Posts

RAMADAN 2022: The Holy Month and the Pursuit of Jihad

The world can now breathe a sigh of relief that the holy month of Ramadan is finally over. In recent years, the world has witnessed a surge in the intensity and frequency of Islamic jihad violence during this “holy month.” The pattern was no different this year; if anything, there have been more instances of recorded Islamic violence than the previous years.

Ramadan started on April 2 this year, coinciding with the first day of the Hindu New Year, celebrated in India. In the Indian state of Rajasthan, Muslim crowds unleashed a planned attack on the Hindus’ procession. The procession was attacked by bikers when it passed through a “Muslim area” in Karauli. The Muslims had placed stones, brickbats, and petrol bombs on their rooftops, and began throwing them at the Hindus at first sight of their procession. What started with a hail of stones culminated in arson attacks, as well as the vandalizing of Hindu ships, and the burning of bicycles.

On April 3, Ahmed Murtaza, a chemical engineer, tried to enter a Hindu temple in Gorakhnath; he screamed “Allahu akbar” while wielding a machete. Though the police arrested him before he could cause any significant harm, he succeeded in injuring two cops in the brawl. Investigations revealed that Abbasi was a terrorist-in-the-making; he was committed to the ideology of the Islamic State and had used various social media platforms to establish contacts with ISIS terrorists.

After this rocking – quite literally – start to the “holy month of peace,” Muslim forces in all corners of the globe took to innovative ways of continuing their legacy of violence.

On April 7, Raad Hazem, a 28-year-old Palestinian gunman, opened fire in a crowded bar in Tel Aviv, Israel, killing three and wounding ten more. The police gunned him down near a mosque on Jaffa the next day.

Synchronized mobs of Muslims attacked Hindus in seven Indian states on the occasion of the Hindu Ram Navami festival on April 10. The modus operandi of these attacks was similar to the onslaught of April 2.

The following day, Muslim youths in Spain tried to block an Easter procession, as they believed that the Holy Week procession was wrong and offensive. Some in the Muslim community seem to harbor a detestation for processions of non-Muslims anywhere, be it the Hindus in India or Christians in Spain.

Another shared virtue of some Muslims worldwide is their penchant for collecting stones and hurling them at the “kaffirs.” Taking a cue from their coreligionists in India, Palestinians sheltered in the Al-Aqsa mosque in East Jerusalem began throwing stones at Israeli forces on Friday, April 15. There was no respite for the Israeli police during this time. They had to go into action against Muslims again in less than 48 hours when Palestinians started throwing stones to block Jewish visitors from the Temple Mount on April 17.

The stone-throwing in Israel took place just a day after Muslim mobs in Delhi, India, attacked Hindus again in the familiar and tested fashion when the Hindus began a procession for Hanuman Janmostav. Interestingly, reports suggest that the Muslims who attacked the Hindus in the nation’s capital were illegal Bangladeshi immigrants who entered India over the porous Indo-Bangladesh border. Right about this time, Muslims in Sweden decided to go on a rampage after hearing that so-called far-right activists were planning to burn copies of the Quran. This led to violent clashes between the Police and the mob.

It’s not just the kaffirs that have to bear the brunt of Islamic jihad. This ideology is plagued with sectarianism; Muslims don’t go easy on the “other” kind of Muslims, either. Infighting is common among the different schools of Islam. On April 5, Abdullatif Moradi, a 21-year-old Muslim youth from Uzbekistan who illegally entered Iran in 2021 from the Pakistan border, reached the Imam Reza shrine in Mashhad, Iran, and stabbed two Shia clerics to death. His plan was to take down three, but he could only manage to injure the third one severely before being arrested along with his six other accomplices. He was identified as a “takfiri,” a Muslim who believed other Muslims were not truly Muslim, and who believed that Shia Muslims were heretics whose blood should be spilled.

The blasts that rocked the Abdul Rahim Shahid High School area on the 19th, in a Shia-dominated part of Kabul, Afghanistan, were another instance of Muslim-on-Muslim violence. Afghanistan kept trembling under the absolute rule of Sharia as one bomb after another exploded through the remaining days of Ramadan. Deafening explosions ripped through the Kunduz mosque, killing over 39 and injuring 43 Muslims who had gathered to offer Friday prayers on April 22.

Things weren’t peaceful in the neighboring country either. On April 26, a 31-year-old Muslim Balochi woman, a mother of 2, blew herself up in Karachi, Pakistani, to support the Balochi freedom movement. Three Chinese nationals became victims in the ongoing conflict between Pakistan and the Balochis. The suicide bomber, a primary school teacher by profession, was convinced that disappearing in a ball of fire was more important than educating children in a crisis-stricken country.

These incidents, steeped in the blood of the innocent people, corroborate the fact that regardless of geography, languages spoken, education, and profession, the philosophy of the jihadi mind remains constant and adamant in its pursuit of the blessings of Allah.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARITICLES:

Amazon removes The Critical Qur’an from its ‘Qur’an’ bestseller list

Canada: Islamophobic hate crime at mosque turns out to have committed by Muslims

UK: Muslim cleric forced to flee city after death threats he received for denouncing ‘Islamic extremism’

Mossad foils Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps plot to kill Israeli diplomat, US general and French journalist

France: High court reverses decision to dissolve pro-Palestinian org for inciting antisemitic hatred and violence

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

In Listing Hamas as a Terror Group, Australia Shows the Bankruptcy of the Left

Australia finally got around to listing the infamous jihad terror group known as the Islamic Resistance Movement, and better known as Hamas, as a terrorist group on Thursday. That’s great, even though it should have been done years ago. The way that Australian authorities chose to do it, however, once again demonstrated the moral cowardice and intellectual bankruptcy of the Left: the Australians had to find a way to condemn Hamas without appearing to be “Islamophobic.” They found a way to do that, but they didn’t find a way to avoid appearing to be woke, politically correct fools.

The Associated Press reported Thursday that Australia has “added the U.S.-based far-right extremist group National Socialist Order and planned to add the entirety of the Palestinian group Hamas to its list of outlawed terrorist organisations as concerns rise about radicalised children.”

Now, it’s easy to see why Hamas is being added to the list of outlawed terrorist organizations. Just in the past few days, its plan to target Israelis living in the Philippines was thwarted. It celebrated the murder of a 91-year-old Holocaust survivor. Before that, it sent rockets into Israel on New Year’s Eve. The leader of the Hamas Women’s Movement has claimed that all the Muslim women in Gaza are ready to blow themselves up in jihad suicide bombings.

And that’s just recently. For decades now, Hamas has called for and worked toward the total destruction of Israel, which would necessarily involve a new genocide of the Jews. For years, its website featured a “Glory Record” detailing its murders of Israeli civilians. Hamas also receives funding from the Islamic Republic of Iran, which is just as genocidal and anti-Semitic as Hamas itself.

At the same time as it announced intentions to list Hamas as a terror group, Australia’s Home Affairs Minister Karen Andrews announced that it had also added “the National Socialist Order, formerly known as Atomwaffen Division,” to its terror list. It seems that the National Socialist Order “advocates a global ‘race war’ and the collapse of democratic societies.” This is not the first “far-right” group that Australia has added to its terror list: “The Base, a neo-Nazi white supremacist group formed in the United States in 2018, was listed in December and the British-based Sonnenkrieg Division was listed in August.”

