I’ve been reporting in recent weeks about the new sites being targeted for refugee seeding by the the UN/US State Department Refugee Admissions Program (most recently yesterday it was Rutland, VT***).
It is my educated guess that the federal resettlement contractors are wearing out their welcome in the190 or so places in the US where refugees are already being resettled(and in many cases have been resettled for decades) and that perhaps one of the limiting factors is government-funded housing (not to mention other important things like lack of jobs!) and are thus scouting fresh territory.
Also, remember that Obama has upped the refugee stream to America this year from the 70,000 number of recent years to 85,000 by September 30th.
Starting October 1, Obama says he will be recommending 100,000 for FY2017 (even though he will be out of the White House for most of it).
Digressing for a minute, Congress will have a huge role to play in September when Obama makes his final determination about the number of refugees coming for the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1 and we will be watching to see if the gutless Congress does anything about it!
So back to Reno (and other sites) which are being prepped for the even bigger wave of refugees expected to begin October 1. By the way, I’m wondering if the low-skilled refugees will compete with Nevada’s large Hispanic population for jobs.
The U.S. State Department has greenlighted a Northern Nevada nonprofit to help resettle refugees escaping hotbeds of conflict around the globe beginning this fall.
Carina Black, executive director of the Reno-based Northern Nevada International Center, says their application to become an official resettlement agency was approved in February. They’ve since been laying the groundwork, and building a stakeholders’ network, before those first few families arrive.
“Those stakeholders include people from the health industry, from education, from ESL… people in the faith communitieshave been coming forward and showing a huge interest in helping us,” she says. “So we’re still basically conducting a lot of training…and getting ready for this new endeavor.” [Remember readers that you are a stakeholder too! Maybe since you are paying for all of it, the biggest stakeholder of all!—ed]
Black says initially about two families — approximately 10 people — could arrive by September. For the federal fiscal year running Oct. 2016 through 2017, they’ve asked to resettle at most 75 refugees.
The full list of countries include: Cuba, Colombia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Eritrea, Sudan, Ethiopia, Somalia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq.
El Salvador and Guatemala have never been refugee-sending countries, that is, until Obama magically turned the unaccompanied alien minors from Central America into refugees. He was re-writing the Refugee Act of 1980 without Congress and Congress let him get away with it!
The mayor had concerns. It is up to citizens of Reno to speak up NOW if you have similar concerns!
Mayor Hillary Schieve was quoted last November saying she would prefer a “pause” on the program, following the terrorist attacks in Paris, but Black says she’s since had productive meetings with Schieve and other city council members to assuage their concerns.
Recently we told you that sites are getting ready to open in Ithaca, NY, Missoula, MT, and Rutland, VT. I’m betting there are at least 30 new sites in the works where plans are being made in secret to bring the joys of multiculturalism to your neighborhood. The only way you or I will know if your town is next, is if it appears in a local news story like this one. And, you can bet you will not see any of this in the mainstream media or cable news!
You might want to visit ‘Ten things your town needs to know‘ by clicking here.
***The major refugee contractor for both Rutland and Reno is the US Committee for Refugees and Immigrants (more to come on this!). Stay tuned!
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/MuslimSupportIowaCity-e1463307095507.jpg398640Ann Corcoranhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngAnn Corcoran2016-05-15 06:11:432016-05-18 07:34:49Gird your loins Nevada: Ready or not Muslim migrants on the way to Reno
According to CBC Canada, almost 27,000 Syrians have arrived in Canada since November and already (in 6 months) their private sponsors are falling down on the job and even government-funded refugees are scurrying to local food banks because they have no jobs and no money.
In photo op, Canada’s boy wonder, Justin Trudeau, greets Syrians at the airport. But, has he invited any home for dinner or planned how to feed them all so they aren’t running to the media with tales of woe? Photo and sickening propaganda video:
Canada PM Justin Trudeau, greets Syrians at airport.
CBC Canada(begins by describing the plight of one hungry family dependent on food banks for indigent Canadians), then this:
“When we come here, we didn’t expect we get any kind of help, and, unfortunately, that was the ugly truth,” she said. “So, we are alone, and we struggle still.”
Demand is growing for food banks and the organizations that supply them.
From February to March, Daily Bread, which supplies its own food bank and 200 other food programs in Toronto, including the Scott Mission, saw a 20 per cent jump in the number of clients using its services.
It was the largest increase in recent memory, said head of research Richard Matern, and most of it was because of the influx of Syrian refugees.
“We are being overwhelmed at the moment,” he said.
Across the country in the Vancouver suburb of Surrey, more than 700 government-sponsored refugees have used the local food bank since February. [of the 1,500 resettled there—ed]
Canada has a bifurcated system. Some refugees are government-funded (like in the US) and some are privately sponsored. Clearly they didn’t screen the private sponsors very well! But, as reported above, even the government-sponsored refugees are devouring the supplies at local and regional food banks.
Under federal guidelines, private sponsors are legally required to cover the cost of food, rent and other living expenses for up to a year, a minimum of roughly $27,000 for a family of four, according to government estimates.
But in Asoyan’s case, her family’s sponsor, Sarkis Shaninian, is unemployed.
He had a job when he signed up to sponsor the family but has been without work for three months.
“Money, I don’t have money to help them, no,” he said in an interview with CBC News.
At last count, 26,921 Syrian refugees had arrived in Canada since last November, and thousands more whose applications are still being processed are expected to arrive by the end of this year.
Can Canadians impeach prime ministers (just wondering)?
See our complete Canada category (177 posts), here.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/liberal-party-canada-logo-e1446981956617.png335640Ann Corcoranhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngAnn Corcoran2016-05-04 07:14:382016-05-04 09:46:56VIDEO: Hungry Canadians move over — Here come the Syrians looking for free food!
I’m a reporter in Grande Prairie, Alberta. My editor, for whatever reason, didn’t want to run my story on Robert Spencer’s talk here (though they did run my advancer). I think it’s worth running, though, since there didn’t seem to be any coverage of what he actually said while here in Canada (see the CBC’s blatant hatchet job here). I created this blog simply to publish the story I would have submitted (with minor changes befitting a blog). I might eventually put up other stuff too.
More than 100 people came to hear Robert Spencer speak about Islam during his stop in Grande Prairie on Friday.
The New York Times best-selling author has appeared on CTV, Fox News, BBC and other networks to discuss Islamic terrorism. His website, Jihad Watch, seeks to call public attention to the ideology motivating Islamic terrorism.
“The longer we misapprehend this problem, and the longer we keep our heads in the sand about it and deny what it’s really all about, the more we will not be able to deal with it adequately and the more lethal it will grow,” Spencer said.
In the years since 9/11, it has become taboo to discuss the ideology that Muslim terrorists themselves cite as their source of motivation, Spencer said. The refrain among Western political leaders is that Islam is a religion of peace, and self-proclaimed jihadists actually have nothing to do with it.
Spencer said this is dangerous, for an obvious reason: “You cannot defeat an enemy you don’t understand.”
The key point that the political and media class don’t want to admit, according to Spencer, is that Islamic terror attacks are inspired by a straightforward reading of the religion’s sacred texts, the Koran and the Hadiths.
Of particular concern is the Koran’s promise of Paradise for believers who “fight in God’s way; they kill and are killed.”
“This is why we see people strap bombs to themselves and go and blow themselves up in a crowd of infidels,” Spencer said. “Because they know that if they kill in the way of Allah, Paradise is promised to them.”
Spencer acknowledges plenty of Muslims aren’t even particularly religious, let alone fundamentalist. However, those who devoutly believe what the Koran tells them present a problem for secular societies even if they don’t resort to violence, he added. This is because Islam comes with a built-in political system, one which believers think is divine.
