The Black Reagan

On February 15, 2013, I published a column titled “The Black Reagan,” in which I compared Dr. Benjamin Carson, former Director of Pediatric Neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins Medical Center, in Baltimore, to Ronald Reagan, the most beloved president of the 20th century.  Now, as we approach the 2016 presidential campaign, we find Dr. Carson launching his political career in much the same way that Reagan did on October 27, 1964.  It was on that day that Reagan made a speech on behalf of Senator Barry Goldwater that few conservatives, or liberals, will ever forget.

Dr. Carson’s February 7, 2013, speech at the 2013 National Prayer Breakfast in Washington, DC, will also be remembered as a historical turning point.  To put it bluntly, with Barack Obama seated within spitting distance, Dr. Carson proceeded to take Obama and all of his liberal friends out behind the woodshed for a long-overdue public ass-kicking.

Dr. Carson, is a black man who typifies exactly what any young man or woman… regardless of race, creed, or color… can achieve in the United States with a little bit of non-Benjamin Spock parenting, some good study habits, a solid work ethic, and some intelligent life choices.  In fact, Dr. Carson is the exact polar opposite of the long-oppressed plantation slaves that liberals and Democrats want black men to be because the very existence of the Democratic Party depends on the continued belief among black Americans that they are the victims of white racism.

Dr. Carson is the product of a single parent home in Detroit.  His mother, who dropped out of school in third grade and who married at age 13, worked two or three jobs in order to make ends meet.  Yet, as her two sons were growing up, she was wise enough to limit the amount of time they spent watching TV each day.  Instead, she required them to read two library books each week.  And although she, herself, was unable to read, she required her sons to write book reports on each of the books they’d read.

After earning an undergraduate degree in psychology from Yale University, Carson attended the University of Michigan School of Medicine.  Following med school he served his residency in neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins, where he eventually became Director of Pediatric Neurosurgery.  Finally, having proven himself to be the ideal role model for black children… far beyond what liberals and Democrats would ever expect or want a black man to achieve… he was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President George W. Bush on June 19, 2008.

In his 1964 speech, Reagan reminded us that the Democrats were attempting to convince the people that the primary issues of that election were the “maintenance of peace and prosperity,” and that “we’ve never had it so good.”  In response, Reagan said, “But I have an uncomfortable feeling that this prosperity isn’t something on which we can base our hopes for the future.  No nation in history has ever survived a tax burden that reached a third of its national income.”  He continued, “Today, 37 cents of every dollar earned in this country is the tax collector’s share, and yet our government continues to spend $17 million a day more than we take in.  We haven’t balanced our budget in 28 out of the last 34 years.  We have raised our debt limit three times in the last twelve months, and now our national debt is one and a half times greater than the combined debt of all other nations in the world.”  Multiply those 1964 statistics by a factor of ten and Dr. Carson could have used the same statistics in his 2013 prayer breakfast speech.

In his 1964 speech, Reagan ridiculed Senator Joseph Clark, (D-PA), who once described liberalism  as “meeting the material needs of the masses through the full power of centralized government.”  Reagan said, “This was the very thing the Founding Fathers sought to minimize…  A government can’t control the economy without controlling people.  And they knew (that),  when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose.”

Dr. Carson opened his remarks by quoting Proverbs 11:9, which King Solomon must have written with Barack Obama in mind.  The proverb tells us, “An hypocrite with his mouth destroyeth his neighbour: but through knowledge shall the just be delivered.”  Obama should have taken that as a hint that he was about to receive a major league tongue-lashing.

In a direct challenge to Obama’s idea of “fairness,” Dr. Carson said, “When I pick up my Bible, you know what I see?  I see the fairest individual in the universe… God.  He’s given us a system.  It’s called (the) tithe.  Now, we don’t necessarily have to do it, 10 percent, but it’s the principle.  He didn’t say, if your crops fail, don’t give me any tithes.  He didn’t say, if you have a bumper crop, give me triple tithes.  So there must be something inherently fair about proportionality.  You make $10 billion, you put in $1 billion.  You make $10, you put in $1… but now some people say, that’s not ‘fair’ because it doesn’t hurt the guy who made $10 billion as much as the guy who made $10.  Where does it say you have to hurt the guy?  He’s just put a billion in the pot.  We don’t need to hurt him.”

But the most interesting parallel to be drawn between the Reagan speech in 1964 and the Carson speech in 2013 is the way in which both speakers made the point that it is not liberals and Democrats… those who exist by taking money from those who have it and giving it to those who don’t… who are the most loving, caring, and compassionate.

In commenting on the cruel way in which Democrats attempted to demonize Goldwater in 1964, Reagan told his audience some things about Goldwater that few people were aware of.  He told of how, before he entered politics, Goldwater instituted a profit-sharing plan in his business long before trade unions ever thought of it; how he provided health insurance for all of his employees; how he set aside 50% of his business profits, before taxes, in order to establish a retirement plan for his employees.  And he told of how Goldwater sent a regular monthly check, for life, to a former employee who was ill and could not work, and how he provided daycare for the children of mothers who worked in his stores.

Reagan told the story of a returning serviceman, during the Korean War, who found himself stranded at the Los Angeles International Airport in the week before Christmas, trying to get home to Arizona.  Many other returning GIs were having the same problem; there simply were no seats available on any of the commercial airlines.  But then a voice came over the public address system saying, “Any men in uniform wanting a ride to Arizona, go to runway such-and-such.”  When they arrived at that location they found Sen. Goldwater waiting there in his plane.  Then, in the days before Christmas, Goldwater spent every day, all day long, flying planeloads of Arizona servicemen from Los Angeles to their hometown airports in Arizona.

In his Prayer Breakfast speech, Dr. Carson described how, some16 years earlier, he and his wife heard of an international study which showed that, in terms of their ability to solve math and science problems, American eighth graders ranked 21st out of the 22 countries surveyed.  It was then that he and his wife created the Carson Scholars Fund.

Instead of receiving only sports trophies for victories on the playing fields, the Carsons saw to it that schools and students were also recognized for scholastic achievement.  The Scholars Fund awarded scholarships to students from all backgrounds for superior academic performance…  Those who demonstrated academic excellence received cash awards.  As Dr. Carson explained, “The money would go into a Trust.  They would get interest on it.  When they would go to college they would get the money…”

According to Dr. Carson, “Many teachers have told us that when we put a Carson Scholar in their classroom, the GPA of the whole classroom goes up over the next year.  It’s been very gratifying.  We started 16 years ago with 25 scholarships in Maryland, now we’ve given out more than 5,000 and we are in all 50 states, but we’ve also put in Reading Rooms.  These are fascinating places that no little kid could possibly pass up.  And they get points for the amount of time they spend reading, and the number of books they read…  In the beginning they do it for the prizes, but it doesn’t take long before their academic performance begins to improve.”  It’s the sort of thing that conservatives regularly do.  Liberals, on the other hand, are noted only for their generosity with other peoples’ money.

In his prayer breakfast remarks, Dr. Carson told the story of a very successful young businessman who loved to buy his mother exotic gifts for Mother’s Day.  When he ran out of new ideas he came across some very expensive birds.  The birds could dance, they could sing, and they could talk, but they cost $5,000 apiece.  He was so excited, he bought two of them.  And when he sent them to his mother he couldn’t wait to call her up on Mother’s Day.  He said, “Mother, mother, what did you think of those birds?”  To which she replied, “They was good.”

The young man was horrified.  He said, “No, no, no, Mother!  Surely you didn’t eat those birds.  Those birds cost $5,000 apiece!  They could dance, they could sing, they could talk!”  To which the mother replied, “Well, they should have said something.”

Ronald Reagan said something very important in his 1964 speech and it was the launching pad that ultimately sent him to the White House.  Dr. Ben Carson also said some very important things in his speech on February 7, 2013, and it will be interesting to see how far and to what heights it takes him.  Like Ronald Reagan, Dr. Carson knows what he believes and does not have to pause to think about which political constituency he might offend before he speaks.  His honesty and sincerity, like Ronald Reagan’s, is such that it appeals to nearly all Americans.

