Covering Up Ahmad Al Issa’s Islamic Yearnings

/in , , , , , , , /by

Denying the Jihad in the Boulder Jihad.

Editors’ note: As we witness U.S. authorities and the establishment media trying to de-Islamize the Jihad in Boulder and to obscure the fact that the Jihadist perpetrator, Ahmad Al Issa, is a Muslim migrant ISIS sympathizer, a vital question confronts us: why does the Left consistently engage in Jihad Denial? Why is it so invested in denying the Islamic roots of Islamic Jihad?

This is, without doubt, one of the most pertinent questions of our time, especially now with the Boulder Jihad — and its tragic victims — hovering right before our very eyes. Frontpage Mag editors have therefore deemed it vital to run, below, an excerpt from Jamie Glazov’s book, Jihadist Psychopath: How He is Charming, Seducing, and Devouring Us.

The excerpt, which includes sections of Chapter 1 of the book (‘The Case’), details the Obama administration’s horrific record of trying to hide and camouflage the true sources of Islamic terror — an effort that spawned catastrophic consequences.

This documentation equips us with the understanding of why Jihadists like Ahmad Al Issa are able to sow the destruction that they do today — and so easily. It also sets the foundation for our insight into why exactly the Left practices Jihad Denial — and what all the specious ingredients of that denial entail. These facts will all be unveiled in several published segments of Jihadist Psychopath in our forthcoming issues of Frontpage Mag.

Don’t miss this essay below.

[To read the chapter on what the Left actually is — and why it aids and abets Jihad — read Utopian Virus: HERE. The Virus in Power, meanwhile, explores how the Left took power in America — and why it had such an easy time doing so. Read it: HERE. The introduction crystallizes the general nature of Jihad Denial: HERE.]

The Case.

On May 13, 2010, Attorney General Eric Holder had an incredulous and perplexed expression on his face as he sat before the House Judiciary Committee. He just couldn’t understand what Representative Lamar Smith, the ranking Republican on the Committee, was asking him, over and over again. Specifically, Smith wanted to know if Holder thought that “Radical Islam” had any connection to Jihadist attacks perpetrated against the United States. Rep. Smith had to ask the same question, repeated in different ways, six times while Holder looked confused and uttered short rejoinders about how Rep. Smith’s questions weren’t making sense to him. Finally, apparently realizing that Rep. Smith would not desist, Holder affirmed that whatever it was that the congressman was talking about (Holder would not pronounce the words), it was definitely not connected to the attacks to which Smith was referring. [1]

Holder’s behavior before the House Judiciary Committee clearly reflected the position of the Obama administration on the terror war — a position that the administration had made conspicuously evident from the moment it took office. It would be the Hear No Islam/See No Islam position when it came to terrorism. Whenever Jihadists would strike, Jihad Denial would be the name of the game. This, of course, was central to the Left’s cause, since denying Jihad and its true roots helps to advance the progressives’ goal of making America more vulnerable to Jihad. And now the progressive dream had come true: the Left had its own Radical-in-Chief in the White House who was faithfully executing its destructive agenda.

Obama’s new path of Jihad Denial and romancing the Muslim Brotherhood took on devastating significance in October 2011, when his administration dutifully followed Muslim Brotherhood “requests” and purged all FBI and other intelligence agencies’ training manuals of any mention of Islam and Jihad.[2]

The Department of Defense followed suit and enforced a purge of all individuals who didn’t toe the new Party Line. New disciplinary action and re-education was made mandatory for anyone in the government who dared to acknowledge Islam’s role in the terror war.[3] Those who courageously told the truth about Islam, such as the scholar Robert Spencer, were removed from their positions as trainers of FBI and military personnel on the jihad threat and were replaced by members of Muslim Brotherhood front groups such as CAIR and ISNA.[4]

In the State Department, meanwhile, officials would be forbidden from asking Muslim immigrants about their views on Sharia and Jihad before approving their visa applications.[5]

A “counterterrorism” government guide would also tell officials that keeping Muslims out of the country for supporting Sharia Law violated the First Amendment. [6] All American officials and investigators were now permitted to consider only violent or criminal conduct in the terror war. Radical ideology was to be ignored, particularly if it had the veneer of “religious expression.”[7]

It soon became clear that Countering “Violent Extremism” {CVE) was the Obama administration’s primary “focus” in the terror war. It served the administration’s agenda perfectly because, at first glance, no one could point to what it was exactly that was being countered. There was no clear objective or identification of any specific enemy and, unsurprisingly, no mention of Jihad or Islam. Countering “violent extremism” became one of those very vague and ambiguous goals to which the administration could refer when it came time to prove it was doing something about terrorism when, in fact, it was doing absolutely nothing at all.[8]

While the CVE strategy had its nebulous aspects, there was actually something that it very clearly sought to “counter.” Indeed, it became quite evident that there were certain individuals, along with an ideology, that the administration regarded as “extremist” and that it wanted to block. And who were the guilty parties? The truth-tellers about Jihad, of course. The counter-jihad movement represented the true “violent extremism” because, according to the administration, it was instigating all the terrible and racist hatred that was being displayed against Muslims everywhere.[9] The evidence substantiating this supposed reality proved non-existent, but the notion prevailed nonetheless. And it was here that we saw the Left’s upside-down inversion of who the good and bad guys really were: Jihad had somehow become the victim, while the victims of Jihad became the terrorists.

The administration’s CVE charade was, in a nutshell, really all about one basic agenda: enforcing Jihad Denial and persecuting the dissidents who violated it. This situation yielded a disaster: the real threat facing America could not be named or labelled. In his book Catastrophic Failure: Blindfolding America in the Face of Jihad, author Stephen Coughlin documents how, under Obama, a dire threat was reduced to a “nameless abstraction.” U.S. leaders and intelligence agencies ignored the most basic tenets of intelligence, which included the critical component of threat identification. The problem, notably, began in the Bush administration. Having worked himself in the Joint Chiefs of Staff Intelligence Directorate in the immediate post-9-11 period, Coughlin recalls how he discovered that,

within the division there seemed to be a preference for political correctness over   accuracy and for models that were generated not by what the enemy said he was but on what academics and “cultural advisors’ said the enemy needed to be, based on contrived social science theories.[10]

Under Obama, the situation went from bad to worse. Coughlin describes how Islamic supremacists became completely aware of the administration’s calculated self-delusion and, consequently, felt arrogantly at ease in actually molding American leaders’ thinking and policies. Our enemies, Coughlin writes, “successfully calculated that they could win the war by convincing our national security leaders of the immorality of studying and knowing the enemy.”[11] As a result, they became overridingly confident in their ability to fulfill the Muslim Brotherhood’s goal, which the Brotherhood boasted about in its own documents, of sabotaging the United States through the process of “civilization-jihad” and achieving this goal by Americans’ own hands.[12]

Thus, America’s suicidal disposition in the terror war reached a crisis level under Obama, when American officials actually started seeking advice and direction from precisely those forces seeking to destroy the country. As Coughlin shows, while the government identified certain individuals and organizations as providers of material support to terrorism, and as members or allies of the Muslim Brotherhood, it simultaneously sought out “those same people as cultural experts, ‘moderates’ and community outreach partners.”[13]

With Obama in the White House, therefore, the enemy was in effect advising Americans and formulating their policy on how to promote their cause. Obama was also mischaracterizing the conflict America was in. “The public face of Islam in America,” Coughlin notes, “was shaped by the Muslim Brotherhood.” Islam in America, in turn, “took the form favored by the Brotherhood.”[14] This catastrophe was compounded by the surreal fact that many officials in senior positions in the Obama administration didn’t even know anything about Islam and were completely oblivious to the Islamic doctrines that justify and even mandate Jihad against the West.[15]

Suffice it to say that while threat identification is the foundation for any successful war effort and is, therefore, crucial to protecting Americans and enhancing our security, under Obama such identification was impossible. As Coughlin points out, “a postmodern form of relativism” had rendered America “incapable of recognizing existential epistemic threats and hence made it defenseless in the face of them.”[16]

And it got worse. Not only did the Obama administration avoid recognizing the true threats that faced America, it spent a significant amount of time chasing around non-threats on purpose. Immense resources were wasted on investigating harmless non-Muslims solely for the sake of appearing non-racist. “Since 2009 we’ve opened investigations of groups we knew to be harmless,” a Pentagon counterterrorism official revealed, “they weren’t Muslims, and we needed some ‘balance’ in case the White House asked if we were ‘profiling’ potential terrorists.”[17] In this way, the Obama administration could proudly maintain that it was not engaged in “Islamophobia.”[18]

Meanwhile, The Obama administration was not content with solely silencing threat identification within the government. It would cause embarrassment, after all, if the media and American citizens could still talk openly and honestly about the ideology that posed a threat to America and the West. House Democrats, therefore, faithfully sprung to action and launched an effort to criminalize truth-telling about Jihad in the country at large. Their effort produced House Resolution 569, which leading Democrats in the House of Representatives sponsored on December 17, 2015. Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary, the resolution sought to destroy the First Amendment by condemning hateful rhetoric towards Muslims in the United States.[19]

Conflating truth-telling about Jihad with the supposed hatred of all Muslim people, the resolution sought to criminalize any attempt to accurately identify America’s enemies and the ideology that inspires them. As Robert Spencer notes, the resolution used

the specter of violence against Muslims to try to quash legitimate research into the motives and goals of those who have vowed to destroy us, which will have the effect of allowing the jihad to advance unimpeded and unopposed.[20]

The Left’s effort with House Resolution 569 was an extension of U.N. Resolution 16/18, the effort pushed by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (O.I.C.), the 57-nation alliance of Muslim states, to stifle free speech about Islam globally by implementing a U.N. rule against the so-called “defamation of religions.” The real aim of U.N. Resolution 16/18 is, of course, to shut down “Islamophobia,” which means to curtail any truth-telling about Islam and to impose Islamic blasphemy laws worldwide.[21]

Any law applied in the U.S. that is based on House Resolution 569 or U.N. Resolution 16/18 would be a violation of the U.S. First Amendment. But this doesn’t concern leftists very much, since that is precisely their objective. This explains why Hillary Clinton personally committed the State Department to impose U.N. Resolution 16/18 on the United States in her meeting with the General Secretary of the O.I.C. in July 2011, while she was serving as Secretary of State. Clinton also affirmed that, until the effort could become U.S. law, there would be action undertaken — by means of “peer pressure and shaming” — to intimidate Americans who engaged in the kind of speech that U.N. Resolution 16/18 sought to end. Then, tellingly enough, in June 2012, when Assistant Attorney General Tom Perez was asked by the Chairman of the House Subcommittee on the Constitution to confirm that the Obama administration would “never entertain or advance a proposal that criminalizes speech against any religion,” he refused to answer.[22]

While the Obama administration and its leftist loyalists were busy trying to impose Islamic blasphemy laws on the United States, other American progressive forces empowered Islamic supremacism in other realms. The leftist leadership of New York City, for instance, became busy accommodating Muslim Brotherhood directives by preventing the New York Police Department from focusing on Muslims in fighting Jihad. The process started in 2012, when the Muslim Students Association (MSA), a Muslim Brotherhood front group, filed a federal lawsuit (along with a few other Muslim Brotherhood plaintiffs) against the NYPD. In its complaint, the MSA charged that the civil rights of Muslims were being violated by the NYPD’s use of informants and plainclothes detectives to monitor various Islamic institutions — particularly MSA chapters — in the New York/New Jersey area.[23]

In early January 2016, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio and Police Commissioner William Bratton agreed to a settlement that would exempt Muslims from NYPD surveillance. The new guidelines explicitly barred police officers from basing any future law-enforcement investigations on race, ethnicity, or, as in the case of the MSA, religion.[24] As part of the settlement, New York City also deleted from the department’s website an exhaustive NYPD report, titled “Radicalization in the West: The Homegrown Threat,” which provided a crucial tutorial for all law enforcement organizations seeking to understand how an individual is moved to Islamic radicalization.[25]

The NYPD’s traditional practice of cultivating informants and using undercover investigators within the Muslim community had undeniably prevented many Jihadist attacks.