Spencer also points out that the Koran incites hatred against Jews and Christians, calling them “the most vile of created beings.” Muslims, in contrast, are “the best of people.”
This means some Muslims come to the West with a belief in the superiority of their own societal model and the inferiority of Western secular society, Spencer said. While they may not support terrorism, they do support curtailing basic liberties such as the freedom of speech.
Britain’s Channel 4 last month released the results of a survey in which 68% of British Muslims said they believed people who “insult Islam” should be arrested and prosecuted.
A member of Spencer’s audience on Friday suggested his talks contribute to “Islamophobia.” Spencer said this phrase is deliberately used to place Islam beyond criticism and make Westerners feel guilty for talking about Islamic terrorism.
“Islamophobia is a term that was actually conceived by the Muslim Brotherhood in order to manipulate and intimidate people into thinking that it’s wrong to oppose jihad terror,” he said.
Spencer was invited to speak by a local group called Concerned Canadians for Canadian Values….
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/ISIS-Israel-and-the-Chaos-in-Gaza-e1451595814741.png354640Robert Spencerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngRobert Spencer2016-05-04 06:43:372016-05-04 08:08:13VIDEO: The roots of the Islamic State and Islamic anti-Semitism
“If you wish to know how civilized a culture is, look at how they treat its women.” Bacha Khan
Treatment of Women Under Islamic Sharia Law
If feminism means: “The advocacy of women’s rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men, and is the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities”, why have national feminist organizations in Canada not condemned oppression and atrocities against women living under Islamic Sharia Law?
There has been intensive research and many articles and interviews containing testimonial evidence that women in societies and countries governed by Islamic Sharia Law — a medieval and barbaric legal framework incompatible with modern values and basic human rights – have limited rights and freedoms compared to women in the West.
In countries and societies ruled by Islamic Sharia Law, women essentially have no rights and no equality. Under Sharia Law women have fewer inheritance rights compared to men and lesser status as witnesses. Women in Islamic countries ruled under Sharia Law are subject to harsh penalties for violation of modesty laws and have no choice but follow the modesty laws such as ‘dress modesty’. In Iran modesty law and activities of country’s modesty police has been handed over to Iran’s current president, Hassan Rouhani’s Ministry of the Interior. Failure to comply with modesty laws has been subject to extreme violence from modesty police in countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and Sudan.
These violations frequently result in state-sponsored violence against women (even death) in Islamic countries. As well, female foreigners travelling to Islamic countries governed by Sharia Law are advised to dress modestly (wearing the hijab, head cover and Islamic garment) and not travel unaccompanied by a man.
A prime example of such embedded inequality is exemplified in marital relations: a man is entitled to have up to four wives. A husband, in divorcing one of his wives, need only make a declaration in front of an Islamic judge without the woman’s consent or even the requirement of her presence. However, if a woman wishes to divorce her husband, his consent is required. Men are allowed to have “temporary” marriages, a form of legal Islamic prostitution where it can even last less than half an hour – a situation allowed by some religious scholars. Temporary marriage is also known as a “pleasure marriage,” called Mutah which was established within Islam by the Muslim prophet Mohammed himself as a way to reward his jihadists for services rendered to Allah. A report by the Gatestone Institute. reveals such occurrences even in the United Kingdom. A minimum marriage age for girls set as young as 12 or 13 is not uncommon in Muslim-majority countries such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and Yemen, to name a few. In Yemen and Afghanistan there are cases where eight-year-old girls died of internal injuries suffered on their wedding night. According to a report by Al Jazeera, “Nearly 14 percent of Yemeni girls married before the age of 15 and 52 percent before the age of 18.”
In Iran, under Sharia Law women are denigrated as second class citizens. Sex outside of the marriage is at times punished by the brutal practice of stoning to death. From the inception of the Islamic republic of Iran in 1979, the women of Iran resisted the Islamic Regime’s introduction of Sharia Law. Iranian women have been demanding changes to the laws that set the legal age of maturity for girls at 13 years old and 15 years old for boys. This means that 13-year-old girls can be married to men decades their senior, with merely the consent of her male guardian, as provided by Article 1041 of the Islamic Republic of Iran’s Civil Code.
The Islamic Republic of Iran’s laws limit a girl to receiving only half the inheritance a boy receives. The inheritance that a wife receives from her husband is even less than half. Such laws cannot be condoned by women who, by official counts, occupy 70% of the university seats in Iran.
One case I would like to highlight in order to emphasize the travesty of inequality for women under Sharia is that of Reyhaneh Jabbari. The University student and interior designer, was found guilty of murder in 2009 for killing her rapist in self-defence, and sentenced to death by hanging. She was executed at age 27 after eight years of imprisonment and torture to obtain a confession.
After meeting Morteza Abdolali Sarbandi, a member of the Iranian Intelligence Service, while having coffee one day, her whole life changed forever. Overhearing her phone conversation about her work, he convinced her to meet with him for advice on renovating his office. When he picked her up for their scheduled appointment he instead took her to a rundown house, brought her inside and locked the door telling her she could not escape, then attempted to give her a drink with sedatives so he could rape her. After a struggle she stabbed his shoulder and managed to escape. Regardless of an international outcry and a petition of over 200,000 signatures, proper testimony, evidence, and confession by authorities privately to Reyhaneh that Morteza’s murder was actually set up by them for political reasons, Reyhaneh became their scapegoat, was convicted of the murder by stabbing, and received her sentence.
I was one of four campaigners to stop Reyhaneh’s execution which had been brought to our attention by her family. Our group launched a petition and collected more than 200,000 signatures. We gave media interviews, organized worldwide events and through our campaign, the international community had supported our campaign and tried to pressure the Iranian officials to stop her execution. Unfortunately, the barbaric and undemocratic practices of Sharia Law under the Islamic constitution in Iran allowed this unjust action by the Iran regime. Reyhaneh Jabbari was executed October 25, 2014.
Aside from the notorious executions of Iranian political dissidents, sexual violence is also routinely committed by the Islamic regime in Iran: Rape and gang rape by prison guards and interrogators is a common practice in the Islamic regime’s prisons. In Iranian prisons, it is common for young girls and virgins to be raped, even, as a final indignity, right before being executed. A disturbing finding of a U.N. Report of the Economic and Social Council was that virgin women condemned to death were forcibly and temporary married to officials on the eve of their execution. This continues to be a horrible reality that many women live with every single day in the prisons of Iran.
Officials would rape these women so that they would not be virgins when they die. There is a sinister and malign religious dogma behind this practice: According to the Iranian regime’s Islamic belief system, a Muslim woman who dies a virgin goes to heaven and therefore, they do not permit female political dissidents to be killed without first getting raped and losing their virginity to Iranian officials prior to their execution, to prevent their receiving a heavenly reward.
Iranian Ayatollah Mesbah has declared that if a woman is sentenced to be executed, “raping her would be as rewarding as going to Mecca on the Hajj-Islamic Pilgrimage.” However, he noted that even if she was not given a death penalty, “raping her will be as rewarding as going on a Karbala pilgrimage.” No doubt this Ayatollah is a theocratic savage.
Iranian women have suffered much due to Sharia Law: A 16-year-old girl was hanged for having had sexual relations with a 50-year-old married taxi driver. Under Islamic law in Iran, the cheating husband would be executed by the reprehensible act of stoning; however, he was not punished. Yet, 16-year-old Atefeh Sahaaleh was executed.
Closer to home, according to American gynaecologists Kavita Shah Arora and Allan Jacob, female genital mutilation should be legal in its mildest forms. They say “procedures that slightly changed the look of a girl’s genitalia without damaging them were comparable to male circumcision or cosmetic procedures in Western countries like labiaplasty.” The two American gynaecologists have stated that countries which have banned female genital mutilation (FGM) should allow less invasive practices such as small surgical nicks to girls’ genitalia as a compromise. CBC Canada This proposal was strongly criticized by activists against FGM where they stated that it would undermine global efforts to eradicate the internationally condemned barbaric practice.