Conservatives have been hungering for a true conservative leader since the day that Ronald Reagan left the White House in January 1989.  It is easy to see how Dr. Ben Carson, the “black Reagan,” could fill those very large shoes.

RELATED VIDEO: Dr. Carson’s comments at the 2013 National Prayer Breakfast:

AUTHORS COMMENTS: In a spirit of full disclosure, I feel compelled to mention that, in the days following the writing of this column, I was contacted by the group that is actively promoting Dr. Ben Carson’s presidential campaign. As a result of that conversation I have agreed to join the organization’s editorial task force and to become a member of their think tank.

In recent months I have had the opportunity to offer what I think was some good advice to the Oklahoma coordinator for the Carson organization. When asked what they could be doing to help build a large grassroots organization, I replied, “Nothing. At this stage of the game the only thing Dr. Carson can do to promote his political ambitions is for him to continue doing exactly what he’s doing… which is to appear before as many large and influential audiences as possible. He has done that quite successfully and we find that, at events such as the Southern Republican Leadership Conference and the Iowa Freedom Summit, Dr. Carson has regularly come in second in the straw polls.

I would also predict that Dr. Carson will do quite well in the first Republican primary debate, but it will be the second and thirds debates that will be critically important. When he matches or exceeds expectations in the second and third debates he will quickly emerge as one of the front runners. However, being realistic, I think that Dr. Carson may very well end up in the second spot on the ticket, running with Gov. Scott Walker or another conservative with greater name recognition. I’m convinced that, if Dr. Carson can draw even 17% of the black vote… which is eminently doable… it will be nearly impossible for the Democrat candidate to win.

What should Christians ask of the GOP nominee?

If Republicans win all three branches of government in 2016, what legislation will get passed?

Economic growth, ending middle-class stagflation, reversing the debt divide in college students, repealing Obamacare. Into the policy mix, social conservatives have an important question to ask themselves: What is it we want for our country from a potentially historic GOP victory in 2016?

gop crossRussell Moore laid down an important marker in a recent Wall Street Journal article, which I would translate as God Talk Is Not Enough:

In recent years candidates have assumed that they can win over evangelicals by learning Christian slogans, by masking political rallies as prayer meetings, and by basically producing a long-form new birth certificate to prove they’ve been born again. This sort of identity politics is a luxury of a past era when evangelicals were part of a silent majority in the U.S., with our First Amendment freedoms assumed and guaranteed. That is not the present situation.

Indeed it is not. Let me speak for traditionalists of all religions for a moment.

A few months before the Supreme Court is likely to rule on gay marriage, the incidents causing concern about what gay marriage will mean for dissenters (especially traditional Christians, Orthodox Jews, and Muslims) multiply:

Gordon College students are banned from tutoring public-school students, because of the college’s embrace of standard orthodox Christian rules (no sex outside of marriage between a man and a woman); the request of its college president for a religious exemption from President Obama has now triggered a possible threat to its accreditation.

Meanwhile, Marquette University (a Jesuit institution) is attempting to strip Professor Scott McAdams of his tenure and his job because he blogged critically about the way a college instructor (and grad student) treated an anti-gay-marriage student.

Kelvin Cochran, whose rags-to-riches rise from Shreveport poverty to police chief of Atlanta is as inspiring as any, was fired for self-publishing for his Bible-study class a book that contains two paragraphs exhorting his fellow Christians to live by Biblical sexual values.

In Lafayette, Calif., parents of 14-year-old public-school students are suing because their children were asked in English class whether their parents would embrace them if they were gay — and then these Christian students were publicly shamed and humiliated when they supported their parents’ values.

A Ford Motor Company worker (contractor) was invited to comment on pro-gay-rights material circulated by the company — and then fired for leaving an anti-sodomy comment on the blog.

Note the similar strategies here: invite or force public comment and then discipline those who say the “wrong” thing.

Angela McCaskill was disciplined by her federally chartered university for simply signing her name to a petition putting same-sex marriage to a vote in Maryland.

A judge in Washington State was found guilty of an ethics violation for saying privately in chambers (in response to a staffer’s question) that he would not perform same-sex marriages.

The great god of gay equality demands a sacrifice of $150,000 from Oregon bakers Melissa and Aaron Klein for the sin of refusing to bake a gay-wedding cake.

More than 70,000 people signed their names to a petition saying Mozilla founder Brendan Eich must either publicly recant his opposition to gay marriage (evidenced solely by a relatively small donation to the Prop 8 campaign) or be fired.

This is not an exhaustive list by any means, but it points to where I think the greatest threats lie: closing down educational and work opportunities to traditionalists who dare to speak.

If the GOP would like to leave a legacy that makes a difference, I would argue for generous anti-discrimination protections for those who favor or oppose gay marriage (unless they work for an organization whose substantial purpose is to favor or oppose gay marriage).

A new poll shows 57 percent of Americans believe small-business owners should not be forced to provide wedding-related services. It also shows 44 percent of Americans favor gay marriage, 39 percent oppose it, and a whopping 15 percent are unwilling to offer an opinion in the current environment. Threatening people with losing their jobs is a very effective way to silence and intimidate.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints gave a high-profile press conference offering to provide substantial new protections for gay people provided that robust religious-liberty protections are part of the deal. Live and let live is the offer on the table. So far the official voices of gay rights don’t like it: James Esseks, who directs the LGBT project of the American Civil Liberties Union, told ABC news that the First Amendment’s protection of religious freedom “does not give any of us the right to harm others, and that’s what it sounds like the proposal from the Mormon church would do.”

One important marker will come out of Utah, where we will find out if it is possible to craft live-and-let-live legislation or whether gay-rights supporters value legislation primarily as a club to suppress dissent.

The report on the poll includes this comment from a respondent: “Why make an issue out of one florist when there are probably thousands of florists?” asked David Kenney, who’s 59. “The gay community wants people to understand their position, but at the same time, they don’t want to understand other people’s religious convictions. It’s a two-way street.”

Not yet. If social conservatives want to be taken seriously as a political force, we need to do what a handful of Common Core moms have just done: push our concerns into the presidential race.

And for me, if I were to prioritize, the right not to lose my job or my tax exemption because I publicly oppose (or support) gay marriage should be at the top.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Republicans in Congress Demand Answers About Military Chaplain Disciplined for Referencing the Bible

Former Fire Chief Sues Atlanta, Mayor for Firing Him ‘Solely’ Because of His Beliefs About Marriage

Theatre of the absurd: Marie Harf says root cause of ISIS is unemployment [VIDEO]

My, oh my. This is why President Obama’s AUMF must be rejected. State Department Deputy Spokesperson Marie Harf actually said “we cannot win this war by killing them [ISIS], we cannot kill our way out of this war” yesterday on MSNBCS’s “Hardball.” Instead, her solution is a jobs program and training for all those jihadis. Even host Chris Matthews was shocked. ‘Nuff said. Watch.

EDITORS NOTE: This video originally appeared on AllenBWest.com.

Fitna Is Worse Than Slaughter

First, a note from the author to the reading audience: None of the terms or phrases used in this article are of my own invention; every term or phrase (including the title itself) is derived exclusively from primary Islamic sources (i.e., the Quran, Hadith, Tafsir and Sharia Law).  I encourage everyone to access the hyperlinked references, then evaluate each statement in this article for accuracy and completeness.

fitna definition

Introduction

The purpose of this article is to introduce the complex, abstract concept of Fitnah to those in the West (i.e., the non-Islamic world) who are concerned about the apparent rising tide of global violence associated with Islam.  After several years of intense study and discussion with colleagues, I have come to believe that Fitnah is the most essential motivational component of Islamic theology, i.e., it is the cornerstone of an adversarial, confrontational worldview that inevitably leads to a state of perpetual conflict with the non-Islamic world.

