. They describe him as “North African origin.” The event was a tribute to Charlie Hebdo. Debate  is  lively in France and we’re not hearing the “nothing to do with Islam” melody. Europeans are aware that all our liberties are under attack. It’s not just a question of blasphemy. That’s just the beginning. 

The Local in Denmark has updates:

Update, 6.18pm: 

The civilian killed in Saturday’s shooting attack was a 40-year-old Danish citizen, police have said. Police added that they have founded the suspected getaway vehicle but two suspects are still at large.

Update, 6.08 p.m.: Reports of up to 200 shots fired:

The French Ambassdor to Denmark told AFP from inside the venue that shots rang out in the midst of a debate on Islam and free speech in Copenhagen.

“They fired on us from the outside. It was the same intention as [the January 7 attack on] Charlie Hebdo except they didn’t manage to get in,” Francois Zimeray said by telephone.

Swedish artist Lars Vilks, the author of controversial Prophet Mohammed cartoons published in 2007 that sparked worldwide protests was also at the debate.

Three police officers were reported wounded outside the building, Danish media reported, quoting eyewitnesses.

Zimeray said earlier on Twitter that he was not harmed.

“Intuitively I would say there were at least 50 gunshots, and the police here are saying 200,” he told AFP.

“Bullets went through the doors and everyone threw themselves to the floor. We managed to flee the room, and now we’re staying inside because it’s still dangerous. The attackers haven’t been caught and they could very well still be in the neighborhood.”

A Femen activist, Inna Shevshenko, said on Twitter that there were several dozen people in the room.

French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius condemned the attack, saying in a statement that France “remains by the side of the Danish authorities and people in the fight against terrorism.”

Vilks has been under police protection since his 2007 cartoons were published.

The French president’s office said Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve was headed to the scene.

Update, 5.57 p.m.:

Police have confirmed that one civilian has died and three police officers are wounded. Police continue to hunting for two suspected gunmen in a dark Volkswagen Polo. The suspects were said to be wearing all black and speaking Danish.

Vilks himself was unhurt in the attack.

Police say they believe Vilks, known for his depictions of the Prophet Muhammad, was the target of the attack. He was attending a debate on the theme of ‘Art, blasphemy and freedom of speech’ at the Krudttønden cultural centre in the Østerbro area of the Danish capital. The attack took place after a speech by the French Ambassador to Denmark.

Delegate Dennis Meyhoff Brink, a satire researcher, told Jyllands Posten that he heard 30 shots over a two minute period. Danish security police then ordered everyone to remain inside. According to reports, the focus of the attack was on the entrance to the building, and the gunman did not enter the main hall.

“[Security police] came running through the room brandishing guns, and they took Lars Vilks out a back door.”

According to Brink, the shots were fired just as the French Ambassador, François Zimeray, had finished speaking. Zimeray immediately took to Twitter to confirm that he was still alive:

Copenhagen police confirmed to the Berlingske newspaper that three officers were wounded in the shooting and that two suspected gunmen were at large. The suspects wore black and spoke Danish.

The meeting was held under tight security, with delegates subject to searches as they entered the building.

The newspaper Ekstra Bladet writes that the police are treating the attack as an act of terrorism.

Helle Merete Blix, one of the organizers of the meeting, told Danish channel TV2 News that the meeting continued following the drama:

“We couldn’t get away, so the debate meeting carried on,” she said.

More soon

RELATED ARTICLES:

Muslims Criticize Obama’s Anti-Extremism Efforts As Wrongly Singling Out Muslims

David Cameron on Denmark attack: “Free speech must always be protected”

Islamic State chops off women’s hands for using cell phones

Islamic State beheading people for smoking cigarettes

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review. The featured image is of Danish Police Searching for Gunman after Attack on Free Speech event at Krudttønden Café 2-14-15. Source Martin Vesty/Scanpix.

VIDEO: Senator Rand Paul, ‘Republicans need to be boldly for what we are for!’

Senator Rand Paul (R-TN) delivered a speech in Sarasota, FL on Valentines Day 2015. He asked the gathered members of the Republican Party of Sarasota County (RPOS), “is anyone here a Democrat light?” Watch the response. Senator Paul calls those in Washington, D.C. the “non-productive sector.” He attacks Islam for its blasphemy laws. “Can we project power from bankruptcy court?” asked Senator Paul.

Senator Paul said, “Republicans need to be boldly for what we are for and boldly go where we have not gone before.”

Senator Paul was introduced by Joe Gruters, Vice-Chairman of the Republican Party of Florida and Chairman of RPOS. Senator Paul was presented with the RPOS 2014 Republican of the year award.