Undeniably, neo-Nazis are horrible people, and I have no doubt that the National Socialist Order thoroughly deserves to be listed as a terrorist group. But why did Australia have to add the National Socialist Order to its terror list as it added Hamas? Have you ever even heard of the National Socialist Order before reading this article? The ADL says that the Atomwaffen Division “is a small neo-Nazi group,” and that “a series of arrests in 2019-20 decimated the group’s active membership.” It adds that “in July 2020, AWD was disbanded, and the National Socialist Order emerged under the remaining AWD leadership.”

So the National Socialist Order is a rump group formed out of another that collapsed, and is likely to be an insignificant band of potbellied LARPing sociopaths, or else FBI agents trying to validate a “far-right” threat. That hardly compares to Hamas, an organization that for years has terrorized a nation with jihad rocket attacks and attacks on civilians. Hamas has international support, most notably from the Islamic Republic of Iran, while no nation has or ever will given support to the National Socialist Order.

So why has Australia only listed Hamas as a terror group in tandem with this insignificant band of Nazi idiots? The answer is clear. Australian authorities are trying to prop up the National Socialist Order as some kind of moral equivalent to Hamas, in order to try to avoid enraging its Muslim population, among whom are numerous Hamas supporters, and to avoid giving the impression that the Australian government is “Islamophobic” and is targeting only Islamic terrorists while ignoring non-Muslim terrorists.

This sort of thing isn’t limited to Australia, of course. I myself am banned from Britain in the British government’s absurd attempt to smear me as a “far right” leader on par with jihad terrorists. Then-Prime Minister Theresa May said in 2016: ““And I acted to keep those who peddle hatred and extremism out of our country. I kicked out Abu Hamza and Abu Qatada. I stopped Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer and Pastor Terry Jones – because Islamophobia comes from the same wellspring of hatred. And I stopped people like Dieudonne coming to Britain. Because nothing excuses antisemitism – not comedy, not satire, not even irony. Antisemitism is just hatred. And it is just wrong.”Spen

So as far as May was concerned, Pamela Geller and I were the “Islamophobic” equivalents of Abu Hamza and Abu Qatada. Abu Hamza is in solitary confinement in a super-max U.S. for, among other things, conspiring to set up a training camp for jihad terrorists in Bly, Oregon. Abu Qatada was convicted of plotting the jihad massacre of Americans and Israelis in Jordan. Neither Geller nor I have ever advocated or condoned any violence at all. But May needed some “far-right extremists” to balance her actions against jihadis and appease Muslims in Britain, and so she didn’t hesitate to smear us.

In fact, calling the National Socialist Order “far-right,” the same term that is used for people (including me) who aren’t remotely Nazi and are simply enunciating unwelcome truths, shows how the term is employed as a weapon to stigmatize, demonize, and marginalize all those whom the elites hate. Lump us in with some Nazi idiots, and the job is done.

It’s good that Australia will list Hamas as a terror group. But the way Australian officials have done it shows them to be Leftist cowards and self-deluded fools.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Was There a Firefight After the Jihad Suicide Bombing at Kabul Airport?

Germany: Muslim ‘asylum seeker’ has been living in the country for 11 years, ten years after being obliged to leave

Malaysia: Mufti rules that Hindu children unilaterally converted as minors by Muslim ex-husband must remain Muslim

India: Murdered Hindu activist had received death threats from Muslims for ‘blasphemy’

India: Muslim sentenced to death for jihad massacre says ‘For me, the decisions of the Koran are supreme’

Qatar sentences woman who was sexually assaulted to 100 lashes and seven years in prison

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

New York Times Jerusalem Bureau Chief Wrong Again

Patrick Kingsley is the Jerusalem Bureau Chief of the New York Times, who has a great deal of trouble getting his facts right about Israel and the Palestinians. He has had help from the rest of the resident staff, but that hasn’t rescued him from error. A report on the ineffable Kingsley is here: “How Many Helpers Does the New York Times Have to Hire for Error-Prone Jerusalem Bureau Chief?,” by Ira Stoll, Algemeiner, February 14, 2022:

The New York Times’ error-prone Jerusalem bureau chief, Patrick Kingsley, is at it again.

A full page of Sunday’s New York Times was devoted to a Kingsley dispatch from the West Bank, with reporting “contributed by Rami Nazzal and Hiba Yazbek from Burin, Myra Noveck from Yitzhar and Givat Ronen, Jonathan Shamir from Tel Aviv, and Rawan Sheikh Ahmad from Haifa.” What did this team of error-prone chief Kingsley and five helpers come up with?

More mistakes. Kingsley and Co. report:

Settlers injured at least 170 Palestinians last year and killed five, UN monitors reported. During the same period, Palestinians injured at least 110 settlers and killed two, UN records show. The Israeli Army said that Palestinians had injured 137 Israeli civilians in the West Bank last year.

But if the numbers are roughly comparable, the power dynamic is different … Settlers, unlike Palestinians, have the protection of the military and are rarely in danger of losing the land they live on.

It’s not accurate that Israeli settlers “are rarely in danger of losing the land they live on.”

Let’s look at the history.

In 586 BCE, when the first Temple was destroyed, the Jews were deported to Babylonia.

After 70 CE, when the Romans conquered Jerusalem and sacked the Second Temple, the Jews dispersed to various places. They were expelled from England in 1290, from France in 1306, and from Spain in 1492. Those who settled in central and eastern Europe had their property seized from them by the Nazis and the Communists.

Jews kept being expelled from one country after another in Western Europe, “losing the land” they lived on, as well as whatever other property they possessed: from England in 1290, from France in 1306, from Spain in 1492, from Portugal in 1497. Those who lived in Central and Eastern Europe had centuries of persecutions an pogroms to contend with, losing their land and their lives during the Khmelnitsky Uprising in the Ukraine in the mid-17th century; Jews were again deprived of their land, and their lives, during the Nazi Holocaust; Jews again lost their property in Eastern Europe and Russia under the Communists.

In the land of Israel, Jews who lived in the Jewish Quarter of the Old City and elsewhere in eastern Jerusalem had their property taken away by Jordan, which seized the territory in the war initiated by the Arabs in 1948 to prevent the establishment of the state of Israel.

Let’s also remember the 850,000 Jews who were either expelled or fled from Arab countries between 1948 and 1953. They lost their homes and land, their businesses, their property. That is why many Jews, including those in Israel, have internalized, as a kind of folk memory, the loss of their land over so many centuries, and in so many places.

Despite that history of Jews repeatedly having their land taken away from them, Patrick Kingsley insists that today’s Jewish settlers in Israel “are rarely in danger of losing the land they live on.” But that is not true, as the settlers well know.

Even the Israeli government has uprooted a series of settlements as part of a series of peace agreements.

In 1982, the Times itself reported that in turning over the Sinai peninsula to Egypt, Israel relinquished “16 civilian settlements.” The last of these was Yamit.

Tearfully but Forcefully, Israel Removes Gaza Settlers,” was the headline over another 2005 New York Times article. “By nightfall, the army said it had cleared the settlements of Morag, Bedolah, Kerem Atzmona, Ganei Tal, and Tel Katifa. Gadid, Peat Sadeh, Rafiah Yam, Shalev, Dugit and Nisanit were already empty or nearly so.”

