Tag Archive for: FEATURED

Kentucky Fried Jihad

My latest in PJ Media:

Everybody knows that “white supremacists” are the biggest terror threat America faces today: Old Joe Biden has told us so, along with Gestapo chief Merrick Garland and the Department of Homeland Security, among others. They wouldn’t lie to us, now, would they? But back in the real world, a threat that the Left has downplayed and denied from the beginning, the global jihad, is still very much with us, even in Bowling Green, Kentucky.

Mirsad Hariz Adem Ramic, a good ol’ boy from down there in Bowling Green, was indicted Monday on charges of providing material support to the Islamic State (ISIS). Ramic, who is a dual citizen of the United States and Bosnia, is also charged, according to the Justice Department, “with conspiring to provide material support to ISIS and receiving military type training from ISIS.”

Ramic flew from Bowling Green to Istanbul in 2014, along with two other would-be jihadis; once there, the trio bought tickets to Gaziantep, Turkey, a city near Turkey’s border with Syria. They crossed the border to enter the Islamic State’s domains in Syria. Ramic was to all appearances a convinced, dedicated jihadi: he “attended an ISIS training camp where he received weapons and physical training and fired an AK-47.” He appears to have been deeply involved in the Islamic State’s aggressive activities: “The FBI obtained photographs of Ramic in ISIS territory that depict him wearing camouflage clothing and standing in front of a pickup truck outfitted with an anti-aircraft gun and the ISIS flag. A second photograph of Ramic depicts him holding a rifle.”

Ramic kept in touch with the two friends with whom he had made his journey to ISIS, and would clue them in on his activities. They “discussed, among other things, Ramic’s presence in Raqqa, Syria,” which served as the capital of the Islamic State in the heyday of the short-lived ISIS caliphate in Iraq and Syria. He also told his friends about “his use of an anti-aircraft weapon to shoot at planes.”

At the same time, Ramic demonstrated a keen interest in the theoretical side of his activities with the Islamic State. He and his talked about “jihad, martyrdom and fighting for ISIS.” Secure in the ISIS domains, one of Ramic’s friends got cocky: “sent two e-mails to Western Kentucky University, stating that he had traveled to Syria to join ISIS and expressing his desire that ISIS conquer the United States.”

Since the fall of the ISIS caliphate, Ramic has been in prison in Turkey, but was deported back to the United States, where he is looking at fifty years in prison and a $750,000 fine if he is convicted.

The Justice Department press release about Ramic’s indictment is laconic. It gives no indication of how a young man (Ramic is 31) in Bowling Green, Kentucky, could have come to believe that it would be a great idea to join an internationally feared and despised jihad terror group. This is the question that remains unanswered whenever a Muslim living in the United States decides to join a jihad group or even plot a jihad massacre on American soil.

There is more. Read the rest here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump Says ‘Everybody Loves Christmas,’ Including Muslims, But an Imam Disagrees

Texas: Muslim gets 12 years prison for providing material support to the Islamic State

India: Muslim politician tells police ‘Allah will destroy you’

Muslim cleric at Al-Aqsa Mosque: Allah sent omicron variant because of homosexuality and Israel

Australia: Man converts to Islam, plots jihad massacres of cops, government officials, non-devout Muslims

Nigeria: Sharia police to arrest parents of woman who won Miss Nigeria Pageant, beauty contests are un-Islamic

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

Facebook allowed photos of beheadings from ISIS and the Taliban to be tagged as ‘insightful’ and ‘engaging’

Facebook was only interested in shutting down the speech of dissenters from the Leftist agenda, not Islamic jihadis.

Facebook allowed photos of beheadings and violent hate speech from ISIS and the Taliban to be tagged as ‘insightful’ and ‘engaging’ – despite claims to crack down on extremists, report reveals

by Jonathan Chadwick, MailOnline, December 21, 2021:

Facebook allowed photos of beheadings and violent hate speech from ISIS and the Taliban to be tagged as ‘insightful’ and ‘engaging’, a new report reveals.

Extremists have turned to the social media platform as a weapon ‘to promote their hate-filled agenda and rally supporters’ on hundreds of groups, according to the review of activity between April and December this year.

These groups have sprouted up across the platform over the last 18 months and vary in size from a few hundred to tens of thousands of members, the review found.

One pro-Taliban group created in spring this year and had grown to 107,000 members before it was deleted, the review, published by Politico, claims.

Overall, extremist content is ‘routinely getting through the net’, despite claims from Meta – the company that owns Facebook – that it’s cracking down on extremists.

‘We do not allow individuals or organisations involved in organised crime, including those designated by the US government as specially designated narcotics trafficking kingpins (SDNTKs); hate; or terrorism, including entities designated by the US government as foreign terrorist organisations (FTOs) or specially designated global terrorists (SDGTs), to have a presence on the platform. We also don’t allow other people to represent these entities.

‘We do not allow leaders or prominent members of these organisations to have a presence on the platform, symbols that represent them to be used on the platform or content that praises them or their acts. In addition, we remove any coordination of substantive support for these individuals and organisations.’

The groups were discovered by Moustafa Ayad, an executive director at the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, a think tank that tracks online extremism….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Russia: Putin says 32 terrorist attacks were foiled in 2021

France: Samuel Paty Square plaque vandalized, the word ‘Islamist’ is painted over

Switzerland: Teacher fired, fined, given suspended sentence for ‘Islamophobic’ Facebook posts

Nigeria: Muslims murder twelve Christians in jihad massacre as they were leaving worship services in church

CAIR: Love for Jesus Unites Christians and Muslims at Christmas Time

Italy: 500 illegal Muslim migrants land in 48 hours

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

Ilhan Omar Bill to Require State Department to Monitor ‘Islamophobia’ Moves Forward

A spurious concept designed to inhibit criticism of jihad terror could soon be funded by your tax dollars. My latest in FrontPage:

Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Mogadishu) and Jan Schakowsky (D-Lightfootland) have determined to take action against “Islamophobia,” and their initiative is gaining traction. The House Foreign Affairs Committee on Friday approved their bill calling for a State Department “Islamophobia monitor,” and now it will go to the full House for further consideration. The idea that Pelosi’s House would reject such a bill is virtually inconceivable.

This all started back in October, when Omar and Schakowsky introduced the Combating International Islamophobia Act, which would, according to a press release posted on Omar’s website, “require the State Department to create a Special Envoy for monitoring and combating Islamophobia, and include state-sponsored Islamophobic violence and impunity in the Department’s annual human rights reports.”

This would supposedly “help policymakers better understand the interconnected, global problem of anti-Muslim bigotry. It will also establish a comprehensive strategy for establishing U.S. leadership in combatting Islamophobia worldwide.”

The press release said nothing whatsoever about combating jihad terror or about how suspicion of Islam may be created by the all too common spectacle of Muslims committing acts of violence while screaming “Allahu Akbar” and justifying their actions by reference to Islamic texts.

Omar and Schakowsky claimed that “this year, the United States has seen over 500 documented complaints of anti-Muslim hate and bias.” Their link went to another press release, this one from the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), claiming that these documented complaints include “hate crimes, harassment, school bullying, discrimination, hate speech, and anti-mosque incidents.”

“Hate speech”: this means that trivial incidents in which someone who is rude to a Muslim gets counted in as a hate crime, inflating the numbers of those crimes and contributing to the false impression that Muslims are victims of widespread discrimination and harassment in America today. With that low a bar, it’s no surprise that the press release at Omar’s site goes on to note that “in March, the United Nations Human Rights Council cited discrimination and hatred towards Muslims has risen to ‘epidemic proportions.”

Omar claimed that “we are seeing a rise in Islamophobia in nearly every corner of the globe. In my home state of Minnesota, vandals spray-painted hate messages and a Nazi swastika on and near the Moorhead Fargo Islamic Center. These types of incidents are all too common for Muslims in the United States and beyond. As part of our commitment to international religious freedom and human rights, we must recognize Islamophobia and do all we can to eradicate it. That’s why I’m proud to partner with Rep. Jan Schakowsky to create a special envoy to put an end to this bigotry.”

Really, that Nazi swastika business is terrible. But let’s try to keep some perspective, shall we? Muslims in Nigeria are subjecting Christians to murderous jihad attacks on a near-daily basis. Muslims in Pakistan persecute Christians and other religious minorities by means of that country’s draconian blasphemy laws, which have seen lives destroyed on rumors and false charges. Compared to that, some spray-painted graffiti just isn’t that big a deal, although certainly the louts who did it should be caught and prosecuted.

