Tag Archive for: Koran

Tel Aviv on the Seine Flushes Out the Slithery Creatures — Part 1

It’s the 14th edition of Paris Plages, a charming operation that transforms the banks of the Seine, from the Quai du Louvre all the way to rue de Crimée, into a summer playground. From mid-July to mid-August the quais are dressed up as sandy “beaches” with deck chairs, picnic tables, fun & games, rental bikes for kids, restaurants, cafés, ice cream stands, a lending library, and—for want of a dip in the river—a stretch of cool-off mist. It’s all done in nice French taste with a pretty blue & white striped and bright yellow color scheme, t-shirted monitors, and an international crowd.

One day each summer a guest country is invited to bring an exotic accent to the Paris Plages river beach. Tomorrow, August 13th, it’s Tel Aviv sur la Seine and, don’t you know, the slithery creatures are climbing up the riverbanks, determined to strangle the very thought of Tel Aviv and the Israel that goes with it. From pseudo-intellectual analyses of the stalemate in the peace process, attributed exclusively to Israel, to ill-concealed threats to smash up the whole thing if the City Hall doesn’t cancel it, the “debate” spins around a few simplistic notions. Should Tel Aviv be coddled because it’s not really Israel, it’s more of a Levantine Paris on the Mediterranean, populated by peace-making leftist gay-friendly secular progressives who detest Netanyahu like we do, or should Tel Aviv be kicked off the river bank until it can be kicked out of the world, no less guilty than the last baby-burning Occupier on a West Bank hilltop whose army massacred all of Gaza one year ago.

The pathetic postman Olivier Besancenot, whose moribund anti-capitalist party [NPA] was revived last year by acting as straw man for Islamic protests against the Protective Border Operation, is ready to lead another rampage tomorrow. The Euro-Palestine site is in a state of volcanic anti-Zionist eruption. An anti-Tel Aviv petition boasts of 23,000 signatures. Riot police have been mobilized and no one knows how they will handle an ambulatory population of Zionists, non-Zionists, anti-Zionists, tourists, and caliphators moving along a narrow band between the river and the quais. To make things merrier, Euro-Palestine reports that the préfecture has authorized a mixed salad of Palestinian tifosi to hold a Gaza Beach demonstration on a stretch of the riverbank that runs from Châtelet, where the commuter trains roll in from the banlieue, and the Notre Dame bridge, where the Tel Aviv beach begins.

Resisting pressure from members of her governing coalition and beyond, the Socialist mayor of Paris, Anne Hidalgo, currently vacationing in her native Spain, stands by Tel Aviv…after a fashion. The idea of inviting Tel Aviv germinated, she says, during her visit to Israel last May. I was there when our mayor, smartly dressed in black set off with a raspberry red jacket, addressed the opening ceremony of the 5th Global Forum for Combatting Antisemitism, organized in Jerusalem by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Speaking alternatively in French and English the mayor expressed her affection for Israel, its startups, its warmth, and vibrant energy. She was no less enthusiastic about French Jews, without whom France would not be France.

Indeed, that is the aim and purpose of domestic and foreign caliphators working to conquer, beyond a little stretch of riverbank, whole neighborhoods, the entire city, and turn the country into something that would not be France. The wedge of that operation is sic the Jews!

Nothing to do with antisemitism, perish the thought. Personally, I don’t ferret out antisemites, and I like to call people what they call themselves. So let’s see how and why they won’t let us enjoy a falafel on the river bank tomorrow. The general idea is that there’s something indecent about hosting Tel Aviv so soon after “an 18 month-old Palestinian baby was burned alive by Jewish extremists.” Not to mention last year’s massacres in Gaza.

Danielle Simonnet (Parti de Gauche), a member of the mayor’s coalition, denounces the “cynicism” of honoring “a festive Tel-Aviv… one year after the massacres in the Gaza Strip by the Israeli State and army while the government intensifies its policy of colonization …” Furthermore, she laments, there was nothing planned with “Israeli humanists,” no debate on the condition of the Palestinians! “Tel-Aviv is not Copacabana,” she blurted out in a radio interview. “Tel-Aviv is the capital of Israel!”

The mayor’s defense is curiously close to Simmonet’s attack. Tel-Aviv shouldn’t be confused with the State of Israel. The Paris Plages invitation is in no way a show of support for Benyamin Netanyahu’s conservative government. Tel Aviv is appreciated for its night life, it welcomes sexual minorities, it’s so progressive that all the intolerant people in Israel detest it! What’s more, the mayor congratulates Tel Aviv for the most impressive demonstrations of solidarity with the “Palestinian child burned alive by fanatics.”

Bruno Julliard, who worked his way up rather quickly from student rabble rouser to a major role on Mayor Hidalgo’s team, is more succinct: “There should be no confusion between the brutal policies of the Israeli government and the city of Tel-Aviv, whose residents and elected officials take a progressive stand on the Israel-Palestine conflict.”

A few rare voices were heard from political figures on the right. Congratulating the mayor on her refusal to give in to pressure, Eric Ciotti [Les Républicains] is outraged by the controversy fueled by the far left “with anti-Semitic undercurrents.” Claude Goasguen, unfailing friend of  Israel, goes one giant step further, asking how Tel-Aviv, which is something more than a beach, can be distinguished  from the State of Israel. “I don’t think the residents of Tel-Aviv refused to defend their country when it was victim of Hamas rockets.”

Law enforcement, apparently, is far more concerned about the possibilities of uncontrollable violence like they had to deal with last summer, than with the geopolitical niceties of Tel Aviv as opposed to Israel, the colonies, and all that. An unidentified riot policeman admits that they are all thinking about the “antisemitic climate” that raged in Sarcelles in July of last year. While the police are stalking potential troublemakers on social media and with phone taps, elected officials, political cartoonists, militants, and commentators are stoking the flames. Or gently stirring them.

In a Libération op-ed, Alexandra Schwarzbrod cautions: As important as it is to denounce the Occupation and clamor for dismantlement of the colonies that deprive Palestinians of a future, it is just as important to refrain from stigmatizing everything Israeli. The reaction to the “premeditated destruction of a Palestinian family burned alive by what some in Israel call ‘Jewish jihadists’” is understandable. One might question the wisdom of the Mayor of Paris of inviting Tel Aviv a year after a war “between the Israeli army and the Palestinians of Hamas left Gaza in ruins.” But, she concludes, contact should be maintained with secular, open-minded Israelis “revolted by the occupation and the climate of intolerance that ravages their country.”

Socialist deputy Alexis Bachelay brought the debate to incandescence. Tel Aviv on the Seine, he tweeted, is tantamount to Pretoria on the Seine in the days of apartheid South Africa. Heating up from tweet to tweet, Bachelay opined that the South African apartheid regime was probably gentler than Israel’s Far Right government with its “separate development” in the form of the separation fence and the colonies. In a last attempt to clarify his statements, Bachelay explained that he was referring to last year’s Gaza conflict; a level of force never used by the “militarization of apartheid.”