Loss of land in Gaza, where 9,000 Jewish settlers were forcibly uprooted in 2005; loss of land, too, in the West Bank, where some settlements were also closed down by the IDF. And every single one of the half-million Israelis living in the West Bank has to worry about a “peace” that will establish a Palestinian state that will include all of the West Bank and Gaza – squeezing Israel back within the 1949 armistice lines. Of course they fear “losing the land they live on.”…

The Times’ formulation that “Violence has long been deployed by both Israelis and Palestinians” makes no distinction between illegal terrorist violence and lawful warfare.

Palestinian violence is deployed in terrorist attacks on Jewish men, women, and children. Israeli violence is deployed by the police and the IDF who track down, and arrest, or kill those same terrorists. These are not equivalent uses o violence. But Kingsley doesn’t appear to see the difference.

Kingsley needs to remember that Israel has faced both enemy states and terrorist groups; it has never been the aggressor. The day after Israel declared its independence on May 14, 1948, the armies of five Arab states invaded to snuff out the young life of the Jewish state. Israel has had to fight three wars for its very survival, in 1948, 1967, and 1973. It has also had to fight eight other campaigns: in the Sinai in 1956, to stop the attacks on Israeli civilians in the Negev by Egyptian fedayin; a campaign to oust the terrorist PLO from Lebanon; two wars against the terrorist Hezbollah, and four campaigns against Hamas terrorists in Gaza. It is the Arabs who have constantly rejected a peace deal with Israel. They rejected the UN Partition Plan in 1947, and in response to Israel’s invitation to make peace with the Arabs after the Six-Day War, the Arabs answered with the “three Nos” of Khartoum:”No peace with Israel, No recognition of Israel, No negotiations with Israel. Yasser Arafat walked away from a generous peace offer from Ehud Barak in 2000; Mahmoud Abbas walked away from an even more generous deal from Ehud Olmert in 2008. Since then Abbas has refused to deal unless Israel agrees that the “1967 borders” – that is, the 1949 armistice lines – will be the basis of negotiations.

Meanwhile, the Palestinians of Hamas, the PIJ, the PFLP, and those, too, who belong to the Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade of Fatah, carry on their terrorism against Israel. And the P.A. raises another generation to hate Israelis, and want to kill them, by continuing to use textbooks filled with antisemitic filth.. None of this Palestinian rejectionism, terrorism, and antisemitism, as Ira Stoll notes, makes it into Kingsley’s highly inaccurate reports. For him, it’s only the “occupation” and the “settler violence” that matters. There is scarcly a single report by Patrick Kingsley from Israel that has not had to be corrected. Given that record of bias and error, perhaps it’s time for the Times to replace him.

COLUMN BY

RELATED ARTICLES:

France: Adidas ad features Muslima who denounces ‘France’s obsession with banning the hijab and niqab’

Iran: Converts from Islam to Christianity begin prison sentences for spreading ‘Zionist’ Christianity

India: Islamic seminary says necktie is Christian emblem that is unlawful and against the Islamic spirit

Pakistan: Court frees brother who confessed to murdering his sister, a social media star, in honor killing

Report shows that the Islamic State transferred large sums of money through Turkey

Germany: Muslim leader justifies murder attempt, rails against ‘Jewish dogs’ on social media

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

OANN VIDEO: Video: Robert Spencer on Afghan Refugee Charged with Sexual Assault

OANN’s Tipping Point – Robert Spencer – Afghan Refugee Charged With Sexual Assault:

RELATED ARTICLES:

Wisconsin: Mediagenic Afghan Arrested for Sexual Assault, Mayor Says ‘This Doesn’t Define All Afghan Refugees’

Somalia: Muslims murder at least four people with bomb in front of restaurant at shopping center

Iranian state-run news agency says Noam Chomsky decries ‘Islamophobia’ in India in interview with US Muslim group

American Muslims for Palestine top dog eulogizes Muslim leader who said ‘Palestinians will rid the world of Jews’

France: Four Muslims on trial as accomplices in murder of priest, ‘Pounce on the infidels like a hungry lion’

Zemmour says he’ll ban ‘cathedral-like mosques’ so ‘France remains a landscape of churches’

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

MSNBC’s Mehdi Hasan, Joe Rogan, and the Left’s Cancel Culture Double Standard

My latest in PJ Media:

Everyone knows the double standard is in place. It is taken for granted so much that people barely remark upon it anymore. When someone who dissents from the Leftist agenda offends Leftist sensibilities, his or her career is ruined for good. Remember Roseanne Barr, Tim Allen, and a host of others. Now the Left has Joe Rogan in its sights for daring to dissent from COVID orthodoxy and has suddenly discovered that years ago, he used a racial slur. Spotify has removed over a hundred of his podcasts, and the end is not in sight. But if someone who is reliably Leftist says something that offends the self-appointed guardians of acceptable opinion, the punishment is slight at best, as we have just seen with Whoopi Goldberg’s two-week suspension for Holocaust denial (which doesn’t really bother the hard Left, but they have to keep up some semblance of an attachment to truth and basic decency). And if the offending speaker is a member of a group with enough victimhood privilege, he or she won’t be punished at all, as the career of Mehdi Hasan indicates.

Mehdi Hasan is a hate-filled far-Left MSNBC host who espouses fashionable Big Lies such as the claim that “white supremacy is now a key ideology of the Republican Party” and “the far-right domestic terror threat is more dangerous than even Al Qaeda after 9/11.” During the Whoopi Goldberg controversy, remarks that Hasan made in 2009 resurfaced, leading many to question why Hasan’s star has consistently risen in the Leftist media, despite his manifest hatred and contempt for non-Muslims.

Hasan, a Shi’ite, said of the early Sunni caliph Yazid: “All of these ulama unanimously agree that at the very minimum if Yazid was not a Kaffir [unbeliever] — then at the very minimum he was a fasiq, a transgressor, a breaker of Islamic laws, a corrupt individual, a tyrant, a killer, a drunkard, a dog lover, a music lover, a homosexual, a pedophile, a sexual deviant, someone who slept with his own mother.”

Now, the Left has no problem with corrupt individuals such as Hunter and Joe Biden if they’re on the right side of the political divide. Tyrannical themselves, Leftists have no problem with tyrants, either. Killers? Depends on who is being killed. Drunkard? Dog lovers? Music lovers? Come on, man! Homosexuals, pedophiles, and sexual deviants? Are we talking about the staff of CNN now?

Anyway, Hasan then broadened his targets to include atheists: “In this respect the Koran describes the atheist as cattle. As cattle of those who grow the crops and do not stop and wonder about this world.” The Qur’an does indeed say: “Already we have created many of the jinn and mankind for Gehenna, having hearts with which they do not understand, and having eyes with which they do not see, and having ears with which they do not hear. They are like cattle, no, they are worse. These are the neglectful.” (7:179)

There is more. Read the rest here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Chicago: Man With Hitler Mustache Paints Swastikas on Synagogue

Pope Francis celebrates ‘unity in diversity’ as Muslim persecution of Christians escalates worldwide

Spain: Muslim migrant rapes 95-year-old woman, says ‘I confused her with a girlfriend of mine’

Norway: Afghan Muslim migrant rapes 92-year-old woman, blames his ‘traumatic upbringing’

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

Today is the International Day of Zero Tolerance for Female Genital Mutilation

We are constantly told the opposite by propagandists in the West, but the reality is that female genital mutilation (FGM) is justified in Islamic law. It is practiced by some non-Muslims, but only in majority-Muslim areas where the influence of Islamic culture, mores and law is all-pervasive.