Omar doesn’t say anything about Muslims being beaten or murdered, or even denied jobs and preferment, in the United States, because such incidents are vanishingly rare; to establish her victimhood bona fides she has to fall back on graffiti.

Nonetheless, Schakowsky chimes in with a claim that is part accurate and part Leftist victimhood fantasy:

“For over a decade we have seen increasing incidents of violent Islamophobia both in the U.S. and worldwide — from the genocide of the Rohingya in Burma, and Uyghurs in China, to the attacks on Muslim refugees in Canada and New Zealand. It is past time for the U.S. to establish a comprehensive plan for combating this hatred worldwide. I am proud to join my friend and colleague, Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, in introducing the Combating International Islamophobia Act. This critical legislation will create a Special Envoy for Monitoring and Combating Islamophobia to ensure the U.S. dedicates the resources necessary to safeguard human rights and religious and cultural freedom around the world.”

All right. But will this Special Envoy for Monitoring and Combating Islamophobia note the large number of faked anti-Muslim hate crimes? Will this Envoy make a clear distinction between the two quite different ways the propaganda neologism “Islamophobia” is used? The term “Islamophobia” is an illegitimate conflation of two distinct phenomena: crimes against innocent Muslims, which are never justified, and honest analysis of the motivating ideology of jihad terror, which is always necessary.

Islamic advocacy groups and their leftist allies have been insisting for years that such analysis, too, constituted “Islamophobia.” Omar and Schakowsky speak of Islamophobic violence, but if this Special Envoy is created, he or she will without any doubt crack down on any honest discussion of how Islamic jihadis use the texts and teachings of Islam to justify violence and oppression, because for years such discussion has been labeled “Islamophobia” along with real acts of anti-Muslim bigotry.

The Special Envoy would just be another agent in the Left’s escalating war against freedom of speech, silencing opposition to jihad violence and Sharia oppression of women, and thereby enabling unarguably sinister forces. Don’t tell me you’re surprised.

RELATED ARTICLES:

ADL Head Slams Muslim Group CAIR for Its Antisemitism

Good News! Illegal Migrants Are Allowed to Fly Without ID

Pakistan: Christian cleric condemns blasphemy lynching, ‘No religion of the world teaches such kind of killing’

Pakistan: Punjab Chief Minister says Islam is a religion of peace, no room for evils such as terrorism

European Union moves to clamp down on ‘hate speech’

Israel: Muslim teenage girl stabs her Jewish neighbor in the back

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

Biden Administration Praises Taliban’s ‘Openness’ to Women’s Rights

What happens when you learn nothing from history.

In 2001, the Taliban blew up the giant Buddha statues. Now they’re charging tourists five bucks each to go see the statues that aren’t there. Considering the Islamic knack for destroying statues, tombs, historic buildings, and anything that isn’t a mosque, tourism can be tough.

Fortunately the Taliban have the opium business to fall back on.

While officially the Taliban deplore drugs, their takeover was partly backed by the country’s drug lords who were eager for an end to America’s war on drugs. Planting season has arrived and everyone is expecting a lot of drug money to start flowing into the Taliban’s terrorist coffers.

The Taliban response to international complaints has been the familiar drug shakedown.

“If the international community recognizes our government and we receive aid and development assistance, then poppies will definitely disappear,” a Taliban governor told the media.

Former U.S. administrations had offered aid in exchange for suspending the drug business. And while Afghanistan’s only real cash crop didn’t go away, the Jihadist bosses of the opium OPEC were willing to occasionally reduce production in exchange for cash from Uncle Sam.

The Biden administration is directing over a hundred million in aid to Afghanistan, but what the Taliban really want is the $9 billion in money from the former government they had overthrown.

That includes the $1.3 billion in gold sitting in Manhattan vaults near Ground Zero.

The Taliban would like that gold, but so would the families of the victims killed by the Taliban’s Al Qaeda allies on September 11.

The 9/11 families had sued the Taliban and won $7 billion in damages. But back then the Taliban didn’t have money just sitting around in downtown Manhattan.

That’s no longer the case.

Biden’s problem is the familiar one facing the Obama administration over judgements won by terror victims against Iran and the PLO. How do you funnel money to the terrorists without letting their victims get hold of it? The answer is that you pay secret ransoms or send “humanitarian aid”. Withholding money from terror victims to pay terror bosses looks tacky, so just turn the money into ransom for American hostages or medicine for crying local children.

And so despite the fact that the Taliban negotiate with all faiths other than their own in bad faith, the Biden administration is still negotiating with the terrorists who broke every previous deal.

A week after Thanksgiving, some of Biden’s boys from the State Department, USAID, the Treasury Department, and assorted spooks, flew off to talk turkey with the Taliban in Qatar.

The assortment of departments and agencies in the delegation to the terrorists was an interesting one. The State Department’s diplomats love to appease terrorists, USAID is there to dole out “humanitarian aid”, the spooks are there to ask the terrorists for info on the other terrorists, and the Treasury Department is there to discuss economic sanctions.

And how to bypass them.

All it takes is certifying that the Taliban are nice folks now and it’s time to work with them on feeding and clothing the Afghan people, not to mention educating the girls of Afghanistan.

A week after the Taliban banned women from television, Biden’s State Department spokesman Ned Price released a statement praising the Taliban’s “openness to engaging with the international community on full access to education”.

Price further claimed that the Islamic terrorist group which closed most schools to girls had actually “welcomed efforts to verify and monitor progress to enroll women and girls in school at all levels.”

The Taliban, apparently, also “asked for support in the education sector.”

Preferably in the form of cash, heroin, or Black Hawk helicopter parts.

According to the Taliban, 75% of girls are back in school. And if you believe that, you probably work for the State Department.

The Taliban’s newfound feminism is as suspect as that of Andrew Cuomo, Bill Clinton, Ted Kennedy, and Joe Biden, but they want money and Joe Biden wants to give it to them.

The levers for extracting that cash are a combination of blackmail and victimhood.

The Taliban will cash in on opium while the people starve. And then ask for money in exchange for shutting down the drug trade and then getting the people something to eat. The remaining Americans and Afghan visa recipients are also hostages who can be traded for more dollars.

That’s another reason why so very few of the visa recipients ever made it to the airport. And why the majority of those who did had no visas and no vetting, but probably did pay off the Taliban.

The Taliban can only make so much money from charging tourists to see the missing Buddhas.

The last year should have been a comprehensive education in why the Taliban can’t be trusted. After agreeing not to conquer Afghanistan, they went ahead and did it anyway. While they were doing that, the Biden administration, which is almost as trustworthy as the Taliban, assured the media, which is almost as trustworthy as the Biden administration, that everything was fine.

Now everything is fine again.

When the Taliban aren’t beheading members of female sports teams, they’re showing a great deal of “openness” to “engaging with the international community” on their feminism.

They’ll even field a fully progressive approved all-female sports team of men in burkas.

The Biden administration promised to leave Afghanistan, but the United States never leaves anywhere. Aside from taking in tens of thousands of Afghans into our country, we’re still on the hook for feeding, clothing, and educating the Afghans in Talibanland, not to mention Pakistan.

Even once the Taliban get their billions and their UN seat, we’ll still be sending them aid.

In December 2000, the State Department boasted that it had sent $113 million in “humanitarian assistance to the Afghan people”. It further bragged that the “United States is the largest single donor of assistance to Afghans, and has a long record of providing such assistance.”

All the while it acknowledged that the Taliban were mischievously harboring Osama bin Laden.

That money stolen from American taxpayers covered “food, housing, health and education programs” for the Afghans. And the State Department shamefully bragged that “of every ten dollars” in aid, “nine dollars is a United States contribution.”

Next year the Taliban contributed four airplanes directed at killing thousands of Americans.

Having learned nothing in twenty years, the Biden administration and its career diplomats expect Americans to continue funding a Taliban welfare state.

This time the Taliban really believe in feminism, they insist. This time they’re really committed to fighting terrorism. And this time they surely won’t host another terrorist attack on America.

As long as we pay them enough.

COLUMN BY

Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center specializing in investigative reporting on the Left and Islamic terrorism.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Biden Invites Pro-Taliban Pakistan to ‘Democracy Summit’

France: Muslim who murdered two people with knife complained about living in land of infidels

France: Teacher says Muslims students are ‘problem’ in Catholic schools, is suspended, fears for his life

Germany: Afghan Muslim asylum seeker rapes two girls, ages 11 and 13

RELATED VIDEO: David Wood and Robert Spencer on This Week in Jihad.

