Posts

VIDEO: New Drone Footage Shows ‘Out of Control’ Situation at U.S.-Mexico Border

What more proof does any American need? The hostile, insurrectionist Democrat party are blowing up the country.

IMAGES SURFACE: New Drone Footage Shows ‘Out of Control’ Situation at US-Mexico Border

By Hannity Staff, September 16, 2021:

Recently released drone footage is revealing the “out of control” situation taking place at the US-Mexico border in Del Rio, Texas; showing thousands of Central American migrants waiting to be processed by Federal Agents before entering the United States.

“Our drone is back over the international bridge in Del Rio, TX. Per source, the number of migrants waiting to be processed has now swelled to approx 8,200. It was 4,000 yesterday AM. Doubled in one day. BP overwhelmed, & I’m told situation is ‘out of control,’” posted Fox News’ Bill Melugin.

The number of migrants crossing the United States border from Mexico continued to surge this summer, with new data from the Department of Homeland Security showing more than 200,000 encounters between immigrants and Federal Agents.

That’s up 317% compared to August 2020.

“The source told Fox that there were 208,887 encounters in August. While it marks the first decrease in migrant encounters seen under the Biden administration, where migrant encounters have been sharply rising for months, it is only a 2% drop over the more than 212,000 encounters in July,” reports Fox News.

“Additionally, the 208,887 number for August represents a 317% increase over last August 2020 which saw 50,014 apprehensions — and a 233% increase over August 2019, where there were 62,707 apprehensions during that year’s border crisis,” adds Fox.

“We have a plan, we are executing our plan and that takes time,” said DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas last month.

“A couple of days ago I was down in Mexico, and I said look, you know, if, if our borders are the first line of defense, we’re going to lose and this is unsustainable,” Mayorkas said. “We can’t continue like this, our people in the field can’t continue and our system isn’t built for it.

RELATED TWEETS:

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

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

Daniel Pearl’s Widow Highlights Message She Got About His Murder: ‘This is Not Islam’

Suicidal self-hatred continues to sweep the West. Mariane Pearl, the widow of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, who was kidnapped and beheaded by Islamic jihadis in Pakistan in 2002, has suffered a great deal, and it is perhaps churlish and uncharitable to venture any critical word at all. But it isn’t she I am criticizing. It is the general tendency, the felt need or the unspoken imperative, to take all possible opportunities to exonerate Islam of all connection to crimes done in its name and in accord with its teachings. One can never solve a problem by pretending it doesn’t exist. But that is exactly what we are doing.

The 19th anniversary of Daniel Pearl’s murder was Monday, and on Wednesday, Mariane Pearl published an op-ed in the Washington Post entitled “My husband’s killer could go free in Pakistan. Despite the injustice, I still have hope.” It began: “Almost two decades ago, the people of Pakistan sent me messages expressing sadness and anger at the murder of my husband, Daniel Pearl, in their beloved country. Danny was 38 years old and the Wall Street Journal’s bureau chief for South Asia. “I am a Muslim and this, my friend, is not Islam,” one wrote. My favorite message read: “Your husband had a great smile . . . a happy mixture of Pope John Paul and Dean Martin.”

It is certain that Mariane Pearl received numerous messages after the murder of her husband. The one that she and/or the Post chose to give first mention, however, was “I am a Muslim and this, my friend, is not Islam.”

The first question that springs to mind about this is: Why this message? Why is cleansing Islam’s image the number one priority?

The second question is: Why is this always asserted but never explained? Daniel Pearl was made to state that he was a Jew in a video, where he likely read a statement the jihadis had prepared for him: “My name is Daniel Pearl. I am a Jewish American from Encino, California USA. I come from, uh, on my father’s side the family is Zionist. My father’s Jewish, my mother’s Jewish, I’m Jewish. My family follows Judaism. We’ve made numerous family visits to Israel. Back in the town of Bnei Brak there is a street named after my great grandfather Chaim Pearl who is one of the founders of the town.” Then he was beheaded.

In a hadith that Muslims consider authentic, Muhammad is depicted as saying:

“The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews.” (Sahih Muslim 6985)

And the Qur’an says:

“When you meet the unbelievers, strike the necks…” (47:4)

In light of all that, it is unfortunate that Mariane Pearl’s interlocutor apparently did not explain how the killing of Daniel Pearl was not Islam, how the jihadis who killed him were transgressing Islamic tenets, or how the passages of the Qur’an and Hadith that seem to allow for such behavior actually have some other meaning or can be interpreted in a benign manner.

In the article, Mariane Pearl describes how it all happened, and how a Muslim who was the chief of the counter-terrorism unit in Karachi offered his help. Mariane Pearl jokes in response to kindness from this man and his wife: “Stop being so nice. How am I ever going to hate you guys?” That is the choice as most people see it today: one must either hate Muslims, or pretend that Islam is a religion of peace. But in reality, the fact that Islam teaches warfare against unbelievers does not mean that every Muslim will believe this to be an imperative or practice it. It doesn’t mean that no Muslims will be kind to unbelievers. But to believe that such kindness precludes the possibility that Islam does teach this warfare is to be willfully blind. And that’s where we are as a society.

The third and easiest question to answer is: Would the Washington Post ever print an explanation of the Islamic justification for the murder of Daniel Pearl, even if such a story included statements by Muslim spokesmen in the West offering differing interpretations of the passages in question? And the answer is, Not on your life! Not only is the Post, and all the rest of the establishment media as well, dedicated indefatigably to whitewashing and obfuscating the ideological roots of jihad terrorism; it is also determined to pretend that there isn’t even a question about those roots: they lay, according to the Post and its colleagues, in “racism” and “Islamophobia,” not in Islamic texts and teachings, and anyone who suggests otherwise is a racist “Islamophobe” himself.

The victory of “Islamophobia” propaganda has been so complete that the elites don’t even consider it remotely necessary even to address the arguments of those whom they smear as “Islamophobes,” or to acknowledge that they have any arguments at all. The only problem with all this is that the jihad, motivated by Islamic texts and teachings according to numerous statements of jihadis themselves, is not going to go away for all this pretending that it doesn’t exist.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Khamenei: ‘Enemies cannot do a damn thing against the Islamic Republic and that Islam’s power is growing’

Professor says he’s ‘struggling’ with his Christian faith because of Trump, beheadings shouldn’t reflect on Islam

Universities get billions from Islamic entities, Biden drops rule forcing revelation of cash from propaganda centers

Pakistan’s Khan: ‘West associated Islam with terrorism. Muslims should have made it clear that there is no link.’

Nigeria’s military executes 6 Christian soldiers framed by a Muslim colonel for a crime they didn’t commit

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

Biden Speaks at Democrat Party Event Honoring Trump Beheader Kathy Griffin

The more vile you are, the more exalted by the Democrat senior leadership.

Biden Speaks at Democrat Party Event Honoring Mock Trump Killer Kathy Griffin

By Kristinn Taylor, Gateway Pundit, July 26, 2020:

Presumptive Democratic Party presidential nominee former Vice President Joe Biden spoke via video at a Los Angeles Democratic Party fundraising event Saturday night that honored Kathy Griffin, the comedian who infamously posed for photographs holding a mock bloody severed head of President Trump in 2017.

Griffith was given the L.A. Democrats’ John F. Kennedy Profile in Courage award. Ironically, President Kennedy’s head was also bloodied by an assassin back in 1963.

Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) was also honored with the Profile in Courage award.

Excerpt from KNBC-TV report on Biden’s remarks.