In fact, fighting against the multi-faceted threat of Fitnah is such an essential part of a Quran-based worldview, that it is both the Strategy & Tactics and the ‘BeatingHeart’ of the Global Islamic Movement (GIM).  Removing Fitnah from the world is so fundamental to Islamic ideology that every primary source contains extensive references to this concept.

It also follows, that if overcoming Fitnah is the gravitational force behind the GIM, then some essential Tactical elements (aka ‘Operative Verbs’) must also be involved.  For this reason, two of these key tactical verbs (Qital and Kharaj, or ‘Kill/Slaughter/Slay’ and ‘Displace/Drive Out/Expel,’ respectively) are discussed in this article.

You will also notice that, except for brief references within a discussion of Quran 2.217 and several major Fatwas (see Five Major Fatwas below), this article does not include an analysis of the word Jihad.  My three-fold reason for this is that the verbs Qital and Kharaj are not only [1] much more graphic and violent than the word Jihad, and [2] occur several times more frequently in the Quran than Jihad, but they are [3] much more revealing, in terms of gaining a Quran-based perspective of the Strategy & Tactics of the GIM.

Another assertion I will present here is that Fitnah, as defined in Quran and Hadith, etc., has been re-formatted into what I call a ‘Secular-Political Narrative,’ which has gained a remarkable (ominous) level of international influence.  Those who are concerned about growing threats against free speech have probably already guessed that I’m referring to the term ‘ISLAMOPHOBIA.’  According to the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) homepage, ‘Islamophobia is a closed-minded prejudice against or hatred of Islam and Muslims.  An Islamophobe is an individual who holds a closed-minded view of Islam and promotes prejudice against or hatred of Muslims.’  Putting aside this highly subjective definition, Islamophobia is really just another ‘non-religious’ word for Fitnah.

Can We Hope To Ever Understand The ‘Global Islamic Movement’?

On December 28, 2014, Major General Michael K. Nagata, commander of American Special Operations forces in the Middle East, made the following public statement: ‘We do not understand the movement, and until we do, we are not going to defeat it.  We have not defeated the idea.  We do not even understand the idea.’

Retired Admiral James A. Lyons made a similar observation on August 29, 2014, when he wrote ‘America’s inconsistent response to the current Islamic State atrocities indicates that we are failing to understand, or deliberately ignoring, the facts that drive the terrorist organization’s ideology…As a result, our warfighters and law enforcement agencies have been denied critical information on combating the Islamic jihadists we are fighting today.’

At this point in time, more than thirteen years post-9/11, is it possible for those of us in the non-Islamic world to ever ‘understand the movement’ and/or ‘the facts that drive the terrorist organization’s ideology’?  My firm assertion is that the answer is ‘Yes.’  We may not like the answer, but if we go to the primary sources of Islamic theology/ideology (as highlighted just above), we can ‘understand the movement’ with absolute clarity.  However, once we do begin to comprehend what really ‘drives the terrorist organization’s ideology,’ the next challenge becomes ‘What then shall we do?

Fitnah In The Quran

The Arabic root of Fitnah (Fa Ta Nun / ن ت ف) occurs 60 times in the Quran, in five derivative forms, sometimes as a noun, and other times as a verb.  Fitnah can be translated in a variety of ways, using many different descriptive adjectives.  In my experience, one of the most insightful translations of Fitnah is the word ‘Opposition,’ so for the sake of simplicity and continuity, I will use the word ‘Opposition’ throughout this article.

For additional clarity and brevity, I have summarized 16 of the most commonly encountered renditions of Fitnah in Table 1 below.  In addition, the right-hand column of Table 1 includes a list of non-Islamic activities and/or responses that, from a Muslim perspective, are seen as Fitnah.  For example, what those in the non-Islamic world see as a legitimate effort to resist the implementation of Shariah Law is seen as resistance, aggression or even incitement to violence (aka Islamophobia) by multitudes of Muslims who support and promote the world-wide expansion of Islam.

Strategy of the Global Islamic Movement – The Religion of Allah Will Prevail in the Earth

Going back to the earlier remarks by Major General Michael K. Nagata and Admiral James A. Lyons, I would now like to address the question, ‘What is the Strategy of the GIM’?  According the Quran, the Strategy of the GIM comes from the phrase Wayakuna Al-Dinu Lillahi, which means ‘The religion should all be for Allah.’

Although this concept (The religion should all be for Allah) is emphasized repeatedly in the Quran, it is most clearly summarized in verses 2.193 & 8.39, which are nearly identical in content and say ‘And fight them until there is no more Fitnah, and the religion should all be for Allah.’ 

Note: In just these two verses (2.193 & 8.39), different respected Muslim scholars translate Fitnah as either Disbelief, Hostility, Idolatry, Mischief, Opposition, Oppression, Persecution, Polytheism, Temptation, Tumult, Unbelief, and/or Worshiping of Others (also see Table I below).

Dr. Aamir Liaquat Hussain, the host of a popular television program in Pakistan called Alim Online, put it into more modern terms in August of 2010, when he paraphrased verse 2.193 as follows: ‘Fight those who interfere with establishing the rule of Allah.’  Of course, the ‘rule of Allah’ he mentions here is Shariah Law.

This tactical approach (‘Fighting until there is no more Fitnah’) so that ‘the religion should all be for Allah,’ is so essential that it forms the ideological foundation for the Muslim Brotherhood and other macro-groups like Boko Haram, the Global Jihad Front (aka Al-Qaeda) and ISIS – along with virtually every other Islamic organization in the world today (and in the past).

Note: For additional detail, see the section below entitled Five Major Fatwas

Meanwhile, according to another well-known Islamic scholar, the mission [Strategy] of Islam…is to ‘Shine with the light of Allah, and gather all the people that have taken the wrong turns, and have gone out in the darkness of the lost paths, and show them where the straight line, where the straight path of light is, that will take them to Allah.’

This scholar also states that the US [and the West] is becoming a ‘fertile ground for Islam, in spite of all the opposition by Zionists and secularists.’  The ‘Opposition’ that he mentions here is just another way to describe Fitnah, which in this case comes from ‘Zionists and secularists.’

In one sense, the dominant theme that emerges here is remarkably simple: The Strategy of the GIM is to continue fighting against Fitnah (Opposition) until Islam becomes the dominant religion in the world.  According to the Quran, this fighting remains obligatory for all Muslims until the non-Muslim world finally stops opposing the advance of Islam.  This deliberate and intentional opposition from the non-Islamic world is just another description of Fitnah, as well as another way of defining Islamophobia.

Tactics of the Global Islamic Movement – Elimination of Fitnah

Now we come to the question, ‘What are the Tactics of the GIM.’?  According to the Quran, once Fitnah (Opposition) is encountered by members of the global Islamic community (aka the Ummah), the Quran provides explicit tactical instructions for Muslims to continue fighting against the Fitnah, until it is finally eliminated.  I refer to these explicit instructions as ‘Operative Verbs.’  The two most dominant operative verbs are [1] Qital (Qaf Ta Lam / ل ت ق), which means ‘Kill/Slaughter/Slay’ and occurs at least 170 times in the Quran, and [2] Kharaj(Kha Ra Jim / ج ر خ), which means ‘Displace/Drive Out/Expel’ and occurs at least 182 times in the Quran.  In contrast, Jihad occurs only about 40 times in the Quran.

Qital is an obscenely violent word that implies abject, utter humiliation, desecration and debasement, while Kharaj, which is no less violent, implies forceful, merciless expulsion of any- and every-one who does not submit to Islam.  We see real-life examples of this every night on the news – think of Boko Haram slaughtering more than 2,000 people in 16 villages on January of 2015, or ISIS relentlessly driving the Yazidis from their homes in August of 2014.  The tactics of Qital and Kharaj are also the underlying force behind the Palestinian group Fatah vis-à-vis Israel (for more on this subject, see the article entitled If Abbas Is A ‘Moderate,’ What’s A ‘Radical’?).