According to a report published by CIJ News, “Abu Ameenah Bilal Philips, a Canadian and Toronto-based Muslim scholar clarifies the Islamic Law regarding the popular practice in Muslim countries of circumcising the girls. Bilal Philips asserts that Islam prohibits female genital mutilation, but permits female circumcision, which is a “slight” cut that does not affect the ability of women to achieve sexual satisfaction.”
At least 200 million girls and women have been subjected to FGM in over 30 countries, according to U.N. estimates. (For reference, please see the slide show and the Petition concerning FGM in Somalia.)
In Iran, women have resisted for 37 years these very Sharia Laws that are now being incorporated in the West in the name of ‘multiculturalism.’
Activism Against Sharia Law
A few Muslim Feminists have different opinions about the interpretations of Sharia law oppressing women and argue that it has no basis in Islam and basically consists of man-made interpretations of the Qur’anic texts. “I argue that Muslim family laws are the products of sociocultural assumptions and juristic reasoning about the nature of relations between men and women. In other words, they are ‘man-made’ juristic constructs, shaped by the social, cultural and political conditions within which Islam’s sacred texts are understood and turned into law.”
One Muslim imam who is defending violence against women in the name of Islamic law states that laws protecting women from violence are un-Islamic.
Maryam Namazie, an outstanding Iranian Feminist from the UK who is an outspoken activist against Sharia law said in a recent speech: “For me, ‘Islamic feminism’ is an oxymoron like ‘Islamic human rights;’ they are antithetical to each other. If there are better laws for women in some countries where Islam plays a role, it is not because of Islam but because of secular movements calling for the separation of religion from the state and its laws. Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?” In an interview podcasted by Feminist Current, “Namaze who is an atheist, a leftist, a feminist, a critic of Islamic extremism, and co-founder of the British Council of Ex-Muslims is routinely attacked and disallowed a platform — not only by Islamic groups, but by feminists and leftists, who call her Islamophobic.” Is there an explanation for why feminists and leftists take this stance?
‘Women on The Front Line’ is a documentary film written and produced by Sheema Kalbasi, an award-winning eminent Iranian-American filmmaker and poet. This documentary, about life under Sharia Law, unveils injustice and focuses on women fighting for equality and freedom in Iran.
Iranian Canadian Homa Arjmand has experienced life under Law in Iran where she was arrested and many of her friends either arrested or executed under Islamic law in Iran. “In 1989 Homa, her husband and their two small children escaped by a grueling trip on horseback through the mountains. Today, she lives in a suburb northeast of Toronto. Her job is helping immigrant Muslim women in distress. And now she is battling the arrival of Sharia Law in Canada.”
In an interview given to Jerusalem Online, Iranian-Canadians Dr. Sima Goel, author of Fleeing the Hijab, Dr. Avideh Motmaen-Far and I explained the plight of Iranian women after Rouhani’s presidency under Islamic law and Iran’s discriminatory laws against women under Islamic Penal Code where woman’s testimony in court is half that of a man’s and a woman’s life is half that of a man’s. I was imprisoned as a teenager in Iran’s most notorious Evin prison and paid the price for not accepting the Sharia Law which enforced by the Khomeinist regime.
I was in my early teens when Khomeini came into power. Overnight, all women, including elementary school girls, were forced to cover their bodies from head to toe and were ordered to only wear dark colors.
We were no longer allowed to attend school with the opposite sex. Our once- praised school curriculum was now replaced by Arabic and Islamic studies, including the Quran, which most of us simply loathed. It was at this time that I had an awakening and started my activism. I was robbed of my teen years by a radical regime that sought to force its values on the masses by devastating force. My childhood memories were replaced by a reality created by a regime where women were now treated as second class citizens, and even the most mundane detail of our lives was strictly controlled by the regime’s Revolutionary Guards Forces and morality police.
Like most teenagers in high school, I spoke my mind about the changes that were happening in my country. In a modern society, teenagers attend school, openly spend time with friends, listen to their favorite music and do all the things that teenagers do. I was arrested by five very large, heavy-set guards. I remember distinctly four vehicles that came to our house to take me away, a 16 year-old girl who barely weighed 90 pounds. The terror I experienced may be unfathomable to the Western imagination, but this was to be my reality for the next 18 months.
In my young mind full of trust, I did not think that a simple conversation — having an opinion and simply expressing it — would put my life in danger. As a teenager, I never considered the possibility of being tortured and that I would be reminded of this torture every time I would look in the mirror and see the scar on my face, a result of being beaten with a very heavy piece of iron while being interrogated. As a teenager, I did not consider that my life would be forever changed.
The United Nations supports equal rights for women and in November 2011 adopted a new campaign aimed at ending violence against women. The UN Declaration of Human Rights includes equal rights for women and calls on Islamic countries to follow these regulations. But the Muslim Brotherhood issued a statement in March 2013 condemning this UN declaration for violating Islamic Sharia Law principles.
In The Name Of ‘Multiculturalism’
The West, instead of fighting against Shariah Law, standing in solidarity with the victims of Islamist oppression and enabling the integration of Muslims into the West, is actually defending misogyny in the name of standing up for the perceived underdog: Even the possibility that Sharia Law could supplant or become part of a two-tiered legal system is a strong indicator that multiculturalism is a huge failure.
It is very important to remember that the entire foundation of multiculturalism was based on the theory that, if we allowed immigrants to keep their culture, (multiculturalism) would end after their generation: their children would obviously want to be Western and would neatly adopt our societal norms. We didn’t count on radical or fundamentalist Islam and closed or isolated Islamic communities that intentionally separate themselves from the rest of society in order to preserve and grow their culture.
Eliminating this type of injustice will only happen if we exert inescapable pressure on local, national, and international governments and organizations. Rights and freedoms are never given, they are taken. Although these rights are inherent, they are not freely honoured, and so strife and relentless effort is the only way to emerge victorious from the ashes of defeat. With the love, dedication and help of people—not men, not women, but human beings—gender equality will be the prevalent principle by which all humanity will abide.
Over the years the mandates of women’s organizations have changed. They started in the 1920s fighting for basic rights in a male-dominated society and in the 1970s fighting for equal rights in the workplace. More recently, with the change of focus from the advancement of women – to networking and supportive fellowship – there seems to have arisen a false sense of security that our right to equality is now static and no longer fragile.
Mass immigration from countries with political and social regimes that increasingly subjugate women creates a highly-visible minority community of women whose understanding of their role is very different than our own North American and western standard. With little to no feminist activity for nearly two generations, our women’s organizations are ill-equipped to stand up for our own culture, to insist on integration and egalitarianism, and speak out against Sharia Law. Instead, they have been groomed to support and nurture the perceived underdog, not realizing that the underdog is now actually us.
Most women’s organizations do not support Sharia Law, and are placing their faith in our government to ensure that it doesn’t pass into fruition by political action or by political stealth. Without a strong feminist backbone or experience strategizing unified messages of assertion, they are extremely uncomfortable speaking out against the political culture of this wave of women, and instead default to being “nice”, “accommodating”, and aligning themselves with the perceived “misunderstood” newcomers. As the newcomers praise them for their understanding and kindness, the women’s organizations feel that they are being “diverse”, “open minded” and “helpful”. They don’t have the capacity to see the big picture, so they focus on the one being shown to them instead.
To defenders of human rights, such as myself, it never occurred that radical or fundamental Islam whose ethics are anathema to ours, would be welcomed by a Canadian government. We have been brainwashed by the concept of “diversity’ and “political correctness” to the point that we can’t find a women’s organization to stand up and take a hard line of Sharia. They’re not used to it. Rather they are used to bending over backwards to accommodate minority groups.