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

Hamas-linked CAIR’s Zahra Billoo: ‘Know your enemies,’ oppose even ‘the polite Zionist’

Elder of Ziyon notes: “Billoo declares that practically every Jewish organization in America is an enemy of Muslims. Not only that, but any organization that supports a two state solution is an enemy of Muslims. She doesn’t call them out explicitly, but that includes J-Street, that includes Peace Now, that includes Breaking the Silence. And she explicitly says that Hillels, the ADL, the Jewish Federations and even essentially all synagogues in America are the enemies of Muslims.”

Will this speech herald a crack in the coalition between Leftist Jews and Islamic supremacist groups? Stay tuned.

Original video:

MEMRI excerpt:

“CAIR Official Zahra Billoo: The Two-State Solution Is ‘Laughable’; Any Organization That Promotes It Is An Enemy; ADL, Jewish Federation, ‘Zionist Synagogues,’ Hillel Chapters Will Throw You Under The Bus,” MEMRI, November 25, 2021:

American activist Zahra Billoo, the executive-director of the San Francisco Bay Area branch of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-SFBA), said in a panel at the American Muslims for Palestine (AMP) Annual Conference, which took place in Chicago on November 27, 2021, that the two-state solution is “laughable” and that any organization that supports it is an enemy. She told the audience that the Anti-Defamation League, Jewish Federation, “Zionist Synagogues,” and Hillel chapters on “our campuses” are not their friends. Billoo said that they will throw the Muslims under the bus. She further urged the audience to donate monthly to AMP, because if they pay U.S. taxes, this means that they financially support “apartheid” every month.

The panel was streamed live on the American Muslims for Palestine YouTube channel, and CAIR executive-director Nihad Awad also participated in the panel (see MEMRI TV clips 9208, 3536, 3701, and 5279). Attendees included Linda Sarsour (see MEMRI TV clips nos. 6935, 6808, and 6111), Lamis Deek (see MEMRI TV clip no. 3430), and Taher Herzallah (see MEMRITV clip no. 7071).

Zahra Billoo: “We need to pay attention to the Anti-Defamation League. We need to pay attention to the Jewish Federation. We need to pay attention to the Zionist synagogues. We need to pay attention to the Hillel chapters on our campuses, because just because they are your friends today, doesn’t mean that they have your back when it comes to human rights.

“So oppose the vehement fascist, but oppose the polite Zionist too. They are not your friends. They will not be there for you when you need them. They will take your friendship and throw your Palestinian brothers and sisters under the bus. Oh! You get along because you are all in Girl Scouts together? Talk to them about what is happening in Palestine, and see how that conversation goes.

“And so, when we think about Islamophobia and Zionism, let’s be clear about the connections. There is no difference between domestic policy and foreign policy when it comes to our human rights. There is no difference between domestic policy and foreign policy when it comes to those who seek to target us.

[…]

“By the way, you should be a monthly donor to American Muslims for Palestine. Build it into your budget and forget about it. Make it your monthly contribution, because you are contributing to the apartheid monthly. It is a part of your budget. You are paying your taxes, so you should be giving money to AMP monthly.

[…]

“The list goes on. Know who is on your side. Build community with them, because the next thing I am going to tell you is to know your enemies. And I am not going to sugarcoat that, they are your enemies. There are organizations and infrastructures out there who are working to harm you. Make no mistake of it. They would sell you down the line if they could, and they very often do behind your back. I mean the Zionist organizations, I mean the foreign policy organizations who say they are not Zionists but want a two-state solution. I am not a Palestinian myself, but it is my understanding that that is laughable. So know your enemies.”

RELATED ARTICLES:

Like Obama, Biden Silent on Iran Mullahs Killing Peaceful Protesters

CAIR’s Nihad Awad declares Tel Aviv ‘occupied,’ prays for its ‘liberation’

Afghanistan: Taliban had sleeper agents in every major city, dressed like Westerners

PA TV program glorifies murder: ‘The blood of the martyrs draws the borders of the homeland’

UK soap opera shows ‘the positives of the Islamic faith and the shocking Islamophobia of far right groups’

RELATED VIDEO: Is Islam More Violent than Christianity? Dr. Javad T. Hashmi vs. Robert Spencer.

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

Just When You Thought The World Couldn’t Get More Idiotic

Here’s the latest installment in the Annals of Idiocy: “Inclusiveness: a European Commissioner recommends no longer using ‘Christmas,’ ‘Christian’ names and the masculine,” translated from “Inclusivité : une commissaire européenne recommande de ne plus utiliser “Noël”, les noms “chrétiens” et le masculin,” Valuers Actuelles, November 29, 2021 (thanks to Medforth):

European Equality Commissioner Helena Dalli launched an internal guide for inclusive communication at the end of October. This prohibits a number of expressions deemed to be stigmatizing according to gender, sexual identities, ethnic origins or culture, the Italian daily Il Giornale revealed on Sunday (November 28). These recommendations aim to “reflect diversity” and to fight against “stereotypes deeply rooted in individual and collective behavior.”

One “stereotype” that racists have is that many black people have names like “Dequan” and “Lashonda” and “Takeesha.” So in order to combat that stereotype, all such names should be banned. No sense giving white racists grist for their mill.

Using Italian names for gangsters in movies about the Mafia simply reinforces stereotypes about “Italo-American” criminals. The only solution is to make sure that no Italian names are used for Mafia members. “Henry” and “Charles” are acceptable as gangster names, but “Enrico” and “Carlo” are not. No Mafia gangster should be shown either cooking, or eating, a plate of pasta. Garlic should also not be mentioned.

Similarly, in a movie about Mexican drug traffickers, their names must not lead anyone to think that they are in any way “Mexican”; that would not be fair, as such names would only reinforce a “stereotype” that far too many of us unthinkingly accept. Give them names like “Randolph” and “James” and “Alice.” Under no conditions should any Mexican drug trafficker be called “El Chapo” or “El Gordo” or “El Mata Amigos.”

In general, the report suggests that no one should be identified on the basis of their particularity or in a way that is not [sic] offensive. For example, the use of the masculine form “by default” should be prohibited and the salutation “Dear Sir or Madam” should be replaced by “Dear Colleague.” Gender-specific terms such as “workmen” should also not be used. As the document – Dalli’s internal guide –is written in English, some recommendations are not applicable to other languages. The text also provides that one should never ” imply ” a person’s sexual orientation or even their gender identity. Similarly, it considers that a reference to elements of Christian culture “assumes that all people are Christians.” It therefore recommends deleting the reference to Christmas and speaking instead of “holidays.” Christian names such as “Mary” or “John” should be banned, according to the Commissioner.

But how can you write, say, an application letter for an academic job and use as your salutation — as Helena Dalli recommends – “Dear Colleague”? You aren’t anyone’s “colleague” yet – that’s what you are applying to be – and use of that salutation would merely come across as presumptuous, and likely nip in the bud your chances to be hired.

To eliminate all gender specific names, start with the easy ones. Thus “workman” can become “worker.” But what do we do when we come, say, to weddings, where there is an insufficiently “inclusive” focus on the “man” and the “woman”? Revise the text. “Do you take this man to be your lawful wedded husband” should instead become “Do you take this man or woman or non-binary other, to be your lawful wedded husband or wife or non-binary other”? Eventually it might be a good idea to provide a single word that can refer equally to both “husband” and “wife.” We’re working on it.

Using the “masculine” form “by default” should. be avoided, according to Helena Dalli, EU Equal Opportunities Commissioner, working tirelessly to make the world a better place by erasing all distinctions. But “Dear Sir or Madam” doesn’t use the “masculine” form “by default” – it carefully allows, in full diversity-inclusivity-equity mode, both the masculine and the feminine possibilities.

The claim that a reference to “elements of Christian culture” necessarily “assumes that all people are Christian” is utter nonsense. If I mention “the Bamiyan Buddhas,” does this make me guilty of assuming “that all people are Buddhist”? If I write that “the holiday of Diwali is observed differently by Hindus, Jains, Sikhs and Buddhists, creating a rich tapestry of cultural traditions and customs,” have I thereby assumed that everybody in the world is either “Hindu, Jain, Sikh, or Buddhist”? If I mention “Hanukkah” or a menorah, or show on YouTube a lesson on “how to spin a dreidl,” have I assumed that everyone in the world is “Jewish”? Should all references to the Bible be eliminated, because such references would be unacceptable, as “too Christian” or too “Judeo-Christian”? Surely we can’t have that in our brave new world that hath such creatures in it as Helena Dalli. Indeed, as the Bible itself is a venerable vehicle for what we now recognize as sexism, why not go beyond forbidding the reading of the Bible, and make possession of the book itself a crime?