A nearly three-minute recorded message from former Vice President Joe Biden recounting familiar themes from his 2020 presidential campaign was played during the Los Angeles County Democratic Party 2020 John F. Kennedy Awards.

Biden criticized President Donald Trump for his response to the coronavirus outbreak on Saturday evening, calling for “leadership that brings everyone to the table, to rebuild an economy that works for working families, creates millions of good-paying jobs for the future” and “leadership that delivers on the founding principles and ensure that all men are not only equal at their creation but treated equally throughout their lives…”


HAVE A TIP WE SHOULD KNOW? YOUR ANONYMITY IS NEVER COMPROMISED. EMAIL TIPS@THEGELLERREPORT.COM


RELATED ARTICLES:

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Obama quotes Muhammad speech endorsing caliphate and beheading

Obama said: “Whoever wants to enter paradise, the Prophet Muhammad taught, ‘let him treat people the way he would love to be treated.’”

That saying comes from this hadith:

It has been narrated on the authority of ‘Abd al-Rahman b. Abd Rabb al-Ka’ba who said:

I entered the mosque when ‘Abdullah b. ‘Amr b. al-‘As was sitting in the shade of the Ka’ba and the people had gathered around him. I betook myself to them and sat near him. (Now) Abdullah said:

I accompanied the Messenger of Allah on a journey. We halted at a place. Some of us began to set right their tents, others began to compete with one another in shooting, and others began to graze their beasts, when an announcer of the Messenger of Allah announced that the people should gather together for prayer, so we gathered around the Messenger of Allah.

He said: It was the duty of every Prophet that has gone before me to guide his followers to what he knew was good for them and warn them against what he knew was bad for them; but this Umma of yours has its days of peace and (security) in the beginning of its career, and in the last phase of its existence it will be afflicted with trials and with things disagreeable to you. (In this phase of the Umma), there will be tremendous trials one after the other, each making the previous one dwindle into insignificance. When they would be afflicted with a trial, the believer would say: This is going to bring about my destruction. When at (the trial) is over, they would be afflicted with another trial, and the believer would say: This surely is going to be my end.

Whoever wishes to be delivered from the fire and enter the garden should die with faith in Allah and the Last Day and should treat the people as he wishes to be treated by them.

He who swears allegiance to a Caliph should give him the piedge [sic] of his hand and the sincerity of his heart (i. e. submit to him both outwardly as well as inwardly). He should obey him to the best of his capacity. It another man comes forward (as a claimant to Caliphate), disputing his authority, they (the Muslims) should behead the latter. The narrator says: I came close to him (‘Abdullah b. ‘Amr b. al-‘As) and said to him: Can you say on oath that you heard it from the Messenger of Allah? He pointed with his hands to his ears and his heart and said: My ears heard it and my mind retained it. I said to him: This cousin of yours, Mu’awiya, orders us to unjustly consume our wealth among ourselves and to kill one another, while Allah says:” O ye who believe, do not consume your wealth among yourselves unjustly, unless it be trade based on mutual agreement, and do not kill yourselves.

Verily, God is Merciful to you” (iv. 29). The narrator says that (hearing this) Abdullah b. ‘Amr b. al-As kept quiet for a while and then said:

Obey him in so far as he is obedient to God; and diqobey [sic] him in matters involving disobedience to God.

Immediately following the passage Obama quoted comes an exhortation to obey the caliph and to behead rival claimants. So embedded within the very same passage that Obama was using are endorsements of ideas that Obama would probably reject as having nothing to do with authentic Islam. It is extremely unlikely, of course, that Obama has seen this passage, but his (i.e., his speechwriters’) use of this quotation follows the same pattern as his use of Qur’an 5:32: he quotes selectively (although no Muslims are accusing him of “cherry-picking”!), ignoring inconveniently violent passages that are right next to the passage he quotes.

Is it not extremely telling that Barack Obama, in making the case that Islam teaches peace, can’t find even a few passages that are unequivocally peaceful, and instead has to grab his peaceful passages from amid exhortations to violence? Doesn’t that tell us something about Islam as a whole — something that Obama and the Western political and media establishment will never tell us?

From Obama’s speech last Wednesday at the Islamic Society of Baltimore:

So let’s start with this fact: For more than a thousand years, people have been drawn to Islam’s message of peace. And the very word itself, Islam, comes from salam — peace. The standard greeting is as-salamu alaykum — peace be upon you. And like so many faiths, Islam is rooted in a commitment to compassion and mercy and justice and charity. Whoever wants to enter paradise, the Prophet Muhammad taught, “let him treat people the way he would love to be treated.” (Applause.) For Christians like myself, I’m assuming that sounds familiar. (Laughter.)

RELATED ARTICLES:

​FBI unable to crack San Bernardino killers’ cell phone

UK: Three government buildings now ruled by Sharia, alcohol banned

Anyone saying ‘Islam is a Religion Of Peace’ needs to read this

“One may well ask how ‘the religion of peace’ became a brand of Islam, for the phrase cannot be found in the Qur’an, nor in the teachings of Muhammad.”

“Anyone Using The Phrase ‘Islam Is A Religion Of Peace’ Needs To Read This”,  by Mark DurieIndependent JournalDecember 17, 2015:

Days after the ISIS-inspired terrorist attack in San Bernardino, President Obama’s address to the nation concerning the threat of ISIS missed the mark. In fact, President Obama seemed at times to be more concerned with Americans ostracizing Muslim communities through “suspicion and hate,” than he was with protecting innocent American civilians from murder in the name of radical Islam.

It is high time for western political leaders to stop responding to terrorism by naming Islam as ‘the religion of peace’. It is time to have a hard conversation about Islam.

The West is in the throes of acute cognitive dissonance over Islam, whose brands are at war with each other. On the one hand we are told that Islam is the Religion of Peace. On the other hand we are confronted with an unending sequence of acts of terror committed in the name of the faith.

There is a depressing connection between the two brands: the louder one brand becomes, the more the volume is turned up on the other.

The slogan ‘Religion of Peace’ has been steadily promoted by western leaders in response to terrorism: George Bush Jr and Jacques Chirac after 9/11, Tony Blair after 7/7, David Cameron after drummer Lee Rigby was beheaded and after British tourists were slaughtered in Tunisia, and François Hollande after the Charlie Hebdo killings. After the beheading of 21 Copts on a Libyan beach Barak Obama called upon the world to “continue to lift up the voices of Muslim clerics and scholars who teach the true peaceful nature of Islam.”

One may well ask how ‘the religion of peace’ became a brand of Islam, for the phrase cannot be found in the Qur’an, nor in the teachings of Muhammad.

Islam was first called ‘the religion of peace’ as late as 1930, in the title of a book published in India by Ishtiaq Husain Qureshi. The phrase was slow to take off, but by the 1970s it was appearing more and more frequently in the writings of Muslims for western audiences.

What does “religion of peace” actually mean?

Words for ‘peace’ in European languages imply the absence of war, and freedom from disturbance. It is no coincidence that the German words Friede ‘peace’ and frei ‘free’ sound similar, because they come from the same root.

While there is a link in Arabic between salam, a word often translated ‘peace’, andIslam, the real connection is found in the idea of safety.

The word Islam is based upon a military metaphor. Derived from aslama ‘surrender’ its primary meaning is to make oneself safe (salama) through surrender. In its original meaning, a muslim was someone who surrendered in warfare.

Thus Islam did not stand for the absence of war, but for one of its intended outcomes: surrender leading to the ‘safety’ of captivity. It was Muhammad himself who said to his non-Muslim neighbors aslim taslam ‘surrender (i.e. convert to Islam) and you will be safe’….

