Posts

VIDEO: If you think Jew hatred ended with the Holocaust, think again!

auschwitz holocaustThe Jewish Federation of Sarasota/Manatee produced a video showing that Jew hatred is alive and well in Florida. The student senate at the University of South Florida voted to divest from the state of Israel for “humanitarian reasons.” Since that vote the student body president vetoed the resolution.

Hate groups such as CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations), Students For Justice in Palestine, the Muslim Student Association, Jewish Voices For Peace and others are the NEW ANTI-SEMITES.  These groups have “crept” into University of South Florida Tampa campus in a major way.

One group is fighting to protect Jewish students on America’s campuses. The group is called the AMCHA Initiative. It is an on-line data base reporting anti-Semitic incidents occurring with rising frequency  on U.S. college campuses. The Initiative was created to protect Jewish students  and  staff on campuses. The 2015 AMCHA report cite more than 302 anti-Semitic incidents at 109 campuses in more than 28 states, among them are five colleges in Florida.

Click here to view the U.S. campus anti-Semitic tracker.

Those behind the resolution to divest from Israel failed to mention that Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East or that the other Arab states are at best theocracies that deny basic human rights or are failed nations controlled by terrorist groups such as the Islamic State.

The video below tells the story of Jew hatred, which is alive and well in Florida and across the United States:

RELATED VIDEO: Crossing the Line 2: The New Face of Anti-Semitism on Campus:

RELATED ARTICLES:

Benjamin Netanyahu Marks Holocaust Remembrance Day

Florida: Muslim convert pledges ‘allegiance to Allah’ planned Islamic State style execution

Canada’s PM Trudeau’s statement on the Holocaust doesn’t mention Jews

Iran’s Supreme Leader uploads Holocaust denial video on Holocaust Memorial Day

Benjamin Netanyahu Marks Holocaust Remembrance Day

Muslims fill German refugee camp with swastikas, anti-Semitic graffiti

Bill to Designate Muslim Brotherhood as Terror Organization Gains Support

Ten more members of Congress have agreed to cosponsor the Muslim Brotherhood Terrorist Designation Act of 2015 since our last update. The legislation identifies three U.S. – based groups — including the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) —  as part of the Brotherhood network linked to financing Hamas.

If passed, the bill would state that Congress believes the Muslim Brotherhood fits the State Department’s criteria of a Foreign Terrorist Organization. The Secretary of State would be required to designate the Brotherhood within 60 days or to provide a detailed report explaining why it does not. Three U.S.-based Brotherhood entities named in the bill are CAIR, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT).

The House version of the bill (HR3892) was introduced by Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-FL) with Reps. Louie Gohmert (R-TX), Randy K. Weber (R-TX), Diane Black (R-TN) and Mike Pompeo (R-KS) as original cosponsors. They are now joined by Reps. Steve King (R-IA); Steven Palazzo (R-MS); Kay Granger (R-TX); Jim Jordan (R-OH); Steve Stivers (R-OH); Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA); Ilena Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL); Charles W. Dent (R-PA); Bill Johnson (R-OH) and David A. Trott (R-MI).

HR3892 was referred to the Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security on December 4, 2015. Two cosponsors, Rep. Gohmert and Rep. Trott, sit on that subcommittee.

The Senate version of the bill (S2230) was introduced by presidential candidate Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) and later cosponsored by Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT). It was referred to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on November 3. Two of Senator Cruz’s presidential rivals, Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) sit on that committee and have not taken a position on the bill.

Although the bill has yet to earn bi-partisan support at this early stage, it is supported by members of Congress from different spectrums of the Republican Party. It includes endorsers of the presidential campaigns of Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush and John Kasich and not only supporters of Ted Cruz.

As our original article about the legislation explained, the bill could be a watershed moment in the fight against Islamist extremism. It is important for voters to know where their representatives stand on this important issue.

We encourage readers to contact their representatives and Senators and ask them for a position statement. Please forward any official statement to the Clarion Project so we can update readers on where they stand on the Muslim Brotherhood. A statement of opposition is just as important as a statement of support.

Of particular interest are the members of Congress who are assigned to the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Below is a table of those who sit on those committees and have yet to take a position:

House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration & Border Security Senate Foreign Relations Committee
Ken Buck (R-CO) Barbara Boxer (D-CA)
Trey Gowdy (R-SC), Chairman John Barrasso (R-WY)
Luis Gutirrez (D-IL) Ben Cardin (D-MD); Ranking Member
Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) Christopher Coons (D-DE)
Raul Labrador (R-ID), Vice Chairman Bob Corker (R-TN); Chairman
Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) Jeff Flake (R-AZ)
Pedro Pierluisi (D-PR) Cory Gardner (R-CO)
John Ratcliffe (R-TX) Johnny Isakson (R-GA)
Ron Johnson (R-WI)
Tim Kaine (D-VA)
Edward Markey (D-WA)
Bob Menendez (D-NJ)
Chris Murphy (D-CT)
Rand Paul (R-KY)
David Perdue (R-GA)
James Risch (R-ID)
Marco Rubio (R-FL)
Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH)

Tom Udall (D-NM)

RELATED ARTICLES:

Three Americans Kidnapped in Baghdad

Rough & Smooth: Iran Sanctions Lifted; Frees 5 American Prisoners

Iran Captures and Releases U.S. Sailors: the Back Story

Gitmo ‘High-Risk’ Prisoner Released; Vows to Kill Americans

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of CAIR Founder and Executive Director Nihad Awad (right) with Ibrahim Hooper, CAIR’s spokesperson and national communications director. (Photo: © Reuters)

VIDEO: It doesn’t Matter if Obama is a Muslim

One of the most common questions is: Is Obama a Muslim? Who knows, but it doesn’t make any difference. He always supports Islam, the Muslim Brotherhood and the Sharia.

What is important is the Islamification of the United States.

Hillary Clinton is not a Muslim but her chief advisor is Huma Abedin. Huma is closely linked with the Muslim Brotherhood. Hillary is an apologist for Sharia and Islam.

George Bush is not a Muslim but he advanced Islam with his declaration that Islam is the religion of peace. Bush would not use the word jihad, and gave us the “war on terror”.

The governor of Tennessee is not a Muslim but he only allows Muslims to train Tennessee law enforcement about “terror”.

Schools in America are beginning to adopt Sharia compliant textbooks.

Obama will be gone, but what difference does that make? Our politicians are Islamifying the U.S. without him.

Muslim workers walk off job over prayer dispute, get fired — Muslim Brotherhood defends

“There has been a desire among some employees to go in larger groups of people to pray. We just can’t accommodate that. It backs up the flow of all the production. We’re a federally inspected, USDA inspected plant. We have to ensure food safety. We have to ensure the products we produce meet consumer expectations.” No, you don’t, as you’ll soon learn: you have to make sure Muslims are accommodated. Everything else takes a back seat to that.

