Tag Archive for: jihad

“Boston Bombers not Islam Associated” says U.S. Attorney

The Boston Globe on June 24th, 2015 reported:

An emotional Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev apologized Wednesday at his sentencing hearing for the April 2013 terror attack that killed three people and wounded more than 260 others.

“I would like to apologize to the victims and the survivors,” said Tsarnaev, who was sentenced to death. “I did do it.”

“I am sorry for the lives I have taken, for the suffering I have caused, and for the terrible damage I have done,” he said. He was hunched over and spoke with a slight accent.

It was the first time Tsarnaev’s voice has been heard in federal court in Boston, other than to enter his not-guilty plea. His statement came after hours of heartwrenching testimony from relatives of those killed in the bombing and survivors of the blasts.

“I am Muslim. My religion is Islam. I pray to Allah to bestow his mercy on those affected in the bombing and their families,” he said. “I pray for your healing.” [Emphasis added]

Islam had nothing to do with the Boston bombings – seriously?

RELATED ARTICLES:

Boston Marathon jihad murderer: “I am Muslim. My religion is Islam.”

The New York Times and the Danish Election: Just a Few Little Things

Islamic State set to issue its own currency, models coin designs after those of third caliph

Study claims right-wing extremists bigger threat to U.S. than jihadis

Al Jazeera Reporter Endorses Terrorists

Why is Ahmad Zaidan, Al Jazeera’s Islamabad bureau chief, tacitly endorsing a terrorist organization?

In an op-ed for Al Jazeera’s English website on June 2, entitled “Nusra Front’s quest for a united Syria,” Zaidan writes that the Islamist militant rebel group in Syria is distancing itself from Al-Qaeda and “positioning itself as the natural heir of jihadi ideology.”

The Al Nusra Front, Al-Qaeda’s offshoot in Syria, is one of the largest, most powerful and best-organized rebel groups fighting the Assad regime, and in December 2012 it landed on the U.S. State Department List of Terrorist Organizations. Officially designated as an alias of Al-Qaeda, Al Nusra was branded for the more than 600 attacks it had claimed responsibility for since November 2011, many of which had taken the lives of innocent Syrian civilians. Recent victories as part of a rebel coalition against the Assad regime in the northwest province of Idlib have further bolstered Al Nusra and strengthened the group’s leadership position among Syria’s anti-government forces.

Zaidan’s bias in favor of Nusra is clear almost immediately, when he notes that when he was covering Al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan, his “hosts” from those two terror organizations never offered him more than “simple tea and bread for breakfast,” whereas his Al Nusra hosts had generously laid out a “dozen dishes” for him. However, his appreciation of a wider range of breakfast options quickly turns to using his position as a leading reporter for the most influential news network in the Middle East — and the larger Muslim world — essentially to act as a mouthpiece for Al Nusra.

Ahmad Zaidan, Al Jazeera’s Islamabad bureau chief, is shown here reporting from Damascus, Syria. (Image source: Al Jazeera video screenshot)

Zaidan recounts and quotes extensively from a separate interview conducted by Al Jazeera Arabic on May 27 with Al Nusra’s leader, Abu Mohammad al-Jolani, to emphasize differences between Jolani’s leadership tactics and those of Al-Qaeda under Ayman al-Zawahiri.

Zaidan writes that Jolani “defies al-Qaeda’s legacy of going after minorities,” highlighting a promise from Jolani that if the Alawites (an offshoot sect of Shia Islam to which Syria’s ruling family and many of its supporters belong) were to abandon the Assad regime, they “would be welcome” in a new Syria.

Jolani, according to Zaidan, also promised that Druze communities in Syria would be protected; as a result of that statement, he has received support from Walid Jumblatt, leader of the Lebanese Druze.

The problem with Zaidan’s translation of the interview with Jolani from Arabic to English is that he leaves out a critical caveat that Jolani made regarding protection of the Alawites, considered by many Sunni Islamists, including Al-Qaeda and Al Nusra, not to be true Muslims, but apostates of Islam. A Guardian article, reporting on Jolani’s interview with Al Jazeera, accurately translated Jolani’s relevant quote as: “If the Alawites leave their religion and leave Bashar al-Assad, we will protect them.” [Emphasis added.]

Zaidan seemingly manipulated the original quote to obscure that Al Nusra is, in fact, not tolerant of other religions or religious minorities, and that only religious conversion would allow Alawites to remain safely in Syria under Al Nusra leadership.

Also absent from Zaidan’s characterization of Al Nusra as more tolerant than Al-Qaeda, is any mention of Syria’s significant Christian minority, which makes up about 10% of the population.

The Guardian article, however, does translate Jolani’s remarks on Christians; his words are far from accepting. The Guardian paraphrases Jolani as saying that “in a future state ruled by Islamic law, the financially capable would pay ‘jizya,’ or tax reserved for non-Muslims.”

Zaidan’s misleading translation and editing of Jolani’s interview reveal more than bias: they demonstrate a violation of a basic principle of journalistic ethics: not to manipulate quotes from sources in a way that fundamentally changes their meaning. Zaidan has done just that — and to support a terrorist organization, no less.

Many who commented on Zaidan’s article noticed his deceitful omission. Journalist Evan Hill, who speaks Arabic and has covered the Middle East for both Al Jazeera and the Guardiantweeted, “Is it me or does Zaidan leave out the part of the Alawite quote where he said ‘give up your beliefs’?”

Having less-than-subtly revealed his support for Al Nusra, Zaidan continues sounding off as an unofficial media spokesman for the group. He cites “recent leaks” that Al Nusra leaders have decided to leave “the al-Qaeda umbrella and operate exclusively as a Syrian party aiming to establish an Islamic State,” although a public announcement of such a break has yet to happen.

According to Zaidan, “[S]uch a move, whenever made, would not only satisfy Nusra’s followers,” of which Zaidan certainly seems to be one; it would “also pull the carpet from under the feet of ISIL.” In other words, as his article’s subtitle, “Nusra Front is positioning itself as the natural heir of jihadi ideology,” makes clear, Al Nusra sees itself as the group that will upstage the Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL) to control Islamist jihadi ideology in Syria — hardly a comforting alternative to Assad and ISIS.

The Middle East — especially Syria and Iraq — needs a great deal of humanitarian aid just now; what it does not need is competition between brutal, seventh century-styled Islamic states. Nevertheless, Zaidan seems to be of the opinion that the way to take down ISIS is a competing caliphate.

