Posts

VIDEO: The Biden Express is Headed Left — AOC as EPA Administrator

This video was published by Senator Ted Cruz. In it shows how Alexandria-Ocasio Cortez would become the EPA Administrator in a Biden Cabinet.

WATCH:

©All rights reserved.

Muslim in tweet ‘To infidels of the West’ Exposes the Truth about Radical Islam

 wrote on Twitter:

This Radical Islamist just commented this under one of my posts!

According to Democrats for Trump Adegoke O. Adebayo tweeted the following:

adebayo tweet

adebayo tweet 2

adebayo tweet 3

This lays out the strategy of radical Islam and who are their supporters and partners.

I have said that the Democrat Party is the party of Marx, Mohammed and Manning. Mr. Adebayo’s tweet appears to confirm my analysis.

RELATED ARTICLE: NEW AXIS OF EVIL Highly-trained Hamas commandos head to Egypt to team-up with terror group ISIS

VIDEO: Moderate Muslims Are Not the Solution to Radical Islam

We hear that moderate Muslims are the solution to radical Islam. But when we examine this idea a step at a time, it will not work.

Radical Muslims want Sharia, moderate Muslims reject Sharia

Radical Muslims want jihad, moderate Muslims reject jihad

And so on…

But the problem is that all of the things that radicals want are pure Islam. And every radical idea that moderate Muslims reject is pure Islam. Moderation simply means rejecting the doctrine. Moderation is a form of apostasy. How can moderates reform what they reject? Moderate Muslims are not Islamic and are not capable of reforming Islam.

There is no moderate Islam; there is no radical Islam. There is only Islam.

RELATED ARTICLES:

My Journey Out of Radical Islam by Ammar Anwer

Jihad: The New ‘New Value’ in Turkey’s Educational System

Dear President Trump: Here is Clarion’s Best Advice

The Inside Story of How John Kerry Secretly Lobbied to Get CAIR Removed From UAE’s Terrorist Organization List by Steven Emerson

EDITORS NOTE: This video originally appeared on PoliticalIslam.com.

Ideas in Exile: The Bullies Win at Yale by Diana Furchtgott-Roth

The student speech bullies have won at Yale. Erika Christakis, Assistant Master of Yale’s Silliman College, who had the temerity to suggest that college students should choose their own Halloween costumes, has resigned from teaching. Her husband, sociology professor Nicholas Christakis, Master of Silliman College, will take a sabbatical next semester.

One of the bullies’ demands to Yale President Salovey was that the couple be dismissed, and a resignation and sabbatical are a close second.

As had been widely reported, Erika Christakis said,

Is there no room any more for a child or young person to be a little bit obnoxious, a little bit inappropriate or provocative or, yes, offensive? American universities were once a safe space not only for maturation but also for a certain regressive, or even transgressive, experience; increasingly, it seems, they have become places of censure and prohibition.

At issue are costumes such as wearing a sombrero, which might be offensive to Mexicans; wearing a feathered headdress, which might offend Native Americans, previously termed Red Indians; and wearing blackface to dress up as an African American.

Dr. Christakis’s comment is so obvious that it hardly needs to be said. Students who are admitted to Yale are some of the brightest in the country, and it should not be the role of the University to tell them how, or whether, to dress up at Halloween.

The speech bullies want mandatory diversity training, rules against hate speech, the dismissal of Nicholas and Erika Christakis, and the renaming of Calhoun College because its namesake, John Calhoun, defended slavery.

If America is to be whitewashed of the names of individuals from prior centuries who fall short of the political standards of the 21st century, we will be a nation not only without names but also without a past. The names of our states, our municipalities, and even our universities would disappear. Elihu Yale was a governor of the East India Company, which may have occasionally engaged in the slavery trade. It is easy to condemn the dead who cannot defend themselves. But if we curse the past, what fate awaits us from our progeny?

Not all Yale students agree with the tactics employed by the bullies. Freshman Connor Wood said,

The acceptance or rejection of coercive tactics is a choice that will literally decide the fate of our democracy. Our republic will not survive without a culture of robust public debate. And the far more immediate threat is to academia: how can we expect to learn when people are afraid to speak out?

The Committee for the Defense of Freedom at Yale has organized a petition in the form of a letter to President to express concern with the bullies’ demands. Over 800 members of the Yale community have signed. Zachary Young, a junior at Yale and one of the organizers of the petition, told me in an email, “We want to promote free speech and free minds at Yale, and don’t think the loudest voices should set the agenda.”

Nevertheless, it appears that the loudest voices are indeed influencing President Salovey. He has given in to protesters by announcing a new center for the study of race, ethnicity, and social identity; creating four new faculty positions to study “unrepresented and under-represented communities;” launching “a five-year series of conferences on issues of race, gender, inequality, and inclusion;” spending $50 million over the next five years to enhance faculty diversity; doubling the budgets of cultural centers (Western culture not included); and increasing financial aid for low-income students.

In addition, President Salovey volunteered, along with other members of the faculty and administration, to “receive training on recognizing and combating racism and other forms of discrimination.”