In reality, Muslims can make up missed prayers at later times, which makes it clear (as does the involvement of Hamas-linked CAIR) that this is simply an Islamic supremacist endeavor to secure special privileges for Muslims, such as we have seen on many other occasions. The objective is to reinforce the principle that wherever Islamic law and practice conflict with American law and practice, it is the latter that must give way.

forsale

“Cargill: Tried to resolve issues before firing Colorado Muslim workers,” by Emilie Rusch and Jesse Paul, Denver Post, December 31, 2015 (thanks to David):

Cargill Meat Solutions said Thursday it tried to resolve a workplace prayer dispute with Somali workers at its Fort Morgan meatpacking plant that led to the firing of about 190 employees.

The workers who lost their jobs were mostly immigrants from Somalia, and their termination came after they failed to report to work for three consecutive days last week to protest what they say were changes in times allowed for Muslim prayer.

Cargill says, however, it makes every “reasonable attempt” to provide religious accommodation for all of its employees at the Fort Morgan plant without interrupting operations.

“At no time did Cargill prevent people from prayer at Fort Morgan,” said Michael Martin, a spokesman for the Wichita-based company, which is part of the agribusiness giant Cargill Inc. ” Nor have we changed policies related to religious accommodation and attendance. This has been mischaracterized.”

Cargill also said while reasonable efforts are made to accommodate employees, accommodation is not guaranteed every day and depends on changing factors in the plant.

“This has been clearly communicated to all employees,” Martin said.

But the [Hamas-linked — Ed.] Council on American-Islamic Relations, which is representing more than 100 of the fired employees, said Thursday that messaging from plant supervisors has not always been so clear.

On Dec. 18, the Friday before employee protests began Dec. 21, “the workers were told: ‘If you want to pray, go home,’ ” CAIR spokesman Jaylani Hussein said.

“To these employees, that is what it is. Maybe Cargill never changed its policy, but to these employees, they feel whatever the policy is, or how it is implemented, there was a change put in place,” Hussein said.

Cargill provides a “reflection room” at the plant where observant Muslim workers are allowed to pray, something that has been available since 2009.

Hussein said depending on the season, the workers pray at different times of the day, typically taking five to 10 minutes away from their work. The time was carved out of a 15-minute break period or from the workers’ unpaid 30-minute lunch breaks.

Many of the workers banded together and decided to walk off the job in an attempt to sway plant managers to reinstate the prayer policy.

“They feel missing their prayer is worse than losing their job,” Hussein said. “It’s like losing a blessing from God.”

On Dec. 23, Cargill fired the holdouts who had not returned to work, citing a company policy that employees who do not show up for work or call in for three consecutive days will be let go.

“It’s an unfortunate situation that may be based somewhere in a misunderstanding,” Martin said. “But the policies have been in place, and we go over the policies for all people who are newly hired to the company when they are hired.”

All of the terminated employees worked the second shift on the plant’s fabrication floor, where chilled beef carcasses are broken down into smaller cuts and packaged, Martin said.

Of those involved, “fewer than 20” employees walked out in the middle of a shift, he said. About 160 failed to report to work, and 10 resigned.

Before the walkout, Cargill employed roughly 600 Somali workers at the Fort Morgan plant. More than 400 still work there, Martin said, and accommodations are still being made to allow Muslims to leave the floor in small groups to pray.

“There has been a desire among some employees to go in larger groups of people to pray. We just can’t accommodate that,” Martin said. “It backs up the flow of all the production. We’re a federally inspected, USDA inspected plant. We have to ensure food safety. We have to ensure the products we produce meet consumer expectations.”…

RELATED ARTICLES:

France: Muslim screaming “Allahu akbar” tries to run down soldiers guarding mosque

Rochester, NY New Year’s jihad mass murder plotter converted to Islam in prison

Muslim Student Association demands ‘zero tolerance policy for Islamophobic speech’

Here again we see how Leftist and Islamic supremacist groups use the term “Islamophobia” for both attacks on innocent civilians, which have no justification under any circumstances, and for honest examination of how Islamic jihadists use the texts and teachings of Islam to incite hatred and violence. These groups use the former to quash the latter, which will have the effect of allowing the jihad to advance unimpeded and unopposed.

Is that what the MSA wants? Probably, since it is a Muslim Brotherhood organization. According to Discover the Networks, “The Muslim Students Association of the United States and Canada, or MSA (also known as MSA National), was established mainly by members of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) in January 1963 at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. Nyack College theologian Larry A. Poston writes that “many of the founding members of this agency [MSA] were members of, or had connections to,” the Muslim Brotherhood or Jamaat-i-Islami. The three most significant founders of MSA were Hisham al Talib, Jamal Barzinji, and Ahmed Totanji, and all of whom were MB leaders of Iraqi descent. Other noteworthy individuals who served as early co-founders of MSA were Mahboob Khan and Malika Khan.”

Meanwhile, our nation’s universities are increasingly becoming thuggish centers of Leftist indoctrination where opposing views are forcibly silenced. This holds true across the country, from ostensibly Catholic entities such as Saint Anselm College in New Hampshire to secular ones such as San Diego State University.

“Muslim Student Association demands all ‘Islamophobic speech’ be punished,” by Alec Dent, College Fix, December 28, 2015:

The Muslim Student Association at San Diego State University is demanding that administrators combat Islamophobia by developing a “zero tolerance policy explicitly for Islamophobic speech and actions.”

The demands, modeled after similar ones issued by black student associations at campuses across the nation, were lodged after a female Muslim student was allegedly attacked by a white man in a campus parking lot on the afternoon of Nov. 19, about a week after the Paris terrorist attacks, which killed 130 people.

At SDSU, despite reports that several witnesses stood by and did nothing as the attacker grabbed the woman’s hijab, as well as a police sketch of the alleged attacker, a police investigation could not identify a suspect, according to the San Diego Union Tribune.

Meanwhile, the female student who said she was attacked has not been identified. But she told Hanif Mohebi, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations-San Diego, that her attacker grabber her from “behind,” called her a terrorist, “choked her with the hajib” and told her to “get out of this country,” the Union Tribune reports.

Several comments on the article expressed incredulity over the attack, questioning whether it is a hate-crime hoax.

Yet less than a week after the alleged hate crime, SDSU’s Muslim Student Association held a protest against Islamophobia on campus that attracted hundreds of students.

Yasser Kaziha, a member of the Muslim Student Association, said that he personally knew the victim of the attack, and “when the attack on our Muslim sister happened here at SDSU, she felt alone after bystanders and witnesses who watched the attack did nothing,” he told the Union Tribune.

At the rally, the Muslim Student Association issued its list of demands, which members claim will help prevent future acts of bigotry against the Muslim community.