Certainly, the half-hearted U.S.-led strategy for fighting ISIS has thus far failed to produce any promising signs that ISIS is on the retreat — especially since the loss of Ramadi in Anbar province last month. Leaving terrorist groups to duke it out, however, has also failed to end the conflict.

The excuse Zaidan offers for his support of Al Nusra is that the international community — as well as any non-Islamist rebel forces on the ground in Syria — have failed to help citizens under siege from the Assad regime, and that these failures have led to increased sympathy among the population for Islamist rebel groups who “exercise real power.”

While this is an accurate, although overly simple, assessment of the situation in Syria, it hardly seems a sufficient reason for Zaidan, as a leading reporter for a major global news network, with unparalleled media influence in the Muslim world, to endorse the cause of a terrorist organization.

To Zaidan, however, not only is the current situation in Syria reason enough to throw his support behind Al Nusra, it is also a reason to chastise the United States for not having already gotten on the group’s bandwagon. Comparing Al Nusra to the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), Zaidan writes: “Washington used to depict the PLO as a terrorist outfit — but then took a U-turn.” Zaidan’s use of the word “depict” is telling; to him, Al Nusra is not a terrorist group; rather it is unfairly being labeled one by the United States.

Instead, he suggests that the U.S. should repeat history and change its tactics toward Al Nusra. However, this change would entail the U.S. supporting a group that does not believe in religious tolerance even among Muslims; that views Christians as second-class citizens, and that uses terrorist tactics, including the attempted use of chemical weapons, in its fighting against the Assad regime, just as the regime has done.

Zaidan draws another parallel to support Al Nusra: between Al Nusra and the Taliban in Afghanistan. He notes that the group was “once the main target of the US military, but is not currently designated as a ‘terrorist organization’ by either the UN, UK or the US.” Finally, he reminds his readers that Washington no longer brands “Hezbollah or Iranian Quds Force’s Qassem Soleimani” as terrorists.

Zaidan argues that since the United States has changed relationships with these current or former terrorist organizations, it should take another extremely dangerous militant Islamist group off its terrorist list.

However, Zaidan’s comparisons should raise concerns about whom the Obama administration designates as terrorists — or even chooses as strategic partners: If these groups are not America’s enemies, who is?

Zaidan proceeds to call the Obama administration hypocritical for supporting “alien” Shia militias “fighting on behalf of Baghdad,” but not demonstrating the same support for “Syrian fighters — such as those who make up Nusra’s ranks” waging war against Assad. Again, Zaidan’s argument should give the White House pause as to whom the U.S. is partnering with in Iraq. Iranian-backed Shia militias, while they may be committed to fighting ISIS, can hardly be considered long-term partners for a stable Iraq.

In his closing thoughts, Zaidan makes a half-hearted attempt to mention the importance of “tolerance” and “build[ing] bridges” in Syria, although given his support for a group whose goal is supposedly to convert everyone to its extremist brand of Sunni Islam or force discriminating taxes on them, honest reconciliation does not seem to be a priority for him.

More alarming than Zaidan’s support for Al Nusra and his editorial dishonestly is that Al Jazeera allowed this article to be published. Zaidan is entitled to express his opinions, regardless of how unsettling they might be. This was, after all, an op-ed piece; the disclaimer at the bottom clearly states that the views presented in the article do not represent the views of Al Jazeera. So while Al Jazeera should not have censored Zaidan for the content of his piece, it was irresponsible and unethical to have published an article that, through deceitful editing practices, grossly misrepresents Al Nusra’s ideology.

As for Zaidan, whatever sympathies he may have for Al Nusra, his loyalty to the ethics of his profession and his responsibility to his readers evidently do not outweigh his loyalties to a terrorist organization.

Follow Rachael Hanna on Twitter.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on the Gatestone Institute International Policy Council website.

Obama and Hillary Compromised: Iran’s Nukes Fully Intact

The Obama Administration says Iran’s chants of “Death to America” are “not helpful,” but won’t have impact on nuke talks.

Retired Admiral “Ace” Lyons says, “The core elements of the Iranian nuclear program are fully intact and have increased 20-40% since these sham negotiations started.

It all begins in 2008 when then candidate Sen. Barak Obama, according to Michael Levine, opened secret negotiations with the Ayatollah’s. The message was don’t sign any agreements with the Bush Administration you will get a better deal from me when I’m President, I am a friend of Iran. This borders on treason! Mind boggling.

Let’s talk about Benghazi. This is a Hillary scenario, Hillary is a pathological liar. Hillary’s emails – You know everyone of our enemies have hacked into her emails, they have the full book on her. She (Hillary Clinton) is totally compromised, she is damaged goods. There’s no way she can be allowed back into the White House.

  • 4:25 – Things were working out in Libya until she met with a Muslim Brotherhood operative at the Paris Westin Hotel for a 45 minute meeting. After that meeting Hillary canceled our negotiations with Gaddafi despite every military leader and intelligence experts advice not too.
  • 5:30 A few words on Christopher Stevens. DIA had 10 days warning the Benghazi attacks were going to happen. If you were SECDEF would you not put countermeasures in place to defend your Ambassador?
  • 7:50 If I had to speculate I’d say this was an operation that went terribly wrong. If you remember in the Summer of 2012 Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood President Mohammad Morsi came to DC with one main objective.

Morsi’s #1 objective was to get the release of The Blind Sheikh, currently sitting in a U.S. Federal Penitentiary for masterminding the first 1993 World Trade Center bombing.

My view was Benghazi was all about the kidnapping Christopher Stevens (Libya Ambassador) and exchanging him for the blind sheikh – when you put it all together nothing makes sense to me.

When you start analyzing all the email that are coming out now it lends more substance to this theory.

Admiral ‘Ace’ Lyons (Ret.) was the Commander Of The Pacific Fleet. He knows first hand our military capabilities and geo political strategic analysis. Admiral Lyons also has a clear understanding of how Washington DC politics works when it comes to national security matters.”

We owe a great deal of gratitude to Rabbi Jonathan Hausman for bringing Admiral Lyons (Ret.) to his Synagogue for his ongoing Lecture Series.

Iran is an enemy of the United States of America. When Iran chooses its time and place to announce they have a nuclear capability the world as we know it will forever change for the worse.

Just as Israel destroyed Sadam Hussein’s Osirak nuclear reactor in 1981 effectively buying the world three decades of a non-nuclear Middle East, It may be time for Israel to save the world again from a Nuclear Iran.

