Tag Archive for: Islam

Huge lines to get new edition of Charlie Hebdo — Sells out within Minutes

The people are unbowed and ready to stand for freedom. The mainstream media and the leaders of the West, not so much. “Charlie Hebdo ‘All Is Forgiven’ edition sells out in minutes,” Reuters, January 14, 2015:

The first edition of Charlie Hebdo published since last week’s deadly attack by Islamist gunmen sold out within minutes at newspaper kiosks around France on Wednesday, with readers queuing up for copies to support the satirical weekly.

It came as al Qaeda in Yemen claimed responsibility for the attack, saying it ordered the killings because it deemed the weekly to have insulted the Prophet Muhammad. A total of 5 million copies of the so-called “survivors’ edition” are to be printed, dwarfing the normal 60,000 print run.

“I’ve never bought it before, it’s not quite my political stripes, but it’s important for me to buy it today and support freedom of expression,” said David Sullo, standing at the end of a queue of two dozen people at a kiosk in central Paris.

“It’s important for me to buy it and show solidarity by doing so, and not only by marching,” said 42-year old Laurent in the same queue, adding he had no guarantee he would get a copy because he had not reserved one the day before.

A few streets away, by Jules Joffrin metro station in northern Paris, one newspaper seller said people were already waiting outside her shop when she opened at 6 a.m. “I had 10 copies — they were sold immediately,” she said….

In a video posted on YouTube, al Qaeda in Yemen said its leadership had ordered last Wednesday’s attack.

“As for the blessed Battle of Paris, we, the Organization of al Qaeda al Jihad in the Arabian Peninsula, claim responsibility for this operation as vengeance for the Messenger of God,” Nasser bin Ali al-Ansi, a leader of the Yemeni branch of al Qaeda (AQAP), said in the recording.

Ansi, the main ideologue for AQAP, said without elaborating that the strike was carried out in “implementation” of the order of overall al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahri, who has called for strikes by Muslims in the West using any means they can find.

It was not immediately possible to verify the authenticity of the recording, which carried the logo of al Qaeda’s media group al-Malahem….

Dieudonne M’bala M’bala — a French comedian who has been convicted in the past for anti-Semitic comments — was detained for questioning Wednesday for writing on his Facebook account “Je suis Charlie Coulibaly,” adding the surname of one of the gunmen to the ubiquitous “I am Charlie” vigil slogan.

Bordeaux mosque rector Tareq Oubrou urged French Muslims not to overreact.

“I don’t think the Prophet of Islam needs stupid or excited reactions,” he told BFM-TV. “Freedom has its down sides and we must live with them.”

Egypt’s Grand Mufti on Tuesday warned the newspaper against publishing a new Muhammad caricature, saying it was a racist act that would incite hatred and upset Muslims around the world.

What race is insulting Muhammad again? I keep forgetting.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Steve Emerson, Reza Aslan, and the mainstream media: some errors are more erroneous than others

Video: Robert Spencer on Sun TV on Obama’s “Countering Violent Extremism” summit

Video: Robert Spencer on Newsmax TV on Obama’s response to the Charlie Hebdo jihad attack

Ohio Muslim arrested for Islamic State-inspired plot to bomb U.S. Capitol

“I believe that we should just wage jihad under our own orders and plan attacks and everything. I believe we should meet up and make our own group in alliance with the Islamic State here and plan operations ourselves.” There will be many other young Muslims acting on the same belief.

“Ohio Man Arrested for Alleged ISIS-Inspired Plot on US Capitol, FBI Says,” by Pierre Thomas, Jack Date, Mike Levine and Jack Cloherty, ABC News, January 14, 2015 (thanks to Anne Crockett):

The FBI has arrested an Ohio man for allegedly plotting an ISIS-inspired attack on the U.S. Capitol, where he hoped to set off a series of bombs aimed at lawmakers, whom he allegedly considered enemies.

Christopher Lee Cornell, 20, of Green Township, was arrested today on charges of attempting to kill a U.S. government official, authorities said.

According to government documents, he allegedly planned to detonate pipe bombs at the national landmark and open fire on any employees and officials fleeing after the explosions.

The FBI first noticed Cornell several months ago after an informant notified the agency that Cornell was allegedly voicing support for violent “jihad” on Twitter accounts under the alias “Raheel Mahrus Ubaydah,” according to charging documents. In addition, Cornell allegedly posted statements, videos and other content expressing support for ISIS — the brutal terrorist group also known as ISIL — that is wreaking havoc in Iraq and Syria.

“I believe that we should just wage jihad under our own orders and plan attacks and everything,” Cornell allegedly wrote in an online message to the informant in August, according to the FBI. “I believe we should meet up and make our own group in alliance with the Islamic State here and plan operations ourselves.”

In the message, Cornell said that such attacks “already got a thumbs up” from radical cleric Anwar Awlaki “before his martyrdom.”

Awlaki was killed in a U.S. drone strike in 2011, but his online messages calling for attacks on the West live on.

U.S. officials considered Awlaki an operational leader within al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, the Yemen-based terror group tied to the deadly assault on a satirical magazine in Paris last week.

Cornell and the informant met in Cincinnati over two days in October, and then another two days in November. During the last meeting, Cornell told an FBI informant that members of Congress were enemies and that he wanted to launch an attack on the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., according to charging documents.

Cornell then allegedly saved money to finance the attack and researched how to build bombs, the FBI said.

Earlier today, while also taking “final steps” to travel to Washington for the attack, Cornell allegedly bought two semi-automatic rifles and 600 rounds of ammunition from a store in Ohio, authorities said….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Washington, DC: Jewish-owned business repeatedly threatened by self-described Islamic State jihadis

Jihad Jane says she became a jihad terrorist “for love” of Muhammad and the worldwide Muslim community

Nancy Pelosi to name Muslim Brotherhood-linked Muslim Congressman to House intelligence committee

Oxford University Press bans mention of pigs in books to avoid offending Muslims

The Paris Attack and the Famous French Whine – “We Need Tooooolerance”

Aside from the three Muslim men who perpetrated the deadliest terror attack in France since 1961, there are some other individuals complicit in the Wednesday massacre. They have names such as Hollande, Merkel, Löfven and Obama. Their connection to the act will largely go unnoticed and unapprehended — and they likely will never be held to account.

In the wake of the brutality at the offices of satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, socialist French president Francois Hollande called for tolerance.

I call for intolerance.

The difference between us isn’t that, relatively speaking, I lack the quality. I have a lot of practice exercising tolerance because I have far more to tolerate — not the least of which is the political power and policies of people such as Hollande, Merkel, Löfven and Obama. The real difference is that I actually know what tolerance means.

Tolerance always implies a perceived negative. You wouldn’t have to tolerate a delectable meal or a beautiful car; you relish those things. But you would have to tolerate a stubborn cold, a painful rash or foul weather. So Tolerance Lesson One for Leftists:

If you say you’re tolerant of Muslims, it implies that you consider them a negative.

If you don’t — if instead you like them or just view them neutrally — tolerance doesn’t enter the equation.

Of course, not everything we perceive as negative actually is so. We may dislike broccoli, but tolerate it in order to avoid offending a host or for health reasons. In such cases, when the perceived negative is not objectively negative and there are good reasons to put up with it, tolerance can be a great exercise of virtue.

It also can be virtuous when dealing with an objective negative (ON), such as unjust imprisonment or a terminal illness, that you cannot remedy. Soldiering on nobly in such situations often builds great character and provides inspiration for others.

But what of when at issue is an ON that can be remedied? This brings us to Tolerance Lesson Two for Leftists:

The only virtue in this case lies in wiping the negative out.

Unlike when bearing up nobly in the face intractable ONs, tolerating those that could be eliminated renders one guilty of a failure of omission; it is dereliction of moral duty. An example would be a man who could prevent someone from habitually invading his home and endangering his family, but who fails to do so out of neglect, cowardice or in deference to twisted ideology. (This could, by the way, be viewed as a microcosm of something that perhaps, just maybe, we might want to start having an honest national discussion about.) Another example was when the Spaniards encountered the bloody-altar Aztecs in 16th-century Mexico; they didn’t say “Hey, tearing the hearts out of thousands of innocents while they’re still alive and hanging their body parts in the marketplace isn’t our thing, but we’re good multiculturalists and don’t impose values.” They were intolerant — and, thankfully, an intolerable Hades-born “religion” was vanquished.

