Clarion Project’s National Security Analyst Ryan Mauro examines some of the key challenges a president Donald Trump will likely face in office.
Clarion Project’s National Security Analyst Ryan Mauro examines some of the key challenges a president Donald Trump will likely face in office.
Cue the stories about how this has nothing to do with Islam, and about how local mosques are now fearing an “Islamophobic backlash.”
“5 Investigates: Suspect in Boston police shooting wrote of Islamic ‘rebirth,’ had several aliases,”WCVB, October 13, 2016 (thanks to Robert):
BOSTON —5 Investigates uncovered six aliases used by Kirk Figueroa, the man killed by Boston police after he shot two officers on Wednesday night in East Boston.
He took on an alias as he experienced what he called an Islamic “rebirth” in Africa.
The aliases, along with his seeming obsession with police and security, help make Figueroa a picture of contradictions and confusion: a 33-year-old man who started companies in Florida and other states focused on security and protection who yesterday nearly killed two police officers responding to a domestic violence call.
5 Investigates uncovered a job posting for “Police Protection” for one of those companies, Bailrunners. In it, Figueroa identifies himself as Muhummed Isa Al Mahdi. The ad said Al Mahdi was looking for people interested in helping him “hunt down fugitives and bring them to justice.”
5 Investigates also discovered a posting from Muhummed Isa on a website guide for mosques from October 2012. Isa wrote about his “rebirth as a baby into the Nation of Islam” following a trip to an area of Ethiopia and a mosque in South Africa.
Isa went on, writing that his unique and blessed journey was prepared and guided by Allah.
Most recently, Figueroa was using the name Kocoa Xango on social media, identifying himself as a police constable. His last post under that name came just a few hours before the fatal shooting, posting a video by Michelle Obama and then a picture of himself after getting a haircut….
Certain sections of the media have been reticent to identify Ahmad Khan Rahami’s Muslim identity in their coverage of his attack.
New York bomber Ahmad Khan Rahami, who stands accused of setting a pressure cooker bomb in Chelsea which injured 29 people on Saturday, has been charged in a criminal complaint. Rahami was arrested after a shootout on Monday.
He is also suspected of planting bombs in Seaside Park and Elizabeth, New Jersey.
After the shootout, police recovered a journal containing Islamist rhetoric and praise for known terrorist groups and ideologies.
“I looked for guidance came Sheikh Anwar, Brother Adnani, Dawla. Said it clearly – Attack the kuffar (non-believer) in the back yard,” Rahami wrote, referencing American Al-Qaeda ideologue Anwar al-Awlaki who was killed in a drone strike in 2011 and the Islamic State’s spokesperson Abu Muhammad al Adnani who was killed in August. (Dawla is an honorific term for a ruler or senior statesman.)
Adnani issued frequent calls to Westerners to carry out terrorist attacks within their home countries.
Rahami also wrote, “The sounds of bombs will be heard in the streets.”
The federal complaint makes mention of Rahami’s support for Al-Qaeda, but not his support for the Islamic State. However, an official told Fox News that more charges and complaints would most likely be brought and the complaint may be included later on.
Pictures of the journal, which is covered in blood from the shootout, are available on Fox News.
Yet networks such as NBC downplayed or ignored Rahami’s faith. The Media Research Center’s Dan Gainor assessed coverage of the attack and found that many news outlets sought to downplay possible links to terrorism as a motivation.
ABC and CBS focused on the fact that Rahami’s family filed a suit a few years ago against the local mayor and police alleging they had been subjected to anti-Muslim harassment.
USA Today wrote a piece on Tuesday which did not mention Rahami’s Muslim faith.
There are several reasons why the press and the government might want to downplay the Islamist motivations behind a terrorist attack:
To Avoid Mass Panic
The desire to avoid mass panic by presenting the incident as calmly as possible may be a factor. While some may say this is a laudable goal, it sacrifices the virtue of accuracy. Media are supposed to bring their audience the truth in order to help them make informed decisions about the world.
Also, it remains questionable if an incident such as this would cause mass panic in the American public.
To Downplay the Influence of Islamist Terror Groups
The press and government may think that they are avoiding strengthening Islamist terrorist groups by not giving them the oxygen of publicity for their ideas. If an attack carried out in the name of Islamist terrorism is not widely reported as such, then, so says this logic, the attack will be less effective.
Yet, if we are unable to accurately discern the motives we will not be able to construct effective solutions. Misdiagnosing the problem can lead to misapplication of solutions and therefore it behooves the media to give all the information it can in their coverage.
To Avoid Accusations of Islamophobia
Our politically correct society is hyper-focused on avoiding accusations of Islamophobia. Highlighting the perpetrator’s Islamic faith may be perceived as causing undue distress to the Muslim community by putting them under the spotlight. No one wants to be a bigot or to be accused of bigotry. Neither do people want to make a community uncomfortable in an increasingly tense climate.
But the rationale is misguided. The fastest way to combat anti-Muslim bigotry is to deal with the menace of Islamist extremism and put a stop to it. Once that is done, relations between Muslims and non-Muslims will improve and anti-Muslim bigots will lose credibility.
Contrary to the goal of decreasing bigotry, obfuscating in this way actually increases it, since people feel there is a cover-up.
Lack of Importance in the Eyes of the Media
News organizations may have actually convinced themselves that Rahami’s Muslim faith is not an important part of the story. However, if this is really their reason, they are simply wrong. As his own journal shows, his radical ideology was a major factor in motivating him to carry out the attack.
Failing to mention Rahami’s faith is not only poor journalism, it’s an omission of necessary facts.
EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of Ahmed Rahami superimposed over his journal. (Photo: © House Homeland Security Committee)
Women are so despised and devalued in Islamic culture that it leads to this sort of thing. And even though this article says that Muslim clerics and the Taliban object to the practice, the Qur’an says that in Paradise, the blessed will be attended not only by the famous virgins, but by boys like pearls as well:
“Those are the ones brought near in the Gardens of Pleasure, a company of the former peoples and a few of the later peoples, on thrones woven, reclining on them, facing each other. There will circulate among them young boys made eternal with vessels, pitchers and a cup from a flowing spring.” — Qur’an 56:11-18
“And they will be given to drink a cup whose mixture is of ginger, a fountain within Paradise named Salsabeel. There will circulate among them young boys made eternal. When you see them, you would think them scattered pearls. And when you look there, you will see pleasure and great dominion.” — Qur’an 76:17-20
And the U.S. military leadership was so intent on pursuing our futile, fruitless, wasteful, pointless misadventure in Afghanistan that they became accessories to this behavior. The whole lot of them should be dishonorably discharged.
“Navy analysis found that a Marine’s case would draw attention to Afghan ‘sex slaves,’” by Dan Lamothe, Washington Post, September 1, 2016:
Last fall, the Navy Department had a controversial disciplinary case before it: Maj. Jason C. Brezler had been asked by Marine colleagues to submit all the information he had about an influential Afghan police chief suspected of abusing children. Brezler sent a classified document in response over an unclassified Yahoo email server, and he self-reported the mistake soon after. But the Marine Corps recommended that he be discharged for mishandling classified material.
The Navy Department, which oversees the Marine Corps, had the ability to uphold or overturn the decision. However, rather than just looking at the merits of the case, Navy officials also assessed that holding new hearings on the case would renew attention on the scandal surrounding child sex abuse in Afghanistan, according to military documents newly disclosed in federal court.
The documents, filed Tuesday in a lawsuit by Brezler against the Navy Department and Marine Corps, also show that Marine and Navy officials in Afghanistan were aware in 2012 of allegations of abuse against children by the Afghan police chief but that the chief was allowed to keep his position in Helmand province anyway. This became a major issue after a teenage boy who worked for the chief — and allegedly was abused by him — opened fire on a U.S. base Aug. 10, 2012, killing three Marines and badly wounding a fourth.
The five-page legal review, written last October by Lt. Cmdr. Nicholas Kassotis for Vice Adm. James W. Crawford III, the judge advocate general of the Navy, recommended that the Marine Corps’ actions against Brezler be upheld. Calling for a new administrative review, known as a Board of Inquiry, would delay actions in the case another six to nine months and possibly increase attention on the case, “especially in the aftermath of significant media attention to the allegations regarding the practice of keeping personal sex slaves in Afghanistan,” Kassotis wrote. A month later in November, acting assistant Navy secretary Scott Lutterloh upheld the Marine Corps’ decision.
Brezler’s case has drawn new attention in recent months as critics of presidential candidate Hillary Clinton have compared her email controversy to Brezler’s, noting that the officer’s military career is on the brink of being over. He sued the Marine Corps and Navy Department in 2014, saying that he was a victim of reprisal for discussing his case with a member of Congress, and it has languished in court since. Brezler wants to block his dismissal, which is now on hold.
Navy and Marine Corps officials declined to discuss the case or the new documents filed in it, citing the pending litigation. A spokesman for the Justice Department, which is handling the lawsuit for the government, also declined to comment.