RELATED ARTICLE: Do We Need the State to License Professionals?

Colonel Allen West – “Thomas More Law Center is ‘Tip of the Spear’ in the fight against Islam”

A private reception this past Friday, hosted by Dr. Walter Knysz, Jr. and his wife Jan, at their Florida home, featured a talk by retired Army Lieutenant Colonel and former US Congressman, Allen West.
During his address, Colonel West, a member of the Thomas More Law Center’s (TMLC) Citizens Advisory Board, characterized President Obama as a Muslim sympathizer.  West condemned President Obama’s remarks at the recent National Prayer Breakfast, where the President found a moral equivalency between the recent barbaric brutality of Islamic terrorists and Christianity and the Crusades fought a thousand years ago.  Colonel West pointed out that a day before the National Prayer Breakfast, Obama secretly met with members of the Muslim Brotherhood, which the President has refused to identify by name.
During his remarks, Colonel West reaffirmed his commitment to assisting the Law Center in the fight against radical Islam and the preservation of Our Christian Nation.

Colonel West also discussed TMLC’s defense of Lieutenant Colonel (LTC) Matthew Dooley, an outstanding combat officer and a highly qualified military instructor on Radical Islam and terrorism.  LTC Dooley was fired from his teaching assignment and publically condemned by General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, after 57 Muslim organizations demanded that all training materials that they judge to be offensive to Islam be “purged” and that the instructors be “effectively disciplined.”

West took a moment to praise TMLC for all of its work defending religious freedom in several areas including fighting for Christian business owners and non-profits against the HHS Mandate.

In the wake of President Obama and his administration’s recent defense of Islamic terrorists, Colonel Allen West spoke about the dangers of the stealth jihad taking place in America and how the Thomas More Law Center is the “tip of the spear” in the fight for our Judeo-Christian heritage.
In closing, Colonel West reminded his audience of the importance of being on offense because those who love Our Nation can no longer wait for the next attack on our military, our religious freedom, or other freedoms.

The Moderate Muslim Vanguard and Islamic Trafficking in Little Girls

Just when everyone’s attention has been directed toward ISIS and some of the most despicable crimes ever committed, and our government is loathe to war with our planet’s unequaled brutality, Jordan’s King Abdullah assumed the role of world leader. Such activity continues to distract us so that we ignore the evils unfolding within our own country – the war of the Moderates who exploit children in incalculable ways.      

ISIS and Boko Haram, who hope to establish a shared Muslim empire, have lured thousands of American and European children to join their jihad against Western civilization.  The UK mirror reported that, within a single two-week period alone, the Islamic State kidnapped about 3,000 Yazidi women and children, and Boko Haram kidnaps young girls by the hundreds from private schools for sexual slavery.  European teenage boys are persuaded to join ISIS with cash offers, rap videos, and tales of adventure. Young women are enticed by adventure and romance, only to be forced to live in the nude as sex slaves, beaten, shared among friends, and raped to bear the next generation of jihadists. The International Labor Organization estimates 1.2 million children are trafficked for exploitation each year.

Chechen Muslims, with their violent history, were responsible for the 2004 Beslan school hostage crisis, when they captured 1,200 people (including 777 children), terrorized and raped the hostages. The death toll was 331, including 186 children (video below). Palestinian Muslims have bombed Israeli school buses and built terror tunnels that led to children’s dormitories and classrooms.

In America, boys and young men are brainwashed in mosques to join ISIS’s fight for Allah. Schools, such as the Universities of California, have become a hotbed of anti-Semitism not seen since the 1930s.  Given a diet of Islamic propaganda in textbooks and videos, the public schools are now “encouraging” and praising Allah (which leads to wearing complete burqas and forced conversion).

hijabGirls are not born with a sense of modesty.  They are taught to feel unsuitable and subservient, whether through their schooling or the Islamic home environment, where the man dominates in a loveless marriage.  From this environment, the young women will readily accept the burqa and its quality of escape and invisibility. Encumbered by these portable tents, they will also be prohibited from the joys of being American, from all forms of sports and social activities (even friendship between women), and they will learn to accept their captivity. Following these forms of conditioning, or being forced to lie (taqiyyah), they will assert their right to the restrictive dress code.

There is yet another consequence of burqas.  In Islam, the idea of modesty is warped into becoming the woman’s shame of her womanhood, which undermines her security and self-respect. This results in an increase in female genital mutilation, and facial disfigurement by acid (already noted in our local upscale shopping mall when a young woman’s face covering slipped). Those who do not wear burqas will be at risk of being raped; the risk in Islamized Sweden and Denmark has reached epidemic proportions, comparable to Islamic countries.  The more subjugated the women, the higher the overall crime rate in a tyrannical regime.  When news reporters state that we have to defeat the Islamic ideology to win against ISIS, be reminded that we must also defeat the ideology’s permeation into our own lives.