“It is a religious thing. Do you want to change religion?” said one Egyptian in response to a campaign to eradicate female genital mutilation. “You only listen to what the West is saying.”

The establishment media ignores the fact that FGM is mandated in Islamic law: “Circumcision is obligatory (for every male and female) (by cutting off the piece of skin on the glans of the penis of the male, but circumcision of the female is by cutting out the bazr ‘clitoris’ [this is called khufaadh ‘female circumcision’]).” — Umdat al-Salik e4.3, translated by Mark Durie, The Third Choice, p. 64

Why is it obligatory? Because Muhammad is held to have said so: “Abu al- Malih ibn Usama’s father relates that the Prophet said: ‘Circumcision is a law for men and a preservation of honour for women.’” — Ahmad Ibn Hanbal 5:75

“Narrated Umm Atiyyah al-Ansariyyah: A woman used to perform circumcision in Medina. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said to her: ‘Do not cut severely as that is better for a woman and more desirable for a husband.’” — Abu Dawud 41:5251

That hadith is classified as weak, but this one is classified as sahih (reliable): “Aishah narrated: ‘When the circumcised meets the circumcised, then indeed Ghusl is required. Myself and Allah’s Messenger did that, so we performed Ghusl.’” — Jami` at-Tirmidhi 108

If Muhammad had the genitals of his favorite wife, Aisha, mutilated, that is a strong endorsement of the practice from the man who is an “excellent example” (Qur’an 33:21) for Muslims.

Why does it matter whether or not FGM is Islamic? Because the practice will never be eradicated if its root causes are not confronted. As long as those Muslims continue to believe that Allah and Muhammad want it done, for some that will override all other considerations, in the United States and everywhere else.

COLUMN BY

RELATED ARTICLE: Muslim cleric defends capital punishment for those who leave Islam

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

Biden Lifts Sanctions On Terror Regime Iran’s Nuclear Program

You think Iran’s behavior has been bad over the last year? Just wait. You ain’t seen nothing yet. Once again, the Biden Administration’s foreign policy is a dangerous joke.

BREAKING: Biden Lifts Sanctions On Iran’s Nuclear Program

By Daily Wire, February 4, 2022

Democrat President Joe Biden restored a sanctions waiver to the Islamic Republic of Iran, the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism, on Friday, as the administration desperately tries to get Iran to re-enter a nuclear deal.

“The waiver, which was rescinded by the Trump administration in May 2020, had allowed Russian, Chinese and European companies to carry out non-proliferation work at Iranian nuclear sites,” Reuters reported. “The waiver was needed to allow for technical discussions that were key to the talks about return to the deal formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).”

RELATED ARTICLES:

GOP Demands Biden Iran Envoy Testify Before Congress

Left-wing groups tell Congress to reject ‘dangerous’ peace accords with Israel

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, click here. It’s open and free.

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

KANSAS: Muslim Convert Wanted to Bomb College Campus for ISIS

Muslim converts tend to be far more fanatical, but the strange element to this story is that we haven’t heard her name before.

According to the DOJ, Allison Elizabeth Fluke-Ekren, aka “Allison Elizabeth Brooks,” aka “Allison Ekren,” aka “Umm Mohammed al-Amriki,” aka “Umm Mohammed,” and aka “Umm Jabril,” 42, “a former resident of Kansas, traveled to Syria several years ago for the purpose of committing or supporting terrorism.”

Fluke-Ekren appears to have converted to Islam at least as far back as 2004 since a news story from that year appears to show her wearing a hijab.

Photos from a blog apparently showcasing her unfortunate kids show little girls being forced to wear hijabs. The kids have Turkish names inflicted on them so it seems likely that she married a Turkish Muslim man and went all the way.

“Since her departure from the United States, Fluke-Ekren has allegedly been involved with a number of terrorism-related activities on behalf of ISIS from at least 2014. These activities allegedly include, but are not limited to, planning and recruiting operatives for a potential future attack on a college campus inside the United States and serving as the appointed leader and organizer of an ISIS military battalion, known as the Khatiba Nusaybah, in order to train women on the use of automatic firing AK-47 assault rifles, grenades and suicide belts. Additionally, Fluke-Ekren allegedly provided ISIS and ISIS members with services, which included providing lodging, translating speeches made by ISIS leaders, training children on the use of AK-47 assault rifles and suicide belts and teaching extremist ISIS doctrine.”

The DOJ materials mention that she went with her husband to Syria to live “in the land of Sharia”

There was a proposed attack on a college campus in which the terrorists would “dress like infidels” and leave a bomb backpack.

Fluke-Ekren “explained that she could go to a shopping mall in the United States, park a vehicle full of explosives in the basement or parking garage level of the structure, and detonate the explosives in the vehicle with a cell phone triggering device.”

When Fluke-Ekren “would hear about external attacks taking place in countries outside the United States, Fluke-Ekren would comment that she wished the attack occurred on United States soil instead.”

“Fluke-Ekren translated her extremist beliefs into action by serving as the appointed leader and organizer of an Islamic State military battalion, directly training women and children in the use of AK-47 assault rifles, grenades, and suicide belts to support the Islamic State’s murderous aims,” wrote First Assistant U.S. Attorney Raj Parekh in a detention memo.

After her original husband’s death, she was passed around ISIS fighters, marrying one after another, now she’s back to face justice.

This is, to put it bluntly, another tragedy caused by Islamic immigration into the United States. And another reminder of how much harm the “international students” and “workers” that universities and companies demand be allowed to come to America do to us.

COLUMN BY

RELATED ARTICLES:

Egypt: Islamic reformers still face prison sentences

Thailand: Muslims place bombs in front of convenience stores, shops, a market, animal hospital and car care shop

The Taliban’s strictly Islamic Afghanistan is now the hardest place in the world to be a Christian

France: Muslim enters church during funeral, screams ‘Allahu akbar,’ scrawls Nazi symbol on wall

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

U.S. ambassador to Israel: ‘The Biden administration believes it must take care of the Palestinian people’

At his first interview with the Israeli media in early January the new American ambassador was asked If he would be visiting any of the settlements. No, he said, “I absolutely will not.” This went over well in the Muqata in Ramallah, but left most Israelis feeling a blend of amazement, chagrin, and fury.

There was more to come. “New US envoy says ‘absolutely won’t’ visit settlements, to avoid inflaming tensions,” by Jacob Magid, Times of Israel, January 14, 2022:

Pointing to another difference between the current and previous American administrations, the US ambassador said, “The Biden administration believes it must take care of the Palestinian people. That is the difference between us and the Trump administration.”

“The Biden administration believes it must take care of the Palestinian people”? Since when did that become an American duty? We have no historic connection to, no special affection for, no duty towards, the soi-disant “Palestinian people,” who, thanks to UNRWA’s ever-increasing largesse, are better provided for than any of the hundreds of millions of real refugees created since World War II.