The Navy Department’s observation about Brezler’s case was made as another U.S. service member’s career was in jeopardy because of his response to alleged child sex abuse in Afghanistan. In that instance, Army Sgt. 1st Class Charles Martland made headlines after the Army decided last year to involuntarily separate him from the service because of a reprimand he had received for hitting an Afghan Local Police (ALP) official in 2011 after the man laughed about kidnapping and raping a teenage boy. The Army overturned its decision in April and allowed Martland, a Green Beret, to stay in the military after Rep. Duncan D. Hunter (R-Calif.) intervened.
The Martland case opened a dialogue in which numerous veterans of the war in Afghanistan said they were told to ignore instances of child sex abuse by their Afghan colleagues. The Defense Department’s inspector general then opened an investigation into the sexual assault reports and how they were handled by U.S. military officials who knew about them.
Brezler’s attorney, Michael J. Bowe, said Wednesday in an email that his client is entitled to a “real review” of his case — “not a whitewash designed to avoid uncomfortable press stories about child rape by our ‘partners’ in Afghanistan.
“Our service members deserve better,” he added….
How did a burkini ban imposed in more than 30 seaside municipalities become the center of international scorn? France, reeling in the aftermath of allahu akhbar mass murders, suddenly becomes the bad guy? Videos, some of them staged provocations, of innocent Islamically dressed women, victims of “police brutality” on French beaches replace the horrifying reality of the dead and the maimed on the Promenade des Anglais in Nice, and hardly anyone notices the paradox?
First of all, it’s not a burkini. The catchy misnomer is good marketing but it does not describe the hijabathing suit that covers a woman from head to toe, leaving only the face, the hands, and the feet exposed. Unless it’s supposed to mean a transition from burqa to bikini? More likely vice versa! As it stands today, it’s nautical miles away from a bikini and the gaggles of ladies performing in front of the French embassy in London and similar locations are paddling in bad faith. “No one can tell me what to wear,” they declaim, echoing sharia -friendly slogans we’ve heard before. Europe is pockmarked with neighborhoods controlled by sharia promoters who most certainly do tell women what to wear. And punish them if they do not comply. In one of countless “honor” murders in France the parents of a young man who burned a woman alive defended him with this straightforward explanation: she wore makeup.
Hala Gorani (CNN International) invited two Muslim women to comment on the French burkini ban. One, dressed in Western clothes, is against the burkini and against the ban. Walking in a neighborhood in Bradford she heard men who did not know she understood their language tearing her apart for showing her face. The other guest, her head and neck enclosed in an opaque winding sheet and the rest of what must be her body hidden inside a thick-skinned jilbab, summed up the French burkini ban as “white men telling brown women what to wear.” The current French government is a stickler for parity but that doesn’t penetrate the young woman’s hijab. From her viewpoint, the president is a white man, the male and female cabinet ministers are a white man, the naughty burkini ban is a white man’s insult to Muslim women.
Islamically correct neighborhoods in our modern Western countries are modelled on Islamic nations in which women are most vehemently told what they can wear. Tourists, businesswomen, wives of heads of state, female politicians, and journalists cover their arms and legs and wrap their heads in scarves more accurately described as hijab when they tread those grounds.
Daughters or granddaughters of bra-burners frolic on a makeshift beach in front of a French embassy, arm in arm with their Muslim sisters whose mothers or grandmothers fled oppressive Islamic lands. Egged on by the usual battalions of reporters in prestigious media, they scold the intolerant French. Nobody can tell you what to wear? Tell me, American and British sisters, can you go topless on your beaches? Can you wear street clothes in the swimming pool? Of course not, and everyone knows. It’s my choice to cover myself? Women who “freely choose” to hide their bodies also accept a wide range of constraints and impositions that may include genital mutilation and purdah. But this ad hoc Sisterhood equates the choice of Islamically hiding one’s body with Women’s Liberation! Contraception, abortion, sexual freedom, the right to be a bus driver, party all night, stay alone in a hotel without being branded a prostitute…and the right to swathe my body in yards of fabric to stifle its improper sexual invitation.
What’s not French about a burkini? asks one sassy progressive. Didn’t Victorian bathing costumes cover women from head to toe?
All the right-thinking commentators, newspapers of reference, international TV networks, and cutesy protestors shook fingers of reprobation at the French, repeating the same storyline, the same clichés, being shocked by the same (probably staged) incident, and not daring to dip a toe into the ocean of evidence that stretches out to the horizon.
The basic premise is: everything Islamic is by definition harmless, benevolent, justified, justifiable, and totally disconnected from that nasty “terrorism” mistakenly connected to the noble religion of Islam and its Muslim populations. There is nothing reprehensible about encouraging or forcing women to hide their bodies, the choices of Muslims are always free and compatible with life in modern democracies, any suggestion to the contrary is a disgraceful stigmatization and, what’s more, feeds the flames of “terrorism.”
It follows that the burkini ban is an act of gratuitous hostility by right wing mayors. The honorable ladies and gentlemen of the Human Rights League (a paragon of anti-Zionism) and the (questionable) Collective against Islamophobia rightfully challenged the shameful ban. Decent people everywhere sighed with relief when the highest administrative court, le Conseil d’Etat, suspended the ban in one commune, Villeneuve-Loubet. Case closed? Not so fast. Most of the mayors are maintaining the ban. The plaintiffs will have to challenge all of them collectively or each one individually. The debate has not ended with the August 26th decision, it has just begun. Lawmakers are preparing bills that will stand up to scrutiny by the Courts. Despite the lack of support from his own administration, Prime Minister Manuel Valls has not backed down. 64% of French people polled in the heat of the controversy support for the ban. By next summer France will have a president from the Républicains party. And Islam will be a decisive issue in the elections.
Disgusting racists, far right extremists, xenophobes, retrograde repressive stubborn fools that don’t understand where the world is going? Diversity is the marching order. Respect for differences, moving over and making room for refugees and immigrants, appreciating their rich cultural heritage, living side by side in peace and harmony, that’s the way to go. So why don’t a majority of French people want to go there?
Is it because they’re hooked on laïcité? If ostentatious religious symbols are really the issue, the municipal decrees would really target the kippa, the cross, a priest’s collar, a nun’s headdress and, who knows, certain tattoos and esoteric symbols. Religious outfits don’t disturb the peace. I never saw an Orthodox Jewish woman in long sleeves and thick stockings on a French beach, but if she did spread a towel and roast in the sun, would it bother anyone? The problem is not religion it’s Islamic conquest, animated by genocidal hatred. And the Collective against Islamophobia is a bad actor in this drama.
Religiously speaking, the burkini is haram for the sharia compliant. See “the True Salaf” for precisions on how the female should be covered and cloistered. Incidentally, this long-winded repetitive contemporary guide sheds light on the free choice vaunted by covered Muslim women. Abu Hammad al Hayiti explains that it is Allah, not a father or a brother or a husband that prescribes hijab/jilbab. And the young ladies cherished by TV cameras dutifully inform us that no one is forcing them to dress that way. Though the burkini is definitely not sharia compliant its use can be condoned strategically as a step in the right direction. Hence the difficulty faced by French society in formulating sociologically and legally the terms of their resistance.
The burkini ban did not come out of a clear blue sky.
In the past 16 years, France has been the target of incessant and increasing Islamic hostility. First directed against Jews and then gradually extended to law enforcement, medical personnel, firefighters, teachers, institutions, and now undifferentiated civilians targeted in mass murders committed by European-born Muslims. Successive governments have tried awkwardly and ineffectively to protect citizens while bending over backwards at every blow to maintain social cohesion. Counter-productive foreign and domestic policies have, to say the least, contributed to this vulnerability to attack and subversion. The breaking point was reached in January 2015 and exacerbated by the massacres in November of that year, then Nice in July 2016, followed by the slaughter of a priest in a Normandy church, not to mention dozens of other atrocities springing from the same source, and dire warnings of more to come.
The Tunisian (with a French residence permit) who killed 86 and maimed or wounded more than a hundred in Nice on the 14th of July, came from Mkasen, a hotbed of Islamism a short distance from Sousse. The jihadi who gunned down 38 people, mainly British tourists, on a beach in Sousse in July 2015 also came from Mkasen. Daesh promised to perpetrate the same kind of executions on French beaches this summer. Heavily armed policemen and soldiers have been patrolling major beaches. All over France, festivals have been cancelled for security reasons. Tourism has dropped radically.
An event organized in a waterpark outside of Marseille open exclusively to women in burkini and children-girls of any age, boys up to the age of ten-blithely disregarding laws against discriminatory separation of men and women, was ultimately cancelled. It would take an entire volume to list all the occasions when this kind of disrespect for French law was tolerated. This time, with nerves still raw from the shock of Nice, the affront was too great.
On August 13th, the court validated a burkini ban imposed by the mayor of Cannes on July 28th. This kind of decree formulated by a local authority responsible for law and order is not a sophisticated text intended to stand for eternity. That same day, three Maghrebi brothers from Bastia (Corsica) decided to privatize a little beach in Sisco so the women could swim in full Islamic dress. They are accused of chasing other beachgoers away with physical and verbal abuse. Two Sisco men stood their ground. It ended with a huge fight, cars were burned, a man from Sisco was stabbed with a harpoon, it took several hours and 100 policemen to restore order.
