Tag Archive for: radical Islam

Israel, Hamas Trade Prisoners, Extend Ceasefire

Israel and Hamas agreed to a four-day ceasefire which began Friday, during which Israel has agreed to release three Palestinian prisoners for every Israeli hostage freed. As of early Monday morning, Islamist terrorists based in Gaza had released 58 hostages, including 39 Israelis, while Israel had freed 117 Palestinians. Despite alleged and real violations of the ceasefire, the combatants agreed Monday to extend the ceasefire for two more days.

Calls for a pause in fighting began immediately after Hamas terrorists invaded Israel on October 7, killing more than 1,200 Israelis, wounding more than 5,000, and kidnapping more than 240 hostages. Hamas militants directly targeted civilians, including elderly women, children, and even babies; they burned, raped, murdered, and committed unspeakable acts of brutality. In context, early calls for a ceasefire — after Hamas finished shooting but before Israel began — implicitly denied that Israel had a right to defend itself, and therefore a right to exist as a sovereign nation.

Demands for a ceasefire intensified as Israel’s air force bombed military targets and Hamas looted humanitarian stores throughout Gaza. On October 27, a majority of world governments passed a resolution of the U.N. General Assembly that called for an “immediate” truce in Gaza and contained no condemnation of Hamas. On November 1, the anti-Semitic wing of the Democratic Party pressured President Biden to reverse his rhetorical support for Israel and add his voice to the growing chorus chanting, “ceasefire now!” On November 9, Israel agreed to observe four-hour daily pauses to allow civilians to evacuate.

“Just as the United States would not agree to a ceasefire after the bombing of Pearl Harbor, or after the terrorist attack of 9/11, Israel will not agree to a cessation of hostilities with Hamas,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in response to global pressure for Israel to unilaterally lay down its arms.

Circumstances changed early last week when Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) successfully completed a two-front pincer advance on Al-Shifa hospital complex in northwest Gaza, which they have long identified as sitting above a key node of Hamas operations. The IDF has produced surveillance footage showing Hamas dragging two hostages through Al-Shifa hospital on October 7, as well as stolen IDF vehicles brought to the center. Israel believes that one hostage, Corporal Noa Marciano, was murdered in the hospital before her body was later found several blocks away. They also found a weapons laboratory in the basement containing finished and half-finished mortars, warheads, thermobaric weapons, and RPGs.

The IDF has also made efforts to explore the web of tunnels underneath Al-Shifa. On Wednesday, they showed journalists a tunnel stretching for 55 meters, which led to a restroom, kitchen, a large room with air conditioning, and several smaller rooms before ending in a blast-proof door with loopholes that would allow Hamas fighters to defend it against the IDF. The IDF also found dozens of guns, ammunition clips, and grenades in the tunnel.

“The findings prove beyond all doubt that buildings in the hospital complex are used as infrastructure for the Hamas terror organization, for terror activity,” the IDF said. “This is further proof of the cynical use that the Hamas terror organization makes of the residents of the Gaza Strip as a human shield for its murderous terror activities.”

It’s unclear whether Israel has completely explored Hamas’s tunnel network under Al-Shifa. The aforementioned tunnel’s only entrance was a four-foot-square hole in the ground, which the IDF only discovered by accident. This raises the possibility that similar underground features are similarly well-concealed. IDF forces exploring other tunnel corridors have found at least one exit leading to a kindergarten and another tunnel underneath a mosque. “It’s going to take time” for Israel to unearth all Hamas hideouts under the 10-acre hospital complex, said Lieutenant Colonel Richard Hecht.

However, Israel’s capture of Hamas’s chief military post did give it an opportunity to contemplate a ceasefire. Israel’s two objectives are freeing the hostages and exterminating Hamas from Gaza. Unfortunately, the IDF did not manage to free any more hostages during their advance on Al-Shifa. The painstaking measures it adopts to protect civilians necessarily slow down its movements, enabling Hamas to spirit away its captives before Israeli rescuers can arrive. Israel is still committed to destroying Hamas, but it agreed to a ceasefire to negotiate the release of as many hostages as possible.

Before the ceasefire took effect, Israel demolished tunnels located beneath Al-Shifa and redeployed troops to the ceasefire lines.

The four-day ceasefire went into effect on Friday at 7 a.m. local time. On Friday, Hamas released 24 hostages — 13 Israeli women and children, 10 Thai citizens, and a Filipino citizen — and Israel reciprocated by releasing 39 imprisoned Palestinians. On Saturday, after a delay, Hamas released 17 hostages — 13 Israelis and four Thai nationals — and Israel released another 39 Palestinians. On Sunday, Hamas released another 17 hostages — 13 Israelis, three Thai nationals, and a dual Israeli-American citizen (a four-year-old girl whose parents Hamas killed on October 7) — and Israel released another 39 Palestinians. All told, Hamas has released 39 Israelis, 17 Thai citizens, one Filipino citizen, and one dual Israeli-American citizen, while Israel has released 117 Palestinian prisoners.

As of Monday afternoon, a fourth prisoner exchange had begun, with Hamas reportedly releasing 11 Israelis in exchange for the release of 33 Palestinian prisoners.

Thus far, all the prisoners exchanged between Hamas and Israel have been women and children. Many of the Palestinian prisoners released by Israel are teenage boys from the West Bank convicted of security offenses such as stone-throwing or disturbing the public order.

The Thai and Filipino hostages were not part of the Israel-Hamas ceasefire, brokered by the U.S., Qatar, and Egypt but were apparently released in a separate deal the Kingdom of Thailand brokered with Iran.

With the release of more hostages, the world learns more about the conditions they faced. “Their captivity sounds horrific — held underground for seven weeks, barely fed, sleeping on chairs, and denied the ability to go to the bathroom for hours; some in need of medical care, including one elderly woman in life-threatening condition,” summarized National Review’s Jim Geraghty.

On Monday afternoon, Qatari Foreign Ministry spokesman Majid Al Ansary announced that Israel and Hamas had agreed to extend the truce for two more days, allowing for the release of another 20 hostages. This agreement would extend the ceasefire until 7 a.m. local time on Thursday.

However, the preservation of the ceasefire is not automatically guaranteed. Unspecified Palestinian militants broke the ceasefire after only 15 minutes when they fired a rocket towards southern Israel — fortunately, it did no damage. “The world barely noticed; no one really expects Hamas to uphold its end of the agreement,” interpreted Geraghty. Hamas has also separated family units, in violation of the ceasefire.

For their part, Hamas officials have complained that Israel violated the terms of the ceasefire by not allowing humanitarian aid trucks into Gaza (Israel allowed 200 trucks carrying aid to enter), not releasing prisoners in the order Hamas wanted (Israel never promised to do so), and firing at Gazans seeking to return to northern Gaza (the ceasefire forbids reentry).

Hamas broke the last ceasefire on October 7 when, after years of lulling the IDF into a false sense of security, it launched a murderous surprise attack on the holiest day in the Jewish calendar. Still smarting from the latest blow, Israel is in no mood to trust the untrustworthy Hamas to abide by another ceasefire.

Whether the ceasefire continues for two days only or extends much longer, there is little hope of a permanent peace between Hamas and Israel. The Iranian-backed terrorist group has stated repeatedly and publicly that it aims at the total “annihilation” of Israel. Faced with an existential threat, Israel has no choice but to make its war aim to “destroy Hamas” — at least in Gaza. Thus, Israel is prepared to resume military operations in “full force” as soon as the ceasefire ends — assuming Hamas waits that long.