In other words, these are not just two obscure words that are rare exceptions in a list of otherwise benign, peaceful Quranic verbs and nouns.  It is also important to note that these two Operative Verbs occur frequently in the imperative tense, which is a ‘grammatical form that commands, demands attention or action, implying an unavoidable obligation or requirement.’  Simply put, these verbs are seen as absolute commandments to the Islamic Ummah to never stop fighting against Fitnah, whenever and wherever it is encountered, until the world as we know comes to an end.  It is a call to perpetual warfare, often by cadres of otherwise peace-loving Muslims who are nonetheless ‘provoked by uncontrollable, irresponsible incidents.’

I use the allegory of a chemical reaction to help explain the relationship between Fitnah and the Operative Verbs of Qital and Kharaj.  If you put pure, elemental chlorine into a flask with pure sodium, they will not react.  However, when a catalyst is added (in this case, water), the two elements combine violently in what is called an exothermic reaction (light- and/or heat-releasing).  The by-product of this particular reaction is NaCl, aka common salt, which has an entirely different nature than the original inert elements.  In this allegory, the catalyst (water) is Fitnah, while the otherwise inert elements (chlorine and sodium) are Qital and Kharaj.  In other words, Islam exists as a religion of peace (‘inert’)…until it encounters the catalyst of Fitnah, and then it becomes suddenly, violently explosive.

As with the Strategy of the GIM, these Tactical verbs are discussed extensively in the Quran, Hadith, Tafsir and Sharia Law, but are perhaps best summarized in verse 2.191, which says ‘And kill/slaughter/slay them wherever ye find them, and displace/drive out/expel them out of the places whence they drove you out, for Fitnah is worse than slaughter.’  Put another way, no punishment is too great for the crime of Fitnah, including the devastating loss of property (Kharaj), and life itself (Qital).  Also notice that this verse commands Muslims to ‘slaughter them wherever you find them,thus advocating  intentional planning and forethought.  The Muslim conquest of India, and the Armenian Genocide, are two among many examples of the global advance of Islam based on these doctrines.

Ibn Kathir Tafsir (Commentary) For Quran 2.217

Quran 2.217 is similar to verse 2.191, but the Tafsir (Commentary) for verse 2.217 includes some very revealing insight vis-à-vis the concept of Fitnah.  In his introduction to this Tafsir, a famous Islamic scholar known as Ibn Kathir wrote the following: ‘Allah made it obligatory for Muslims to fight in Jihad against the evil of the enemy who transgress [=Fitnah] against Islam.  Az-Zuhri said, ‘Jihad is required from every person, whether he actually joins the fighting or remains behind.’ 

Next, Ibn Kathir adds the following comments to verse 2.217: ‘Fighting [Qital] therein [during the Sacred Months] is a great (sin) but a greater (sin)…is to prevent mankind from following the way of Allah, to disbelieve in Him…and to drive out [Kharaj] its inhabitants, and Fitnah is worse than killing.’  In this case, the ‘great sin’ of Fitnah is caused by those who would prevent mankind from following the way of Allah.

Every Islamic group in the world today agrees with Ibn Kathir, thus claiming that both secular rulers in Muslim countries, and non-Muslim leaders in western countries, ‘prevent mankind from following Allah’ with malicious intent.  Therefore, it is obligatory for all Muslims to fight against such Fitnah, using whatever means possible.  As mentioned earlier, the shorthand term for such ‘malicious intent’ has become known as Islamophobia.

Five Major Fatwas

Have modern leaders of the GIM followed the Strategy & Tactics of warfare, as authorized in the Quran?  Absolutely.  Here is a summary of five of the most significant Fatwas issued in the last 17-plus years.  Several of them were released to coincide with the Arab Spring, and each one is solidly based on the imperative command to fight against Fitnah, using the operative verbs of Qital and Kharaj, as found in Quran 2.193, 2.217, 8.39 & etc.

[1]           On February 23, 1998, Osama Bin Laden (along with a coalition of four renowned Sheikhs and the leaders of 12 other Islamic caliphates) issued a now-infamous Fatwa, calling for perpetual global Jihad against ‘The Jews and the People of the Cross.’  The introductory paragraph includes the following statement: ‘The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies – civilians and military – is an individual duty for every Muslim…This is in accordance with the words of Almighty Allah, Fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression [Fitnah], and there prevail justice and faith in Allah.’  In this case, the phrase Al-Dinu Lillahi (‘the religion of Allah’) is translated as ‘justice and faith in Allah’ (see earlier discussion of verses 2.193 & 8.39 above). This is because the Arabic word ‘Din’ can be translated interchangeably as either Religion, Law, or Justice.

[2]           On September 10, 2010, Mohammed Badie, who was the Supreme Guide of the Muslim Brotherhood at the time, made the following declaration: ‘Resistance [Jihad] is the only solution against the Zio-American arrogance & tyranny…Islam is capable of confronting Oppression & Tyranny [Fitnah]…the outcome of the confrontation has been predetermined by Allah.’  Remarkably, this Fatwa was issued right in the middle of the Arab Spring movement, which was promoted as a popular pro-democracy revolution in support of ‘Freedom and Justice.’

[3]           On January 08, 2011, Imad Mustafa, a prominent scholar at Al-Azhar University in Cairo, Egypt, issued the following Fatwa: ‘Fighting against non-Muslims is…a prescribed duty in cases of aggression [Fitna] from the infidels against Muslims, for we must resist them, make Jihad against them, and defend against them.  This is according to the Quran, for Almighty God has said ‘Fight in the way of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress.’ This Fatwa cites Quran 2.190, which is similar to Quran 2.191, 2.193, 8.39 & etc.

[4]           On January 17, 2011, Anwar Al-Awlaki issued a Fatwa based on Kharaj (Displace/Drive Out/Expel), which stated: ‘Not only was Jihad financed by war booty, but also throughout our early history, when the Islamic treasury itself was mostly dependent on income generated from Jihad.  A tax called Kharaj was placed on land opened [stolen] by Muslims, enslaved POW’s would be sold, and the people of the book paid Jizyah [i.e., a protection tax].’

[5]           On July 05, 2014, Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi gave his first public sermon at the Grand Masjid of Mosul City, Iraq.  During the course of his message, Al-Baghdadi quoted directly from Quran 8.39, saying that ‘He the Most High says, And fight them until there is no Fitnah, and the religion, all of it, is for Allah.’

Note: Quran 8.39 is one of ISIS’ ‘favorite’ verses; it is usually narrated in the background of their official anthem, as well as in the execution (beheading) videos they produce.  According to ISIS, all the Fitnah in the world is caused by the Kufarin (Non-believers).  This means that all of the violence and suffering such non-believers endure at the hands of ISIS is their fault, not the fault of the soldiers of Allah.

Summary

Now we come to the heart of the matter.  Apologists for Islam, or advocates of the current political narrative, will insist that the premise for this article is wrong, maybe even dangerous, and that I have misinterpreted the Quran.  My answer would be, ‘Absolutely not.  It may be unpleasant, but it is not wrong.’

The interpretations of the verses included in this article have been established for hundreds of years; the authorized Strategy & Tactics of the Global Islamic Movement have not changed in nearly 1,400 years.  It is only in relatively recent times – post WWII – that modern technology has made it possible for the Islamic world to promote the global spread of Islam and/or fight the non-Islamic West at near-parity.

According to the Quran, any effort by non-Muslims to oppose the advancement of Islam is considered a flagrant, abhorrent crime.  Also known as Fitnah, such crimes are seen as so egregious that people can be slaughtered, honor-killed, beheaded or crucified (and yes, all of these punishments are found in the Quran, with added endorsements and insights in the Hadith & Tafsir).

Compared to the Fitnah (Islamophobia) of dishonoring Mohammed, or opposing Shariah Law, or calling Jihadiststerrorists,’ or any of a hundred other outrageous offenses, the loss of life and property is considered as less than inconsequential.  For proof, just run an internet query of Charlie Hebdo Cartoon Protests, and you’ll see how violent and widespread these demonstrations have been.  Enraged crowds in Islamic countries around the world have screamed obscene threats, destroyed property, burned churches [Kharaj] and killed people [Qital].  And this is just the latest episode.