Opinion makers and decision makers know about this. But most prefer to disconnect. They disconnect the Islamoswimsuit from the Salafists that prey on the Muslim community, strong arm imams, push their way into mosques, occupy territory, and exert relentless pressure for compliance. They disconnect the hijabathing suit from those nice Muslim men that no one would have suspected who turn out to be jihad mass murderers. They disconnect the escalation of Islamic dress that covers more and more Muslim women, by stages, from loose unrevealing clothes, to hijab, plus jilbab, and all the way to the niqab. And even though the niqab is banned in France, some defiant women continue to wear it, and small riots break out if the police intervene. Opinion makers disconnect the credible threats of beach massacres, the riot at Sisco, isolated assaults at other beaches and vacation spots this summer. They wrap the whole story in the image of a smiling attractive Muslim in a bright blue hijabathing suit, just doing her thing.
Inoffensive. That’s what the tolerant Western mind thinks. Everyone should be free to do as he pleases as long as it doesn’t harm the other. But that is not the meaning of hijab for those who impose it on Muslim women. A woman in hijab is “closed” and women with bared heads are consequentially “open,” the face & hair are the sex, and a bared “sex” is an invitation to penetration. Inoffensive? What of the countless “honor” killings? Women savagely murdered by family members because they were Westernized. Education Minister Najat Vallaud Belkacem, in frontal opposition to the prime minister, decried the burkini ban that “stigmatizes Muslims and fans the flames of racism.” The minister has just presided over a program of mass murder & hostage drills in public schools because she knows, the government knows, people with sharp intuition know Daesh is planning to attack French schools. In full atrocity mode.
International public opinion, enflamed by what is perhaps a well-orchestrated campaign to portray France as shamefully Islamophobic, has practically ignored the Allahu Akhbar murder of a beautiful Eurasian from the UK by a French national named Smail Ayad. Mia Ayliffe Chung, Ayad, and two other men shared a small room with four bunk beds in a backpacker’s hostel in Queensland (Australia). The killer, who was reportedly infatuated with her, flew into a rage because she rejected his advances and took part in a glamour photo shoot. Backpackers at the hostel say he had been threatening for two weeks to massacre all of them. They thought it was a joke.
Another disconnect. And a tragic joke.
EDITORS NOTE: Ms. Poller is the author of “The Black Flag of Jihad Stalks the Republique”
The 14 juillet National Holiday fireworks were over, the horror began in Nice. A 19-ton semi-trailer truck went around the barrier and barreled down the famous beachfront Promenade des Anglais. The monster truck drove 2 kilometers, zigzagging to make direct hits, deliberately picking off babies in their strollers, before the driver was stopped in a shootout with police. At this writing the toll stands at 84 dead; 50, including 10 children, with life threatening injuries; and 150, including 54 children, less seriously injured. The mass murderer has been identified as a 31 year-old Tunisian, Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel, living in Nice on a residence permit, recently licensed to drive big trucks, father of three, separated from his wife since 2014. Bouhlel’s criminal record, including assault and battery, theft, and domestic violence, dates back to 2010, one year after he was granted a 10-year residence permit. He is under a restraining order obtained by his wife who has sued for divorce. He is described by several of his neighbors as a mean loner, with the exception of one who found him to be a nice guy, not at all religious, didn’t say his prayers, liked to dance the salsa and go out with the chicks.
On March 24th, Bouhlel was given a six-month suspended sentence for assaulting a motorist who had asked him to move his truck that was blocking traffic. The victim, Jean-Baptiste Ximenes, posted on Facebook his indignation that the man who had violently beaten him with a baseball bat, was left free…to commit mass murder.
An irascible young Tunisian armed with a 19-ton truck killed more than 80 civilians and the toll is expected to rise. In the truck he rented on July 11th –and was supposed to return on the 13th— Bouhlel was carrying two fake machine guns, a pierced grenade, a fake handgun and a real one that he used in the final shootout with the police. The death toll of the November 13th jihad attacks at the Bataclan, sidewalk cafés, and stadium in Paris is 130. That operation, masterminded from Syria, involved dozens of fighters trained in the caliphate or handling logistics in Europe. They traveled by complicated routes, some joined the “refugees” in Greece and snaked up to Belgium with them, probably recruiting a few shahids in the lot. They had safe houses, false passports, money, weapons, ammunition, explosive vests … Vastly disproportionate weapons and planning, give ghastly similar results Eighty-four dead, fifty maimed for life, the blue waters of the Côte d’Azur trembling with horror and outrage; 130 dead, countless maimed and marked for life, Parisian joie de vivre stunned….
But all of that may be nothing compared to what is coming next. Only the other day Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve warned that the “terrorists” might switch from “suicide” attacks to other methods like truck bombs and IEDS. The root motivation that inspires these mass killings passes through myriad disparate channels and achieves significant results. The focus on anecdotal details obscures that single source and delays our understanding of the war waged on the free world. It must be granted that the Hollande government, ineffectual as it may be, did not call for stricter control of semi-trailer truck rentals in the wake of the Nice attack. The investigation was handed over to Paris Prosecutor François Molins, and classified as a terrorist attack committed in collusion with a terrorist organization. In his first public declaration Molins explained: whether or not Bouhlel was in direct contact with Daesh, his heinous act responds to instructions given by the organization. Subsequently PM Manuel Valls maintained that Bouhlel was in fact connected to a radical Islamic movement.
Mournful ceremonials of sincere flowers & candles and solidarity light-shows in the colors of the afflicted nation after each mass killing give the illusion of exceptional incidents that can somehow be contained in a time frame, with a beginning a middle and an end. They are not appropriate to the reality of all-out war with no borders, no outlined battlefields, no predictable indicators except that the perpetrators will be Muslim, native born or converts. The most graphic illustration of this ceremonial confusion is the current state of la Place de la République in Paris. The national focal point of dignified grieving has been turned into a pigpen. Flowers, candles, and peace & love messages on the pedestal of the Marianne statue, symbol of the République, have been replaced by disgraceful graffiti left by the false hopes Nuit Debout movement. [http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/up-all-nightmare]
Unless and until democratic citizens have a comprehensive picture of jihad conquest they cannot be mobilized to defend their freedom and their lives. However dramatic, these mass killings have to be understood in their totality and accurately. We need determined leadership that will show the way to mobilization, not closure.
In a climate of national unity after the November attacks, President Hollande solemnly promised to take vigorous measures to protect the population from terrorism. Prime Minister Valls named it Radical Islam. Among these measures was the controversial proposal to strip the citizenship of dual nationals involved in supporting, planning or perpetrating these attacks. Under pressure from his Socialist majority President Hollande abandoned most of the promises. The other day, in his July 14th message to the nation, the president announced that the state of emergency declared in the wake of the attacks and repeatedly extended for three-month periods would not be renewed when it expires on July 26th. As if the very real danger hanging over French civilians could be dissipated by a governmental decision. He reversed this decision on the 15th.
And that’s the least of the miscalculations. Since March 31st and despite its own state of emergency declaration, the government has allowed countless protest demonstrations against a labor reform law, even though every single march ended up with vicious attacks against the police. Hundreds of policemen were injured, some seriously. And all were humiliated. At least half a million euros worth of damage to public and private property was committed. On May 18th a policeman and woman narrowly escaped death when their patrol car was smashed and torched. The policeman was beaten as he fled the flames. On June 15th, seven two-story plate glass windows of the Necker Children’s Hospital were smashed, teargas seeped into the building, health care personnel were unable to reach the hospital, and young patients were terrified. The Nuit Debout movement occupied la Place de la République for months, damaging property, generating attacks on the police, preaching anarchy and sedition. The mass occupation of the public square made a mockery of the state of emergency, which was high on the movement’s list of sins against the people. “Down with the state of emergency, down with the state!” By allowing the Nuit Deboutniks to congregate, agitate, firebomb the police and deface the monument of the Republic the government displayed its lack of resolve. PM Valls had said we are at war. The atmosphere was bread and circuses.
Let the children play. Let the protestors march and holler. Let the smashers destroy. Unpleasant to be sure, but the very nastiness of that familiar violence was a way of saying we have things in hand. These are normal problems that can’t really be solved, they just fade away. The labor reform bill was watered down and pushed through (the government engaged its responsibility instead of letting the Parliament debate and vote). Strong measures were taken to protect the Euro 2016 soccer championship that went off almost without a hitch. Then came the fireworks!
Lagging behind reality
Just a short time ago there was debate on what should be done with the thousands of “S-flagged” individuals marked as terror suspects and vaguely watched over until they slip under the radar and emerge with Kalashnikovs or turn to other occupations. Shouldn’t they be more closely followed, fitted with electronic bracelets, or even held in retention centers? What of jihadis sentenced to prison? Are they properly isolated from other prisoners? The top dog in this department, Salah Abdeslam, responsible for the logistics of the November 13 attacks, is held in solitary confinement with 24-hour video surveillance. He actually sued the government for violation of his privacy. His complaint was rejected. Meanwhile it was revealed that he has a three-cell complex, including a well-equipped workout room. This is justified by European human rights rules. Abdeslam has never given the slightest shred of information to investigators. Occasionally he promises he will talk, then backs down. He isn’t feeling good, doesn’t feel like talking, won’t talk until his detention conditions improve. He is defended by a court-appointed lawyer at public expense.