They demanded that the university adopt a zero-tolerance policy toward “Islamophobic speech,” mandatory bystander training, develop more courses on Islam, and increase funding for The Center for Intercultural Relations. Moreover, they demanded that “the SDSU administration address, alleviate, and eliminate systems of oppression that disproportionately target students of color, womyn, and all marginalized students on campus.”

Beth Chee, a representative for the university, told The College Fix in an email that the university has not issued a formal response to the demands, but members of the administration have reviewed the list and are currently “meeting internally and with the students to discuss their concerns.”…

RELATED ARTICLES:

Islamic State has department of “war spoils,” in accord with the Qur’an

Toronto Sun: Robert Spencer “held up for his views while refugees (whose views we don’t know) are welcomed like heroes”

A Victory In Lawfare

This has not been a good year.  From the start of January when gunmen walked into the offices of Charlie Hebdo to last month when suicide bombers walked into a concert hall in the same city, the terror and bloodshed may have returned to France but in the meantime it circled the entire globe.  From California to Tunisia and Texas to Mosul this year has been one of atrocities and barbarism of a scale almost too appalling to consider.

At the same time our politicians have struggled to even get some consensus on what to do about the human tide which has flowed across the continent and begun a process of change which will take decades to play out.  In the Middle East we have prevaricated and then patted ourselves on the back for doing little and late.  In the international arena we have seen Vladimir Putin begin to look like a world leader, while the President of the United States has been reduced to something like a global commentator. Everywhere the world looks more unstable and uncertain and the future more troubling than it has at any year’s end for a long time.

In such a situation one has to look for points of light.  One such point came this week in a small but important victory in the UK.  It is a year and a half since David Cameron ordered a review into the activities of the Muslim Brotherhood in the UK.  Since the conclusion of that report’s findings and its writing-up earlier this year the Brotherhood has three times tried to stop the report’s findings from being released.  They have attempted injunctions in March, in the summer and then again this week, just one day before the publication of the findings, though not the full report.

That such an organisation can even think of being able to use the British courts to silence the British government says much about why the global battle against Islamic extremism is going backwards.  But the UK government won out and its findings are immensely helpful to pushing back the tide of extremism at home.  While deciding that the Brotherhood does not meet the level of violence required to justify outright proscription it does find that the group is one that possibly leads to extremism and that new measures should therefore be put in place to tackle those groups and individuals associated with the movement.

When the review began a team of our top researchers at HJS were invited in to give evidence about the activities of the Brotherhood in the UK and in Europe.  It was a great pleasure and honour to do so and to be able to name some of those who have been named and identified in the final report’s conclusions.  This makes the fight against the group’s affiliates in the UK very significantly easier.  Much of the challenge in this area in recent years has been fighting to ensure that extremist groups are identified as such by the authorities so that it cannot be lowered to a ‘he-says, she-say’ debate between non-governmental organisations.

Much more will be needed to turn events around globally, but keeping our own stable clean in the UK and Europe is a very important part of changing around that global tide.  This is a very long conflict, and although the set-backs can be swift, progress is always arduous.  Nevertheless, some progress there is and for that we can at least reflect on a year which has ended with a modest victory.


mendozahjsFROM THE DIRECTOR’S DESK  

This week, yet another bit of hope in the world was extinguished by the Obama Administration. In this case, that the USA would attempt to stick by some principles – as well as sound strategic sense – in its decision making over Syria.

Speaking in Moscow following a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, US Secretary of State John Kerry uttered the fatal words that “The United States and our partners are not seeking so-called regime change” in Syria. In short, that the Butcher of Damascus, Bashar al-Assad, could stay in power after all, and despite both destroying his country and occasioning the rise of Islamic State through his murderous behaviour.

This is disappointing, but not surprising. The Obama Administration has after all flunked pretty much every foreign policy test thrown at it, ranging from Russia in Ukraine to the Iranian nuclear agreement.

But it is also a decision that will have serious consequences going forwards. If our declared intention is to defeat Islamic State by bringing the remaining non-jihadist forces together in a political settlement, then keeping Mr Assad will make that harder, not easier to achieve. Syrian rebels who have spent the past few years seeking his removal on account of his dictatorship will not now suddenly rush to embrace him, although they could have been persuaded to ally with Assad’s regime minus a few figureheads. Instead, they will continue their struggle, even if it looks ever more forlorn.

Assad has become a symbol of oppression. And in acquiescing to that symbol’s survival, the US has betrayed its principles as a bastion of liberty in the world. You can be certain that Islamic State will use this declaration to pump propaganda material out to its Muslim targets in the West, entreating them to join its jihad because the Western powers have shown they are happy to tolerate repression.

But the true victors from this policy shift will be the Iranian revolutionary regime. Assad’s dependency on Iran is well-established. If his regime wins, then so does Iran. And if Iran wins in Syria, it will be able to extend its push for dominance in the region through territorial control linking Lebanon to Iran through a direct land corridor that will take in Syria and a Shia dominated Iraqi state. Which will be bad for Western allies in the region, and ultimately for the West itself.

Congratulations therefore to President Obama and Mr Kerry. It is a rare feat to be both strategically shortsighted and morally bereft. But they have managed it and in some style.

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

UK’s Cameron breaks with Obama on the Muslim Brotherhood

When even David Cameron, thoroughly compromised to Islamic supremacists and in near-total denial about the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat, is tougher than Obama on a stealth jihad group such as the Muslim Brotherhood, you know we’re in deep trouble.

MuslimBrotherhood

Muslim Brotherhood logo.

“UK breaks with U.S. on Muslim Brotherhood,” by Steve Emerson and Pete Hoekstra, Washington Examiner, December 24, 2015:

The United Kingdom broke from the largely complacent U.S. position on radical Islamists in a startling indictment of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB).

“Aspects of the Muslim Brotherhood’s ideology and activities … run counter to British values of democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty, equality and the mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs,” Prime Minister David Cameron said in a statement. Cameron further states that “association with, or influence by the Muslim Brotherhood should be considered as a possible indicator of extremism.”

As the West attempts to pinpoint potential terrorists, the Brits tell us where to look, and that is to the MB and its associates.

The new account — resulting from an 18-month-long exhaustive investigation by respected foreign policy experts — presents a brutally honest examination of the movement. In breaking from the U.S., the UK has shifted closer to Egypt, the UAE and Saudi Arabia in identifying it as a terrorist organization.

The UK position sharply contrasts with that of the Obama administration, which sought to strengthen ties to the Brotherhood. Just a few years ago Director of National Intelligence James Clapper described the MB as “largely secular…” and “which has eschewed violence.”

The Obama administration quickly condemned the UK report in an email to the IPT, citing the MB’s stated commitment to nonviolence and that pushing back against the organization would lead to the radicalization of a minority of its followers.