Sheikh Ramadan Al-Buti of Syria was one of the most widely respected traditionalist Sunni scholars before he was killed in 2013 by a suicide bomber. The year before he had been listed as number 27 in the ‘The Muslim 500’, an annual inventory of the most influential Muslims in the world. According to Al-Buti, the claim that Islam is a peaceful religion was a ‘falsehood’ imposed upon Muslims by westerners to render Islam weak. He argued in The Jurisprudence of the Prophetic Biography that when non-Muslims fear Islamic jihad, their initial inclination is to accuse the religion of being violent. However they then change tack, and craftily feed to Muslims the idea that Islam is peaceful, in order to make it so. He laments the gullibility of ‘simple-minded Muslims’, who:

“… readily accept this ‘defense’ as valid and begin bringing forth one piece of evidence after another to demonstrate that Islam is, indeed, a peaceable, conciliatory religion which has no reason to interfere in others’ affairs. … The aim … is to erase the notion of jihad from the minds of all Muslims.”

There does seem to be something to Al-Buti’s theory, for it has invariably been after acts of violence done in the name of Islam that western leaders have seen fit to make theological pronouncements about Islam’s peacefulness. Who are they trying to convince?

In the long run this cannot be a fruitful strategy. It invites mockery, such as Palestinian cleric Abu Qatada’s riposte to George Bush’s declaration that ‘Islam is peace’. Abu Qatada asked: ‘Is he some kind of Islamic scholar?’

We do need to have a difficult conversation about Islam. This is only just beginning, and it will take a long time. The process will not be helped by the knee-jerk tendency of western leaders to pop up after every tragedy trying to have the last word on Islam. This strategy has failed, and it is time to go deeper.

RELATED ARTICLE: Pakistan: Two Ahmadiyya Muslims arrested for calling themselves Muslim

Islamic State letters give government 3 days to convert to Islam or be decapitated

A report by RT Arabic published on December 12, the “Swedish government is in a state of panic after dozens of its citizens received threatening letters signed by ISIS and offering them three choices, either conversion to Islam, payment of jizya, or decapitation.”

The letters warned their recipients that they had three days to decide.

Written in the Swedish language, the letters appeared yesterday on dozens of homes in different cities at the same time.  Police are reportedly taking the threat “very seriously.”  Among other regions, letters appeared in the cities of Ronneba, Sigtuna, Vstroes and the capital Stockholm.

Along with threatening those who refuse to convert to Islam or pay the jizya with death, some letters also threatened their recipients with “the bombing of theirs roofs above their heads.”  The letters further warned that the police will not save recipients of the letters and that “death would extend to all.”  Click here for image of one of the letters and an English translation.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Maryland Muslim charged with supporting the Islamic State

Muslim ex-Illinois Guardsman pleads guilty in Islamic State plot

The Continuing Failure to Confront Radical Islam

There seems to be growing tolerance for agendas that conflict with Jewish sovereignty and national claims.  At the same time, Islamic operatives enlist liberal support for their anti-liberal goals.

After a recent trip to Israel, former Congresswoman Michele Bachmann reportedly called upon Christians to step up efforts to convert the Jews.  Her pronouncement was met with indignation from across the Jewish political spectrum – and deservedly so, as it displayed a patronizing and flawed understanding of Jewish scripture and history.  But as misguided as it certainly was, it was not a call to pogrom or massacre; and while Jews have every right to be offended, such comments are benign, albeit insulting, and pose no threat to Jewish life, limb, or belief.

Ironically, few of those who criticized Bachmann would ever chastise those Muslims who preach doctrinal supremacism or reject the very concept of a Jewish state.  Nor would they denounce leftist ideologues who defend progressive anti-Semitism as political speech or delegitimize Israel.  The question, then, is how they can reconcile assertive condemnations of Christian missionary zeal with apologetic attitudes towards radical Islam and a refusal to acknowledge the religious basis for much of today’s terrorism.

As suggested by ongoing dialogue between the nontraditional movements and dubious Muslim advocacy organizations, and by liberal support for progressive groups like the New Israel Fund, there seems to be growing tolerance for agendas that conflict with Jewish sovereignty and national claims.  There is also a tendency to express admiration for Islamic values while ignoring troubling dogmas that discourage free speech and demonize Jews.

Jewish progressives are quick to praise Islamic culture as peaceful and tolerant, yet few have actually read the Quran, Hadith, Sira, or classical legal commentaries.  Fewer still have any concept of the stringent nature of Sharia or how “infidels” are treated thereunder.  They overlook the history of Jews in Islamic lands, where subjugation, massacres, segregation, pogroms, and forced conversions were the rule, not the exception; and they rationalize Muslim Jew-hatred as a modern consequence of the Arab-Israel conflict.

In denying the existence of traditional anti-Semitism in Islamic society, these sophists also claim that the Quran and Hadith are no different from the Torah and Talmud.  But Jewish law does not command the subjugation of Gentiles and has no jihad-like tradition of holy war.  Whereas Halakha applies to Jews, Sharia purports to bind non-Muslims, whom it regards as infidels to be conquered, taxed and converted.

These issues were discussed at a recent program in Massachusetts entitled, “Western Media and Sharia Law: A Fundamental Misunderstanding,” featuring Daniel Akbari, an ex-Muslim and former Sharia lawyer from Iran, and Lt. Col. Roy White, a retired U.S. Air Force combat pilot and Gulf war veteran.

Before renouncing Islam and converting to Christianity, Mr. Akbari defended clients accused of capital offenses in Sharia courts.  He was jailed and tortured for apostasy before coming to the United States, and is the author of many articles and two books, “Honor Killing: A Professional’s Guide to Sexual Relations and Ghayra Violence from the Islamic Sources,” and “New Jihadists and Islam.”

Lt. Col. White served in various Air Force command positions for twenty years and now heads the San Antonio, Texas chapter of “ACT! for America,” which is at the forefront of the counter-jihad movement.  Through the “Truth in Texas Textbooks Coalition” he spearheaded a review of books being considered by the Texas State Board of Education for use in its public schools, which exposed more than 1,500 errors regarding, among other things, Jewish history, Christianity, and the historical use of violence against non-Muslims.  As a result, hundreds of errors were corrected or deleted, and many of the textbooks were rejected altogether.

One strategy of civilizational jihadists is to infiltrate societal institutions and pursue their goals from within.

Mr. Akbari and Col. White discussed the spread of Islamism in the West, which they see as a consequence of doctrinal supremacism combined with a western failure to discuss it or acknowledge its existence.  They explained that jihad can be violent or nonviolent, and that in the absence of sufficient power to dominate infidel society by force, it is permissible to advance the faith bytaqiyya (deception).

Propagating the faith covertly is the modus operandi of many extremists posing as moderates in the West.  The principles of “civilizational jihad” were articulated in “An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America,” reportedly written for the Shura Council of the Muslim Brotherhood, which was entered in evidence by federal prosecutors in U.S. v. Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, a terror financing trial in 2009.  One strategy of civilizational jihadists is to infiltrate societal institutions and pursue their goals from within. They commonly use political correctness to portray themselves as a minority (despite a global Muslim population of approximately 1.6 billion) and to characterize their opponents as bigots.

According to Mr. Akbari, the term “Islamophobia” was created to chill discourse by equating critical discussion of Islam or Sharia with unwarranted prejudice, adopting the strategy of gay rights activists who coined the term “homophobia” to describe opposition to their cause.  Stealth Islamists understood how quickly the term “homophobic” became synonymous with “bigot,” and endeavored to manipulate language to similar effect.  The irony is that in so doing they emulated the strategy of a group that suffers greatly in Sharia states.