Islamic State Video: Slaughtering People in Revolting New Ways

Jihadis frequently tell us how much they love death. Austrian Muslim teenage girls who recently traveled to Syria for jihad announced: “Death is our goal.” Boko Haram leader Abubakar Shekau said: “I’m even longing for death, you vagabond.” A Muslim child preacher taunted those he has been taught to hate most: “Oh Zionists, we love death for the sake of Allah, just as much as you love life for the sake of Satan.” Jihad mass murderer Mohamed Merah said that he “loved death more than they loved life.”

Ayman al-Zawahiri’s wife advised Muslim women: “I advise you to raise your children in the cult of jihad and martyrdom and to instil in them a love for religion and death.” And as one jihadist put it, “We love death. You love your life!” And another: “The Americans love Pepsi-Cola, we love death.” That was from Afghan jihadist Maulana Inyadullah.

This idea comes from the Qur’an: Say, “O you who are Jews, if you claim that you are allies of Allah, excluding the people, then wish for death, if you should be truthful.” (62:6)

In their new video, the Islamic State shows how much it loves death, by lavishly depicting new and imaginative ways it brings death upon its enemies. “Sickening new ISIS video shows caged prisoners lowered into a swimming pool and drowned, shot with an RPG and blown up with explosive-filled ‘necklaces,’” by John Hall, MailOnline, June 23, 2015 (thanks to Anne Crockett):

Vile jihadis fighting for the Islamic State in Iraq have brutally murdered five prisoners by locking them in a metal cage and lowering them into a swimming pool.

Filmed in the ISIS stronghold of Mosul, the sickening seven minute long video uses expensive underwater cameras to film the terrified men as they sink below the surface with no hope of escape.

Shortly afterwards the cage is lifted back out of the water, with the dying men – who are understood to have been accused of spying – seen foaming at the mouth as they lie motionless on the floor of the cage, piled on top of one another.

Elsewhere in the video, ISIS militants are filmed brutally killing prisoners by locking them in a car and shooting them with a grenade launcher, while another group of jihadis chain a set of prisoners together with explosive necklaces which are then detonated.

The barbaric video is a new low for the terror group, whose catalogue of horrific filmed murders includes the savage beheading of several British and American hostages, the burning to death of Jordanian pilot Moaz al-Kasasbeh and numerous clips of people being shot and stoned to death.

The main section of the film begins with the stomach-churning sight of five men being locked in a tiny metal cage that has been suspended above a luxury swimming pool somewhere in the ISIS-held city of Mosul in Nineveh province.

Standing up straight with their legs bound, the men look reasonably calm until the moment the cage begins to be lowered into the pool.

As the water begins to enter, the victims start to panic, praying and pacing the tiny metal cell.

Once completely submerged, the video cuts to the high-tech underwater cameras, which show the men thrashing around until they appear to lose conciousness and fall to the floor.

The cage is then removed from the pool, with the dying men seen foaming at the mouths as they lie piled on top of one another under the blazing Iraqi sun….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Obama Administration says Iran’s chants of “Death to America” are “not helpful,” but won’t have impact on nuke talks

Uganda: Muslim in-laws poison mother of 11, who converted from Islam to Christianity

Obama laments “distorted impression” many Americans have of Muslims

Islamic State mints its own ‘Islamic Dinar’ coins

ISIS BLOWS UP ANCIENT Shrines in Palmyra, Syria

Apocalyptic Iran — EMP Bombs over America!

Sometimes our work takes us into areas that appear to be “science fiction,” but under careful analysis the facts rise to the level of science fact and the implication is catastrophic! It is just this case with the subject of Electro-Magnetic-Pulse bombs.

On this show Dr. Peter Pry, one of the world’s foremost experts on EMP technology walks us through some absolutely frightening scenarios which include Iran attacking both America and Israel with EMP’s thus destroying BOTH countries! Is this even remotely possible? Is Iran that crazy as to attack countries which have counter-strike capabilities?

Tune in, but get ready to have some sleepless night once you understand the dire situation before all freedom loving people.

RELATED ARTICLES:

AP reports U.S. is offering Iran nuclear technology
Nuclear Agreement Misleads About Iranian Breakout Time
‘Iran Supporting More than 100 Shiite Terror Groups’
Why People Become Islamic Extremists
Women’s ‘Rights’ in Iran: 5 Laws That Will Appall You

Islam a la Fiorina

There was once a civilization that was the greatest in the world.”

And so began a mythical, deceptive tale by Carly Fiorina, when she spoke in praise of Islam within a mere two weeks of their bombing the World Trade Center. The concern is not that she was attempting to deceive others, but that she, a person who aspires to the presidency of the United States, was herself deceived regarding the true nature of Islam, and that she has never retracted her statements.

“[Islam’s] armies were made up of many nationalities . . . [Islam] was able to create a continental super-state . . . within its dominion lived hundreds of millions of people, of different creeds and ethnic origins,” and “the reach of this civilization’s commerce. . .”*

As a religious leader, Mohammed converted few followers. As political and military leader, he was far more successful – torturing and beheading 700 stalwart Medinan Jews, raping and enslaving women, and conscripting the survivors for jihad (holy war). Thus he dominated different creeds and ethnic origins, replenishing his army with many nationalities, and increasing his wealth with booty.

“Within its dominion” is Fiorina’s euphemism for “living under domination.” All non-Muslims, slaves and women were treated with contempt, unequal under law but economically necessary. Although specific enmity was directed against Jews and Christians, the severe “jizya” tax was imposed on “infidels” as humiliation and punishment for rejecting Mohammed. This tax and many other discriminatory laws extended through the centuries to Nestorians, Syrians, and Romans of newly conquered empires, and further to animists, Buddhists, Hindus, Mongols, Greeks, and Armenians (the Armenian Genocide), who suffered torture and death.

Jews held trades and occupations that Muslims judged inferior – including “this civilization’s commerce,” diplomacy, banking, brokerage, espionage, working in gold and silver, and cleaning cesspools. The inevitable deterioration of relations between Muslims and the outside world meant more restrictions and social segregation for non-Muslims (dhimmis), but the subservient and useful survived.

“. . . its military protection allowed a degree of peace and prosperity that had never been known.”

“Peace,” as the absence of discord, existed, depending on the beneficence of the ruling caliphate and internal/external changes, but from the twelfth to thirteenth centuries onward, tolerance decreased; intellectual, social and commercial life depreciated, and ever-increasing restrictions and deprivation for dhimmis were imposed.

“And this civilization was driven more than anything, by invention. Its architects designed buildings that defied gravity.”