The poor guy went too far. Fellow Socialist Jérôme Guedj awarded him a gold medal for the most idiotic tweet. I too congratulate him for displaying the crude inner pyrotechnics that are feeding this controversy and driving the anti-Zionists crazy. One thinks Tel Aviv is the capital of Israel, Bachelay knows the Israeli government is worse than apartheid South Africa, another pinches his nose over Netanyahu’s “brutal politics” and most of them hug Tel Aviv as if it were an annex to the Quartier Latin.

What will tomorrow bring? A standoff, a clash, or maybe a thunderstorm. A real one, the kind nature produces.

Next year they could invite Iran. There’s nothing controversial about Tehran’s unsullied beaches and they can work out the details when President Rohani will be the guest of President Hollande this November.

Obama’s Failed Islamic State Narrative by Raymond Ibrahim

“However, when State Department spokeswoman Mary Harf appeared on live television and asserted that the best way to defeat the Islamic State was by offering its members better ‘job opportunities,’ the idea that the State Department is run by fools became increasingly plausible.”

“Critic Blasts Obama Narrative on Islam,” by F. Michael Maloof  for WND, August 8, 2015:

WASHINGTON – The persecution and slaughter of Christians throughout the Middle East has become a major humanitarian crisis, with Pope Francis warning that the atrocities border on “genocide,” according to a report from Joseph Farah’s G2 Bulletin.

Yet critics say the U.S. State Department just apologizes for the terror and never seems to find a good reason to go to bat for Christians.

One reason, a prominent Middle East expert explains, is that the U.S. State Department, as well as other government offices, “are infiltrated by Islamists and their sympathizers.”

But Raymond Ibrahim, author of “Crucified Again: Exposing Islam’s New War on Christians,” told G2 Bulletin in an interview there’s another reason, too.

“I believe the greatest reason is that for whatever reason the Obama government has a ‘narrative’ that it’s trying to sell to the American people, one that maintains that Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance – so it’s not in the State Department’s favor to allow persecuted Christians to expose the truth about Islam.”

Ibrahim said the problem isn’t just with the State Department but exists throughout the Obama administration.

“It seems more systemic,” he said. “Again ‘The Narrative’ – that is, the lie – must prevail, and most politicians who often care little for truth and/or reality are willing to go along with the ‘Narrative’ in the hopes that they gain favor from on high, that is, the Obama administration.”

ISIS’ attacks on Christians have been horrific in recent months. They’ve included recordings of mass beheadings, crucifixions and worse. There even have videos of children under the control of ISIS firing guns point-blank into victims.

But in spite of the atrocities against Christians, Ibrahim said, he’s never received any communication from the State Department acknowledging the attacks on Christians.

“No, any criticism of Islam is not welcome by this government,” he told G2. “For example, back in February 2009, I was asked to testify about Islamist and counter strategies before the U.S. House of Representatives Armed Services Committee. Although my testimony was posted on the Armed Services website, it was later removed (but can be read on my website).”

At the time, the U.S. House of Representatives was run by Democrats, with Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., the House Speaker. The chairman of the House Armed Services Committee at the time was Ike Skelton, D-Mo.

Ibrahim went on to say State won’t even acknowledge that the attacks by the Islamic State on Christians and their churches are part of an overall religious conflict between Christianity and Islam, whose leaders repeatedly have vowed to establish a worldwide caliphate and force everyone to either be Muslim or be punished.

The reason for that, Ibrahim said, is that the State Department “is either composed of fools or it is lying. There are no other alternatives.

“I generally believe that the State Department is merely lying,” he said. “However, when State Department spokeswoman Mary Harf appeared on live television and asserted that the best way to defeat the Islamic State was by offering its members better ‘job opportunities,’ the idea that the State Department is run by fools became increasingly plausible.”

A request to the State Department for comment on Ibrahim’s allegations went unanswered.

RELATED ARTICLES:

“Where do the loyalties of two current Muslim members of Congress lie?”

Iran deal “does nothing to change the fact that, in plain Farsi, Iran is committed to world conquest by Islam”

Where do the loyalties of two current Muslim members of Congress lie?

So asks the Daily Caller, and adds: “The Koran forbids allegiance to non-Muslim authority, preventing these congressmen from serving two masters at once. As the Koran dictates Islam is in a perpetual war against all infidels until a sharia-dominant world is established, which master do they then serve in this conflict?”

“With Obama’s Help, Assembling Allah’s Domestic Army Is Now Easier,” by James Zumwult for The Daily Caller, August 7, 2015:

If immigrants to the U.S. seek citizenship but are reluctant to take an oath of allegiance because it requires a commitment to help defend the country, what is the solution?

If the immigrants in question are Muslim and you have a pro-Muslim U.S. president, the solution is simple — just change the oath to accommodate them.

For years, the oath for citizenship included a requirement the declarant agree to “bear arms on behalf of the United States” and “perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States” when required by the law. But the U.S. Customs and Immigration Service (USCIS) now says, “a candidate may be eligible to exclude these two clauses based on religious training and belief or a conscientious objection.”

The quandary for U.S. citizen candidates who are Muslim is this: Just like America’s first two wars as a new nation were against Muslims, so too have its last two been. However, Islamic law — sharia — prohibits Muslims from fighting fellow Muslims. While this prohibition seems somewhat hypocritical in light of extensive Muslim-on-Muslim violence running rampant in the Middle East today, the concern of would-be U.S. citizen Muslims is that a non-Muslim U.S. could require they fight other Muslims.

To accommodate this concern, President Obama now gives Muslim immigrants wishing to become U.S. citizens a free pass: they no longer are required to undertake a responsibility which even he has relinquished — defending our nation against any Islamic threat.

Raymond Ibrahim’s August 6th article “Obama Alters U.S. Oath of Allegiance to Comply with Islamic Law” explains another important aspect of sharia that is at odds with Muslims taking an allegiance oath to America.

While sharia imposes the above prohibition upon Muslims gaining U.S. citizenship, it also prohibits them from giving fidelity to any non-Muslim government. The act of taking such an oath and not really meaning it is permissible in Islam under the concept of “taqqiya” — feigning loyalty to non-Muslims when necessary to do so to gain their confidence.

This was why naturalized U.S. citizen Faisal Shahzad — convicted of attempting the May 2010 Times Square car bombing only to have the fuse to his device, and his hope of killing infidels, fizzle—when asked by the judge about having taken an oath of allegiance to America said he swore it “but I didn’t mean it.”

As authority for taqqiya, Ibrahim cites Prophet Muhammad’s close companion Abu Darda, who said, “Let us grin in the face of some people while our hearts curse them.”