With an endowment of $24 billion, these expenses are a proverbial drop in the bucket for Yale. But it doesn’t mean that the administration should cave. Isaac Cohen, a Yale senior, wrote in the student newspaper,

Our administrators, who ought to act with prudence and foresight, appear helpless in the face of these indictments. Consider President Salovey’s email to the Yale community this week. Without any fight or pushback — indeed, with no thoughts as to burdens versus benefits — he capitulated in most respects to the demands of a small faction of theatrically aggrieved students.

Yale’s protests, and others around the country, including Claremont-McKenna, the University of Missouri, and Princeton, stem from the efforts of a small group of students to shield themselves from difficult situations. Students want to get rid of speech that might be offensive to someone that they term a “micro-aggressions.” This limits what can be said because everything can be interpreted as offensive if looked at in a particular context.

For instance, when I write (as I have done) that the wage gap between men and women is due to the sexes choosing different university majors, different hours of work, and different professions, this potentially represents a micro-aggression, even though it is true. Even the term “the sexes” is potentially offensive, because it implies two sexes, male and female, and leaves out gays, lesbians, and transgenders. The term “gender” is preferred to “sex.”

What about a discussion of the contribution of affirmative action to the alienation of some groups on campuses today? Under affirmative action, students are admitted who otherwise might not qualify. In Supreme Court hearings on Wednesday, Justice Antonin Scalia said, “There are those who contend that it does not benefit African Americans to — to get them into the University of Texas where they do not do well, as opposed to having them go to a less-advanced school, a less — a slower-track school where they do well.”

The majority of students at Yale want an open discussion of all subjects, but the attack on the Christakises have frightened them into silence. Zach Young told me,

If the accusers’ intent was to enlighten and persuade, their result was to silence and instill fear. I worry that because of this backlash, fewer students or faculty — including people of color and those of liberal persuasions — will feel comfortable expressing views that dissent from the campus norms. Why risk getting so much hate, disgust, calls against your firing, just for the sake of expressing an opinion?

Why indeed? The answer is that arguing about opinions is the only way to get a real education. Let’s hope that another university stands up for freedom of speech and offers the Christakises teaching positions next semester.

This article first appeared at CapX.

Diana Furchtgott-RothDiana Furchtgott-Roth

Diana Furchtgott-Roth, former chief economist of the U.S. Department of Labor, is director of Economics21 and senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute.

Congressional Democrats Visit Radical Mosque in “Anti-Islamophobia” Act

In the wake of the California Islamist terrorist attack, a group of congresspeople visited the extremist Dar al-Hijrah mosque in Virginia in an ‘show of solidarity’ with ordinary, non-extremist Muslims in America.

The idea for the visit was conceived before the California Islamist terror shooting but after the Paris attack. “We just thought it was really important to continue to reiterate to the many, many peace-loving Muslim Americans that they were still a welcome part of our community,” Representative Don Beyer (D-Virgina), one of the organizers of the visit, told The New York Times.

Speaking the day after the California attack and just one day before the visit, Beyer said, “Yesterday does make it a little harder. It’s just another unfortunate data point. So, I think it’s more necessary than ever to go talk to the people who have nothing to do with that [editor’s emphasis].”

Either Beyer and his group of lawmakers failed to research the history of the Dar al-Hijrah Islamic Center, or they are incredibly naïve. Both are enormous problems and speak volumes about the inadequate strategy currently in place in the United States government for weeding out radical Islamists before they wreak more havoc on an already traumatized country.

Dar al-Hijrah is one of the most radical Islamic centers in America. Its history of extremism dates back decades to one of its founders, Ismail Elbarasse, who was an assistant to a senior Hamas official. In 2002, a government document written by the Customs and Border Protection stated Dar al-Hijrah was “operating as a front for Hamas operatives in U.S.” A December 2007 document says it “has been linked to numerous individuals linked to terrorism financing.”

Click here for a complete history of the Dar al-Hijrah Islamic Center.

Other salient points about Dar al-Hijrah include:

  • Dar al-Hijrah’s imam from 2001 to 2002 was Anwar al-Awlaki, who later became a senior al-Qaeda operative. His sermons were attended by two of the 9/11 hijackers and Nidal Hassan, who carried out a terror shooting at Fort Hood in 2009.
  • It’s imam from 2003 to 2005, Mohammed Adam El-Sheikh justified Palestinian suicide bombings and  was a member of the Sudanese Muslim Brotherhood. He was previously the regional director of the Islamic American Relief Agency, which was labeled by the U.S. Treasury Department as a Specially Designated Terrorist organization because of its links to Osama Bin Laden and Hamas.
  • The current imam of Dar al Hijrah, Shaker Elsayed, said the teachings of Hassan al-Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, are the “closest reflection of how Islam should be in this life.” He has also called for Muslims to arm themsleves for jihad (see video below).
  • In 2010 and 2013, radical texts teaching that Muslims are to wage violent jihad in order to resurrect the caliphate, destroy Israel and implement sharia governance were found at the mosque.