But now, with more than thirty thousand worldwide Muslim terrorist attacks inspired by Islamic texts since 9/11,[26] with Jihadist attacks on the rise globally, and with the FBI recently stating that it was investigating as many as 900 open cases on individuals suspected of being ISIS operatives,[27] it has become illegal for the NYPD to single out anyone in the Muslim community for surveillance and undercover operations. As writer Daniel Greenfield noted regarding this development, “if a successful terror attack occurs in New York, it will be because Bill de Blasio crippled the NYPD at the behest of Islamic groups.”[28]

In America, we see how the Left succeeded through Obama in enforcing Jihad Denial and in enabling the strength of Islamic supremacist forces. In achieving this feat, progressives empowered the advance of Jihad and Sharia in the United States, which made the nation vastly more vulnerable to its enemy’s attacks.

It is undeniable that the Jihadist attacks that occurred on American soil throughout the Obama years could have easily been prevented. This fact will be heavily documented later in our story, but for now we will cite just one illustrative example: the Boston Marathon Massacre that the Tsarnaev brothers perpetrated on April 15, 2013, did not have to happen. The Russians, after all, had warned the FBI about the Tsarnaevs before the massacre, but the intelligence agency found nothing after its “investigation” of the two brothers. This is because the Bureau had its hands tied behind its back with the Jihad Denial rules of the administration. It couldn’t ask the right questions, nor pursue the right and necessary leads.

Jamie Glazov holds a Ph.D. in History with a specialty in Russian, U.S. and Canadian foreign policy. He is the editor of Frontpagemag.com, the author of the critically-acclaimed, United in Hate: The Left’s Romance with Tyranny and Terror, and the host of the web-tv show, The Glazov Gang. His new book is Jihadist Psychopath: How He is Charming, Seducing, and Devouring Us. Visit his site at JamieGlazov.com, follow him on Twitter: @JamieGlazov, and reach him at jamieglazov11@gmail.com.

Notes:

[1] Stephen Dinan, “Holder balks at blaming ‘radical Islam’,” The Washington Times, May 14, 2010. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/may/14/holder-balks-at-blaming-radical-islam/#ixzz30MluWyrS

[2] Robert Spencer, “Hillary Lets the Jihadist Cat Out of the Bag,” Frontpagemag.com, January 24, 2013. http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/robert-spencer/hillary-lets-the-jihadist-cat-out-of-bag/print/

[3] Stephen Coughlin, Catastrophic Failure: Blindfolding America in the Face of Jihad, (Center for Security Policy Press: Washington D.C., 2015), pp.21.

[4] Robert Spencer, Arab Winter Comes to America: The Truth About the War We’re In, (Washington, D.C: Regnery, 2015), pp. xiii-xvi; Frank Gaffney, The Muslim Brotherhood in the Obama Administration, (Sherman Oaks, CA, David Horowitz Freedom Center: 2012).

[5] Leo Hohmann, “Exploding Muslim immigration overwhelms FBI,” WorldNetDaily.com, July 17, 2015. http://www.wnd.com/2015/07/exploding-muslim-immigration-overwhelms-fbi/#vJezltXyYmuQXX0j.99

[6] Daniel Greenfield, “Counterterrorism Gov Guide: Keeping Out Muslims for Sharia Law Violates First Amendment,” The Point, Frontpagemag.com, December 16, 2015. http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/261149/counterterrorism-gov-guide-keeping-out-muslims-daniel-greenfield

[7] Ibid.

[8] For an authoritative account of the CVE strategy, see Stephen Coughlin Interview, “The Hoax of ‘Countering Violent Extremism’” on The Glazov Gang, JamieGlazov.com, April 12, 2016. http://jamieglazov.com/2016/04/12/the-hoax-of-countering-violent-extremism-on-the-glazov-gang/

[9] Ibid.

[10] Coughlin, p.12.

[11] Ibid.

[12] Ibid.

[13] Ibid, p.13.

[14] Ibid, p.17.

[15] Ibid., p.14.

[16] Ibid., p.17.

[17] John R. Schindler, “The Intelligence Lessons of San Bernardino,” Observer.com, December 14, 2015. http://observer.com/2015/12/the-intelligence-lessons-of-san-bernardino/

[18] Ibid.

[19] Robert Spencer, “House Democrats Move to Criminalize Criticism of Islam,” Frontpagemag.com, December 29, 2015. http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/261268/house-democrats-move-criminalize-criticism-islam-robert-spencer

[20] Ibid.

[21] Deborah Weiss, “Democrats Castigate ‘Anti-Muslim’ Speech in Proposed Legislation,” Frontpagemag.com, January 26, 2016. http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/261550/democrats-castigate-anti-muslim-speech-proposed-deborah-weiss; Robert Spencer, “Secretary of State Clinton says State Department will coordinate with OIC on legal ways to implement UN’s resolution criminalizing ‘defamation of religion’”, JihadWatch.org, August 3, 2011. http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/08/secretary-of-state-clinton-says-state-department-will-coordinate-with-oic-on-legal-ways-to-implement

[22] Melanie Arter, “DOJ Official Won’t Say Whether Justice Department Would ‘Criminalize Speech against Any Religion’”, CNSNews.com, July 26, 2012. http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/doj-official-won-t-say-whether-justice-department-would-criminalize-speech-against-any. See also Coughlin, p.22.

[23] John Perazzo, “The MSA Defeats New York,” Frontpagemag.com, January 12, 2016.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/261427/msa-defeats-new-york-john-perazzo; for documentation of the MSA being a Muslim Brotherhood front group, see the profile on the MSA at DiscovertheNetworks.org: http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6175

[24] Ibid.

[25] Paul Sperry, “The purge of a report on radical Islam has put NYC at risk,” NYPost.com, April 15, 2017. http://nypost.com/2017/04/15/the-purge-of-a-report-on-radical-islam-has-put-nyc-at-risk/; Patrick Dunleavy, “NYPD Caves to Political Correctness,” InvestigativeProject.org, January 8, 2016. http://www.investigativeproject.org/5121/nypd-caves-to-political-correctness

[26] See the website thereligionofpeace.com which keeps a track of the number of Islamic terrorist attacks since 9/11.

[27] Kevin Johnson, “Comey: Feds have roughly 900 domestic probes about Islamic State operatives, other extremists,” UsaToday.com, October 23, 2015. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/10/23/fbi-comey-isil-domestic-probes/74455460/

[28] Daniel Greenfield, “Bill de Blasio Cripples NYPD Surveillance of Muslim Terrorism,” The Point at Frontpagemag.com, January 7, 2016. http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/261384/bill-de-blasio-cripples-nypd-surveillance-muslim-daniel-greenfield

Mexican President Blames Biden For Border Crisis, Says He Created ‘Expectations’

/in , , , , , /by

Mexican President Andrés Manuel Lopez Obrador blamed President Joe Biden’s immigration policies for the crisis at the southern border during a Tuesday press conference.

“Expectations were created that with the Government of President Biden there would be better treatment of migrants,” Lopez Obrador said. “And this has caused Central American migrants, and also from our country, wanting to cross the border thinking that it is easier to do so.”

“People don’t go to the United States for fun, they go out of necessity,” Lopez Obrador said, according to Reuters.

Biden sent an envoy to the region to address the surge at the border, with Mexico’s Foreign Minister Marcelo Ebrard saying there needs to be “humanitarian actions” that promote economic development to address the root causes of migration from Central America to the U.S., according to Reuters.

Biden’s administration, however, has blamed the Trump administration for the crisis at the border despite rolling back Trump-era policies meant to curb illegal immigration.

Department of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas blamed the Trump administration Sunday while speaking on CNN’s State of the Union, according to The Hill.

“There was a system in place in both Republican and Democratic administrations, that was torn down during the Trump administration, and that is why the challenge is more acute than it ever has been before.”

“We are rebuilding the orderly systems that the Trump administration tore down to avoid the need for these children to actually take the perilous journey,” he said.

Biden halted construction of the border wall, placed a 100-day moratorium on deportations and ended Trump’s “Remain in Mexico” policy.

Biden has since suggested his administration would be re-establishing the “Remain in Mexico” policy, which forces migrants seeking asylum to remain in Mexico while their asylum claims were processed.

Since Biden took office, a large influx of migrants, including unaccompanied children, have arrived at the border and overwhelmed facilities.

COLUMN BY

BRIANNA LYMAN

Reporter. Follow Brianna on Twitter.

RELATED VIDEO: General Flynn on Enemy Infiltration.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Kamala Harris given lead role over border by President Biden

‘Not Today!’: Kamala Harris Cracks Up When Asked If She Will Visit The Border

Government Accountability Office Investigates Biden’s Decision To Halt Border Wall Construction

Lindsey Graham On Border Crisis: ‘Where is AOC? Why Aren’t You At The Border?’

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

Pew Research: Lockdowns Prompting Devastating Levels of ‘Psychological Distress’ Among Young People

/in , , , , , /by

These astounding new figures offer a painful reminder of the perennial perils of tunnel-vision policymaking.

Most young people are at little risk of dying from the coronavirus. But a new Pew Research survey shows that they are disproportionately bearing the consequences of heavy-handed pandemic lockdowns and isolating government restrictions.

Pew finds that an astounding 32 percent of young adults aged 18 to 29 report experiencing high levels of “psychological distress.” An additional 31 percent say they’ve experienced a medium level. Notably, women and lower-income are even more likely to have experienced serious psychological distress within this young subgroup.

Meanwhile, 45 percent of respondents under 30 reported being “nervous, anxious or on edge” at least “occasionally or a moderate amount of time.”