This is why Muslim immigrants refuse to assimilate in a host country. While retaining one’s identity is not a concern in and of itself, it is the Muslim’s purpose in doing so that is. His purpose is to use his increasing numbers to eventually wield enough influence to replace the host nation’s fundamental laws with those of sharia.

Among those who discourage assimilation by Muslim immigrants in order to support what is known as “creeping sharia” within a host nation is Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. In February 2011, he addressed thousands of Turkish immigrants in Germany, challenging them to turn Germany into Turkey by refusing to assimilate.

Years earlier, as mayor of Istanbul, Erdogan boldly proclaimed democracy was but a temporary vehicle on the journey to establish global Islam. He said: “Democracy is merely a train that we ride until we reach our goal. Mosques are our military barracks, minarets are our spears, and domes are our helmets.” The goal of Islamists, like Erdogan, is to use non-assimilation to eventually claim non-Muslim lands as Muslim.

Erdogan made the mistake of revealing his intentions at a time Turkey was still very much secular, resulting in his arrest. However, today, his efforts to take the train of democracy back to the days of the Ottoman Empire are very obvious.

Erdogan is not alone in defending non-assimilation by Muslims. As Ibrahim cites, numerous verses from the Koran support it including:

Koran 3:28: “Let believers not take for friends and allies infidels rather than believers: and whoever does this shall have no relationship left with Allah—unless you but guard yourselves against them, taking precautions;” and

Koran 58:22: True Muslims do not befriend non-Muslims “even if they be their fathers, sons, brothers, or kin.”

Lest we simply ignore the above sharia mandate in the interests of political correctness, we should reflect upon incidents in which Muslims have chosen the loyalty of religion over that of country — with deadly consequences for U.S. citizens. While there are several, among them are:

– The April 2005 grenade attack by U.S. Army soldier Hasan Akbar, prompted by his concern over U.S. troops killing his fellow Muslims in Iraq. He killed two and wounded 14.

– The November 2009 Fort Hood shooting by Major Nidal Hasan, prompted by his concern he would be deploying to the Middle East. Rather than doing so, he turned his weapon upon his true enemy—fellow U.S. soldiers—killing 13 and wounding more than thirty.

Ibrahim observes of the former incident: “In short, the first loyalty of any ‘American Muslim’ who follows the Koran is to fellow Muslims, regardless of their nationality. It is not to American ‘infidels.’”

Of the latter incident, he adds: “Much of Hasan’s behavior is grounded in the Islamic doctrine of Loyalty and Enmity. According to this essential teaching, Muslims must always be loyal to Islam and fellow Muslims while having enmity for all non-Islamic things and persons.”

It is chilling to reflect on statements by Islamist supporters such as Tarik Shah who, residing in the U.S., sought to assist al-Qaeda establish training camps here. Arrested in 2005, he boasted, “I could be joking and smiling (with non-Muslims) and then cutting their throats in the next second.”

The two observations above by Ibrahim should cause us to ask a question which, due to political correctness, never will: Where do the loyalties of two current Muslim members of Congress lie?

The Koran forbids allegiance to non-Muslim authority, preventing these congressmen from serving two masters at once. As the Koran dictates Islam is in a perpetual war against all infidels until a sharia-dominant world is established, which master do they then serve in this conflict?

Either these two congressmen are true Muslims serving Allah and, therefore, unable to serve America, or, they are true patriots serving the U.S. and, therefore, unable to serve Allah. The latter, incidentally, would make them apostates under sharia — a crime punishable by death….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Minnesota: Attorneys for Somali refugees arrested on terrorism charges say ISIS not a terror group

Obama’s failed Islam narrative

Meet the U.S. Professors who love Obama’s Iran Nuke Deal

It isn’t surprising that Aslan and Cole would be cheer-leading for this disastrous deal, since they are both Board members of the National Iranian American Council (NIAC). NIAC has been established in court as a lobbying group for the Islamic Republic of Iran. Said Michael Rubin: “Jamal Abdi, NIAC’s policy director, now appears to push aside any pretense that NIAC is something other than Iran’s lobby. Speaking at the forthcoming ‘Expose AIPAC’ conference, Abdi is featured on the ‘Training: Constituent Lobbying for Iran’ panel. Oops.” Iranian freedom activist Hassan Daioleslam“documented over a two-year period that NIAC is a front group lobbying on behalf of the Iranian regime.” NIAC had to pay him nearly $200,000 in legal fees after they sued him for defamation over his accusation that they were a front group for the mullahs, and lost. Yet Aslan and Cole remain on their Board.

Aslan also may genuinely like this deal, not simply because he is a subversive, but because he is an imbecile — a prime example of an empty-headed charlatan propped up by the mainstream media (and, no doubt, handlers who are far more intelligent than their front man) because he reflects currently acceptable thinking. But all too frequently, his true intellectual level shines through: he thinks Ethiopia and Eritrea are in Central Africa. He called Turkey the second most populous Muslim country, which was only about 100 million people off. He has also referred to “the reincarnation, which Christianity talks about” — although he later claimed that one was a “typo.” Aslan has claimed that Muhammad outlawed slavery (the Muslim prophet actually owned slaves). Aslan has asserted that Marx and Freud “gave birth to the Enlightenment” (both were born after it ended). He has insisted that the idea of resurrection “simply doesn’t exist in Judaism,” despite numerous passages to the contrary in the Hebrew Scriptures.

Video of Reza Aslan Dancing for Peace:

Aslan has also claimed that the Biblical story of Noah was barely four verses long — which he then corrected to forty, but that was wrong again, as it is 89 verses long. Aslan claimed that the “founding philosophy of the Jesuits” was “the preferential option for the poor,” but the Jesuits were founded in 1534, and according to the California Catholic Conference, “the popular term ‘preferential option for the poor’ is relatively new. Its first use in a Church document is in 1968.” He invoked Pope Pius XI as an example of how “historically, Fascist ideology did infect corners of the Catholic world,” apparently ignorant of the fact that Pius XI issued the anti-fascist encyclical Mit Brennender Sorge.

Similarly, Aslan has revealed that he can barely write English, indicating that his books are either ghostwritten or very heavily edited: he confuses “than” with “then”; apparently thinks the Latin word “et” is an abbreviation; and writes “clown’s” for “clowns.”

And as for the other academics listed here, Hatem Bazian actually pretends that “Islamophobia” as an academic discipline, issuing smears and libels in psuedo-academic dress of foes of jihad terror.

This is the intellectual caliber of American academia today.

“The Profs Who Love Obama’s Iran Deal,” by Cinnamon Stillwell, FrontPage, August 10, 2015:

Who supports the Obama administration’s increasingly unpopular Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) aimed ostensibly at curbing Iran’s nuclear program? Many of its strongest proponents come from the field of Middle East studies, which boasts widespread animus towards the U.S. and Israel along with a cadre of apologists for the Iranian regime determined to promote ineffectual diplomacy at all costs.