Helena Dalli, the powerful EU Commissioner, thinks we need to rid the world of names that are too linked to Christianity. She mentions as examples of names that must no longer be used “Mary” and “John.” But these are just the names that come immediately to mind. We need to get rid as well of other names smacking of Christianity, including “Peter,” “Simon,” Thomas,” “Joseph,” “Martha,” “Christopher,” George” (which makes one think of “Saint George”), “Andrew,” “Samuel” and so many more names that are “too Christian” for Christians – or anyone else — to use.

But why does Helena Dalli not mention the need to abolish names that are “too connected” to the religion of Islam? Why should “Mary” and “John” be eliminated, but “Mohammed” and its many variants — Mahmoud, Ahmad, Muhammad, Magomed, Mahmad, Mehmet, Mamadou, Muhammadu, Mahamed, Mohamad, Mohamed, Mohammad, and so on – be tolerated inside the EU? Helena Dalli should provide us with a list of names that she believes are unacceptably linked to religions other than Christianity, the sole faith she mentions and for which she appears to bear a deep animus. Then we can get to work banning those names as well.

She’s also against mention of the very word “Christmas.”

Even the expression “colonizing of Mars” is considered negative, as it would be reminiscent of colonialism, and should be replaced by the phrase “sending people to Mars.” The report [by Helena Dalli] also advocates a form of positive discrimination. It suggests not convening working groups where only one gender is represented and thinking about inviting people from different ethnicities to events and photo shoots. Helena Dalli has already been criticized for the polemical campaign “Freedom with the Hijab” and the participation of Islamist associations in the campaign.

It will be fascinating to see if the EU Commissioner manages to make every single working group at the EU “gender diverse.” How will such a rule work in practice, particularly with the Muslims, whose unequal treatment of men and woman is legitimized in the Qur’an itself and who insist even on separating male from female worshippers in the mosque?

A verse in the Quran – 4:34 – gives husbands the right to “beat” their wives if they even suspect them of “disobedience.” Honor killings by Muslim men of their wives, daughters, sisters, and daughters-in-law – which may be prompted by a multitude of sins committed by females in the family, such as refusing to wear a hijab, or being seen talking to a non-Muslim boy – lead to very light punishment or in some cases to no punishment at all. The misogyny of Islam can also be seen in the fact that a Muslim woman’s testimony is worth only half that of a man, and a daughter inherits only half what a son receives. Will Helena Dalli be able to force Muslim males to include females in their meetings? I suspect she will not even try. Her desire to impose restrictions of all kinds on “religions” ends up with her applying her humorless and bizarre restrictions to one religion only – Christianity.

As for doing away with the very word “Christmas,” the cast of Seinfeld, trying to be as ridiculous as possible, already provided some years ago a different word for that day, even less “Christian” than the word “holiday” (which derives from “holy day”); they called it “Festivus.” That should please Helena Dalli. A Festivus Tree, Festivus Lights, Festivus Presents, Festivus Cards. What’s not to like?

I know what you’re thinking. You are thinking that her idiocy will be rejected all those who have kept their wits about them, that the thinking world will rise up and laugh to scorn Ms./Mrs.Mr./Non-binary/Equal opportunity Helena Dalli. But she’s not just some Hyde Park Corner lunatic; she’s the EU Equal Opportunities Commissioner. In that post she can do – she’s already done — a lot of damage. She needs not just to be laughed at, but to be relieved of her position. Please, EU, put her, and therefore us, out of her misery.

COLUMN BY

RELATED ARTICLES:

UK: Another Muslim rape gang busted, 39 men plus three women who allowed premises to be used

Turkey: One in three women has been a victim of domestic violence

France: Government organizes Islamic exhibitions to teach the French to accept cultural differences

Ilhan Omar plays audio of death threat she claims she received on her voicemail

Australia: Muslim family stabs daughter at shopping center because she was dating a Christian

UN holds pro-Palestinian conference on anniversary of recognizing Israeli statehood

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

ALMOST NONE of the 82,000 Afghans Airlifted From Kabul in August Were Vetted Before Coming to the U.S.

My latest in PJ Media:

Back in September, Old Joe Biden’s teleprompter offered some reassurance to the American people: “Planes taking off from Kabul are not flying directly to the United States. They’re landing at U.S. military bases and transit centers around the world. At these sites where they are landing, we are conducting thorough scrutiny — security screenings for everyone who is not a U.S. citizen or a lawful permanent resident.” Will it really surprise you, after ten months of this hard-Left, habitually dishonest administration, to discover that he was lying?

The reality is that almost none of the 82,000 Afghans who are now in the United States after being airlifted out of Kabul in August were vetted first. There could be any number of jihad terrorists and other criminals among them, but there is no way to know for sure until they actually commit crimes. Until then, celebrate diversity!

This revelation comes from a memo that Senate Republicans drafted in October, in which, according to a Wednesday report in the Washington Examiner, “senior officials across the departments of Homeland Security, Defense, State, and Justice described a disastrous screening and vetting process.” This process relied completely on databases of criminals and terrorists, which were incomplete in the best of times and even less useful in the chaotic situation of the disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan. Biden administration officials accepted at face value what these Afghan evacuees told them about themselves, without making any effort at all to check whether or not the evacuees’ claims were true.

What’s more, the Examiner reports that “the large majority of people, approximately 75%, evacuated were not American citizens, green card holders, Afghan Special Immigrant Visa holders, or applicants for the visa.” The Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) was given to Afghans who aided U.S. forces during our twenty-year misadventure in the country. As bad as the 75% figures was, it represented a slight improvement over the situation at the beginning of September, when Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas admitted that “of the 60,000 Afghans who have entered the U.S., nearly 8,000 are either U.S. citizens or residents, while about 1,800 are SIV holders, having obtained visas after assisting the U.S. military.” That is, 52,000, or 86 percent, were not U.S. citizens or SIV holders. However, Senator Rob Portman (R-OH) noted in early November that as of the beginning of October, only 700 of the 82,000 Afghans who had already been brought to the United States had SIVs.

Biden himself wasn’t the only one who promised that the Afghans they were bringing into the United States by the thousands would be thoroughly vetted. State Department wonk Ned Price was just as firm: “Before anyone who is evacuated from Afghanistan comes to this country, they undergo a rigorous vet. Unless and until they complete that vet they will not be in a position to come to the U.S.”

There is more. Read the rest here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

New York: Muslim aids Islamic State, says ‘there will come a time where people will only know to say Allahu Akbar’

Biden Administration Didn’t Actually Bother Vetting Afghan Refugees

India, November 26, 2008: Islamic Jihadis Execute Mumbai Jihad Massacres, Apologists Claimed It Was Hindu Terror

Germany: Refugees from Muslim countries protest call to prayer, they had to listen to it while being tortured

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

Why Should Academic Departments Have Foreign Policies?

When did academic departments decide they had to declare themselves on the Palestinian-Israeli dispute but on no other foreign policy question? And why are they so eager to express their visceral hatred of the Jewish state? A report on this disturbing phenomenon is here: “Academic departments must steer clear of anti-Israel activism,” by Richard L. Cravatts, Israel Hayom, November 12, 2021:

The obsessive loathing of Israel by large swathes of academia was evident this past spring as Hamas showered Israeli population centers with more than 4,000 rockets and mortars. Instead of denouncing genocidal aggression on the part of Hamas, these woke, virtue-signaling moral narcissists took it upon themselves to condemn – in the loudest and most condemnatory terms — the Jewish state, not the homicidal psychopaths intent on murdering Jews….

There is a difference between an individual expressing an opinion on, say, social media. That opinion is his alone. No pressure has been placed on him to express it. But when academic departments put out what are presented as that department’s — presumably unanimous — opinion, those who may not agree with the majority seldom dare to express their minority opinion in the daggers-drawn atmosphere of current academic life, where dissent is only for the tenured, and even they must be very brave, to express solidarity with, or sympathy for, the embattled Jewish state that has been so demonized in the swamps of academe.

At the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Cary Nelson, former president of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) and professor emeritus of English, challenged the propriety of departments authoring statements of support for the Palestinian cause while vilifying and denouncing Israel in the process. Four academic units at Illinois had issued anti-Israel statements in the spring – the Department of Gender and Women’s Studies, Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Department of Asian American Studies, and the Department of History – prompting Nelson and 43 of his fellow faculty to write a letter to Chancellor Robert Jones and Provost Andreas Cangellaris.