It’s equally ironic that their operatives in the West have enlisted progressive support to advance an agenda that contravenes liberal principles.  According to Akbari, they have beguiled western progressives by claiming only to be protecting a minority culture while downplaying supremacist religious doctrine.  He believes the distinction between culture and religion is artificial, however, and that in evaluating the long-term goals of civilizational jihad it is necessary to determine those of Sharia.

In assessing the nature of Sharia, Akbari said one must analyze its rules and determine whether harsh applications can be militated by interpretation.  Informed by his experiences growing up in Iran and practicing law in Sharia courts, he opined that punishments such as crucifixion, beheading and amputation reflect a body of law that is anti-western.  Moreover, the prevalence of honor killings of women and girls who adopt western manners or refuse arranged marriages cannot be ignored.  These killings have occurred in North America and Europe without comment from apologists who so freely characterize critics of Sharia as racists and bigots.

Mr. Akbari believes that many Muslims who came to the US and Europe a generation ago were nominally religious and had little understanding of Sharia law and doctrine.  Indeed, many were fleeing persecution and had no interest in forcing their beliefs on others.  But as first generation children began to assimilate, their parents often encouraged them to attend Islamic centers run by fundamentalist clerics, or student groups under the aegis of such organizations as the Muslim Brotherhood.

It is in fundamentalist environments where youths from acculturated homes become radicalized and learn the use of dissimulation.  Mr. Akbari noted that a sure sign of taqiyya is the claim that the word jihad does not mean war, but instead means “fighting evil temptation,” a definition that he said is not found in Islamic scripture.  According to Akbari, this interpretation requires a suspension of orthodox belief, which itself could be considered heretical.  There is nothing heretical, however, in claiming to be moderate to advance jihadist goals.  And no expense is spared promoting such efforts, particularly in public schools and on college campuses.

Both Akbari and White expressed concern about the prevalence of Islamist propaganda in American schools.  White’s work in vetting textbooks is a response to the proliferation of educational materials from questionable sources that seek to indoctrinate schoolchildren.  At a time when organized prayer and moments of reflective silence are banned in American public schools, many districts are using materials that teach Islamic principles, and parents who complain are often branded “Islamophobic.”  Sometimes it takes interventions by activists like Col. White to force schools to reassess their counterintuitive – and perhaps unconstitutional – use of such materials.

The problem is especially acute on college campuses, where groups with ties to organizations like the Brotherhood are accorded respect and credibility, and where anti-Semitism is pervasive, Israel is vilified, and free speech is denied those who disagree with the agenda.  Universities boasting anti-hate speech codes only seem to enforce them when progressive or Muslim sensibilities are offended, not when Jewish students are abused or conservative students are penalized for voicing their opinions.

The divide between western enablers and critics of radical Islam is reflected in the debate over Syrian refugees.  The left advocates relaxing immigration restrictions and admitting refugees with little scrutiny, while the majority calls for a cautious approach in light of the skewed demographic profile of the refugee population, seventy to eighty percent of which consists of single men of fighting age.  Furthermore, many are non-Syrians with fake passports or are suspected of having terrorist sympathies or affiliations.  This is especially troubling in light of reports that at least one of those responsible for the recent carnage in Paris entered France as a refugee.

Through it all, progressives refuse to identify the problem, and their critics tend to limit the danger to extremist groups like ISIS or al-Qaeda.  But western society would be better served by recognizing the dogmas that motivate extremism and the existence of civilizational jihad.  If Americans and Europeans are to prevail against today’s terrorism, they will need to discard their stupefying political correctness, acknowledge the doctrines that sanctify violence, and assert those values that are under attack.  Falling short will only facilitate submission and defeat.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in Arutz Sheva.

Florida: Prayer March For Persecuted Christians and Jews 2015

We had a Prayer March For Persecuted Christians and Jews in Orlando, FL on May 16. Close to 300 people of all faiths and political affiliations attended.

Please watch the Video and I’m sure you will find it newsworthy and inspirational at the same time. Share this with your Pastors, Priests, Rabbis, Shaman’s, and Atheist friends – we are all in the same boat.

Go to our Facebook Page and friend us.  We have speakers at the ready to talk at schools, Churches, Synagogues, political clubs, and home groups of any size.  https://www.facebook.com/events/351504328371891/

Today we have the noble declaration of human rights enshrined in Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

“Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.”

Despite Article 18, there are severe human rights violations in many countries, especially in the so-called 10-40 window. Christians and Jews are persecuted across Africa, Latin America, the Middle East, most of Asia (including China) and now Europe (via the European Union). Iran is one of the world’s most repressive states, and those who offend Sharia law may be publicly flogged or even executed by hanging in the streets.

In 2008 over 200 million Christians around the world were in danger of being tortured, persecuted, or killed for their faith.

North Korea and China see Christianity as a threat to their respective political systems.  As closed societies North Korea and China are able to keep news of the politically motivated persecution of the Christians from reaching the outside world.

The persecution of the Christians, Jews, Yazidis, Hindu, Buddhist, Atheists, Pagans, and the many others who do not follow the Islamic doctrine, theology, and politics also face persecution.

As Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolf wisely stated,  “The purpose of this March is to force awareness of this persecution into the public consciousness.”

Now you have been informed and all people of conscience have a duty to act.  All the leadership of Churches and Synagogues at the  local level must become the voice for their persecuted voiceless.  Prayer is good but your voices must shout out from every pulpit and bema – when my people bleed we all bleed.

Each act of persecution  anywhere in the world should be taken personally by everyone who is currently safe in the cocoon of western religious plurality and has the freedom to exercise your spirituality without fear.

The issue of persecuted Christians and Jews crosses all party lines and denominations.  Those individuals who believe in no faith at all are also targets of persecution – we are all in the same boat.

Each one of us has free will.  How you use that free will defines who you are as a person.  Be a part of the solution.

Oklahoma: Muslim attacks Christian with knife, says Muslims need to “step up” beheadings

Where did Stepney get the idea that “more Muslims need to step up to the plate” and behead people? Was it at his local mosque? And what mosque does he go to? Does anyone know? Does anyone care?

“Man arrested, accused of slashing man after heated religious conversation,” by Dave Detling, KOCO.com, November 18, 2014 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

On Monday authorities responded to a 911 about an assault in the 1400 block of Northeast 11th Street.

Upon their arrival, officers learned the victim, Jerome Bullock and 54-year-old Jimmy Stepney had been arguing about the Bible and the Quran.

According to the arrest affidavit, Stepney is a Muslim and the Bullock is a Christian.

The report went on to say Stepney had been making comments about beheading people.

“We were watching the news,” said Bullock. “He said he felt like more Muslims need to step up to the plate and do certain thing. He was talking about beheading people.”

Because of the statement, Bullock says he asked Stepney, who’d been staying with the family, to leave.

Stepney complied but eventually came back and started arguing with Bullock.

According to the arrest affidavit, the pair began fighting in the yard after Stepney allegedly punched the victim.

Witnesses told officers that Stepney had a knife and was attempting to stab the victim. That’s when Bullock’s mother, Diane Range, came out with a baseball bat and started swinging at Stepney.

“He was trying to kill my son,” said Range.

Bullock suffered minor cuts from the fight and Stepney was able to walk away.

“I was just trying to pay it forward by helping him out,” said Bullock. “Instead I got a lot of cuts and hurt feelings.”…

RELATED ARTICLES:

FrontPage: Hamas-linked CAIR: A terror organization

Islamic State jihadi tells Muslims in France to attack non-Muslims: “Kill them and spit in their faces and run over them with your cars”

Italy: Muslim teenager viciously beaten by her family for being “too Western”

The Ultimate Camping Trip

islam poster

For a larger view click on the poster.