According to a petition written by the Canadian Feminist Alliance for International Action (FAFIA), Canada was reviewed by the United Nations Human Rights Committee in July 2015. The Committee was assessing Canada’s compliance with its obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. “The Human Rights Committee has highlighted violations of Women’s Covenant- protected human rights that may result from state-imposed regulations on the clothing women wear in public. It specifically includes among the rights endangered by such regulations, a woman’s rights to freedom of religion, to manifest in public her religious beliefs, and to be considered equal before courts and tribunals.” In their petition FAFIA protests attacks on the rights of Muslim women and states: “Feminists understand well that patriarchy demands or encourages women, depending on differing religions or cultures, to either cover or uncover our bodies, or parts of our bodies. We do not all agree about the implications for equality of covering or uncovering. But we women need to control our own bodies, including what we wear, rather than being dictated to by political leaders, and being punished by losing access to our human rights.”
National Canadian front feminist organizations do little to prevent violence caused by Shari’a Law. Take the Ottawa Hijab Day, World Hijab Day, where such “Feminist” organizations encourage non-Muslims to try on the Islamic covering, almost promoting it. Then there is the attempt to make the hijab a fashion statement by designers and having hijab-wearing dolls for young girls.
Muslim Canadian author, Suhail Kapoor in his book, Balancing Life and Beyond, advocates that within the tenets of Islam, it is permissible to “lightly” strike your spouse if she exhibits serious moral misconduct. In a chapter entitled “Does Islam Allow Wife Beating?” Kapoor outlines the circumstances under which it is appropriate for a man to punish his wife using “light” slaps on the wrist with a small wooden stick.” In a statement to QMI Agency (March 12, 2013) Suhail Kapoor said the permission to reprint his book was granted by the Ottawa-Centre MPP, Yasir Naqvi’s office. (MPP Naqvi is a Pakistani born Canadian and the Ontario Liberal Government House Leader. Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services.)
The UN, the world’s most powerful human rights defender NGO, is affiliated with the dictatorships and human rights basket cases in its leadership roles and positions that entail responsibilities diametrically opposed to their qualifications. The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) is also an adviser or affiliated with many of these commissions. Their view of Human Rights is based on Sharia Law and of course it’s not the same as our understanding of Human Rights and Gender Equality. 28
As a defender and advocate for human rights, I strongly condemn Islamic Sharia Law which is opposed to democracy, having the ultimate purpose to destroy liberty and dominate the world.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/shariah-law-violates-freedoms-e1462272331788.jpg356640Shabnam Assadollahihttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngShabnam Assadollahi2016-05-03 06:45:412016-05-03 06:54:22Islamic Law versus Liberty, Equality and Democracy
Islamic scholarship divides the world in two: the House of Islam (dar al-Islam, nations ruled by Sharia law) and the House of War (dar al-harb, nations in rebellion against Allah). It is incumbent on dar al-Islam to make war upon dar al-harb until all nations submit to the will of Allah and accept Sharia law.
“He it is who has sent His Messenger (Mohammed) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islam) to make it victorious over all religions even though the infidels may resist.” — Koran 61:9.
Jihad is the force that gives Islam meaning.
In his book, Lights Out: Free Speech, Islam and the Twilight of the West, Mark Steyn wrote: “These are the books we will never read, the plays we will never see, the movies that will never be made… The lamps are going out all over the world – one distributor, one publisher, one silenced novelist, one cartoonist in hiding, one sued radio host, one murdered film director at a time.” Preventing free speech worldwide is Jihad,but the Jewish people are Islam’s perpetual target.
In the 7th century, the prophet Mohammad struck the infamous ten-year hudna,with the Quraysh tribe of Mecca, who rejected his claim of prophethood. He broke the agreement over a minor infraction, conquered Mecca, and extirpated the last remaining major tribe of Jews in Medina, the Qurayza, because they rebuffed his faith. Preferring bloodshed to mercy, Mohammad’s 3,000 Muslims set the paradigm of merciless inhumanity for future generations. The brutal annihilation of entire communities is Jihad, and modern-day Israel remains in the spotlight of Islam and her many accomplices.
Allah endorses Islam in battle, celebrates slaughter and enslavement (Sura 33:25-27), and sanctions the capture and beheading of Jews and plundering their property. Jewish experience has shown that Land for Peace has brought nothing but violence and bloodshed from their Muslim neighbors. The concept cannot succeed because land is not returned when the peace agreement fails and becomes a base of operations against Israel.
Truces and treaties with Islamic regimes is another opportunity for Jihad.
A similar spirit now infects the nations. The Jews have been a presence in the Golan Heights since Biblical times. After many attacks by Syria, Israel won and, in 1979, Syria signed a disengagement agreement; Israel then democratized the Golan Heights. Although Syria continues supporting terrorism, the Golan is flourishing under Israeli civilian law – with infrastructure, electrical and water services, agricultural improvements and job training, and health clinics for 46,000 Jewish and Druze residents. Israel’s protection has brought welfare and social security programs, schools, freedom of worship, industry and tourism. Yet now, Barack Obama, Vladimir Putin, Syria and the UN are calling for the return of the Golan to Syria. While thousands of people are being massacred in Syria, the UN Security Council together with Israel’s enemies are focused on Israel.
Intimidation and coercion for land is Jihad.
Again joining the Jihad war of 1948/49 to enlarge her territory, Jordan occupied Judea, received Samaria from Iraq (renaming the region West Bank), and expelled the Palestinian activists. Another Arab attack against Israel in 1967 became what is now known as the Six Day War, in which Israel regained Judea and Samaria. These wars had nothing to do with Palestinians, yet Obama and Putin are now demanding that Israel abandon the area to the Palestinians.
Betrayal by unreliable “allies” is Jihad.
Although Israel is the only homeland for the Jewish people and the only nation whose values and deeds help other countries through every form of natural disaster, and provide agricultural advancements, hi-tech and medical innovation and treatments for even her enemy; and although Mahmoud Abbas brought his wife to Tel Aviv for surgery, and his brother chose an Israeli medical center for his cancer treatment, the Palestinian leader continues the war of lies against Israel. And the world continues to accuse Israel of her enemies’ depravities.
False judgment is Jihad.
Israel’s permanent mission to the US and the organization, StandWithUs, submitted a thirteen-panel exhibition, Israel Matters, to the UN in early April, ‘16. The Jerusalem Panel describes the Jewish people as indigenous to Israel, the city as the focus of Jewish life and religion for three millennia, and its holiness to Christians and Muslims. The Arab-Israel Panel describes Arabs as the largest minority (20+ percent) in Israel and as equal citizens under the law in Israel. The Zionism Panel defines “the liberation movement of the Jewish people . . . to overcome 1,900 years of oppression and regain self-determination in their indigenous homeland.” However, Israel was told by the UN Department of Political Affairs that these three Panels were censored for being “inappropriate.”
Suppression of the truth is Jihad.
The next step after suppression of truth is the invention of a false narrative. The most recent resolution of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) is their de-legitimization of Israel, calling Israel an “occupying power” and giving Arabic names to the Temple Mount and Western Wall, the Jewish holiest site. Thus, they deny the Jewish attachment to the Temple Mount, and ban Jewish worship on the Mount, falsely claiming that Israel is threatening to prohibit prayer to Muslims so as to incite continued deadly attacks by Palestinian. The UN is also planning an egalitarian prayer service space near Robinson’s Arch with restricted access to the site during Muslim holidays (destined for full restriction of all dhimmis).
Supporting or inventing a false narrative is Jihad.
Other UN condemnations include Israel’s blockade against Hamas-controlled Gaza and Israel’s control over her historic landmarks, the Tomb of the Patriarch and Rachel’s Tomb, which the UN is renaming and usurping for Palestinians. The UN calls for stopping Israel’s historic excavations, which continues to yield evidence of Jewish history, while never denouncing Palestinians’ continuous destruction of archaeological artifacts beneath the Al Aqsa mosque compound.