Some of us – the better-informed some of us — don’t accept the existence of a separate “Palestinian people” whom Ambassador Nides thinks we must “take care of.” We know that their invention was a propaganda effort, suggested to Arafat by the KGB. The head of the Palestinian terror group As-Saiqa, Zuheir Mohsen, explained in an interview he gave to the Dutch newspaper Trouw in 1977: “Between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese there are no differences. We are all part of one people, the Arab nation […] Just for political reasons we carefully underwrite our Palestinian identity. Because it is of national interest for the Arabs to advocate the existence of Palestinians to balance Zionism. Yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity exists only for tactical reasons.”

Mohsen repeated – and reinforced — the point: “The Palestinian people do not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct ‘Palestinian people’ to oppose Zionism. Yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity exists only for tactical reasons.”

Nides may think “we have to take care of the Palestinian people,” but many will reject – as you and I do – both parts of that bizarre proposition.

Nides pointed to Biden’s renewal of hundreds of millions of dollars in humanitarian aid to the Palestinians that was cut by Trump, amid Ramallah’s refusal to engage with his administration.

Asked if he’s had any meetings with Palestinian officials since his arrival, the envoy admitted that he had yet to cross the Green Line, but said he well might do so in the coming weeks if asked.

While the Palestinian Authority has renewed its ties with the Biden administration, it has maintained an overall boycott of the US embassy, objecting to its relocation from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. The boycott hasn’t always been maintained though, and PA President Mahmoud Abbas has met with the head of the embassy’s Palestinian Affairs Unit George Noll — which operates in lieu of the Jerusalem Consulate that Trump shuttered in 2019.

Nides repeated the Biden administration’s assertion that the US plans to reopen the consulate that historically served as the de facto mission to the Palestinians. However, he did not provide any additional details, including a timeline for when the matter will be seen through.

Biden is a year into his term as President, and while he promised to reopen the consulate to the Palestinians very early on, it looks as if it’s not going to happen. Biden has a lot on his plate: a possible Russian invasion of Ukraine, a Chinese threat to Taiwan, the North Korean missiles, the endless wrangling with Iran in Vienna. The Palestinians are small beer. The Abraham Accords show how little they matter to the other Arabs. He’s already thinking of the 2024 election, his sinking numbers in the polls, and likely Democratic losses in 2022. Why unnecessarily antagonize Israel’s supporters by trying – in vain — to reopen that consulate to the Palestinians in east Jerusalem?

Besides, Biden would need to obtain the approval of Israel to open that consulate, and he knows that under the Vienna Convention of 1963, to which both Israel and the US are signatories, a consulate cannot be opened without the agreement of the host state. A unilateral reopening of the consulate would contradict the convention, custom, and common sense. Both Prime Minister Bennett and Foreign Minister Lapid have insisted that Israel will never give such approval. Biden is stuck.

And the Bidenites have gotten the message.

Three sources familiar with the matter told The Times of Israel last month that Washington has effectively decided to shelve plans to reopen the consulate amid strong Israeli resistance to the move. The news has deeply angered PA leaders, who warned ToI [Times of Israel] that the move would have consequences on US-Palestinian relations moving forward.

Oh dear. America, you have been warned. There will be “consequences on [sic] US-Palestinian relations” if that consulate is not reopened. What might they be? Will the Palestinians refuse to cash those generous checks the Bidenites have been sending to Ramallah? No one in the U.S. will be losing sleep over that.

Nides asserted that despite declarative efforts to reopen the consulate, “Jerusalem is the capital of Israel and the American ambassador works and lives there.”

Beyond that, he said that the US hopes the final status of Jerusalem will be determined through direct negotiations between the parties.

I hate to break it to Ambassador Nides, but the “final status” of Jerusalem was decided some 3000 years ago, when it became the center of Jewish life, the place where Jews lived uninterruptedly for thousands of years. There have been updates to the story since, as the city changed rulers, but not its central significance to Jews. The last major change was in 1980, when the modern state of Israel formally annexed all of Jerusalem. Its “status” is not subject to “negotiations between the parties.” Sorry, Mr. Ambassador. No can do.

As for the Biden administration’s support for Israel more broadly, Nides characterized it as “unconditional.”…

“Unconditional”? Not if the Bidenites are willing to violate the Taylor Force Act and provide hundreds of millions of dollars to the P.A. despite its continuing to reward past, and incentivize future, terrorist acts through the “Pay-For-Slay” program that is Mahmoud Abbas’ proudest achievement. Not if it is willing to let the PLO, which has Israeli blood on its hands, reopen an office in Washington.

“Unconditional”? Not If the Biden Administration refuses to admit that Israel has a very strong claim to retain all of Judea and Samaria (a/k/a the West Bank), based on Article 6 of the Mandate for Palestine, which encourages “close settlement by Jews on the land.” What land? All the land that the League of Nations assigned to the Palestine Mandate for the Jewish National Home. That land extended 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. Have the Bidenites read, and understood what the League of Nations’ Mandate for Palestine signifies? Are they aware that Article 80 of the U.N. Charter committed the U.N. to fulfill the requirements of any League of Nations mandates still remaining? Does Biden, does Blinken, does Sullivan understand that Resolution 242 of the U.N. Security Council allowed Israel to retain the territory it deems necessary in order to have “secure [i.e. defensible] and recognized boundaries”? I have an awful feeling that Ambassador Nides has paid no attention to, inter alia, the Mandate for Palestine, the Treaty of San Remo, Article 80 of the U.N Charter, and Resolution 242 of the Security Council. It’s time, Ambassador Nides, for you to hit the books, and burn the midnight oil.

“Some of the conversations are meant to calm your anxiety. If I were Israeli, I would be anxious too. I respect that with all my heart,” Nides said.

They’d be a little less anxious in Israel, Mr. Ambassador, If you’d do the right and handsome thing, and announce that “upon reconsideration, I intend to visit the five settlement blocs that Israelis keep telling me, will remain part of Israel, whatever else may be subject to negotiation. Yes, I’d like to see some things in the West Bank for myself. And I will.”

Impotent rage from the rais in Ramallah, feeling betrayed. Quiet satisfaction in Jerusalem. A highly desirable denouement.

COLUMN BY

RELATED ARTICLES:

Terror Regime: Biden Halted Terror-Vetting Procedures Which Would Have STOPPED Texas Jihadi From Entering the Country

Palestinians refer to Jesus in terms reserved for jihad terrorists

After synagogue incident, Muslim spokesmen ignore Islamic antisemitism, focus on ‘Islamophobia’ and criticize Israel

Why Was Texas Synagogue Jihadi Allowed Into U.S. Two Weeks Ago Despite ‘Long Criminal Record’?

In Wake of Texas Synagogue Hostage-Taking, Anti-Defamation League Warns Against ‘Islamophobia’

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

Texas synagogue gunman identified as Muslim from UK, Malik Faisal Akram who had ‘mental health issues’

Well, sure. All jihadis have mental health issues. Nothing they do has anything to do with Islamic texts or teachings. Don’t you know that by now, you greasy Islamophobe?

Feds Identify Synagogue Hostage-Taker as 44-Year-Old British Citizen

by Dia Gill, Daily Beast, January 16, 2022:

The feds on Sunday identified the gunman who was shot dead after taking four hostages in a dramatic 10-hour standoff at a Texas synagogue as 44-year-old Malik Faisal Akram, a British citizen.