May you live in interesting times,” an expression (a curse) that may be traced back to post-World War II England, but is apt today, when times have become all too interesting – chaotic and troubling.  We must be reminded of the July 7, 2005 bombings of a bus and three tube trains that killed 52.  More recently, May 2013, when a Muslim beheaded a soldier on the streets of London; and September, 2014, when a Muslim sodomized a dog and stabbed two women, beheading one of them; and October, 2014, when Scotland Yard captured four Muslims who admitted their mission to terrorize and decapitate ordinary people on city streets, and another four who were plotting to kill police officers or soldiers on London streets – a total of 218 arrests in the past 12 months alone. Britain identified a “complex web” of 60 Muslim Brotherhood organizations now operating from London, Istanbul, and Doha, Qatar.

In Turkey, in August, Islamists shelled, beheaded, crucified and shot 700 members of the Shaitat tribe because they dared to rise up in their own defense.  Over the past week, a recent convert to Islam ran down two Canadian soldiers in a Quebec province, and was shot while preparing to stab a woman police officer. A Canadian soldier was shot and killed by another convert at the National War Memorial in Ottawa; the suspect was killed.  A Muslim terrorist ran his car into a crowd in a Jerusalem railroad station, wounding six adults and killing a 3-month-old baby.  This was followed by rock-throwing session on a kindergarten and PA leader Mahmoud Abbas’s praise of the killer’s heroics.  Two hospital guards at a Philippines hospital were murdered by a Muslim group.  A suicide bomber killed another person in Libya, and six young people were executed and then hung, by ISIS, in Iraq.

America surely needs repeated reminding of 9/11, for which Islamist apologists persistently dismiss with a flick of the wrist. Major Hassan’s Allahu Akbar was cast aside with a flimsy “workplace violence” designation, and the stabbing and beheading of an employee at a meat-packing plant in Oklahoma was lost in the media amid all the other excitement of the times, including crimes called “scandals.” But earlier today, a hatchet-wielding, self-inspired terrorist purposely targeted four New York police officers, perhaps in keeping with the new Islamic directive discovered by Scotland Yard.

In fact, the Jihad Report shows Islamic terrorists are responsible for 78 deadly attacks during the week of October 11 – 17, 15 Allah Akbars, 630 dead and 828 critically wounded, bringing the total terror attacks since 9/11 to 24,184 – a number that changes with increasing rapidity.

Walid Shoebat cautions in Why I left Jihad that Muslims have come here for one reason only – to physically act out their hatred for Jews and Christians, until their “enemy is obliterated.” Muslims are attending universities only to infiltrate the student body and train and indoctrinate new jihadists. The extremists win over the moderates with campus events that incite the naïve Americans who have already been taught to accept multiculturalism, moral relativism, and contempt for the West. Spoon-fed Islam as an alternative culture by leftist professors, the students are motivated to collect huge sums of money and support the branches of the Muslim Brotherhood whose missions are to kill Jews, take over Israel, and conquer Western civilization.

Crimes are on the rise in the US, such as the recent stabbing and beheading of an employee at a food distribution center in Oklahoma by an ex-convict, converted to Islam while in prison.  When the crimes are reported, they are unconnected to any common denominator, yet there have been kidnappings, assassinations, and arson or firebomb attacks that are attributed to the homegrown Islamic terrorists, Muslims of America (MOA)/Jamaat ul-Fuqra, (aka Soldiers of Allah).  Their connection is terrorist communes that are fully established and operational in rural America, Canada, and the Caribbean.

Beginning in 1979, there were attacks on eastern houses of worship – Hare Krishna temples, Iranian (Shi’ite) mosque, an Islamic Cultural Center, an Indian-owned hotel, an Ahmadiyya Center, the Integral Yoga Society and two Vendanta Societies, a Laotian temple, and more.  Physicians of Hindu and East Indian origin have been kidnapped and killed, as were mosque leaders.

Tom Gallagher, of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, describes the MOA, specifically, as a “violent, black Muslim extremist sect that acts out jihads against perceived enemies.” The group provides firing ranges and paramilitary and guerilla-warfare training to spread Islam and destroy America through violence.  Trained in camps in America, they are sometimes sent to Pakistan to become a new generation of jihadists.

Their activities in Colorado (1989) have included fire breakouts at a power station. Law enforcement officials also discovered a large, well equipped arsenal, documents and photos of the Jewish Community Center and Hare Krishna Temple in Denver; and an illegal collection of checks.  Four of five MOAs were arrested.  An MOA arsenal was discovered in 1992, with plans for targets in Denver, Tucson, and Los Angeles.

Five MOAs were arrested in New York in the 1990s for conspiracy to bomb a Hindu temple and Indian theater in Toronto, with an expected death count in the thousands.  The FBI and local police discovered a cache of weapons to be used across the Canadian border. The NYC Dept. of Investigation uncovered an Islamic compound a year before the World Trade Center attack (arresting some for mixing explosives) and one year later, learned that this had been a training compound for 9/11.  Eight men were arrested from another group with a plot to bomb the UN, FBI headquarters, and the Holland and Lincoln tunnels.  A gang of ten who were arrested in three New York boroughs for selling illegal weapons was also linked to MOA.

image003

For a larger view click on the map.

Other camps in the network were discovered in South Carolina, Pennsylvania, Virginia, California (see map at left), all controlled by the group’s founder, a Pakistani Sufi mystic, Sheikh Syen Mubarik Ali Gilani.  Although general reports claim more than 3000 members – many ex-convicts who had been convicted of violent crimes, the cleric and known international terrorist asserts to have as many as 15,000 followers, 35 “villages” in 22 states, ranging from 33 acres in South Carolina to 300 acres in California.

En route to interview Gilani about his follower, shoe-bomber Richard Reid, journalist Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and beheaded because Gilani thought he (Pearl) was a secret service agent.  Although Gilani’s original purpose was to recruit mujahedeen to fight the Soviets, Gilani’s ideology is the purification of Islam through violence – meaning, the obliteration of all infidels.  And, recruiting American citizens makes it is more difficult to stop their activities. Not only are they protected as citizens by state laws, the US Constitution, and our climate of political correctness, but they formed a legal church, hence a tax-exempt organization.   As such, they can conduct banking transactions, launder money; purchase land, buildings, lodging and safehouses, communication equipment, weapons, lethal substances/explosives, all without having to pay taxes or report expenditures or income.

The U.S. State Department has known of these training camps since 1993.  FBI Director Robert Mueller admits their existence; special FBI agent Jody Weis declared the homegrown terrorists to be more dangerous than any known group; and Ryan Mauro, national security analyst and political analyst, exposed the camps in the Counter Jihad Report.  Sean Hannity (Fox News) reported on the status of these camps in 2009.

Law enforcement officials believe Gilani hides terrorists (as the “Beltway Snipers” were probably hidden during their 23-day shooting spree in Washington D.C.).  Christian Action Network (CAN) urges the U.S. to designate Muslims of America a “Foreign Terrorist Organization” (FTO).  Sheikh Gilani operates from Lahore, Pakistan, and that connection would make illegal any support to his group, and restrict their funding and expansion.  CAN also asks that we contact our political leaders and demand that Muslims of America be placed on the State Department’s Foreign Terrorist Organization watch list and demand that each State and Congress outlaw any Islamic communities, organizations and mosques that preach Jihad against America.