AUTHOR

Joshua Arnold

Joshua Arnold is a senior writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Some Facts about Israel You Might Have Missed

Professor Suspended for Saying “Hamas Are Murderers”

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2023 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

UN Refugee Fund for Gaza Is Being Used to Finance Terrorism and Anti-Semitism, Experts Say

In the wake of the atrocities perpetrated by Hamas terrorists that killed over 1,400 Israeli civilians on October 7, increased scrutiny is being centered on the ideology that fueled the barbarity that took place. Experts say that funds allocated to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) have not only been funneled to terrorists in Gaza, but have also been used to fund educational materials for Palestinian youth that is rife with anti-Semitism.

UNRWA was established in 1949 by the U.N. General Assembly with the original purpose of aiding the refugees that resulted from the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. Since then, the fund has been renewed almost every year and has grown astronomically to a current annual budget of over $1 billion. The Biden administration contributed $153.7 million in U.S. taxpayer dollars to the fund in June, which the UNRWA commissioner claimed would “help us keep over 700 schools and 140 health centres open over the next months.” For decades, however, the fund has been embroiled in controversy, as reviews of the fund’s expenditures showed that a significant amount of money was going to terror-group affiliates.

In 2018, the Trump administration ended funding for UNRWA due to the corruption that was uncovered. A report found that less than 5% of the population that it funded actually met the original definition of a “refugee.” But as experts have observed, this was only the tip of the iceberg. It was found that a number of the UNRWA staff working in Gaza had personal ties to terrorism and that “UNRWA schools in Gaza have been used by Hamas to launch rockets against Israel.”

What has become particularly distressing to observers is how the money is being used to fund schools that indoctrinate Palestinian youth to hate Israel and the Jewish people. On Monday, Itamar Marcus, founder and director of Palestinian Media Watch, joined “Washington Watch with Tony Perkins” to discuss the situation.

“Our first report on Palestinian schoolbooks … was in 1998, and they were filled with poison,” he explained. “At that time … [an] American representative said, ‘I read this material and I wanted to vomit.’ It’s just unimaginable.’ Americans condemned it then, and the United States continued funding the Palestinian Authority year after year after year, knowing what was happening already then.

Marcus continued, “[W]e did a report in 2007, which I decided to release in the Senate, and I turned to Hillary Clinton. I wanted a Democrat … someone who would [not] be automatically pro-Israel. And she appeared at a press conference with me … [and] said, ‘The Palestinians are profoundly poisoning the minds of their children.’ And that was 2007. I call the Palestinians who are running through the streets today murdering Israelis, the Hamas, as well as the Palestinian Authority, Fatah people, the mainstream. They are the poisoned generation. They were brought up on hate, on demonization. And that’s what we have today.”

Marcus went on to describe the specific beliefs that have been espoused by religious authorities in Gaza.

“Mahmoud Abbas is the head of the Palestinian Authority — he’s seen as the moderate,” he noted. “He has a personal adviser on Islam … name[ed] Mahmoud al-Habash. He went on TV and he said that the Jews have been the enemies of Islam since the beginning of time, literally since the time of Adam. … [He also said] when you see a Jew, it actually might be Satan in the form of a human. … He literally said that the Jews are subhuman. [He also] said that the Jews are humanoids — creatures that Allah created in the form of humans but aren’t really humans. So you’ve got the top religious figure in the Palestinian Authority [saying] that Jews are actually subhuman, either Satan or animals, but they’re humanoids, so of course you can kill them.”

Marcus also pointed out that Palestinian textbooks for schoolchildren include quotes from a hadith (an Islamic tradition attributed to Muhammad) that commands Muslims to kill Jews, and that TV programs owned and controlled by the Palestinian Authority teach children similar lessons. “Children have said they’ve learned in school to hate the Jews and kill them,” he noted. “We’ve had many, many chants and children’s programs where they talk about the Jews being the descendants of apes and pigs. … And one of the worst things that they’ve taught these kids is that they should go out and die for Allah, that if they [fight] against Jews and they’re killed, that’s the best thing that can happen to them.”

Perkins further wondered if peace is possible when Palestinian youth are taught that Israel has no right to exist.

“They deny Israel the right to exist as a state, and they deny Jews the right to exist as individuals,” Marcus somberly emphasized. “Those two together make peace impossible.”

AUTHOR

Dan Hart

Dan Hart is senior editor at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. ©2023 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Trump’s new counterterrorism strategy singles out ‘radical Islamists’

Bolton says: “Radical Islamist terrorist groups represent the preeminent transnational terrorist threat to the United States, and to United States’ interests abroad. The fact is the radical Islamic threat that we face is a form of ideology. This should not be anything new to anybody. King Abdullah of Jordan has frequently described the terrorist threat as a civil war within Islam that Muslims around the world recognize, and he is, after all, a direct descendent [sic] of the Sharif [inaudible], the keepers of the holy cities. If that’s how King Abdullah views it, I don’t think anybody should be surprised we see it as a kind of war, as well.”

The idea that there is a significant pushback to the jihad ideology within the Islamic world is a trifle overstated. The concept of jihad as meaning warfare against unbelievers in order to establish Islamic law’s hegemony over them is deeply rooted in Islamic texts and teachings, as well as in Islamic law. Nonetheless, in 2011 the Obama Administration removed all mention of Islam and jihad from counterterror training; this is a strong step in the right direction, toward once again enabling counterterror analysts to study and understand the motivating ideology of the enemy.

“New White House Counterterrorism Strategy Singles Out ‘Radical Islamists,’” by Adam Kredo, Washington Free Beacon, October 4, 2018:

The Trump administration is implementing a new, government-wide counterterrorism strategy that places renewed focus on combatting “radical Islamic terrorist groups,” marking a significant departure from the Obama administration, which implemented a series of policies aimed at deemphasizing the threat of Islamic terror groups.

In releasing the first national counterterrorism strategy since 2011, the Trump administration is working to take a drastically different approach than that of the former administration, according to senior U.S. officials.

While the Obama administration sought to dampen the United States’ focus on Islamic terror threats, the Trump administration has made this battle the centerpiece of its new strategy.

National Security Adviser John Bolton acknowledged in remarks to reporters Thursday afternoon that the new strategy is “a departure” from the former administration’s strategy, which has been characterized as a failure by Republican foreign policy voices due to the increasing number of domestic terror attacks and plots across the United States

“Radical Islamist terrorist groups represent the preeminent transnational terrorist threat to the United States, and to United States’ interests abroad,” Bolton said.

“The fact is the radical Islamic threat that we face is a form of ideology,” Bolton said. “This should not be anything new to anybody. King Abdullah of Jordan has frequently described the terrorist threat as a civil war within Islam that Muslims around the world recognize, and he is, after all, a direct descendent [sic] of the Sharif [inaudible], the keepers of the holy cities. If that’s how King Abdullah views it, I don’t think anybody should be surprised we see it as a kind of war, as well.”

“One may hope that the ideological fervor disappears, but sad to report, it remains strong all around the world, and even with the defeat of the ISIS territorial caliphate, we see the threat spreading to other countries,” Bolton added.

The Trump administration strategy also shifts the focus to Iran, characterizing the country as the foremost state sponsor of terror across the globe.

“The United States faces terrorist threats from Iran, which remains the most prominent state sponsor of terrorism that, really, the world’s central banker of international terrorism since 1979,” Bolton said. “And from other terrorist groups. Iran-sponsored terrorist groups such as Lebanese Hezbollah, Hamas, and Palestinian Islamic jihad, continue to pose a threat to the United States and our interests.”…

EDITORS NOTE: This column with photos originally appeared on Jihad Watch. The featured photo is by Sophie Keen on Unsplash.

Sudan Orders Demolition of 25 Church Buildings

We hope you read our engrossing, but disturbing series of articles on jihad genocide in the Sudan perpetrated by indicted war criminal, President Bashir.