Of the 1.3 billion Muslims in the world, it is estimated that up to 25% may be violent extremists, with the majority of Muslims in most Islamic countries favoring Shari’a law.  Within the populace are the traumatized, fearful and irrelevant women, as well as the mentally challenged, both invariably disposable and “volunteered” for suicide mission.  Another group, a courageous handful who speak out against parts of the Koran and for Islamic reform, has undertaken a daunting and dangerous mission.

And finally we have the Moderates, the comparatively discreet in Western society, who go about their daily lives inconspicuously, never speaking out against terrorism, all the while effecting changes in our land in gradual increments.  They are the non-violent who nevertheless seek to establish a tyrannical regime here, in America.  While citizens are battling the ACLU’s attempt to allow Muslim laws in Oklahoma, a Shari’a court has been established in Texas. New school textbooks are crammed with indoctrinate material about Islam, with little about America and the other major religions, leaving parents in Massachusetts and Florida furious about the deceitful programs inflicted on their children.  It is the Moderates who surreptitiously prepare proselytizing films and school excursions to mosques without prior parental notification, all changes that are meant to create a new generation of devotees and jihadists. Only recently, Florida parents exposed to the media the textbooks that contain several chapters on whitewashed Islam, with 100 pages of Judaism and Christianity missing.

muslim studentsModerates are also the college students who, now brazen and empowered by a quiescent, ignorant, leftist administration, defend terrorist organizations, vilify Israel and call for her annihilation, and unite to attack Jewish students.  Encouraged to invite outside speakers from terrorist groups (Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood), the Muslim Student Union (MSU) and Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) work together to impose their ideology and establish Shari’a laws and restrictions on their host population.  Their leader, Azka Fayyaz, is now openly promoting violence and Israel’s destruction.  A dedicated anti-Semite, she announced that Hamas and Shari’a have taken over the University of California, and is no doubt responsible for recent Nazi-style graffiti at a Jewish fraternity and Hillel House.

The families that allege to have come to the West in order to escape tyranny reared and nurtured their children in their home culture of intolerance and harshness.  These Moderates are fast becoming the jihadists of tomorrow, eager to replace our way of life with theirs.  They are the new devotees who celebrate the Islamic Eid  with animals that are ruthlessly tortured and slaughtered for sacrifice, and demand particular accommodations from the public schools. They are the bystanders who cheer while non-moderates behead, torch, or throw their fellow human beings off cliffs. They are the ones who happily extend their hands to receive candy distributed on the occasion of a suicide bombing by one of their own.  They are the parents of young women who leave home to join a Palestinian cause and become comfort women to Islamo-fascist barbarians, and are ultimately killed.  They are the Moderates who believe that every punishment meted out in the 7th century Qur’an is acceptable today, against homosexuals, women, apostates, infidels, and more

These are the Moderates who are working to influence and change our children. Their clothes may remain unsplattered, but we may be certain that their hands are soaked in blood.

RELATED VIDEO: The Myth of the Tiny Radical Muslim Minority

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of a young Yazidi girl fleeing from the Islamic State.

Islamic State: “Allah has revealed Islam to be the religion of the sword, and the evidence for this is…profuse”

Cognitive dissonance: Bush, Obama, David Cameron and a host of others insist that Islam is a religion of peace. The Islamic State, which they claim has nothing to do with Islam, quotes the Qur’an copiously to establish that Islam is actually a religion of the sword that calls for permanent war against Infidels. Would it be permissible to examine the Qur’an to try to determine which claim is more accurate? Or would that be “Islamophobic”?

“ISIS Upset with Obama, Kerry, ‘Heretics’ for ‘Slogan’ That Islam Is Religion of Peace,” by Bridget Johnson, PJ Media, February 12, 2015:

The new issue of ISIS’ magazine released today takes issue with Western leaders who assert that Islam is a religion of peace.

In the Dabiq magazine article, the writer said the wrongful “slogan” is also being used by “apologetic ‘du’āt’ [beggars] when flirting with the West.”

“They have repeated this slogan so much to the extent that some of them alleged that Islam calls to permanent peace with kufr and the kāfirīn. How far is their claim from the truth, for Allah has revealed Islam to be the religion of the sword, and the evidence for this is so profuse that only a zindīq (heretic) would argue otherwise,” the magazine states….