There exists a real and present danger to the survival of our country and our civilization, and a few phone calls might work to protect us.  After all, daily life is interesting enough under the best of circumstances.

Beheading in the U.S.: Will we see more ‘work place Islam’?

I interview Robert Spencer on the Oklahoma beheading and all the implications for increased violent activity coming from jihad mosques here in the United States.

Do not miss this amazing analysis by Robert Spencer, one of the world’s top experts on Islamic jihad.

RELATED ARTICLES:

White House official flies to Oklahoma City to read special thank-you note from Obama to beheader’s mosque

Boko Haram top dog: “We follow the Koran…in the land of Allah”

“Love”: The Islamic State’s Source of Strength

Raymond Ibrahim: Is the Islamic State a Good Thing?

Oklahoma beheader’s city: Man with “thick Arabic accent” enters high school unauthorized, asks “suspicious questions”

6 Elements of ‘Extremist’ Islam That ‘Moderate’ Muslims Endorsed as They Condemned the Islamic State

At last, moderate Islam! The Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Fiqh Council of North America held a press conference in Washington on Wednesday at which they announced with great fanfare that they had refuted the religious ideology of the Islamic State [see below video].

They issued this lengthy “open letter” (not, interestingly enough, a fatwa) addressed to the Islamic State’s caliph Ibrahim, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, explaining how he was misunderstanding Islam. The international media is, predictably, thrilled, but unfortunately, and not surprisingly, there is less to it than meets the eye. In fact, the “moderates” who signed on to this open letter have ended up endorsing elements of Islam that most non-Muslim Westerners consider to be “extremist.”

The fact that this is not an Islamic case against the Islamic State’s jihad terror that will move Islamic State fighters to lay down their arms, but rather a deceptive piece designed to fool gullible non-Muslim Westerners into thinking that the case for “moderate Islam” has been made, but which will not change a single jihadi’s mind, is clear from the outset from the involvement not only of Hamas-linked CAIR, but also from some of the 126 signers.

These include Professor Mustafa Abu Sway, the integral professorial chair for the Study of Imam Ghazali’s Work, Jerusalem — and a Hamas activist; Dr. Jamal Badawi, an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation Hamas terror funding case; Mustafa Ceric, former grand mufti of Bosnia and Herzegovina, who has called for Sharia in Bosnia; Professor Caner Dagli, a venomously hateful Islamic apologist at Holy Cross College in Worcester, Massachusetts, who traffics in Nazi imagery about “unclean” unbelievers; Ali Gomaa, former grand mufti of Egypt, who endorses wife-beating, Hizballah, and the punishment of apostates from Islam; Hamza Yusuf Hanson, founder and director of Zaytuna College, USA, who blamed the West for Muslim riots over a teddy bear named Muhammad; Ed Husain, senior fellow in Middle Eastern Studies for the Council on Foreign Relations, who recently claimed that seizing British jihadis’ passports so that they couldn’t return to the UK from the Islamic State would only create more jihadis; Muhammad Tahir Al-Qadri, founder of Minhaj-ul-Qur’an International, Pakistan, who drafted Pakistan’s notorious blasphemy law and issued his own disingenuous and hypocritical Fatwa Against Terrorism; and Muzammil Siddiqi, chairman of the Fiqh Council and former head of the Hamas-linked Islamic Society of North America (ISNA).

Hardly a group that inspires confidence in their “moderation.”

And in the course of their very lengthy open letter, they endorse these six elements of what is usually considered to be “extremist” Islam:shutterstock_76411432

1. Jihad

“All Muslims see the great virtue in jihad,” says the open letter. It repeatedly stresses that jihad warfare is strictly defensive. “There is no such thing,” the scholars assert, “as offensive, aggressive jihad just because people have different religions or opinions. This is the position of Abu Hanifa, the Imams Malik and Ahmad and all other scholars including Ibn Taymiyyah, with the exception of some scholars of the Shafi’i school.”

The Shafi’i school is one of the four great schools of Sunni jurisprudence. If some Shafi’i scholars allow for “offensive, aggressive jihad just because people have different religions or opinions,” can it really be said to be un-Islamic? Are the scholars pronouncing takfir on the Shafi’i school? Or just deceiving gullible non-Muslims? The answer is clear.

What’s more, restricting jihad to defensive warfare looks even worse in light of the fact that in Sunni Islamic law, only the caliph has the authority to declare offensive jihad, but defensive jihad is obligatory upon all Muslims when a Muslim land is attacked, and need not be declared by anyone. So since the caliphate was abolished in 1924 to this day (except for those who accept the Islamic State’s caliphate claim), all jihad attacks, even 9/11, have been cast by their perpetrators as defensive – hence the jihadist tendency to retail long lists of grievances when justifying their actions.

So if 9/11 was defensive jihad, and these “moderate” scholars are endorsing defensive jihad, their “moderation” should send just a bit of a chill up the spine.

ud

2. Dhimmitude

“Regarding Arab Christians,” the scholars remind the Islamic State caliph, “you gave them three choices: jizyah (poll tax), the sword, or conversion to Islam.” Jizya is the tax specified in the Qur’an (9:29) to be levied on “the People of the Book” as a sign of their dhimmitude, their subjugation and submission to Muslim hegemony. This, the scholars say, was wrong, because “these Christians are not combatants against Islam or transgressors against it, indeed they are friends, neighbours and co-citizens. From the legal perspective of Shari’ah they all fall under ancient agreements that are around 1400 years old, and the rulings of jihad do not apply to them.”

However, then the open letter asserts that “there are two types of jizyah in Shari’ah (Islamic Law)”: the first “applies to those who fought Islam,” but the second “is levied on those who do not wage war against Islam.”

Now wait a minute. The scholars tell the caliph that the Arab Christians are friends of the Muslims, they “did not wage war against you” and thus should not have been subjugated as dhimmis. But then in the next paragraph they say that “the second type of jizyah is levied on those who do not wage war against Islam.” Thus how is the Islamic State transgressing against Islam by levying the jizya on those who did not wage war against Islam?

In any case, the “moderate” scholars are apparently fine with a religion-based poll tax, a sign of the subjugation of the religious minority, in an Islamic state. In this the authors also contradict their earlier claim that jihad is only defensive; now “those who do not wage war against Islam” are to be made to pay the jizya, which results from Muslims fighting the People of the Book: “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” (Qur’an 9:29)

3-5. Stoning for adultery, amputation for theft, execution of apostates

Hudud refers in Islamic law to the punishments fixed by Allah himself for serious crimes, including the stoning of adulterers, the amputation of thieves’ hands, and the execution of apostates from Islam. While Islamic apologists in the U.S. routinely claim that these punishments are not really part of Sharia or Islam at all, these scholars say: “Hudud punishments are fixed in the Qur’an and Hadith and are unquestionably obligatory in Islamic Law.” Their only quibble with the Islamic State is that they have been cruel and merciless in applying these punishments.

This is telling. CAIR has led campaigns against anti-Sharia laws that depend in large part on the claim that these punishments are not part of Sharia. Now Hamas-linked CAIR has admitted otherwise. The claim that the Islamic State has not implemented them properly is just a judgment call, not a refutation of the Islamic State’s practices.

6. The Caliphate

“There is agreement (ittifaq) among scholars,” say the scholars, “that a caliphate is an obligation upon the Ummah.”

A caliphate is an obligation. That is, Muslims should strive to establish a single multinational, multiethnic empire, to which alone they owe political loyalty – in other words, they owe no loyalty to the nations in which they currently reside.