The inventions and contributions were made by victims of the Muslim jihadists who invaded the “infidel” world over 1400 years, enslaving, slaughtering, and plundering. Islam is antithetical to creativity, but based on envious resentment of the accomplishments of others. Their greatest achievement was their ability to expropriate every creative, innovative groundbreaking device of Islam’s victims and to fraudulently claim each as their own.

Fiorina’s reference to “buildings that defied gravity,” as in “air-borne,” surely defies logic, but she doubtless refers to the arches, which were already in use in prehistoric times by ancient Egyptians, Babylonians and Greeks. With the help of concrete made from lime and volcanic sand, Roman arches could support huge weight, and were soon adopted by Byzantine and Romanesque architects, evolving into the groundbreaking inventions of the Gothic arch and flying buttress in northern (Christian) Europe. Meanwhile, the Muslims also adopted the Syrian styles, followed with Greek, Byzantine and Persian, and later Chinese and Indian, architecture, to develop pointed, scalloped and horseshoe arches for mosques and palaces. Even the vaulted and hemispherical (domed) ceilings were invented by the non-Muslim Romans.

“Its mathematicians created the algebra and algorithms that would enable the building of computers, and the creation of encryption.”

The first positional numerical system was developed in 2nd millennium BCE Babylon, over 800 years before Islam; the first true “zero” was developed by mathematicians in the Indian Subcontinent. Persian and Arab mathematicians are believed to have adopted the Hindu-Arabic numerical system in India. The work of Italian scholar, Fibonacci, was crucial in bringing them to Europe and the world. Francois Viete, French lawyer, mathematician and privy councilor to Henry III and Henry IV, provided the step from “new algebra” to modern algebra.

Only an Islamist steeplechaser could leap from working with numbers to creating computers and encryptions centuries later. English polymath Charles Babbage, mathematician, philosopher, inventor, and mechanical engineer, conceived the first programmable computer (1830). Alan Turing laid the groundwork for computational science; Korad Zuse is credited as “the first freely programmable computer.”

The earliest form of cryptography is on stone in Egypt (190 BCE), long before Islam. Ciphers were used by the Spartan military and in the 2000-year-old Kamasutra of India. It wasn’t until the 9th century that Arab mathematicians and polymath Al-Kindi worked with cryptography.

“Its doctors examined the human body and found new cures for diseases.”

Arabs had no scientific traditions; their scientists were largely Jews who were forcibly converted as a result of Islam’s rampaging throughout the Near East, Egypt, and Libya. As a typical example, Jews and Berbers, who lived together harmoniously in North Africa, were overcome by 60,000 Islamic troops in 694, and the descendants of those who survived the massacre became “Arabic” philosophers and scientists.

A great physician, Egyptian Jew, Isaac Israel of Kairouan, immigrated to West Africa. His surviving works on logic, Aristotelian physics, and pharmacology became the standard for medical history, and it was from him that the greatest of “Arab” scientists, Avicenna (980-1037), drew inspiration. Known as the Aristotle of the East, Avicenna wrote in Arabic and became a vizier in Persia, but he was born near Bokhara, then heavily populated by Jews, and was probably of Jewish origin. Even so, physicians who attended lords and kings of Islam and Christendom were largely Jews.

“Its astronomers looked into the heavens, named the stars, and paved the way for space travel and exploration.”

Jewish savants were largely responsible for the invention and development of instruments and astronomical tables that facilitated world-girdling sea voyages. The Jerusalem Talmud (tractate Avodah Zarah, Ch.3, fol.,42c) strongly implies the spherical nature of the earth. The astrolabe, used by Islamic astronomers as a guide to the sky and to tell time by the position of heavenly bodies, was introduced into the Arab-speaking world by a “remarkable Jewish genius, Mashala of Mosul, the phoenix of his age.” Astronomical tables, compiled by the Jew, Joseph ben Wallar at Toledo (1396), and in Aragon by Judaic specialists, including Emanuel ben Jacob (aka Bonfils de Tarascon), were used with the astrolabe.

The Jews were among the most notable cartographers, the most advanced being a Jew forcibly converted to Christianity. Christopher Columbus’s cartographers and other companions may have been conversos. The most reputable astronomer of the day, Abraham Zacuto (1452-1515), instructed Columbus on using the perfected astrolabe, also used by Vasco de Gama and Amerigo Vespucci.

In all these areas, Fiorina makes the absurd leap from recognizing Muslims as merely a people who used a product to being an innovative people who “paved the way” for the future. She made a similar leap of dissonance when she made corrupt trade agreements with Iran in violation of US trade sanctions, resulting in 30,000 workers laid off at Hewlett-Packard, and jobs shipped to China. We could remark in passing that, at the same time, her salary and perks also leaped – they more than tripled.

“When censors threatened to wipe out knowledge from past civilizations, this civilization kept the knowledge alive and passed it on to others.”

How much creativity, ingenuity and innovation might we have had from those 400 million people slaughtered by jihadists over 1400 years? What greatness is Islam passing on to civilization now, beyond a high illiteracy rate, great intolerance and aggression? Their history is one of perpetual massacre, encouraged in their Qur’an and taught from early childhood. Their culture is one of unrest, riots and wars; and women’s fears of female genital mutilation, forced marriages, rape, and death for male honor. Their homes are microcosms of the greater tyrannical regimes.

Had Muslims the knowledge to be kept alive, how might it have been done? Of the 1.4 billion Muslims, 800 million are illiterate (60 percent cannot read). In Christendom, the adult literacy rate stands at 78 percent. Of the ten most literate countries, not one is Islamic. Muslims are the world’s poorest, weakest and illiterate. The combined annual GDP of 75 Muslim countries is under $2 trillion; America’s is worth $10.4 trillion. Muslims are 22 percent of the world population, yet produce less than five percent of global GDP, and diminishing all the time.

Over the past 105 years, 1.3 billion Muslims produced eight Nobel Laureates (only two won for physics and chemistry); compare this with a mere 14 million Jews (0.23% of the world population) who produced 170 Nobel Laureates.

Islam’s militaristic, supersessionist ideology that began 1400 years ago has remained unchanged. We know of no event that sparked the glory they claim, and no catastrophic event that might have forced a decline. Carly Fiorina is severely misinformed about the civilization that embraces our death and destruction and she confuses politically-correct theories for hard facts – no point from which to hold the highest-ranking position in the United States of America.

Iran Votes to Ban Access to Military Sites

Nothing to be concerned about. Barack Obama and John Kerry say they want peace. And they wouldn’t lie to us, would they?