What’s the root cause of this widespread distress among young adults? Well, reports often attribute it to “the pandemic” or “COVID,” but in actuality, it’s largely attributable to the lockdown policies and government restrictions, not the virus itself.

The death rate for members of this age group, approximately 18 to 29, is between .003% and .013%—a tiny sub-fraction of a percentage. So, it’s not the virus itself or fear of it, but primarily the deprivation of their lives and livelihoods that is dragging young Americans down.

“Young people have been a particular group of concern during the pandemic for mental health professionals, and young adults stand out in the current survey for exhibiting higher levels of psychological distress than other age groups,” Pew explains. “The shutdowns have disrupted job opportunities, college experiences, and the mixing and mingling that marks the transition to adulthood.”

The only conclusion left to draw is that young people are having life-threatening psychological distress and trauma inflicted on them by overzealous government lockdown policies.

These policies were implemented with a tunnel-vision focus on containing COVID-19, something lawmakers have proven unable to do. Government officials enacted unprecedented restrictions depriving people of their livelihoods, shutting down schools, and isolating people from their communities and families—failing to account for the myriad unintended consequences and second-order impacts that were always sure to ensue.

The arrogance of our elected officials will be remembered as the root reason our COVID outcomes were so disastrous. They failed to heed one of the most basic lessons of economics: disastrous results await policymakers who lack the humility to see the limits of their ability to control society top-down.

“Lawmakers should be keenly aware that every human action has both intended and unintended consequences,” FEE’s Ant Davies and James Harrigan explain. “Human beings react to every rule, regulation, and order governments impose, and their reactions result in outcomes that can be quite different than the outcomes lawmakers intended.”

“So while there is a place for legislation, that place should be one defined by both great caution and tremendous humility,” they conclude.

When it comes to unprecedented lockdown measures, our policymakers have been anything but humble. Lawmakers and public health experts foolishly thought they could solve everything with top-down mandates and centralized control—and the collective psyche of an entire generation of young people will be forever scarred as a result.

COLUMN BY

Brad Polumbo

Brad Polumbo (@Brad_Polumbo) is a libertarian-conservative journalist and Opinion Editor at the Foundation for Economic Education.

RELATED ARTICLE: How ‘15 Days to Slow the Spread’ Became a Year

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

How Many Covid-19 Vaccine Deaths Are Acceptable?

/in , , , , , /by

In the early days of the controversial China Virus “pandemic,” President Trump was asked by a typically hostile MSM reporter, “How many deaths from Covid-19 are acceptable?” Trump, uncharacteristically snookered by the damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don’t question, answered, “None!” Of course you can’t prevent all deaths from any naturally occurring illness.

But now let’s ask a more relevant question, since you can prevent deaths from a medical intervention if it proves deleterious, simply by ceasing to use it: How many deaths from Covid-19 vaccines should be allowed?

Let’s zero in on just a few of the people who listened to the experts and got their “safe and effective” experimental Covid vaccines.

  • From a headline: ”Boxing Great Marvin Hagler Dies – According to Reports He Was Struggling in ICU on Saturday After Taking Vaccine”
  • Kassidi Kurill, a 39-year-old mother of one from Ogden, received the vaccine due to her work as a surgical tech for several plastic surgeons. Four days after receiving the second dose of the Moderna vaccine, Kurill died.
  • A 28-year-old physical therapist died 2 days after being injected with an experimental Covid vaccine. Says her mother, “My 28 year old daughter took the vaccine on a Tuesday and was dead by Thursday.”
  • Tim Zook, 60, an x-ray technologist, proudly displayed his vaccination card right after getting his second dose of the Pfizer vaccine. Two hours later, he had troubling symptoms, and four days later, hospitalized and in intensive care with massive organ failure, he died.
  • Florida’s Dr. Gregory Michael died of a rare blood disease after getting Pfizer’s COVID vaccine. Dr. John Spivak, an expert on blood disorders from Johns Hopkins, calls it “a medical certainty” that the vaccine caused Dr. Michael’s death.
  • 58-Year-Old Woman Drene Keyes Died Hours After Getting First Dose of Pfizer Vaccine. A “gifted singer and grandmother of six,” Drene was unable to breathe and began vomiting within a couple hours of being vaccinated.
  • Norwegian Medicines Agency links 13 deaths to vaccine side effects. Those who died were frail and old. A total of 23 deaths have been reported in Norway in connection with the corona vaccination. 
  • Four people in Utah died shortly after receiving a Covid vaccine injection.
  • A Nebraska man in his 40s with underlying health issues died a week after receiving the vaccine.
  • A 56-year-old man in Placer County died shortly after receiving a Covid vaccine.
  • A 41-year-old health worker in Portugal died two days after she got the Pfizer vaccine.
  • A 60-year-old Danish woman died from a blood clot after getting the AstraZeneca vaccine.
  • Baseball great Hank Aaron, who proudly got his Moderna vaccine in public to encourage the Black population to do likewise, died 2 weeks later. He had tweeted: “I was proud to get the Covid vaccine earlier today at Morehouse School of Medicine. I hope you do the same!” The fact the this baseball legend died so soon after his injection sends a very different message to the community.  Was his death vaccine-related? Big Pharma and its media shills say no. In this case, we may never know for sure, but I feel it’s worth a mention in this list.

As of March 5th, according to VAERS—the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System in America—there have been 1,524 deaths, 5,507 serious injuries and 390 reports of Bell’s Palsy resulting from Covid vaccines. In all, a total of  31,079 adverse Covid vaccine events have been reported to VAERS thus far. Keep in mind that this is over the course of barely three months, and by the time you read this, these numbers will undoubtedly be higher.

DRUG RECALLS DUE TO HARMFUL EFFECTS AND CASUALTIES

To put things in perspective, let’s consider just a few of the many dozens of drugs various pharmaceutical companies have had to recall once it became clear they’d done more harm than good—and especially those that resulted in deaths.

  • Duract (Bromfenac) Cause for recall: 4 deaths; 8 patients requiring liver transplants; 12 patients with severe liver damage
  • Omniflox (Temafloxacin) Cause for recall: 3 deaths; anemia & other blood cell abnormalities; kidney dysfunction (half cases requiring dialysis); anaphylaxis
  • Rezulin (Troglitazone) Cause for recall: at least 90 liver failures; at least 63 deaths; 35,000 personal injury claims were filed against the manufacturer (Pfizer).
  • Darvon & Darvocet (Propoxyphene) Cause for recall: toxicity to the heart; between 1981 and 1999 there were over 2,110 deaths reported—that’s over the course of 18 years!

ISRAEL: A NATION OF GUINEA PIGS

In his recent Unz Review article entitled “Satan’s Poker,” Mike Whitney turns his laser-sharp focus to Israel’s massive vaccination program. Since Israel is such a small country to begin with, the results are particularly striking. Over  half the population has already been vaccinated. Hmmm…was that wise? Whitney asks why their Covid cases rose dramatically during the first month of the vaccine program. He also wonders why, after only 2 months, “76% of new Covid-19 cases [affected people] under 39. Only 5.5% are over 60. 40% of critical patients are under 60.”

But here’s his most important question: “Did the vaccinations shift the direction of the infection to a different demographic or have the vaccines created a more virulent strain of the virus that targets younger people?”  Wouldn’t one want to know that immediately before proceeding any further? Are Pfizer and the other Big Pharma companies just going to say, “Trust the science?” And is the Israeli government going to pursue this grand vaccination plan regardless of deleterious effects on many of its citizens?

THE FINE ART OF DENIAL

The pharmaceutical giants are quick to tell us the vaccine deaths and injuries must have been from some other cause, or that they’re an acceptable trade-off. Case in point: “The benefits of the AstraZeneca vaccine in preventing COVID-19, with its associated risk of hospitalization and death, outweigh the risks of side effects,” according to the EMA (European Medicines Regulator)—though multiple countries banned it as unsafe. Furthermore, many respected scientists—including virologists, microbiologists, epidemiologists and physicians—have long been sounding the alarm regarding these experimental vaccines.

In fact, it has been pointed out that the Pfizer, Moderna and AstraZeneca products are not traditional vaccines at all, but function more or less like software programs that instruct your own cells to make the virus’ spike protein so that your immune system will form antibodies against it. Since nothing like this has ever been implemented before and there are no long-term studies, there can be no reasonable assurances of the safety of these vaccines. But you have to dig to find such troubling facts, as you won’t encounter them on CNN, MSNBC et al. That should be a warning sign in and of itself.

FAILURE OF THE PRELIMINARY mRNA TRIALS

While these novel “vaccines” have never been unleashed on the public at large, in fact, there have been a few small experimental trials using the mRNA vaccines against several diseases. They did not go well. Dr. Drew Weissman–an early pioneer of mRNA technology—wrote in Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, that the results from an mRNA flu vaccine were “more modest in humans than was expected based on animal models… and the side effects were not trivial.” [Italics mine.]

Here are a few of these “non trivial” side effects: systemic inflammation, potentially fatal autoimmune responses, blood coagulation, and pathological thrombus formation. Hmmm… Didn’t 18 European countries recently halt the use of AstraZeneca’s vaccine precisely due to blood clotting issues—a “side effect” discovered in preliminary trials?

There are a number of doctors and scientists outside of the Big Pharma tent, with no vested monetary interest in this issue, who predict millions of deaths from these mRNA vaccines—magnitudes higher than anything ever seen from the Covid virus. We may call this speculation, but why use our entire population as guinea pigs in the first place? What happened to the Hippocratic Oath’s first principle: Do No Harm?

VACCINATION TYRANNY?

Every official, business, industry, organization or other entity that insists you be vaccinated in order to enter its premises, work or live therein, etc., is effectively asking you to play Russian Roulette with a revolver held up to your head. You won’t know till you’ve pressed the trigger whether you’ll get an empty chamber or take a fatal bullet.

Who exactly has the right to demand that you risk your life to “protect” yourself? To “protect” others? Nor do we know if these experimental vaccines are actually “effective” or even whether they may cause other serious harm to the inoculated in the long-term—as that key study that is so central to the development of safe vaccines was bypassed in this colossal rush-to-market.

In view of the sheer numbers of deaths and irreversible harm to people these vaccines have caused in just a matter of weeks, I’m waiting for the announcement from Big Pharma companies Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, etc., that they’re pulling these vaccines off the market, as this experimental trial on millions of human beings—the largest in history—has tragically proven these novel, experimental vaccines far too dangerous for human use.

I’m still waiting. Maybe tomorrow….

[BIO: Cherie Zaslawsky is a writer, freelance editor, and private educator/teacher/writing coach for high school students, as well as a confirmed Constitutionalist who nevertheless lives in California. Her work appears in Renew America, Lew Rockwell, American Thinker, Canada Free Press, WND, The Published Reporter, and more.]