Concluding Observations – Where Do We Stand?

On January 27, 2015, retired former DIA Chief Michael Flynn said that the Obama administration is ‘paralyzed and playing defense in the fight against Islamic militancy,’ adding that ‘you cannot defeat an enemy you do not admit exists,’ that the ‘administration is unwilling to admit the scope of the problem,’ and that ‘there are many sincere people in our government who frankly are paralyzed by this complexity,’ so they ‘accept a defensive posture, reasoning that passivity is less likely to provoke our enemies.’

On September 19, 2014, retired Marine General James Conway, who served as the 34th Commandant of the Marine Corps, publicly stated that President Barack Obama’s strategy to defeat ISIS didn’t have ‘a snowball’s chance in hell of succeeding.’

President Obama could hardly argue with General Conway’s assessment of ISIS, because on August 28, 2014, he said, ‘I don’t want to put the cart before the horse: we don’t have a strategy yet.  I think what I’ve seen in some of the news reports suggest that folks are getting a little further ahead of what we’re at than what we currently are.’

During the same interview, President Obama also said: ‘This should be a wake-up call to Sunni, to [Shi‘ite], to everybody, that a group like ISIS is beyond the pale; that they have no vision or ideology beyond violence and chaos and the slaughter of innocent people.’

The problem is, groups like ISIS, Hamas and Boko Haram et al., do have a vision, and an ideology, that goes well beyond the initial spasms of violence, chaos and slaughter (ironically, these are all adjectives describing Fitnah).  However, we in the non-Islamic world will remain ‘paralyzed and playing defense,’ as long as we fail to acknowledge the Quranic origin of their strategic vision, and the true nature of the tactical threat we face.

Adding further irony, Congressional hearings on ISIS were held in September of 2014, sandwiched right in between the comments by President Obama and General Conway.  During the hearings, Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel and General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, both tried to explain some of the apparent contradictions of our ever-evolving policy vis-à-vis the threat from ISIS.  In the end, it became very apparent ‘that there is, and will continue to be, a gaping hole at the heart of our ISIS strategy.’

We’ll close with a final observation: The word ‘Phobia’ has two meanings – either to hate something intensely, or to fear something intensely.  Using these two meanings, it could be said that Muslims and non-Muslims both have ‘Fitnaphobia’ – Muslims because they hate Fitnah, and non-Muslims because they fear it.

However, in the case of the non-Muslim world, it appears that we are much more concerned about causing Fitnah (by Opposing the Strategy & Tactics of the Global Islamic Movement), than we are about protecting our western civilization from the increasingly aggressive promoters of Shariah Law.

Islamic State: 21 Christians beheaded, President Obama and Walid Shoebat

SPECIAL GUEST – WALID SHOEBAT – At what point does the complete avoidance of reality – that Islam is the active agent in the Islamic State’s Islamic Jihad – cause a person to completely laugh at President Obama and his national security team? Though this theater of the absurd may be humorous on its face, it is near treasonous in its essence.

President Obama prances the globe as the “weak” horse and the Islamic “strong” horse mujaheddin are chopping off Christian heads as fast as they chop Muslim heads and winning the information propaganda war. To cut through the Obama nonsense we feature terrorism expert, Walid Shoebat and his insightful analysis of the 21 Coptic Christians who were beheaded by the Islamic State in “south Rome,” Libya.

Watch this powerful show!

RELATED ARTICLES:

Texas Islamic Center fire reported as a hate crime wasn’t one

Michigan: Muslim asks people if they’re Muslim, stabs those who say no

The Betrayal Papers: Under Obama, the U.S. has been Captured by the Muslim Brotherhood

White House Now Says Unemployment Causes Jihad [+video]

Minneapolis: Muslims demand anti-terror program be separate from FBI

“At the Tuesday news conference in Minneapolis, representatives from various mosques and Muslim organizations in the state will outline several recommendations on how they think the CVE pilot program would best serve the community. One of their key recommendations: that the program be independent from the influences of all law enforcement agencies, including the FBI, the Department of Justice and the National Counterterrorism Center.” Why? What is the problem with having the FBI, the DoJ (Obama’s DoJ!), and the National Counterterrorism Center involved? What do these Muslim groups have to hide? And if they don’t want any government involvement in their “Countering Violent Extremism” program, should they receive federal funding?

“Government’s anti-extremism initiative divides Twin Cities’ Somali community,” by Ibrahim Hirsi, MinnPost, February 17, 2015 (thanks to Bill):

The Twin Cities’ Somali-American community and religious leaders are divided over an anti-terrorism initiative that aims to deter young Muslims from enlisting with the Islamic State and other violent extremist groups.

Even while a delegation of local officials heads to the White House for a Wednesday conference about the Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) program, other local leaders plan to hold a press conference Tuesday afternoon to raise concerns about the same program.

At the Tuesday news conference in Minneapolis, representatives from various mosques and Muslim organizations in the state will outline several recommendations on how they think the CVE pilot program would best serve the community. One of their key recommendations: that the program be independent from the influences of all law enforcement agencies, including the FBI, the Department of Justice and the National Counterterrorism Center.

Jaylani Hussein, executive director of the Minnesota chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said the program stigmatizes the Muslim community. “The Department of Homeland Security is not known to be providing funds to do after-school programs,” Hussein, who is organizing the press conference, told MinnPost last month. “There are other organizations that do that.”

“We don’t want police, especially law enforcement agencies — we don’t want them to be doing after-school programs because their job is to investigate, their job is not to run after-school programs or to monitor after-school programs,” he continued….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Texas Islamic Center fire reported as a hate crime wasn’t one

Michigan: Muslim asks people if they’re Muslim, stabs those who say no

Term “Islamic extremism” off limits at White House terrorism summit

“We are not treating these people as part of a religion. We’re treating them as terrorists.” In other words, we’re ignoring their stated motives and goals, thereby ensuring that our analysis will be entirely faulty, and our recommendations about what to do to end this threat, if implemented, will create more problems than they solve.

“‘Islamic extremism’ off limits at White House terrorism summit,” by Marisa Schultz, New York Post, February 17, 2015:

WASHINGTON — The White House will kick off a three-day summit Tuesday on combating violent extremism on social media — but the administration won’t focus on Islamic extremism and won’t even mention the term.

“You can call them what you want; we’re calling them terrorists,” a senior Obama administration official said Monday….

“There is absolutely no justification for any of these attacks in any religion, and that’s the view of the vast majority of Muslims who have suffered huge casualties from the likes of [ISIS] or al Qaeda,” the official told reporters. “We are not treating these people as part of a religion. We’re treating them as terrorists.”

President Obama will speak twice at the summit.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Islamic supremacist groups including Hamas-linked CAIR say Obama terror summit wrongly singles out Muslims

State Department’s Harf: “We cannot kill our way out of this war,” we need to give the jihadis job opportunities

Pope says Copts in Libya were murdered “for sole reason of being Christian,” blames arms traffickers

The President’s Conference and its message: “Think Again, Turn Away”

Today starts a three day conference in Foggy Bottom at which President Obama will appear before an audience of representatives from 60 countries dealing with the threat of “violent extremism”.  The White House and State Department have made it abundantly clear that they refuse to identify the perpetrators and the victims of the Paris Charlie Hebdo and Kosher Supermarket attacks, this weekend’s attacks in Copenhagen, among them Jews, and the grisly beheading of 21 Coptic Christians in Libya by ISIS.  The critics of this no name policy suggest that if you cannot define the threat of radical Islam and its basis, Qur’anic doctrine and Sharia Islamic law,  that you can’t develop a strategy for “degrading “and” defeating” the Islamic State.