Then there are the futile de-radicalization programs. All part of a massive denial of reality. As if the genocidal Islamic rage that inspires lesser and greater mass murderers were some kind of misunderstanding that could be cleared up by heart to heart talking. Another example of focusing on things that can’t be done-like persuading jihadis to turn to basket weaving or making it impossible for 19-ton trucks to smash through barriers or Kalashnikov-armed killers to mow down under-armed security guards-instead of finally putting our countries on the appropriate war (that is, jihad conquest) footing.
Georges Fenech, president of the bipartisan Parliamentary Commission that published its investigation of the November 13th attacks last week, regrets the lack of interest from the Hollande administration in the Commission’s concrete recommendations. “Our country is not armed against Islamic terrorism.” One of the findings of the extensive report is that police forces preparing to intervene to stop the massacre at the Bataclan only had handguns. They begged the soldiers to either come with them or lend them their Famas assault weapons. The soldiers could do neither. They didn’t have orders. According to an official of the SCPN [Police Commissioners’ Union] the forces that finally stopped the killer truck in Nice did not have proper weapons. They fired repeatedly into the windshield but Bouhlel was able to continue 300 meters before they finally neutralized him. Christian Estrosi, former mayor of Nice and currently president of the PACA [Provence Alpes Côte d’Azur] region had alerted President Hollande, on July 13th, to the lack of proper protection for the July 14th fireworks display in Nice. The central government alone can mobilize national police forces, better armed and trained than the municipal agents.
Nice, for all its nostalgic elegance and beautiful beaches, is a jihad hotspot. An attack against the Carnival of Nice was foiled a few months ago. An assailant stabbed three soldiers guarding a Jewish Community Center in Nice. One of the most vicious jihadi cells discovered in recent years, the “Torcy cell” based in Nice, was involved in the 2012 grenade attack against the Naouri kosher grocery store in Sarcelles, subsequently torched and burned to the ground in the summer of 2014.
Israel as a model
Though the Israeli connection may be brushed off as too hot to handle, Israel is more frequently and frankly mentioned in French debates as a model for dealing with the full range of jihad attacks: citizens are armed and have combat experience, intelligence services are exceptionally efficient, the society has learned to live fully and remain fully conscious of the danger. Olivier Rafowicz, IDF Reserves colonel, says he recently accompanied an Israeli delegation to Nice for security consultations. Private Israeli security agencies are quietly hired by French private and public companies.
The West will improve its defenses when Israel is recognized as the rampart in our defense against jihad conquest, standing for our values in the middle of a vast expanse of genocidal hatred. Israel has always lived in awareness of its perilous surroundings. Now the rest of the free world is in the same neighborhood. I remember the snide voices of French commentators in the early years of the jihad-intifada, spitting on “Israel’s sacrosanct concern for security.” This constant demonization of Israel is a rot that jams our weapons, weakens our military, and destabilizes our societies in Europe and, yes, even in the United States.
Daesh like a wireless mouse
It was reasonable to suppose that the French prime minister would not have forthrightly claimed a direct connection between Mohamed Bouhlel and a terrorist organization if he did not have evidence drawn from electronic devices seized after the Nice massacre. Did Bouhlel, like the Orlando killer, declare his allegiance to the caliphate just before going on the rampage? Saturday morning Daesh took responsibility for the brave operation conducted by its soldier in Nice. Some French media are reporting that this is a codified designation that follows strict rules and necessarily implies a pledge of allegiance. Several of the five people detained for questioning confirm Bouhlel’s “recent radicalization.” We will learn more in the coming days or weeks about the nature of that connection. Even if there is not a single incriminating document, conversation, or contact, it is essential to understand that Daesh operates like a wireless mouse: the message goes out from the higher echelons via communicators into the evil hearts of the masses of potential genocidal killers.
A telling personal experience
Saturday afternoon, after spending hours collecting information on the Nice attack from every available source, I took a walk to the post office, stopping on the way at a tobacconist’s shop to buy a book of métro tickets. I’ve been there at least five times in the past six months. Exchanges with the “buraliste” (proprietor or employee, one can’t be sure which) have always been cordial. I was reaching for my money, when the gentleman announced the price: 14.10 euros. “14.10,” I exclaimed! Had the price gone up again, or did I forget what I paid the last time?
“Don’t you ever take the métro?” he scolded. And got nastier as he went along, accusing me of accusing him of being a thief, telling me to go and buy my tickets at the métro station and never come to his shop again. I truly think that he could have reached out to slap me if I hadn’t been so calm and sunny.
“If I accused anyone it was the RATP [transport company] but that’s ok, I won’t come back anymore.” I said “au revoir,” revised it to “adieu,” and walked out.
I mention this because of the visible origins of the “buraliste.” Apparently feeling unjustly suspected, for his however distant shared origins with the truck-killer, he found nothing better to do than to lash out at me!
The most recent horrific terror attack, this time in Nice, France on Bastille Day, is the latest of a string of attacks overseas as well as inside the United States. It has shaken people around the world, causing them to question what their governments need to do to protect them.
Our leaders are forever reacting to the latest attack, placing us on an elevated defensive posture, whenever and wherever it may occur. Often news reports are aired that show video clips of heavily armed police officers patrolling our airports and other venues in response to the latest attack no matter where the attack was carried out, to create the illusion of protecting us.
This perspective can most generously be called folly. The terror threats we face do not go up and down like the stock market. While it makes sense to marshal snow plow drivers and those that drive the trucks that spread salt on highways when a blizzard is forecast for the region, in preparation for the impending storm to quickly clear the roads, terrorism presents a constant threat.
The only questions are how, when, where, and how many will be killed or injured. We are in this battle for the long haul and failure is not only not an option but would spell the catastrophic demise of our nation.
While some have simplistically said that our military alone, combating ISIS overseas can protect, the reality is that we must fight this war on two fronts- overseas and within our borders. Domestically this battle must be waged by many elements of the law enforcement apparatus- including, especially, immigration law enforcement authorities.
This was my focus in my recent article, “Fighting The War On Terror Here, There and Everywhere.”
The 9/11 Commission was created to determine how terrorists were able to carry out deadly attacks in the United States to make certain that it would never happen again. This is comparable to the way that the NTSB and the FAA investigate plane crashes to make the appropriate fixes.
The preface of the official report, “9/11 and Terrorist Travel – Staff Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States” begins with this paragraph:
“It is perhaps obvious to state that terrorists cannot plan and carry out attacks in the United States if they are unable to enter the country. Yet prior to September 11, while there were efforts to enhance border security, no agency of the U.S. government thought of border security as a tool in the counterterrorism arsenal. Indeed, even after 19 hijackers demonstrated the relative ease of obtaining a U.S. visa and gaining admission into the United States, border security still is not considered a cornerstone of national security policy. We believe, for reasons we discuss in the following pages, that it must be made one.”
That report was a companion document to the The 9/11 Commission Report which also discussed how failures of border security and the lack of routine immigration law enforcement, including the identification of immigration fraud and visa fraud, enabled terrorists to enter the United States and embed themselves in communities throughout the United States.
However, at the behest of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Visa Waiver Program which should have been terminated on September 12, 2001, has been continually expanded. On September 11, 2001 26 countries participated in this program. Today their are 38 member countries even though, as I wrote in a recent article, GAO Revelations: Our Open Door For Terrorists –The deadly failures of the visa waiver program, more than one-third of these countries fail to provide us with vital information about terrorists.
It should be clear that our borders and our immigration laws are our first and last lines of defense against international terrorists entering our country- yet our borders have become little more than speed bumps to those who smuggle drugs and illegal aliens.
The massive quantity of heroin and other illegal and dangerous drugs that pour across our borders 24/7 show how porous our borders are. Those drugs are not only smuggled across the U.S./Mexican border but across our northern border and along our 95,000 miles of coastline and through our international aiports located in states across our nation.
Page 61 contained this passage:
Exploring the Link between Human Smugglers and Terrorists
In July 2001, the CIA warned of a possible link between human smugglers and terrorist groups, including Hamas, Hezbollah, and Egyptian Islamic Jihad.149 Indeed, there is evidence to suggest that since 1999 human smugglers have facilitated the travel of terrorists associated with more than a dozen extremist groups.150 With their global reach and connections to fraudulent document vendors and corrupt government officials, human smugglers clearly have the “credentials” necessary to aid terrorist travel.
Furthermore most of the terrorists who have thus far been identified, including the 9/11 hijackers, were admitted into the United States through ports of entry. Some terrorists succeeded in being granted political asylum, lawful immigrant status and even, in several cases, United States citizenship before they carried out terror attacks.
Meanwhile the administration continues to admit thousands of refugees from Syria even though they cannot be screened, an issue made abundantly clear by sworn testimony of James Comey, the Director of the FBI and other high-ranking officials, as I noted in my article, “Syrian ‘Refugees’ and Immigration Roulette .”