University of California, Riverside creative writing professor Reza Aslan concedes that his generation of Iranian-Americans “feel[s] far removed from the political and religious turmoil of the Iranian revolution” before falling in line with the Iranian regime’s propaganda: the deal will “empower moderates in Iran, strengthen Iranian civil society and spur economic development,” and create “an Iran that is a responsible actor on the global stage, that respects the rights of its citizens and that has warm relations with the rest of the world.” “Warm relations” are the least likely outcome of the increase in funding for Iran’s terrorist proxies Hamas and Hezbollah that even President Obama admits will follow the easing of sanctions.

Flynt Leverett, an international relations professor at Pennsylvania State University, whitewashes these terrorist groups as “constituencies” and “communities” which the Iranian regime “help[s] organize in various ways to press their grievances more effectively,” effective terrorism being, for Leverett, a laudable goal.  Characterizing the regime as “a rising regional power” and “legitimate political order for most Iranians,” he urges the U.S., through the JCPOA, to “come to terms with this reality.”

Diablo Valley College Middle East studies instructor Amer Araim’s seemingly wishful thinking is equally supportive of Tehran’s line: “it is sincerely hoped that these funds will be used to help the Iranian people develop their economy and to ensure prosperity in that country.” Meanwhile, Hooshang Amirahmadi, an Iranian-American international relations professor at Rutgers University, attempts to legitimize the regime by delegitimizing the sanctions: “The money that will flow to Iran under this deal is not a gift: this is Iran’s money that has been frozen and otherwise blocked.”

Others deny the Iranian regime intends to build a nuclear bomb. University of Michigan history professor Juan Cole has “long argued that [Iran’s leader Ali] Khamenei is sincere about not wanting a nuclear weapon” because of his “oral fatwas or legal rulings” indicating that “using such weapons is contrary to Islamic law.” His unwarranted confidence in the regime leads him to conclude:

[T]hey have developed all the infrastructure and technical knowledge and equipment that would be necessary to make a nuclear weapon, but stop there, much the way Japan has.

Evidently, Cole has no problem with a tyrannical, terrorist-supporting regime that seeks regional hegemony on the threshold of becoming a nuclear power.

Likewise, William Beeman, an anthropology professor at the University of Minnesota, maintains that, “It was . . .  easy for Iran to give up a nuclear weapons program that never existed, and that it never intended to implement.” Like Cole, he uncritically accepts and recites the regime’s disinformation: “Iran’s leaders have regularly denounced nuclear weapons as un-Islamic.”

Beeman—who, in previous negotiations with the Iranian regime, urged the U.S. to be “unfailingly polite and humble” and not to set “pre-conditions” regarding its nuclear program—coldly disregards criticism of the JCPOA for excluding conditions such as the “release of [American] political prisoners” and “recognition of Israel,” calling them “utterly irrelevant.” No doubt the relatives of those prisoners and the Israeli citizens who live in the crosshairs of the regime’s continued threats of annihilation would disagree.

A number of academics have resorted to classic anti-Semitic conspiracy mongering to attack the deal’s Israeli and American opponents, calling them the “Israel Lobby.”Muqtedar Khan, director of the Islamic Studies Program at the University of Delaware, accuses “the Israeli government and all those in the U.S. who are under the influence of its American lobbies” of obstructing the deal, claiming that, “The GOP congress is now being described as the [Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin] Netanyahu congress.”

Hatem Bazian, director of the Islamophobia Research & Documentation Project at the University of California, Berkeley, takes aim at “pro-Israel neo-conservatives,” “neo-conservative warmongers,” “AIPAC,” and (in a mangled version of “Israel-firster”) “Israel’s first D.C. crowd” for “attempting to scuttle the agreement.” Asserting a moral equivalence between the dictatorial Iranian regime and the democratically-elected Israeli government, Bazian demands to know when Israel’s “pile of un-inspected or regulated nuclear weapons stockpile” will be examined before answering, “It is not going to happen anytime soon!” That Israel has never threatened any country with destruction, even after being attacked repeatedly since its rebirth, is a fact ignored by its critics.

The unhinged Facebook posts of Columbia University Iranian studies professor and Iranian native Hamid Dabashi reveal in lurid language his hatred of Israel:

It is now time the exact and identical widely intrusive scrutiny and control compromising the sovereignty of the nation-state of Iran and its nuclear program be applied to the European settler colony of Jewish apartheid state of Israel and its infinitely more dangerous nuclear program! There must be a global uproar against the thuggish vulgarity of Netanyahu and his Zionist gangsters in Israel and the U.S. Congress to force them to dismantle their nuclear program–systematically used to terrorize and murder Palestinian people and steal the rest of Palestine!

Elsewhere, Dabashi attacks adversaries of the JCPOA, including “Israel, Saudi Arabia, the U.S. Neocons, and their treacherous expat Iranian stooges masquerading as ‘Opposition,’” calling them a “terrorizing alliance,” a “gang of murderous war criminals,” and “shameless warmongers.”

Willful blindness to Iran’s brutal, terrorist-supporting regime, moral equivocation, and an irrational hatred for Israel and the West characterize the fawning support enjoyed by the mullahs from these and other professors of Middle East studies. In place of objective, rigorously researched plans for countering Iran’s aggression and advancing the safety of America and its allies, they regurgitate the crudest propaganda from Teheran. Until their field of study is thoroughly reformed, their advice—such as it is—should and must be utterly ignored.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Chicago Muslim pleads guilty to attempting to aid jihad terror group

Three fake “Islamophobic hate crimes” the media ran with

VIDEO: Victim of Muslim Rape Gangs Speaks Out

On this special episode of The Glazov Gang, we are joined by Toni Bugle, the founder of M.A.R.I.A.S. (Mothers against Radical Islam and Sharia).

She came on the show to discuss her victimization at the hands of Muslim grooming/rape gangs — and her efforts to help victims and to protect future potential victims of a barbaric ingredient of Islamic Jihad. 

EDITORS NOTE: The Glazov Gang is a fan-generated program. Please donate to keep it alive, subscribe to its YouTube Channel and LIKE it on Facebook. For details on advertising on our show or arranging your own appearance on a special segment, email us at theglazovgang@gmail.com.

MAP OF LOCATIONS OF RAPE GANGS IN THE UK:

muslim rape gangs map

RELATED ARTICLES:

Only a matter of time: Islamic State jihadis in UK ready to attack

UK allows jihadi preacher to stay in country despite “extremist” views

Pope Francis: Rejection of Migrants “an act of war”

Pope Francis has been chastising Europe for years now for not welcoming the hordes of migrants arriving on European shores and across its eastern borders.  There is nothing new here.   Apparently he must have gone to Lampedusa again.