Especially concerning was the disclosure of the Arab Coalition ‘final solution’ document captured in a Janjaweed truck by General Abakar M. Abdallah of Sudan United Movement. It presented evidence of Bashir’s plan to ethnically cleanse the indigenous African tribes in Darfur, Nuba Mountain, Blue Nile Region and South Kordofan regions dividing up the spoils among Arab tribes and exploiting gold and other natural resources with Saudi and Emirate funding.

Bashir is assembling a 150,000 Jihad army from across the Sahel region of Africa, include Islamic State foreign terrorists from Chad, Central African Republic, Niger, Mali, Libya and Syria.

Sudan’s ‘Orwellian’ Peace Force has been assembled in 16 training camps around the capital region of Khartoum.

You may have read our post of a bomb explosion in a Khartoum high rise on February 12th. SPLM-N secretary general Yasir Arman suggested the explosion was evdence of the presence of those foreign jihadi terrorists Bashir has assembled. 35,000 trained Peace forces have been deployed in both Darfur and the Nuba Mountains regions equipped with armed Toyota hilux pickup trucks.

This Gospel Herald report reveals the wanton destruction of churches ordered by the Bashir Regime in those Sudan regions, a practice begiun in 1990. That order came within a few years of issuance of the Arab coalition final solution in 1987, reissued in the 1990’s, 2003 and 2014 with a target of ‘completion’ by 2020, Bashir’s self proclaimed retirement year.

The Gospel Herald report noted the forced conversion to Islam of Christians especially directed at the vulnerable Nuba people. The Gospel Herald noted that the Sudan is the fifth leading counry of concern for indigenous Christian minorities.

Yesterday, my colleague Mike Bates of Northwest Florida’s 1330am WEBY Talk Radio and I interviewed Dr. Walid Phares Trump Campaign Foreign Policy Analyst and Fox News national security and foreign policy expert. Phares is the author of the acclaimed “Future Jihad: Terrorist Strategies against the West,” and a recent book, “The Lost Spring: US Strategies in the Middle East and Catastrophes to avoid.” Phares is being considered for a possible post a the State Department. We had posted on Phares’ remarks at a gathering of Nuba emigres in Washington , DC just days following President Trump’s election on November 10th..

In yesterday’s interview with him, Dr. Phares noted the lifting of Sudan sanctions by the outgong Obama Administration as unconscionable in view of Bashir’s genocidal record. Further, he stressed the hope that the Trump Administration might reimpose the1997 sanctions within the six month look back provision of the executive order. Ultimately, he thinks the solution is regime change to stop jihad in the Sudan and Sahel region of Africa.

The order by Mohamad el Sheikh Mohamad, general manager of the land department in the Ministry of Physical Planning, urged that it be implemented immediately.”I
TOPBUZZ.COM

VIDEO: ‘Enemedia’ Lies yet again about the Threat of Radical Islam

It is important to expose the establishment media, both large outlets and small, until it is universally known that these are not news outlets, but lying propagandists with an agenda. I was sent this article several weeks ago and was struck by this: “Norm Dyck attended an information session in Grande Prairie last year by controversial author Robert Spencer, who is a self-proclaimed expert on Islam. Spencer introduced his speech, according to Dyck, by showing footage of New York’s World Trade Center crumbling to the ground.”

The implication was that I was relying on some emotional appeal, a rabble-rouser stirring up trouble: “The connection was immediately made for us that Islam and the Muslim people where [sic] to be feared” said Norm Dyck.

I am a twentieth-century speaker. Anyone who peruses YouTube videos of my various talks around the U.S. (and in Europe, Israel and Australia, for that matter) will see that I never use PowerPoint, or film, or any audio-visual aids; I just speak. Usually I read a few things from the Qur’an. That’s it. So I was puzzled by this claim that when I spoke in Grand Prairie, Alberta, that I opened with video of the World Trade Center collapsing. I emailed the event organizer and asked him if he had shown such video before I arrived. He said he hadn’t, and would write a Letter to the Editor of the Daily Herald-Tribune, asking for a correction.

He did so. His letter is below. Not surprisingly, the Daily Herald-Tribune did not publish it or make any correction. Meanwhile, here is video of my talk in Grand Prairie last year. It begins with the introduction, while I am standing by (with my late great security man, Floyd Resnick, visible in the first few seconds of the video). Then I come up. No sign of any World Trade Center footage in either the introduction or the beginning of my speech.

“The first casualty is the truth,” eh, Mr. Dyck?

Of course, Svjetlana Mlinarevic of the Daily Herald-Tribune made no effort to contact me or the event organizer, or even to search out the YouTube video of the event, to see whether Norm Dyck was telling the truth. Why bother, when he confirmed the establishment propaganda line?

“A meeting of the faiths,” by Svjetlana Mlinarevic, Daily Herald-Tribune, February 2, 2017:

It was a meeting of two religions that wished to share their beliefs and open their minds to each other.

St. Paul’s United Church invited members of the Islamic Association of Grande Prairie and District (IAGPD) into their sanctuary on Wednesday to pray together, to share their experiences and fears, and to sing in unity….

Norm Dyck attended an information session in Grande Prairie last year by controversial author Robert Spencer, who is a self-proclaimed expert on Islam. Spencer introduced his speech, according to Dyck, by showing footage of New York’s World Trade Center crumbling to the ground.

“The connection was immediately made for us that Islam and the Muslim people where to be feared. This gentleman (another parishioner) talked about confronting falsity. That is extremely difficult. With a media predisposed to play on our fears (for) us and the others out there who are our enemy. The first casualty is the truth,” he said.

Dyck called on people searching for the truth to pursue it courageously regardless of where it takes them saying, “Truth denied, closes us from the light.”…

Here is the Grand Prairie event organizer’s letter to the Daily Herald Tribune, which the paper of course ignored. I present it unedited:

I think dialogue is important and as Norm Dyck emphasized that truth should be pursued. To clarify regarding the speaking engagement of Robert Spencer, there was no footage of world trade center’s crumbling, you can view the whole talk on YouTube at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X36LSw7X5Bs. Robert has written many books on Islam and presents facts. As far as the suggestion that Islam is a religion of peace, that is a myth. It was said that radicalism, racism, terrorism and violence are not virtues of the Islamic faith, that is also a myth. There are peaceful Muslims to be sure, as there are in Grande Prairie, but when you are talking about the Ideology of Islam or it may be better described as Mohammadism, then questions should and must be asked. To understand the Ideology of Islam, the Quran and the Hadith’s and Sira of Mohammad are the norm. The leader of Islam was Mohammad. The Quran speaks of Mohammad as the great example 33:21, 68;4 and being that, Muslims must follow him. If Mohammad did it, said it, they are to emulate him. A historical summary of Mohammad shows him as a warlord, who killed, raped, terrorized, subjugated anyone who got in his way. He prescribed to what is called pedophilia. He married a girl Aisha at 6 years old and had sex with her when she was nine. Hadith and Sira 8:3309, 58;234,8:3311. That may have been common in the seventh century but not in the 21st century at least in Canada, US and other free nations. There have been over 30,000 Islamic terrorist attacks around the world since 9/11 www.thereligionofpeace.com. 270,000,000 killed in 1400 years of Jihad htpps://www.politicalislam.com/tears-of-jihad. Reliance of the Traveller is on Islamic Sacred Law, I would encourage everyone including politicians, judges to read this book.
Truthful and frank dialogue is needed before Canada finds itself like Europe, possibly living under Sharia Law. Unfortunately, we are 40 years behind in our conversation. As Norm said “Truth denied, closes us from the light”.