Politicians from both the Democratic and Republican parties have insisted that since we cannot deport 11 million illegal aliens- the number they frequently cite, we should simply give them lawful status and somehow this would magically enable us to identify who they are. They also claim that this would get these heretofore illegal aliens “out of the shadows.”
The only question this raises is are these proponents for such a massive legalization program ignorant or are they so driven to placate their super-wealthy campaign contributors that they are willing to lead our nation down the path to our own destruction?
Here is what you need to consider. First of all, there are likely two or three times as many illegal aliens as they claim- this means at the very least 30 million illegal aliens would participate in any such massive program.
With numbers that humongous, there would be no way to conduct any face-to-face interviews let alone any field investigations to determine if they provided false information in their applications. This would include their true identities- including even their actual countries of citizenship, providing terrorists with the opportunity to game this process to acquire lawful status under false identities that would enable them to embed themselves in the United States and travel freely around the United States and even overseas where they could threaten our safety and the safety of our allies.
There would be absolutely no way to determine when they actually arrived in the United States. Therefore it would be meaningless for politicians to establish a cutoff date of entry for aliens applying for amnesty. Illegal aliens would simply claim to have been present in the United States prior to that date and there would be no way for our adjudications officer to deny their claims.
Additionally, terrorists and wanted criminals who know that they could be identified by their bio-metrics would simply continue to hide in the “shadows.” There would be no resources to track them down and arrest them. The amnesty program would require all of the resources (money and personnel) allocated to ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) and other immigration-related components of the DHS be devoted to the amnesty program.
If we are to truly harness the immigration system for the best interest of America and Americans we need to have a much larger number of ICE agents to enforce our immigration laws from within the interior of the United States.
What is generally not known by most Americans is that while the second largest contingent of law enforcement personnel assigned to the Joint Terrorism Task Force are ICE agents. Most international terrorists commit immigration law violations including visa fraud and/or immigration benefit fraud.
Yet we have precious few agents assigned to ICE- no more than 7,000 for our entire country. More than half of those agents are assigned to pursuing customs investigations that have nothing to do with immigration. To put this number into perspective, the Border Patrol has well over 20,000 agents, there are more than 20,000 CBP (Customs and Border Protection) inspectors at our 325 ports of entry and roughly 45,000 employees at TSA. The NYPD has more than 35,000 police officers to protect the City of New York. We need to have many more ICE agents.
For roughly half of my 30 year career with the INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service), the agency that was sliced into several agencies when the DHS was created, I was assigned to the Drug Task Force and to DEA Intelligence. I frequently assisted other law enforcement agencies including the FBI, DEA and many other federal as well as state and local police agencies in cultivating alien informants who were part of various ethnic immigrant communities who were eager to assist us.
As an INS agent, one of the biggest incentives I could offer to any illegal alien who was able to help us was to provide him/her with temporary employment authorization and, if the assistance was of particular importance and/or long term, we could provide such aliens with lawful immigrant status and even bring their family members to the United States.
In many instances, these informants were central to our ability to perfect criminal cases against major drug trafficking organizations and other such entities. Such techniques could also be used to great advantage to pierce the veil of secrecy surrounding Middle Eastern communities involving aliens who may be involved in supporting and plotting terror attacks.
Illegal aliens who have no criminal histories should never be ignored. Most terrorists, like most spies, understand that to embed themselves they must keep an extrmely low profile to not call attention to themselves. Consider what the 9/11 Commission Staff Report noted:
“Once terrorists had entered the United States, their next challenge was to find a way to remain here. Their primary method was immigration fraud. For example, Yousef and Ajaj concocted bogus political asylum stories when they arrived in the United States. Mahmoud Abouhalima, involved in both the World Trade Center and landmarks plots, received temporary residence under the Seasonal Agricultural Workers (SAW) program, after falsely claiming that he picked beans in Florida.” Mohammed Salameh, who rented the truck used in the bombing, overstayed his tourist visa. He then applied for permanent residency under the agricultural workers program, but was rejected. Eyad Mahmoud Ismail, who drove the van containing the bomb, took English-language classes at Wichita State University in Kansas on a student visa; after he dropped out, he remained in the United States out of status.
On November 20, 2013 ABC News reported, “Exclusive: US May Have Let ‘Dozens’ of Terrorists Into Country As Refugees.” This is not a new problem, on July 13, 2011 the Washington Times published a truly disturbing article, “Visas reviewed to find those who overstayed / Aim is to find any would-be terrorists.”
Consider that on September 2, 2014 ABC News reported, “Lost in America: Visa Program Struggles to “Track Missing Foreign Students.”
Here is how this report began:
The Department of Homeland Security has lost track of more than 6,000 foreign nationals who entered the United States on student visas, overstayed their welcome, and essentially vanished — exploiting a security gap that was supposed to be fixed after the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks.
“My greatest concern is that they could be doing anything,” said Peter Edge, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement official who oversees investigations into visa violators. “Some of them could be here to do us harm.”
Homeland Security officials disclosed the breadth of the student visa problem in response to ABC News questions submitted as part of an investigation into persistent complaints about the nation’s entry program for students.
ABC News found that immigration officials have struggled to keep track of the rapidly increasing numbers of foreign students coming to the U.S. — now in excess of one million each year. The immigration agency’s own figures show that 58,000 students overstayed their visas in the past year. Of those, 6,000 were referred to agents for follow-up because they were determined to be of heightened concern.
“They just disappear,” said Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla. “They get the visas and they disappear.”
Coburn said since the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks, 26 student visa holders have been arrested in the U.S. on terror-related charges.
The failures of the administration to enforce our immigration laws from within the interior of the United States hobbles our efforts to protect America and Americans.
Indeed, page 54 of The 9/11 Commission Staff Report on Terrorist Travel contained this excerpt under the title “3.2 Terrorist Travel Tactics by Plot.”
Although there is evidence that some land and sea border entries (of terrorists) without inspection occurred, these conspirators mainly subverted the legal entry system by entering at airports.
In doing so, they relied on a wide variety of fraudulent documents, on aliases, and on government corruption. Because terrorist operations were not suicide missions in the early to mid-1990s, once in the United States terrorists and their supporters tried to get legal immigration status that would permit them to remain here, primarily by committing serial, or repeated, immigration fraud, by claiming political asylum, and by marrying Americans. Many of these tactics would remain largely unchanged and undetected throughout the 1990s and up to the 9/11 attack.
Thus, abuse of the immigration system and a lack of interior immigration enforcement were unwittingly working together to support terrorist activity. It would remain largely unknown, since no agency of the United States government analyzed terrorist travel patterns until after 9/11. This lack of attention meant that critical opportunities to disrupt terrorist travel and, therefore, deadly terrorist operations were missed.
The threats America and Americans face are real. Our government and our leaders must finally take the findings and recommendations of the 9/11 commission seriously. Our very survival hangs in the balance.
EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in Front Page Magazine.
I was surprised to see that this large number—38%—of Democrats think our refugee admissions are too high!
Readers you have to wade through a lot of column inches before you get to what I consider the meat of this story by AP. It sure looks like Americans generally are not in agreement with Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton on admitting tens of thousands of refugees from mostly Muslim countries, especially Syrians.
Associated Press at WHIO (12 paragraphs into the story). Emphasis below is mine:
Americans are slightly more likely to oppose than favor a temporary ban on Muslims who are not U.S. citizens from entering the United States, by a 52 percent to 45 percent margin that has been strikingly consistent in AP-GfK polls conducted this year.
Sixty-nine percent of Republicans say they favor the temporary ban on Muslim immigration, while 68 percent of Democrats are opposed. Half of whites and just a third of non-whites say they favor the ban. Seventy-six percent of Trump supporters are in favor.
On a trip to Scotland last month, Trump shifted his rhetoric, saying he would instead “want terrorists out” of the U.S., and to do so, he would limit people’s entry from “specific terrorist countries and we know who those terrorist countries are.”
The poll indicates that rhetorical shift could win support. Among those asked more broadly about a temporary ban on immigrants from areas of the world where there is a history of terrorism against the U.S. or its allies, 63 percent are in favor and 34 percent opposed. Ninety-four percent of Trump supporters say they favor this proposal, as do 45 percent of Clinton supporters.
“That’s a necessity for creating stability,” said Ryan Williams, 40, a health care provider from Jacksonville, North Carolina.
Most Americans — 53 percent — think the United States is currently letting in too many refugees from Syria, engulfed in civil war since 2011 and the Islamic State militant group’s de facto center. President Barack Obama has pledged to admit some 10,000 Syrian refugees this year.
Remember Hillary is on record saying she wants to admit 65,000 Syrians immediately (only 11 percent of Americans agree with her!):
Another 33 percent think the current level is about right, while just 11 percent want to let in more. About 4 in 10 think there’s a very or somewhat high risk of refugees committing acts of religious or political violence in the United States, 34 percent think the risk moderate, and 24 percent consider it very or somewhat low.
Seventy-six percent of Republicans think the U.S. should allow fewer refugees. Among Democrats, 43 percent think the current level is about right, 38 percent think the U.S. should allow fewer, and 18 percent want to allow more.
This tells me that Trump has to continue to pound the issue of refugees! (And, that the propagandists at The Hive have their work cut out for them).