After a page worth of quotes from the Quran that “revealed the sword against the apostates,” the article asks, “So how can the zanādiqah (heretics) or even those who blindly follow them – Bush, Obama, and Kerry – obstinately claim that ‘Islam is a religion of peace,’ meaning pacifism?”…

It quotes more of the Quran, concluding “it is clear then that salām (peace) is not the basis of the word Islam, although it shares the same consonant root (s-l-m) and is one of the outcomes of the religion’s sword, as the sword will continue to be drawn, raised, and swung until ‘Īsā (Jesus – ‘alayhis-salām) kills the Dajjāl (the Antichrist) and abolishes the jizyah. Thereafter, kufr and its tyranny will be destroyed; Islam and its justice will prevail on the entire Earth.”

“…There will always be a party of Muslims fighting parties of kāfirīn until there is no more fitnah and the religion is completely for Allah alone.”

That’s from the Qur’an: “And fight them until there is no fitnah and the religion, all of it, is for Allah” (8:39).

RELATED ARTICLES:

1 dead at Copenhagen free speech debate on Islam; Muhammad cartoonist featured

Pakistan: Sunni Muslims attack Shi’ite mosque, murder at least 20 people #Muslimlivesmatter

Libya: Islamic State of Tripoli murders 21 “humiliated followers of the Coptic church” #Christianlivesmatter

Obama uses National Prayer Breakfast to compare Christianity to ISIS

Chapel Hill murderer: “Knowing several dozen Muslims…I’d prefer them to most Christians”

This won’t stop the mainstream media/Islamic supremacist/Obama myth-making, but here is yet more evidence that the psychopath who murdered three Muslims in cold blood in Chapel Hill, North Carolina last Tuesday was not motivated by “Islamophobia,” much as the jihad enablers wish that he had been — because hate crimes against Muslims are so very useful to them.

“Everything We Know So Far About The Alleged Chapel Hill Shooter,” by David Mack, Buzzfeed, February 12, 2-15 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

…In a post on Aug. 19, 2010, debating the so-called “Ground Zero mosque” on XDtalk.com, an account that appeared to belong to Hicks posted that he had known “several dozen Muslims” and believed “that they aren’t what most think of them.”

In a post on Aug. 19, 2010, debating the so-called "Ground Zero mosque" on XDtalk.com, an account that appeared to belong to Hicks posted that he had known "several dozen Muslims" and believed "that they aren't what most think of them."

xdtalk.com
When a user took a poll of the forum, the account that appeared to belong to Hicks voted in favor of a response reading, “I am indifferent about the project itself — I can see the arguments both for it and against it. But this is a free country, and the developers certainly have a right to express themselves.

The full post reads as follows

I voted #2 for several reasons.

The first amendment to our constitution guarantees freedom of religion, which takes precedence over any other “feeling” that any of us as Americans may have.

Beyond that though after being in D.C. for a decade and knowing several dozen Muslims for most of that time I can say that they aren’t what most think of them. In fact, I’d prefer them to most Christians as I was never coerced in any way by the Muslims to follow their religion, which I cannot say about many Christians.

While the terrorists who did the 9/11 attacks were Muslims, they were extremists in that faith which isn’t common. I know of many Christian extremists personally, much less the ones we have heard about on the news. People of this country don’t seem to hold that against Christianity though(probably because they’re a majority in this country).

While it may cause problems with those that don’t want it there with vandalizing and such, what if that excuse stopped our forefathers from starting a new nation. Civil rights, suffrage, heck even our own gun rights have been “fought” for at times. On that matter, the vast majority of our own ancestors in this country had to fight for their rights as Americans as most of the ethnic groups in this country were looked down on at some point(some still are).

This country was founded on freedoms, and many forget that one of the biggest freedoms that was fought for was freedom of religion. Then after all was said and done, Americans pushed west and took the lands of the Native Americans, put them on reservations (land that has no use), and stuffed religion down their throat. Their children were often taken from them to be taught Christianity (brainwashed might be a better word). They were not allowed to have their ancestral hair or garments, not allowed to use their given names but had to use the Christian ones assigned to them, and not allowed to speak their native tongue among other things. Funny how during World War 2, the same government that violated the Native Americans 1st amendment rights in the previous century were called upon because of their ancestral language.

With all that being said, I don’t see how anyone who calls themselves American can claim that a Mosque shouldn’t be TWO BLOCKS AWAY from what is known as ground zero.

RELATED ARTICLE: Oregon: Muslim pleads guilty to funding jihad murderer

RELATED VIDEO: The Chapel Hill murders and the “anti-Muslim hate crime” industry