This letter could have stood a little editing and clarification of the citations, but its points are generally correct. They’re just not issues that the establishment propaganda media wants brought to light.

RELATED ARTICLES:

More faked hate: Ohio Muslim charged with painting anti-Arab graffiti on garage door of Muslim family

Daniel Greenfield once again (humorously) explains how the SPLC lies about ‘groups’

Muslim from UK blows himself up outside Mosul for the Islamic State

Maryland: Mosque hosts celebration to honor jihad murderer of foe of Pakistan’s blasphemy laws

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on Jihad Watch.

Canadian Broadcasting Corporation’s Anti-Free Speech, Pro-Radical Islam Reporting

Attention Canadian Broadcasting News Agency (CBC),

My name is Shabnam Assadollahi. I am a Canadian of Iranian origin, an award winning human rights advocate and freelance writer.

Reference your February 18th article “Protesters outside Masjid Toronto call for ban on Islam as Muslims pray inside.

As an Iranian, a former refugee and former child prisoner of Evin for 18 months by the Islamic Republic of Iran who has been advocating for democracy and woman’s rights, I am strongly against the Political and Radical Islam and openly have shared my views about Motion-103. I am also appalled by a small group of people protesting in front of the mosque on Friday, some held hateful banners while ordinary Muslims were in and out and praying. IMHO, what that minority small group did yesterday was NOT activism but another form of hate.

I read your bias coverage of the demonstration at the mosque in Downtown Toronto and the connection you made between the demonstration and the controversy over Motion-103 which reminded me of what Muslim Brotherhood’s frequent cover up in Egypt and Iran’s Qods Forces propaganda in Iraq, Yemen, and Syria.

Religious freedom is part of our Canadian values and such small group’s hateful rally will only harm our Free speech but we already have laws to protect Every member of our nation. Shouldn’t your remind ALL Canadians to take pride to know that in 1982 the Charter of Rights and Freedoms made all Canadians equal? Don’t you think that this is the most important value that has been holding us together as Canadians?

As a former radio producer working for over twelve years knowing the ethics in journalism, I have observed that you frequently give a disservice to all Canadians by not sharing the complete information which can have an effect on one’s response to an issue. The last thing any of us should do is promote divisiveness because of lack of information especially coming from taxpayers funded media outlet.

This well documented article by CIJNews-Canada shows the supplications at Masjid Toronto Mosque located in downtown Toronto which is affiliated with the Muslim Association of Canada (MAC). According to this investigative journal, the mosque operates in two locations in downtown Toronto: Masjid Toronto at Dundas (168 Dundas St. West) and Masjid Toronto at Adelaide (84 Adelaide St. East).

Dr. Wael Shihab was appointed in April 2014 to a full-time resident Imam of the mosque Masjid Toronto. Shihab has a PhD in Islamic Studies from Al-Azhar University and he was the head of the Fatwa (Islamic opinion) Unit of IslamOnline.net (English website) and the Shari’ah (Islamic Law) consultant of the Shari’ah department of OnIslam.net. Shihab is also a member of the International Union for Muslim Scholars (IUMS) headed by Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi, who played a major role in launching both aforementioned websites.

Shihab’s views as presented in articles and Islamic rulings posted on Onislam.net:

“Slay them one by one and spare not one of them; The solution to the global violence, extremism and oppression is Islam; Qaradawi’s book “Jurisprudence of Jihad” should serves as a guidance to Muslims; Thieves’ hands should be chopped off no matter their social status; Person who underwent gender reassignment surgery should return to his original gender; Muslims should avoid gays as homosexuality is evil and succumbing to the temptations of the Satan; Wife should not reject her husband’s call for having sex”

The above preaching is also against our Charter of Rights and Freedoms which ONLY creates hate and spreads radicalism among the worshipers, especially the youth. At the same time, a group of protesters rallying in front of this mosque and shouting for banning a religion in Canada is no difference from what the Islamic Republic of Iran is doing to atheists, Sunnis, Bahais Christians, and Jews, to name a few. Islamic republic of Iran also does not recognize Bahai as a religion/ faith. What is the difference between this small group of protesters, the radical Imams as such and what Iran regime is doing to Bahais? IMO: No difference.

Going in front of a place of worship calling to ban the worshipers’ faith on a “FRIDAY” especially a few weeks after a mass shooting happening in a mosque is NOT Canadian and it is not defending Free speech; but IMO is Hate Speech. The acts of radicalism by the small group of people is absolutely unacceptable. What they do will only assist the MSM and the Muslim Brotherhood to take advantage and to attack Freedom loving Canadians and to silence Freedom of Speech.

It is very sad that some Canadians from Islamic faith express that they don’t feel safe under Canada’s Charter of Rights and equality laws. When government and the media choose one group over another in a country that is diverse, they attack the very fabric that holds all of us together by saying that we are failing at diversity. If we do not treat all groups equally and say no to hatred to all; not singling out one group over another, then would only degrade our Charter.

It is appalling that when NCCM calls Canada to pass M-103, Canadian MSM such as yours cries for their call and yet QC imam Sayed AlGhitawi calls for the annihilation of the Jews and CBC and the rest of Canadian MSM won’t give any coverage on his hate speech.

It is the responsibility of our officials, educators and the media to remind all people living in this country that we are all equally protected-that no one needs an extra motion or extra protection-for that would make some “more equal” than others.

I have a reasonable fear of radical Islam” which I sent to MPs, and Senators Thank you.

Kind wishes,

Shabnam Assadollahi

RELATED ARTICLE: Quebec legislature adopts sharia blasphemy motion condemning ‘Islamophobia’

EDITORS NOTE: According to Wikipedia CBC News.

In 2009, CBC President Hubert Lacroix commissioned a study to determine whether its news was biased, and if so, to what extent. He said: “Our job — and we take it seriously — is to ensure that the information that we put out is fair and unbiased in everything that we do”. The study, the methodology of which was not specified, was due to report results in the fall of 2010.

In April 2010, the Conservatives accused pollster Frank Graves of giving partisan advice to the Liberal Party of Canada, noting his donations to the party since 2003. Graves directed a number of public opinion research projects on behalf of the CBC as well as other media organizations, and also appeared on a number of CBC television programs relating to politics. An investigation conducted by the CBC ombudsman found no evidence to support these allegations, stating that personal donor history is not relevant to one’s objectivity as a pollster.

In March 2011, the Toronto Sun accused Vote Compass, an online voter engagement application developed by political scientists and launched by CBC during the 2011 federal election campaign, of a liberal bias. The accusation centred on the observation that one could provide identical responses to each proposition in Vote Compass (i.e., answer “strongly agree” to all propositions or “strongly disagree” to all propositions) and would in each case be positioned closest to the Liberal Party in the results. This claim was directly addressed by Vote Compass representatives, who noted that the propositions in the application are specifically constructed in such a way as to avoid acquiescence bias and that the result described by the Toronto Sun was arrived at by gaming the system.[11] Vote Compass also released analyses of the data it gathered from the federal election, which have further negated efforts to discredit it. It is widely speculated that suspicions of bias were fuelled by Sun Media in an effort to promote its anti-CBC agenda and the concurrent launch of its cable news channel. The criticism appears to have been isolated to the 2011 Canadian federal election edition of Vote Compass and has not re-emerged in any subsequent editions of Vote Compass, either in Canada or internationally.

In February 2015, Prime Minister Stephen Harper made comments relating to the allegations. Speaking to Radio-Canada, the outlet’s on-air Quebec division, Harper commented saying he understood that many at Radio-Canada “hated conservative values”. Radio-Canada did not deny the allegations.