I wonder how many migrants have been ‘welcomed’ to live at Vatican City? Does anyone know? Has anyone asked?

Meanwhile, British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond is quoted as saying: “marauding” migrants threatened the British “standard of living,” which brought howls of criticism from members of the ‘human rights industrial complex.’

Philip-Hammond_3024915b

British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond

From the UK Independent:

Speaking to a youth group, he said the situation where desperate migrants were bounced from country to country seeking shelter was “an unresolved conflict… and this is war, this is violence, it’s called murder”.

In his speech on the island of Lampedusa in southern Italy the Pope called on European powers to do more to help the migrants that have been arriving on the island, according to the Gazzetta del Sud.Pope Francis has called the rejection of migrants fleeing violence “an act of war”.

Speaking to a youth group, he said the situation where desperate migrants were bounced from country to country seeking shelter was “an unresolved conflict… and this is war, this is violence, it’s called murder”.

In his speech on the island of Lampedusa in southern Italy the Pope called on European powers to do more to help the migrants that have been arriving on the island, according to the Gazzetta del Sud.

No surprise, the Independent goes on to criticize David Cameron quoting the Mayor of Calais calling Cameron a racist and then says this (below).  Frankly, at the moment the UK is holding firm and trying to save itself from the invasion that is washing across southern Europe and into Germany and most of the rest of Europe.

Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond caused further controversy on Sunday when he told the BBC he believed “marauding” migrants threatened the British “standard of living”. Amnesty International condemned the remarks saying they were “mean spirited” and “shameful”.

For more in the ‘Invasion of Europe’ at RRW, go here.

American Muslim Leaders Shocked, Shocked to Find that Terrorism Is Going On Here!

Over at PJ Media, I ask why authorities are still taking mosque leaders’ statements after terror arrests at face value.

It’s an iconic moment in American cinema, from Casablanca: Captain Renault tells Rick Blaine that he is “shocked! shocked!” to discover that gambling is going on in his establishment, and that it will be immediately closed — just as a clerk approaches and hands Renault his winnings. Muslims aren’t generally known for cinematic tributes, but mosque leaders around the country deserve Oscars for how they reenact this scene every time a jihadi is apprehended. For how long are law enforcement officials going to fall for the act?

The latest example comes courtesy of Arafat Nagi of Lackawanna, New York, who was arrested last week for recruiting for the Islamic State. According to WIVB, the local Muslim community is “devastated and in shock.”

In shock, eh? Dr. Khalid Qazi, President of the Muslim Public Affairs Council of Western New York, said that Nagi “had withdrawn from the community about three years ago. He had some domestic issues, some family issues.” Ah, that does explain it. Qazi is implying that Nagi was a bit unbalanced, leading to his involvement with the Islamic State, and that if he hadn’t withdrawn from the peaceful Muslim community three years ago, this wouldn’t have happened.

But wait: back in 2002, Nagi had wanted to join the Lackawanna Six – six local Muslims who attended an al-Qaeda training camp.

According to Qazi, Nagi only withdrew — he wasn’t expelled for his “extremism,” but withdrew — from the local Muslim community only three years ago. That means that for ten years after trying to join an al-Qaeda group, Nagi was presumably a member in good standing of the local Muslim community.

Clearly his recent arrest shows that he hadn’t given up his “extremism.” Yet when Nagi is arrested, the local community is “in shock”? They knew for at least thirteen yearsthat Nagi was a supporter of the violent jihad doctrine they supposedly reject and abhor. What was shocking about his arrest?

Qazi was, of course, posturing for the media and law enforcement authorities, and there is no indication that either didn’t wholly swallow his act. Indeed, despite the fact that this same act has played all over the country, it always gets rave reviews.

It played in Birmingham, Alabama, last April, when a young Muslim woman fled to the Islamic State. A spokesman for the girl’s parents — why did they need a spokesman? — said:

For them this is worse than losing the life of a child, to have them join such a horrible, horrible gang of violent extremists. Nothing can describe the pain they are facing.

The spokesman was none other than Hassan Shibly, a lawyer and the chief executive director of the Florida chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a group with established ties to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood.

Shibly claimed that the woman had withdrawn from the local Muslim community a year before joining the Islamic State, and added:

The reason she withdrew from the community is because the Muslim community is very vocal against groups like ISIS … she made the decision based on her communication online with them that she wanted to join them.

He didn’t bother to explain why the peaceful Islam the young woman presumably learned from the community and her shocked and devastated parents wasn’t able to withstand the appeal of a supposedly twisted, hijacked version of the religion. He didn’t have to: he could be secure in the knowledge that no one would ask him to do so.

And so it goes. After the July 16 jihad massacre of U.S. Marines in Chattanooga by Mohammod Abdulazeez, the Times Free Press reported that Bassam Issa, president of the Islamic Society of Greater Chattanooga:

… has said how shocked he was to find out that a young man who went to his mosque harbored radical ideas. He doesn’t see how anything Abdulazeez learned locally could have led to such thinking or to such a tragic plan.

And last April, a Muslim woman named Noelle Valentzas was arrested for plotting, along with another Muslim woman, a jihad bombing on U.S. soil. Valentzas’ husband, Abu Bakr, said of his wife’s arrest:

I don’t believe any of it, period. We are all shocked, the whole community. That’s not who she is.

But back in 2007, Abu Bakr was photographed at the Muslim Day Parade in New York City with the black flag of jihad. He carried it at other parades as well.

A particularly hammy version of this play-acting came in Rochester, New York in June 2014, when Mufid Elfgeeh, a Muslim local restaurant owner, was arrested for plotting to murder American soldiers. Sareer Fazili, President of the Islamic Center of Rochester, said:

Our religion is one of peace and one of submission and I think all of our friends in the faith based community know that. … I’m very shocked, I’m very upset, very disappointed that somebody who claims they follow Islam, the same religion that has been taught for so many years would think that he is within the bounds of our teachings because nothing could be further from the truth.

He was shocked to hear that someone who professes to be a Muslim would commit an act of violence? Really?

Had Sareer Fazili never heard of 9/11? 7/7? The Bali bombing? The Boston Marathon bombing? The Fort Hood massacre? Or any of the thousands of other jihad attacks perpetrated by people who not only profess to be Muslim, but say that when they bomb and kill they are following the teachings of Islam?

Fazili also said, according to WHEC, that he “does not believe Elfgeeh has ever been a member of the Islamic Center.” That may be, but it is noteworthy how so many devout Muslims who turn to violent jihad — Elfgeeh had tweeted “about the prophet Muhammad and terrorist groups fighting in the name of Allah” — never seem to go to mosque.

Every time there is a jihad attack or plot in the U.S., local Muslims say that no one knew him, he never went to mosque. Yet by their own words, these people are fanatically devout and observant….