Also note that since being neglectful, a coward or a twisted ideologue is an ON itself, it generally doesn’t engender respect. Remember that allowing the continued existence of remediable ONs sometimes amounts to a person letting himself be used as a doormat. And people wipe their feet on doormats. Of course, other times an individual won’t perceive the ON as a negative; noteworthy here is that ingested poison will kill you whether you recognize it as poison or not.

Many interesting lessons on tolerance could be learned from the Muslim world. Note that when pious Muslims perceive something as negative (this isn’t to imply that all their perceptions are accurate), they often stop at nothing to wipe it out. Just consider the tens of thousands of non-Muslims killed and thousands of churches burned by jihadists during the last decade, the enforcement of Sharia law, and the Muslim-conquered parts of European cities euphemistically known as no-go zones.

The leftist response to this Islamic chauvinism is well exemplified by the reaction to the 2014 “Trojan horse scandal,” involving the supplanting of Western curricula by Islamist doctrine in seven London schools. Critiquing one offending institution, British officials noted that pupils didn’t “learn about different faiths and cultures” and, critiquing another — and this is the money line — said that students “understanding of…mutual respect and tolerance…is underdeveloped.” “Ah, yes, these Muslims just need to be tolerant like us,” say the good leftists.

Talk about being dimmer than a 15-watt bulb in a North Korean night.

Since these Muslims view other faiths and cultures as inferior to their own, as negatives, they would have to be tolerant of them — if they didn’t think they could vanquish them. But because they’re making great headway on that front, they have no need to be tolerant.

You needn’t tolerate what you can terminate.

And they’re really just taking a leaf out of the left’s book. How tolerant are liberals, really? Remember again, the only test of tolerance is how well you abide things you dislike. And no one is more vicious in destroying perceived negatives than leftists. Just ask the people who’ve lost jobs for defending marriage or criticizing homosexual behavior, such as former Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich or ex-Atlanta fire chief Kelvin Cochran. Ask those punished under hate-speech laws or bitten by speech codes on college campuses. Ask the bakers and other Christian businessmen put out of business for refusing to be party to homosexual “weddings.” The reality is that when leftists hate something — and it is all emotion with them — they have no mercy. (Mind you, this is one reason liberals accuse conservatives of being “haters”; it’s projection. Governed by emotion, they only oppose what they despise, so they naturally view opposition as synonymous with hatred.)

So leftists’ calls for tolerance amount to a request that Muslims and others practice what leftists themselves merely preach. But if you consider their working definition of the word — confusing tolerance with affinity or indifference — there is an irony here: these secular fundamentalists have the same message the Islamic fundamentalists do:

Believe what we believe.

Like what we like.

Hate what we hate.

Become one with our collective.

And we can live in peace.

Secular and Islamic fundamentalists have something else in common. Both groups have many perceived negatives that aren’t actually objectively negative, so they try to wipe out the wrong things. Thus do they work together to destroy Christianity and Western civilization. And this is why I named as co-conspirators in the Paris attack Francois Hollande, Angela Merkel, Stefan Löfven and Barack Obama. But this brings me to my last Tolerance Lesson for Leftists, and I direct my words now specifically to leftists: There’s something else pious Muslims perceive as a negative, and it also happens to be something that is an objective negative.

You.

EDITORS NOTE: You may contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com

Je ne Suis pas Charlie — I’m Sane

It’s so often the case that the best thing a person can do to improve his reputation is die. John F. Kennedy is now a legendary president, but would he be estimated so highly if he’d been able to end his political career as a man and not a myth? Ah, the power of martyrdom.

And so it is with the editors and cartoonists of French magazine Charlie Hebdo (CH). In the wake of the Jan. 7 attack on its offices, millions are showing their support, heroicizing CH and saying “Je suis Charlie” (I am Charlie). On the other hand, there are a few lonely voices, such as Catholic League president Bill Donohue, who have some less than flattering things to say about the magazine. After unequivocally condemning the killings, Donohue called CH’s late publisher, Stephane Charbonnier, “narcissistic” and said that the journalist “didn’t understand the role he played in his tragic death.”

While I usually agree with Donohue, I do part company with him here — somewhat. First, the tone of his statement is a bit too deferential toward Islamic sensitivities. Second, I’m not so sure Donohue himself truly understands the role Charbonnier played in his tragic death. As to this, make no mistake:

Charlie Hebdo was an enemy of Western civilization.

Question: Did the people at CH ever oppose the Muslim immigration into France that, ultimately, led to their deaths?

Maybe I’m wrong, but I’m willing to go out on a limb and guess they didn’t, that they were rather more inclined to call those who did inveigh against it “racists,” xenophobes and intolerant bigots. And this certainly was reflected in an interview CH cartoonist Bernard Holtrop gave to a Dutch newspaper Saturday. He didn’t say much, it seems, but amidst his few words he made sure to express his dissatisfaction with the fact that the CH attack will help Marine Le Pen’s National Front, the only prominent French party questioning the nation’s immigration model.

We might also note that the victims at CH were basically defenseless, save the one police officer guarding the journalists, because of the gun control that is part of their leftist agenda.

As for the material CH was disgorging, Town Hall’s John Ransom characterized it well, saying that the Charlie caricatures were “juvenile, loaded with bathroom humor, and not at all smart. There were many cartoons that I felt were just offensive — not just to Muslims, but to me as well” (hat tip: Jack Kemp). In other words, to reference that failed leftist radio effort, CH was the Air(head) America of print. In typical liberal style, its artists mistook profanity for profundity, cynicism for sagacity and insult for intellectualism. It’s reminiscent of the women who strip naked to protest; even if their causes were just — which they invariably aren’t — what does it prove? Could you imagine George Washington, or maybe wife Martha, having bared it all to protest the British? With that mentality, would there ever have been a positive and successful American Revolution?

But I’ll tell you what it proves: that we’ve had a successful Western devolution. It proves that Frankfurt School founder Willi Munzenberg wasn’t kidding when he said that to impose the dictatorship of the proletariat, they would “make the West so corrupt it stinks.” This putrefaction is now well advanced, and CH was part of this decay.

Of course, many would respect the fact that CH, unlike most leftists, didn’t spare Muslims the scorn it also heaped on Christians and anyone else didn’t like (which seems to have been everyone else). But while this isn’t as bad as a fifth column in your midst, a platoon that indiscriminately sprays bullets at everybody, its own side as well as the enemy, isn’t exactly helping. (In fact, were one of these leftists in a foxhole next to me, I’d have to frag him before dealing with the foe wearing a different uniform.)

Oh, but let me amend that. One might wonder if CH had a side except its own, and I suspect that such people don’t much like themselves, either (can you blame them on that score?); it seemed that everyone was its enemy. CH showed “nuns masturbating and popes wearing condoms,” as Donohue pointed out, and had also attacked the French government, which is pretty much socialist no matter who is in charge. And I know a fellow like this, by the way; he criticized G.W. Bush for being too conservative and then changed his tune when Obama took office.

He started criticizing Obama for being too conservative.

We might ask such people, is there any good in the world at all? Or are you the only good extant?

I know what their answer will be: “F*** ***, @#$%&!”

This typical leftist hatred was reflected by CH’s Holtrop, who responded to the outpouring of support for his mag rag by dismissively saying “We have a lot of new friends, like the pope, Queen Elizabeth and [Russian President Vladimir] Putin. It really makes me laugh …We vomit on all these people who suddenly say they are our friends.”

But Holtrop and his comrades had been vomiting on Western civilization for years, which is why he doesn’t have to worry about me counting myself among his friends. Instead, I would remind you of British statesman Edmund Burke’s sage words, “It is written in the eternal constitution of things that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters.” We’re not going to preserve legitimate liberties that would be robbed by men of intemperate minds by being men of different intemperate minds. And whom should we fear most? Who most imperils us? Muslim fundamentalists? Or the left-wing fundamentalists who, like dysfunctional cells attacking a body’s immune system, make us susceptible to harmful outside agencies? To paraphrase Roman philosopher Cicero, an enemy at the gates carrying his banner openly is less formidable than those within the gates who rot the soul of a nation, work secretly in the night to undermine the pillars of the society, and infect the body politic so that it can no longer resist.