During the 2015 federal election, CBC was again accused of bias by some viewers and outlets. The majority of these claims spawned from a promise by the Liberals and New Democratic Party of Canada after the two groups promised to increase funding for CBC. The pledges came after the then Conservative government had cut $115 million from the CBC in the 2012 budget. Shortly before the pledges were made, CBC president Hubert Lacroix complained of the Conservative cuts, saying “the cuts make us weaker and affect morale, critics, key stakeholders and even some of the citizens we serve.”

Relegating Radical Islam to the ‘Ash Heap of History’

On June 8th, 1982 in a speech before the British Parliament President Ronald Reagan blazed forth with his belief that ”[T]he march of freedom and democracy . . . will leave Marxist Leninism on the ash heap of history.” Nine years later, on Christmas Day 1991, the Soviet flag flew over the Kremlin in Moscow for the last time.

Fast forward to February 15th, 2017 and the meeting between President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Washington, D.C.

During a press conference Prime Minister Netanyahu said to President Trump,

“Under your leadership, I believe we can reverse the rising tide of radical Islam, and in this great task, as in so many others, Israel stands with you and I stand with you. Mr. President, in rolling back militant Islam, we can seize an historic opportunity because for the first time in my lifetime and for the first time in the life of my country, Arab countries in the region do not see Israel as an enemy, but increasingly as an ally.”

Breitbart’s Edwin Mora reports:

President Donald Trump’s deputies intend to overhaul President Barack Obama’s “Countering Violent Extremism” program to focus only on Islamist extremism, says Reuters.

The shift is not finalized, but is expected to reduce federal focus on non-Islamic extremism, reports Reuters, citing five unnamed people briefed on the matter. The shift may also cut off pending federal funding for Islamic groups.

The pending reorganization comes after widespread reports that Obama’s program has already failed, largely because of opposition by resident Muslim activists and groups, say some Republican lawmakers and news outlets.

Reuters notes:

The program, ‘Countering Violent Extremism,’ or CVE, would be changed to ‘Countering Islamic Extremism’ or ‘Countering Radical Islamic Extremism,’ the sources said, and would no longer target groups such as white supremacists who have also carried out bombings and shootings in the United States.

The news outlet cites Hoda Hawa, director of policy for the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), who said she learned of the push to refocus the CVE program “from tackling all violent ideology to only Islamist extremism” from unnamed U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials last week.

MPAC has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and has previously advocated for the removal of Hamas, Hezbollah, and the group Palestinian Islamic Jihad from the U.S. State Department list of designated terrorist groups.

Read more…

President Trump has now named the evil empire bent on stopping the march of freedom and democracy in the world. That neo-evil empire is lead by radical Islamic supremacists. It is called “the Caliphate.” The restoring of the caliphate has been and remains the ultimate goal of radical Islamists.

Marxism, Leninism and radical Islam share a common ideal, the replacement of freedom with subjugation and replacing democracy with a totalitarian ideology based upon a fanatical world view.

President Trump understands this, others do not. The others are the followers of Marx, Lenin and Mohammed.

RELATED ARTICLE:

New Hamas Leader, a Vicious Killer, Portends New Rounds of Violence by Yaakov Lappin

Report: Muslim Sympathizers at CIA Behind Trump Leaks

Researcher finds over 50 million Muslims support radical Islamic terror attacks

Bring in more Muslim migrants! What could possibly go wrong?

“More than 50 million Muslims are willing to support those who carry out terror attacks to defend their religion, migration expert warns the EU,” by Allan Hall, MailOnline, February 13, 2017:

A migration expert warns that there are more than 50 million Muslims willing to accept violence and support those who carry out terror attacks to defend their religion.

Professor Ruud Koopmans of the Netherlands warned the EU on Monday to block the entry of any refugees whose identity cannot be categorically confirmed.

Koopmans said that of the 1billion adult Muslims in the world, ‘half of them are attached to an arch-conservative Islam which places little worth on the rights of women, homosexuals, and people of other faiths’.

In an interview with a German news website he claimed that of these 500million conservative Muslims, at least – and probably more – than 50million are willing to sanction violence.

Koopmans, who is a professor of sociology and migration research at the Humboldt University of Berlin and the director of integration research at the WZB Berlin Social Science Centre, stressed that not every one of them was ready to exert violence directly.

But he added: ‘They support the radicals, they encourage them and provide them shelter or simply keep their mouths shut when they observe radicalization.’

He says he considers his own estimate of 50million ‘an understatement’, citing studies that show eight per cent of German Muslims agreed to the use of violence against ‘Infidels,’ while in his own country 11 per cent of Muslims agreed with the statement: ‘There are situations in which it is acceptable for me from the perspective of my religion, that I use violence’.

In several Islamic countries, 14 per cent of local Muslims think suicide attacks against innocents are ‘sometimes’ or ‘often’ justified to defend Islam, said Koopmans, citing a study by the US-based Pew Research Center.

‘I’m very conservative with my estimate of 50million violent Muslims,’ added Professor Koopmans.

The expert sees a ‘clear difference’ between anti-Islam baiting and justified criticism of Islam.

He went on: ‘There is nothing wrong with foreign cultures, as long as they are looking for the connection to the majority in society and actually enrich our countries.

‘But those who are here to spread their medieval beliefs, which are unfortunately widespread in Islamic countries, must be met with zero tolerance’….

That greasy Islamophobe!

RELATED ARTICLES: 

FBI contacting newly arrived Syrian refugees, is the FBI doing this on its own?

Robert Spencer: Answering an Islamic apologist (Part IV)

Denmark: 16-year-old Muslima plotted jihad bombings at schools, including Jewish school

Remembering the 1979 Russian Invasion of Afghanistan: How Democrats created radical Islamic terrorism

Don Hank in an email titled “This is how the terror started (in 1979)” provided this quote:

In his 1993 memoirs [“From the Shadows“], ex-Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) Robert Gates revealed that direct CIA involvement in Afghanistan had commenced almost six months before the Soviet invasion. Jimmy Carter signed a presidential decree in July 1979 to covertly aid the Mujahideen insurgents.

Hank then wrote, “And then came Al-Qaeda and the 9-11 attack, and then ISIS and the invasion of Europe. It all seems to have started with the CIA. If you want a war on terror, you have to start with the people who spawned the terror. A true war on terror would include a war on the CIA. It starts with education.”

Hank provided a link to a Daryl Morini, paper dated January 3rd, 2010 titled “Why Did the Soviet Union Invade Afghanistan?.” Morini wrote:

The Soviet intervention in Afghanistan was a costly and, ultimately, pointless war. Historical hindsight has made this evident. However, exactly why the Red Army wound up in direct military conflict, embroiled in a bitter and complicated civil war—some 3,000 kilometres away from Moscow—is a point of historiographical uncertainty. The evidence available suggests that geopolitical calculations were at the top of the Kremlin’s goals. These were arguably to deter US interference in the USSR’s ‘backyard’, to gain a highly strategic foothold in Southwest Asia and, not least of all, to attempt to contain the radical Islamic revolution emanating from Iran. The subsidiary goal of the invasion was to secure an ideologically-friendly régime in the region.

[ … ]

Following the 1970s period of détente between the United States (US) and the Soviet Union, the latter seemed to be in an advantageous strategic position, compared to the post-Vietnam paralysis which plagued its main opponent. Scott McMichael, a military historian, argued that this “turned out largely to be an illusion,” although there is substance to the claim that the Soviet Union was ahead of the game in the lead u p to 1979. This is exemplified by Moscow’s increasing assertiveness in foreign affairs during this period. As a direct result of the so-called ‘Brezhnev doctrine’, the USSR asserted its “right and duty” to go to war in foreign countries “if and when an existing socialist regime was threatened.” [Emphasis added]

Read more…

Is Russia, under Putin, making the same mistake that his predecessors in the Former Soviet Union made by exerting Russia’s “right and duty” to go to war in foreign countries “if an when an existing socialist regime [like Assad’s Syria] was threatened.” According to Wikipedia:

The Ba’ath Party, and indirectly the Syrian Regional Branch, was established on 7 April 1947 by Michel Aflaq (a Christian), Salah al-Din al-Bitar (a Sunni Muslim) and Zaki al-Arsuzi (an Alawite). According to the congress, the party was “nationalist, populist, socialist, and revolutionary” and believed in the “unity and freedom of the Arab nation within its homeland.” 