Given what happened in Egypt’s Sinai and this past weekend in Libya, the area of conflict with IS might be expanded to include North Africa and, obviously, the West, given the attacks in France, Belgium and Denmark, as well as America and Canada. Thus the “violent extremism” conference will focus on warning potential IS recruits of foreign fighters from across the globe to “Think Again, Turn Away.” That message is  being  refined by the State Department  Center  for Strategic Counter-terrorism Communications (CSCC) set up under an executive order issued by President  Obama in 2011. Otherwise, the recruits might end up dead either as suicide bombers or at the hands of IS masterminds. The CSCC has a daunting task. According to its website:

CSCC is comprised of three interactive components. The integrated analysis component leverages the Intelligence Community and other substantive experts to ensure CSCC communicators benefit from the best information and analysis available. The plans and operations component draws on this input to devise effective ways to counter the terrorist narrative. The Digital Outreach Team actively and openly engages in Arabic, Urdu, Punjabi, and Somali to counter terrorist propaganda and misinformation about the United States across a wide variety of interactive digital environments that had previously been ceded to extremists.

As a New York Times (NYTarticle on the conference pointed out the State Department CSCC coordinator, Ambassador Alberto Fernandez is leaving shortly after trying to lead the messaging effort across a broad spectrum of competing internal State, Homeland Security and intelligence echelons. This comment by former State Department counterterrorism coordinator Daniel Benjamin sums up why Fernandez will retire in April, 2015. “After its first year or two, it was never taken seriously and got little support from higher-ups.”

The CSCC has endeavored to communicate that the IS Salafist jihadist slick presentations in videos, tweets and Face book pages corrupts the central message of Islam of “peace and justice” – that is only to adherents of the faith. In point of fact, the IS following in the way of Allah, Jihad.

How slick is the IS agit-propaganda spewed out on-line to the unwary recruit? One recent example is reflected in a new release translated by MEMRI, entreating recruits to come to Libya and join the gateway to the Conquest of Rome – a thought that should be unnerving to Pope Francis. The NYT CSCC article cited as examples of effective “messaging”:

One online image two years ago, for instance, showed photographs of three American men who traveled to Somalia and died there, including Omar Hammami, a young man from Alabama who became an infamous Islamist militant. The accompanying message reads, “They came for jihad but were murdered by Al Shabaab.”

Another image showed a young man weeping over a coffin. The message read, “How can slaughtering the innocent be the right path?”

Each of the online posts carried a warning: “Think again. Turn away.”

Last June, Islamic State supporters warned fighters to beware of the center’s Twitter account and not to interact with it.

The reality of the CSCC mission, is that it has been corrupted- to quote Egyptian President Al-Sisi- by the origin of  IS and Al Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood (MB).  As late as January 2015, the State Department was caught in a conference with alleged Egyptian MB leaders.  There were graphic messages on twitter set against the backdrop of the Seal of the State Department by one of the participants flashing the ‘rabbia’ hand sign-a signal to support ousted President Morsi and hundreds of others currently being tried for sedition in Egypt.  Last May, the State Department was embarrassed by a tweet it sent about the presence at a White House meeting on messaging with Sheik Bin Bayyah, a deputy to notorious MB preacher, Yusuf Al Qaradawi.  Bin Bayyah had been there before along with another Egyptian legislator and member of a terrorist group in 2013.

The President’s Conference on Violent Extremism is being stage managed by a skilled media expert, Richard Stengel, former Time Magazine managing editor, who was appointed in 2013 as Undersecretary Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs.  Stengel will be assisted at the Conference by Ambassador Rashad Hussein, current Envoy to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation and former Deputy White House Counsel with MB connections.  Stengel admits that countering the ISIS supremacy in messaging its appeal to young impressionable Muslim recruits is daunting. He was cited by the New York Times saying, “We’re getting beaten on volume, so the only way to compete is by aggregating, curating and amplifying existing content…. These guys [meaning IS] aren’t BuzzFeed; they’re not invincible in social media.”

Last fall, Stengel was interviewed by the Voice of America while in the midst of the propaganda war with IS:

VOA: What are some challenges in terms of dealing or confronting the ISIS propaganda machine?

Stengel: There are a lot of challenges. They are very sophisticated. They will stop at nothing, so to speak. They are not bound by the truth in any way. There are structural problems in the Middle East and the Arab world that can sometimes make Daesh’s ideology attractive, attractive to young men who don’t have jobs, who don’t see a great future for themselves, who have only heard a kind of misbegotten idea of Islam. So that is part of the challenge. What we’re trying to say, along with the coalition partners, is that Daesh is not the true face of Islam, it doesn’t represent what the prophet or the Koran stands for, and that the vision they’re creating of a caliphate is a false vision where none of the things they say are true are true.

Clearly, Stengel is toeing the White House line that IS is ‘misinterpreting’ Islam, even as  some scholars believe it is reflecting the core doctrine of Salafist/Jihad.

Last October, Stengel appeared at a forum on Public Diplomacy at the University of Southern California’s Center for Public Diplomacy (CPD).  Watch the video of his talk and Q&A here:

USC Professor of Journalism and International Relations Phillip Seib in a CPD article suggested that countering ISIS messaging capability is in the wrong place at State’s CSCC. Rather it should be transferred to the CIA. He wrote:

A much more effective approach to combat their message would be a bare-knuckles operation: no disclaimers and a product that matches up better against the videos coming from Al Hayat, ISIL’s video production arm (the name stolen from the pan-Arab newspaper, Al-Hayat).

These videos should feature imams denouncing ISIL’s tactics and women urging their sisters not to be enticed by ISIL’s recruiting messages. They should include video testimony from disillusioned ISIL fighters who have returned home. And they should show the ravaged Muslim communities that have been attacked by ISIL. But few anti-ISIL speakers want to participate in a State Department-branded video. And even fewer jihadist recruits believe it. American credibility in the region remains low, and many Muslims are wary of a new round of U.S. involvement in their homelands.

Our comment on the President’s “violent extremism” Conference this week in Washington is soft power is trumped by raw Islamic Jihad every time. That is embodied in failure to recognize the Qur’anic doctrine behind the rise of IS. To paraphrase the CSCC motto, “Think Again, Turn Away” from Taqiyya – lying for Allah.

RELATED ARTICLE: Islamic supremacist groups including Hamas-linked CAIR say Obama terror summit wrongly singles out Muslims

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

In ‘Progressive’ Madison, Wisconsin, an Outbreak of Antisemitic Hate

Jim Hoft of the Gateway Pundit reported on a Ha’aretz article  on an outbreak of Antisemitic screed spray painted on garage doors in liberal Madison, Wisconsin, Thirty Madison, Wisconsin Homes Spraypainted With Anti-Semitic Slurs.”   A h/t to Ken Lamb of Pensacola for forwarding this  hate screed attack  plastered on garage doors in Wisconsin’s capital.  However, as the Ha’aretz report notes there were over 30 such reports of Antisemitic hate reported in Madison in 2014. Perhaps time for Gov. Walker to investigate the hate mongers ringing Lake Mendota. Are these KKKers, white supremacists?  How could this ferment occur in liberal Madison?

At least thirty Madison, Wisconsin homes were spray-painted with anti-Semitic slurs this weekend.

Haaretz reported:

At least 30 homes in Madison, Wisconsin, were vandalized overnight Friday, some with anti-Semitic slurs and swastikas.

Other residents awoke to derogatory words geared toward women and other minorities sprayed on their homes, cars, garage doors, mailboxes and driveways, according to the Coordination Forum for Countering Anti-Semitism.

One resident, Jim Stein, told Wisconsin television station WISC TV, “Everyone in the neighborhood is pretty upset.”

Stein woke up Saturday morning to discover “F— Jews” scrawled on a garage door across the street and a swastika on the driveway.

“It was, of course, extremely disturbing to me,” Stein, who is the president of the Jewish Federation of Madison, told the station. Other graffiti included a garage door defaced with the words “KKK Bound.”

There have been over thirty confirmed antisemitic incidents reported in Wisconsin in 2014.
JS Online reported:

There were 33 confirmed incidents of anti-Semitism of those reported in 2014, compared with 13 a year earlier, the audit says.

They included an unprecedented number of swastikas drawn on public and private property, continued harassment of Jewish middle and high school students, and attacks on Zionism and Israel that went beyond legitimate political criticism to attack Jews personally, according to the audit.