We fought with the besieged Soviets to defeat Hitler, but we never said “I am Stalin.” I’m certainly as opposed to Muslim jihadists as anyone, but I’m proud to say je ne suis pas Charlie.

EDITORS NOTE: You may contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com

The Deadly Paris Terror Attack and the Myth of Religion

“Another attack in the name of religion,” I heard someone say after the vicious and vile Wednesday assault on the offices of French magazine Charlie Hebdo. And there is a huge problem with “religion.” But it’s not what you think.

Question: When the Nazis, Stalinists, Khmer Rouge, the Shining Path or the Weathermen committed violence, did we lament, “Another attack in the name of ideology”? Did we hear “Ideology is the problem”? That would be about as helpful as going to a doctor with a dreadful illness and, upon asking him what the problem is, his responding “Your state of health.”

Like ideology, religion is a category, not a creed. As with states of health, which occupy a continuum from excellent to awful, they both contain the good, the bad and the ugly. But modern man, not wanting to place an onus on a faith or seem a “religious” chauvinist, is a bad physician who refuses to name the disease or the cure. So depending on how he is emotionally disposed, we may hear utterances such as “Children need some religion” or “Religion breeds violence.” Ancient Aztec children had “religion,” and they learned well how to sacrifice thousands of innocents a year to Quetzalcoatl on bloody altars. And Amish children have “religion,” and peace and charity define them.

Conservatives exhibit this problem as well. So many will say “Islam is not a religion; it’s a destructive all-encompassing ideology,” or some variation thereof. They treat “religion,” that broad category, as if it’s good by definition. Not that this isn’t understandable. Raised in a relativistic and pluralistic (and these two qualities have a bearing on one another) society, they want to get along with their neighbors; so they tacitly accept an unwritten agreement stating “I won’t say my religion is better than yours if you don’t say yours is better than mine. We’ll just be even-steven!” The trouble is that this solves nothing — and its implications are more dangerous than jihad.

Starting out simply, note that most of the “religions” man has known were more in the nature of the Aztecs’ bloody faith than what we generally embrace today. But many will assert that this is the point: can’t we say all our mainstream faiths are “good,” practically speaking? Can’t we just omit from their category any “religion” not considered good? Well, we can say and do many things, but ideas have consequences. And a civilization with a corrupted philosophical foundation will not long stand.

Consider another question: what makes some ideologies better than others? It’s that they espouse different values. But what of “religions”?

They also espouse different values.

(And not all values are virtues.)

Thus, not all “religions” can be morally equal unless all values are so. This is important to understand. Every time we treat “religions” as if they are all morally equal, every time we spread that idea explicitly or implicitly — no matter how good our intentions — we’re transmitting the notion that all values are equal. And consider what follows from this: if all values are equal, how can peace be better than jihad?

How could respect for life be better than disdain for it?

How could Western law be better than Sharia law?

How could the Sisters of Charity be better than ISIS?

Of course, this means all ideologies would have to be equal as well, from Nazism to Marxism to conservatism to liberalism to libertarianism. Upon embracing relativism, you have no sound intellectual foundation from which to critique or combat anything (though you can certainly fake one without blinking, as relativism deems deception no worse than sincerity).

Why does this matter? Because this relativism has robbed us of an intellectual argument for defending Western civilization (“How could it be better than any other?” asks Professor Larebil). It is the philosophical fifth column that has opened the door to destructive, unassimilable foreign elements via multiculturalism. As to this, multiculturalism states that all cultures are morally equal. But it’s as with “religion” and ideology: since different cultures espouse different values, not all cultures could be morally equal unless all values were so. It is pure and utter nonsense, a phenomenon of modern times, but, of course, moderns in the main believe it. In fact, the Barna Group research company reported in 2002 in “Americans Are Most Likely to Base Truth on Feelings” that only six percent of teenagers believe “moral truth is absolute.” But it’s an apple that has fallen not far from the burning tree and just a little closer to Perdition — only 22 percent of adults believe in moral absolutes, Barna found, and I think that figure is generous. And this baby philosophy of relativism, my friends, as I’ve been telling you for years and years and years, is why we’re collapsing.

Now let’s return to something mentioned earlier: the criticism of Islam for not being a “religion” but a whole system for living. This misses the point that your “religion,” if true, is supposed to be a whole system for living. And this also brings me to why I have religiously placed “religion” in quotation marks.

This distinction between “religious” and “secular” is largely a false one.

There is only one distinction that truly matters: the true and the untrue.

“Secular” and “religious,” especially in the sense we use them, are relatively modern terms. There was a time when beliefs were not “secular” or “religious” — or even liberal or conservative, or right or left — but simply true or untrue.

And this is the only perspective that makes sense. Think about it: if God exists, is it significant that we call recognition of this reality “religious” or that it’s true? If communism is essentially false, is it significant that we call recognition of that reality “secular” or that it’s untrue? There is only Truth and everything else — and everything else, no matter how you dress it up linguistically, is nothing at all.

In a way, pusillanimous moderns are much like pious Muslims. Muslim theology entertains the curious notion of “dual truth,” the idea that what may be true “religiously” may not be true in nature. This silliness was rejected by Western thinkers in the Middle Ages; now, however, something smacking of it has been embraced by their descendants, who may say things such as “A little ‘religion’ is okay, as long as you don’t go overboard.” Or they may compartmentalize faith, thinking it must be left outside the government-building door or even relegate it to one hour a week of “worship services,” as if it’s mere recreation or an unhealthful indulgence only to be taken in moderation. But if your faith is the Truth — if it reflects the will of the Creator of the Universe — you have an obligation to govern yourself, and infuse your every institution, with it. And if it be a lie, it belongs nowhere but the bowels of Hell.

Of course, if, like most Americans, we believe everything is relative, then none of this matters. Then tolerance and intolerance, multiculturalism and cultural chauvinism, charity and barbarity, the “religious” and the “secular” are all equal. And then those darkly clad men with AK-47s in Paris on Wednesday couldn’t really have been “wrong.” They just had a different perspective.

If we don’t really believe this, then it’s time to grow up. It’s time to understand that if everything is relative, then what we say is relative, too, and thus meaningless. So let’s talk about what is meaningful. We can start by accepting that culture isn’t bad, but there are better and worse cultures. “Religion” isn’t bad, but there is bad “religion.” And tolerance, correctly defined as the abiding of perceived negatives, isn’t bad — except when those perceived negatives are objectively negative and, instead of just being tolerated, could actually be wiped out. Willful tolerance of evil is evil itself.

The Muslims have bad “religion.” We have bad philosophy. Both our civilizations believe in things that are untrue. It’s the “tolerant” meeting the intolerable, a match made in Hell — and poised to create exactly that on Earth.

EDITORS NOTE: Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com

Open letter to the President of Pakistan: Please free Asia Bib

To: Mr. Mamnoon Hussain, President of Pakistan

Mrs. Asia Bib is in your country Pakistan and under Sharia law, she was convicted of the crime of blasphemy and sentenced to be hanged in 2010. She is a wife and also a mother to five children who desperately want their mother to come home. She wrote the following and gave it to her husband:

“My prison cell has no windows and day and night are the same to me, but if I am still holding on today it is thanks to everyone who is trying to help me. When my husbnd showed me the photographs of people I have never met drinking a glass of water for me, my heart overflowed. Ashiq told me that the city of Paris is offering to welcome our family. I send my deepest thanks to you Madam Mayor, and to all the kind people of Paris and across the world. You are my only hope of staying alive in this dungeon, so please don’t abandon me. I did not commit blasphemy.”

Ashiq Masih
Pakistan, 17th of November 2014

Mr. President, Asia is a Christian, and because of that, when she offered water to Muslim workers, who were working in a berry field in Itan Wali, they called her unclean. She allegedly responded, “Your Muhammad had worms in his mouth before he died.” She responded from emotion after being insulted after offering a kind hand of love and gesture to a Muslim.