In that letter, the faculty noted that “the statements in question were not issued by individual faculty or groups of faculty. They were subscribed to by departments … [and] have been placed on websites and disseminated through social media and email, which created the impression that the unit was speaking for all or most of the faculty within it. This represents a worrisome development. And it is worrisome irrespective of one’s views on the dispute between Israelis and Palestinians.”…

These “departmental opinions” are the result of an atmosphere of intellectual intimidation, with those not subscribing to the majority view nonetheless being “spoken for.” Did absolutely every faculty member, for example, in the Department of Urban and Regional Planning, agree that Israel is an arch-villain? Or was such an opinion presented by a handful of anti-Israel activists, without the agreement or even, possibly, the knowledge, of all of that department’s members? Did the Department of Gender and Women’s Studies decide, as in the Soviet Union, that “for the good of the Party” no dissent could be allowed and simply rode roughshod over those who dared to even mildly disagree with the kind of hysterical language that is used to blacken Israel’s image? And did the members of that same department not know, or not care, that it is the Palestinians who, as Muslims, allow husbands to “beat” their wives should they be even suspected of “disobedience”? It is the Palestinians who engage in “honor killings” of girls and women by their menfolk, who may then be let off with a short prison sentence, or too often receive no punishment at all. It is Israel that guarantees the legal equality of men and women, and it is the Palestinians who violate that equality at every turn, yet here is the Department of Gender and Women’s Studies standing foursquare with those who mistreat women, while it rages against those who defend their rights.

Academic life is supposed to be dedicated, among other things, to the pursuit of the truth. Far from the madding crowd’s ignoble strife, professors have the great privilege of time – time to investigate matters of interest to them, time to weigh competing claims, time to analyze, to praise and to blame. The May conflict was only a few days old when academic departments issued their summary judgments against Israel. There is a rush to judgment when it comes to Israel. What led these departments to think they had to express the “department’s” opinion, instead of letting individual faculty members have their say, or if they wished, choose to say nothing at all? Why this insensate urge to force a false consensus, through veiled threats of retribution if someone fails to toe the anti-Israel line – threats that too often are successful? Those who disagree with the consensus find it more prudent to simply remain silent, rather than make enemies of fellow members of the department. For non-tenured faculty, it’s obvious why such a choice is made. But even tenured faculty may want to keep their heads down, avoid trouble, concentrate on their own work, and hope that the madness passes.

For academic departments to pronounce with such authority, on things they know so little, or nothing, about, is intolerable. Academics who have no special knowledge of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict presume that their opinions deserve special respect. They should be heeded simply because they are professors, no matter how distant their field may be from what they pontificate about. As an example, let’s look at how four departments at the University of Illinois presented what we were to assume were the collective views of its members.

Let’s start with the Department of Urban and Regional Planning at the University of Illinois, which denounces Israel in hysterical terms, charging it with the “illegal occupation of Palestinian land”; a “siege, indiscriminate destruction and massacres in Gaza”; “state-sanctioned execution of Palestinian people”; and, echoing the venomous blood libel promoted by Rutgers professor Jasbir Puar, among others, the “deliberate maiming of Palestinian bodies.”

First, there is no “illegal occupation of Palestinian land.” Israel, in a war of self-defense started in May by Gamal Abdel Nasser, won by force of arms both Gaza and Judea and Samaria (a/k/a the West Bank). The victory in the Six-Day War did not create Israel’s claim to these territories, but allowed it to exercise its preexisting claim. Israel has a right, under the Mandate for Palestine, Article 6, to establish “close settlement by Jews on the land.” What land? All the land from the Golan in the north to the Red Sea in the south, and from the Jordan River in the east to the Mediterranean in the west – the land that the League of Nations intended to be part of the future Jewish National Home. Have these professors of urban planning read the Mandate for Palestine? The San Remo Treaty? Article 80 of the U.N. Charter? U.N. Security Council Resolution 242? Don’t be silly.

Israel gave up Gaza in 2005, pulling out all 8,500 Israelis who had been living the Strip. There is no “siege” of Gaza, as the Department of Urban Planning at the University of Illinois insists. Electricity, water, and natural gas are all supplied by Israel to the people of Gaza. There is no attempt to keep out any medicines or food. There is a blockade, but that is on goods that can be used by the terror group Hamas, which has run Gaza since 2007, in attacks on Israel. Thus, the supplies allowed into Gaza of some building materials, such as cement, are limited. For they are deemed to be “dual-use” materials, because they can be used innocuously to build apartments, but can also be used to build such things as emplacements for rocket launchers and terror tunnels.

There are no “indiscriminate destruction and massacres in Gaza.” Israeli pilots pinpoint their targets; there is no carpet bombing. Hamas places its weapons, its rocket launchers, its command-and-control centers, in or next to schools, hospitals, apartment buildings, even mosques. Israel tries very hard to minimize civilian casualties. When a target has been chosen, the Israelis warn inhabitants to leave the building, through various means – telephoning, leafletting, emailing, and use of the “knock-on-the-roof” technique. Ordinarily the Palestinians have between 15 minutes and two hours to leave. There have been no “massacres in Gaza.” In the 11-day conflict this past May, of the 260 Palestinians killed, 225 of them were determined, through the tracking of death notices, to have been Hamas fighters; 25 of them were senior commanders of the terror group. Only a few dozen of those killed could have been civilians. And there were no reports of any “massacres.” The professors in the Department of Urban Planning were simply throwing in Israel’s direction whatever grotesque charges they could fabricate against the Jewish state, counting on some of it to stick.

Similarly, there has been no “state-sanctioned execution of Palestinian people.” The IDF, as British Colonel Richard Kemp has noted, is the “most moral army in the world.” It makes heroic efforts to protect civilian lives through every possible method of warning inhabitants in or near buildings soon to be hit. Israeli pilots have been known to call off their mission if they spot children too near to the target; this happened several times during the May war.

Let’s look at the less extreme statement of the History Department at the same university.

The Executive Committee of the Department of History issued a briefer statement by email that condemned “the state violence that the Israeli government and its security forces have been carrying out in Gaza” and “standing in solidarity with Palestine and support for the struggle for Palestinian liberation” – “liberation” being a euphemism for the Middle East without Israel and free of Jewish sovereignty on Muslim land.

The statement was put out in an email, as if all members of the History Department agreed to its contents. By what right did the “Executive Committee” presume to speak for the whole department? And why does it describe as Israeli “state violence” a war that began on May 10, when Hamas launched hundreds of rockets at civilian areas of Israel, and Israel did what any nation-state would do – it fought back in defense of its people, hitting in response Hamas rockets, rocket launchers, command-and-control centers, fighters, and a network of terror tunnels? What should Israel have done? Simply let those 4,500 rockets that Hamas flung toward Israeli cities such as Ashdod and Ashkelon land without trying to hit back, in self-defense, at Hamas – its weapons depots, its rocket launchers, its fighters – so that it could no longer launch those rockets? Why is this self-defense described as “state violence”? Would America have done differently?

As for that claim of “standing in solidarity with Palestine , and support or the struggle for Palestinian liberation,” as Richard Cravatts, correctly notes, that is code for the replacement of Israel, “from the river to the sea,” by a Palestinian state. That’s what the History Department’s members – all of them – are made to seemingly endorse. How many of them are happy with that?

Immersed in the ideology of multiculturalism and the intersectionality of oppression, the Department of Asian American Studies condemned “the ongoing 73 years of settler-colonial violence against Palestine and the Palestinian people” and “the exploitation, theft and colonization of land and labor everywhere, including in Palestine. To this, we say no more.”

According to the Department of Asian-American Studies, then, since its very founding in 1948, Israel has been engaged in “settler-colonial violence against Palestine and the Palestinian people.” But there were no “settlers” in 1948, or 1958, or 1968. There was “violence” in 1948, but it was the violence started by five Arab armies that attacked the Jewish state on May 15, 1948, ignoring Israel’s offer of peace, as they tried to snuff out the young life of the nascent state of Israel. Israel was fighting for its survival, as it would have to again do so in the wars of 1967 and 1973. Those people denounced as “settler-colonials” in 1948 consisted of the following: Jews whose families had been living uninterruptedly in the Land of Israel for centuries; Zionist pioneers who had, beginning in about 1900, been making aliyah, buying land from Arab and Turkish landowners and settling on it; Jews who had fled Arab lands where they had lived for centuries, with many more of them –some 850,000 in all – fleeing in the late 1940s and early 1950s, with most of them choosing to settle in Israel; Jews who had managed to escape from Europe just before World War II; Jews who had survived the Nazis and arrived in Israel from DP camps after the war. These were the people, so many of them survivors of terrible ordeals in Europe and in Arab lands, who are now being denounced by this all-knowing “Department of Asian-American Studies” in Illinois as “settler-colonials,” for managing to find refuge in what would become, in 1948, the tiny Jewish state, and then for helping to rebuild that ancient Jewish commonwealth in the Land of Israel.