Destroying Israel’s history is the Machiavellian strategy of Jihad.
The Pentagon has just approved aggressive American airstrikes against the Islamic State, disregarding civilian casualties or the “proportional force” concept. Yet this very disproportionate defense is a frequent accusation against Israel, despite her more serious threat from Hamas and their use of women and children as shields. Although verification of Israel’s extraordinary care and morality exists, the Obama administration invariably faults Israel for “excessive” collateral damage – sheer hypocrisy and, worst of all, destroying Israel’s credibility is Jihad.
Closer to home, anti-Israel activity on American college campuses includes Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaigns in an effort to isolate, delegitimize, and dismantle Israel, using a tactic of falsely accusing the State of Israel of apartheidism. Additionally, two American academic associations, the American Studies Association and the Asian American Studies Association, passed resolutions to boycott Israel.
Boycotts against democratic Israel, but not against despotic regimes, is Jihad.
HarperCollins, publishing giant, omitted Israel from its Middle East map, a powerful tool in delegitimization, saying their maps would otherwise not have been acceptable to their customers. A subsidiary, Collins Bartholomew published its Primary Geography Atlas for the Middle East, without Israel, and its fallacious Palestinian Narrative of History. Thea Stilton and the Blue Scarab Hunt, published by Scholastic, also contains a map without Israel. Palestinian textbooks make no mention of Israel and NPR (National Public Radio) omitted Israel from its Middle East map, labeling it Palestine instead. Denying Israel’s existence is Jihad.
To collaborate with Jihadists is to become one.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/jihad-muslim-soldier-e1462219454463.jpg369640Tabitha Korolhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngTabitha Korol2016-05-02 16:05:272016-10-22 06:01:57Jihad Defined
Last Thursday, April 14, I spoke at a private event in Montreal about the Islamic war on the freedom of speech that began with the Iranian fatwa against Salman Rushdie and is now approaching final victory.
Thanks to Vlad Tepes for the video and for his indefatigable work making these videos that were filmed in less than ideal conditions watchable and listenable.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/free-speech-woman-islam.jpg352640Robert Spencerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngRobert Spencer2016-04-21 08:06:012016-04-21 08:06:53Video: How Islam killed freedom of speech in just 30 years
Saudi Arabia has threatened the United States that it will sell off hundreds of billions of dollars worth of American assets if Congress passes a bill that would allow families of the 9/11 victims to hold Saudi Arabia legally responsible for their role in the 9/11 attacks.
The Saudi threat is economic extortion.
Our response should be swift and clear — “Go to Hell.”
Instead, the Obama administration is lobbying Congress to block passage of the bill.
It’s time that the American people know the full story of Saudi Arabia’s complicity in the 9/ 11 attacks – the most horrendous surprise attack in American history.
It’s time that the American people know exactly what our government did to protect Saudi officials residing in America from FBI investigations. The families of the 9/11 victims have a right to know. See New York Times article here.
It’s time the American people know how our own government intentionally covered up Saudi Arabia’s role in the 9/11 attack. See New York Post article.
Joint Terrorism Task forces say virtually every road leads back to the Saudi Embassy in Washington as well as the Saudi Consulate in Los Angeles.
Yet, time and again terrorism investigators were called off.
As a first step the American government should declassify the 28 pages of the 838-page congressional report on the 9/11 attacks.
According to recent news articles, some leaked information reveals:
A flurry of pre-9/11 phone calls between one of the hijacker’s Saudi handlers in San Diego and the Saudi Embassy.
The transfer of $130,000 from Prince Bandar, the then Saudi ambassador’s, family checking account to another hijacker’s Saudi handlers in San Diego.
Days after 9/11, the FBI evacuated dozens of Saudi officials from multiple cities, including at least one of Osama bin Laden’s family members who was on the terror watch list.
According to FBI agent Mark Rossini, “The FBI was thwarted from interviewing the Saudis we wanted to interview by the White House.”
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/saudi-arbia-involvement-in-911.jpg350608Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2016-04-19 06:37:522016-04-20 16:21:52Saudi Arabia threatens the United States — America’s Response Should Be: “Go to Hell”
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/islamic-invasion-of-america-1030x773-1-e1460884850334.jpg408640Robert Spencerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngRobert Spencer2016-04-17 05:21:412016-04-17 05:21:41VIDEO: On the Muslim Migrant Crisis
If Canadian authorities had approached this problem realistically, they never would have spent $16,000,000. They would have known from the outset that this program would never work, and that there is no way to distinguish jihadis from peaceful Muslim migrants.
“RCMP refugee screening a $16M flop, says internal report,” by Dean Beeby, CBC News, April 15, 2016 5:00 AM ET Last Updated: Apr 15, 2016:
A $16-million RCMP project to help keep dangerous refugees out of Canada has turned out to be an expensive security flop.
An internal evaluation says the screening project delivered information too late, strayed beyond its mandate, and in the end did almost nothing to catch refugees who might be linked to criminal or terrorist groups.
Meanwhile, 30 Mounties were tied up for four years on duties that did little to enhance Canada’s security.
“The current approach does not appear to provide much by way of relevant information to support the admissibility screening of refugee claimants,” concludes the Sept. 29, 2015, report, obtained by CBC News under the Access to Information Act.
The report on the anemic results was completed at about the same time as then prime minister Stephen Harper said Canada had to proceed cautiously in accepting Syrian refugees so that Canada’s screening process could weed out terrorists.
“When we are dealing with people that are from, in many cases, a terrorist war zone, we are going to make sure that we screen people appropriately and the security of this country is fully protected,” Harper told a 2015 election rally in Welland, Ont.
“We cannot open the floodgates and airlift tens of thousands of refugees out of a terrorist war zone without proper process. That is too great a risk for Canada.”
Domestic databases checked
The RCMP screening pilot was launched in 2011-12 as part of a package of Conservative reforms tightening up the processing of refugees, including a controversial move to withdraw some medical treatments for rejected asylum seekers. The Liberals have since reversed that measure.
Under the pilot project, the RCMP vetted potential refugees already in Canada — the names were provided by the Canada Border Services Agency — by checking domestic police databases for links to criminal or terrorist organizations, among other things.
But the auditors found a raft of problems:
RCMP officers hired for the work couldn’t get started for months because legislation was slow to be passed in 2012.
The border agency and RCMP computers couldn’t talk to each other, so the organizations had to exchange thousands of names manually.
The cost per screening skyrocketed from a planned $425 to $1,026, on average.
The RCMP delivered screening checks to the border agency too late about a third of the time, rendering them useless because of refugee-decision deadlines.
The RCMP reported only 85 of 4,085 names as potential problem refugees, the auditors said, based on a significant sample of the completed work. But the border agency used only two of those names in its vetting process because of late or inadequate information from the Mounties. And even the information on the two names was later found not to be pertinent to the border agency’s final decision.
The RCMP pilot began poorly by primarily vetting the names of refugee claimants who were brand-new to Canada — and therefore were unlikely to have a Canadian criminal record….
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/muslim-refugees-vancouver-e1460883387220.jpg323640Robert Spencerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngRobert Spencer2016-04-17 04:57:372016-04-17 04:58:13FAILURE: Canada’s $16,000,000 project to vet Muslim migrants
It was Trevor Phillips who first gave the spurious propaganda term “Islamophobia” an intellectual veneer. Now he is admitting he was wrong all along, and has enabled and abetted the creation of Sharia enclaves in Britain and all over Europe. So what is he going to do about it now? Can the damage done to Britain be repaired? Does Phillips or anyone else have the will to try to repair it.