Among the confirmed incidents:

■ At least nine swastikas were drawn, carved or painted at various places, including public streets, the driveway of a Jewish high school student’s home and in an elevator of a Jewish institution. Swastikas and a Star of David were carved at two golf greens, causing $5,000 in damage. Another included a reference to “1488,” a known white supremacist symbol.

■ A man entered a Jewish facility shouting “All Jews will (expletive) burn.”

■ At one business, a hairdresser told a potential client that she doesn’t cut “Jewish hair.” At another, an employee called his boss a “stingy Jew” when he refused to give him a raise.

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

Westerners join Iraqi Christian militia to fight Islamic State

These individuals are doing what the governments of the post-Christian West have shown no interest in doing: protecting the Christians persecuted by the Islamic State. But since they self-identify as Christian, watch for them to be vilified and demonized by the mainstream media, and held up as the equivalent of the Islamic State: Christians committing violence in the name of their religion on one side, and Muslims committing violence in the name of their religion on the other. That these men have gone there to prevent atrocities rather than commit them will be glossed over and ignored.

“Westerners join Iraqi Christian militia to fight Islamic State,” by Isabel Coles, Reuters, February 15, 2015:

(Reuters) – Saint Michael, the archangel of battle, is tattooed across the back of a U.S. army veteran who recently returned to Iraq and joined a Christian militia fighting Islamic State in what he sees as a biblical war between good and evil.

Brett, 28, carries the same thumb-worn pocket Bible he did whilst deployed to Iraq in 2006 – a picture of the Virgin Mary tucked inside its pages and his favorite verses highlighted.

“It’s very different,” he said, asked how the experiences compared. “Here I’m fighting for a people and for a faith, and the enemy is much bigger and more brutal.”

Thousands of foreigners have flocked to Iraq and Syria in the past two years, mostly to join Islamic State, but a handful of idealistic Westerners are enlisting as well, citing frustration their governments are not doing more to combat the ultra-radical Islamists or prevent the suffering of innocents.

The militia they joined is called Dwekh Nawsha – meaning self-sacrifice in the ancient Aramaic language spoken by Christ and still used by Assyrian Christians, who consider themselves the indigenous people of Iraq.

A map on the wall in the office of the Assyrian political party affiliated with Dwekh Nawsha marks the Christian towns in northern Iraq, fanning out around the city of Mosul.

The majority are now under control of Islamic State, which overran Mosul last summer and issued am ultimatum to Christians: pay a tax, convert to Islam, or die by the sword. Most fled.

Dwekh Nawsha operates alongside Kurdish peshmerga forces to protect Christian villages on the frontline in Nineveh province.

“These are some of the only towns in Nineveh where church bells ring. In every other town the bells have gone silent, and that’s unacceptable,” said Brett, who has “The King of Nineveh” written in Arabic on the front of his army vest….

Tim shut down his construction business in Britain last year, sold his house and bought two plane tickets to Iraq: one for himself and another for a 44-year-old American software engineer he met through the internet.

The men joined up at Dubai airport, flew to the Kurdish city of Suleimaniyah and took a taxi to Duhok, where they arrived last week.

“I’m here to make a difference and hopefully put a stop to some atrocities,” said 38-year-old Tim, who previously worked in the prison service. “I’m just an average guy from England really.”…

RELATED ARTICLES:

Islamic State murders two “spies,” crucifies another, as children watch

Sisi vows revenge for Islamic State’s murder of 21 Christians

A Christian Woman Stands Against the Enemy Within by Monica Morrill

“Jesus Christ died on that cross. He is the reason we are to worship only Him. Jesus Christ is our Lord and Savior,” Christine Weick declared at the Washington National Cathedral. “We have built …allowed you your mosques in this country. Why don’t you worship in your mosques and leave our churches alone? We are a country founded on Christian principles.”

The complex interworking of Islam inside the West has already established itself. It should be familiar, particularly because much of the same tactics and ideology can be compared to Communism during the Cold War. Communist infiltration during the Cold War has been mirrored and amplified by Muslim infiltration even before the declared War on Terror in 2001. The impact of the Islamic infiltration has been especially insidious, relying on the social paralysis created by political correctness and the misplaced desire to not be seen as discriminating. Entire communities, public spaces, even Christian churches and our nation’s capitol have been infected.

Muslims invaded the Washington National Cathedral, a monument to Christianity, this time under the guise of “prayer” on Friday, November 14, 2014. Disguised as an ecumenical Muslim prayer service, it was being planned in the Cathedral for 12 to 18 months. Whether the Dean of the Washington National Cathedral, Reverend Gary Hall of the Episcopal Church, knew it or not he was actually hosting the precise 100th anniversary of the declaration of Holy War by the Ottoman Empire as the Muslim Caliphate had done on November 14, 1914. It was a bold declaration of Holy War by the Ottomans against the most powerful Christian nations of that time.

It is crucial to highlight history and specific dates, which are significant by the Ottoman tradition of Holy War. The 100th anniversary marked a deliberately disrespectful act by Mohammedan followers to the God of Abraham, Jacob and Moses – Jehovah God. Much to the chagrin of the interfaith leaders, Muslims and Christians do not worship the same God. Muslims view the God of Moses as inferior to the god of Mohammed.

A Christian Woman Rises

For this 100th anniversary, Muslims began planning to push the boundaries to denigrate Christianity in America’s capital. However, unlike the event of 1914 when the Ottoman Empire declared a Holy War against the great powers of the day: Britain, France, Russia and so on, there was the lone voice of a woman 100 years later in America’s Washington National Cathedral who was not as silent as the mosaics in the church of Santa Sophia. So it was that Christine Weick stood, with her hair down, without a head covering, and made a declaration to honor her Christian faith.

“Jesus Christ died on that cross. He is the reason we are to worship only Him. Jesus Christ is our Lord and Savior,” she said. “We have built …allowed you your mosques in this country. Why don’t you worship in your mosques and leave our churches alone? We are a country founded on Christian principles.”

The Muslims weren’t expecting a reaction from anyone, and certainly not a woman, which is quite profound as the “woman” in the Bible symbolically represents God’s anointed ones as a bride to the Lamb of God (Revelation 19: 7, 8). This sole woman, Ms. Weick, scolded Muslims along with their leader in the Cathedral. She threw a spanner into the plans of “Holy War” in America. Not surprisingly, the prayers by the Muslims in the National Cathedral insulted both Jews and Christians just as it did when an imam was praying over the dead bodies of men from the U.S. Military in 2011 at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan.

When retelling her story Ms. Weick says that she let God direct her path to finally speak out the words that God wanted her to proclaim. One reaction to Ms. Weick’s stance was from another woman who knows well the trickery of Islam in Africa, particularly Sudan and South Sudan. She is Pastor Lynn Childers, the wife of Sam Childers. With the assistance of fellow Christians for the past 18 years, both have been saving thousands of Christian orphans from Muslims who are murdering African Christians and their families.

The Profound Symbolism of the Woman in Christianity

In an exclusive interview, Pastor Lynn remarked, “It was disappointing to know that we Christians had no men to stand up for our faith at that moment. It had to be a woman.” Ms. Weick has inspired people like Pastor Lynn who is now inviting people to join her at Shekinah Fellowship in Central City, Pennsylvania to organize groups to visit mosques nationwide and peacefully pray to the Almighty God in Jesus’ name for Muslims to be enlightened with the truth about Christ. The notion of interfaith worship is inconceivable to both women. For Christians, Jesus is God’s Son and God has anointed Jesus as Lord and King in heaven. This belief is anathema to the Muslims.

That women are standing up for the Christian faith would be a reason to rejoice for other Christians. In the Bible, it was Mary who was chosen to be the mother of Jesus the Messiah, it was Mary Magdalene and a group of other women who first learned that Jesus had been resurrected – Christian women have been abundantly blessed by God. Christian women in turn have blessed others, for example they played an imperative role in ending slavery in the United States, pioneered the way for women’s suffrage, and continue to do so today. Decades after the death and resurrection of Jesus, the aristocratic women of Rome were also among the first Romans to convert, leading eventually to the end of Roman persecution of Christians by Constantine the Great, and to his conversion as the first Christian Roman Emperor.