Another point to consider: the Asian-American Studies Department statement includes this: “the exploitation, theft, and colonization of land and labor everywhere, including in Palestine.” So, we are told, this “exploitation, theft, and colonization” by Jews goes on everywhere, including Palestine. Isn’t this a statement that would not be out of place in Mein Kampf?

The Department of Gender and Women’s Studies signed a statement, “Gender Studies Departments in Solidarity with Palestinian Feminist Collective,” along with some 100 other gender-studies departments. With the characteristic pseudo-intellectual babble that currently dilutes the scholarly relevance of the social sciences and humanities, the “solidarity statement” pretentiously announced that “as gender-studies departments in the United States, we are the proud benefactors of decades of feminist anti-racist, and anti-colonial activism that informs the foundation of our interdiscipline” [sic] and that “‘Palestine is a Feminist Issue.’”…

The Department of Gender and Women’s Studies asserts that “Palestine is a Feminist Issue.” And so it is, but not in the way the good professors in the department seem to think. To repeat what I wrote yesterday on the subject: It is the Palestinians who, as Muslims, allow husbands to “beat” their wives should they be even suspected of “disobedience,” it is the Palestinians who engage in “honor killings” of girls and women by their husbands, fathers, brothers, who may then be let off with a short prison sentence, or too often, receive no punishment at all. It Is the Palestinians who enforce dress codes on “their women,” who value the testimony of females as half that of males; who have girls and women inherit half what a male inherits. Israel, by contrast, guarantees the legal and social equality of men and women, while the Palestinians violate that equality at every turn, yet here is the Department of Gender and Women’s Studies standing foursquare with those who mistreat women, while it inveighs against those who defend their rights.

Three points suggest themselves:

First, let every man and woman speak for himself or herself. Don’t force people into letting their Department speak for them. Not even professors should be made to suffer that.

Second, academics, like cobblers, should stick to their last.

Third, “whereof we do not know, thereof we should not speak.”

Come to think of it, the third point is really just the second one, expressed less succinctly. But it bears repetition.

COLUMN BY

RELATED ARTICLES:

UK: Labour MP claims Muslims are ‘suffering racial hatred’ after Liverpool jihad suicide bombing

Austria: Muslima had hundreds of images of ‘executions of unbelievers,’ wanted to sacrifice her life for ISIS

Nigeria: Muslims have murdered over 137,000 people in Benue state

France: Muslim prisoner screaming ‘Allahu akbar’ stabs two guards

Austria: Public broadcaster deletes report on persecution of Christians and Jews in Europe, without explanation

UN envoy: Taliban ‘unable to stem’ Islamic State growth as it spreads to ‘nearly all’ Afghan provinces

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

Hamas-linked CAIR accuses College Democrats of America of ‘Islamophobia’

Democrats supporting Israel’s self-defense against the “Palestinian” jihad? That isn’t allowed. Hamas-linked CAIR is ensuring that the miscreants get back in line, and pronto. Independent thought? Pshaw! That’s only for “right-wingers.”

Muslim advocacy group accuses College Democrats of ‘Islamophobia

by Sean Salai, Washington Times, November 12, 2021:

A Muslim advocacy group is accusing the College Democrats of America of “Islamophobia” for harassing one of their officers on social media over pro-Palestinian comments she made online as a child.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) this week called in a letter for the Democratic Party-affiliated group to open an “independent investigation” with the intent of disciplining or expelling the unnamed members who “repeatedly harassed” Rollins College senior Nourhan Mesbah on social media when she ran successfully for national vice president in August.

The harassment includes the members’ “liking” a social media comment that read in part: “Boot this jihadist out, no room for racist totalitarianism,” CAIR says.

In the letter sent this week to College Democrats President Jalen Miller, CAIR’s national deputy director Edward Mitchell also accuses the CDA members of “weaponizing” an “anti-Muslim” political ad against Ms. Mesbah over the pro-Palestinian comment she said she regretted making online as a 13-year-old.

“Anti-Muslim bigotry is not unique to any particular party, and no party is immune to it,” Mr. Mitchell told The Washington Times on Friday.

“The perception is that only the Republicans have a problem with Muslims, but the truth is that you find Islamaphobia [sic] on the Democratic side, too,” he added.

Ms. Mesbah declined to discuss the incident, which erupted after the ad featuring her childhood comment prompted fellow College Democrats to accuse her of antisemitism and push for her censure.

The letter includes testimony from several Muslim members of the organization, including College Democrats Muslim Caucus Chair Tyrese Rice, who complained on Ms. Mesbah’s behalf about the “bigoted and imbalanced implications of the organization” at both the state and national levels.

“There was a lack of Muslim representation and an underlying stigma against discussion [of] related topics and concepts,” Mr. Rice said about the College Democrats when he first joined them.

Another comment in the letter from an anonymous student says CDA perpetuates a culture of hostility toward “Palestinian liberation” and silences Muslim students who speak up about it.

“By creating a space to allow Muslim members to be called ‘jihadist[s]’ among other names, we have abandoned our progressive ideals,” the student writes.

The College Democrats have not responded to Mr. Mitchell’s letter, and their spokesman did not respond Friday to telephone and email requests for comment.

Reached Friday afternoon, a spokesperson for the Democratic National Committee declined to comment on the dispute….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Germany: Police conceal face of Muslim migrant rapist of 15-year-old girl in asking people to watch for him

Bangladesh: Hindu population steadily declining in the face of Muslim persecution

Burkina Faso: Muslims murder at least 19 people in jihad raid on military police post

UK taxpayers to back solar project in Turkey up to $291,000,000

Turkey: No Budget from Government for Schools Run by Armenians, Jews and Greeks

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

Just What You’ve Been Waiting For: Benetton is Now Offering a Unisex Hijab!

My latest in PJ Media:

As American society, and Western society in general, progresses from glory to glory and grows more woke by the day, the trendy Italian brand United Colors of Benetton is offering an exciting new item, just in time for the Christmas season: a unisex hijab. It’s described as a “unisex hijab in stretch fabric. Multicolor monogram print with Benetton logo joined to the G of Ghali. Small logo printed on the left side. This accessory belongs to the ‘United Colors of Ghali’ capsule collection, created by Ghali.”

One wonders who Benetton execs think will want this item. After all, the hijab is prescribed in Islamic law specifically for women. The idea of a man wearing one would be considered absurd because the whole idea of a hijab is to remove the source of temptation for men. If a man is tempted anyway and a woman ends up being sexually assaulted or raped, it’s her fault. Because the hijab is an important part of a woman’s responsibility under Sharia, many women have been brutalized and even killed for not wearing it.

There are, unfortunately, numerous available examples of this brutalization, and many others whom we will never know because such matters are often not considered news fit to print in Sharia states. In Mississauga, Ontario a few years ago, Aqsa Parvez’s Muslim father choked her to death with her hijab after she refused to wear it. Amina Muse Ali, a Christian woman in Somalia, was also murdered because she wasn’t wearing a hijab. 40 women were murdered in Iraq in 2007 for not wearing the hijab. Fifteen girls in Saudi Arabia were killed when the religious police wouldn’t let them leave their burning school building because they had taken off their hijabs in their all-female environment.

A mid-October incident in Egypt reinforced the idea that the hijab is a symbol of the oppression of women, and a pretext for their brutalization. A female pharmacist named Isis Mustafa went to work as usual at a health facility in the village of Kfar Atallah; however, on this day something was different: Mustafa was not wearing a hijab. According to the Arabic-language El Balad, Mustafa’s female colleagues were enraged. They set upon her, beat her, and dragged her by her uncovered hair.

So why would a man wear a hijab? To ward off the advances of other men? To remove a source of temptation from gay Muslims? In a majority-Muslim country, a man who wore a hijab would likely be considered insane. In the woke West in 2021, such a man is making a fashion statement.

There is more. Read the rest here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Yemen: Model charged with ‘violating Islamic dress codes’ imprisoned for five years

Finally: Pentagon Ratcheting Up Efforts to Get Americans Out of Afghanistan

The UK Muslim, CIA Operative, and Author of ‘I Posed as a Man Online for Sex’ Behind the Dems’ Censorship Campaign

Germany: Churches criticized for remaining ‘incredibly mute’ in the face of ‘Muslim contempt for Christians’

Mozambique: Islamic State grows in strength and brutality, while broadening international ties

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

Poland vows to ‘defend Europe’ from ‘migrant invasion’ unleashed by Belarusian dictator Lukashenko

Lukashenko’s motive:

Brussels accuses Belarus’s disputed leader of provoking the influx in retaliation against EU sanctions, imposed after his widely discredited re-election and subsequent crackdown on mass protests.