“UK Equalities Chief Who Popularised The Term ‘Islamophobia’ Admits: ‘I Thought Muslims Would Blend into Britain… I Should Have Known Better,’” by Raheem Kassam, Breitbart, April 10, 2016:
The former head of Britain’s Equalities and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), Trevor Phillips, has admitted he “got almost everything wrong” on Muslim immigration in a damning new report on integration, segregation, and how the followers of Islam are creating “nations within nations” in the West.
Phillips, a former elected member of the Labour Party who served as the Chairman of the EHRC from 2003-2012 will present “What British Muslims Really Think” on Channel 4 on Wednesday. An ICM poll released to the Times ahead of the broadcast reveals:
One in five Muslims in Britain never enter a non-Muslim house;
39 per cent of Muslims, male and female, say a woman should always obey her husband;
31 per cent of British Muslims support the right of a man to have more than one wife;
52 per cent of Muslims did not believe that homosexuality should be legal;
23 per cent of Muslims support the introduction of Sharia law rather than the laws laid down by parliament.
Writing in the Times on the issue, Phillips admits: “Liberal opinion in Britain has, for more than two decades, maintained that most Muslims are just like everyone else… Britain desperately wants to think of its Muslims as versions of the Great British Bake Off winner Nadiya Hussain, or the cheeky-chappie athlete Mo Farah. But thanks to the most detailed and comprehensive survey of British Muslim opinion yet conducted, we now know that just isn’t how it is.”
Phillips commissioned “the Runnymede report” into Britain and Islamophobia in 1997 which, according to both Phillips himself and academics across the country, popularised the phrase which has now become synonymous with any criticism – legitimate or not – of Islam or Muslims.
Durham University’s Anthropology Journal noted in 2007: “It has been a decade since the Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia was established, a Commission that through its 1997 report, “Islamophobia: a challenge for us all” (“the Runnymede report”) not only raised an awareness of the growing reality of anti-Muslim and anti-Islamic hostility in Britain, but also marked the onset of what might be described as ‘the first decade of Islamophobia’. In doing so, the Runnymede report propelled the word ‘Islamophobia’ into the everyday common parlance and discourses of both the public and political spaces.”
Phillips says his new data shows “a chasm” opening between Muslims and non-Muslims on fundamental issues such as marriage, relations between men and women, schooling, freedom of expression and even the validity of violence in defence of religion. He notes – echoing an article on Breitbart London just two weeks ago which reveals a growing disparity between older and younger Muslims in Britain – that “the gaps between Muslim and non-Muslim youngsters are nearly as large as those between their elders”.
And while he is cautious to note that many Muslims in Britain are grateful to be here, and do identify with role models such as Hussain and Farah, there is a widening gap in society with many Muslims segregating themselves.
“It’s not as though we couldn’t have seen this coming. But we’ve repeatedly failed to spot the warning signs,” he admits.
“Twenty years ago… I published the report titled Islamophobia: A Challenge for Us All, we thought that the real risk of the arrival of new communities was discrimination against Muslims. Our 1996 survey of recent incidents showed that there was plenty of it around. But we got almost everything else wrong.”
His comments will come as a blow to those who continue to attack elements in British society who are concerned about Muslim immigration and integration, and in fact may even go some way to shoring up comments made by U.S. Presidential candidates Donald Trump and
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) seeking to slow down or pause the rate of Muslim immigration into the West.“We estimated that the Muslim population of the UK would be approaching 2 [million] by 2020. We underestimated by nearly a million. We predicted that the most lethal threat to Muslims would come from racial attacks and social exclusion. We completely failed to foresee the urban conflicts of 2001 that ravaged our northern cities. And of course we didn’t dream of 9/11 and the atrocities in Madrid, Paris, Istanbul, Brussels and London.”“For a long time, I too thought that Europe’s Muslims would become like previous waves of migrants, gradually abandoning their ancestral ways, wearing their religious and cultural baggage lightly, and gradually blending into Britain’s diverse identity landscape. I should have known better.”
And Mr. Phillips even acknowledges that the mass sexual grooming and rape scandals that are plaguing heavily Muslim populated towns across Britain are because of Muslim – not ‘Asian’ – men. He writes: “The contempt for white girls among some Muslim men has been highlighted by the recent scandals in Rotherham, Oxford, Rochdale and other towns. But this merely reflects a deeply ingrained sexism that runs through Britain’s Muslim communities” – in a nod to those who have long protested this to be the case in the face of political, media, and even police cover ups.
Even left wing columnist Yasmin Alibhai-Brown told him: “[W]e [liberal Muslims] are a dying breed — in 10 years there will be very few of us left unless something really important is done.”
Phillips comments: “Some of my journalist friends imagine that, with time, the Muslims will grow out of it. They won’t.”
And indeed he lays the blame at the feet of the liberal, metropolitan elite, media classes: “Oddly, the biggest obstacles we now face in addressing the growth of this nation-within-a-nation are not created by British Muslims themselves. Many of our (distinctly un-diverse) elite political and media classes simply refuse to acknowledge the truth. Any undesirable behaviours are attributed to poverty and alienation. Backing for violent extremism must be the fault of the Americans. Oppression of women is a cultural trait that will fade with time, nothing to do with the true face of Islam.”
“Even when confronted with the growing pile of evidence to the contrary, and the angst of the liberal minority of British Muslims, clever, important people still cling to the patronising certainty that British Muslims will, over time, come to see that “our” ways are better.”
In terms of solutions, Mr. Phillips opines on “halting the growth of sharia courts and placing them under regulation” ensuring that school governance never falls into the hands of a single-minority group, “ensuring mosques that receive a steady flow of funds from foreign governments such as Saudi Arabia, however disguised, are forced to reduce their dependency on Wahhabi patronage” and an end to the “silence-for-votes understanding between local politicians and Muslim leaders — the sort of Pontius Pilate deal that had such catastrophic outcomes in Rotherham and Rochdale”.
Mr. Phillips’s comments echo those of the Czech president, and research from across Europe that revealed attitudes amongst Muslims on the continent have hardened. The younger the Muslim, the more likely they are to hold hard-line views, one recent study found.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/trevor_phillips.jpg370640Robert Spencerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngRobert Spencer2016-04-11 05:38:142016-04-11 12:26:25Man who popularized term ‘Islamophobia’ says it was a mistake, Muslims won’t assimilate
Everyone has been sending me the below video of the debate in Toronto on Friday on the issue of mass migration going on literally around the world, but most visibly now in Europe.
Yesterday, I finally watched the debate and it was all everyone said it was!
Here at World Net Daily, reporter Leo Hohmann gives us the highlights. You may watch the video of the full debate below. He begins:
Mark Steyn delivered a stinging rebuke of the progressive stance on mass migration of mostly male Muslim refugees into Europe at a recent debate in Toronto.
Steyn faced off April 1 with opponents in the Spring Munk Debates on the issue of refugee resettlement and whether Western countries should welcome thousands of Muslims from the Middle East and Africa.
The Munk Debates, founded by Peter Munk, allow the audience to pick the winners based on online voting. When the dust had settled, Steyn’s team was declared the winner. The scores are based on how many viewers report their positions being changed on the issue from pro to con or vice versa.
When the debate started, 77 percent of viewers reported being in favor of refugee resettlement as put forth by the Emma Lazarus poem on the Statue of Liberty: “Give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.”
By the end of the debate, only 55 percent agreed with that position and the “cons” moved from 23 percent to 45 percent.
Steyn, and his debating partner Brit Nigel Farage, won by changing the minds of 22% of the debate audience which came in stacked against them with 77% in favor of supporting those lines in the d*** Emma Lazarus poem, which by the way, I said here should be removedfrom the Statue of Liberty for its role in perpetuating a historical inaccuracy.
Continue Hohmann’s summaryand then near the end note this mention from Pro-refugee debater, Louise Arbour former UN Commissioner for Human Rights.