BTW, if every American could see what I’ve seen over the last two days on my road trip, these numbers would be even higher!
One more thing…I’ve heard several times lately that some Americans think that the U.S. refugee program is a temporary one for the refugees, that they only come here until things calm down in their home countries. That is NOT the case! Refugees who come to the U.S. come here permanently and ultimately become citizens.
There are those who still refuse to identify this war on Islamic terror, despite the increasing threats to the safety of the Western public. No matter how many times the Islamic State or Al Qaeda declares the nature of this war of conquest, nothing will convince these leftists that Western nations (and Israel) are engaged in a jihadist war. In fact, a lunatic former Manhattan prosecutor and longtime defense attorney, Scott Fenstermaker, stated of 9/11 that America “got what it deserved” because of past injustices.
Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel shouted “Allahu Akbar” as he ploughed through the Bastille Day-celebrating crowd in Nice, France, killing 84 people and injuring hundreds with a 90-ton truck, driving zigzag to kill as many men women and children that he possibly could.
Many victims are now in intensive care, hanging on by a thread for their lives, so the death toll will likely rise.Al Qaeda urged lone wolves to target whites in America to clarify its message of jihad, and Omar Mateen declared allegiance to the Islamic State as he massacred his victims at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando. Nothing will convince leftist ostriches that we are engaged in a jihadist war against us. They continue to shelter our worst enemies since Nazism and promulgate the propagandist word “Islamophobia” in partnership with stealth jihadists to try to silence legitimate observers of real threats to Western safety and civilization.
Full credits to stealth jihadists and leftists that so-called “Islamophobia” will likely increase, due to Islamic jihadist attacks against innocent Western civilians.
Donald Trump stated in response to the Nice, France attacks:
“This is war. If you look at it, this is war coming from all different parts. And frankly it’s war and we’re dealing with people without uniforms.”
French Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve also said:
“We are at war with terrorists who want to strike us at any cost and who are extremely violent.”
That was vague, but Marine Le Pen of the so called “far-right” French political party, the National Party — which has been growing in popularity — called for a declaration of war against Islamic fundamentalism.
Meanwhile, other leftist leaders such as Barack Hussein Obama publicly postured in calls to “pray” for the victims of this latest act of jihadist terrorism, while willfully refusing to acknowledge the nature of the jihadist war, which would enable effective strategizing on tactics to end the rise in the tally of those very victims for whom they pray.
“France attack reactions: Obama prays for victims, Trump says ‘this is war’,” The Indian Express, June 15, 2016:
World leaders are expressing dismay, sadness and solidarity with France over the attack carried out by a man who drove a truck into crowds of people celebrating France’s national day in Nice, killing at least 80 people.
Here are reactions from some of these leaders:
“Appalled by the horrific attack in Nice. I strongly condemn such mindless acts of violence. My thoughts are with the families of deceased,” PM Modi said on Twitter.
President Pranab Mukherjee
“I am shocked to hear about the terrorist attack on an innocent crowd of people gathered to celebrate the Bastille Day in Nice, France…I strongly condemn the perpetrators of the terrorist attack in France…India stands shoulder to shoulder with the people and Government of France as it responds to this attack…We will strengthen our cooperation with France and other countries in the fight against terrorism…Heartfelt condolences to families of bereaved; prayers for speedy recovery of injured in attack,” the President tweeted.
US President Barack Obama
Obama condemned what he said “appears to be a horrific terrorist attack” in Nice.
“Our thoughts and prayers are with the families and other loved-ones of those killed.”
Noting that the attack occurred on Bastille Day, Obama praised “the extraordinary resilience and democratic values that have made France an inspiration to the entire world.”
French President Francois Hollande
President Hollande said he was calling up military and police reservists to relieve forces worn out by an eight-month state of emergency begun after the Islamic State militant group killed 130 people in Paris.
“France is filled with sadness by this new tragedy,” Hollande said. He called the carnage, which came as France celebrated the anniversary of the 1789 revolutionary storming of the Bastille, an attack on liberty by fanatics who despised human rights.
Russian President Vladimir Putin
“I am shocked by the violence and exceptional cynicism” of Thursday’s attack in Nice.
Putin said in a message of condolences to French President Francois Hollande that terrorism can be defeated only if “all civilized mankind pulls efforts together” to fight militants, their leaders as well as targeting their financial backers “wherever they are hiding.”
Putin said Russia is willing to work closely with France and other countries to fight terrorism which is “devoid of any human moral,” as Russia knows what terror is and the threats that it creates for all of us.
New British Prime Minister Theresa May
Though Britain has just upset Paris and other European capitals by voting to leave the European Union, PM Theresa May said Britain stood “shoulder to shoulder” with France.
French Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve
“We are at war with terrorists who want to strike us at any cost and in an extremely violent way,” said Cazeneuve.
Canadian President Justin Trudeau
“Canadians are shocked by tonight’s attack in Nice. Our sympathy is with the victims, and our solidarity with the French people,” he tweeted…….
Despite the devastation being wrought throughout the globe by Islamic jihadists, and the accelerated threat to the West since the emergence of the Islamic State, Western leaders continue to minimize this threat, believe jihadist propaganda, and adhere to political correctness.
Jihadists were slaughtering long before the Islamic State appeared, but the Islamic State’s zeal for conquest and destruction have taken the savagery to new levels, particularly with the persuasiveness of its leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, who is well-grounded in Islamic theology and law, and wields them to stir fanaticism and militancy among his following.
Baghdadi — who has a Ph.D. in Islamic studies — is all the more dangerous particularly given the traditional rigidity of Islam, as Muslim scholars, leaders, mullahs and clerics are the only respected sources to interpret the immutable decrees of Islamic texts. Baghdadi is also well versed in the strategies of the more stealthy Muslim Brotherhood.
Leftist Westerners remain clueless as to the nature of this jihadist war against us. Former Department of Defense official Rich Higgins said in an interview that he knew that America was losing the war on terror when Omar Mateen pledged his allegiance to the Islamic State and went on his rampage at the Pulse nightclub. Higgins stated that jihadists are “‘weaponizing political correctness’ and using narratives to collapse our understanding of the enemy and how to battle them.”
“Former DOD Official Warns America Is On The Wrong Track To Fighting War On Terror [VIDEO],” by Ginni Thomas, Daily Caller, July 2, 2016:
Former Department of Defense official Rich Higgins knew America was losing the war on terror when a terrorist attacked the Pulse bar in Orlando, killing 49 people and injuring over 50.
Higgins’ sister-in-law asked him if he was doing all he could to fight this enemy after seeing the carnage of innocent life. Now, Higgins is taking considerable risk to speak truthfully about the lack of strategic policy in our government’s war on terror.
In this exclusive video interview with The Daily Caller News Foundation, the former Department of Defense official explains how Islamists are “weaponizing political correctness” and using narratives to collapse our understanding of the enemy and how to battle them.
His expertise is political warfare and developing strategies to battle against the ideologies and tactics used to carry out terror attacks.
Political warfare includes both non-violent and violent actions working in synthesis, Higgins says. The left, with enemy-friendly Muslim Brotherhood allies, is able to control the dominant cultural narrative with the media and the government, blinding us in the war on terror and impacting how Americans think, he argues.
Higgins calls for a “strategic and operational pause” in America’s misguided battle to stop the terror. He would, instead, ask new leadership to develop a comprehensive political warfare plan, while removing the subversive policies and personnel causing America to lose this paramount battle.
There is nothing that Islamic terrorists do that surprises me. They burn people alive, they behead men and women, they rape children, they throw homosexuals off of buildings, they kill American military personnel, and today I read an article that they beheaded a 4 year old innocent child. Although the hate and violence conducted by Islamic terrorists in the name of Allah and Islam does not surprise me, the people who support the beheaders of 4 year old children often does surprise me. In America liberals from all walks of life support Islamic based terrorists each and every day. But now a few liberals who are homosexual are beginning to see that Islamic terrorists do not care about them.
People must begin to realize that Islam itself is the enemy and until this ideology can be branded as dangerous, the world will continue to suffer at the hands of the people who worship and praise Allah in mosques across the world. Of course there are some people who identify with Islam who do not want hate or violence, but these pseudo Muslims are not in the mosques. If a person attends a mosque they are aware of what Islam advocates today and 1400 years ago. If a person attends a mosque that advocates killing homosexuals then that person is just as much a part of the problem as an ISIS fighter. The hatred of Christians, Jews, and homosexuals is not a radical concept within Islam. It is a basic fundamental belief just as within Christianity we have basic beliefs within the 10 Commandments.
People need to ask themselves why liberals to include the media, law enforcement, politicians, and millions of other Americans would support an ideology that is filled with hate and violence and Islamic leaders and their followers do not stand up against it. I have been to over 280 mosques in America. In each of these mosques it is taught to hate Christians and Jews, and it is taught to kill homosexuals anywhere you find them. There are liberals who despise conservatives because of their belief that homosexuality is not honoring Christianity. Yet these same liberals will fight tooth and nail for Islam. People have a right to believe what they feel is morally right and what is not, but they cross the line when they advocate killing people for acts such as homosexuality.