Days ago, Bulgaria sent 350 troops to the Turkish border as illegal Afghan migrant crossings tripled. “Migrants have described how Belarusian authorities seized their phones and pushed them towards the border fence. Overnight temperatures at the border have slumped below zero and several people have already died in recent weeks.”

But aside from political reasons, since the Syrian migrant crisis of 2015 and beyond, Poland has demonstrated its resolve in defending its borders and sovereignty from an invasion of Muslim migrants, while the EU undermined Polish efforts, relentlessly pressuring Poland (and Hungary) to take in migrant “quotas.”

During the Syrian crisis, the Islamic State found success in infiltrating the refugee stream, thanks to reckless politicians. The risk from jihadist infiltration of countries with open borders is no less now with the influx of refugees from Afghanistan.

While most of the globalist EU supports open, unvetted migration, as well as the UK’s Boris Johnson government, despite the fact that Britain left the EU due to open-door immigration.

Warsaw called the “action ‘an invasion’ and declared it was sending 12,000 troops to reinforce 10,000 already stationed along the frontier.” This should serve as an example to other EU countries, some of which are beginning to wake up. 12 EU countries were recently rejected by the EU for their request for EU financing to help build barrier walls to keep out illegal migration from Afghanistan, which presents obvious security issues.

We will defend our country and the entire EU’: Polish soldiers force back hundreds of migrants at the border with pepper spray after Belarus dictator Lukashenko sent 1,000 refugees to invade

by Will Stewart, Ed Wight, Ross Ibbetson, and David Averre, MailOnline, November 8, 2021:

Poland has vowed to ‘defend Europe’ from a ‘migrant invasion’ unleashed by Belarusian dictator Alexander Lukashenko whose forces have coerced more than 1,000 refugees to smash through the border.

Desperate migrants gathered at the Belarusian frontier with Poland on Monday, attempting to hack down a barbed-wire fence only to meet a phalanx of Polish guards who forced them back with pepper spray.

Middle Eastern and African migrants have been flown into Belarus by Lukashenko who is using them as human cannon fodder in his battle with the EU, the US and Britain, after they imposed sanctions following a violent political crackdown, which included forcing a Ryanair flight from the sky in May.

Poland’s Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki said: ‘The Polish government is determined and we will defend the security of our country and the entire EU, respecting our international obligations and bearing in mind, above all, the interests of the state and the safety of Polish soldiers, Border Guard officers and citizens.’

Warsaw called today’s action ‘an invasion’ and declared it was sending 12,000 troops to reinforce 10,000 already stationed along the frontier.

Polish soldiers were seen pepper-spraying the migrants from behind a barbed-wire barrier as the desperate people tried to hack it down with branches and spades.

At other sections of the line, small children were held up by desperate parents who pleaded with the Polish forces to let them through, while others chanted: ‘Germany,’ renowned for its hospitality towards refugees.

Poland said on Monday it had repelled an attempt by hundreds of migrants to illegally cross the border with Belarus, but that thousands more were on the way and future attempts to breach its frontier could be ‘armed in nature’.

Defense Ministry video taken later Monday showed the migrants settling in for the night by the border, having put up scores of tents and cooking meals.

A NATO official called the use of migrants ‘a hybrid tactic’, meaning a combined military-political operation, and said: ‘NATO stands ready to further assist our allies, and maintain safety and security in the region’….

RELATED ARTICLE: Bangladesh: Muslims threaten Christian family, force them to leave their home, steal their land

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

FBI again claims that ‘white supremacists’ pose as great a threat to the U.S. as Islamic State jihadis

You just don’t see “white supremacist” terror attacks and plots around the U.S., while any regular reader of Jihad Watch knows that there are Islamic State jihad plots caught here fairly often.

Why is that?

Are “white supremacists” better able to cover their tracks? Or is the whole idea of a massive “white supremacist” terror threat an attempt to silence and destroy the political opposition by first smearing it as “white supremacist” and then as terrorist?

White supremacist threat to US as great as Islamic State, FBI tells Congress

by Alex Woodward, Independent, November 4, 2021:

Federal law enforcement has once again warned members of Congress that white supremacists and other domestic extremists pose as great a threat to the US as Islamic State militants, a familiar warning to lawmakers after repeated advisories have pointed to the rise of racist violence and conspiracy theories that have proliferated online.

Officials with the FBI and Department of Homeland Security also told…

RELATED ARTICLES:

CARTELVILLE USA: Mexican Drug Cartels Take Over Small Town California

Shocking and Frightful Video of Immigrants Across Europe Causing Chaos

Pakistan: Muslims attack and fire upon Christians in order to seize their lands

VIDEO: ‘Inside the World of Sharia’ by Anni Cyrus

Muslim Migrant Goes on Knife Rampage On High Speed Train in Germany, 3 STABBED

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

Soldiers Forced to Bunk Outdoors While Afghan Refugees Slept in Their Barracks

Afghans first, Americans last.

In 2019, members of the 2nd Battalion, 127th Infantry returned home from Afghanistan. In early October, the 127th left Appleton, Wisconsin and traveled to Fort McCoy for training.

Unfortunately, Fort McCoy was already occupied by an estimated 13,000 Afghan “refugees”.

According to Rep. Tom Tiffany, who has paid several visits to Fort McCoy, the base only has the capacity to house 10,000 people, and is struggling to cope with the overflow in tents. When they first arrived some 600 Afghans had been quarantined with a variety of infectious conditions.

Fort McCoy, located in rural Wisconsin between the small cities of Sparta and Tomah, started out as an artillery range and its barracks were intended to house military personnel arriving for training exercises, not huge numbers of foreign migrants. The barracks, which were built during World War II, are in poor condition and a new construction project only recently got underway.

Even while hosting the largest population of Afghan migrants in the country, Fort McCoy struggled to maintain its training role. Over 100,000 troops had trained there during the fiscal year with personnel from all of the services participating in everything from cold weather operations (it gets pretty cold in that part of the country) and various exercises.

When the 127th arrived, the barracks they were meant to sleep in had already been taken. With Afghans sleeping in their barracks and their beds, they reportedly had to sleep outside instead.

“The summers are warm and wet; the winters are freezing, snowy, and windy,” is how the local weather has been described. In October the weather had begun its slow descent from warm and wet to freezing, but it was not the Afghans who were expected to deal with the weather.

According to a Department of Defense spokesperson, “The 2-127 Infantry Battalion was offered access to the hard structures in the field, as the barracks on post are currently occupied by our Afghan guests.” The spokesperson also insisted that, “There were no unexpected weather events during the training and no impact to the Fort McCoy mission or training for the service members.” And yet according to some the impact on morale has been quite serious.

The displacement of American soldiers to make way for Afghan migrants was symbolic of events in Washington D.C. and at Fort McCoy where refugee meals closely follow Islamic Sharia and liquor was removed from the shelves of the PX so as not to offend the Afghans.

The men of the “Red Arrow” are used to challenges. With a history that includes the Iron Brigade of the Civil War and the Les Terribles in WWI, and as members of the Wisconsin National Guard, they’re not afraid of weather. But the displacement drove home to them where the priorities of the military brass lie, not with the soldiers who served in Afghanistan, but the Afghans whom the Taliban waved past their terrorist checkpoints in Kabul and on to America.

Some no longer recognize Fort McCoy, divided into Afghan “neighborhoods” where the hated Shuras (an Islamic form of tribal governance) have been reconvened and are dictating to base personnel the way that they did during the failed “hearts and minds” efforts in Afghanistan.

The national media, which had little interest in Fort McCoy when it was filled with American heroes training to save lives and win wars, has swarmed over the place. The Today Show, among many others, has filmed canned propaganda segments touting carefully selected Afghan refugees, usually young, western, and female, who locals say are unrepresentative of the thousands of covered and frightened young women, many of them pregnant, in the barracks.

Sources say that reporters are asked to leave their cars behind in the visitor lot and then bused over to selected locations. Camera interviews are usually conducted at the main gate to avoid anything problematic in the background.

What are they worried about?

Since the Afghans swarmed into Fort McCoy, two Afghan refugees are federal facing charges, one for “attempting to engage in a sexual act with a minor” and another for “assaulting his spouse by strangling and suffocating her”. But that may only be the tip of a very large iceberg.

A leaked State Department document contained multiple reports of “child brides” and polygamous marriages at Fort McCoy. Wisconsin Democrats however tried to shut down reports by whistleblowers about the abuse of young girls happening right on our military bases.