Arbour said her definition of a “refugee,” based on the current state of armed conflict, should include “virtually every civilian who is not a combatant unless he is a war criminal.”
I can’t impress upon you enough how important it is to stop this campaign to change the definition of what defines a “refugee.”
Every chance they get the one-worlders are promoting this idea that any unhappy person on the move is a legitimate refugee entitled to special treatment wherever he or she wants to go. A legitimate refugee must be able to prove that he/she is persecuted for his religion, race, political persuasion and so forth.
Someone migrating to get a job, or healthcare, or running from crime or war is NOT a legitimate refugee!
If you have never read Mark Steyn’s “America Alone: The End of the World as we Know It,”you must. Here at Amazon. When first published a decade ago, Steyn, in analyzing the demographic time bomb Europe was facing, could not have imagined the size and scope of the present invasion and how it would speed up the inevitable end of Europe as we know it.
By the way, most “refugee” advocates in the US are also attempting to expand the definition of ‘refugee’ to include the Unaccompanied Alien Children flooding our borders in recent years.
VIDEO:Global Refugee Crisis Debate: Louise Arbour + Simon Schama vs Nigel Farage + Mark Steyn:
We live in incredible times! The invasion of Europe is happening before our eyes and the invaders are being welcomed!
In the wake of the latest Islamic terrorist attack, this time in Belgium, a writer who says he is weary (he should be he has been writing and warning about the escalating Islamic violence in Europe for at least ten years, maybe longer, but that’s when I began reading Fjordman’s work) penned an essay posted at Gates of Vienna last week.
This is the section that jumped out at me:
After the many Islamic terror attacks in Europe in 2015 and 2016, several Western political leaders have stated that we are at “war.” Yes, we are. But at war with whom? Are we supposed to wage war against an enemy we don’t even dare to name?
The cause of this situation is very simple: Mass immigration in general and Muslim immigration in particular. Western Europe did not have these problems 50 years ago. The eastern half of Europe that has not been widely subjected to Muslim immigration does not face the same problems today. All those who have promoted or accepted Muslim immigration are responsible for creating entire urban districts full of people who are plotting to murder us. And yet, they still continue.
What is that? The lie that America’s Muslims are better assimilated and we won’t have these problems.
Maybe we don’t have it as bad as Europe yet, but we will when American cities have the large Muslim populations cities like Brussels have. It is only a matter of numbers!
I’m too lazy to do all the searching around for those population percentage numbers, but here is a 2014 article at Gatestonereporting on the high Muslim populations of cities in Belgium and The Netherlands (Fjordman thinks Holland is next).
The number of Muslims in Brussels—where roughly half of the number of Muslims in Belgium currently live—has reached 300,000, which means that the self-styled “Capital of Europe” is now one of the most Islamic cities in Europe.
In 2013, Muslims made up approximately 26% of the population of metropolitan Brussels, followed by Rotterdam (25%), Amsterdam (24%), Antwerp (17%), The Hague (14%) and Utrecht (13%), according to a panoply of research.
We hear the refrain constantly—the U.S. is bad because we support Israel, we kill women and children in the Middle East and so many of us are ‘Islamophobic’ (LOL! Some of us like Donald Trump), but what did the people of Belgium do to justify being brutally murdered in the name of Islam? Nothing as far as I can tell. They have “welcomed” the Muslim migration with open arms, accommodated them, and still get kicked in the teeth!
The comforting lie….
Have you noticed this? A whole host of talking heads, elected officials, ‘humanitarians’ and so forth are running around saying that in America it’s different, our Muslims don’t live in impoverished situations and they have upward mobility, yada yada yada. First of all, that theory assumes that there is no Islamic component to their lives, but it isn’t true and it won’t be true if we continue to import over 100,000 (more?) a year to America.
We already see the beginning of the ‘disenfranchised’ Muslims in Minneapolis where there exists a large Somali Muslim population where 63% of Minnesota’s Somalislive below the poverty level. So, if you want to blame violent Islamic terrorism on poverty, we have that too!
It is very simple, once the Muslim population reaches a certain level (exactly what that point is will vary), the Islamists among them become emboldened and ‘moderates’ fear them and protect them because they all know that this is about theHijra, the migration, the creation of Islamic caliphates around the world.
The smart ones are being patient, working their way in our political system, while it’s the young hot heads, the ones who can’t wait for the generations-long change the migration take-over requires who jump the gun and want to kill us (and do kill some of us!).
Maybe in some strange way, we should welcome some Islamic terror attacks which help to alert us, wake us up! so hopefully we can stop the great demographic takeover before it is too late.
The only way to save America from the same fate as Europe, is to enact a moratorium on Muslim immigration—NOW!
For our complete archive on the ‘invasion of Europe’ going back years, click here.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/World-War-3-feature.jpg368640Ann Corcoranhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngAnn Corcoran2016-04-04 12:45:472016-04-05 05:56:17Europe: ‘We are at war’ — Mass Muslim migration is the cause
“When the Pope kneels before a Muslim, these are the thoughts that will come into the minds of many followers of Islam. For them, the Pope’s gesture will serve as confirmation of the age-old Islamic conception of Christianity as a second-rate religion. Although some Muslims may be moved by the Pope’s gesture and some may even be converted, it’s likely that a majority of Muslims will interpret it as a sign of weakness.”
Indeed. And submission. But as the entire Catholic hierarchy and even the rank-and-file clergy appear to be in full submission mode, and determined to stigmatize those who call evil what it is, the Pope’s act was in line with the way the wind is blowing.
“The Problem with Multicultural Foot Washing,” by William Kilpatrick, Crisis, March 31, 2016:
During Holy Thursday Mass, Pope Francis washed the feet of migrants, three of whom were Muslims. Most Catholics understood this as a gesture of humility and brotherhood. That is how the Catholic press reported it—and that, undoubtedly, was the Pope’s intention.
Many Muslims, however, may see it differently—not as a gesture of brotherhood, but as one of submission and surrender. The word “Islam” means “submission,” and submission is what Islam expects of other faiths. Muslims consider Islam to be the supreme religion. To the extent that it tolerates the “People of the Book” (Christians and Jews), Islam tolerates them on the condition that they acknowledge its supremacy.
Historically, the People of the Book were expected to assume the status of dhimmis—second-class citizens with limited rights. The origin of this attitude can be found in several verses in the Koran, particularly 9:29, which says that the “People of the Book” are to be fought “until they pay the jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.”
The conditions that govern the lives of dhimmis were further elaborated in the Pact of Omar (named after the second caliph, Omar bin al-Khattab). The two dozen or so stipulations include a prohibition on building new churches or repairing old ones, a prohibition on displaying crosses, and a demand that dhimmis give up their seats “to honor the Muslims.”
With the passage of time, the dhimmi requirements were expanded, but the general idea was to keep Christians in their place, and even humiliate them. Sometimes, when dhimmis paid the jizya, they were required to approach the tax official on all fours.
Unfortunately, the dhimmi laws are not a thing of the past. Churches are prohibited in Saudi Arabia, and Christian visitors to the Kingdom are not allowed to bring Bibles with them. In Pakistan and other Muslim countries, Christians are looked upon by many as inferior beings, fit only for menial jobs. In Iraq and Syria, the Islamic State has re-imposed the jizya tax, and Islamic State scholars cite the Koran and the Pact of Omar as justification for doing so.
When the Pope kneels before a Muslim, these are the thoughts that will come into the minds of many followers of Islam. For them, the Pope’s gesture will serve as confirmation of the age-old Islamic conception of Christianity as a second-rate religion. Although some Muslims may be moved by the Pope’s gesture and some may even be converted, it’s likely that a majority of Muslims will interpret it as a sign of weakness.