We’re not sure that they even read the report. Since founding the group in 1928, former schoolteacher Hassan al-Banna, “accepted the political utility of violence, and the Brotherhood conducted attacks, including political assassinations and attempted assassinations against Egypt state targets and both British and Jewish interests during his lifetime,” it says….

RELATED ARTICLES:

No Christmas celebration in Sudan: Muslims burn and demolish churches

India: Muslim abducts, tortures, sexually assaults woman, forces her to convert to Islam to marry him

72 U.S. Department of Homeland Security employees on terrorist watchlist

Representative Stephen Lynch (D-Massachusetts) points up an appalling weakness in the Homeland Security Department that won’t be fixed by the firing of these 72 employees and the resignation of the director (which director he is referring to is unclear; the DHS Secretary certainly didn’t resign).

The entire culture of the Department, and the Washington establishment, needs to be changed, such that there is not a remote possibility of people who are on a terrorist watchlist getting hired at DHS. But no adequate screening procedures are in place, because they would be “Islamophobic.”

Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate U.S. Rep. Stephen Lynch, D-Mass., addresses an audience during a campaign rally in Boston’s South Boston neighborhood, Monday, April 29, 2013. (AP Photo/Steven Senne)

“Congressman Lynch: 72 Department of Homeland Security Employees On Terrorist Watchlist,” by Tori Bedford, WGBH, December 1, 2015:

Earlier this month, 47 democrats in the house of representatives defied a house veto threat by backing a GOP bill to ramp up screening requirements for Syrian and Iraqi refugees. Congressman Stephen Lynch was among them. He joined Jim Braude and Margery Eagan on Boston Public Radio to discuss the reasoning behind his vote and other congressional matters.

Questions are paraphrased, and responses are edited where noted […].

MARGERY: Let’s start with the vote on the Syrian refugees. Why were you with those 47 other democrats?

It’s a very simple bill, I know that it’s got subsumed within a larger discussion about immigration policy, but basically, the bill we voted on was a very short bill—four pages in length, basically, and it said that the director of national security shall review the vetting process as being conducted by both the FBI and the department of homeland security. Because of the disastrous results we’ve had so far with the screening process, especially the department of homeland security, I think it was a very good idea to have another set of eyeballs looking at that process.

Back in August, we did an investigation—the inspector General did—of the Department of Homeland Security, and they had 72 individuals that were on the terrorist watch list that were actually working at the Department of Homeland Security. The director had to resign because of that. Then we went further and did and eight-airport investigation. We had staffers go into eight different airports to test the department of homeland security screening process at major airports. They had a 95 percent failure rate. We had folks—this was a testing exercise, so we had folks going in there with guns on their ankles, and other weapons on their persons, and there was a 95 percent failure rate.

I have very low confidence based on empirical data that we’ve got on the Department of Homeland Security. I think we desperately need another set of eyeballs looking at the vetting process. That’s vetting that’s being done at major airports where we have a stationary person coming through a facility, and we’re failing 95 percent of the time. I have even lower confidence that they can conduct the vetting process in places like Jordan, or Belize or on the Syrian border, or in Cairo, or Beirut in any better fashion, especially given the huge volume of applicants we’ve had seeking refugee status.

JIM: Even if you’re right that the system needs strengthening, the most likely way that a terrorist would come into this country is not through an 18-24 month-long process, but through this Visa program that allows 20 million people from 38 countries to come here every single year with absolutely no prior approval at all.

We had Democratic and Republican proposals on this bill, and there wasn’t a dime’s worth of difference between the two of them. It became a sort of a proxy battle over immigration. You had a bunch of Republican governors who were using it politically, and saying, “we’re going to stop refugees from coming into our state, which is baloney because they have no ability—zero ability—under the constitution to actually prevent refugees from coming into their state. You also had other people on the far left saying that this would stop every person from coming into the United States. In both cases, if they only took the time to read the bill, they would see that it did not do either. The democratic proposal also requires a multi-layered vetting process of refugees.

The reason the refugee issue came up and not the Visa waiver program is because in the Paris example, you had somebody go into the stream of legitimate refugees and then perpetrate acts of violence upon the civilians in Paris. That’s why that example came to the forefront.

I agree with you—I think the Visa waiver program, where you’ve got 20 million people coming in, versus the [refugees] coming in, 10,000? perhaps? At the end of the day, obviously the Visa waiver program is the one that we should be looking at….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Boston Marathon jihad murderer wants a new trial

SecDef on Pakistan: “We do press them on the need to fight terrorists”

U.S. State Department Genocide Victim Ruling Excludes Middle East Christians

Nina Shea of the Washington, D.C.-based Hudson Institute Center for Religious Freedman is the most outspoken critic of Administration policies towards Middle Eastern Christian and other non-Muslim religious minorities.  The latest episode concerns a proposed ruling by the State Department of minorities threatened by extinction by the Islamic State, as a predicate for possible rescue, asylum determinations and assistance. Incredibly this ruling excludes, those Christians in Syria and Iraq, who are threatened with extinction by ISIS barbarity.. Shea writes about this in a National Review On-line article, “ISIS Genocide Victims Do Not Include Christians, the State Department Is Poised to Rule.

The State Department official poised to issue the ruling is none other than Anne Patterson, former U.S. Ambassador to Egypt, and now Assistant Secretary of State, Bureau of Near East Affairs. Patterson was a controversial figure and supporter of ousted Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi, a Muslim Brotherhood leader.

Shea cites an investigative  report by Michael Isikoff about the callous rationale behind why Patterson chose to Include Yazidis, but exclude Syriac and, especially Chaldean Christians:

Yazidis, according to the story by investigative reporter Michael Isikoff, are going to be officially recognized as genocide victims, and rightly so. Yet Christians, who are also among the most vulnerable religious minority groups that have been deliberately and mercilessly targeted for eradication by ISIS, are not. This is not an academic matter. A genocide designation would have significant policy implications for American efforts to restore property and lands taken from the minority groups and for offers of aid, asylum, and other protections to such victims. Worse, it would mean that, under the Genocide Convention, the United States and other governments would not be bound to act to suppress or even prevent the genocide of these Christians.

The rationale for Patterson ruling:

An unnamed State Department official was quoted by Isikoff as saying that only the attacks on Yazidis have made “the high bar” of the genocide standard and as pointing to the mass killing of 1,000 Yazidi men and the enslavement of thousands of Yazidi women and girls. To propose that Christians have been simply driven off their land but not suffered similar fates is deeply misinformed. In fact, the last Christians to pray in the language spoken by Jesus are also being deliberately targeted for extinction through equally brutal measures. Christians have been executed by the thousands. Christian women and girls are vulnerable to sexual enslavement. Many of their clergy have been assassinated and their churches and ancient monasteries demolished or desecrated. They have been systematically stripped of all their wealth, and those too elderly or sick to flee ISIS-controlled territory have been forcibly converted to Islam or killed, such as an 80-year-old woman who was burned to death for refusing to abide by ISIS religious rules.