There will continue to be bloodshed in the name of Islam in every corner of the world. The murder of innocent 4 year old children by worshippers of Islam will continue. When will it stop? The answer is it will never stop. Islam has put so much fear in people that they will continue to support an ideology that is dangerous in the hope that they will be sparred. No one will escape the hatred and violence of Islam. Please read the below article.
Isis beheads 4-year-old girl then forces mother to soak hands in her blood ‘swearing to Allah’ By: William Watkinson
Sick jihadists from the Islamic State (Isis) beheaded a four-year-old girl then forced her horrified mother to soak her hands in her dead daughter’s blood. The latest shocking incident is said to have happened in the Daesh (Isis) de-facto capital of Raqqa, in Syria.
The extremists are renowned for their shocking punishments meted out by their feared al-Hisbah police who enforce their strict version of Sharia Law on the towns and cities they conquer. Often the punishments are handed out for seemingly minor infringements and their latest example shows just how brutal they can be.
According to reports, a jihadist overheard a mother ‘swear to Allah’ that she would behead her daughter if she did not return home from playing. Instead of ignoring the throw-away remark the woman was reported for what she said.
It was decided that as she ‘swore to god’ she should carry out the act. The mother however refused to kill her child so the jihadists decapitated the defenceless little girl as ‘punishment’ for her mother’s behaviour.
Not content with taking the child’s life they then forced the mother to soak her hands in the girl’s blood after she died. The shocking tale was revealed by a woman who escaped from the terrorists who told the story to the Iran-based Al Alam International News Channel
She said: “A mother told her four-year daughter to go home and she refused. And then the mother told her unintentionally ‘go home and I swear to God that I will behead you if you don’t.'”
“But they beheaded the little girl and soaked her mother’s hands in her daughter’s blood,” the woman added. The woman, who wished to remain anonymous through fear of reprisals, told the news agency that the beheading took place in the notorious al-Naeem square.
The square is said to be filled with the heads of those slaughtered by jihadists who have become adept at scaring civilians into submission. “They rape women, take children to war, loot houses and threaten people in Raqqa with beheadings if they don’t agree with their daughters’ marriage with the Isis members,” the woman continued.
Although the woman’s story could not be confirmed by IBTimes UK, a number of other similar petty executions have been reported from their self-declared caliphate. Only last week the extremists crucified three men in the street after giving them 70 lashes as punishment for breaking their Ramadan fast.
The jihadists are known for their brutal interpretation of Sharia Law and sick beheadings.
The Vortex talks about Orlando, Gays, Liberals and Muslims. Message: The Catholic Church wants to save gays from Hell. Islam wants to send gays to Hell.
All the victims at the gay nightclub who were murdered over the weekend need our prayers. Fifty people, 50-plus souls were on the scene, and the very next moment, they were standing before the judgment seat of Almighty God — as we all will be one day. Life can seem so certain one moment and over the next, in a twinkling of an eye. We must always be prepared to die.
The murders bring about a very interesting point of a larger discussion. The liberal alliance has brought various factions together, with one common goal: to end Catholic morality’s influence on Western civilization.
There are indeed some strange pairings in this liberal alliance: homosexualists, the Democratic Party, the mainstream media and Islam. Whatever differences Islam and liberals have, they have been willing to overlook them to join forces against the common enemy of Christianity, specifically Catholicism.
So, for example, from ISIS and the Islamic world you hear threats against Rome — loud threats, so loud that Italian army soldiers now stand at the ready fully armed with machine guns in very plain sight around the boundaries of Vatican City. And you hear from various gay groups that the Catholic Church hates gays — that we are homophobic, that we are a threat, that we need to have our non-profit status revoked, that we need to be monitored and so forth.
One point needs to become very clear to all those who wish to paint the Church as an enemy of gays: We want you saved. Islam wants you dead. And let’s be very clear: The Catholic Church wants to save gays from Hell. Islam wants to send gays to Hell.
Just last month in the Middle East, these horrific images of a man being thrown off a building to his death were released. His “crime”: being gay in a Muslim country. Again, Catholics don’t hate gays. But Islamicists do. It wasn’t Catholics throwing that man to his death. And it wasn’t a Catholic in the gay nightclub murdering dozens of same-sex-attracted men and women.
But this whole situation does pose a very difficult conundrum for the whole liberal alliance. Gays hate the Church because the Church teaches about the immorality of homosexual acts. And Islam hates the Church because it was born from a hate of the Church and has always had as its object the overthrow of Christianity.
Up until now, the liberal mainstream media has been happy to be complicit in giving Islamic terrorism a pass because it had common cause with undermining Catholicism in the culture. The liberal alliance was happy to make common cause with Islam because they had a common enemy: the Catholic Church. So whenever an Islamic terrorist murdered a group somewhere, it could be whitewashed and follow-up stories done on how Islam doesn’t really have a widely accepted notion of jihad and violence, and how the various terror acts were “isolated,” or the individual was disturbed and so forth. But Islam could never be approached as a problem in itself. That would be shooting an ally in the back.
Well, this past weekend radical Islam shot one of its own allies in the back; more than 50 souls were dispatched into eternity as a result. So now the conundrum: Random victims were not targeted but homosexual men and women. Islam hates gays and wants them dead, and this is a fact that the liberal alliance of homosexualists, Democrats and the media have simply not said out loud.
Well, now they have to.
The liberal alliance may finally have to come out and say for the whole world to hear what should be blindingly obvious to the whole world: Islam hates gays and wants them dead.
But that admission will cost the liberal alliance. For all their common cause with wanting to undermine or even eradicate Catholicism, the Church does share some core principles with Islam regarding morality. Pope John Paul II was able to use those shared beliefs about sexual morality in the U.N. Cairo Conference back in the 1990s to fend off an attempt by Western nations to embrace abortion and contraception as human rights. By working with various Islamic nations, the Church was able to beat back the initiative.
This move by the Vatican angered many Western powers who want to push sexual immorality, and the Church came into sharp focus as a threat to their new world order. So the liberal alliance of gays, news media, politicians, Hollywood, all banded together and began their relentless pounding of the Church. To the extent that Islam could be conscripted, even indirectly, all the better.
Up until Orlando, the strange alliance between gays and gay-hating Islam was able to hold. Now, it’s over — or, at least, it should be. What remains to be seen is how this will be handled or massaged in the media. Will the Muslim killer be painted as a lone extremist who does not represent “peaceful” Islam? Will media reports devolve into story after story about the need for gun control? Will the murderous action be whitewashed as an act against “Americans” and “our way of life” instead of the full-on truth that Islam hates gays and wants them dead?
Now that Islam has broken ranks with the liberal alliance by attacking a key component of it in the homosexual ideology, what remains to be seen is which enemy will the liberal alliance choose to attack more: Islam or the Catholic Church? Since Satan is behind the liberal alliance, the homosexual ideology and Islam, it’s pretty certain the Church will be the one continuing being attacked once this has all receded from the headlines.
The liberal alliance will move on with business as usual.
RELATED ARTICLE: K-12 Gender Identity Standards Surprise Some Washington Parents
“Police said the gunman was believed to be in his 20s was not a local man, and the FBI believe he may have ‘leanings to radical Islamic terrorism.’”
We tried to sound a warning on this, and were vilified for doing so. When AFDI ran ads highlighting the mistreatment of gays in Islamic law, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, which is its city council, issued a resolution condemning not that mistreatment, but our ads.
Gay advocates such as Theresa Sparks and Chris Stedman attacked us for daring to call attention to the institutionalized mistreatment of gays under Islamic law. Their gay advocacy doesn’t extend to standing up to Sharia oppression of gays, even though that oppression is far more virulent and violent than anything from “right-wing extremists” in the U.S. And you can’t blame them: given the Leftist/jihadist alliance, it’s clear that if they spoke out against Sharia mistreatment of gays, they would no longer be invited to the best parties, and might even be branded as “right-wing.” Their moral cowardice and duplicity, however, are obvious, and monstrous in the light of what has just happened in Orlando.
“‘We consider this an act of terrorism’: Suspected Islamic extremist shoots dead at least 20 dead at Florida gay club after bursting in ‘wearing a suicide vest’ and taking hostages – injuring a further 42,” by Matt Hunter and Jenny Stanton, Dailymail.com, June 12, 2016:
A suspected Islamic extremist [Omar Mateen] wielding an assault rifle and a handgun has killed about 20 people after taking party-goers hostage inside a gay nightclub in Orlando.
The gunman was carrying a suspicious device, possibly a suicide vest, when he opened fire inside Pulse in the early hours of this morning.
Orlando Police Chief John Mina said authorities have not determined the exact number of people killed, but that ‘approximately 20’ have died. Another 42 people were taken to hospital.
An FBI spokesman said the mass shooting is being investigated as an act of terrorism. He explained authorities are looking into whether this was an act of domestic or international terror, and if the shooter was a lone wolf.
Police said the gunman was believed to be in his 20s was not a local man, and the FBI believe he may have ‘leanings to radical Islamic terrorism’.
The killings took place less than four miles from where The Voice singer and YouTube star Christina Grimmie, 22, was shot dead at The Plaza Live in Orlando on Friday.