So your country will hang a mother of 5 children for expressing herself from emotion after offering help to Muslims with a simple glass of water where her help was rejected because she is a Christian. Has your nation been taken over by the grip of Satan and you will kill a woman for her expressing opinion? Shame on you.

You need to man up and release her from prison with a full pardon and let her return to her family. Islam is peaceful right? Then prove it. Let her go home. This is a disgrace to the nation of Pakistan and it brings discredit to you Mr. President. Where is the freedom in your country? Are you a nation of intolerant cowards? Let this woman go home. In fact, let her leave your country and come to the United States or to Paris, France where she can live free to speak her mind. I will pay her way, one way tickets for her and all her family.

What sort of a country chooses to hang a defenseless woman for helping a Muslim with a drink of water only to be rejected for her Christian belief. Islam is not a religion of peace it is a religion of intolerance and pure evil……stop being a coward and start showing tolerance and mercy as your religion so expresses.

Mr. President, if you are a man of peace under Islam, release her from jail, send her home to her family and then send her to my country the United States or to France. DO IT. Me merciful like your Allah.

VIDEOS: Our Response to the Charlie Hebdo Attacks

Between 7 and 9 January, Paris witnessed a brutal and drawn-out terrorist attack which left 17 dead and sparked widespread debate on questions of security and freedom of speech. Though shocking, the attack is just one in a string of radical Islamic terrorist atrocities targeting civilians as well as the democratic and security institutions of Western nations.

As ever, The Henry Jackson Society was on hand to provide in-depth analysis to top news outlets in the UK and around the world, arguing vocally against any compromise in our right to freedom of speech.

Associate Director Douglas Murray led opinion with his thought leadership on the attack in both the Daily Mail and the Spectator (both are reprinted below).

Below is a selection of HJS’ latest TV and radio interviews on the topic. We will, of course, continue to promote our cause throughout the media and our appearances can always be viewed on our YouTube channel.

TV Appearances

7 January: Douglas Murray on Channel 4 News 

7 January: Davis Lewin on France 24

7 January: Douglas Murray on WSJ Live 

7 January: Robin Simcox on ITV News 

7 January: Hannah Stuart on Al Arabiya  

8 January: Alan Mendoza on CNBC  

8 January: Douglas Murray on Sky News  

8 January: Douglas Murray on Al Jazeera  

8 January: Douglas Murray on BBC Daily Politics  

10 January: Davis Lewin on France 24  

11 January: Douglas Murray on BBC’s Big Questions  

Radio Appearences

7 January: Douglas Murray on BBC World Service

7 January: Douglas Murray on BBC London

7 January: Robin Simcox on BBC 5 Live

7 January: Douglas Murray on BBC 5 Live

8 January: Douglas Murray on BBC World Service’s World Tonight

9 January: Emily Dyer on BBC Ulster

9 January: Douglas Murray on BBC World Serivce’s World Have Your Say

Thought Leadership

A threat to every single one of us: The cold-blooded outrage in Paris is about our right to be free to express ourselves

Douglas Murray in The Daily Mail

The cold-blooded outrage in Paris is not a story about one magazine or one country – and it is not just about freedom of the Press.

It is about the right of every single one of us to be free to express ourselves. And it is high time the nations of Europe woke up to how gravely that right is under threat.

Because what happened yesterday – though the most appalling incident of its kind yet – is in many ways far from unprecedented. It is just the latest chapter in a long, concerted campaign to shut down criticism and discussion of one religion, its founder and its teachings.

The aim of the campaign is to place that religion – Islam – above the level of all other religions or ideas and make it immune from criticism. And the tactic is working.

This campaign has been gathering pace for at least 25 years. It really started in the West in 1989 after the publication of Salman Rushdie’s novel The Satanic Verses, which contained passages considered deeply offensive by some Muslims.

The novel resulted in Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran issuing a fatwa – a religious judgment, in this case a death sentence – on Rushdie that forced the author into hiding. Though Rushdie survived, the fatwa was followed by the murder of a translator of his works and knife attacks on two others.

Then, as now, some people claimed that Rushdie had been deliberately provocative. Then, as now, even if that were the case it would matter not a jot. Nosociety can be considered truly free if its members are terrorised into silence and hiding by fatwas and mortal threats.

Even so, ever since the Rushdie affair, most authors, artists and publishers have avoided producing anything that might stoke the ire of fundamentalist Muslims.

Of course it is important to state that the great majority of Muslims are peaceful, law-abiding citizens, who abhor violence. Indeed yesterday Muslim leaders in Britain were among the first to condemn the Paris atrocity.

Nevertheless, there have been a very troubling number of attacks carried out in the name of Islam on those in the West considered to have criticised or shown a lack of respect to the religion.

In 2004, the Dutch film-maker Theo van Gogh was shot, stabbed and partially decapitated in broad daylight on a Dutch street. His killer, Mohammed Bouyeri, objected to a film van Gogh had made which criticised some of the Koran’s teachings about women.

Fear works. It breeds self-censorship. In 2005 the Danish newspaper Jyllands Posten discovered that no illustrator in Denmark would depict Islam’s founder for a series of children’s books on world religions.

The paper commissioned a dozen cartoonists to break this apparent taboo and published the results. The subsequent furore saw burnings and lootings of Danish Embassies across the Middle East and threats against Danes worldwide.

Having investigated and written about the growth of Islamic fundamentalism and its effects on our society for some 15 years, I came to know some of those involved in that Danish newspaper, as well as those at Charlie Hebdo, the French magazine attacked yesterday.

I began to realise how they had to endure constant threats to their safety, yet they continued to publish because they believed supremely in the right to freedom of expression, the right to make jokes about anyone and any subject, however powerful or revered they may be. Charlie Hebdo is a satirical, secular, punchy magazine which has picked up themes most people wanted to ignore.

In the wake of the 2005 Danish cartoons furore, it was about the only magazine that, sticking to its principles, chose to print any depiction of Islam’s founding prophet.

The magazine, which laughs at all religions, politics and beliefs, argued that if you are to be free you cannot allow any ideology to hold such a privileged position as to be above criticism. And so they lampooned Mohammed, and ISIS – as well as other targets like critics of Islam and the Far Right politician Marine le Pen.

After an issue that played on the magazine’s name and sharia law with the title ‘Charia Hebdo’, and mercilessly mocked Islamic fundamentalists, a firebomb was thrown into its offices. Its editor – who died yesterday, along with his police protection officer – received constant death threats.

But Charlie Hebdo magazine was not alone in being targeted for daring to poke fun. In 2010 one of the Danish cartoonists was confronted in his home by an axe-wielding Islamist trained by the Somali terrorist group al-Shabaab. A different cartoonist from Sweden, Lars Vilks, was targeted for death in a separate attack.

Across Europe I have encountered countless people – Muslim, ex-Muslim and non-Muslim – who have faced death threats.

Two years ago a 70-year-old friend of mine in Denmark – the historian and journalist Lars Hedegaard, who founded a Free Press Society in the wake of the cartoons affair – woke to a ring from the postman.

But the man at the door was not the postman. He was a young man with a gun who fired at Lars’s head at almost point-blank range. Miraculously he missed.

As Lars struggled with his would-be assassin on his own doorstep, the man fired again. The gun jammed and the culprit ran off. If you have seen and studied these cases of assassination and attempted assassination as many times as I have you notice certain patterns emerging.

One of the most common is for Western apologists for these terrorists to suggest that the victims have provoked the rage of fundamentalists – and they have therefore brought it upon themselves.

Nothing could have been further from the truth. The only people responsible for the carnage in this insidious and evil campaign to stamp out our freedoms are the thugs and murderers who carry it out.

In galleries, newspapers and magazines every day and week of the year there are works of art and articles that offend mainstream Christians.

Cartoons abound at Christmas depicting the Three Wise Men or the Virgin Mary with a humorous twist; there are revolting and puerile cards whose Christmas messages contain foul language.