© 2021 Cherie Zaslawsky – All Rights Reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: Covid Vaccine Disclosure Form

FASCISM: Facebook Removed 1.3 Billion Accounts During October-December 2020

/in , , , , , /by

But Communist China operatives, Democrat disinformation, Palestinian Nazis, New York Times child predators etc are all still spreading their poison with Facebook. It’s victims are punished.

I predict that Facebook will censor its way into tech oblivion — just wait.

Facebook Says It Removed 1.3 Billion Fake Accounts, Explains How It Handles Misinformation

By Samuel Allegri, The Epoch Times, March 22, 2021:

Facebook on March 22 issued an announcement on how it plans to combat misinformation on its platforms. The technology giant also said it took down 1.3 billion fake accounts between October and December 2020.

“Tackling misinformation actually requires addressing several challenges including fake accounts, deceptive behavior, and misleading and harmful content,” Guy Rosen, vice president of integrity at Facebook, wrote in the statement.

Rosen said they have a group of “more than 80 independent fact-checkers, who review content in more than 60 languages,” and if they judge something as untrue, the content’s dissemination is limited.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg testifies via video conference before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial and Administrative Law in the Rayburn House Office Building on Capitol Hill in Washington on July 29, 2020. (Graeme Jennings/Pool via Reuters)

“When they rate something as false, we reduce its distribution so fewer people see it and add a warning label with more information for anyone who sees it,” Rosen wrote.

He also noted that once one of these labels is applied, the vast majority of people don’t click on the post.

“We know that when a warning screen is placed on a post, 95% of the time people don’t click to view it,” he said.

The company published its policies before a U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce investigation into how tech platforms are tackling misinformation.

Rosen wrote that Facebook suppresses the distribution of “Pages, Groups, and domains who repeatedly share misinformation,” with a particular emphasis on “false claims about COVID-19 and vaccines and content that is intended to suppress voting.”

Rosen said the platform uses both people and artificial intelligence to detect activity they’re looking to combat, adding that they now have 35,000 people working on it.

“As a result, we’ve removed more than 12 million pieces of content about COVID-19 and vaccines,” he said.

Facebook Fact-Checker Funded by Chinese Money

While Facebook portrays its army of fact-checkers as independent, the money behind at least one carries a distinct taint.

Lead Stories is partly paid through a partnership with TikTok, a social media platform run by a Chinese company that owes its allegiance to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).

Moreover, the organization that’s supposed to oversee the quality of fact-checkers is run by Poynter Institute, another TikTok partner.

Lead Stories says it’s been contracted by ByteDance “for fact-checking-related work,” referring to TikTok’s announcement earlier this year that it has partnered with several organizations “to further aid our efforts to reduce the spread of misinformation,” particularly regarding the CCP virus pandemic, which originated in China and was exacerbated by the CCP regime’s coverup.

Lead Stories was started in 2015 by Belgian website developer Maarten Schenk, CNN veteran Alan Duke, and two lawyers from Florida and Colorado. It listed operating expenses of less than $50,000 in 2017, but had expanded sevenfold by 2019, largely because of the more than $460,000 Facebook paid it for fact-checking services in 2018 and 2019. The company took on more than a dozen staffers, about half of them CNN alumni, and became one of Facebook’s most prolific fact-checkers of U.S. content.

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

Boulder Jihad Mass Murderer Had Planned to Hit Trump Rally, also Targeted Churches and Temples

/in , , , , , , /by

Time to start calling for “jihad control” legislation like Trump’s jihad immigration ban. Or will the media disappear this news story after running article after article about “white supremacist” shooter? Apparently Democrats consider slaughter in the cause of  Islamic supremacism to be righteous ……..

Boulder jihad mass murderer had planned to hit Trump rally, also checked churches as potential targets

By: Robert Spencer, March 23, 2021:

https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1374395567489519632?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1374395567489519632%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.jihadwatch.org%2F2021%2F03%2Fboulder-jihad-mass-murderer-had-planned-to-hit-trump-rally-also-checked-churches-as-potential-targets

RELATED ARTICLES:

BOULDER JIHAD MASS MURDERER IS MUSLIM MIGRANT WHO WAS KNOWN TO F.B.I.

ISIS: BOULDER MASS MURDERER AHMAD AL-ISSA WAS ISLAMIC STATE SYMPATHIZER

BOULDER MASS MURDERER IS DEEPLY RELIGIOUS MUSLIM WHO FREQUENTLY RAILED AGAINST ‘ISLAMOPHOBIA’

BROTHER OF BOULDER JIHAD MASS MURDERER DETAINED, ALONG WITH OTHER FAMILY MEMBERSAHMAD AL ALIWI ALISSA CHARGED WITH 10 COUNTS OF MURDER IN KING SOOPERS SHOOTING IN BOULDER

Colorado Is One of Few U.S. States with Universal Background Check Gun Controls

Biden calls on Senate to pass GUN CONTROL ‘immediately’ after Boulder jihad mass murders but remains silent on religious motive

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

Biden: Meeting Afghanistan Withdrawal Deadline Will Be ‘Tough,’ Blames Trump — Endless Wars Beginning Again

/in , , , , /by

WATCH: Endless wars beginning again.

Donald Trump warned us about this, and now here we are. On Tuesday, Democrat Party media operative George Stephanopoulos asked the Old Puppet in the White House: “President Trump reached a deal with the Taliban to have all American troops leave by May first. Are they going to leave?” Biden’s answer was utterly predictable to anyone who understands why the forces that came together to defeat President Trump were so intent upon making sure he didn’t get a second term.

Initially, Old Joe hedged, saying: “I’m in the process of making that decision now as to when they’ll leave. The fact is that — that was not a very solidly negotiated deal that the president, the former president — worked out. And so we’re in consultation with our allies as well as the government. And — that decision’s gonna be – it’s in process now.”

Sure, Joe: the problem with our leaving Afghanistan is that Trump didn’t negotiate a good deal for doing so, as if we could possibly hit on the precisely correct agreement with the Taliban that would herald the dawning of a new era of peace in the “graveyard of empires.” Old Joe did, however, offer a reassuring note. When Stephanopoulos asked him if the withdrawal from Afghanistan was “likely to take longer,” the President-For-Show answered: “I don’t think a lot longer.”

But how long is not “a lot longer”? The May 1 deadline, Old Joe added, marshaling all his resources for an effort at coherence amid obfuscation, “could happen, but it — it is tough beca — look, one of the drawbacks, George, and it’s gonna be, like, Sanskrit to people listening here, but it is the failure to have an orderly transition from the Trump presidency to my presidency, which usually takes place from Election Day to the time you’re sworn in, has cost me time and consequences.”

Trump is Right: Our Exit from Afghanistan is Long Overdue

Yeah, Sanskrit. Because it’s so very hard for us peasants to understand that all-important message, it’s all Trump’s fault.

Trump summed up what is really going on with Biden’s handlers and Afghanistan last September: “The top people in the Pentagon…want to do nothing but fight wars so that all of those wonderful companies that make the bombs and make the planes and make everything else stay happy. But we’re getting out of the endless wars, you know how we’re doing.” Well, no, we’re not getting out of them, we’re diving in deeper, because that same military-industrial complex is deeply embedded among the political and media elites who came together in an unprecedented gang-up of media lies and bias, along with other chicanery, to rid the world of the baneful presence of the American president who dared to put the interests of the American people before theirs.

Anyway, how long do we have to stay in Afghanistan? Until the wheels of the last Humvee fall off and burn? Until every school and mosque in Afghanistan holds seminars on critical race theory? Until antifa riots in Kandahar? Until the Afghans elect a trans president? How long? At what point do Biden’s handlers believe that the Taliban will give up its efforts to impose Islamic law (which is already essentially in effect) in Afghanistan? Five more years? Ten more years? And if they reframe our mission there as preventing the establishment of an Islamic emirate, won’t Biden’s Muslim Brotherhood-linked allies in the United States be enraged?

However long we have to stay, it won’t be hard for Joe’s handlers to find a pretext for ignoring the May 1 deadline. When he heard that his unwanted guests may be staying even longer than announced, Taliban negotiator Suhail Shaheen said flatly: “They should go. After that, it will be a kind of violation of the agreement. That violation would not be from our side … Their violation will have a reaction.” Then the Taliban’s reaction will become the pretext for American troops to stay even longer.

The Afghanistan war has no point, no purpose, except to line the pockets of the military-industrial complex. Our troops should have come home years ago, and our focus there should have been shifted to preventing Afghan jihadis from attacking Americans. An American president should have no other interest in Afghanistan. But as Biden has informed us, he is not putting America first.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Sweden: Wheelchair-bound Muslim migrant rapist can mysteriously walk during luxury Middle East vacation

Mali: Islamic State jihadis claim responsibility for jihad massacre that killed 33

ISIS resurgent worldwide, publishes online manual for ‘the novice jihad fighter,’ bomb-making instructions

Brother of Boulder jihad mass murderer detained, along with other family members

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

Covid-19 Responses Have Been Consistently Callous

/in , , , , , /by

Science decided that love means staying away, masking up and awaiting the vaccine.

From the very outset of the Covid-19 lockdowns — a year ago now — something odd, if not sinister seemed afoot. How quickly the repetitive messaging came from all quarters to quarantine the healthy: “because we’re all in this together”!

A minority, perhaps, wondered: is all this a planned operation, or a spontaneous collection of self-interested responses constantly reinforced by the provoked panic of the masses? Maybe these are not mutually exclusive explanations.

One hypothesis is that there is a larger plan (a “Great Reset”), in which population reduction is one explicit goal. Such talk is dismissed as baseless, though powerful figures have long discussed it openly. And curiously, there has been little scrutiny of the major lapses in judgment that account for a large share of the lives lost during this whole ordeal.

It may be hard to weigh in definitively on any larger agendas, but one thing is clear: so many of our big decisions have wound up costing rather than saving lives — predictably and sometimes deliberately.

First, there were the fiascoes in which Covid patients were directed into nursing homes, knowingly threatening their frail and vulnerable residents. This was not an isolated error but a death-dealing pattern.

There are also ongoing reports that nursing homes in the UK are imposing blanket DNR orders for handicapped residents diagnosed with Covid. Detect a touch of the Lebensunwertes Leben (life unworthy of life) mentality on this front?

Then there was the persistent suppression and vilification of safe and marvelously effective prophylactic and treatment options. Ivermectin, Hydroxycloroquine (with zinc), and Vitamin D sufficiency may not have been known, life-saving remedies right at the outset, but their promise – and demonstrated utility in practice – soon became apparent. These simple, inexpensive measures succeeded when tried elsewhere but were shunned here in the US by medical authorities and the media alike, which surely accounts for a great number of our preventable deaths.

Such egregious callousness is prima facie evidence that saving lives is not what this past year has been about.

This alone would seem sufficient to shatter trust — without even taking into account the radical lockdowns that in myriad ways promise to keep doing more harm than good. Stanford’s Dr Jay Bhattacharya considers them to be the “biggest public health mistake we’ve ever made”, having produced “devastating effects on short and long-term public health.”