Shea notes the clear evidence of ISIS atrocities against  Christian communities in Syria and Iraq;

ISIS atrocities against Christians became public in June 2014 when the jihadists stamped Christian homes in Mosul with the red letter N for “Nazarene” and began enforcing its “convert or die” policy. The atrocities continue. Recently the Melkite Catholic bishop of Aleppo reported that 1,000 Christians, including two Orthodox bishops, have been kidnapped and murdered in his city alone. In September, ISIS executed, on videotape, three Assyrian Christian men and threatened to do the same to 200 more being held captive by the terrorist group. Recent reports by an American Christian aid group state that several Christians who refused to renounce their faith were raped, beheaded, or crucified a few months ago.

Christian women and girls are also enslaved and sexually abused. Three Christian females sold in ISIS slave markets were profiled in a New York Times Magazine report last summer. ISIS rules allow Christian sabaya, that is, their sexual enslavement. Its magazine Dabiq explicitly approved the enslavement of Christian girls in Nigeria, and the jihadist group posted prices for Christian, as well as Yazidi, female slaves in Raqqa.

The Congressional response to the State Department exclusion of Christians-  H.R. 75:

In recent weeks, the stalwart Knights of Columbus have been placing emotionally searing ads in Politico and elsewhere advocating the passage of H.R. 75.

This bipartisan bill was initiated by Representative Jeff Fortenberry (R., Neb.) and Representative Anna Eshoo (D., Calif.) to declare that genocide is being faced by Christians, Yazidis, and other vulnerable groups. The ads — depicting a mother and child, who appear as the very personifications of grief, against a landscape of ISIS destruction — might strike a nerve within the Obama administration. But as of now, the administration looks poised to preempt the bill and render a grave injustice to the suffering Christians of Iraq and Syria.

One who knows how dangerous this misbegotten ruling by Patterson is Joseph Kassab, President of the Iraqi Christian Advocacy and Empowerment Institution. (See out interview with Kassab in the November, NER: Iraqi Christians Face Extinction.  Note this exchange with Kassab:

Gordon:  How threatening is the ISIS genocide towards Assyrian–Chaldean Christian communities in both Iraq and Syria?

Kassab:  ISIS brutalities and atrocities committed against innocent Christians and Yazidis in Iraq is a very serious issue that needs to be immediately confronted by the international community. These evil acts of ISIS are leading to serious cultural and human genocide. ISIS’ acts of brutality are intentional to gain the attention of the world and the global media is falling for it. Our suggestion is not to fall for it as it is better to look into their evil Islamic ideology and expose it to the world.

Kassab voiced  prescient concern about the fate of his Chaldean Christian  co-religionists following the fall of Mosul to ISIS in June 2014. Watch this  You Tube Overview video interview by Raymond Arroyo with Kassab. Note Kassab’s prediction of the fate that may already  have be fallen Iraqi Christians, extinction;  if assistance is not speedily  forthcoming from the Administration.

Over a year has passed since Iraqi Christians fled from Mosul and the Biblical Nineveh plains. They languish ill-housed as urban refugees in Iraqi Kurdistan. They are without prospects for sanctuary in the West and Diaspora, because they allegedly do not qualify for asylum status under UN definitions applied by the State Department Bureau of population, Migration and Refugees.  Now, Assistant Secretary Patterson is poised to deprive Syrian and Iraqi Christians of sanctuary here in the US. Despite, as Kassab has demonstrated they have been vetted and accredited for possible P2/P3 Family reunification Visas.

The mean-spiritedness of Patterson and the State Department may assign these ancient Christian minorities to possible extinction with this proposed Genocide ruling. Their behavior is appalling and beyond contempt. All Americans should be outraged. They should press for passage of H.R. 75 by the House effectively rebuking this incredulous State Department proposed ruling.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review. The featured image is of the two blindfolded men, shaved by Islamic militants, who were crucified for their belief in Christianity.

A Muslim organization’s influence operation on Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT)

Yesterday we told you that Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) is leading the charge to lessen the security screening for Syrian and other Middle Eastern refugees and he wants to expand the so-called P-3 (fraud ridden!) family reunification program.

See yesterday’s post by clicking here.

(When I mentioned to a friend that I had updated my post with that information (thanks to Kyle), she suggested I write a second post because as a subscriber, who received the earlier one, she would not see the update.)Now we know the answer to the question I asked all of you to help answer.  Looming over Blumenthal’s shoulder is none other than Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR)- Connecticut director Mongi Dhaouadi.

But it is worth mentioning again because this is now the second time we have seen CAIR involving itself directly in the Syrian (mostly Muslim) resettlement issue (and you can bet they are not advocating for the persecuted Syrian Christians).

Clearly their interest is in boosting the Muslim population in the US.

CAIR was here in the St. Louis ‘Bring them here march’ last month.

Here is Mr. Dhaouadi’s bio at CAIR’s website:

Mongi Dhaouadi
Executive Director

Mongi S. Dhaouadi was born and raised in Tunisia. He moved to the US when he was 19 years old and studied Electrical Engineering at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. As The Executive director of CAIR-CT, he conducts civil rights workshops throughout the state of Connecticut under the title “Know Your Rights.” Also, he leads several workshops and discussions on Islamophobia and the Muslim experience before and after 9/11. He has participated in and led several media campaigns and press conferences on issues concerning the Muslim community ranging from discrimination cases to advocating for the change of racial profiling laws in the state of Connecticut. Dhaouadi was featured in countless local, national, and international media outlets including NPR, FOX News, and Democracy Now with Amy Goodman. During the summer, he runs a youth internship program during which high school and college students work on several projects ranging from preparing a toolkit on Islamic cultural competency for schools, to writing and publishing articles from a Muslim youth perspective in the local papers and publications. Dhaouadi leads a Connecticut delegation at the Capitol Hill visits; an event that is organized every year by CAIR National, where members of the Muslim community visit their representatives in Wasington, DC and advocate for issues of concern domestic and foreign. Prior to joining CAIR-CT on a full time bases Dhaouadi was the Head Administrator at SKF Academy in Hamden Connecticut. Dhaouadi is married with three children: ages 11, 14 and 18. He lives with his family in New London, Connecticut. His favorite past time is playing or coaching soccer.

So far Connecticut doesn’t get very many refugees compared to other states.  I guess Blumenthal and Dhaouadi would like to change that.  Go to this map and have a look!

Is CAIR getting into the refugee resettlement program where you live?  Let me know.  And, while you are at it, see if you notice the involvement of Islamic Relief (USA) as well.

Go here to find the regional offices of Islamic Relief (USA) thanks to reader Cathy.

RELATED ARTICLE: A great honor has come my way! Called out AGAIN by Right Wing Watch

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of CAIR-Connecticut’s Executive Director Mongi Dhaouadi behind Senator Blumenthal.