Imagine that a Christian – any Christian – were to have responded to those cartoons or images by decapitating or gunning down the editor or staff of the magazine, newspaper or art gallery in question. Would we blame his victims, saying they had provoked the outrage? I think it highly unlikely.

Politicians in France have in the past dismissed Charlie Hebdo as radicals of the Left and ‘provocateurs’ – although one would hope yesterday’s events will shock them out of complacency.

The fact is this challenge to our freedoms from radical Islam is real and happening now. If mainstream politicians ignore or shy away from it, tragedy beckons for all of us.

Charlie Hebdo stood alone. What does that say about our ‘free’ press?

Douglas Murray in The Spectator

Over the coming hours and days there will be a lot of talk – largely by anonymous Twitter warriors – about the need to express ‘solidarity’ withCharlie Hebdo.  Many others will say how important it is to ensure that ‘the terrorists and fundamentalists don’t win.’

But the terrorists and fundamentalists are winning and for the moment it looks like they will keep winning.  Because even before today Charlie Hebdoalready stood alone.  In the wake of the 2005 Danish cartoons affair no other major newspaper or magazine in Europe was willing to keep running depictions of Islam’s founder.  Of course they said they didn’t publish, or republish, because they didn’t want to cause offence, or because they thought the (wholly innocuous) depictions were wilfully ‘provocative’ and the like.  And of course Jyllands Posten is a conservative, ‘right-wing’ newspaper.

But they will say the same thing now.  And the left-wing Charlie Hebdo will be abandoned now even more than the right-wing Jyllands Posten was back then.  People will come up with various excuses, but in truth they won’t publish because they are afraid.  The remaining staff of Charlie Hebdo could hardly be more alone.

There is only one way in which this couldn’t remain the case: if tomorrow, or some day this week every newspaper and magazine in Europe, the front-page of the BBC and Channel 4 News websites and every other major news site simultaneously published a set of Charlie Hebdo’s depictions of Mohammed among others.  I put this suggestion to the BBC today during an interview and was told by the presenter that ‘in fairness’ to the BBC they had earlier retweeted Charlie Hebdo’s recent cartoon of ISIS’s leader al-Baghdadi.  Which, of course, isn’t quite the same thing.  Some readers may recall that during the Danish cartoon affair Channel 4 ran a live programme on freedom of speech which included a live vote as to whether or not Channel 4 should show the cartoons.  The public voted that they should.  And then Channel 4 unilaterally decided to ignore the public’s wishes and would not show the cartoons.

It was around the same time that Ayaan Hirsi Ali put it best.  She suggested in the wake of the Danish cartoons affair that ‘we have to spread the risk.’  But the free press didn’t spread it around then.  And I very much doubt that they will now.  I know all the arguments.  I know the fears – that someone from the typing pool or on the front desk will be the target.  I’ve heard every possible argument over the years.

And that is why I can safely say that the free press will fail this latest test too.  For all its historic traditions, its self back-slapping for its alleged ‘bravery’ and so on, there are only a couple of tiny outcrops of freedom.  The rest of the vast, powerful, fearless, outspoken tradition that is the Western press is too intimidated to publish a single cartoon that might conveivably provoke a Muslim.

This is what it looks like to lose a freedom.  Not many people will care today.  But they will tomorrow, or another day in the future.

Top 50 anti-Christian Countries

Sarah Eekhoff Zylstra in her column “‘Not Forgotten’: The Top 50 Countries Where It’s Most Difficult To Be A Christian” reports that, “Open Doors says 2014 saw the worst persecution of Christians in the ‘modern era’—but not because of violence.”

Zylstra writes:

New research reveals one more reason to remember 2014: for the greatest number of religious freedom violations against Christians worldwide in recent memory—even in Christian-majority countries. Of the worst 50 nations, 4 out of 5 share the same primary cause. And, while the number of martyrdoms did double from 2013, the main driver of persecution in 2014 wasn’t violence.

Open Doors released today its latest World Watch List (WWL). The annual list ranks the top 50 countries “where Christians face the most persecution,” aiming to create “effective anger” on believers’ behalf.

“This year, the threshold was higher for a country to make the list, indicating that worldwide levels of persecution have increased,”stated Open Doors in announcing its analysis of the “significant trends” in 2014 that drove persecution higher worldwide, “even in places where it has not been reported in the past.”

So while countries such as Sri Lanka and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) fell significantly in rank on this year’s watch list (Sri Lanka dropped 15 spots to No. 44, and the UAE dropped 14 spots to No. 49), their level of persecution dropped only slightly from last year’s list (by four points and two points, respectively, on a 100-point scale). And while three countries—Bahrain, Morocco, and Niger—were removed from the list this year, the level of persecution in each remained virtually the same from 2013 to 2014.

Overall in 2014, pressure on Christians increased in 29 countries, decreased in 11, and remained stable in 7. Three countries—Mexico, Turkey, and Azerbaijan—were added to the watch list this year. [See infographic below.]

christian persecution info graphic

For a larger view click on the image.

Open Doors researchers measure persecution by “the degree of freedom a Christian has to live out his or her faith in five spheres of life (private, family, community, national, and church life),” as well as by tallying acts of violence.

Researchers calculate that 4,344 Christians were “killed for faith-related reasons” in 2014, which is “more than double the 2,123 killed in 2013, and more than triple the 1,201 killed the year before that,”reports World Watch Monitor (WWM). (Measuring martyrdoms has drawn debate in recent years, and Open Doors is usually on the conservative end of estimates.) By far the largest number of deaths occurred in Nigeria, where 2,484 Christians were killed; the next deadliest country for Christians was the Central African Republic (CAR), with 1,088 deaths. The remaining three deadliest countries were Syria (271 deaths), Kenya (119 deaths), and North Korea (100 deaths).

In addition, 1,062 churches were “attacked for faith-related reasons” in 2014. The majority of attacks took place in five countries: China (258 churches), Vietnam (116 churches), Nigeria (108 churches), Syria (107 churches), and the Central African Republic (100 churches). Last year’s highest-profile incident: a government campaign to “de-Christianize” the skyline of one of China’s most Christian cities. (The Pew Research Center also recently tallied the countries with the most government destruction of religious property.)

Read more.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is courtesy of Open Doors.

Jihad training in the United States [+ Videos]

I spoke on Fox and Friends on January 11, 2015, about the Muslims of America compounds in rural areas in the U.S., and Sharia No-Go Zones in France.

Sharia No-Go Zones in France as Incubators of Jihad:

RELATED ARTICLES:

Paris attacks prompt fears France’s Muslim ‘no-go’ zones incubating jihad

Pope Denounces Jihad as ‘Deviant forms of Religion’

Charlie Hebdo’s new edition includes Muhammad cartoons

Hamas-linked terror org CAIR demands that Fox drop those who speak the truth about the jihad threat

Video: Robert Spencer on Hannity, January 10, 2015, on Obama’s denial of the jihad threat and the jihad against free speech

OBAMA: Je ne suis pas Charlie!

dnOBAMA: Je ne suis pas Charlie…means, OBAMA: I am NOT Charlie!

Though he claims to be a “Christian” is President Obama really a Muslim? This question has been asked a zillion times and still people are confused about his true beliefs. On today’s show we raise the question once again this time in light of the President’s very bizarre behavior related to the Muslim attacks in France.

Whereas the whole world, including many Muslim leaders are calling these Muslim attacks, President Obama still refuses to attribute any Islamic behavior to the jihadi’s who gave allegiance to Al Qaeda and the Islamic State and claimed to kill in the name of Islam! Moreover, on Sunday, during a historic rally in Paris of world solidarity against Muslim jihad attacks, with over 40 world leaders arm-in-arm, President Obama did not send a representative and did not himself attend.

The logical conclusion to this avoidance of participation against Islamic jihad speaks volumes…as you will see in this episode of Enemies of the State.

Soviet Fascism in the 21st Century: Paris in January 2015

Finally the world has awakened–the heart of Europe, the freedom attacked in Paris has caused a deep awakening of the entire decent world. Have you seen Paris in January 11, 2015? The tremendous display of solidarity, outpouring of emotions, excitement, love of freedom and rejection of terror were shown with all possible colors of human decency by citizens of Paris: Muslims, Christians, and Jews. The leaders of the world did not speak, they just presented the united forces of civilization–ordinary people spoke.