What about the vaccines? Are they mainly about protecting lives? That sounds unconvincing when other simpler and sensible protective measures were not endorsed or even pursued; the blunders of this past year hardly invite confidence in the overall strategy — rushed, novel vaccines included.

But could they also pose a threat? It’s a fair question — even though it is necessarily a speculative one. Because we simply do not know what the intermediate and long term effects of this vaccine may or may not be.

There are a couple areas of concern. First, there is talk that these vaccines could result in infertility. This has not been proven — but it hasn’t been disproven either. “Fact-checkers” dismiss it outright, which all too often suggests the truth may be hovering nearby. This may admittedly sound far-fetched, but when a former VP for Pfizer, Dr Michael Yeadon, voices this concern, should it be so readily dismissed?

The mechanism is said to go like this: the spike protein that the mRNA vaccine triggers in order to induce an immune response includes a protein needed to develop a placenta. A vaccinated woman would therefore develop antibodies that could also attack that protein, rendering her unable to form a placenta, i.e. infertile.  Yeadon insists this possibility be ruled out before going any further, which seems reasonable.

Another way these vaccines could lead to loss of life is through a phenomenon called Antibody-Dependent Enhancement (ADE) or “pathogenic priming” — which in a nutshell means that vaccinated persons could actually be at greater risk once they come into contact with the real virus, due to a potentially fatal autoimmune response such as the dreaded “cytokine storm”.

This has been a longstanding problem in previous, unsuccessful attempts to develop a coronavirus vaccine. Cats, for example, tolerated the vaccine reasonably well in several studies. But when they were challenged with (i.e. exposed to) the actual coronavirus, they had an extreme overreaction of the immune system.  All of the cats ended up dying. The vaccines rolling out now never underwent any animal trials; those were passed over due to the emergency.

Yet the very case for “emergency use authorisation” of the vaccines (which is not FDA approval) collapses if the authorities had recognised — as they should have — that viable treatments already do exist, as mentioned above. As long as suitable alternatives are available, no emergency authorisation should be given. But science had already decided that love means staying away, masking up and awaiting the vaccine.

The risk that these vaccines could lead to a worsened outcome should be prominently featured in the process of obtaining informed consent, particularly considering it isn’t even on most people’s radar. Instead, we are veering towards various forms of coercion, even without official vaccine mandates.

People who decline to take an unnecessary vaccine, German Chancellor Angela Merkel recently threatened, “might not be able to do certain things” (think vaccine passports and the like). That sounds like a blatant repudiation of the Nuremberg Code, which insists upon voluntary consent — absolutely free from any kind of duress, force, overreach or deceit.

UNESCO has also declared that such consent is required for any “preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention” (e.g. masks, meaningless PCR tests, and vaccines), while further stipulating that anyone may withdraw said consent “at any time and for any reason”.

Private employers and service-providers (e.g. airlines, restaurants) seem poised to go along with the flouting of these safeguards. So do journalists and religious entities, which in saner times we might expect to defend the unthreatening individual (against the patently unfounded presumption that everyone poses a risk to everyone else), demand truth, and castigate the pandemic of lies that have ushered in these dystopian days.

Finally, too few are aware the mRNA vaccines are not technically vaccines but are actually more akin to gene therapy. Vaccines by definition enable you to be exposed to a pathogen without becoming infected, or further transmitting it. No one insists the mRNA “vaccines” do that – only that they can lessen the severity of symptoms.

They do not necessarily create immunity or “stop the spread”, and apparently do not obviate the supposed need to maintain mask mandates and other suffocating restrictions. The logical disconnect here is astonishing: we are being sold, and are buying, the line that these vaccines are — but also kind of aren’t — the solution that will get us back to normal.

This is an acute example of just how much the use of reason — along with genuine esteem for man — has atrophied in our post-Christian, irreligious age.

Hopefully we avoid any worst-case scenarios, and all presently reasonable concerns will prove unfounded. But it is anything but crazy to notice that harms have been visited upon us in the name of health and that inhumanity has been advancing in the name of humanity.

This content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International license.

Matthew Hanley is the author of Affirming Love, Avoiding AIDS; What Africa Can Teach the West, published by the National… More by Matthew Hanley

RELATED ARTICLE: Does Canada’s Bill C-7 ignore a dark lesson from history?

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

The Boulder Jihad and Jihad Denial

/in , , , , , /by

Why U.S. authorities and the establishment media are trying to obscure who Ahmad Al Issa is and what he believes.

Editors’ note: As we witness U.S. authorities and the establishment media trying to de-Islamize the Jihad in Boulder and to obscure the fact that the Jihadist perpetrator, Ahmad Al Issa, is a Muslim migrant ISIS sympathizer, a vital question confronts us: why does the Left consistently engage in Jihad Denial? Why is it so invested in denying the Islamic roots of Islamic Jihad?

This is, without doubt, one of the most pertinent questions of our time, especially now with the Boulder Jihad — and its tragic victims — hovering right before our very eyes. Frontpage Mag editors have therefore deemed it vital to run, below, an excerpt from Jamie Glazov’s book, Jihadist Psychopath: How He is Charming, Seducing, and Devouring Us. The excerpt, which is part of the introduction to the book, details the Left’s standard practice of trying to hide and camouflage the true sources of Islamic terror. This documentation equips us with the understanding of why Jihadists like Ahmad Al Issa are able to sow the destruction that they do today — and so easily. It also sets the foundation for our insight into why exactly the Left practices Jihad Denial — and what all the specious ingredients of that denial entail. These facts will all be unveiled in several published segments of Jihadist Psychopath in our forthcoming issues of Frontpage Mag.

Don’t miss this first essay below.

[To read the chapter on what the Left actually is — and why it aids and abets Jihad — read Utopian Virus: HERE. The Virus in Power, meanwhile, explores how the Left took power in America — and why it had such an easy time doing so. Read it: HERE.]

At approximately 3:05pm on Halloween afternoon, Oct. 31, 2017, 29-year old Sayfullo Saipov drove a rented truck onto a Manhattan bike path and slammed into nearly two dozen cyclists and pedestrians. He then crashed into a school bus and emerged from the vehicle wielding a paintball gun and a pellet gun. He screamed “Allahu Akbar” throughout the whole ordeal and succeeded in murdering eight people and wounding fifteen — until an NYPD officer shot and wounded him, dropping him to the ground.[i]

Saipov was a married Muslim father of three who had come to the United States from Uzbekistan seven years earlier on a “diversity visa lottery” program, a system that allows foreigners into the country, not through their merit, but through random games of chance.[ii]

The evidence was overwhelmingly clear that this Uzbekistani immigrant was engaging in Islamic Jihad during his massacre on that Halloween afternoon in Manhattan. Indeed, he was already known to law enforcement “for his direct ties to other terrorism suspects under investigation,” and the FBI quickly tracked down a second Muslim in connection with his attack. [iii] Saipov had also left a note behind in the truck, stating that the Islamic State “would endure forever” and that “There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is his prophet.”[iv] His cellphones contained thousands of Islamic State-related images, including about 90 videos depicting Islamic State fighters killing prisoners by running them over with a tank, beheading them, and shooting them in the face.[v]

When he was recovering in the hospital, Saipov requested that the Islamic State’s flag be displayed in his room. He waived his Miranda rights and gloated about what he had done, acknowledging that he had acted in response to the Islamic State’s online calls to Muslims to attack non-Muslims. He also boasted that he chose to carry out his rampage on Halloween, so as to maximize the body count.[vi]

Saipov was a resident of Paterson, New Jersey, an area known to the locals as ‘Paterstine’ for its sizable Islamic community, where the PLO terror flag flies over City Hall and where Islamic terrorist sympathizers celebrated after their compatriots murdered thousands on 9/11.[vii] Saipov’s 23-year-old wife, Nozima Odilova, wore a niqab, a Muslim garment that reveals only the eyes. The Muslim couple had two girls (ages 6 and 4) and a six-month old baby boy. A neighbor observed that “The girls didn’t have friends. There were no parties.’’[viii]             Notwithstanding all of the empirical evidence pointing to the Islamic nature of Saipov’s Halloween massacre, the establishment media, New York’s leaders and America’s higher culture just couldn’t seem to a find a motive in it all. Saipov’s shouts of “Allahu Akbar” throughout his terror attack, for instance, were quickly explained away by Zainab Chaudry, a member of the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), who informed the New York Daily News that the Arabic term simply meant “God is greatest” and that Muslims use that term in a variety of contexts, and not only while they are murdering infidels.

The New York Times was also most happy to assure Americans that Saipov’s “Allahu Akbar” pronouncements had absolutely no connection to his crime. The paper tweeted that although the phrase had “somehow become inextricably intertwined with terrorism,” “its real meaning is far more innocent.”[ix] CNN’s Jake Tapper jumped forward to explain all of that innocence, noting that “Allahu Akbar” meant that “God is great” and that it was “sometimes said under the most beautiful of circumstances.”[x]

During these curious developments, the leaders and authorities in New York joined the peculiar chorus. The governor of New York, Andrew Cuomo (D), stepped forward to assure everyone that Saipov was just a “lone actor,” that there was “no evidence to suggest a wider plot or wider scheme” and that there was, therefore, no “ongoing threat or any additional threat.”[xi] The mayor of New York City, Bill de Blasio, was of a similar mind, announcing that what had happened in Manhattan was very un-Islamic. “The last thing we should do,” he pleaded with his constituents, “is start casting dispersions on whole races of people or whole religions or whole nations. That only makes the situation worse.”[xii]

New York Deputy Police Commissioner John Miller was also on the same page, announcing that what Saipov had perpetrated “isn’t about Islam” and “isn’t about the mosque he attends.”[xiii] Even H.R. McMaster, President Trump’s national security adviser, got into the mix, affirming that Saipov should be classified as a “mass murderer,” a statement that clearly implied that the Jihadist was not motivated to carry out his crime by a religious conviction.[xiv]

In this bizarre atmosphere of denial, Muslims were depicted as the victims of it all. And the establishment media went the extra yard to drive that particular theme home. The Press Herald led the way, titling its main article on the terror attack: “In aftermath of bike path killings, mosques near NYC face hostility again.”[xv] The story featured Dr. Mohammad Qatanani, an imam at a mosque in Paterson, NJ, voicing his concern that, after Saipov’s murder spree, Muslims in the area would now feel “blamed as a religion and as a people.” The article also highlighted the views of a Muslim interviewee named Abu Mohammed, who blamed Saipov’s massacre on the policies of the United States. [xvi]