RELATED VIDEO: Iranian Parliament Chants “Death to America” – Votes to Ban Nuclear Inspections

“Iran votes to ban access to military sites amid chants of ‘death to America,’” Associated Press, June 21, 2015 (thanks to Anne Crockett):

With some lawmakers chanting “Death to the America”, Iran’s parliament voted to ban access to military sites, documents and scientists as part of a future deal with world powers over its contested nuclear programme.

If ratified, the bill could complicate ongoing talks in Vienna between Iran and the P5+1 group of world powers – the US, Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany – as they face a self-imposed 30 June deadline for a final deal on the Islamic Republic’s nuclear ambitions. The talks are focused on reaching a final accord that curbs Iran’s nuclear program in return for the lifting of economic sanctions.

Of 213 lawmakers present on Sunday, 199 voted in favour of the bill, which also demands the complete lifting of all sanctions against Iran as part of any final nuclear accord. The bill must be ratified by the Guardian Council, a constitutional watchdog, to become law.

The terms stipulated in the bill allow for international inspections of Iranian nuclear sites, but forbid any inspections of military facilities.

The bill states in part: “The International Atomic Energy Agency, within the framework of the safeguard agreement, is allowed to carry out conventional inspections of nuclear sites.”

However, it concludes that “access to military, security and sensitive non-nuclear sites, as well as documents and scientists, is forbidden”. The bill also would require Iran’s foreign minister to report to parliament every six months on the process of implementing the accord.

Iran’s nuclear negotiators say they already have agreed to grant United Nations inspectors “managed access” to military sites under strict control and specific circumstances. That right includes allowing inspectors to take environmental samples around military sites.

But Iranian officials, including supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khameni, have strongly rejected the idea of Iranian scientists being interviewed.

In a statement on Sunday, the US state department said inspections remained a key part of any final deal.

All parties “are well aware of what is necessary for a final deal, including the access and transparency that will meet our bottom lines”, the statement said. “We won’t agree to a deal without that.”

RELATED ARTICLES:

Islamic Republic of Iran: 74 lashes, prison for eating in public during Ramadan

Obama rebuffs Israel’s last-ditch bid for nuclear constraints in Iran accord

NY Times: ISIS “is offering reliable, if harsh, security; providing jobs in decimated economics; and providing a rare sense of order”

Islamic Hate for the Christian Cross by Raymond Ibrahim

Last May in Italy, a Muslim boy of African origin beat a 12-year-old girl during school because she was wearing a crucifix around her neck.  The African schoolboy, who had only started to attend the school approximately three weeks earlier, began to bully the Christian girl—“insulting her and picking on her in other ways all because she was wearing the crucifix”—before he finally “punched the girl violently in the back.”

What is it about the Christian cross that makes some Muslims react this way?

The fact is, Islamic hostility to the cross is an unwavering fact of life—one that crosses continents and centuries; one that is very much indicative of Islam’s innate hostility to Christianity.

Doctrine and History

Because the Christian cross is the quintessential symbol of Christianity—for all denominations, including most forms of otherwise iconoclastic Protestantism—it has been a despised symbol in Islam.

According to the Conditions of Omar—a Medieval text which lays out the many humiliating stipulations conquered Christians must embrace to preserve their lives and which Islamic history attributes to the second “righteous caliph,” Omar al-Khattab—Christians are “Not to display a cross [on churches]… and “Not to produce a cross or [Christian] book in the markets of the Muslims.”

The reason for this animosity is that the cross symbolizes the fundamental disagreement between Christians and Muslims.   According to Dr. Sidney Griffith, author of The Church in the Shadow of the Mosque, “The cross and the icons publicly declared those very points of Christian faith which the Koran, in the Muslim view, explicitly denied: that Christ was the Son of God and that he died on the cross.”  Thus “the Christian practice of venerating the cross and the icons of Christ and the saints often aroused the disdain of Muslims,” so that there was an ongoing “campaign to erase the public symbols of Christianity, especially the previously ubiquitous sign of the cross.”

Islam’s hostility to the cross, like all of Islam’s hostilities, begins with the Muslim prophet Muhammad. He reportedly “had such a repugnance to the form of the cross that he broke everything brought into his house with its figure upon it.” He once ordered someone wearing a cross to “take off that piece of idolatry” and claimed that at the end times Jesus himself would make it a point to “break the cross”—an assertion the Islamic State regularly makes.

Islamic history following Muhammad is riddled with anecdotes of Muslims cursing and breaking crosses.  Prior to the Battle of Yarmuk in 636, which pitted the earliest invading Muslim armies against the Byzantine Empire, Khalid bin al-Walid, the savage “Sword of Allah,” told the Christians that if they wanted peace they must “break the cross” and embrace Islam, or pay jizya and live in subjugation—just as his Islamic State successors are doing today in direct emulation.  The Byzantines opted for war.

In Egypt, Saladin (d. 1193)—regularly touted in the West for his “magnanimity”—ordered “theremoval of every cross from atop the dome of every church in the provinces of Egypt,” in the words of The History of the Patriarchate of the Egyptian Church.

Europe: Growing Violence against the Cross

Centuries later, not much has changed concerning Islam’s position towards the cross, though much has changed in Western perceptions.  In other words, an African boy punching a Christian girl in Italy for her crucifix is part of a long continuum of Islamic hostility for the cross.  Perhaps he learned this hatred in mosque—the same European mosques where Islamic State representatives call Muslims to jihad?

After all, earlier this year in Italy, another  crucifix was destroyed in close proximity to a populated mosque.  The municipality’s Councilor, Giuseppe Berlin, did not mince words concerning the identity of the culprit(s):

Before we put a show of unity with Muslims, let’s have them begin by respecting our civilization and our culture. We shouldn’t minimize the importance of certain signals; we must wake up now or our children will suffer the consequences of this dangerous and uncontrolled Islamic invasion.

Nor is Italy the only European nation experiencing this phenomenon.   In neighboring France, a “young Muslim” committed major acts of vandalism at two churches.  Along with twisting a massive bronze cross, he overturned and broke two altars, the candelabras and lecterns, destroyed statues, tore down a tabernacle, smashed in a sacristy door and even broke some stained-glass windows.  (Click for images.)