VIDEO: Muslim Brotherhood affiliated charity bringing Syrian refugees to U.S.

Invasion of Europe news…..

And, you can bet they would scream bloody murder if the Cameron government ever had the guts to put persecuted Christians at the head of the line.

BTW, Islamic Relief is working in the U.S. to help Syrians get resettled in your states—Kentucky and Maryland that we know of (so far).

I wanted to learn more about the new UK Director of Islamic Relief, Imran Madden.  I didn’t find much, but am posting this 2012 Al Jazeera interview I found informative…..a bit off-topic!

Here is the surprising (not!) news from Islamic Relief (UK must dramatically accelerate Syrian resettlement):

The new UK Director of Islamic Relief will use his speech in a fringe debate at the Conservative Party conference in Manchester to urge the Government to inject greater urgency into resettling Syrian refugees in the UK and leave ‘no diplomatic stone unturned’ in the search for a lasting peace in Syria.

At a conference fringe debate organised by Islamic Relief and World Vision (details in Notes to Editors along with details of separate Muslim Charities Forum fringe event), Imran Madden will speak alongside the Minister of State for International Development, Desmond Swayne MP, to highlight the enormous human cost of forgotten crises around the world – and the Syrian conflict in particular.

They recommend 5 prescriptions for the crisis, this is #5:

A dramatic acceleration of planned refugee resettlement in the UK.

Related:  First Syrians headed to Northern Ireland, here.  They will be mostly Muslims as the UK is working with the UNHCR to pick its refugees.

About the video (and maybe too much in the weeds for most readers!):   I’ve been following the Rohingya refugee issue for nearly eight years.  In the most recent years, the reason for the original outbreak in the latest wave of violence in Burma (Myanmar) which broke out when three Rohingya Muslim men raped a Buddhist woman, has been long forgotten.  I have been so annoyed over the years to see that original spark for the latest violence between the ethnic groups expunged from media coverage. The media and humanitarian agitators (including the OIC) have made it look like the Rohingya were pure as the driven snow.

I was thus surprised to see this 2012 Al Jazeera piece (an interview with Imran Madden) that actually does mention the rape that started it all.

For Hillary watchers out there, one of the few foreign policy success stories that Hillary was earlier mentioning was supposedly bringing some democracy to Burma. She even sent the ‘Podesta Group’ there to help shore-up her legacy.  Dead silence now as Burma is still in internal conflict.

If you are interested in the Rohingya issue we have enough posts here that you could write a book (see Rohingya Reports category).

For all of our posts on the ‘Invasion of Europe’ go here.

U.S. Liberal Jews pushing for more Syrian refugees. Why?

At one time I was a member of the national board of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS) in the early 1980’s when the priority was helping Jews escape from tyranny in Russia, Ethiopia and Syria. There are reported to be less than a dozen elderly Jews left in Syria. HIAS was also involved in processing Vietnamese boat people refugees in the US.  That was over three decades ago.  HIAS is one of the 11 Voluntary Agencies (VOLAGS) under the State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration (PRM) and Department of Health and Human Services Office of Refugee Resettlement pushing to bring to the US 100,000 Syrian refugees streaming out of the more than 5 million displaced internally and in external camps in Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan.

HIAS has joined with Arab American advocacy groups and immigration lawyers, some controlled by Muslim Brotherhood leaders, like those on the Syrian American Council, to bring predominately Muslim Syrian refugees to America. As we have seen in the flood of an estimated  400,000 Syrian refugees, a vanguard of whom have entered the broken open borders of the Shengen system of EU countries, the predominate demographics are young men,. Among who may be ISIS sympathizers that may add to the already daunting problems that FBI Director Comey had said already faces us in all 50 states.

President Obama announced last week an increase in the annual allotment of 10,000 Syrian refugees to be resettled here. The current total PRM allotment under the Refugee Act of 1980 is 70,000. The PRM updated a list of local resettlement agencies in more than 180 communities throughout the US being screened as potential recipients of these Syrian and other UN designated refugees. One of those on the PRM listed is Catholic Charities in my community of Pensacola in northwest Florida.

A Pew Trust study revealed that 1.7 Muslim immigrants were admitted to the US over the US over the period from 1992 to 2010. Upwards of 250,000 Muslim refugees have already been admitted under the US Refugee Resettlement Program from conflict zones in the Middle East, Eastern and sub-Sahara Africa and South Asia since 1990. One refugee family assisted by the program in Boston were the Chechen Tsarneavs, whose sons, Tamerlane and Dzhokhar, who became Jihadist terrorists who perpetrated the heinous Boston Marathon bombing. We have written extensively about assimilation and national security problems of Somali refugees in the U.S., especially the problems in the Twin Cities of Minneapolis-St. Paul, Columbus, Ohio and other émigré communities. Some of these communities have spawned émigré fundamentalist fighters who joined terrorist groups Al Shabaab in Somalia and ISIS in Syria and Iraq. Some of these émigré jihadis have returned to the U.S. and been arrested and convicted for material support for terrorism. Now the threat may be self motivated jihadists who perpetrated attacks such as in Garland, Texas and the deadly attack on Marine and Naval reservists in Chattanooga, Tennessee.

On 9/11 the Jewish Telegraph Association (JTA) reported these developments in an article, “Arab Americans look to Jews for help on Syrian refugees:”

Over the last few days, HIAS, the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, launched a petition drive calling on President Barack Obama to swiftly open America’s gates to an additional 100,000 Syrians, and the president of the Union for Reform Judaism wrote to the president and congressional leaders calling for a coordinated international response.

“Our great nation must respond immediately by providing safety, food, shelter, refuge, and dignity,” wrote the Reform leader, Rabbi Rick Jacobs. “How can a nation built by refugees from political persecution turn our back on refugees fleeing religious and political persecution?”

Omar Hossino, the Washington-based Syrian American Council’s public relations director, singled out HIAS as being particularly helpful.

“HIAS has been consistently calling for more resettlement and pushing back against the discriminatory rhetoric opposing opening the doors to Syrian refugees,” he said.

This week, HIAS president Mark Hetfield held a conference call with American Jewish organizational officials to talk about his agency’s decision to join with Arab-American leaders in critiquing U.S. policies that limit the numbers of refugees settled in the United States to about 70,000 per year.

Only about 1,500 Syrian refugees have been admitted since the start of the civil war in 2011. Obama announced Thursday that the United States soon would take in 10,000 refugees, but Hetfield said that number was inadequate.

“We are dealing with a global humanitarian crisis to which the entire world must respond,” he said in a statement issued within hours of Obama’s announcement. “If Germany can open its doors to 800,000 asylum seekers, the U.S., with a population four times the size of Germany’s and a history as a nation of immigrants and refugees, can take 100,000.”

Hetfield appealed to regional Jewish groups to act on the grassroots level to help absorb refugees.