[ … ]

The party merged with the Arab Socialist Party (ASP), led by Akram al-Hawrani, to establish the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party in Lebanon following Adib Shishakli‘s rise to power. [Emphasis added]

Read more…

Has President Obama made the same mistake as Jimmy Carter did in 1979 by arming the anti-Assad Mujahideen insurgents? Is the CIA complicit, once again, in doing the wrong thing for what it believes is in America’s national interests?

President-elect Donald J. Trump has expressed his doubts about the CIA and other U.S. national intelligence agencies, especially when it comes to Russia, Iran, North Korea, China and Syria.

On January 20th, 2017 Donald J. Trump will be sworn into the Office of the President of these United States. Will a President Trump learn from the failures of both Democratic President’s Carter and Obama? Me thinks so.

RELATED ARTICLE: Secretary of State Kerry’s Speech on the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

President-Elect Trump — Where He Stands on Radical Islam

Policies to watch once Trump has a perspective from the Oval Office: opposition to the nuclear pact with Iran and not arming Syrian rebels.

Donald Trump, president elect of the United States, spoke out on the campaign trail against radical Islam. Trump opposed the Obama administration’s pressure on former Egyptian president and U.S. ally Hosni Mubarak to resign. That resignation paved the way for the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood across the Middle East. Expect President Trump to support anti-Islamist regimes in the Arab world and those individuals in America.

Trump has also said he would shut down extremist mosques in America, which would be a welcome policy to stop radicalization of America’s Muslims. He will need an expert team of legal experts to accomplish that goal since opponents will argue that the line between freedom of speech and religion and incitement to violence is razor thin.

Policies to watch once Trump has a perspective from the Oval Office will be his stated opposition to the nuclear agreement with Iran and his opposition to regime change and arming the rebels in Syria.

Below is the platform that Trump campaigned on:

Domestic Islamists

  • Shut down mosques that preach extremism
  • Would revoke the passports of Americans who travel abroad to join the Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL). Initially advocated a temporary ban on all Muslim immigration and has since scaled it back to only Muslim countries with major terrorist activity. In his national security speech in June, he proposed using ideological vetting such as support for extremist beliefs or links to extremist groups (not necessarily terrorists) in deciding who gets to enter the U.S. He cited polls showing high levels of support for Sharia governance in countries like Afghanistan.

Egypt & the Muslim Brotherhood

  • Opposed the Obama Administration’s pressure on Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak to give up power.

Intelligence

  • Supports enhanced interrogation of terror suspects (considered torture by critics).

Iran

  • Opposes the nuclear deal with Iran, calling it “terrible,” but “loves the concept” of a good deal.
  • Thanked by the wife of an American pastor imprisoned in Iran for bringing attention to his captivity.
  • Endorsed airstrikes on Iran’s nuclear program in 2007.

ISIS, Iraq & Syria

  • Only candidate to support Russia’s military intervention in Syria against rebels fighting ISIS, as well as ISIS and Al-Qaeda.
  • Opposes involvement in the civil war and arming rebels.
  • Opposes a policy of regime change towards the Assad dictatorship.
  • “I say that you can defeat ISIS by taking their wealth. Take back the oil. Once you go over and take back that oil, they have nothing. You bomb the hell out of them, and then you encircle it, and then you go in. And you let Mobil go in, and you let our great oil companies go in. Once you take that oil, they have nothing left.”
  • “I would hit [ISIS] so hard. I would find you a proper general, I would find the Patton or MacArthur. I would hit them so hard your head ,would spin.”
  • U.S. should not get involved in Syria by supporting the rebels or launching airstrikes in retaliation for the Assad regime’s use of chemical weapons.
  • Opposed the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.
  • Opposed the invasion of Iraq and any policy aimed at removing Saddam Hussein from power.
  • U.S. should take Iraq’s oil and reimburse the countries who were involved in the 2003 invasion and give $1 million to the family of every U.S. soldier who died in Iraq.

Libya

  • Would only support military action in Libya against the Muammar Gaddafi leadership if the U.S. gets to take the country’s oil.

Gulf States

  • Would force Saudi Arabia and other countries to pay for the U.S. military presence that protects them.

Military Spending

Would increase military spending to foster deterrence.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Call for Muslim Immigration Ban Now Off Trump’s Website

ISIS Warns of End of US Following Trump Victory

Muslim Community Ponders a President Trump

Vice President-Elect Mike Pence — A Balance to His ‘Boss’

VIDEO: Five Policy Issues for Donald Trump on Radical Islam

Clarion Project’s National Security Analyst Ryan Mauro examines some of the key challenges a president Donald Trump will likely face in office.

RELATED ARTICLES:

ISIS Recruits Learn to Beat Asylum-Seeker Checks

Raw Footage From the Front Line (GRAPHIC)

Russia Thwarts ISIS Attacks on Moscow and St Petersburg

Pakistan Bomb Blast Kills 52 at Sufi Shrine

Law Enforcement’s Failure to Understand Radical Islam

On Saturday evening, September 20, 2016, a pressure cooker bomb exploded in a dumpster in New York’s Chelsea district.  The bomb was powerful enough to blow the heavy steel container more than 120 feet through the air and metal fragments from the explosion were found more than 600 feet away. Thirty-one people were injured.

Within hours, NYPD officers found the bomber, radical Islamist Ahmad Khan Rahami, asleep in a doorway.  After a brief exchange of gunfire, Rahami was arrested and taken into custody.  In a subsequent interview, Rahami’s father explained that, in 2014, he informed New Jersey police that his son was a terrorist.  The father explained, “Two years ago I go to the FBI because my son was doing really bad, O.K.?  But they check almost two months, they say, ‘He’s O.K., he’s clean, he’s not a terrorist.’ I say O.K… Now they say he is a terrorist. I say O.K.”

It is a story that is repeated time and time again.  The once highly-touted  FBI, as symbolized by men such as J. Edgar Hoover and Elliott Ness, and as portrayed by Efrem Zimbalist. Jr. in the long-running television series, The FBI, has suffered a major loss of credibility in recent decades.  The bureau’s unprofessional mishandling of episodes such as Ruby Ridge, Idaho; the Branch Davidian siege at Waco, Texas; the Oklahoma City bombing, and, most recently, the politically tainted bungling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation, has caused the bureau to lose much of its reputation as the world’s foremost law enforcement agency.

In the Ruby Ridge incident in 1992…in which the U.S. Marshals Service and the FBI laid siege to the mountain residence of Randy Weaver and his family… his wife, Vicki; his son, Sammy; the family dog, Striker; and Deputy Marshal William Degan lost their lives.  The federal agents were attempting to serve a weapons warrant on Weaver, charging him (falsely) with having sold a sawed-off shotgun to a neighbor.  When Weaver refused to cooperate with the federal agents a 12-day standoff ensued in which several hundred federal agents surrounded the Weaver cabin.