You could identify Muslims by their clothes, moreover you could see the imams speaking, articulating and rejecting a part of the Muslims hijacked by the ideology of terror. You saw a young Jewish woman with the Christian sign standing next to an imam and also eloquently rejecting terror, as did the representative of the Jewish community Simone Rodan- Benzaquen AJC Paris. You saw and heard a French writer and philosopher Bernard Henri Levy who openly and publicly called terrorism–Islamic Fascism. He is exactly right mentioning the word Fascism, but it is only a partial explanation of the events.

The people in Paris were united by their rejection of terror, but in reality they all were speaking about three major targets of Fascism:

  1. Freedom of the Press
  2. Police forces
  3. anti-Semitic attacks against Jewish people

The European history of the 20th century taught us about Fascism and its major targets.The reality of life and the citizens in Paris has identified these three targets again in January 11, 2015, one hundred years later.

As a matter of fact, Islamic Fascism is an integral part of Soviet Fascism, I have been writing about it for the last twenty-five years. The factions of the Muslims who are adhered to the political ideology of Soviet Fascism are acting in the realms of tactics and agenda of Soviet Fascism to destroy and replace Western civilization. This part of Muslim was hijacked by the Russian intelligence many years ago. My book The Russian Factor:From Cold War to Global Terrorism illustrateshow it was done. You should know Stalin’s Doctrine and the fact of his upbringing by the Muslim culture, to grasp the significance of the Doctrine in the 21st century. I have beenemphasizing this fact in all my current articles. Please go to simonapipko1.com in Google’s images and read them.

There is only one road to stop Terrorism–a total awareness of its deep roots connected to the Stalin’s ideology of Socialism and Communism, which were a pure FRAUD, numerous times described in my articles. The people of Paris are echoing and responding to this lethal force that has happened in Sidney, London, Pakistan, Israel, Ukraine, and in many other locations. The similarity of tactics is striking; the sophistication of the techniques is identical. History repeats itself and knowledge is the only power to stop repetition of the prior mistakes.

Thank you the people in Paris. Thank you France forcarrying the bannerof Liberty. Viva La Press Libre. 

To be continued  at www.simonapipko1.com.

RELATED ARTICLES:

French PM declares “war against terrorism, against jihadism, against radical Islam”

“She was definitely killed because she was Jewish”

The Conundrum

Conundrum as defined by Webster‛s dictionary as “an intricate and difficult problem”. An intricate problem. A difficult problem. A Conundrum!

This is the claim made by Major General Michael K. Nagata, Commander of U.S. Special Operations forces in the Middle East. American Special Operations Forces, the elite forces, volunteers dedicated to serving in our U.S. military. Let me first say, I have the utmost respect for General Nagata and his military pedigree, however his comments are perplexing.

Perplexing, as defined by Webster‛s dictionary: “Completely baffling; very puzzling” This is the conundrum we are left with, when comments by an esteemed man of the military sought help this summer in solving an urgent problem for the American military: “What makes the Islamic State so dangerous”? Really? In 2014, the 21st Century, we must ask the question; “What makes the Islamic State so dangerous? The Counter Jihad Report writes further: “Trying to decipher this complex enemy – a hybrid terrorist organization and a conventional army – is such a conundrum that General Nagata assembled an unofficial brain trust outside the traditional realms of expertise within the Pentagon.

Some thirteen plus years after America‛s homeland was attack by Islamic jihadists/terrorists our U.S. Military officials still ask the questions: “Who are these people”? “What makes them so dangerous”? How can a Major General who Commands American Special Operations make the following statement: “We do not understand the movement and until we do, we are not going to defeat it”.

One counter terrorism expert commented this statement is a dereliction of duty. I would agree! With the brilliance of our military, their ability to execute complex military missions, the ability to fly and operate drones from over 7,000 miles away, with pinpoint accuracy, yet we have high ranking military officials stating they do not understand ISIS, their movement or Islamic terrorism.This ignorance orated by our military leaders can lead directly back to the man in the White House, the POTUS. Mr. Obama makes the statement the Islamic State
is not Islamic, yet Mr. Obama continually refers to the Islamic State as “ISIL”.

ISIL stands for: (ready for this) Islamic State and the Levant. Yep, Islamic State is in the name of ISIL, which is not Islamic according to Mr. Obama. When you have the POTUS speaking out of both sides of his mouth, how can one not think the Commander in Chief‛s subordinates would be confused or in a conundrum?

After suffering America‛s most horrific attack on 9-11-01, at the hands of Islamic Jihadists, our military leaders, strategists and/or brain trusts are still in a conundrum. ISIS/ISIL/IS Muslim Confession of Faith: “There is no God but Allah and Mohammed is the messenger of Allah”. Even the ISIS/ISIL/IS flag reads the same Muslim Confession. So where is the conundrum? The Quran is said to be the word of Allah, which is the book followed by 1.6 billion devout Muslims. The Quran is Muslims Constitution, it has not changed in over 1400 years.

ISIS/ISIL/IS follows the Quran. Gen. Nagata to understand the Islamic State‛s movement, one could look directly into the Quran for guidance – verses such as: Chapter 2 verse 244; or Chapter 4 verse 71; or Chapter 4 verse 81 or Chapter 9 verse 123, just to name a few. Please don‛t buy the excuse this is cherry picking verses either. Reliance of the Traveler, which is Islamic Jurisprudence, defines Islamic Law for the 1.6 billion Muslims around the world; Islamic Sacred Law defines Jihad, as written on Page 599 – the meaning of Jihad? Answer: To war against non-Muslims. This definition is qualified by Islamic Clerics who use individual verses from the Quran. No one accuses Islamic Clerics of “Cherry Picking” Quranic verses to justify the meaning of Jihad to “War against Non-Muslims”.

General Nagata is not alone in this ISIS/ISIL/IS conundrum. His frustrations are shared by other American officials. Frankly that‛s scary! However it speaks volumes as to the inroads the Muslim Brotherhood and other “Radical Islamists” have made infiltrating our US Government. From the Department of Homeland Security with devout Muslims such as; Mohamed Elbiary, Arif Alikhan and Kareem Shora writing and defining policy in the Department of Defense with Hesham Islam working for the Under Secretary of State and the man responsible for having a counterterrorism expert removed from advising the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Not to mention devout Muslims being appointed by Barack Hussein Obama to serve inside the White House. These devout Muslims serve(d) at the request of the POTUS – like Gallop‛s own devout Muslim Dahlia Mogahed. Ms. Mogahed was appointed by Barack Obama as an adviser for White House Office of Faith Based and Neighborhood Partnership. An advisory position reporting directly to the POTUS.

Ah Dahlia Mogahed, the same woman who appeared on a fundamentalist Islamic TV show in England, hosted by Hizb ut-Tahrir and stated her belief: Sharia Law should supplant the U.S. Constitution. Did I mention Ms. Mogahed was a White House Adviser appointed by Mr. Obama and had direct access to him?

Another devout Muslim – Mohamed Elbiary was a Senior DHS Adviser who had known “radical beliefs”, such as this tweet from Mr. Elbiary: “As I‛ve said before inevitable that the “Caliphate” returns”, Elbiary tweeted in response to a question about the terror group the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (also known as ISIS or the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham) which is currently seeking to overthrow the Iraqi government and instate strict Sharia Law in that country. Or Mr. Elibary‛s belief “the United States is an Islamic country with Islamically compliant constitution”.

The conundrum for the American people: Why has the Commander-in-Chief purged our United States Military of the most brilliant dedicated General‛s, Admirals and other high ranking military officials? Were these great military minds knowing of the enemy (Islam)? What is the purpose of relieving these experts of their command or duties when Islam has not suspended their operations? Are the
comments made by our leading Military Commanders, such as Maj. Gen. Michael Nagata aiding and abetting the enemy? Or is it a safe assumption America‛s enemies are embolden by the comments of not understanding the ISIS movement, thereby giving the enemy confidence their dawa is working well within America?