The New Yorker made sure to help out with the whole narrative, running a piece that focused on how Muslims and Islam were the real victims of Saipov’s act. The story featured Annie Thoms, an English teacher at Stuyvesant High School in Lower Manhattan, who was very worried about Islam being maligned and about the feelings of her Muslim students. “Especially after 9/11,” she said in the article,

every time I see that something is a terrorist incident, and someone has said   ‘Allahu Akhbar,’ I feel a pit in my stomach, because terrorism is the evil opposite of what Islam is. So many of our kids here at Stuyvesant are Muslim, and they fear being tarred with this kind of thing.[xvii]

It was probably Isaac Stone Fish, a former Newsweek correspondent who was on sabbatical from the magazine Foreign Policy, who best encapsulated the establishment media’s view of the Manhattan massacre. Seemingly unable to grasp what all the fuss was about, he tweeeted, “The most Trumpian thing most people do is overreact to a small terrorist attack.”[xviii]

Even the U.S. court system couldn’t seem to find a speck of Islam in Saipov’s Islamic act. When a federal grand jury returned a 22-count indictment against the Jihadist, it treated him as though he were a mafia member, charging him with murder “in aid of racketeering” — a charge that federal prosecutors typically use in organized crime cases. The message rang out loud and clear: Saipov had nothing to do with a religion or with an ideological movement. [xix]

Despite all of this denial about Saipov and his terrorist act, the truth nonetheless stared everyone in the face: Saipov was a devout Muslim and was clearly devoted to ISIS and to his prophet Mohammed. The fairy-tale of “Allahu Akbar” that Zainab Chaudry, the New York Times and Jake Tapper tried to foist on Americans couldn’t erase one undeniable fact: that the Arabic phrase is a declaration of Islamic superiority and supremacism. Those who understand Arabic are well aware that the phrase does not mean “God is great,” but “Allah is greater” — because Allah is greater than the other gods of other religions and that is why Islam’s followers, like Sayfullo Saipov, are commanded to subjugate and/or kill them.[xx]

What Chaudry, the New York Times and Tapper also failed to tell their audiences was that the actual origin of “Allahu Akbar” lies with the Prophet Mohammed himself, who shouted the phrase upon destroying the Jews of Khaybar in the year 628. [xxi] When Jihadists shout those words, therefore, they are emulating their prophet and declaring Allah’s superiority by killing non-Muslims.[xxii] This is why the last words heard on the flight recorder of United Airlines Flight 93, the domestic passenger flight that was hijacked and driven into the ground by four Al-Qaeda terrorists on 9/11, were “Allahu Akbar.”[xxiii] It is also why Mohamed Atta, ringmaster of the 9/11 plot, advised his fellow hijackers to shout that phrase, since, as he explained, “this strikes fear in the hearts of the unbelievers.”[xxiv]

Thus, when the New York Times tweeted its confusion about why “Allahu Akbar” had somehow become “inextricably intertwined with terrorism,” the paper revealed its breathtaking ignorance regarding the millions of Muslims who have screamed that phrase over the centuries in the process of murdering millions of unbelievers.[xxv]

When Tapper stated that “Allahu Akbar” is “sometimes said under the most beautiful of circumstances,” he was partially right, but he failed to explain the context, which, as Cheryl K. Chumley of the Washington Times has accurately noted, is that “Heil Hitler” was also said in circumstances that many Nazis perceived as “beautiful.”[xxvi]

The statements of New York’s leaders also left much to be desired. In terms of New York governor Cuomo’s assurance that Saipov was just a “lone actor” and that there was no “wider plot,” one couldn’t help but wonder: upon what evidence had Cuomo based his assessment? How did his assurance square, exactly, with the fact that law enforcement knew of Saipov’s direct ties to other terrorism suspects under investigation, and that the FBI had tracked down a second Muslim in connection with Saipov’s attack? How was Cuomo’s assurance consistent with all of Saipov’s other ISIS connections and with his personal declarations? How did it fit with the fact that in June 2017, the Islamic State published a poster depicting an SUV driving over a heap of skulls and bearing the legend “Run Over Them Without Mercy”? How could Saipov have possibly been a “lone actor” if he was a foot soldier for ISIS, and ISIS had issued a directive to Muslims to engage in vehicular jihad? [xxvii] And how could there have been no “wider plot” if Saipov’s vehicular jihad mirrored many other terror attacks, from the vehicular Jihadist attacks in Barcelona to France to the UK?[xxviii]

No one asked Cuomo these questions directly, so he did not have to answer them. Nor was Mayor de Blasio taken to account on his warning against “casting dispersions” [sic] on whole religions. Neither was New York Deputy Police Commissioner John Miller called out personally on his contention that Saipov’s attack wasn’t about Islam or about Saipov’s mosque. But de Blasio and Miller had left one very pertinent question unanswered: what if Saipov’s religion and his mosque’s teachings actually had inspired him to wage terror against unbelievers?

In terms of the court that treated Saipov as though he were in the mafia, one matter remained extremely disturbing: Saipov was not, in fact, in the mafia. He was a soldier of Islam and of the Islamic State. As leading scholar of Islam, Robert Spencer, noted on this issue:

The Islamic State is not a mafia family, and jihad mass murder is not racketeering. This is a war, and the New York City truck jihad massacre was one battle in that war. Yet authorities continue to prosecute these jihadis as if they were a series of criminals committing separate and discrete criminal acts that are unrelated to one another.[xxix]

In the end, one of the most troubling aspects about Saipov’s Halloween massacre was that it could have easily been prevented. But it wasn’t prevented precisely because of the attitudes exhibited by the Chaudrys, de Blasios, Tappers and all of their other ideological comrades. Indeed, the evidence surfaced that the NYPD had actually suspected Saipov’s mosque of terror ties over a decade before the massacre, and that it had kept the mosque under surveillance for a number of years. But all of that stopped because an individual by the name of Linda Sarsour, the notorious Palestinian-American political “activist” who was one of the organizers of the 2017 Women’s March, considered the NYPD’s surveillance of the mosque to be discriminatory. With the help of the ACLU and other pro-terror groups, she waged a campaign to stop this surveillance, and Mayor de Blasio complied, terminating the NYPD’s capacity for investigating all mosques and Islamic radicalization.[xxx] This dire development resulted in eight dead in Manhattan.

What had inspired de Blasio to make his decision about the NYPD was, of course, very clear, just as it was very clear what Sarsour and the New York Times were expecting him to say about Saipov. And that is exactly why they so approvingly embraced his announcement. It was the message that has been sanctioned by our society’s elites; the message that is now the only one allowed to be spoken or heard. And that message is that Islamic terrorism has absolutely nothing to do with Islam. What Saipov had done on that Halloween afternoon in Manhattan, therefore, also had nothing to do with the Religion of Peace — even if Saipov himself thought it did.

De Blasio’s, Cuomo’s and Miller’s message was just the latest in a long and consistent narrative of messages that had been emanating from American leadership, media and popular culture long before Saipov plowed a truck into innocent civilians on a Manhattan bike path. Its hackneyed theme had been heard after every single Islamic terror attack on American soil, from Fort Hood in 2010 to the Boston Marathon Massacre in 2014, and from San Bernardino in 2015 to Orlando in 2016. And that theme was that no matter how proudly and unambiguously Jihadists point to Islam to justify and explain the mayhem and violence that they perpetrate, their pronouncements are never to be taken seriously. Rather, it is other factors, the ones connected to racism, unemployment and climate change, that, we are told, are actually the main causes of the terrorists’ actions.

As we stand back and examine this picture, it becomes painfully evident that something very wrong is transpiring right before our eyes in the terror war. Some kind of “pressure” is in the air — a pressure that ensures that after every jihadist attack, we call the attack everything but what it actually is. We are to ascribe many different motives to the perpetrators, except the very motives that they themselves have candidly identified. Indeed, we have been given a template of mantras to repeat each time, with just a few blanks to be filled in for each new attack, so that the different set of names, times and places fit accordingly.

Accompanying the “pressure in the air” are several articles of faith that we are expected to dutifully embrace. The Party Line is unmistakable: first, when Jihad strikes, we have to accept that the guilty party is us. We are expected to believe that it is America and the West that are responsible. That’s right: the devil made them do it. Second, and perhaps most importantly, we have to embrace the sacred rule that it is Muslims that are the real victims. Any deviation from this perspective is now considered tantamount to a hatred of all Muslims in general. In other words, you are an awful and bad person if you fail to embrace every single tenet that the “pressure in the air” instructs you to believe about terrorism.

What we have here is a situation in which any desire to protect the West from the terrorist enemy is now categorized as a hatred of an entire group of people. It is also labelled “racist” — even though Jihad is not a race and its Muslim practitioners come in all shapes, colors and ethnicities. And no matter how illogical and erroneous this line of thinking may be, it now prevails as the only permitted narrative in our cultural and official discourse.

Consequently, we have a disaster facing us. And that disaster, in a nutshell, is this: a totalitarian and expansionist ideology called Islamic supremacism is waging a deadly war on the West. It is a war that Islamic supremacists have openly proclaimed and shouted from the rooftops. They have made it abundantly clear as to why they are waging this war, why they hate us so much, and why they are so determined to destroy our way of life. But standing up to this ideology and protecting ourselves from those who heed its call is now, as noted above, considered hateful, racist and, of course, “Islamophobic.” And since most people’s most dreaded fear in our leftist and politically correct culture is to be called a racist, our civilization’s will and ability to defend itself has been severely disabled. What we have, in essence, is our surrender to Islamic supremacism.

The “pressure in the air” can take credit for this surrender. And it has done its job extremely well. This “pressure” has been created, of course, by a pernicious and treacherous entity: the Unholy Alliance, that sinister pact between Islamic supremacism and the Left that seeks to destroy the democratic-capitalist West and every liberty that comes with it. As empirical reality reveals, and as author David Horowitz has meticulously documented in his book Unholy Alliance and on his website DiscovertheNetworks.org, leftist and Islamic supremacist totalitarians are working feverishly together to destroy America and the West.[xxxi]

It is transparently clear who our enemies are today, and there is no mystery about the agendas they are pursuing. But tragically, the Unholy Alliance controls our culture, which is why it has succeeded in creating the “pressure in the air” that is now so effectively sealing so many eyes and lips and, in turn, allowing the enemy to encroach with so much ease.

This book is dedicated to unveiling the causes and elements of this tragic catastrophe. It will reveal Islamic supremacism’s assault on our society and the Left’s complicity in that assault. In so doing, it will expose the Left’s inner nature, its method of regulating our thoughts and language, and the treacherous manner in which it empowers our deadly foes. The work will also crystallize how Jihad Denial, which manifested itself so blatantly and disturbingly in the Saipov Halloween massacre, plays a key role in the Left’s agenda – and in our own suicide.