On April 19, 1993, a 51-day siege of the Branch Davidian compound near Waco, Texas, came to a violent end.  The Branch Davidians were suspected of weapons violations, and when they refused service of a federal warrant Attorney General Janet Reno gave the order to attack with military-style weaponry.  The authorities, including members of the ATF, the FBI, and the Texas National Guard, set fire to the Branch Davidian compound and 83 members of the religious sect… men, women, and children… and four ATF agents lost their lives.  Most burned to death.

Exactly two years later, on April 19, 1995, a team of Islamic terrorists, with the assistance of American anti-government activists Timothy McVeigh and Larry Nichols, bombed the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City.  However, as local authorities and investigative  journalists produced irrefutable evidence pointing to the involvement of radical Sunni Muslims, former members of Saddam Hussein’s Republican Guard, FBI agents placed their hands behind their backs, refusing to consider or even take custody of the evidence.  FBI agents also ordered surveillance cameras removed from nearby buildings and confiscated the associated video tapes, none of which have ever been produced, even under court order.

This occurred at a time when federal investigators on the scene were given instructions from the Clinton White House and Janet Reno’s Justice Department… at the insistence of radical leftists at the Southern Poverty Law Center… that they were to divert their attention from the pursuit of Middle Eastern terrorists, concentrating instead on members of domestic right wing militia groups.  As a result of the FBI’s mishandling of the Oklahoma City bombing investigation, their handling of the terror attack, which focused only on McVeigh and Nichols, has become the  “conventional wisdom.”  The explosion killed 168 people and injured more than 680 others.

In early 2011, Russian authorities warned the FBI that Boston Marathon bomber, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, may have been a radical Islamist.  The FBI acknowledged that it had investigated the Chechen immigrant.  However, after interviewing him and members of his family they could find no evidence of terrorist activity.  But then, on April 15, 2013, Tsarnaev and his younger brother, Dzhokhar, planted two pressure cooker bombs near the finish line of the Boston Marathon and walked away.  When the bombs exploded, 3 spectators were killed and some 264 others were injured.

On June 12, 2016, Omar Mateen, a heavily armed radical Islamist, opened fire inside a popular Orlando, Florida, nightclub, killing 49 and wounding 53 others.  The FBI was informed of his radical views in 2013.  However, when agents put him under surveillance they could find no hard evidence of terrorist activity.  They dropped the investigation.

There are many more such examples on the record in which the FBI was forewarned about potential terrorists, leading many Americans to conclude that the bureau has become either sloppy or incompetent.  But is that a fair assessment?  What are the chances that an FBI background check, along with surveillance and a series of interviews, would provide hard evidence of planned terrorist activity?  The chances are very slim.

And what are the chances that, if informed by the FBI that a certain individual is under suspicion of terrorist activity, local authorities could intervene successfully?  Again, the chances are very slim.  In the absence of evidence of an actual crime, local police are limited in what they can do to prevent terrorist activity.  Even when there is strong suspicion, local police must first provide a court with reasonable cause before a telephone tap or a search warrant can be authorized.

It is in this gray area, between mere suspicion and deadly terrorist activity, that radical Islamists operate, skillfully using our laws and our system of justice against us.  So who are these people who kill and maim so indiscriminately?  Who are these terrorists who gleefully behead their enemies, douse them with gasoline and burn them alive, or place them in steel cages and lower them into deep water?  Who are these religious fanatics who welcome death and who cherish death over life?  Who are these extremists who dutifully swear allegiance to a prophet who has commanded them to either kill or convert every other human being on Earth?  Who are these militants who have been actively pursuing a goal of world dominion for more than 1400 years?

Those of us who have been born and raised in western Christian or Judeo cultures have difficulty getting inside the minds of such people.  However, what is most helpful is a study of the genetic makeup of Islamists and the impact that 1400 years of inbreeding, in which cousins marry first cousins, has had on an entire religious sect.

One published report tells us, “Medical research suggests that, while British Pakistanis are responsible for 3% of all births, they account for one in three British children born with genetic illnesses.  The question arises, could the practice of interbreeding be the key to the success and longevity of Islam?  Could it be that the genetic and mental illnesses, borne of interbreeding, are a factor in the unquestioning nature of the majority of Muslims regarding religion?  Successive generations of cousin marriage damage the genes and produce widespread idiocy and insanity.”

Nicolai Sennels, a Danish psychologist and recognized expert on Muslim inbreeding, writes that, “This practice, which has been prohibited in the Judeo-Christian tradition since the days of Moses, was sanctioned by Muhammad and has been going on now for 50 generation in the Muslim world… This practice of inbreeding will never go away in the Muslim world since Muhammad is the ultimate example and authority on all matters, including marriage.  The massive inbreeding in Muslim culture may well have done virtually irreversible damage to the Muslim gene pool, including extensive damage to its intelligence, sanity, and health.”

Sennels explains that close to half of the world’s 1.4 billion Muslims are inbred.  In Pakistan, the number approaches 70%.  In the U.K., roughly 50% of Pakistani immigrants are married to first cousins.  In Saudi Arabia, 67%; in Jordan and Kuwait, 64%; in Sudan 63%; in Iraq, 60%; and in the Emirates and Qatar, 54%.  The risk of having an IQ lower than 70, the official threshold for being declared “retarded,” increases by roughly 400% among children of cousin marriages.

Mental illness is also a product of inbreeding.  Sennels tells us that “the closer the blood relative, the higher the risk of schizophrenic illness.  The increased risk of insanity may explain why more than 40% of the patients in Denmark’s biggest ward for the criminally insane have an immigrant background.”

As matters now stand, we in the West are being bombarded with propaganda aimed at making Islam acceptable in civilized cultures.  It is arguable that Western Europe is already lost because they have been invaded by millions of Muslim immigrants.  It is only in Eastern Europe where political leaders have taken a firm stand against Muslim immigration.  We can only hope that American political leaders will also come to their senses.  Until western leaders come to grips with the fact that it is impossible for non-Muslims to ever live side-by-side with Muslims, it behooves us to separate ourselves from them.  Until we dispense with the “turn the other cheek” approach favored by liberal political leaders and journalists, and until we can all agree that Islam is not a “religion of peace,” Islam will continue its relentless jihad against the West.

Since there is no reasonable prospect for either an intellectual or a military victory over Islam, the next president should, as his first official act, implement 8 USC 1182(f), which reads, “Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.”

Given the nature of the radical Islamic threat, it is clear that we don’t need more law-making; what we need is more law enforcement.

Huma Abedin’s ties to the Muslim Brotherhood are no joke

The Clinton campaign is attempting once again to sweep important questions under the rug about top aide Huma Abedin, her family ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and to Saudi Arabia, and her role in the ballooning Clinton email scandal.

The New York Post ran a detailed investigative piece over the weekend about Ms. Abedin’s work at the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs from 1995 through 2008, a Sharia law journal whose editor in chief was Abedin’s own mother.
This is not some accidental association. Ms. Abedin was, for many years, listed as an associate editor of the London-based publication and wrote for the journal while working as an intern in the Clinton White House in the mid-1990s.

Her mother, Saleha Abedin, sits on the Presidency Staff Council of the International Islamic Council for Da’wa and Relief, a group that is chaired by the leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi.

Perhaps recognizing how offensive such ties will be to voters concerned over future terrorist attacks on this country by radical Muslims professing allegiance to Sharia law, the Clinton campaign on Monday tried to downplay Ms. Abedin’s involvement in the Journal and the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Clinton surrogate group Media Matters claimed predictably there was “no evidence” that Ms. Abedin or her family had ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, and that Trump campaign staffers who spoke of these ties were conspiracy theorists.

To debunk the evidence, Media Matters pointed to a Snopes.com “fact-check” piece that cited as its sole source… Senator John McCain. This is the same John McCain who met Libyan militia leader Abdelkarim Belhaj, a known al Qaeda associate, and saluted him as “my hero” during a 2011 visit to Benghazi.