Akram Abusharar, a Gaza-born U.S. immigration attorney who handles approximately 80 Syrian asylum cases per month, said HIAS’s involvement was a boost to his cause.

“The Jewish community has more capacity to move the politicians on this issue than the Arab-American community,” he told JTA in an interview.

But more recently Hossino has tracked an uptick in opposition to bringing Muslim immigrants to the United States — especially among Republican candidates and members of congress. In television appearances last weekend, Republican presidential candidate Carly Fiorina said the United States has “done its fair share” when it comes to the refugee crisis. Sen. Rand Paul asserted that the U.S. “can’t accept the whole world” and should adopt a cautious stance towards resettlement.

Hetfield, in the conference call, said concerns about the Muslim and Arab identity of the refugees are misplaced, reminding listeners of similar reasoning when some nations in the 1930s blocked Jewish immigration from Germany.

So why is HIAS joining with other willing NGOs like the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, Lutheran World Refugee and Immigration Services, Church World Services and the International Rescue Committee promoting a flood of Syrian Refugees to come to the U.S.?  Is it a humanitarian gesture of openness?  Or is it the fees they receive  from processing refugees and asylees who fit the UN and US Citizenship and Immigration Service definitionthat determines who  qualifies to be admitted  for asylum under the Refugee Act of 1980? Those refugees that are admitted under the US resettlement programs receive a smorgasbord of federal and state welfare, medical, housing and other benefits that some migration specialists’ estimate could exceed 10 to 12 billion dollars annually. That taxpayer burden might double if HIAS and other VOLAGs, with the assistance of the Obama White House, succeed in dramatically increasing the allotments for Syrian Refugees over the next several years.

Syrian Christian refugees(1)

Syrian Christian Refugees.

If anyone among the displaced Syrian refugees deserves priority it is the Syriac Christians and other non-Muslim religious minorities with existing Diaspora communities in the US. Communities that might provide private sponsorship assistance. Those traditional private sponsorship programs like the Canadian federal effort have demonstrated the ability to rapidly absorb refugees who share basic values traditional with our society.  We also have the examples of Jewish philanthropists like the venerable UK publisher, 95 year old Lord George Weidenfeld, a holocaust survivor, spearheading the Safe Havens Fund actively supporting efforts to spare a fraction of these threatened Christian and non-Muslim Middle East minorities. HIAS could expand upon Weidenfeld’s example.

HIAS, Jewish Federations and the leaders of the  Reform Movement should carefully vet Arab American ‘partners’ before sallying forth on humanitarian grounds to admit more Syrian and predominately Muslim refugees. Especially, when there are threatened Middle East Christians and other non-Muslim minorities that deserve preference. That is demonstrated by the Safe Havens Fund of Lord Weidenfeld, who received the Theodore Herzl Award of the World Jewish Congress.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review.

Could the Jig Finally Be Up for Huma Abedin?

In FrontPage this morning I explain why the current mini-controversy over Huma Abedin bespeaks a much larger problem with America’s contemporary political culture.

They got Al Capone for tax evasion, and they may get Huma Abedin for “violating rules regarding vacation and sick leave” and for the “possible exchange of unsecured, classified data.” To be sure, these are serious charges, and the available evidence makes it abundantly clear that there is ample warrant to investigate and perhaps even charge Abedin. However, it is a sign of a serious problem with today’s political culture that even more serious allegations regarding Abedin have never been investigated, and almost certainly never will be.

Huma Abedin’s Muslim Brotherhood connections have been fully exposed by Andrew McCarthy and bruited about for years. The facts are quite public, albeit largely ignored: Abedin’s parents are both members of the Muslim Brotherhood, but her links to the organization are not just familial. Abedin was for twelve years the assistant editor of the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs (JMMA), which was founded by Abdullah Omar Naseef, a Muslim Brotherhood operative and al-Qaeda financier. Naseef and Abedin both appeared on the JMMA’s masthead from 1996 to 2003.

Consider that Abedin worked closely for seven years with a member of the Muslim Brotherhood who financed al-Qaeda in light of the Obama Administration’s foreign policy during the years that Hillary Clinton was the Secretary of State. Everyone acknowledges that Abedin and Clinton are extremely close, and that Abedin controls access to Clinton and has tremendous influence over her. Hillary Clinton’s tenure at the State Department was distinguished by the remarkable sight of Egyptian anti-Muslim Brotherhood protestors holding signs denouncing the President of the United States for supporting terrorism, and by the Benghazi debacle, when the Secretary of State sat back and did nothing as jihad terrorists murdered four Americans, including an ambassador.

Then there was the Benghazi cover-up, during which Clinton vowed to have a man who made a video criticizing Muhammad arrested and imprisoned for supposedly provoking the riots, thereby placing herself firmly in opposition to the freedom of speech and aligning herself with the Organization of Islamic Cooperation’s efforts to compel Western governments to criminalize criticism of Islam (under the guise of “incitement to religious hatred”).

Is it at all possible that Huma Abedin, whose parents were active in the Brotherhood and who worked for twelve years for a journal closely linked to the Brotherhood, had anything to do with the pro-Muslim Brotherhood orientation of the Obama/Clinton State Department? In today’s poisonous political culture, it isn’t possible even to ask the question without incurring charges of “Islamophobia” – as we saw in 2012, when Representative Michele Bachmann (R-MN) had the temerity to call for an investigation of possible Muslim Brotherhood infiltration of the U.S. government.

Bachmann explained: “The concerns about the foreign influence of immediate family members is such a concern to the U.S. Government that it includes these factors as potentially disqualifying conditions for obtaining a security clearance, which undoubtedly Ms. Abedin has had to obtain to function in her position. For us to raise issues about a highly-based U.S. Government official with known immediate family connections to foreign extremist organizations is not a question of singling out Ms. Abedin.  In fact, these questions are raised by the U.S. Government of anyone seeking a security clearance.” And that was to say nothing about Abedin’s association with Naseef and work with the JMMA.

Now that Abedin is suspected of mishandling classified material, Bachmann’s questions about Abedin’s security clearance are piquant in retrospect. But when she first raised them, Bachmann was ridiculed and vilified, even earning a denunciation from John McCain: “These sinister accusations rest solely on a few unspecified and unsubstantiated associations of members of Huma’s family, none of which have been shown to harm or threaten the United States in any way. These attacks on Huma have no logic, no basis, and no merit. And they need to stop now.”

It was actually about more than just Abedin’s family, and a perfectly sound case could be made, in light of Obama’s foreign policy disasters, that Abedin’s Muslim Brotherhood links possibly did harm and threaten the United States. But Bachmann’s name was dragged through the mud in 2012 for talking about all this, and now none of the new allegations against Abedin raise any issue with her possible Muslim Brotherhood connections.