The Blackburn Muslim Community in the U.K. confirmed Akram’s death in a Facebook post on Sunday afternoon, asking the community to “avoid taking part in the sin of backbiting” as authorities continue to investigate the attack, which President Joe Biden has called “an act of terror.”

The group shared a statement from Akram’s brother, identified as Gulbar, that condemned the attack.

“We would like to say that we as a family do not condone any of his actions and would like to sincerely apologize wholeheartedly to all the victims involved in the unfortunate incident,” he wrote.

Hours before the FBI’s announcement, a spokesperson for the British Foreign Office said they were “aware of the death of a British man in Texas and are in contact with the local authorities.”

“The FBI’s Evidence Response Team (ERT) will continue processing evidence at the synagogue,” the FBI wrote in its release. “At this time, there is no indication that other individuals are involved. The FBI’s North Texas Joint Terrorism Task Force (NTJTTF), which includes member agencies from across the region, will continue to follow investigative leads. An FBI Shooting Incident Review Team (SIRT) will conduct a thorough, factual, and objective investigation of the events.”…

According to the Gulbar’s statement, the family was aware of Akram’s involvement during the crisis. They said that despite his “mental health issues,” they believed he would not harm his captives.

According to Gulbar’s post, the FBI is expected to fly to the U.K. and meet with the family later today.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Islamic Terrorists Previously Discussed Trading Jewish Hostages for ‘Lady Al Qaeda’

Muslim Hostage Crisis at Synagogue Parallels Hamas-Linked CAIR Campaign for ‘Lady Al Qaeda’

Germany: More than 30 jihadis set to be released from prison

UK: For Telling the Truth About Islam, Jewish Board of Deputies Vice President Compelled to Resign

Austria: Hitler photos found on imam’s cell phone

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

TEXAS: Muslim takes hostages at synagogue, says he will kill people if anyone gets close

Congregation Beth Israel Synagogue in Colleyville, Texas, was in the middle of Shabbat services that were being livestreamed on Facebook, when a gunman burst in and took hostages. As of this writing, the situation is ongoing, but some details have already emerged.

Amichai Stein of Kan, the Israeli Public Broadcasting Corporation, reports that “The gunman says he is Muslim and holding at least 6 people says ‘he will kill people if anyone gets close to the synagogue.’” Before the livestream from the synagogue was cut off, the gunman could be heard ranting in a foreign language that, according to journalist and trial attorney Marina Medvin, turned out to be Arabic. Medvin noted that the gunman said, “Are you listening? I am going to die. So don’t cry for me…”

RELATED ARTICLES:

Texas Synagogue Rabbi And Jewish Congregants RESCUED, Muslim Terrorist DEAD

The American Islamist Campaign to Free Aafia Siddiqui, Congregation Beth Israel

Texas Synagogue Hostage Crisis: Jew-Hatred ands Hostage-Taking are Sanctioned in Islam

First with victim card: ‘journalist’ Wajahat Ali warns of ‘Islamophobia’ in wake of Texas synagogue hostage crisis

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

Iran’s Supreme Leader Releases Video Depicting Assassination of Trump

My latest in PJ Media:

It’s readily available on Twitter, of course: the website of the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has released a video showing the assassination of Donald Trump and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on the golf course at Mar-a-Lago. This comes as Iran has been issuing a barrage of threats against Trump for the killing of Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani in Jan. 2020. As Biden’s handlers persevere in their attempts to appease Iran at the nuke talks in Vienna, the Islamic Republic grows more emboldened, audacious, and aggressive by the day.

The establishment media has been dragging its feet about covering the threats from Iran. After all, it isn’t as if Khamenei threatened Old Joe Biden or Nancy Pelosi. Threats to Trump? Big deal. So it was perhaps understandable that a reporter was slow on the uptake regarding the blizzard of threats the Iranians have issued against Trump and others.

A reporter asked White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki Monday if there had been any threats at all: “Jake Sullivan had a statement over the weekend with regards to Iran and sanctions and he alluded to the threats against American officials. Should we interpret from that that the U.S.’s intelligence — that there have been threats, in particular against Trump officials who were involved in the Soleimani strike?”

Psaki answered tepidly, without naming the dreaded Trump: “Well, I’m not going to get into intelligence here, from the podium.  But we’ve certainly seen concerning public rhetoric from Iranian officials about individuals from previous administrations, even before sanctions from this weekend, and that’s unacceptable.” Previous administrations? The Iranians are actually threatening to murder people from only one administration, the one that didn’t bend over backward to appease the bloodthirsty regime in Tehran.

Psaki did go on to suggest that Biden’s handlers would be working to protect those who were threatened, even their nemesis Trump: “As the National Security Advisor, Jake Sullivan, said in his statement over the weekend that you just referenced: ‘As Americans, we have our disagreements on politics…on Iran policy,’ and other issues, of course. ‘But we are united in our resolve against threats and provocations.  We’re united in the defense of our people.’ And we’re going to protect and defend our own people. But I’m not going to get into more specifics.”

Nor did Psaki bother to explain that the Iranians are only bold enough to issue all these threats because the Biden administration has been so supine and appeasement-minded. The Iranians even saw this coming: it is enlightening to remember what former Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said on Nov. 5, 2020: “the next U.S. administration will surrender to the Iranian nation.” This wasn’t just tough talk. In light of Biden’s handlers’ apparent willingness to give the mullahs all they want and more, it was a sober assessment of the geopolitical situation.

There is more. Read the rest here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Rockets Fired at US Embassy in Baghdad by Iran Backed Terrorists

Iran: Anti-regime activists take credit for torching of Soleimani statue right after its unveiling

MSNBC’s Jason Johnson: Republican Party is ‘a dime store front for a terrorist movement,’ ‘they’re the PLO to Hamas’

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

Twitter Is Allowing Iranian Government Officials to Issue Death Threats Against Trump

My latest in PJ Media:

Everyone knows that one Donald J. Trump of Palm Beach, Florida is the source and summit of evil in the modern world, but he has been banned from Twitter for over a year now, so the republic (you know, that thing the Democrats constantly refer to as “our democracy”) is safe. Twitter is nothing if not consistent: Trump is so extremely evil that Twitter is permitting official accounts of the Islamic Republic of Iran, one of the world’s premier regimes of color, to threaten to murder Trump and officials from his administration without being banned or even suspended. Death threats are ordinarily not permitted, but when they’re against Trump, they serve wokeness; what could possibly be wrong with that?

On New Year’s Day, Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, tweeted: “Martyr Soleimani is an eternal reality that will live on forever. His assassins – including Trump & the like – will go down in history’s garbage bin, but of course after receiving retribution in this world for the crime they committed.” That “retribution in this world” bit was a clear threat, but Twitter did nothing to restrict Khamenei’s account.

Nor did Twitter do anything to the account of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps when it tweeted: “The Islamic Republic of Iran considers vengeance against those responsible for the Baghdad crime to be the right of all believers; whether they are drops in the ocean or bits of sand in the desert they’ll seek vengeance next to the criminals’ homes.”

Rep. Greg Steube (R-Fla.) commented: “So, the leftist oligarchs at Twitter will allow the [Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps] to tweet death threats at President Trump, but will deplatform him for calling for a peaceful protest? Last I checked, making death threats is inciting violence.”