And in Germany, a Turkish man who checked himself into a hospital for treatment went into a sudden frenzy because there were “too many crosses on the wall.”  He called the nurse a “bitch” and “fascist” and became physically aggressive… KEEP READING

RELATED ARTICLES:

Iran: Pastor “viciously beaten” in prison, told only way out is to deny Christ

North Carolina jihadi: “I’m thinking about using biological weapons”

NC jihad plotter: “I started thinking about death and stuff so I became a Muslim”

U.S.: Iran’s Support for Terror Undiminished

Despite the fact that Iran’s global terror activities were “undiminished” between 2013 and 2014, the U.S. State Department is still entirely committed to pursuing a nuclear deal with Iran.

“We think it’s essential that we pursue those negotiations,” said Tina Kaidanow, the State Department’s coordinator for counterterrorism, as quoted in The Wall Street Journal. “None of that implies that we would be, again, in any way taking our eye off the ball with respect to what Iran is doing as a supporter of terrorism.”

Iran’s support for terror was documented in the State Dept.’s annual report on global terrorism, which was released Friday. The report says “Iran’s state sponsorship of terrorism worldwide remained undiminished,” which makes the State Dept. “very, very concerned,” according to Kaidanow.

While the June 30 deadline for the deal is now fewer than 10 days away, the release of the report shows, “Iran continued to sponsor terrorist groups around the world,” according to Kaidanow.

The report specifically mentions Iran’s continued support for the Shiite terror organization Hezbollah in Lebanon as well as those fighting with embattled Syrian President Bashaar al-Assad.

The Clarion Project reported last week that Iran is supporting more than 100 terrorist organizations in Syria and Iraq alone.

In an interview with The Atlantic, U.S. President Barack Obamas admitted that some of the money freed up the deal’s proposed sanction relief may up going towards terrorism, although he argued that Iranian government would have to make good on their commitments to improve the country’s economy.

“I don’t think …anybody in this administration said that no money will go to the military as a consequence of sanctions relief,” Obama said. “The question is, if Iran has $150 billion parked outside the country, does the IRGC automatically get $150 billion? Does that $150 billion then translate by orders of magnitude into their capacity to project power throughout the region? And that is what we contest …”

The report also showed that between 2013 and 2014, there was a significant rise in global terror attacks, causing an increase in over 80 percent of violent deaths from the previous year (which itself had seen a 43 percent increase from the year before). In addition, the report showed:

  • There was an average of 1,122 attacks per month
  • Kidnappings increased by one-third, with more than with 9,400 people taken hostage
  • The number of global attacks rose by 35 percent
  • 32,727 people were killed worldwide (versus 17,800 in 2013)
  • 34,700 people were injured in attacks in close to 95 countries
  • In Iraq alone,  10,000 people died in 3,360 attacks representing close to a third of all people killed in terror attacks worldwide

RELATED ARTICLES

Nuclear Agreement Misleads About Iranian Breakout Time
‘Iran Supporting More than 100 Shiite Terror Groups’
Why People Become Islamic Extremists
Women’s ‘Rights’ in Iran: 5 Laws That Will Appall You

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of members of the Iranian volunteer Basij militia. Photo: © Reuters.

Dems, Republicans and Experts Question Terms of Iran Deal

Politicians and experts from across the political spectrum are calling into question the proposed nuclear agreement with Iran. The two primary issues – verifiability and the possibility of military dimensions (PMD) of the Iranian nuclear program – threaten to derail the agreement.

A report, “Verifying a Final Nuclear Deal with Iran,” written by the former deputy director of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Olli Henomen, states that for the agreement to be effective in real terms, verifiability must be a function of “unfettered,” “anywhere, anytime” access and not subject to any bureaucratic procedures which would give Iran time to alter the results of any inspections.

The report, signed by 20 foreign policy experts including Democrats and Republicans, criticizes the Obama administration for drawing up an agreement that essentially lets Iran remain a “nuclear threshold state,” specifically noting the fact that the agreement does not resolve any issues having to do with PMD and that sanctions relief will come without any of the above issues being resolved. In addition, the proposed verification provisions fall significantly short, meaning that there is no assurance that Iran’s nuclear program will stay contained within the limitations set out by the agreement.

Other damning reports recently released have come to the same conclusions:

  • A report titled “Necessary Safegurads for a Final Deal with Iran” by Eric Edelman – a career foreign service officer, ambassador and under-secretary of defense for policy — and the president’s former senior adviser Dennis Ross, says “it is uncertain whether the potential monitoring and verification regime adumbrated in the White House factsheet would be remotely sufficient for this task.”
  • Another report titled “Sunsets and Snapbacks: The Asymmetry Between an Expanding Iranian Nuclear Program and Diminishing Western Leverage” by Mark Dubowitz and Annie Fixler questions wisdom of  making an agreement with Iran before the issue of PMD is resolved, thereby giving up any leverage the West may have. In addition, the report makes the case that it is folly to believe that sanctions can realistically be “snapped back” once international companies have invested billions of dollars in Iran.  The report notes that “international sanctions regime took decades to put in place and to have an impact on Iran’s economy and decision making.” Any snap-backs, if possible, will not be felt immediately. Given that the breakout time to create a bomb is estimated at one year, snap-backs offer no real deterrance to Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon.

Meanwhile, the Iranian parliament voted to take away their power to veto of any nuclear agreement drawn up with world powers. In amending their own previous legislation, the lawmakers put the veto power into the hands of the Supreme National Security Council (SNSC), a group made up of ministers and military commanders chosen by Iran’s Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and headed by Iranian President Hasan Rouhani.

“Whatever decision the leader takes in this regard, we should obey in parliament,” said speaker of the parliament Ali Larijani . “We should not tie the hands of the leader.”

However, the lawmakers did reject any inspections of the country’s nuclear program that are not “conventional” visits, effectively banning inspection of military sites.

At the same time, France’s Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said “at the point where we are, things are not clear [in terms of whether an agreement with Iran] can be reached. There is a need to clarify, make precise and ensure the deal is robust.”

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is a look inside of a nuclear reactor. Photo: © Reuters.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Iranian Academic Challenges ‘Death to Israel’ Mantra
Iran’s Army Head Vetoes Access to Military Nuclear Sites
US: Iran’s Support for Terror Undiminished
Nuclear Agreement Misleads About Iranian Breakout Time

Michelle Obama “sees herself” in UK Muslim women by Pamela Geller

The First Lady passes up an opportunity to speak out about real oppression. “Michelle O. ‘sees herself’ in British Muslim women,” by Pamela Geller, WND, June 21, 2015:

Michelle Obama recently visited the U.K., where, according to The Mirror, she “compared her struggle to succeed as a young black woman in America to the experience of inner-city Muslim girls.”