This is a notable and extremely important admission. The Islamic State is appealing to so many young Muslims in the West because of its claim to reconstitute the caliphate. Caliphates are established and sustained on the principle of Might Makes Right. If the Islamic State sustains itself and survives, more and more Muslims will pledge allegiance to it.

To be sure, Hamas-linked CAIR and the Fiqh Council and all the signers of this open letter really do oppose the Islamic State. But they don’t oppose it because it is transgressing against the commands of what they believe to be a religion of peace. They oppose it because they want to establish a caliphate under the auspices of or led by the Muslim Brotherhood, and the Islamic State constitutes competition. This is clear from their sly endorsements in this document of jihad, the Sharia, and the concept of the caliphate. But with so many infidels so eager to be fooled, their work is easy.

EDITORS NOTE: The image illustration via Larry Bruce / Shutterstock.com

Black convert to Islam beheads woman in Oklahoma [+Videos]

Officials with the Moore Oklahoma Police Department say the FBI is now involved in the investigation related to a brutal attack of workers at the Vaughn Food South distribution plant. KFOR News Channel 4 reports:

Sgt. Jeremy Lewis says the alleged suspect, 30-year-old Alton Nolen [pictured above] had just been fired when he drove to the front of the business, hit a vehicle and walked inside.

Sgt. Lewis confirms the type of knife used in the attack is the same kind used at the plant. Lewis confirms that Hufford was stabbed several times and that Nolen “severed her head.” At that point, Lewis claims Nolen met 43-year-old Traci Johnson and began attacking her with the same knife.

Officials say at that point, Mark Vaughan, an Oklahoma County reserve deputy and a former CEO of the business, shot him as he was actively stabbing Johnson.

Read more.

Alton A. Nolen has a history of run ins with the law with multiple incarcerations in 2011. It is possible that Nolen converted to Islam while in prison.

JahKeemYisrael3-300x136Jihad Watch’s Robert Spencer reports:

The Oklahoma beheader’s Muslim name is Jah’Keem Yisrael. His Facebook page (thanks to Pamela Geller) is all about Islam. It is not only full of Qur’anic and moral exhortations, but also several pictures of Yisrael at a local mosque. Watch for mosque officials to say they hardly knew him and to complain about “Islamophobia” and “backlash.”

In Jah’Keem Yisrael we once again have a convert to Islam who became quite devout and became violent. In the wake of the murder he committed today, watch for more assurances that the murder had nothing to do with the religion that exhorts believers in its holy book, “When you meet the unbelievers, strike the necks.”

In case the Facebook page gets taken down, Pamela Geller has a great deal of it here.

Nolen was a drug user (marijuana), drug pusher (cocaine) and had multiple arrests for assaults against the police. He had a number of tattoos on his body including one on his abdomen reading “As-salamu alaykum” (Arabic السلام عليكم) used by Muslims. It translates to “peace be upon you”. Below is the Oklahoma Department of Corrections list of offenses courtesy of Heavy.com.

alton-nolan wrap sheet

RELATED ARTICLES:

Oklahoma Beheader Tied to CAIR-Associated Imam

‘Sharia Law is Coming:’ Woman Beheaded at Oklahoma Workplace

RELATED VIDEOS:

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo of Alton Nolen is courtesy of KFOR News Channel 4. Following is the full text of the 911 call released by the Moore police:

911 Caller: “Shut the door, shut the door!”

Dispatcher: “Moore 911, where is your emergency?”

911 Caller: “Vaughan Foods, Moore, Oklahoma, 216 N.E. 12th St. We have..”

Dispatcher: “What’s going on there?”

911 Caller: “We have someone attacking someone in the building. I was just informed. I’m in the..”

Dispatcher: “Okay, where are they at?”

911 Caller: “Inside, are they in the office? They’re in the office, front office of the building. Yeah, we can hear a lot of screaming. We’re actually in a different office but someone just came in here yelling.”

Dispatcher: “315. Okay, do you know where they’re at in the building?”

911 Caller: “In the front of the building, there’s our main entrance.”

Dispatcher: “Okay, do you know where he is at in the plant?”

911 Caller: “We know that he’s loose. He has stabbed someone.”

Dispatcher: “Yeah, we’ve got medical en route for them.

911 Caller: “Okay.”

Dispatcher: “Is anybody with him or do you know?”

911 Caller: “Hold on, my (garbled.)

Dispatcher: “Respond on lacerations. Vaughan Foods, 216, go ahead sir, N.E. 12th.”

911 Caller: “I’m going to put you on speakerphone for one second, okay?”

Dispatcher: “Standby on a map. Page 1608, time out.”

911 Caller:  “Okay, so we don’t know where the person went and he went through our front office, went through the shipping office and stabbed a woman in our customer service department.”

Dispatcher: “Okay, did he know her? Do you know, is that who he was arguing with? Is she an employee?”

911 Caller: “She is an employee, yeah.”

Dispatcher: “Okay, thank you.”

911 Caller: “Lock that door.”

Dispatcher: “Yeah, go ahead lock everybody in there if you can.”

911 Caller: “Yeah, we’re trying. Okay, can you hear this in the background?”

(yelling)

Dispatcher: “Is that him? He’s back?”

911 Caller: “Yeah, it sounds like he’s running around out here.”

(loud bangs)

911 Caller: “And that, that’s a gun shot.”

Dispatcher: “Got a gun shot. Units responding to Vaughan Foods, be advised we do now have gunshots. Okay, do you know where he’s at now?”

911 Caller: “He’s in the hallway, outside of the center of the building.”

Dispatcher: “Maybe in the hallway in the center of the building. And how many more shots have you heard?”

911 Caller: “We’ve heard three.”

Dispatcher: “Three shots?”

911 Caller: “Now I’m hearing somebody yelling in the hallway, stay down.”

Dispatcher: “There’s another subject yelling in the hallway. Units be advised that there’s another subject yelling in the hallway. Still same amount of injuries.”

911 Caller: “Stay down, stay down.”

“Shock and Flaw”

Not a week goes by without our work at HJS turning out to be ever more prescient and ever more disconcertingly necessary. Sometimes it is our work on Russia and other autocratic states. Sometimes – and never more so than in recent months – it is our work on Islamic extremism, its causes, proponents and the possible answers to it.

The murder of an American citizen by a British subject would always be a cause of shame and horror. But never could it have been more shameful or horrific than in the murder of the American journalist James Foley this week. Everyone is shocked – David Cameron is shocked, the leaders of the opposition are shocked. But shock is not enough, and nor is horror or outrage. We are all capable of feeling that and all do. The question for political leaders is what they are going to do about it.

To date, the political reaction in Britain has been woeful. The normally hawkish former Security Minister Baroness Pauline Neville-Jones was reduced to advocating more ‘tweeting’ to extremists from Britain in Syria. The shadow Home Secretary was reduced to complaining about the coalition government’s watering-down of Control Orders into ‘TPIMs’. Nothing could have been more grossly partisan or inept. Even if the very slightly watered-down ‘TPIMs’ were turned back into Control Orders immediately it could have had no impact on the life or death of James Foley.

So the paucity of debate is striking. Our political leaders remain strangely fearful of trying to answer the problem that we are all now aware of and increasingly concerned by. But that gap of political leadership will at some point have to be filled. And that is one of the areas where The Henry Jackson Society is able to tread. Because we have been ahead of the curve in identifying this problem, we are also in a good position to be ahead of the curve in providing the answers to it.