Retired Three Star Army General Michael T. Flynn added: “The fact that someone as experienced in counterterrorism as Mike Nagata is asking these kind of questions shows what a really tough problem this is”.

The Quran is a wealth of knowledge and devout followers of Islam, such as ISIS, ISIL, IS, Al-Qaeda, Al-Shabab, Boko Haram, Hamas, CAIR, ISNA, MSA, Jamaat al-Fuqra, Hizb ut-Tahrir to name a few, believe as much.

Criminal Mindset behind French Jihad Attacks

Behind the Charlie Hebdo Massacre, the martyr finale of the Kouachi Brothers and the deadly anti-Semitic hostage standoff at the Kosher Market in Paris by Amedy Coulibaly is a factor that the mainstream talks little about:  the criminal mindset  of Jihadists in France and throughout the EU. Watch this MEMRI video of Coulibaly made shortly before the Jewish super market attack in he declares his connections to the Kouachi Charlie Hebdo massacre. In the wake of this week’s sorrow over the victims of Islamic terrorism by the Kouachi brothers and Coulibaly have come some revelations about their criminal records, as well as those who previously committed barbaric murders of French Jews.

Cherif Kouachi was arrested in 2005 before he could travel to Iraq. He was part of the “Buttes-Chaumont network” that helped send would-be jihadists to join Al Qaeda. While in detention awaiting conviction, Kouachi met Djamel Beghal in 2006l,  who attempted an attack on the U.S. Embassy in Paris in 2001 and was an Al Qaeda recruiter.  Beghal was a disciple of notorious UK- based hate mongers, Abu  Hamza al-Masri  and Abu Qatada. Egyptian-born Al-Masri, whose hand and an eye were lost in a bomb-making explosion, was deported to the US  by the British.  Coincidentally on January 9, 2015, al-Masri was sentenced to life by a New York federal judge for support of Al Qaeda and the Taliban.  Qatada, considered as ‘Osama Bin Laden’s right-hand man in Europe’, was freed from a UK jail in February, 2014. Kouachi was sentenced  in 2008 to time served during his three years of detention for recruiting fighters to join Al Qaeda in Iraq,(AQI) from which the Islamic State(IS) emerged.  AQI  was headed by Abu Musab al Zarqawi.  Zarqawi became the exemplar for IS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi by graphically beheading U.S. contractor, Nick Berg and others on video.  Zaraqawi  was  killed in a US  Air Force strike at an AQI meeting north of Baghdad  in June, 2006.

In 2010, Cherif and Beghal conspired in an attempted  prison break for convicted  Algerian terrorist, Smaïn  Ali Belkacem,  convicted in 2002 to life for  the bombing  in 1995  of the  Museum D’Orsay train station  injuring  30 persons.  Among the  14 persons  arrested  by French authorities  in that case were  Cherif and Coulibaly who  had known each other as Muslim gang members in the  tough 19th Arrondissement  of Paris  and were  apparently  members of a sports team. The French prosecutors couldn’t prove the conspiracy and Cherif, Coulibaly and the others were released for alleged lack of evidence. Notwithstanding this,  Coulibaly was subsequently sentenced to three years on a related charge.  Coulibaly, a possible prison convert to Islam,  had a long rap sheet of criminal convictions. At age 17 with convictions for theft and narcotics, he  went on to armed robbery of a bank in September 2002 in Orléans.  In 2011, Cherif traveled to Yemen where it is alleged he underwent  terrorist military training with Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula  (AQAP) prior to the September drone strike that took out American-born  Sheikh Anwar al-Awlaki. AQAP has claimed it directed the Kouachi brothers Charlie Hebdo attack that ultimately led to their  deaths in a hail of bullets becoming Martyrs for Jihad, Islamikazes.

This pattern of jail-house radicalization following criminal convictions is a pattern that we have seen across Europe and in America.  In France’s case it is compounded by the formation of an estimated  750 so-called ‘no go areas’ in Paris and other major cities throughout the country.  Those areas are alleged to be  compliant with Islamic Sharia law in defiance of French secular law. There is alleged to be radical Muslim Brotherhood and Salafist infiltration  of  many of the country’s Mosques.

While Muslims account for 7.5% of France’s 66 million in population, sociologists estimate that Muslims account for 50% of the country’s prison  population. The troubled second and third generations  of North African and Equatorial  African Muslim émigrés find themselves without  adequate education and with menial job prospects become disaffected. They are readily susceptible to recruitment by the on-line video and social media messages  extolling graphically the barbaric Islamist ‘successes’ of the Islamic State.

 Marseilles, second largest city in France with a population of over 850,000 is  the  Mediterranean  port of entry for North African Muslim émigrés. It currently  has  a Muslim population of over 41%. It has been ravaged by rival Muslim drug gang, equipped with AK-47s,  dispatching “revenge” on competitors and anyone who gets in their way. In 2012, local politicians requested French military assistance to bring matters under control only to be rejected by then Interior Minister Manuel Valls, now Premier in the Hollande government. Daniel Greenfield in a January 2014, Front Page Magazine article, “French City with 40% Muslim Population is the Most Dangerous City in Europe”:

The eruption has refocused attention on Marseille’s long-standing reputation as a European drug-smuggling hub, a place where entire neighborhoods have slipped away from police control and fallen under the command of gangsters who earn millions importing and selling North African hashish and settle turf disputes with AK-47 assault rifles.

“Marseille is sick with its violence,” Interior Minister Manuel Valls said.

Vowing to squash the drug trade and end the violence, Valls  dispatched 250 paramilitary and other national police officers to reinforce the usual deployment of around 3,000. The night after they were deployed, with television cameras in tow, another body was found, burned to a crisp with a bullet in its charred skull, the execution method local traffickers call the “barbecue.” The next day, two Turkish immigrants were shot and wounded, and a pair of youths driving by on a motor scooter opened fire with a pistol on a third man, wounding him in the legs.

Marseille doesn’t have a violence problem. It has a Muslim immigrant problem.

Prior to  the bloody Jihadist spectacles this week in Paris there has been a  grisly history  of anti-Semitic violence perpetrated by French Muslim gangs and  criminals.

In Paris in 2003, young Jewish disc jockey Sebastien Selam, a.k.a. DJ Lam.C, was brutally murdered by his childhood friend Adel Amastaibou  in one of the banlieues.  According to reports in the Jerusalem Post, Adel Amastaibou took out a long knife and stabbed Sebastien Salem repeatedly in the chest, killing him. He went upstairs to his mother’s apartment and told her and then the police when they arrived, “I killed a Jew, I will go to paradise. Allah made me do it.”  Amastaibou  was examined by a panel found mentally ill, confined to a mental hospital,   not brought to trial and released.  Subsequently after denials  of trials  it was discovered that Amastaibou had a rap sheet that included “10 prior violent convictions, including assaulting rabbis, threatening pregnant Jewish women and making Molotov cocktails.”  Nidra Poller wrote in January 2010:

The ghastly murder and mutilation of Sébastien Selam was committed in the midst of the worst wave of anti-Semitic attacks since WW2. And, it should be noted, in the month of Ramadan. Psychiatric expertise, in Amastaibou’s case, purified murderous Jew hatred into psychotic fantasies detached from reality. But the experts are not alone. Overwhelming pressure to deny the anti-Semitic motive was immediately exerted from all sides. The media, law enforcement, government officials, and Jewish organizations concurred in the cover up. The grieving Selam family was slyly accused of having somehow participated in its own misfortune or suspected of trying to attract sympathy by framing a vulgar criminal act in a noble anti-Semitic narrative. Several lawyers in succession failed to prod law enforcement and the courts into seriously investigating the case.

 [French Lawyer] Axel Metzker when he took over as counsel for the Selam family  found proof that the registered letter informing them that the case was closed had never been delivered. Marked “unknown at this address,” it lay in a pile of neglected mail at the post office. Based on this proof, he pleaded successfully to reopen the case and allow his clients to appeal. This culminated in the January 5, 2010 verdict, which [was] appealed to France’s highest court.