Our story will be told in a completely original and unprecedented context, unambiguously laying bare the fact that Islamic supremacy is rooted in psychopathy. To make this case, we will document how a psychopath behaves, and then demonstrate how Islamic supremacism’s behavior is classically psychopathic. As a result, this work will make manifestly clear that our psychopathic enemy is doing what a psychopath does best: charm, seduce and devour his prey — all while playing the role of the victim. We will be able to see that Islamic supremacism is subjugating the West in exactly the same way that psychopaths subjugate their victims. In turn, we will also see that the manner in which we are surrendering is exactly the manner in which victims surrender to psychopaths. And thus, the Jihadist Psychopath will be unveiled for the first time for all to see.

In demonstrating this thesis, this book will reveal the powerful temptation in human nature to accept a pernicious lie like Jihad Denial, showing how and why humans desperately cling to its subliminal and comforting assurances that a safe and ordered world is possible, if only we will turn a blind eye to the very forces that seek to annihilate us. In illuminating this human need to delude oneself in the face of a dire threat, this work will make clear what the psychopath’s conquering of his prey is really all about.

The pages ahead will focus primarily on the battle taking place in America, which is reflective of what is happening in the rest of the world, especially in Western Europe, where the battle is now almost totally lost. There are, of course, still many brave people left in Europe who want to save their freedoms and are valiantly rising up and fighting back, but they face a colossal uphill battle.

And so we embark on dissecting and crystallizing the threat of the Jihadist Psychopath and the process by which, with the willing aid of his leftist minions, he is charming, seducing and devouring us. It is a harrowing tale which, this author prays, lovers of freedom will heed with gravity, taking every lesson and warning to heart.

For there is not much time.

Notes:

[i] Tina Moore, Larry Celona and Danika Fears, “8 killed as truck plows into pedestrians in downtown NYC terror attack,” NYPost.com, October 31, 2017. https://nypost.com/2017/10/31/8-killed-truck-pedestrians-downtown-nyc-terror-attack/

[ii] Matthew Vadum, “America’s Terrorist Lottery,” Frontpagemag.com, November 2, 2017.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/268299/americas-terrorist-lottery-matthew-vadum

[iii] Patrick Poole, “New York City Terror Attack Is Confirmed as ‘Known Wolf’ Terrorism … Again,” PJMedia.com, November 1, 2017. https://pjmedia.com/homeland-security/new-york-city-terror-attack-confirmed-known-wolf-terrorism/; Rich Schapiro, “FBI tracks down second Muslim in connection with NYC truck jihad massacre,”NyDailyNews.com, November 1, 2017. http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/fbi-tracks-man-nyc-terror-attack-article-1.3604765

[iv] Stefan Becket, “Feds reveal what they found in NYC terror suspect Sayfullo Saipov’s truck,” CBSNews.com, November 2, 2017. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-york-attack-suspect-sayfullo-saipov-what-feds-found-truck-cellphones/

[v] Vadum, “America’s Terrorist Lottery.”

[vi] Ibid.

[vii] Danusha V. Goska, “Did New Jersey Muslims Celebrate on 9/11?,” Frontpagemag.com, November 30, 2015. http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/260952/did-new-jersey-muslims-celebrate-911-danusha-v-goska

[viii] Robert Spencer, “NYC jihad mass murderer Saipov a ‘devout’ Muslim, wife wears a niqab,” JihadWatch.org, Nov 2, 2017. https://www.jihadwatch.org/2017/11/nyc-jihad-mass-murderer-saipov-a-devout-muslim-wife-wears-a-niqab

[ix] New York Times Tweet: https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/926944927153577985

[x] John Nolte, “Very Jake News: Tapper Melts Down over Criticism of Inaccurate ‘Allahu Akbar’,” Breitbart.com, Nov 2, 2017. http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2017/11/02/tapper-melts-criticism-inaccurate-allahu-akbar/

[xi] Katie Reilly and Alana Abramson, “8 People Were Killed in New York’s Deadliest Terror Attack Since 9/11. Here’s What to Know,” Time.com, Nov. 1, 2017. http://time.com/5004500/new-york-city-lower-manhattan-attack/; Matthew Vadum, “America’s Terrorist Lottery.”

[xii] Nicole Chavez, Holly Yan, Eric Levenson and Steve Almasy, “New York attack suspect charged with federal terrorism offenses,” CNN.com, November 2, 2017.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/01/us/new-york-attack/index.html

[xiii] Robert Spencer, “NY Deputy Police Commissioner: ‘This isn’t about Islam, this isn’t about the mosque he attends’,” JihadWatch.org, Nov 1, 2017. https://www.jihadwatch.org/2017/11/ny-deputy-police-commissioner-this-isnt-about-islam-this-isnt-about-the-mosque-he-attends

[xiv] Aaron Klein, “H.R. McMaster Avoids Islamic Terrorist Label Again, Calls Manhattan Jihadist a ‘Mass Murderer’,” Breitbart.com, Nov 3, 2017. http://www.breitbart.com/jerusalem/2017/11/03/h-r-mcmaster-avoids-islamic-terrorist-label-again-calls-manhattan-jihadist-a-mass-murderer/

[xv] Wayne Parry, “In aftermath of bike path killings, mosques near NYC face hostility again,” PressHerald.com, Nov.2, 2017. www.pressherald.com/2017/11/02/in-aftermath-of-bike-path-killings-mosques-near-nyc-face-hostility-again/

[xvi] Ibid.

[xvii] Anna Russell and Ben Taub, “A Terrorist Attack in Lower Manhattan,”

NewYorker.com, October 31, 2017. https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/terror-in-lower-manhattan?mbid=social_twitter

[xviii] Robert Spencer, “FP ‘journalist’ Isaac Stone Fish: ‘The most Trumpian thing most people do is overreact to a small terrorist attack’,” JihadWatch.org, Nov 2, 2017 12:57. https://www.jihadwatch.org/2017/11/fp-journalist-isaac-stone-fish-the-most-trumpian-thing-most-people-do-is-overreact-to-a-small-terrorist-attack

[xix] Robert Spencer, “Indictment of NYC truck jihadi treats ISIS as if it were a mafia family, charges jihadi with ‘racketeering’,” JihadWatch.org, Nov 22, 2017. https://www.jihadwatch.org/2017/11/indictment-of-nyc-truck-jihadi-treats-isis-as-if-it-were-a-mafia-family-charges-jihadi-with-racketeering

[xx] Daniel Greenfield, “’Allahu Akbar’ Is the Motive for Islamic Terror,” Frontpagemag.com, November 8, 2017. http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/268309/allahu-akbar-motive-islamic-terror-daniel-greenfield; See also: Glazov Gang Video, “Daniel Greenfield on The Real Meaning of ‘Allahu Akbar’”, JamieGlazov.com, March 27, 2015. http://jamieglazov.com/2015/03/27/daniel-greenfield-on-the-real-meaning-of-allahu-akbar-on-the-glazov-gang/

[xxi] Bukhari 64.238.4198.

[xxii] Greenfield, “’Allahu Akbar’ Is the Motive for Islamic Terror.” See also: Glazov Gang Video, “Daniel Greenfield on The Real Meaning of ‘Allahu Akbar’”.

[xxiii] Greenfield, “’Allahu Akbar’ Is the Motive for Islamic Terror.”

[xxiv] TheGuardian.com, “Last words of a terrorist,” Sept. 30, 2001.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/sep/30/terrorism.september113

[xxv] Scholar Bill Warner estimates that 270 million non-Muslims have been murdered by the Jihad since the foundation of Islam. See: Bill Warner, “Tears of Jihad,” PoliticalIslam.com, May 3, 2008. https://www.politicalislam.com/tears-of-jihad/

[xxvi] Cheryl K. Chumley, “Jake Tapper, CNN’s finest, defends ‘Allahu akbar’ as ‘beautiful’,” WashingtonTimes.com, November 1, 2017. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/nov/1/jake-tapper-cnns-finest-defends-allahu-akbar-beaut/

[xxvii] Robert Spencer, “Vehicular Jihad Comes to Barcelona,” Frontpagemag.com, August 18, 2017.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/267619/vehicular-jihad-comes-barcelona-robert-spencer

[xxviii] Ibid.

[xxix] Robert Spencer, “Indictment of NYC truck jihadi treats ISIS as if it were a mafia family, charges jihadi with ‘racketeering’,” JihadWatch.org, Nov 22, 2017. https://www.jihadwatch.org/2017/11/indictment-of-nyc-truck-jihadi-treats-isis-as-if-it-were-a-mafia-family-charges-jihadi-with-racketeering

[xxx] Robert Spencer, “NYPD monitored jihad murderer Saipov’s mosque until Linda Sarsour convinced them to stop,” JihadWatch.org, Nov 1, 2017. https://www.jihadwatch.org/2017/11/nypd-monitored-jihad-murderer-saipovs-mosque-until-linda-sarsour-convinced-them-to-stop; Daniel Greenfield, “The Left Has Blood on its Hands in Manhattan,” Frontpagemag.com, November 1, 2017. http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/268286/left-has-blood-its-hands-manhattan-daniel-greenfield

[xxxi] David Horowitz, Unholy Alliance: Radical Islam and the American Left (Washington, D.C.: Regnery, 2004). The site DiscovertheNetworks.org identifies the constituents of the Islamist jihad and describes the radical leftist networks that aid and abet it – especially the networks that surrounded the Obama administration and the Democratic Party leadership up till this moment. For more discussion and analysis on the Left’s romance with Islamic Supremacism, and how this romance is an extension of the Left’s alliance with communism during the Cold War, see Jamie Glazov, United in Hate: The Left’s Romance With Tyranny and Terror (Los Angeles: WND, 2009).

[xxxii] For the resistance of the courts see Associated Press, “Appeals court denies request to immediately reinstate travel ban,” February 5, 2017.
http://nypost.com/2017/02/05/appeals-court-denies-request-to-immediately-reinstate-travel-ban/?utm_source=maropost&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nypdaily&utm_content=20170205 and Joseph Klein, “Judicial Overreach on National Security,” Frontpagemag.com, February 6, 2017. http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/265711/judicial-overreach-national-security-joseph-klein. For State Department resistance see Jeffrey Gettlemanjan, “State Dept. Dissent Cable on Trump’s Ban Draws 1,000 Signatures,” NYTimes.com, January 31, 2017. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/31/world/americas/state-dept-dissent-cable-trump-immigration-order.html?_r=0

[xxxiii] See Soeren Kern, “White House Officials Divided on Islam, ISIS, Israel and Iran,” GatestoneInstitute.org, April 5, 2017. https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10158/white-house-islam-isis-israel-iran. For a discussion on the war within Trump’s inner circle on how to deal with Islamic Supremacism, see Chapter 18.

©Jamie Glazov. All rights reserved.

COLORADO MASSACRE: Syrian Immigrant Ahmad Al Aliwi Alissa didn’t do it. The Ruger did it!

/in , , , , , /by

It looks like in less than his first one hundred days, Biden has an Islamic terrorist attack on his hands, but you will likely never hear those words uttered.

Just a nut with a gun, move along, nothing to see.