Senator McCain and others roundly criticized Rep. Michele Bachmann in 2012 when she and four members of the House Permanent Select Committee Intelligence and the House Judiciary Committee cited Ms. Abedin in letters sent to the Inspectors General of the Department of Defense, Department of State, Department of Justice, Department of Homeland Security, and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, warning about Muslim Brotherhood infiltration of the United States government.

In response to those critiques, Rep. Bachmann laid out the evidence in a 16-page memo, which has never been refuted by Senator McCain or the elite media.

The evidence, in my opinion, is overwhelming: Huma Abedin is nothing short of a Muslim Brotherhood princess, born into an illustrious family of Brotherhood leaders.

Her father, Syed Zaynul Abedin, was a professor in Saudi Arabia who founded the Institute for Muslim Minority Affairs, an institution established by the Government of Saudi Arabia with the support of the Muslim World League.

The Muslim World League was “perhaps the most significant Muslim Brotherhood organization in the world,” according to former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy. Its then-General Secretary, Umar Nasif, founded the Rabita Trust, “which is formally designated as a foreign terrorist organization under American law due to its support of al Qaeda,” he wrote.

That is not guilt by association but what federal prosecutors would call a “nexus” of like-minded people who shared the same goals.

A Saudi government document inspired by Ms. Abedin’s father explains the concept of “Muslim Minority Affairs,” the title of the Journal Mr. Abedin founded, and its goal to “establish a global Sharia in our modern times.”

Simply put, Huma Abedin worked for thirteen years as part of an enterprise whose explicit goal was to conquer the West in the name of Islam. No wonder the Clinton campaign wants to sweep this issue under the rug.

Mrs. Clinton has sometimes referred to Huma Abedin as her “second daughter.” Whether it was because of their close relationship or for some other reason, Mrs. Clinton has done much to further the Muslim Brotherhood agenda while Secretary of State, and can be counted on doing more as president.

As Secretary of State, she relentlessly pushed the overthrow of Libyan leader Mohammar Qaddafi, a dire enemy of the Brotherhood, even when President Obama and his Secretary of Defense were reluctant to go to war.

Along with Obama, she pushed for the overthrow of Egyptian leader Hosni Mubarak and his replacement by Muslim Brotherhood leader Mohammad Morsi.

She pushed for direct U.S. involvement in the Syrian civil war, including the arming of Syrian rebels allied with al Qaeda.

As I reveal in my new book, she worked side by side with the Organization of the Islamic Conference, the umbrella group where 57 majority Muslim states pushed their agenda of imposing Sharia law on the non-Muslim world, to use hate crime laws in the United States to criminalize speech critical of Islam, in accordance with United Nations Resolution 16/18.

Their first victim in the United States was a Coptic Christian named Nakoula Bassiley Nakoula, the maker of the YouTube video Hillary and Obama blamed for Benghazi.

New Abedin emails released to Judicial Watch this week show that Huma Abedin served as liaison between Clinton Foundation donors, including foreign governments, and the State Department.

When foreign donors had difficult in getting appointments with Mrs. Clinton through normal State Department channels, Clinton Foundation executive Douglas Band would email Huma Abedin, and poof! the doors would open as if by magic.

Donald Trump has criticized this as “pay for play.” But it also raises questions as to whether Huma Abedin and Mrs. Clinton were in fact serving as unregistered agents for foreign powers who sought to impose their anti-freedom agenda on the United States.

The United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Egypt outlawed the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization in 2014. But by then, the damage had been done.

Do Americans want eight years of a President Clinton, who will do even more to empower the Muslim Brotherhood and impose its agenda on America?

DeceptionEDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in The Hill. The featured image is of Huma Abedin is by Greg Nash.

Mr. Timmerman is a Donald Trump supporter. He was the 2012 Republican Congressional nominee for MD-8 and is the author of Deception: The Making of the YouTube Video Hillary & Obama Blamed for Benghazi, published by Post Hill Press.

We Warned You In 2007 About Tim Kaine: Hillary’s VP Pick and the Muslim Brotherhood

The Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Watch (GMBDW) reported in October 2007 that current Democratic Vice-Presidential candidate Tim Kaine had a close relationship to the Muslim American Society (MAS), a part of the US Muslim Brotherhood closest to the Egyptian organization. According to a local media article cited in that post:

Democratic Gov. Timothy M. Kaine is far too close to a Muslim group that allegedly has ties to Islamic terrorism and espouses radical views, according to two local delegates. But a group leader says the charges are founded in racism.

Kaine should move to put some distance between his administration and the Falls Church-based Muslim American Society, said Dels. Todd Gilbert, R-Woodstock, and Clifford L. “Clay” Athey Jr., R-Front Royal.

It all started when Kaine appointed Dr. Esam Omeish, the president of the society, to the Virginia Commission on Immigration. Gilbert wrote to Kaine, asking him to reconsider the appointment after seeing online videos of Omeish accusing Israel of genocide against Palestinians and exhorting Muslims to “the jihad way.”

Omeish resigned less than a day later under pressure from Kaine.

But after some investigation, the delegates say the connections between Kaine and MAS appear to be deeper than just one appointment.

Kaine was the keynote speaker at the society’s Freedom Foundation “Standing for Justice Dinner.” He was photographed with leaders of the group, including Imam Mahdi Bray, the executive director of the foundation.

In an online video of a 2000 rally in Washington, Abdurahman al-Amoudi — who would later plead guilty to charges of funneling money from Libya to Saudi militants — took to the podium and declared his support for Hamas and Hezbollah.

Hamas, now the ruling party in the Gaza Strip, started a wave of suicide bombings against Israeli civilians in 1993, according to the nonpartisan Council on Foreign Relations. Hezbollah, which now holds a quasi-state in southern Lebanon, is thought to be behind the 1983 bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut that killed 241 servicemen.

“I have been labeled by the media in New York to be a supporter of Hamas. Anybody support this Hamas here?” al-Amoudi says in the video, drawing cheers from the crowd and fist pumps from Bray.

“I wish the added that I am also a supporter of Hezbollah. Anybody supports Hezbollah here?” he asks, drawing more cheers and fist pumps.

Read the rest here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

2016 Presidential Race, Hillary Clinton, Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Tim Kaine

Clinton VP Pick Tim Kaine’s Islamist Ties

The Wages of Kaine

VIDEO: GOP Congressman to House Democrats during sit-in: ‘Radical Islam killed these people’

The unnamed man who took hostages in a theater in Germany today had no problem getting a gun, despite Germany’s draconian gun laws. The House Democrats are perpetuating the prevailing willful ignorance about the real threat of jihad terror.

“GOP Congressman to House Democrats during sit-in: ‘Radical Islam killed these people,’” AOL News, June 23, 2016:

Tensions between Democrats and Republicans reached a boiling point , with one Republican lawmaker getting into a shouting match over a sit-in aimed at forcing votes on gun control measures.

Representative Louie Gohmert staging his own protest yelling at the Democrats saying, “We’re talking about radical Islam”. While also proclaiming, “Radical Islam killed these people.”

The Congressman waving his finger at posters featuring photos of the victims of the recent mass shooting in Orlando that left 49 people dead.

Gohmert’s own protests were then drowned out by the Democratics [sic] shouting, “Don’t let terrorists have a gun!”

The Democrats began their sit-in because of the Senate’s rejection of four purposed gun bills. Congressman John Lewis is leading the charge saying Congress has a moral obligation to speak up and speak out to address gun violence….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Saudis kept 2 jihad groups with ties to Huma Abedin off US terror list

UK Muslim stabs girlfriend: mother disapproved of his relationship with non-Muslim