“There are no cases in Fort McCoy right now with child, 15-or- under, who is married,” Sen. Tammy Baldwin contended in a very precisely worded denial leaving open the question of whether such cases had existed in the past or whether the children weren’t technically married.

Locals in nearby Sparta whose medical resources have been drafted into the Afghan refugee crisis however describe large numbers of pregnant women, some looking very young and a threatening atmosphere where calls to emergency services in the small city are a constant.

The media plays up stories of impoverished refugees, but sources say that the Fort McCoy Post Exchange keeps running out of smaller bills because the Afghan refugees have plenty of hundred dollar bills to spend. Not to mention credit cards and cell phones.

While locals have generously donated their own clothing, the Islamic Society of Milwaukee has been conducting its own clothing drive focused on hijabs and “traditional” and “modest clothing” for the women. The infidel clothes apparently weren’t sufficiently compliant with Sharia law.

Despite media disinformation, few if any of the Afghans were “interpreters”, many did not even speak English, and the vast majority had not received visas to come to the United States, When the Biden administration surrendered Kabul to the Taliban, it allowed the terrorist group to man the checkpoints and pick which Afghans (and Americans) were allowed to make it to the airport.

The Afghans who had legitimate visas based on their time working for the United States were not allowed through. Some may have been abducted and killed after the Biden administration turned over lists of visa recipients to the Taliban. Only 1,800 SIV visa holders made it here. Another 50,000 were Afghans who had no legal right to be here and once in this country began committing crimes and disappearing from the bases that were hosting them.

Many in Sparta are worried about what this influx of Afghan migrants means for them.

When Cuban refugees were housed at Fort McCoy, some stayed on in the area. Locals are concerned that history may repeat itself with the large number of Afghans. Even if only a few hundred are left behind, they could significantly change the character of the area.

To some locals, the sight of Americans being displaced by Afghans may be their future.

COLUMN BY:

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Fails to Question Nominee for US Ambassador to Turkey about Terrorism

Afghanistan: Man sells 9-year-old daughter to buy food, begs 55-year-old husband not to beat her

An ‘Islamophobe’ Under Every Bush: Georgetown Fellow with CAIR Past Tries to Cancel Critics of Jihad

Twitter’s New ‘Curator’ for Middle East News has Long Anti-Israel History

Charity boss: “Taliban has a ‘kill list’ circulating, identifying LGBTQI+ persons”

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

Christian Persecution Group Wants to Know if Biden’s Muslim Religious Freedom Ambassador Will Help Non-Muslims

My latest in PJ Media:

Old Joe Biden’s handlers have chosen Rashad Hussain, who served during Obama’s first two terms as U.S. special envoy to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), to succeed former Senator Sam Brownback as U.S. ambassador-at-large for international religious freedom. Hussain went before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last week for a perfunctory hearing, but as is increasingly the case in Washington these days, the most important questions at hand weren’t asked. So now a group dedicated to protecting embattled Christians worldwide, the Save the Persecuted Christians organization, along with a number of allied groups and individuals, is asking them of Hussain directly.

The group on Monday sent Hussain an open letter, signed by notables including Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy; Baroness Caroline Cox of the House of Lords; retired Air Force Col. Michael Onisick; radio host Eric Metaxas, Juliana Taimoorazy of the Iraqi Christian Relief Council; Amy Beam, author of The Last Yezidi Genocide; and many others. The letter asks Hussain pointed questions about Sharia, which is entirely justified given the fact that Hussain is clearly a devout and Sharia-adherent Muslim and Sharia quite clearly denies equality of rights to non-Muslims.

When he appointed Hussain his ambassador to the OIC back in 2010, Barack Obama proudly noted that his appointee was “a hafiz of the Qur’an,” that is, that he has memorized the entire Islamic holy book. That means he has memorized passages declaring that non-Muslims are “the most vile of created beings” (Qur’an 98:6), that Christians who believe that Jesus is the Son of God are under the curse of Allah (Qur’an 9:30), and that Allah transformed disobedient Jews into apes and pigs (Qur’an 2:63-65; 5:59-60; 7:166). Hussain has likewise lovingly committed to memory the passage enjoining Muslims to “fight against those do not believe in Allah or the last day, and do not forbid what Allah and his messenger have forbidden, and do not follow the religion of truth, even if they are among the people of the book [that is, Jews and Christians], until they pay the jizya with willing submission and feel themselves subdued” (Qur’an 9:29).

None of that necessarily means that Hussain, as ambassador for international religious freedom, will slight reports of Islamic entities denying religious freedom to Christians or others. He may have some understanding of such Qur’anic passages that blunts their literal force. However, every nation that claims to implement Sharia today — including Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Afghanistan — denies religious freedom in varying degrees to non-Muslims, as well as to Muslims who are considered heterodox. If Hussain believes that Sharia is the unalterable and perfect law of Allah, does he even believe that non-Muslims should have equality of rights in such countries?

There is more. Read the rest here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Belgium: Woman labeled ‘racist,’ badly beaten on bus after Muslim migrant hits her

Not A Joke: Taliban Asks for International Aid to Help It Fight…Climate Change

India: Catholic bishop charged with ‘promoting feelings of hatred’ for speaking against ‘love and narcotic jihad’

New Zealand: New charges for Muslim teen accused of death threats to non-Muslims

Amid Hizballah threats, Israel prepares for war, conducting drills for 2000 rockets per day

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

Biden’s handlers send $144,000,000 in ‘aid’ to Taliban’s Afghanistan

Democrats fund terrorism the way that Republicans cut taxes. And so the Biden administration is determined to keep sending money to Afghanistan even after the Taliban takeover.

While Americans can’t afford to buy a house, put gas in their cars, or food on their plates, Biden’s sending $144 million to Afghanistan.

The United States announced Thursday it is providing nearly $144 million in new humanitarian assistance to Afghanistan, where millions of people could face acute hunger this winter unless aid arrives soon.

National Security Council spokesperson Emily Horne said in a statement the U.S. assistance will be directed through independent organizations that provide support directly to more than 18.4 million vulnerable Afghans, including Afghan refugees in neighboring countries.

Sending it through “independent organizations” provides plausible deniability when those organizations and their staffers…

1. Pay protection money to the Taliban and possibly even ISIS-K

2. Pay Taliban taxes

3. Hire Taliban personnel and contract with companies either directly controlled by the Taliban or that pay money to the Taliban

These are the primary mechanisms for directing aid money to the Taliban.

She noted that the additional funding brings the total U.S. humanitarian aid in Afghanistan and for Afghan refugees in the region to nearly $474 million in 2021, the largest amount of assistance from any nation.

Not actually something to brag about considering the only thing it’s done is armed and financed Islamic terrorists.

But Blinken insists that this time it’ll be different.

“To be clear, this humanitarian assistance will benefit the people of Afghanistan and not the Taliban, whom we will continue to hold accountable for the commitments they have made,” he asserted.

Asserted is the correct term. It’s a baseless assertion that is obviously and transparently false.

The official press release states that, “This assistance is provided directly to independent humanitarian organizations, including the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), International Organization for Migration (IOM), the World Health Organization (WHO), and other international and non-governmental organizations following extensive vetting and monitoring.”

As I warned in my article, “10% of Biden’s Afghanistan Aid Will Go To Taliban,” UN groups had signed up with the Taliban a long time ago.

The Taliban had set up its Commission for the Arrangement and Control of Companies and Organisations at least over a decade ago. Much like the old Afghan government, it made few distinctions between for-profit companies and non-profit charities, and taxed them both.

The Taliban at one point provided a list of non-profits that had registered with their Commission for the Arrangement and Control of Companies and Organisations. The group “included UN agencies, national and international NGOs and human rights organisations” including those that  “rely on funding from a wide range of sources, including both the UN and the US government”.

That was back in 2013 when the Taliban had far less power and were less intimidating.

Did Blinken’s vetting compare the list of “independent organizations” USAID will be funding with the list of those on the Taliban’s Commission? The information certainly exists, but you can bet that the State Department won’t release it or act on it.

COLUMN BY

RELATED ARTICLES:

Persecution group asks Religious Freedom appointee to clarify his views on Sharia hostility to religious freedom

Israel: Muslim given entry permit for humanitarian reasons, carries out multiple arson jihad attacks

Iraq: Mother protests marriage of 12-year-old, but Interior Ministry says ‘Sharia allows the marriage of a minor’

Germany: Foundation wants to put plaque next to Bible verses on Berlin City Palace cupola to avoid offending Muslims

Afghanistan: Taliban calls for international funding to support its efforts to fight climate change

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