Rep. Pat Fallon (R-Texas), skewered Twitter’s hypocrisy: “In Twitter’s safety rules and polices, they say, ‘You may not threaten violence against an individual or a group of people.’ If this is the case, why is the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism, Iran, allowed to threaten to kill President Donald Trump? Not only is Twitter exclusively censoring conservatives, but now they are letting Iran’s armed forces issue death threats to a former sitting president. Twitter needs to consider following their own policies and immediately remove this tweet.”

When contacted by the Washington Free Beacon, “Twitter did not respond to a request for comment on why the tweet remains active and whether that tweet violates the company’s guidelines.” That’s not surprising. What could they possibly say? Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), who was recently banned from Twitter herself, called Twitter “an enemy to America and can’t handle the truth.” When Twitter allows Iranian officials who shout “Death to America” a platform to threaten an American and bans that same American on false pretenses, it’s hard to say that Greene is wrong.

There is more. Read the rest here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

GOVT CENSORSHIP: Biden Tells Social Media Platforms to Crack Down on Free Speech

Iran provides new details about its arming of Palestinian jihad terrorists in Gaza

Iranian athletes call for canceling February match after pro-regime ‘Death to America’ chant

US warns of ‘severe consequences’ if Iran carries out revenge attack over Soleimani  

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

Islamo-Leftism [Part 8]

Editor’s note: The following is a translation by Ibn Warraq and Robert Kerr of Michel Onfray’s L’Art d’Etre Francais (The Art of Being French, Bouquins, 2021), published here for the first time. Part 1 is here. Part 2 is here. Part 3 is here. Part 4 is here. Part 5 is here. Part 6 is here. Part 7 is here.


This essentialization finds its theory in long discourses on “the Other” (p. 141) with a capital letter… One can’t do more essentializing than with this hollow, empty, pretentious concept, redolent of the philosophical jargon of phenomenologists! What is this Other that some people who quote Levinas go on about? What though is the ‘Other’ than the ‘same entity’ (Même), repeatedly recast from the same mould, duplicated ad nauseam for the particular needs of the cause on hand. The Other is nonexistent, just an idealized figure, a notion, a Platonic ideal that can never become manifest because there are only multiplicities, diversities, otherness. Plenel writes at one point: “This Other who, in our societies, has taken the figure of the Muslim” (p. 143). There can be no better proof that this Other is nothing but a ‘Sameyness’ (Même) conceptualized as an archetype, allowing for all possible journalistic and pamphleteering variations.

Plenel is a realist, in the medieval philosophical sense of the term, in other words someone who believes in the reality of ideas more than in the truth of multiplicities. He does not believe what he sees, but he sees what he believes. And there is little difference between the realist in this sense and the ideologue, for whom reality never materializes because the idea imposes the law in its place. Plenel’s Muslim does not exist, except as an allegory by means of which all ideological variations are possible.

Secondly: godwiner. I propose this neologism based on Godwin’s observation[16] which describes the tendency of people to invoke the Holocaust [or Nazis] to prevent any subtle analysis in order to preclude any complex reflection. This criminalization of the interlocutor forbids us to debate with him. He is de facto a monster comparable to the Nazis.

Edwy Plenel’s title is not by chance: Pour les musulmans. Since Émile Zola published Pour les juifs (p. 67) during the Dreyfus affair, Edwy Plenel, in response to this new Dreyfus affair, namely the assertion that there is “a problem with Islam in France” (p. 39), must take up the torch and be the Zola of his time.

Muslims are allegedly stigmatized, despised, hated and persecuted in France, just as the Jews were in the course of the 20th century. They are seen as an “enemy from within (the Jew yesterday, the Muslim – or, indiscriminately, the Arab today)” (p. 54) – the upper and lower case letters are the author’s.

If today’s Muslims are yesterday’s Jews, then where are the Drumonts[17] and Maurras[18] of today? Finkielkraut[19], answers Plenel…  Where is the media in which hatred against Muslims is spewed out every day? Plenel can produce no culprit worse than France Inter, specifically the Matinales program of this radio station, which by all accounts supports most of his theses – the book opens with a denunciation of this state broadcasting station, as it serves “lark’s pâté” every day, inviting an Islamophile horse[20] and [what offends Plenel] a lark critical of Islamophilia (p. 39). There was even a time, on France Inter, under the leadership of Patrick Cohen, when there was a blacklist of people not to be invited, most of whom could have played the role of the lark in a pâté that was then frankly more horse, with the blessing of the management of this public service that lives on taxpayers’ money and that declined to comment when this became known…

Is there a newspaper that would be the equivalent of L’Action française?[21] Yes. It’s Libération… No laughing matter… First, Edwy Plenel points out “the responsibility of the media” (p. 60), which itself is then essentialized, he claims that they construct, convey, and trivialize “the stigmatization of a population of men, women and children, on the pretext of their religious, spiritual or community identity” (p. 60). Libération? Le Monde? L’Humanité? L’Obs? L’Express? France Inter, France Culture, France infoFrance 2? Media that propagate a bad image of Muslims – yea right, get real.

But where then are the anti-Muslim laws, such as those passed by Vichy on October 3, 1940, antisemitic laws which prohibited Jews from being judges, teachers, doctors, civil servants, soldiers, journalists, film-makers, directors, administrators or theater managers? What is the counterpart of the law of June 2, 1941, which racialized Jews on the basis of their ancestry? Which forbade them from receiving decorations, including the Legion of Honor? Which expanded the work bans to [Jewish] craftsmen, merchants, industrialists, librarians, bankers, advertisers, real estate agents, traders, brokers, foresters, publishers? Which civil service is working to concretely discriminate against Muslims, as did the General Commissariat for Jewish Questions created by the law of March 29, 1941?

The proposal to revoke nationality (of Muslims) following the attacks was indeed foolishness intended to produce a media effect, but that is not enough to conclude that the Muslims of today are the Jews of yesterday. To which I should not be so presumptuous to add that, even among the most vehement opponents of Islam, Jean-Marie Le Pen, no one has envisioned or proposed the equivalent of the Vel’d’Hiv Roundup,[22] of a mass deportation of Muslims to concentration camps, let alone extermination. Just as one would look in vain for a massive plan to destroy Europe’s Muslims in gas chambers, which, need we remind you here? alas yes, remains synonymous with the Jewish people. That is why this moment in history should not be invoked or referred to so lightly.

COLUMN BY

 

REFERENCES:

[16] Godwin’s Law (also known as Godwin’s Rule of Nazi Analogies) is a saying made by Mike Godwin in 1990. The law states: “As a discussion on the Internet grows longer, the likelihood of a person‘s being compared to Hitler or another Nazi, increases.” That means that as more people talk on the Internet for a longer time, it becomes more and more likely that someone will talk about Hitler or the Nazis.”

[17] Édouard Drumont [1844 -1917] was  a journalist, writer and right wing politician, who was an antidreyfusard and antisemite.

[18] Charles-Marie-Photius Maurras [ 1868 – 1952) was a French author, politician, poet, and critic. He was an organizer and principal philosopher of Action Française, a political movement that was monarchist, anti-parliamentarist, and counter-revolutionary. Maurras’ ideas greatly influenced National Catholicism and integral nationalism.