Of course, a week ago the nut with a gun was a white guy perpetrating a hate crime against Asians.

This week it’s a ‘new American,’ a Syrian Muslim, whose innocent victims are all white and you likely won’t see the phrase “hate crime” anywhere outside of conservative media.

Oh, don’t get me wrong, the Left will rage, but their fury will be directed at the weapon and not the man. (Biden will have his excuse.)

The Syrian immigrant is just a nut who had gone over the edge, driven there by Islamophobic America. And, they may go one step further and blame it on (understandable to them) pent-up Trump hatred.

Here is just one of many stories you will see today (this one at CBS) about the slaughter quoting Biden’s reaction:

At the White House, President Biden said another city has been “scarred by gun violence” and called on Congress to pass gun control measures. “I just can’t imagine what the families are feeling, the victims whose futures were stolen from them, from their families, their loved ones, who know have to struggle to go on and try to make sense of what’s happened.”

There was a delay by authorities in announcing the name of the suspect, so a bunch of Lefties went crazy on social media blaming whitey for the shooting.

See the Washington Examiner op-ed:

Ahmad al Aliwi Alissa isn’t a ‘white man,’ so can we make assumptions about what motivated him?

We know now that the man who shot up a grocery store Monday in Boulder, Colorado, is an immigrant from Syria named Ahmad al Aliwi Alissa. In the context of recent history, this means there’s reason to think he might be a Muslim terrorist. But saying that aloud will get you called a racist by the media.

For now, we’ll just have to pretend that this is another “lone wolf” who in no way fits into the totally not-real pattern (according to the media) of mass violence perpetrated by Muslim extremists in places as far-flung as Mumbai, Rouen, and Chattanooga and as close as Miami, San Bernardino and New York.

If Aliwi Alissa were white, we could at least assume, without any evidence, like the media are doing with the recent killing spree in Atlanta, that this was an act of white supremacism. Instead, it looks like we’re back to square one.

Gasp! Maybe he was a pro-Trump anti-masker! Opinion writer Eddie Scarry continues….

Of course, before the shooter was identified by police, liberals had been very eager to draw early conclusions about him. They were 100% certain he was white and perhaps even an anti-masker — i.e., a Trump supporter.

I’m serious. Liberal journalist Kurt Eichenwald *** mused on Twitter that the details might reveal that the shooting, which left 10 people dead, was an episode of “anti-masker violence.”

Meena Harris, the niece of Vice President Kamala Harris, tweeted immediately after the shooting that “violent white men are the greatest terrorist threat to our country.” She anticipated that Aliwi Alissa might be a real terrorist, but not the kind that Democrats would rather not acknowledge.

There is more.

But, speaking of nut jobs….

***Get a load of where this Leftie “journalist’s” head is!

At Breitbart:

Kurt Eichenwald’s COVID Freakout: ‘I Want to Find an Antimasker and Beat Them to Death’

(Islamic terrorists, not so much…..)

Eichenwald thinks the country is insane!

Is there a chance in hell that we will hear the truth if this later tweet speculation, that Biden provoked an Islamic terror attack, turns out to be on the mark?

There is so much news and commentary about this horrible event and I have a doctor appointment today with little time to look further.  So please send some links with updates via the comment section here at ‘Frauds and Crooks.’ 

I would love to know if anyone sees anything about how his Syrian family came to be living here.

And, of course, pray for the innocent victims’ families.

Endnote:  Do you think libertarian Alex Nowrasteh is still pimping for more Syrian refugees? See my post yesterday.

Trump was Right! Jihadists Attempting to Get Across our Southern Border

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED ARTICLE: Brother of Boulder jihad mass murderer detained, along with other family members

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

President Trump Returning to Social Media with ‘his own platform’ in 2-3 Months

/in , , , , /by

Let’s hope this is true. Conservatives are being banned, suppressed, and persecuted on the mainstream social media sites. As such, Conservatives must have an engaging social media platform that we can call home. A platform that allows the freedom of thought and the exchange of ideas. In addition, this will give President Trump a platform to effectively communicate with the American people. Team Trump must support these efforts if we are to have any chance at defeating the Left in the years and months ahead.

Trump returning to social media with ‘his own platform’ in 2-3 months: adviser

Jason Miller tells Fox News’ ‘#MediaBuzz’ the platform will ‘completely redefine the game’

By Fox New, March 21, 2021

Former President Donald Trump will be back on social media in the near future with his own service, according to one of his senior advisers.

Jason Miller, who was a spokesperson for Trump’s 2020 campaign, told Fox News’ “#MediaBuzz” on Sunday that Trump will be reentering the social media space in two to three months with a new platform of his own that will “completely redefine the game.”

Miller said he expects Trump’s new venture to have tens of millions of users.

Trump was banned from Twitter following the Jan. 6 Capitol riots. He had been a prolific poster on that platform before and during his presidency.

RELATED ARTICLE: The Biden ☭ Administration Is Imposing A Media Blackout At His Crisis On The Border

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

VIDEO: Project Veritas Obtains Never-Before-Seen Images Inside Texas Migrant Facility

/in , , , , , , /by

Project Veritas released a new bombshell video today displaying never-before-seen photos inside a detention facility near the U.S.-Mexican border where illegal immigrants are concentrated in tight spaces and wrapped in space blankets.

Here are some of the highlights from today’s video:

  • Just over a month ago, Customs and Border Patrol completed the construction of this 185,000 square foot facility in Donna, Texas to house countless migrants who come across the border daily.
  • The facility will not allow non-profit lawyers who conduct oversight of these detention centers to go inside or even see photos of the conditions.
  • Source: “These photos were taken within the last few days. There are eight pods with eight cells each in the facility. At any given moment there are an average of 3,000 people in custody here.”
  • Source: “They [illegal immigrants] are separated by age or physical size depending on room. Fifty were COVID positive in these cells over the last few days. There have been multiple sexual assaults, normal assaults and daily medical emergencies.”
  • The Biden administration continues to allege that the border crisis is not out of their control.
  • New Project Veritas Insider working within the Department of Homeland Security has leaked documents warning of a Central American-based caravan headed to the U.S. border.

Watch the video:

These images are appalling. No wonder the government didn’t want the public seeing these photos.

The Biden administration has continuously denied that there is an ongoing crisis at the border and claims that the situation is under control.

Project Veritas is still on the ground in Texas to expose corruption and wrongdoing as it appears.

If you or someone you know work for the Department of Homeland Security or Customs and Border Patrol, contact us at VeritasTips@protonmail.com.

©Project Veritas. All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEOS:

Immigrants are Asked About Biden’s Border Policy – Their Answer Says it All

James O’Keefe STUNS, Leaks Photos Of Border Crisis Biden and Psaki Don’t Want You to See

VIDEO: The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Supreme Court!

/in , , , , , /by

You don’t want to miss the latest episode of Capital Research Center and Dangerous Documentaries’ new series The Politically Incorrect Guide, The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Supreme Court!

Watch it now!

In the third episode of The Politically Incorrect Guide podcasters and authors Tom Woods and Michael Malice become the un-PC Schoolhouse Rock to bust myths about the American Judiciary.

Tom & Michael prove that the courts are no impartial guardian of our liberty, instead being biased towards big government, that the states were supposed to be able to nullify federal law and federal courts, and that the left’s court packing desires are a partisan scam.

Based on the Regnery book series of the same name, each episode of The Politically Incorrect Guide will cover stories from history, culture, and social movements that students in today’s mainstream education system may never hear, but need to know. The book series contains 32 works, each written by a different expert, including The Politically Incorrect Guide to Communism and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Capitalism, both of which will be among the show’s upcoming episodes. Season one of The Politically Incorrect Guide is 10 episodes long and will release throughout 2021.

Be sure to check out the show and Dangerous Documentaries’ work on social media:

Stay updated on The Politically Incorrect Guide at PIGseries.com.

©Dangerous Documentaries. A project of Capital Research Center.

PODCAST: The PRO Act nationalizes the worst of California’s policies!

/in , , , /by

GUESTS AND TOPICS:

GREGORY WRIGHTSTONE

Gregory Wrightstone is a geologist with more than 35 years spent investigating the Earth and its processes. He earned an undergraduate degree from Waynesburg University and a masters degree in geology from West Virginia University. He is also the author of a new book — Inconvenient Facts: The science that Al Gore doesn’t want you to know.

TOPIC: “CLEAN Future Act” offers no future for America!

MARK MIX

Mark Mix is President of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation. He also serves as President of the National Right to Work Committee., Mark frequently appears on national television shows including Fox News, Neil Cavuto, Glenn Beck and Fox & Friends, and has also appeared multiple times on CNBC and CNN. Similarly, Mr. Mix’s writings have appeared in national outlets such as the Wall Street Journal, Washington Times, Investors Business Daily, Washington Examiner and National Review. His pieces have also been featured in widely-read regional publications across the country including the Detroit Free Press, the Orange County Register and the Detroit News.

TOPIC: The PRO Act nationalizes the worst of California’s policies!

©Conservative Commandoes Radio. All rights reserved.

President Trump says GOP has ‘pretty deep bench’ if he doesn’t seek reelection

/in , , , /by

There is no “deep bench” in the GOP, President Trump! Governor Ron DeSantis is without question the GOP’s only other viable option for 2024. If President Trump decides that he is not going to run for POTUS in 2024, then he must support Governor Ron DeSantis wholeheartedly. Any other candidate will get their ass kicked.

Trump says GOP has ‘pretty deep bench’ if he doesn’t seek reelection

By The Hill, March 22, 2021

Former President Trump in an interview released Monday said that the Republican Party has a “pretty deep bench” if he decides not to seek a return to the White House in 2024.

“I’ll make that decision sometime later, but there’s a pretty deep bench,” Trump told the podcast “The Truth with Lisa Boothe.”

The former president said the Republican Party “is stacked” with “very good people” heading into upcoming elections. He specifically named Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, Sen. Josh Hawley (Mo.), Sen. Ted Cruz (Texas), Sen. Rand Paul (Ky.) and his former press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who is running for governor in Arkansas.

When asked who would be the GOP presidential candidate if Trump decides against running, the former president said “some of the names, I guess I just mentioned perhaps,” adding that “there’s a pretty deep bench” of potential candidates.

“I think we’ve got a lot of great people in the Republican Party,” he said.

Trump cited the Conservative Political Action Conference’s (CPAC) straw poll that found a 97 percent approval rate for the former president’s job performance.

The CPAC poll also gauged support for potential candidates in the 2024 presidential election, with 55 percent of respondents saying they’d vote for Trump in a theoretical primary. In the poll that excluded Trump as a possible candidate, DeSantis showed a wide lead with 43 percent support, followed by Noem.

At the conference, Trump teased another presidential campaign during his speech but has not officially said whether he will enter the race.

RELATED ARTICLE: President Trump backs Republican challenger to traitorous RINO Raffensperger

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.