In January 2006, Ilan Halimi, a young  Parisian cell phone salesman of Moroccan Jewish origins was lured by a  teenage French Iranian girl, abducted and tortured over a three week period by  the so-called Gang of Barbarians resulting in his death. Poller described the barbaric coup de grace of Halimi and what happened to his Muslim tormentors:

 On February 13th Youssouf Fofana, the Brain of the Barbarians, took an emaciated battered Ilan to Ste. Geneviève des Bois, stabbed him in the throat, sprinkled him with inflammable liquid, set him afire, and left him to die by the railroad tracks. Three years later Fofana–along with 27 accessories and accomplices– was tried behind closed doors in juvenile court and was sentenced to “life” in prison, with no possibility of parole in the first 22 years.

In 2012, petty criminal and alleged Al Qaeda operative, Mohammed Merah gunned down four French soldiers in  Montauban. He then went to Toulouse where he  killed a Rabbi and three young  Jewish students at the Ozar Hatorah Jewish day school.  The standoff and ultimately killing of Merah  in a  shootout  with police  occurred in Montauban.   Israel Hayom reported that Merah, had been arrested in Israel in 2010.  His family was deep into the Jihadist circle in Toulouse.  A Wall Street Journalarticle noted:

His mother is married to the father of Sabri Essid, a leading member of the Toulouse radical milieu who was captured in Syria in 2006. Essid and another Frenchman were running an al Qaeda safe house in Syria for fighters going to Iraq. In a 2009 trial that came to be known in the press as “Brothers for Iraq,” they and six others were convicted in France of conspiracy for terrorist purposes. Essid was sentenced in 2009 to five years imprisonment.

Merah’s Mother and Sister were arrested by French authorities in April 2014 for support of terrorism and other charges. More than 30 suspects  had been detained by French counterterrorism prosecutors.  Those still under arrest, according to a Jerusalem Post report were: “Abdelkader Merah, the older brother of the killer, Muhammad Mounir Miskine, a friend, and Fetha Malki, the arms supplier. “  Merah’s heinous murder of the Rabbi walking his young children to the Toulouse Jewish school  was the worst anti-Semitic Islamic terrorist murders prior to the Hyper Cacher Paris supermarket killing of four innocent Jewish customers by  Coulibaly.

In  the wake of the Toulouse  fiery martyrdom of Merah, we issued a warning about what occurred in Paris this week  regarding  criminal mindset of jihadists.

Given the lengthy criminal record of  French Jihadists  Mohammed Merah, [the Kouachi Brothers and Amedy Coulibaly] , it is time to give wider credence, both in the EU and here, to Danish psychologist Nicolai Sennels’ clinical observations drawn from his assessment of young Muslim criminals in Copenhagen. See: Muslims and Westerners: The Psychological Differences … in the May 2010 NER.

 It is the Islamic doctrine at the core of their rejection of host country values and integration in the West that leads them to perpetrate such criminal enterprise and commit violence.  They spent time in French jails for their criminal convictions, where their Jihadist creed clearly gave rise to rejection of the West, criminal recidivism and terrorism. Their minds and those of young Danish Muslim criminals were marinated in Islamic doctrinal violence towards unbelievers.

In a  December 2014, 10 News.Dk  article “Psychology: Why Islam creates monsters” Sennels  wrote following the Sydney Lindt Café jihad attack:

Brainwashing people into believing or doing things against their own human nature — such as hating or even killing innocents they do not even know — is traditionally done by combining two things: pain and repetition. The conscious infliction of psychological and physical suffering breaks down the person’s resistance to the constantly repeated message.

Totalitarian regimes use this method to reform political dissidents. Armies in less civilized countries use it to create ruthless soldiers, and religious sects all over the world use it to fanaticize their followers.

During numerous sessions with more than a hundred Muslim clients, I found that violence and repetition of religious messages are prevalent in Muslim families.

Muslim culture simply does not have the same degree of understanding of human development as in [Western] societies, and physical pain and threats are therefore often the preferred tool to raise children. This is why so many Muslim girls grow up to accept violence in their marriage, and why Muslim boys grow up to learn that violence is acceptable. And it is the main reason why nine out of ten children removed from their parents by authorities in Copenhagen are from immigrant families. The Muslim tradition of using pain and intimidation as part of disciplining children are also widely used in Muslim schools — also in the West.

[..]

Not only does a traditional Islamic upbringing resemble classical brainwashing methods, but also, the culture it generates cultivates four psychological characteristics that further enable and increase violent behavior.

These four mental factors are anger, self-confidence, responsibility for oneself and intolerance.

Counter-terrorism officials in France and elsewhere in the West should study this important body of work by Sennels. It might materially assist counter terrorism echelons in understanding the criminal mindset behind predatory jihadist Islamic threats whether in Paris, Israel or elsewhere in the West.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review. The featured image is a screen shot of video of the late Islamikaze Amedy Coulibaly. Source: Imtel Center.

FRANCE: Jihad Wins – French Lose

Our attention is turned to the developing attacks in Paris, France. As various terrorist cells go operationally jihad, we center in on the systemic failures of elected officials, both in France and America, to properly and professionally make the obvious connection between the doctrine of Islam, the behavior of the jihadi and the consequent death of innocent Westerners.

The question is raised: Will France learn a lesson about confronting the take over of its country by Islamic supremacy?

Or will the bad guys have another tactical success in their march to building a world Caliphate?

HINT: French President François Hollande went out of his way to state that the attacks from Islamic terrorists had NOTHING to do with..Islam!

Watch and find out!

RELATED ARTICLES:

Charlie Hebdo jihad mentor’s wife lives on welfare in UK

Video: INCREDIBLE footage of French police storming in market to kill madman, save hostages

Congress’ First Navy Seal: Obama’s Foreign Policy Supports Terrorism

Double-Agent: Numerous Jihadist Sleeper Cells Prepared to Repeat Paris Attacks Worldwide

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is courtesy of RubenL.nl.

Islam’s Struggle Against Cartoon Terrorism Offline

Western terror labs have finally produced a weapon so horrific that it has shaken Islamic world to the core, making over a billion people from Morocco to Indonesia fear for the survival of their freedoms, morals, beliefs, cultures, governments, and the very life itself.

The new weapon of terror, the so-called “Cartoon,” is capable of delivering an equivalent of one million Hiroshima bombs, resulting in a horrendous mass destruction like none seen on Earth before.Ahmed Jihad of the Qatar-funded charity Make Bombs, Not Cartoons sadly stated that “This is the end of a tenuous peace between Muslims and Infidels, with only the occasional beheading, open market suicide bomb, or fiery suicide plane mission.”

Howard Dean and John Kerry launch investigation to determine the extent to  which Bush knew about the cartoons prior to their publication.

“I see no way to combat this horrific infidel weapon other than by balanced, fair, and rational hostage-taking, bomb-throwing, and embassy-burning, based on strict Islamic law and mutual understanding of our common goal, which is the Islamization of Earth,” Mr. Jihad added. “These methods have proven efficient in dealing with the West in the past.”Qatar, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, and Iran have been clandestinely working on the “Mother of All Erasers,” in an attempt to control the budding menace of cartoon proliferation.

“You can kill one infidel with a sword, but if he has already published a Mohammed cartoon, the cat is out of the fire, so to speak. With our new eraser technology, we may stand a chance at eliminating the cartoons before the damage is done,” said Rabid Habibi, a member of People for the Unethical Treatment of Infidels.

People for the Unethical Treatment of Infidels: Stop cartoon proliferation before it destroys this wonderful green planet. of ours!

French, German, and U.K. politicians have already promised to deliver any wayward cartoonists to the proper authorities for beheading.

Said English foreign secretary Jack Straw, “We stand with our Islamist brethren on the precipice of an escalation from the current calm discourse to a world in which cartoons are free to offend willy-nilly, resulting in the need for retaliation against infidels on a broad scale. We in the West understand this, and will do our part to maintain the peace.”

In the U.S., Howard Dean and John Kerry plan to hold special hearings on the matter, and are proposing a bill criminalizing the depiction of all Islamic religious figures.

A probe is underway to determine the extent to which the Bush Administration knew about these cartoons prior to their publication.