She “struggled to hold back tears,” said the Mirror, as she spoke to an audience of hijab-wearing Muslim girls at the Mulberry School for Girls in London’s notorious Muslim area, Tower Hamlets.

“Girls like you inspire me and impress me every single day,” she said. “When I look out at all these young women, I see myself. In so many ways, your story is my story.”

In saying this, Michelle Obama was implying that both she and the Muslim girls she was addressing faced oppression, discrimination and disadvantage. She was, in other words, advancing the false Muslims-as-victims narrative that Islamic advocacy groups such as the Hamas-tied Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR, work so hard to cultivate in the U.S.

Michelle Obama did not, of course, address the fact that the primary source of the oppression and discrimination that these Muslim girls face and will face in the future is their own families – primarily their fathers and husbands.

The first lady could have called upon these girls to reject the Shariah misogyny that devalues women’s testimony and inheritance rights, reduces women to commodity status via polygamy, sanctions their beating and makes them vulnerable to genital mutilation and honor killing. But she didn’t dare say anything about any of that.

What she did say was extremely odd. Michelle sees herself in the gender apartheid under Islamic law? Was Michelle held down by her mother and other female relatives while they cut her clitoris off? The U.K.’s “failure to stop FGM is a ‘national scandal.’” There have been 170,000 victims of female genital mutilation, a practice justified under Islamic law, in Britain, and yet there were no prosecutions of any of the perpetrators until this year. Where is Michelle Obama’s hashtag about that?

Michelle sees herself in the British Shariah courts, where the appalling treatment of women and children at the hands of the Shariah court “justices” goes unpunished? Shariah law courts have become a parallel legal system in the U.K. They justify and legislate extensive abuse of women, refuse to grant even abused women divorces, charge the woman but not the man for divorce proceedings and even take away the woman’s children. These kinds of rulings happen routinely, despite the fact that they are contrary to British law.

Does Michelle Obama see herself in this Quran verse? “Men are the managers of the affairs of women for that God has preferred in bounty one of them over another, and for that they have expended of their property. Righteous women are therefore obedient, guarding the secret for God’s guarding. And those you fear may be rebellious admonish; banish them to their couches, and beat them” (4:34).

Michelle Obama also said: “Maybe you see the news and see people talking about your religion, and wonder if anyone will ever see beyond your headscarf.”

Her husband said the same thing in his notorious speech in Cairo in 2009: that the U.S. would protect the right of women to wear hijab. But who is infringing on that right? No one. And who is not seeing beyond the headscarf? Michelle Obama meant “Islamophobes,” but the real people these girls have to fear regarding their headscarves are the Muslim men who will kill them if they don’t wear it.

Aqsa Parvez was murdered by her father and her brother for not wearing the headscarf. Innumerable other Muslim women have been similarly victimized. Who speaks for them? Who stands for their rights? Not Michelle Obama.

Tell us, Mrs. Obama, about your oppression and disadvantage, from your position emanating from the highest and most powerful office in the free-est country in the world.

Tell us how wronged you were in between your multiple daily wardrobe changes of the most expensive designer clothes in the world. Tell us how awful it was for you to get accepted and attend Princeton University (along with your brother) in your youth and make your own choices to live your life any way you wanted.

Vicious hypocrite.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Jihad families used UK welfare benefits to fund flight to the Islamic State

Islamic State offers female slaves as top prizes for Qur’an competition

UK: Husbands of Muslimas who fled to ISIS say UK police “radicalized” their wives

India: Muslim murders 17-year-old daughter in honor killing

Ohio Muslim said he’d “cut off the head of his non-Muslim son if necessary”

“O you who have believed, do not take your fathers or your brothers as allies if they have preferred disbelief over belief. And whoever does so among you – then it is those who are the wrongdoers.” (Qur’an 9:23)

“You will not find a people who believe in Allah and the Last Day having affection for those who oppose Allah and His Messenger, even if they were their fathers or their sons or their brothers or their kindred.” (Qur’an 58:22)

“There has already been for you an excellent pattern in Abraham and those with him, when they said to their people, ‘Indeed, we are disassociated from you and from whatever you worship other than Allah. We have denied you, and there has appeared between us and you animosity and hatred forever until you believe in Allah alone…’” (Qur’an 60:4)

“Sheffield Lake terrorist suspect said he’d behead his non-Muslim son, FBI reports,” by Ida Lieszkovszky, Northeast Ohio Media Group, June 19, 2015:

CLEVELAND, Ohio — The Sheffield Lake man facing terrorism charges told a FBI informant that if war broke out in the U.S. between Muslims and non-Muslims, he would “cut off the head of his non-Muslim son if necessary,” according to a criminal complaint.

Amir Said Abdul Rahman Al-Ghazi’s comment about his son is revealed in the 33-page complaint filed Friday by the FBI in U.S. District Court.

The complaint also states that when asked by the criminal informant what he thought of videos showing the beheading of U.S. citizens by Islamic State militants, his response was: “You really wanna know what I think? … I support that. … That’s our way of life. … Yeah, I go for this. … I’m uh. … I do this.”

Al-Ghazi, 38, faces charges of supporting a terrorist organization, the Islamic State, also known as ISIS. A federal judge ordered Friday afternoon that Al-Ghazi be held in custody until a hearing on Wednesday.

Al-Ghazi made comments to a total of three FBI informants, according to the complaint, at times stating he thinks it’s okay to behead Christians, Jews, and atheists. Al-Ghazi also referred to Iraqis as his “brothers and sisters,” the complaint states, and told one informant that he had ideas for a terrorist attack in the U.S., including attacking a police station or derailing a train.

But, Al-Ghazi said he wasn’t interested in becoming a martyr, but rather told an informant that he “wanted to get away with it,” the complaint states.

Al-Ghazi also posted on various social media sites including Facebook and Twitter messages in support of ISIS. According to the complaint, he also commented on a message board that “We are all Islamic state citizens. This isn’t some gang in the desert you’re fighting. This is WW3 the beginning has just begun.”

He also told one informant that he was trying to recruit people to join ISIS, the complaint states. He also tried to buy an AK-47 to use in propaganda videos. He told an informant that he already had a ski-mask and a “green screen,” and that he’d already bought a machete. He made references to conducting “cyber jihad.”…

RELATED ARTICLES:

New Jersey Muslim charged with plotting to support the Islamic State

UK city shocked! shocked! by family’s flight to join the Islamic State

Ramadan Bomb-A-Thon versus Israeli Life-A-Thon

Today we take a look at the religion of Piece(s) and how the empirical data verifies that during the Islamic Holy month of Ramadan where peace is supposed to be the norm, in actuality, the jihadis attack more aggressively than ever!