Read the rest here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Iraqi archbishop: US more concerned about image of Islam than victims of persecution

New Jersey Muslim charged with conspiring to support the Islamic State

Killing Babies – Betraying Israel – God Bless America?

Josh, in Israel, emailed me. He said they are “living under the specter of the Iran deal and see where this is all heading.” They are extremely concerned. Josh said,“For starters what even gave him the right to lead such “negotiations” on behalf of the world? Who anointed him king, anyway?” Josh concluded, Either Obama’s deal is insane or deliberate.” 

Well Josh, the U.S. mainstream media has for all intents and purposes made Obama king. Concerned Americans say we are starting to resemble a banana republic (with a dishonest government ignoring laws). The MSM aggressively promotes whatever Obama wants the public to know and blocks was he does not.

For example: Everyone knows about the shooting of Cecil the lion. Due to a MSM insidious blackout of the story, 70% of Americans do not know about the real-life horror movie happening behind the walls of Planned Parenthood. The vile butchers at PP are illegally black marketing baby body parts (mostly black). A cause for PP staff to high-five and celebrate is when they score an intact dead baby because the profit is higher

Think about that folks. The MSM has made sure the masses know nothing about Obama and Democrats supporting and covering up the PP illegal baby body parts chop shop scandal. And yet, everyone knows about the death of a lion.

The MSM also makes sure (King) Obama can lie with impunity. In my youth, I naively thought public officials cannot lie because we have video. If Obama lies to America and the MSM refuses to call him on it, does it make a sound?

Yo Morgan, I need you and that Black dude (Jack Black) to sell my nuke deal to my peeps. Whenever Obama wants to scam blacks his language becomes more urban. Black actor Morgan Freeman and other Hollywood liberals produced a video, “#Iran Deal is Awesome!” – to sell Obama’s nightmarish deal. The lie-filled video is an outrageous insult to Americans’ intelligence. 

Clearly, Obama knows the MSM will help sell his lies. The Iran ego-driven irresponsible nuke deal is Obama urinating on America and Israel’s head while his minions tell us his golden nectar is divine rain that will ultimately produce beautiful flowers of peace. Frustratingly, black race loyalists, white guilt ridden Obama sycophants and Leftists will sigh and say, “Isn’t he wonderful?”

My announcer will tell you how Obama’s deal screws everyone.

Thanks Lloyd, and hereeee’s what Iran gets – over one hundred billion dollars to further its role as the world’s greatest exporters of terrorism. That’s right folks. The U.S. will be funding terrorism against itself.

The guy Obama made the deal with, Ayatollah Khamenei, along with Iranian hardliners chant, “Death to America!” Ayatollah Khamenei’s new book, “Palestine” instructs how to outsmart the U.S. and destroy Israel. Obama says chill-out, Khamenei does not mean it

Obama says inspectors will have 24/7 access to Iran’s nuclear facilities to insure they are not making a bomb. Not true. The deal says inspectors must give Iran 24 days notice – which Iran can stretch even longer. Do I really need to elaborate on the absurdity of this Obama concession?

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Obama’s nuke deal will spark a middle east nuclear arms race. Well duh! If the neighborhood bully gets a gun, doesn’t self-preservation dictate that neighbors rush to acquire guns to defend themselves from the bully? Is Obama that stupid or is he, as Josh suggested, “deliberately” endangering Israel?

But wait folks, there’s more. Everyone on the planet knows Iran will break the deal and immediately pursue a nuclear bomb. In 2013, Obama backed Israel’s right to use force to stop them. Unbelievably, Obama’s Iran nuke deal requires the U.S. to defend Iran against Israel. Can you imagine the U.S. actually fighting our ally to protect terrorism? How satanic is that?

Regarding Israel (Genesis 12:3): “And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee.” – God

And now, back to you, Lloyd!

To my fellow black Christians who are going along with Obama’s evil deal, you should be ashamed of yourselves; choosing skin-color loyalty over God’s chosen people.

The Bible says, “Before I formed thee in thy mother’s womb, I knew thee…” To provide intact dead babies for its clients, PP abortion doctors deliver the entire baby except for the head (partial birth abortion). Then, the doctor inserts scissors into the base of the baby’s skull and forces the scissors up into its brain to kill the baby. Whether you are a Bible believer or not, your gut tells you this is evil. This fall, congress will vote whether or not to continue giving PP billions of taxpayer dollars in support of this evil.

In less the 50 days, congress will vote thumps up or down on Obama’s insane Iran nuke deal. Thumps up equals officially turning our backs on our ally, Israel.

Brother and sister Americans, if congress fails us on either of these two crucial issues, how can we expect God to bless America?

Before You Get Too Excited about Presidential Candidate Ms. Carly

Sorry, if I will offend some of you, but I am pretty much a one issue voter.  The future of America is not going to hang on what happens to Obamacare or any other social program.

The future of America and indeed the future of Western Civilization hangs on one thing only—what we do about immigration and specifically what happens with the migration (the Hijra) of Islamic supremacists the world over.

Carly Fiorina, former chairman and chief executive officer of Hewlett-Packard Co. and chairman of Good360, listens at the Bloomberg Link Economic Summit in Washington, D.C., U.S., on Tuesday, April 30, 2013. The Bloomberg Washington Summit gathers key administration officials, CEOs, governors, lawmakers, and economists to assess the economy and debate the path beyond the fiscal cliff. Photographer: Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Carly Fiorina, former chairman and chief executive officer of Hewlett-Packard Co.

Fox News seems to be making sure that Carly Fiorina moves up in the polls.  Yes, I agree, she spoke well in the debate last week.  But, I won’t let you forget what she said right after 9/11.  It’s not her facts (or her lack of facts) that is a problem, it is her judgement in uttering the words she spoke.

Here, Gates of Vienna, reposts an article that was written in June.  It begins:

“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 of 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.

Continue reading……

We will be waiting for Ms. Fiorina to tell us how wrong she was!

By the way, she has a C- score on immigration at NumbersUSA.

RELATED ARTICLE: Des Moines, Iowa: State scrambling to figure out how to pay for refugee influx as fed money dries up!

RELATED VIDEO:

Arming Children: The Islamic State and Mexico’s Gulf Cartel

There is much talk about disarming law abiding American citizens by the Obama administration but little done to stop the use of children as hit-men by Mexican drug cartels  and soldiers by the Islamic State.

This is the worst form of child abuse – using children to kill, slaughter, behead, assassinate.

child soldier of Islamic StatePamela Geller in her column “Generation Kill: The Child Soldiers of the Islamic State” writes:

Look at this child [right]. Remember him. This is your children’s future.

This is who your children will face in the future. These children are being trained to kill. These children are being schooled in the sharia and jihad. Our children are being disarmed and misled about the genocidal ideology behind this war. Sheeps to slaughter.