Unlike women in the Muslim faith, Christian women have been elevated to positions of leadership in both the public and private sphere from the founding of Christianity and even prior to that among the Israelites. Hence, the woman in Christianity is symbolically profound. Jesus Christ is the male figure of Christianity and his anointed ones are the female figure, married in spiritual unity as a husband and wife. Therefore to defile the Christian “woman” of Christ is a desecration against the Father and the Son.

The Lack of American Preparedness

The prayers on that Friday, November 14 by the Muslims in Washington, DC are in reality a desperate attempt by a failed ideological path to rewrite history. In fact, just hours prior to the prayer at the Washington National Cathedral, Hamad Chebli an imam from the Islamic Center of Central Jersey was also praying on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives, where Allah was worshipped and praised as supreme.

Observers are astounded at the lack of American preparedness for Muslim manipulations by both alleged Christian leaders and political leaders in Washington, DC. Indeed, a Muslim imam was allowed to pray on the Congressional floor the day before the 100th anniversary of the Ottoman Empire’s declaration of a Holy War against Christian nations under the presence of America’s naive elected public servants. But the imam hurriedly prayed out of despair under the U.S. Congressional roof because the hour of glory will never come for Muslims amidst their willful lies and deceptions (taqiyya) against true Christians in America.

Others remain steadfast and righteous. Christine Weick, a servant of Jesus Christ, stood with the Wisdom of God like the church of the Santa Sophia, and the Washington National Cathedral when they were first built, anchored with God. But it was the people, the custodians entrusted with the Cathedral and U.S. Congress who had vacillated and trembled toward the Mohammedan seductions. Jesus Christ as the figurehead of the Christian world continues to be rejected as the King of Kings and God’s Only Begotten Son by the Islamic world – that is another unwavering truth, and always will be.


Monica Morrill, is the co-author of BETRAYED: The shocking true story of Extortion 17 as told by a Navy SEAL’s father. She is an Economic Geographer and has taught as an adjunct at the Institute of World Politics. Ms. Morrill is also a contributor to SFPPR News & Analysis.

Are We Seeing History Repeat Itself?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

© Alan Caruba, 2015

RELATED ARTICLE: Sadomasochism and the Jihadi Death Cult

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

Do We Need the State to License Professionals?

Voluntary mechanisms tell the public which professionals are qualified by ROBERT P. MURPHY:

Economics columnist Eduardo Porter gave fans of economic freedom a pleasant surprise when he recently praised Uber in the New York Times. He even wondered whether other occupations besides taxis suffered from artificial state restrictions. As welcome as this analysis was, Porter still conceded the basic premise of occupational licensing and made a smart-aleck remark about the bad old days of medical quackery under pure laissez-faire.

I will push his analysis to its logical limits and show that there is no justification for the state to declare certain professionals off-limits to willing customers.

To reiterate, the gist of Porter’s article was very encouraging, especially considering its location in the NYT. Even so, he pulled his punches and gave the state too much credit by writing:

Sometimes professional licenses make sense, ensuring decent standards of health and safety. I’m reassured that if I ever need brain surgery, the doctor performing it will have been recognized by the profession to be up to the task. We don’t want to return to the 19th century, when barbers pulled teeth and freelance doctors with no certification peddled miraculous cures.

It’s true that few Americans today would go to a barber to get a tooth pulled. But this is precisely why unlicensed tooth extraction wouldn’t be a problem nowadays, even if the state allowed it. You don’t need to pass laws to protect the public against doing things that the overwhelming majority recognize as stupid. Furthermore, even if you do pass laws against stupid things, a few people are still going to do them.

There is a fundamental problem with state-issued standards, whether we’re discussing occupational licensing, product safety, or academic accreditation. If some particular criterion of quality or safety is deemed so obvious that no one could possibly object, then by the same token, the state doesn’t serve a function by mandating the standard.

The problem that Porter’s glib quotation ignores is that some people might think “miraculous cures” really exist. For example, suppose someone is peddling a little white pill that rapidly alleviates headaches and other pains, and also reduces the chance of a heart attack for those with heart disease. Sounds like a quack product, doesn’t it? I sure hope that Porter’s zeal to ban “miraculous cures” wouldn’t have taken aspirin off the table when it was sold, unregulated, in the late 1800s. Similarly, in our haste to regulate professions, we exclude people who have the aptitude and skills to make our lives better at far lower cost. It’s not that people don’t want safety and efficacy. They do. The point is that there are far better and lower-cost ways of getting these outcomes than the procedures most state licensing regimes set up. (In this context, Uber has become a paradigmatic case.)

When it comes to licensing professionals, there are two distinct considerations. First, even if the public and experts all generally agreed on standards of quality, there would be the issue of priceMilton Friedman popularized the analogy of automobiles in this context, asking readers to imagine the government mandating a “Cadillac standard” for motorists. By driving up the cost of vehicles, such a measure would obviously hurt those former motorists who couldn’t afford a Cadillac and so had to take the bus, ride a bike, or walk. Yet, even considering the Americans who could afford a Cadillac, the measure would still be harmful. Forcing such people to spend their scarce dollars on a nicer car, rather than on housing, clothes, or their children’s education, doesn’t make them better off — it just imposes the officials’ value scale.

What is obvious with our hypothetical “Cadillac standard” for cars carries over to medical licensing. Even if everybody could agree that a doctor with an MD from Harvard and 20 years experience in a major hospital was better than someone fresh out of high school, to insist that all doctors in the United States meet the former requirements would be absurd. It would force people to spend more on medical care than they would have voluntarily chosen in a freer system.

Things are even worse when we recognize that people can’t agree on standards of quality. There is genuine debate over the efficacy of certain treatments and the value of certain types of medical education (such as homeopathy). By declaring certain professionals off-limits to consumers because of a genuine disagreement — even among experts — about qualifications, occupational licensing from the state prevents services that would benefit some consumers. A society doesn’t solve the problem of different opinions by telling its political officials to designate the experts; that is merely one mechanism of anointing some professionals as suitable.

We can imagine alternative, voluntary mechanisms of telling the public which professionals are qualified, such as fraternal organizations, guilds, unions, and other private certification associations. With medical care in particular, surely hospitals and insurance companies would exercise a large degree of quality control. For example, a major hospital wouldn’t allow someone to work in the operating room without good credentials, and an insurance company wouldn’t issue malpractice coverage to a surgeon who merely had an undergrad degree in biology.

It is a paradox of our age that the interventionists think the public is too stupid to consult Angie’s List before hiring a lawyer, and so they need politicians to weed out the really bad ones by requiring law licenses. Yet, who determines whether a person (often a lawyer!) is qualified to become a politician? Why, the same group of citizens who were too stupid to pick their own lawyers.

In conclusion, it is a mistake to confuse the public’s need for expert guidance on professionals with the public’s need for political intervention in various occupational markets. Telling political officials to weed out the unqualified members of a profession merely pushes the problem back one step. Whatever story we can tell that would make a democratic “solution” work would show how a voluntary system of ratings and peer review would be even better.

ABOUT ROBERT P. MURPHY

Robert P. Murphy has a PhD in economics from NYU. He is the author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Capitalism and The Politically Incorrect Guide to The Great Depression and the New Deal. He is also the Senior Economist with the Institute for Energy Research and a Research Fellow at the Independent Institute. You can find him at http://consultingbyrpm.com/

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

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

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

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

Who is Craig Hicks?

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

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

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

What’s more, Hicks’ wife has said:

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

These killings were over parking, not Islam

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

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

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

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

Is the sky falling on accusations of Islamophobia?

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read the rest here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

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

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

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

The Moderate Muslim Vanguard and Islamic Trafficking in Little Girls

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

RELATED VIDEO: The Myth of the Tiny Radical Muslim Minority

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