We deconstruct this apparent contradiction and expose the Islamic rationale which allows, indeed demands, this increased bellicosity, even during a month of “peace.”

From there we discuss the Temple Mount with Jerusalem Jane as she explains the latest decision of the Israeli government – to allow jihadis from Gaza and the West Bank to travel to the Temple Mount during Ramadan!! And, what could possibly go wrong with that!

RELATED ARTICLES:

Ohio Muslim arrested on terror charges: “We are all Islamic State citizens.”

Northern Ireland: Pastor who said “Islam is satanic” faces six months in jail

Tajik special forces chief who joined Islamic State threatens to behead his brother

ISIS following al-Qaeda’s game plan for a caliphate

Reign of Terror: Inside the Islamic State

In FrontPage today, I discuss new gruesome details that have emerged of life inside the Islamic State.

The Islamic State’s caliphate turns one year old on June 29, and few inside its domains, aside from the true believers who have traveled all over the world to live in the Islamic promised land, are likely to be celebrating. Like all totalitarian states, it has swiftly established for its citizens an environment of oppression and fear, supported (in a new twist) not by a personality cult centered upon the specter of a ubiquitous, all-seeing, all-knowing leader, but by the guilt-manipulation of religious duty. Obey the Islamic State’s dictates, no matter how egregious, or else you’ll not just be tortured and brutally murdered, but you’ll burn in hell besides.

And so those deemed to be ideologically deviant are not labeled “counterrevolutionaries” or “imperialist running dogs” or “capitalist roaders,” but “heretics,” and are made to carry “repentance cards.”

A repentance card is not a get-out-of-jail-free card, however. Everyone in the Islamic State must show signs of his or her repentance and devoutness in Islam every day, or else. Breaking the law in the Islamic State can get you lashed or even beheaded – even for “infractions” such as these, many of which are classic Sharia provisions and thus are found in Saudi Arabia, Iran, and elsewhere as well:

  • Women must cover their entire body except face and hands. (According to some reports, they must cover their faces as well.)
  • Women may not leave the house without a male accompanying them.
  • Only women may sell clothing to women.
  • Women must not wear high heels, but only flat-soled shoes.
  • Not only drugs and alcohol, but cigarettes are forbidden.
  • Those who leave Islam are to be killed.
  • Graves and shrines are forbidden, and are to be destroyed.

There are other rules as well – many recalling Woody Allen’s Republic of San Marcos. Women may not wear makeup or sit in a chair. Men may not cut their hair, put gel in it, or wear it in a “modern style.” Men may not wear low-hanging jeans (okay, for that one I’m booking my ticket to Raqqa now). Just as postwar Vietnamese were forbidden to utter the name “Saigon,” in the Islamic State no one may refer to the ruling group as “Daesh,” the Arabic acronym for the group’s former name, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. Those wearing soccer jerseys will receive 80 lashes. And several weeks ago, Islamic State clerics banned pigeon breeding: the sight of the birds’ genitals as they flew overhead was un-Islamic.

That’s right: this is a state that legislates about pigeon genitals. But no one is laughing, as it commands respect at the point of a gun.

That’s also how it inspires Islamic piety. A deserter from the Islamic State has recounted that Islamic State prisons in Raqqa are filled with people were not sufficiently reverent during prayers or who have uttered the name of Allah in a way that Islamic State authorities deemed blasphemous. Their Islamic State captors torture them with sticks and cattle prods, and occasionally even burn prisoners to death.

Sharia forbids music, and so playing music on your car radio can get you ten lashes. Just as in Saudi Arabia, stores must close during the time for Islamic prayers.

And there is no recourse within the Islamic State itself. No political parties or armed groups are allowed other than the Islamic State. The ruling elites exert control over their people so tightly as to arouse the envy of Hitler, Stalin, Mao or Pol Pot: inside the caliphate’s capital of Raqqa, in the experience of one man who lived there, “the once colorful, cosmopolitan Syrian provincial capital has been transformed…Now, women covered head to toe in black scurried quickly to markets before rushing home. Families often didn’t leave home to avoid any contact with the ‘Hisba’ committees, the dreaded enforcers of the innumerable ISIS regulations.”

Raqqa’s central square is now known as Hell Square, as it is where the Islamic State carries out public executions, often leaving the dead bodies on display for days, as a warning to the living.

There is no end in sight. “People hate them,” said one man whose family lives in the Islamic State, “but they’ve despaired, and they don’t see anyone supporting them if they rise up. People feel that nobody is with them.” In fact, lots of people are with them: Barack Obama, who has vowed to “degrade and ultimately destroy” the Islamic State, but done little to make good on his vow; the Iranians, the Shi’ite regime in Baghdad, the Assad regime in Damascus, the Kurds, and a host of others. None of them, however, have the will or the means so far to deliver the knockout blow to this evil state. And so the citizens of the caliphate are in for, at very least, a second year of misery.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Ohio Muslim arrested on terror charges: “We are all Islamic State citizens.”

Northern Ireland: Pastor who said “Islam is satanic” faces six months in jail

Tajik special forces chief who joined Islamic State threatens to behead his brother

ISIS following al-Qaeda’s game plan for a caliphate

VIDEO: Understanding Civilizational Jihad In America

Understanding civilizational jihad is essential to America’s national security.

An expert on civilizational jihad is Mr. Frank Gaffney. Mr. Gaffney is a subject matter expert on the Global Jihad Movement. Mr. Gaffney was nominated by President Reagan to become the Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy, the senior position in the Defense Department with responsibility for policies involving nuclear forces, arms control and U.S.-European defense relations. He acted in that capacity for seven months during which time, he was the Chairman of the prestigious High Level Group, NATO’s senior politico-military committee. He also represented the Secretary of Defense in key U.S.-Soviet negotiations and ministerial meetings.

In this short 4 minute clip you will learn the basic elements of Jihad to better help you understand the world around you both friend and foe. Know Thyself and Know Thy Enemy.

Rabbi Jonathan Hausman invited Frank Gaffney, Admiral ‘Ace’ Lyons, and Clare Lopez to educate his congregation and the greater public through his “Speaker Series”

Take the information in this clip and learn about the threats to America and to your community.

EDITORS NOTE: To learn more about the Center for Security Policy visit: http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/. To learn more about the Rabbi Hausman speaker series here: http://www.atorah.org/