[19] Alain Finkielkraut [born 1949] philosopher, whose parents were Polish Jews, defines himself as being “at the same time classical and romantic”. Finkielkraut deplores what he sees as the deterioration of Western tradition through multiculturalism and relativism.

[20]   “To make a lark pie, take a horse and a lark …”. In this list of ingredients, the size disproportion between horse and lark is striking. The contrast makes us say that it would have been intellectually more honest to name such a dish (if we had to find a name for it), paté of horse with lark.

This exaggerated imbalance between two substances “packaged and sold” together under the same name, a disparity that the lark pie idiom perfectly highlights. Lark pâté is a Machiavellian trap in the place of a product or a proposition that has been misleadingly highlighted. The recipe is well known to advertisers and politicians. It consists of highlighting one of the secondary characteristics of a product, a law or a proposal, in order to present it in its best profile; the goal being to make up, minimize or even make people forget the dominant, uninteresting, harmful or liberating characteristic of the object in question.

[21] Action française is a French far-right monarchist political movement. The name was also given to a journal associated with the movement. The movement and the journal were founded by Maurice Pujo and Henri Vaugeois in 1899, as a nationalist reaction against the intervention of left-wing intellectuals on behalf of Alfred Dreyfus. Charles Maurras quickly joined Action française and became its principal ideologist..

[22]  The Vel d’Hiv Roundup (an abbreviation of Rafle du Vélodrome d’Hiver) in Paris was a mass arrest of Jewish families who were herded into this stadium, used for cycling tournaments during the winter, by French police and gendarmes on the orders of the German authorities in July 1942. Over 13,000 Jews were arrested, including more than 4,000 children. They were all later sent to Auschwitz.

RELATED ARTICLES:

NYC: Muslim arrested for brutal attack on man wearing IDF sweatshirt

Taliban Defense Minister Threatens to Put 2,000 Jihad Suicide Bombers at Afghan Embassy in Washington, D.C.

France: Muslim screaming ‘Allahu akbar’ injures three police officers

UK: Christian nurse bullied by hospital staff over small cross while Muslims wore hijab, went to mosque 4Xs daily

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

Islamo-Leftism [Part 3]

Editor’s note: The following is a translation by Ibn Warraq and Robert Kerr of Michel Onfray’s L’Art d’Etre Francais (The Art of Being French, Bouquins, 2021), published here for the first time. Part 1 is here. Part 2 is here.


Foucault went on a second trip in November of that year, and a new series of articles appeared. On February 13, 1979, when Khomeini left for Iran, the philosopher, who had made the trip to Neauphle-le-Château, was present at the airport.

What arguments do the articles he published in the Italian newspaper at the end of 1978 make?

That Islam is the answer to the Shah’s westernization of Iran; that, for want of justice, the Mullahs provide charity in response to the regime’s imperialism; that a Muslim killing another Muslim is scandalous – which is however to ignore the history of Shiite-Sunni relations for almost a millennium and a half; that Israel backed the Shah along with the United States and France (but then so did the Soviet Union); that, paradoxically for a normalien, modernity is archaism – and thus tradition is the true modernity; that the regime was corrupt and that the Shah was imposing on his people “a regime of occupation” comparable “to all colonial regimes” (III, 683).

– therefore, to oppose this is to resist; secularism and industrialization are no longer relevant

-and consequently, theocracy and feudal economy represent the true modernity; the Shah’s regime stands for archaism while that of the Mullahs  is modernity; that the traditional life defended by the Mullahs is preferable to the modernity advocated by the Shah; that “Islam, which for so many centuries has so carefully regulated daily life, family ties, and social relations” (III, 685), is most capable of offering “protection” against the regime – “didn’t its rigor [sic], its immobility [re-sic] determine its success?” Accordingly, “the Islamic government” and the left make common cause without any difficulty  (this is the genealogy of Islamo-leftism); that the Qur’an legitimized the struggle against the Shah, the Americans, “the West and its materialism”; that Islam is fascinated by death and martyrdom (and it is understandable that this proved irresistible to Foucault, who shared this fascination); that the Islamist sermons broadcast in the streets by loudspeaker reminded him of Savonarola – who headed the Catholic theocratic dictatorship in Florence without our philosophy professor being troubled about it; that the Shiite clergy disregards hierarchy, but that one must follow ‘the great ayatollahs’ because they crystallize the will of the people; that Islam is opposed to state power (a notion that a thousand years of Islamic politics refutes); and “that one fact must be clear: By ‘Islamic government’ no one in Iran means a political regime in which the clergy would play a leading or supervisory role” (III, 691) – Everyone will appreciate the philosopher’s immense foresight; that Islam once in power would protect freedoms, minorities, the equality of men and women, that the people could hold those who govern them to account; that this same political Islam would make it possible to reinsert spirituality, that is to say religion, into politics – which means abolishing secularism and restoring the theocratic order that the French Revolution had suppressed in order to favor the democratic order; that a ‘political spirituality’ (III, 694) is a project that ‘impressed’ (that’s his own word) Michel Foucault.

In speaking of this “political spirituality” as something we had forgotten “since the Renaissance and the great crises of Christianity” (though all counter-revolutionary thought was full of it in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, one only has to read Joseph de Maistre[4], Louis de Bonald[5], Blanc de Saint-Bonnet[6]), Foucault writes: “I can already hear the French laughing, but I know they are wrong” (III, 694).

The philosopher, however, was also wrong on this subject: many French people did not laugh, many of them even subscribed to this reactionary and theocratic thinking, since it came from a man who called himself a leftist. I am thinking of Serge July in Libération or Jean Daniel in Le Nouvel Observateur, who also thought along these lines. The same applies to the Parti socialiste. Or with Le Monde, which, since the war in Lebanon in 1975, pitted the “Islamo-progressivists” against the “conservative Christians”. This has since become the dominant ideology of what presents itself as the Left and claims to be progressive.

Islamo-Gauchism was thus born in the wake of this Iranian revolution when Foucault believed that Islamic traditionalist thought, that is to say its anti-Semitism, its phallocracy, its misogyny, its theocracy, its homophobia, were susceptible to become the truth of the future.

He was certainly not wrong to write: “The issue of Islam as a political force is a crucial matter for our time and for the years to come” (III, 708). But why on earth did he think that abolishing secularism, suppressing democracy, renouncing progress, that is, restoring the power of the religious, rehabilitating theocracy, and re-establishing tradition, were the political answers to the crisis of the Western world? The ghost of Foucault hovers over European decadence.

COLUMN BY

REFERENCES:

[4] Joseph de Maistre [1753-1821] was a key figure of the Counter-Enlightenment. He regarded the monarchy both as a divinely sanctioned institution and as the only stable form of government. Maistre argued that the rationalist rejection of Christianity was directly responsible for the disorder and bloodshed which followed the French Revolution of 1789.

[5] Louis de Bonald [1754-1840], was a monarchist who opposed the French Revolution, and wished France to return to the principles of the Roman Catholic Church.

[6] Blanc de Saint-Bonnet [1815-1880] was a counter-revolutionary, anti-liberal who favored social Catholicism. He wrote, “You who separate reason and religion, know that you destroy both. Religion is the health of reason; reason is the strength of religion. Religion without reason becomes superstition. Reason without religion becomes disbelief” (L’Unité spirituelle)

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