Party-goers were urged to ‘get out and keep running’ as bullets started flying at around 2am local time.
Eyewitnesses described the gunman having a bomb strapped to himself when he started shooting today.
At around 6.00 local time (11am GMT) police said on Twitter: ‘Pulse Shooting: The shooter inside the club is dead.’ Officers described it as a ‘mass shooting’.
One man who said he was inside the club posted that the shooting broke out around 2 a.m. and that he heard about 40 shots being fired.
Police earlier carried out an controlled explosion at 5.15 local time (10.15am GMT today). but it is not yet clear whether that was linked with the gunman’s death.
It was thought that at least one hostage had been locked in a bathroom with gunshot wounds.
Around 100 officers were involved in the hostage situation before the gunman was killed.
During the gunfire, an officer was shot, but he was saved by his helmet.
Local TV reporter Stewart Moore said that more than 20 people had been shot with an assault rifle.
Jon Alamo said he was at the back of one of the club’s rooms when a man holding a weapon came into the front of the room.
‘I heard 20, 40, 50 shots,’ Alamo said. ‘The music stopped.’
Club-goer Rob Rick said it happened around, 2 a.m., just before closing time. ‘Everybody was drinking their last sip,’ he said.
He estimated more than 100 people were still inside when he heard shots, got on the ground and crawled toward a DJ booth.
A bouncer knocked down a partition between the club area and an area in the back where only workers are allowed. People inside were able to then escape through the back of the club.
Christopher Hansen said he was in the VIP lounge when he started hearing gunshots.
‘I was thinking, are you kidding me? So I just dropped down. I just said please, please, please, I want to make it out,’ he said. ‘And when I did, I saw people shot. I saw blood. You hope and pray you don’t get shot.’
He continued to hear shooting even after he emerged, where police were telling people to back away from the club. He saw injured people being tended to across the street.
Mina Justice was outside the club trying to contact her 30-year-old son Eddie, who texted her when the shooting happened and asked her to call police.
He told her he ran into a bathroom with other club patrons to hide. He then texted her: ‘He’s coming.’
‘The next text said: `He has us, and he’s in here with us,” she said. ‘That was the last conversation.’
Ricardo Almodovar was in the nightclub. He said: ‘Shooter opened fire at around 2.00am. People on the dance floor and bar got down on the floor and some of us who were near the bar and back exit managed to go out through the outdoor area and just ran.
‘I am safely home and hoping everyone gets home safely as well.’ Juan Rivera said on Twitter: ‘Never seen so many dead bodies on the floor, God is good that my friends and I didn’t get shot’.
Anthony Torres heard people screaming that others in the nightclub were dead.
Rosie Feba was in the club with her girlfriend and described the moment the shooting happened to the Orlando Sentinal.
She said: ‘Everyone was getting on the floor.I told her [girlfriend] I didn’t think it was real, I thought it was just part of the music, until I saw fire coming out of his gun.’
A police dispatcher described the incident as an ‘active shooting’. Officers are advising locals to stay away from the area.
He said: ‘There are injuries. I am not sure if there are any deceased at this time.’
‘Officers are going in to search the building and to get people out,’ the dispatcher said.
The police department posted on their official Twitter account: ‘Multiple injuries. Stay away from the area.’
Pulse nightclub said on its Facebook account: ‘Everyone get out of Pulse and keep running.’
Dozens of officers and medics are at the scene including Orlando Fire Department’s bomb squad and hazardous material team.
Police have not given any further updates on the hostage situation or the gunman….
EDITORS NOTE: The suspected shooter is 29-year old Omar Mateen, a U.S. citizen from Port St. Lucie, Florida. Mateen was born to Afghan parents. Mateen is related to Mariam Seddique and Sabrina Seddique.
The Islamic State has hailed the slaughter in the below Facebook post:
The World Bulletin reports:
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), America’s largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization has launched a satirical public awareness campaign to challenge growing Islamophobia in America.
[ … ]
Labelled as “a multi-symptom relief for chronic Islamophobia,” the over-the-counter medication ( in actual fact a sugar-free chewing gum) is available online and its “maximum strength formula” is designed to treat “blind intolerance,” “unthinking bigotry,” “irrational fear of Muslims” and “U.S. presidential election year scapegoating.”
After appearing on the shelves of grocery stores in Dearborn, Michigan several Muslims bought packs of Islamophobin gum. While chewing the gum, according to the store owner, a sense of euphoria over came them. They lost their blind intolerance and unthinking bigotry towards Jews and Christians.
Mohammed Mohammed said, “Immediately after tasting Islamophobin gum I have lost my irrational fear of Christians and Jews. I went to a local church and embraced Jesus. I, with my family, went to the Dearborn City Clerk’s office and changed our party affiliation from Democrat to Republican. We have joined the Michigan4Trump campaign. I feel a great burden has been taken off of me and my family.”
Mohammed’s wife Aisha noted, “After my husband chewed Islamophobin he became a different man. He took me to the Great Lakes Crossing Outlets mall and bought me a dress, shorts and tank top at the GAP. Mohammed then purchased some provocative underwear from Victoria’s Secret for me. Praise be the Lord Jesus!”
A representative from the Dearborn City Clerk’s Office, which oversees all elections within the City, noted, “We have seen an influx of individuals changing their party affiliation from Democrat to Republican. We have noticed that all of them were chewing gum.”
The Department of Defense Public Relations office in a press release states:
We have obtained samples of Islamophobin gum and are testing it for use by our soldiers deployed in the Middle East. The results of our initial tests on Muslims incarcerated at Guantanamo is promising. We noted they lose their will to fight and become lambs. They throw down their weapons and surrender.
All test subjects converted to the religions of peace, i.e. Judaism and Christianity.
The DOD plans to mass produce the gum for use in the great war against terror.
The Michigan4Trump campaign headquarters issued the following press release:
We have begun a door to door campaign in high Muslim populated areas of Michigan. Our team has been given packs of Islamophobin gum, which they offer a Muslim family. Upon tasting the gum the voting age family members put down their swords and pick up a pen and join the Michigan4Trump campaign.
According to an unnamed FBI source, law enforcement at Donald Trump rallies have been issued an “aerosol version of Islamophobin.” This Islamophobin spray or “Love America Spray” will be used against protestors to curtail violence, intolerance and bigotry against Republicans in general and Donald J. Trump in particular.
The New York office of the Make America Great Again campaign in a short statement noted, “Let them eat gum!”
UPDATE: Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and the Islamic State have banned the importation of Islamophobin gum. CAIR has issued the following warning “Islamophobin gum is not to be ingested by Muslims or else.”
EDITORS NOTE: This political satire originally appeared in Chewing Magazine.
The Florida Family Association (FFA) reports on The Huffington Post publishing an article on April 26, 2016 titled Did Jesus Predict Muhammad? A Biblical Portal Between Christianity and Islam. The article states in part:
The time has come for Christians and Muslims to make peace between our communities.
Our planet simply cannot afford another century of misunderstanding and violence between these two communities.
In an earlier blog on the Huffington Post about the problem of Christian Islamophobia, I argue that Christians have the opportunity to transform the way we see Islam and Muslims by accepting Muhammad as “Spirit of Truth.”
Historically, most Christian theologians—including John of Damascus, Thomas Aquinas, Dante, Nicholas of Cusa, and Martin Luther—have seen Muhammad not as a “Spirit of Truth” but as a “Spirit of Error,” a false prophet or heretic. There are many Christians today who respect the Islamic tradition and would never make such an offensive statement about Muhammad.
However, the majority of Christians still maintain a fundamentally Islamophobic position on Muhammad. So I believe that the time has come for peacemaking Christians to contradict this position directly. Changing our view of Muhammad—so that we recognize him as a true prophet rather than discredit him as a false prophet—would effectively inoculate Christians against Islamophobia and would help to establish a new paradigm of cooperative Christian-Muslim relations.
[ …. ]
There is no better candidate than Muhammad, no one in fact that comes even close, in terms of fulfilling Jesus’s promise of the Spirit of Truth who would bring forth a new revelation from God. I do not have space in this article to explore the many Qur’anic verses directly addressed to Christians, but if we were to receive them our religion would be transformed for the better and would come into balance with Judaism and Islam.
Click here to read the full article.
FFA asks: WHAT violence do Christians appear to be committing against Muslims suggested by the Huffington Post article? That would be Islamophobia which is the rational, fact based concern that Islamists use violence and Sharia law to advance their political agenda for Caliphate.
Islamic Terrorists Have Carried Out more than 28,386 Deadly Terror Attacks Since 9/11
Jihad Report Last 30 Days
Suicide Blasts 35
Weekly Report May 07, 2016 thru May 13, 2016
Suicide Blasts 15
FFA notes, “Yet, the Huffington Post article has the audacity to blame Islamophobic Christians for the worldwide conflict between Muslims and Infidels.”
Jihadwatch.org reports the following regarding Islam’s view of Jesus issue:
Christianity is incompatible with Islam. The Huffington Post article perverts bible scriptures and hides what the Qur’an states about Christians and Jews.
EDITORS NOTE: To learn more about Islam please visit Fitnaphobia.com.