Obama’s No-Win Dilemma

Most of the nation states of the Middle East, as we know them today, were created in 1916 by the Sykes-Picot Agreement, otherwise known as the Asia Minor Agreement, between Britain and France. The states created include Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, and Syria. In that agreement, national boundaries were drawn without regard to sects, Shiite or Sunni, and without regard to tribes or clans, setting up an explosive mixture of religious animosities.

After the creation of Iraq and Syria, the French and British drew a line from the Mediterranean due east to Mount Hermon. North of that line, the French created a coastal nation, largely Christian, called Lebanon. While south of that line, between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River, the British created a coastal Arab nation which they called Palestine. The territory south of Iraq and east of the Jordan River was divided between two Arab tribes that were allied with the British during World War I, but who didn’t care much for each other. The Sauds were given a large tract of land called Arabia… hence Saudi Arabia… while the Hashemites were given a much smaller territory east of the Jordan River, which they named Trans-Jordan… now Jordan. Thus, six nations were created between the Mediterranean and the Tigris, and south of Turkey. These six nations became seven when the United Nations created Israel in 1947.

As might be expected, the many disparate religious sects found it difficult to occupy the same territory and chaos reigned for most of the next century. For example, in early August we learned that some 40,000 Yazidis, a minority religious sect, had taken refuge on Mount Sinjar in northern Iraq. Their choices were to either stay on the mountain, short of food and water, or they could descend the mountain and be slaughtered by terrorists of the Islamic State in Syria (ISIS). The Yazidis were aware that ISIS forces were beheading children elsewhere in Iraq, so rather than risk that terrible fate, many families killed their own children by throwing them off the mountain. Within a week of that report, Yazidi women were also found to be leaping to their death from the mountain rather than face being captured, raped, and sold into slavery.
In other reports, hundreds of Shiite soldiers of the Iraqi military were captured, executed, and buried in mass graves… some of them while still alive. These were the same ISIS jihadists who recently posted a YouTube video showing American newsman James Foley being beheaded by his captors. According to best estimates, some 191,000 people in Syria and Iraq have lost their lives in sectarian fighting since March 2011.

A strong case can be made that the map created in 1916 is now being redrawn through force of arms, and that what is now occurring in the region represents nothing more than a realignment of national boundaries, consistent with religious convictions and backed by the use of terror and military might. It is a struggle in which western powers find it difficult to decide who’s who without a scorecard, or to find any clear national interest amidst all the violence.

It is into this maelstrom of warring factions that the United States and its coalition partners waded in 2003 to depose the Iraqi dictator, Saddam Hussein, foolishly believing that the many warring states and factions could be defeated, pacified, or managed. To paraphrase an old Mark Russell line, “Their plan was to make the Shiites and the Sunnis act like Christians.”

What they should have understood, but didn’t, is that no amount of bombing and no amount of ground forces can win a war against the forces of Islam… in the same sense that Germany and Japan were defeated in World War II. The best we can ever hope to accomplish is to contain the forces of Islam in their home countries and to do whatever is necessary to protect our homeland from ISIS-style atrocities. So whatever “strategy” Obama ultimately decides on, it must have an international component and a domestic component… neither of which involve military power.

For example, what few Americans understand about the James Foley video is that it was far more than an unspeakably grisly scene; rather, it was a political statement intended for American audiences as a means of terrorizing them, frightening them into putting anti-war pressure on Congress and the Obama administration.

Even the normally clueless New York Times appears to have recognized the “information warfare” subtleties of the Foley video. In a story dated August 30, the Times reported that, “ISIS, the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, is using every contemporary mode of messaging to recruit fighters, intimidate enemies, and promote its claim to have established a caliphate, a unified Muslim state run according to a strict interpretation of Islamic law. If its bigotry and beheadings seem to come from a distant century, its use of media is up to the moment.” As crude and cruel as the beheadings were, the video message is proof that radical Islam is far more adept at the use of modern communications than any western power, including the United States.

So why does the United States, the most powerful and resourceful nation on Earth, not have a sophisticated information warfare, or SOFTWAR, capability to use against radical Islam? Why has the Obama administration not spread the word throughout the Muslim world, covertly, that members of ISIS are not good Muslims? Instead, they engage in Hirabah (prohibited war against society), and that their leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, is a Mufsidoon (an evil-doer condemned by the Koran). Why are we not spreading the word throughout Islam that those who follow al-Baghdadi and ISIS will surely suffer Jahannam (eternal hell fire) unless they repent?

While ISIS is experiencing some success in Syria and Iraq, they should not deceive themselves that the caliphate they are establishing can ever encompass any major portion of the western world. Aside from protecting the lives of U.S. citizens who live and work in the Middle East, our primary national interest is in seeing to it that they do not establish a foothold on our shores.

So, as sympathetic as I may be to any dilemma that might cause Barack Obama some sleepless nights, I understand that no amount of conventional military power will stop the ISIS onslaught in that region of the world. Any time we spend debating whether or not to commit military forces against ISIS, or how much, is wasted time. Instead, we should be spending our time thinking in terms of how to discredit radical jihadists throughout the Muslim world through the skillful use of information technology, and how we might protect our American homeland. King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia has recently warned, “If we ignore (ISIS), I am sure they will reach Europe in a month and America in another month.” We simply cannot allow that to happen and military power is not the answer.

Instead, we must make the Muslim presence here so unpleasant that they will long for a return to whatever hellhole they came from. To do that, we must make membership or participation in any organization advocating the violent overthrow of the U.S. government a major criminal offense. In the spirit of Eisenhower’s signing statement as he signed the Communist Control Act of 1954, we must resolve that, “The American people are determined to eliminate from their midst organizations which, purporting to be “religious,” in the accepted sense of that term, are conspirators dedicated to the destruction of our form of government by violence and force…”

To accomplish that end, the Congress should take immediate steps to amend Section 2 of the Communist Control Act of 1954 to read as follows:

The Congress hereby finds and declares that Islam, although purportedly a religious sect, is in fact an instrumentality of a foreign conspiracy to overthrow the government of the United States. It constitutes an authoritarian dictatorship within a republic, demanding for itself the rights and privileges accorded to individuals of other religious denominations, but denying to all others the freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution…

As a segment of the U.S. population, Islam is relatively small numerically and gives scant indication of its capacity ever to attain its ends by lawful political means. The peril inherent in the existence of Islam arises not from its numbers, but from its failure to acknowledge any limitation as to the nature of its activities, and its dedication to the proposition that the present constitutional government of the United States ultimately must be brought to ruin by any available means, including resort to force and violence. Holding that doctrine, its role as the agency of a hostile foreign power renders its existence a clear present and continuing danger to the security of the United States. It is the means whereby individuals are seduced into the service of Islam, trained to do its bidding, and directed and controlled in the conspiratorial performance of their revolutionary services. Therefore, the organization known as Islam shall be outlawed in the United States.

With that statute on the books we can make it very uncomfortable for radical Islamists. With eyes and ears planted in every mosque in America, radical Imams such as Anwar al-Awlaki could be quickly exposed and FBI agents could be on the scene within hours to make arrests.

An old adage tells us that “the enemy of my friend is my enemy,” but, as much as that adage has been applicable throughout history, it does not apply in the Middle East today. Recent events in that part of the world should be enough to convince us that the enemy of my enemy is also my enemy. Other than Israel, we have no “friends” in the Middle East; there are only enemies and potential enemies.

Napoleon Bonaparte once said, “Never interfere with an enemy while he’s in the process of destroying himself.” Will Barack Obama be wise enough to take that advice? We shall see.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of pedestrians waiting at a trolley stop in Oslo, Norway in front of a sign of Nobel Peace laureate Barack Obama Wednesday December 9, 2009. Source: AP.