That few people care about those connections, and that those who do are dismissed as “far-Right bigots,” shows how myopic and foolish our contemporary political culture is. If Huma Abedin had a hand in the pro-Muslim Brotherhood tilt of the Obama/Clinton State Department, that would be a far graver offense than anything she is accused of now, just as old Capone was guilty of far greater crimes than tax evasion. But on the other hand, those tax evasion charges ended Capone’s operations for good, and so if Hillary’s infamous email server does the same to Huma Abedin, no one who values America’s historic role as leader of the free world will have any reason to complain.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Ahmadi imam says Muslim clerics have perverted Islam for 1400 years

Iran’s President warns of plots to portray Islam as a religion of violence

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Flynn: I think the administration.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jihad on Churches: Muslim Persecution of Christians

On Sunday, March 15, as Christian churches around the world were celebrating morning mass, two churches in Pakistan—one Catholic, one Protestant—were attacked by Islamic suicide bombers. At least 17 people were killed and over 70 wounded.

The Taliban claimed responsibility. It is believed that the group had hoped for much greater death tolls, as there were almost 2,000 people in both churches at the time of the explosions.

According to eyewitnesses, two suicide bombers approached the gates of the two churches and tried to enter them. When they were stopped—including by a 15-year-old Christian youth who blocked them with his body—the Islamic jihadis self-detonated. Witnesses saw “body parts flying through the air.”

According to an official statement of the Justice and Peace Commission of the Episcopal Conference of Pakistan, despite all the threats received by the churches, authorities only provided “minimal” security.

As in other Muslim-majority nations, churches in Pakistan are under attack.  On September 22, 2013, in Peshawar, Islamic suicide bombers entered the All Saints Church right after Sunday mass and blew themselves up in the midst of approximately 550 congregants, killing nearly 90 worshippers. Many were Sunday school children, women, and choir members. At least 120 were injured.

One parishioner recalled how “human remains were strewn all over the church.” (For an idea of the aftermath of suicide attacks on churches, see these graphic pictures.)

In 2001, Islamic gunmen stormed St. Dominic’s Protestant Church, opening fire on the congregants and killing at least 16 worshippers, mostly women and children.

The rest of March’s roundup of Muslim persecution of Christians around the world includes, but is not limited to, the following accounts, listed by theme and country in alphabetical order, not necessarily according to severity.

Muslim Attacks on Christian Churches and Monasteries

Central African Republic: At least eight churches were burned in the northern province of Nana Grebizi, after heavily armed Muslim Fulani herdsmen attacked several villages. Two Christians, including a pastor, were killed in the attack; another Christian was severely tortured. After the carnage, the Islamic herdsmen started fires and looted the local population. The blaze destroyed swathes of farmland, at least eight churches, several other mission centers and an unknown number of Christian homes.

Egypt: During the early morning hours of March 9, the Coptic Catholic Church of Kafr el-Dawar was attacked by armed men who used an explosive device against the place of worship.  Two policemen were hospitalized after the attack.  Separately, Dr. Yusuf al-Burhami, a leading cleric in Egypt’s Salafi movement, appeared in a video that surfaced in March saying that “Destroying churches is permissible—as long as the destruction does not bring harm to Muslims, such as false claims that Muslims are persecuting Christians, leading to [foreign] occupations.”  He further added that “the reason we agree to their [churches] being built, via the article in the constitution dealing with worship, and the reason we do not collect the jizya [tribute] from the Christians, is because the condition of Muslims in the current era is well known to the nations of the world—they are weak and deteriorating among the people.” Burhami explained that when the Arab Muslims first conquered Egypt in the 7th century, the ancient nation was Christian, and because the Muslims were few in number, Coptic Christian churches were allowed to remain—“just as the prophet allowed the Jews to remain in Khaibar after he opened [conquered] it, but once Muslims grew in strength and number, [second caliph] Omar al-Khattab drove them out according to the prophet’s command, ‘Drive out the Jews and Christians from the Peninsula.’”

Germany: A potential jihadi attack on the cathedral and synagogue in Bremen was averted following action by police, a Belgian newspaper reported.  Numerous police guarded the cathedral and synagogue and searched a local Muslim cultural center.

Iraq: Islamic State militants blew up a 10th century Chaldean Catholic church north of Mosul and bulldozed a nearby graveyard.  According to Nineveh Yakou—an Assyrian Archaeologist and Director of Cultural Heritage and Indigenous Affairs at A Demand for Action—the Saint George monastery was “wiped out” by IS.  The building was founded by the Assyrian Church in the 10thcentury but rebuilt as a seminary by the Chaldean Catholic Church in 1846. “The current monastery was built on an archeological site containing ancient Assyrian ruins. It was an important show of continuity from the Assyrian to our culture,” Yakou said. “ISIS is wiping out the cultural heritage of Iraq. The monastery was classified as cultural heritage. It’s a cultural and ethnic cleansing.”

Kenya: On the afternoon of February 28, in Maramande, Hindi, Muslims from neighboring Somali set a Christian church on fire.  This same church was set on fire last July 5, 2014, but was built again in January 2015.  According to the pastor of the twice-torched church, “These people do not want Christianity in this area….  They want to finish me so that Christianity will not go on here. But I will continue raising up my eyes to God for help.”  According to Morning Star News, “Violence in Kenya’s coastal region has accelerated in the past few years. On Jan. 11 in the Mombasa area, a gunman shot a Christian dead at the gate leading to a church building, apparently after mistaking him for the church pastor. Police reportedly said the assailants could be members of an active Islamic extremist terror cell in Mombasa blamed for past gun and grenade attacks.”

Lebanon: Unidentified persons invaded Mar Elias, an ancient Maronite church in Bekaa.  Along with damaging one of the church’s windows, they destroyed a portion of the flooring, as they dug a large hole near the altar.  According to Maronite Bishop Joseph Mouwad, much of the church’s sacred items were left intact and not stolen.  Instead, “they broke the tiles and dug the ground, apparently looking for something, though we do not know what.”  Fingerprints and cigarette butts were found. 

Muslim Slaughter of Christian ‘Infidels’

Central African Republic:   An argument between a taxi driver and his Muslim passenger led to the slaughter of at least 16 Christians in Bangui, the nation’s capital.  A Muslim man known as Aladji hailed a motorcycle taxi and asked to be taken to a Muslim-dominated district of Bangui. He was carrying a bag of grenades. When the motorcycle broke down, the driver stopped to fix it, but his agitated passenger pulled out a knife and tried to stab him. The driver overpowered Aladji and killed him instead.  After his body was found, Muslims marched to the Christian sector of the city where they slaughtered at least 16 Christians—some decapitated.  Authorities arrested 10 members of Seleka—the almost entirely Muslim rebel group—following the killings…. Click for complete report

RELATED ARTICLE: The Islamic State has displaced 100,000 Christians from Mosul