The below video, called “The Cubs of Dijla” in a reference to the young boys being indoctrinated and groomed to fight, shows children as the clip’s primary speakers. They deliver monologues and recite verses of the Quran, marking the first time the Islamic State has depicted boys—one as young as three—speaking at length directly into the camera.

gulf drug cartel child killerMia De Graff writing for the Daily Mail reports:

These are the baby-faced members of Mexico’s menacing Gulf Cartel [right].

In an unprecedented series of photos, scores of hitmen have unmasked themselves to apparently prove: ‘We aren’t afraid to show our faces, we want you to see nothing but the Gulf Cartel.’

Shockingly, some look as young as 12.

The Gulf Cartel is one of Mexico’s oldest, dating back to the Prohibition era.

With roots in the United States, Europe, West Africa, Asia, Central America, and South America, the organization wields significant power over the drug-trafficking trade – despite losing ground to rivals in recent years.

Read more.

Here is a video about Mexican drug cartels:

The use of children as killers is as bad as using children as sex slaves. Evil is evil. Not to call this evil is a travesty. Sadly the Gulf Cartel and Islamic State continue to recruit, train and use children to kill — these are the baby-faced hit men of the 21st Century.

Iran: Decision Time For Democrats

The British media traditionally refers to the month of August as ‘silly season’, but apart from the blanket coverage of the sad fate of Cecil the lion, this silly season has been notable for being remarkably un-silly. Received wisdom has it that with Parliament away there are no political stories for the media to report on. But nothing could be further from the truth this year.

The migrant crisis in the Mediterranean and stretching to Calais shows no sign of letting up just because MPs are in their constituencies or on their holidays. And nor are the stories of the continuously emerging awfulness of the Iran deal slowing just because Parliament is not in session. The fact – not very surprising – is that politics goes on all the time as usual, whether Parliament is in session or not.

It must be hoped, however, that the break does some good to our political class. Standing back from the day-to-day running of Westminster can provide an opportunity to survey the real political landscape rather than getting bogged down in the procedural issues which take up so much of any politician’s day. Watching the ongoing political fight in Washington is a reminder of this.

At the time of writing a number of very significant leading Democrats look like they are going to come out against their own President’s deal with Iran. In doing so it is perfectly possible that they are performing career hara-kiri. It seems inevitable that whether Congress votes against the deal or not the President, and those around him, are unlikely to forgive or do much to support the future of those who have voted against them. Chicago politics can work just as easily in Washington.

But the Democrats in particular who choose to vote against the deal are doing so for an extraordinary and admirable reason: they are willing to put their concern for the future of their country and the future of the world ahead of concerns over the future of their careers. It is not too cynical to say that this order of priorities is not always present in politics. But this is an important moment. Even if the President gets his way with the deal, the rebellion of a large enough number of members of his own party could still succeed in signalling just what a mistake America and her allies are making.

New stories have emerged this week of the Iranian regime’s genocidal rhetoric against America and her allies. Perhaps people are so used to this that it has become background noise. But this background noise is going on whilst in the foreground the same regime is getting the biggest financial, diplomatic and military boost it could possibly ever have. If you stand back from everything else that is going on this is the big story. What would be silly would be not to recognise that.


mendozahjs

FROM THE DIRECTOR’S DESK 

It is 70 years since the detonation of an atomic bomb at Hiroshima introduced the world to a terrifying new form of warfare in the form of nuclear weapons. Since that time much effort has been expended by nations seeking to obtain this technology, with Iran being but the latest example. Concurrently, equal attempts have been made to ensure further proliferation does not occur.

In recent weeks, I have spent a fair bit of time defending Britain’s own nuclear arsenal in the face of assaults from those who would wish to see us give up our independent nuclear deterrent when the time comes shortly to replace our ageing Trident capability. While no reasonable person could be against the idea of controlled multilateral disarmament – and great strides have been made in this direction since the peaking of nuclear arsenals in the 1980s – unilateral disarmament is quite a different prospect. It would strip the UK of the ultimate deterrent at a time of increasing, rather than decreasing, global instability, with any number of major threats on the horizon. Which British Prime Minister could credibly give up our nuclear weapons at a time when Mr Putin menaces Europe’s and NATO’s eastern borders, and the Middle East is at its most uncertain point in a century, for example?

I rather fear that the goal of ‘Global Zero’ – the push to physically eliminate nuclear weapons or to put them beyond possible use – is also doomed to failure. While noble in intent, the obvious flaw in this approach is that you cannot uninvent technology that has been invented and that as a consequence, the temptation to cheat and keep a small stockpile is just too great. Would we really trust Russia and China to give up all their weapons if we did, let alone Pakistan and North Korea?

Unfortunate as it may be, nuclear weapons are here to stay. The challenge remains to regulate their numbers, avoid their use and prevent dangerous states like Iran from acquiring them.

Dr Alan Mendoza is Executive Director of The Henry Jackson Society
Follow Alan on Twitter: @AlanMendoza

Why doesn’t the Pope go to Syria?

A good opportunity for “Muslim-Christian dialogue”:

Let’s put the pope’s Muslim-Christian “dialogue” policy to the test. Here’s the perfect destination for the next papal trip: Raqqa, the de facto capital of the Islamic State’s caliphate.

Last Sunday, Pope Francis called for the release of Gregorios Yohanna Ibrahim (the Syriac Orthodox archbishop of Aleppo), Boulos Yazigi (the Greek Orthodox bishop of Aleppo), and Italian Jesuit priest Paolo Dall’Oglio, who — if they are still alive — have all been held captive for two years now by Islamic jihadists in Syria. Said the pope:

I hope for a renewed commitment by the competent local and international authorities, so that these, our brothers, will soon be restored to freedom.

He must know that the “competent local and international authorities,” if there are any, aren’t going to do a thing to free these clerics.

If the pope wants it done right, he is going to have to do it himself – and in doing so, he can prove the value of the Church’s insistence and dependence upon “Muslim-Christian dialogue.”

The pope should go to Raqqa and appeal personally to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the Islamic State’s Caliph Ibrahim, for the release of Ibrahim, Yazigi, and Dall’Oglio. Pope Francis has said that “authentic Islam and the proper reading of the Koran are opposed to every form of violence,” and he has assiduously called for “dialogue” and denounced violence in virtually every situation. So he should go there, and display the correctness of his recommendations by initiating an in-person “dialogue” with the caliph or other appropriate Islamic State representatives, during which he can explain to them how they are misunderstanding the Qur’an and Islam.

This will fix everything: not only will the Islamic State forthwith release the bishops and the priest, but they will lay down their arms, and distribute flowers to all the children. The power of “dialogue” over all forms of violence will be abundantly established before the eyes of a world struck with awe, yet again, at the wisdom of this pope and the compelling power of his humble, saintly personality.

As he prepares for this “dialogue” trip, however, the pope may face resistance from his own bishops.