In assessing the impact of the novel foot-washing ceremony, the timing also needs to be taken into account. The Holy Thursday Mass came two days after the Brussels bombings, and at a time when Muslim persecution of Christians is escalating. If Christianity was anything other than a humiliated faith, Muslims would expect to see some kind of strong response or some gesture of resolve.
Islam claims to be the natural religion of mankind, and the natural response to aggression is resistance. As Osama bin Laden reminded us, “if a man sees a strong horse and a weak horse, he will by nature favor the strong horse.” Yet, in the face of worldwide attacks on Christians, Church leaders meekly call for more dialogue and indulge in “reaching-out” gestures.
These unfortunate interpretations of the foot-washing ceremony could have been avoided if Pope Francis had not sought to give it a multi-religious flavor. Apparently, he was hoping to make a statement about the Church’s inclusivity. But the statement may have backfired. That’s one of the dangers in politicizing the liturgy. Muslims who see the Pope’s gesture as one of submission before Islam are not going to be convinced of the wisdom of Christian charity, they are going to be convinced of the prudence of sticking with the strong-horse religion. They will be more, not less likely to throw in their lot with the militants. If the Catholic Church appears to be submitting to Islam, they will reason that the only safe course of action is to do the same….
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Pope-kissing-feet-e1459589706902.jpg370640Robert Spencerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngRobert Spencer2016-04-02 05:38:322016-04-04 06:10:37Why Pope Francis should not have washed then kissed the feet of Muslim migrants
A month ago, while attending the Startup Turkey conference in Antalya, I had the chance to talk to Shoaib Fadie, CEO and co-founder of the social networking platform Muslimface.
He was there to pitch to potential investors his website, which, in addition to social networking also offers prayer times, job postings, a tool to locate the nearest mosque, a ‘find your spouse’ feature, and much more.
It might not seem the best of times, now, to write about Islamic online content, given the prejudices that surround the topic and the rising Islamophobia (which the recent terrorist attacks has certainly not helped reduce). Just think of Donald Trump’s proposal to ban all Muslim immigrants from entering the United States.
The Islamic State Media Department, creators of MujaTweet, in a press release stated:
We give a big thumbs up to our shariah [Islamic law] friendly brothers and sisters and welcome them to the social media experience. The new Muslim brotherhood alternative to Facebook, owned by the kaffir [non-Muslim] Zuckerberg, will give a voice to the 1.6 billion, and growing, members of the ummah [Muslim community].
It is time for a Shahid [martyr] Social Network (SSN).
After creating MujaTweet it is good news that MuslimFace will be launched by Shoaib Fadie, our Muslim brother in Turkey. We must fight the kaffir, the infidel, the non-believers by ‘uniting the ummah’ online.
This is a way for our Muslim fighters to connect and share their feelings, after a busy day stabbing Jews, executing homosexuals, crucifying Christians and dealing harshly with Muslims who are not ‘shariah friendly’.
We plan on investing in MuslimFace in the name of the prophet Mohammed, may peace be upon him. Our headquarters in Turkey has already reached out to Fadie and offered a substantial investment to get his website off the ground. We expect an explosion, no pun intended, in membership.
The Islamic State mujaheddin [soldiers of Allah] are looking forward to hooking up online. They are most interested in the ‘find your spouse’ feature. Many of our fighters are growing weary of their sex slaves captured on the battlefield and want a real Muslim woman to deal with the day to day chores of cleaning rifles, loading ammunition onto Toyota trucks and cooking a halal dinner after a hard day killing the kaffir dogs.
The ‘job postings’ feature will help the mujaheddin who are seeking job opportunities in Europe and America to take the battle to the infidels!
MuslimFace social media page. Screen shot courtesy of MuslimFace.
Islamic State soldier of Allah Mohammed Mohammed in a MujaTweet wrote:
The prophet Muhammed, may peace be upon him, has given us a voice on social media. His soldiers now can hook up and hang out with our fellow shahids [martyrs] after a hard day fighting the great Satan’s [American] invaders. Allah Akbar!
Mark Zuckerberg, Photo: Time Magazine.
Mark Zuckerberg, chairman, chief executive, and co-founder of the social networking website Facebook, released the following statement:
Facebook welcomes MuslimFace to the social media world. We must love and embrace this change with the hope that others will begin to embrace our differences.
While, as a Jew, I am not allowed to join MuslimFace, I find that refreshing. Blocking me, homosexuals, Christians, Hindus, atheists and other non-Muslims [kaffirs] is not unlike our blocking of TEA Party members and Conservatives spewing their pro-U.S. Constitution hate and vitriol on social media.
The followers of Mohammed, as members of the religion of peace, will now have a dedicated social media platform to deal with Islamophobes like Donald Trump and Ted Cruz.
We noticed that among the first to join MuslimFace are our good friends Valerie Jarret, senior adviser to President Obama, Paul Brennan, Director of the CIA and Huma Abedin, former senior aide to Hillary Clinton.
The White House press office issued the following short statement:
MuslimFace dispels the notion that Muslims hate America and want to replace the U.S. Constitution with shariah law. This shariah friendly social media website will be a place where moderate Muslims may gather to do the work of the prophet Mohammed, may peace be upon him.
While MuslimFace does not allow non-Muslims to become members we are pleased that they have made an exception and will allow President Obama to join, once he leaves office.
We want to make it perfectly clear that the President is not a Muslim.
EDITORS NOTE: This political satire first appeared on Facebook, the multicultural social media website. Shortly after posting this on Facebook we were blocked. We are appealing the block.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/MuslimFace-social-media.jpg360640Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2016-04-01 05:27:062021-10-08 01:47:18Islamic State investing in ‘Sharia Friendly’ Social Network MuslimFace — Zuckerberg responds
I am a fan of the Divergent film series. The Divergent series is based on the Divergent novels by the American author Veronica Roth. The films show a world where people are divided into distinct factions based on “human virtues.”
The series focuses on those forms of governance that control the people for the greater good. It is about power. The power to control, the power to enslave and the power to create fear.
The power of human virtues were displayed this past week in black and white. The differences between Christianity and Islam are stark and undeniable. While Pope Francis was delivering his Easter ‘Urbi et Orbi‘ message, the Islamic State was busily crucifying Christians, slaughtering non-believers and Muslims alike.
What a stark contrast in human virtues.
One religion, Christianity, praying for the protection of those oppressed, the other, Islam, oppressing those who do not fully embrace it.
Anyone acquainted with history knows that it’s [Muslim attacks on Christianity] happened before. Once robust Roman and Christian North Africa, the birthplace of Clement of Alexandria and Origen, Sts. Cyprian and Augustine, Felicity and Perpetua, lacking a strong secular state after the fall of the Western Empire, disappeared under Muslim assault. Except for their moral and intellectual achievements, in today’s North Africa those great figures might as well never have existed.
[ … ]
[President] Obama often says that ISIS [the Islamic State] isn’t an “existential” threat. By that, he may mean that terrorists and their armies are, for now, too small to conquer or destroy us. But there are many ways to be destroyed – and one of them is by undermining those very “values” the president thinks are “right.” Sometimes the undermining comes, unintentionally, from the very people who think they are defending them.
Other nations may explain their values as they will. We Americas know – or used to – whence they come: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that men have been endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights and among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”
To better understand how truly divergent Christianity is from Islam please watch the following videos. One of Pope Francis delivering the Easter message, the second of the Islamic State delivering its Easter message:
Pope Francis delivering the Easter Urbi et Orbi on March 27th, 2016:
Islamic State video released in the wake of the attack on Brussels on March 22nd, 2016:
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Indian-Catholic-Priest-Crucified-by-Islamic-State-on-Good-Friday.jpg350620Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2016-03-29 07:30:572016-03-29 09:22:42Divergent: The Crucifixion of Christianity by Islam [+Videos]