Robert McManus, the bishop of Worcester, Massachusetts, two years ago (ironically not long before Ibrahim, Yazigi, and Dall’Oglio were abducted) summed up the prevailing view of the U.S. Catholic bishops:

Talk about extreme, militant Islamists and the atrocities that they have perpetrated globally might undercut the positive achievements that we Catholics have attained in our inter-religious dialogue with devout Muslims.

So what is Pope Francis doing even talking about these abducted clerics? He should keep quiet about such matters, so as to preserve the “dialogue.” Will Bishop McManus and the other American bishops, recognizing the dignity but also the limitations of his positions, humbly but unmistakably call him on the carpet and “oppose him to his face, because he stood condemned,” as St. Paul did to Francis’ first predecessor, St. Peter (Galatians 2:11)?

Of course they will say nothing, and Pope Francis will not go to Raqqa, because in both cases the concerned parties probably know full well that the sham of the “dialogue” policy would be exposed to the world.

The contemporary Catholic Church, especially in the West, has confused niceness with charity.

It may be nice to avoid unpleasant matters and to enjoy delicious hummus and pita down at the mosque, but it is not charitable to confirm Muslims in their bullying and supremacism by kowtowing to their wishes.

It is not charitable to keep silent about the atrocities they commit in the name of their religion and in accord with its teachings….

Read the rest here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Ex-Soviet army officer who converted to Islam guilty on jihad terror charges

“We are committed to being active participants in our society, but it has to be on Islam’s terms”

Former DIA Director: Obama made “willful decision” to support al-Qaeda and Muslim Brotherhood in Syria

Mehdi Hasan is a highly suspect analyst and Foreign Policy Journal appears to be a pro-jihad paleocon publication, and Al Jazeera is certainly a pro-jihad propaganda outlet. All that is noted, but if this transcript is accurate, former DIA director Michael Flynn is confirming that the Obama Administration knowingly decided to support al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria, and directly enabled the rise of the Islamic State. And given the Obama Administration’s general stance toward the global jihad and Islamic supremacism, what would be unbelievable about that?

In a sane political atmosphere, this would be enough to bring down the Obama presidency. Instead, it will get little notice and no action whatsoever.

“Rise of Islamic State was ‘a willful decision’: Former DIA Chief Michal [sic] Flynn,” by Brad Hoff, Foreign Policy Journal, August 7, 2015 (thanks to Joshua):

In Al Jazeera’s latest Head to Head episode, former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency Michael Flynn confirms to Mehdi Hasan that not only had he studied the DIA memo predicting the West’s backing of an Islamic State in Syria when it came across his desk in 2012, but even asserts that the White House’s sponsoring of radical jihadists (that would emerge as ISIL and Nusra) against the Syrian regime was “a willful decision.” [Lengthy discussion of the DIA memo begins at the 8:50 mark.]

Amazingly, Flynn actually took issue with the way interviewer Mehdi Hasan posed the question—Flynn seemed to want to make it clear that the policies that led to the rise of ISIL were not merely the result of ignorance or looking the other way, but the result of conscious decision making:

Hasan: You are basically saying that even in government at the time you knew these groups were around, you saw this analysis, and you were arguing against it, but who wasn’t listening?

Flynn: I think the administration.

Hasan: So the administration turned a blind eye to your analysis?

Flynn: I don’t know that they turned a blind eye, I think it was a decision. I think it was a willful decision.

Hasan: A willful decision to support an insurgency that had Salafists, Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood?

Flynn: It was a willful decision to do what they’re doing.

Hasan himself expresses surprise at Flynn’s frankness during this portion of the interview. While holding up a paper copy of the 2012 DIA report declassified through FOIA, Hasan reads aloud key passages such as, “there is the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist principality in Eastern Syria, and this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime.”

Rather than downplay the importance of the document and these startling passages, as did the State Department soon after its release, Flynn does the opposite: he confirms that while acting DIA chief he “paid very close attention” to this report in particular and later adds that “the intelligence was very clear.”

Lt. Gen. Flynn, speaking safely from retirement, is the highest ranking intelligence official to go on record saying the United States and other state sponsors of rebels in Syria knowingly gave political backing and shipped weapons to Al-Qaeda in order to put pressure on the Syrian regime:

Hasan: In 2012 the U.S. was helping coordinate arms transfers to those same groups [Salafists, Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qaeda in Iraq], why did you not stop that if you’re worried about the rise of quote-unquote Islamic extremists?

Flynn: I hate to say it’s not my job…but that…my job was to…was to ensure that the accuracy of our intelligence that was being presented was as good as it could be….

As Michael Flynn also previously served as director of intelligence for Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) during a time when its prime global mission was dismantling Al-Qaeda, his honest admission that the White House was in fact arming and bolstering Al-Qaeda linked groups in Syria is especially shocking given his stature….

RELATED ARTICLE: Iraqi Christian: Islamic State jihadis blinded me after I refused to convert to Islam

VIDEO: Preventing Prevent? Challenges to Counter-Radicalisation Policy On-Campus

The Henry Jackson Society (HJS) heard from Lloyd Randle, Former Prevent Engagement Officer, Hampshire Constabulary, Dr Usama Hasan, Senior Researcher at the Quilliam Foundation, and Rupert Sutton, Director of Student Rights at The Henry Jackson Society.

The speakers discussed the findings of the recent Student Rights report ‘Preventing Prevent: Challenges to Counter-Radicalisation Policy On-Campus’, on-the-ground experiences counter-radicalisation efforts, including the challenges posed by student opposition, and the narratives used by extremists to undermine efforts to challenge extremism on our campuses.

RELATED VIDEO: A team of Highbury College Media students produced this documentary into the world of radicalisation as a global concern and, more concerning, on our doorstep.

Greece in Chaos: 50,000 Muslim Refugees Arrived in July Alone

Invasion of Europe news…..

From Malta Today:

The Greek islands of Kos, Chios and Lesbos are in “total chaos” due to a heavy influx of refugees, the UN’s refugee agency UNHCR have warned.

The organisation said that around 50,000 migrants arrived in Greece in July alone, more arrivals than in the whole of 2014. The majority of them are refugees fleeing the wars in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan.

UNHCR European Director, Vincent Cochetel said that refugee facilities on the Greek islands are “totally inadequate” and called on the EU to do more to ease Greece off its burden.

“On most of the islands there is no reception capacity, people are not sleeping under any form of roof, so it’s total chaos on the islands,” he said. “After a couple of days they are transferred to Athens, there is nothing waiting for them in Athens.”

Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras admitted that his country was unable to cope and that Greece’s economic problems meant it was facing a humanitarian “crisis within a crisis”.

Meanwhile in the US, the border flood is apparently underway again as July numbers reveal, here.

Go here for our ‘Invasion of Europe’ archive.

What do you think? Could there be some planning in this invasion?