Watch Dar al-Hijrah Imam Shaker Elsayed call for armed jihad:

All congresspersons are equipped with numerous staff members who are specifically hired to do research for their employer. A simple Google search by one of them would have yielded the above information.

Perhaps for Rep. Beyer and his fellow Dar al-Hijrah visitors, these facts were just more “unfortunate data points.”

But for the majority of the population, including “peace-loving Muslim Americans,” who are concerned about the radicalized Islamists in our midst, these are data points that are too deadly to ignore.

To check if there is an extremist mosque near you, click here for Clarion Project’s Islamist Organizations in America project

ABOUT MEIRA SVIRSKY 

Meira Svirsky is the editor of ClarionProject.org

RELATED ARTICLES:

Are We Defeating ISIS?

Trump Asks Us to Choose: The Boot or the Feather

Obama’s Take on Terror: The Good and the Bad

Obama’s San Bernardino Speech – The Missing Link

Prescribing Solutions for Radical Islam in America

Dr. Welner, on Fox & Bill Bennett, Decries Lies About Mass Shootings and Crisis Incidents, Issues Multi-Pronged Homeland Proposal to Mitigate Risk.

New York – Reacting to the mass shooting incident at a staff holiday party in San Bernardino, the United States government and many media initially emphasized that a workplace mass shooting had taken place. The early national discourse directed itself to gun control advocacy. Once a terrorist motivation could no longer be denied, outlets began suggesting that the shootings were instigated by remarks that one of the deceased had made about Islam not being a peaceful religion, suggesting that he had provoked the killings. More recently, revelations of how United States immigration policy allowed one of the perpetrators into the country has touched off a highly-charged policy debate.Almost immediately after the perpetrators were identified, Dr. Michael Welner, forensic psychiatrist and Chairman of The Forensic Panel, recognized the event to bear the hallmarks of Islamist terrorism, given the role of a female perpetrator – a fact never associated with American mass shootings without direct personal conflict. Such American mass shootings customarily involve perpetrators aspiring to idealized destructive masculine identity.

Dr. Welner’s early appearance on “Fox and Friends” laid out the distinctions from workplace mass killing, and raised the importance of learning more of how a woman taking up destructive spectacle crime (which happens regularly overseas) related to how Muslim identity is expressed in America. Dr. Welner relied on his extensive experience in evaluating mass shooting incidents, workplace risk assessment, and risk assessment and other Jihadi psychology and criminology issues.

Dr. Welner added, in an appearance later that hour on “Fox & Friends,” that the hallmarks of how far one would go for their faith, demonstrated in a woman leaving an infant behind, bore the hallmarks of ISIS’ modus operandi. He encouraged the government and press to be straightforward about terrorist motivation, adding that being forthright was essential to devising public safety plans ahead.

Former Secretary of Education Bill Bennett, in his nationally broadcast program“Morning in America,” praised Dr. Welner for focusing the discussion on the core cause and not allowing a false narrative to take hold in the press. Dr. Bennett then invited Dr. Welner onto “Morning in America” yesterday to discuss Dr. Welner’s proposals for mitigating Islamist risk in America. Dr. Welner asserted that it was necessary to dismiss a number of oft-repeated false assertions as deliberate manipulations by informed authorities seeking to avoid addressing violence risks and risk factors of potential perpetrators, specifically:

  • Islamist terror is not Islam
  • Adherents to Radical Islamist thinking are very few in number
  • America is responsible for creating intense Muslim hostility towards this country
  • We are not at war with Islam
  • Frank discussion of Islamist terrorism endangers American Muslims

In their extended discussion, Dr. Welner proposed a number of policy prescriptions for mitigating risk. Dr. Welner’s recommendations, which have since been re-published by the Investigative Project for Terrorism and the New English Review, include:

  • Flipping the paradigm to focus on how American Muslims can actively defuse national anxieties of Americans who witness Islamist terrorism, rather than Americans’ alleviating anxieties of attacks on Muslims, which are altogether rare
  • Branding America and how it has helped Muslims around the world
  • Promoting Muslim attitudes reflecting loyalty to America first
  • Encouraging mosque, parental, and family responsibility to self-police communities in order to root out radical nihilists who recruit others and ensnare young people
  • Financially support Muslim institutions’ efforts to root out terrorism from within communities
  • Promote humor and the arts to promote the marginalizing, reform, and self-regulation of Islamist intolerance
  • Retake the campuses from rejectionist Islam, prevent access of radical leadership
  • Retake the prisons from intolerant imams who groom new and alienated adherents and feed angry violent wannabees into the community
  • Ban investment by governments and large donors promoting radical Islam from American media, campaigns, and academic institutions
  • End American backdoor funding and support of countries and entities that collaborate with Islamist terror
  • Expose and root out Islamist contributions to political candidates and to media entities
  • Full security screening of federal employees in sensitive positions who do not currently undergo security clearance
  • End exclusion of Jewish Arabic speakers by American intelligence services, who are available but not relied upon for gathering human intelligence

A more extensive explanation of these proposals can be found at billbennett.com

To listen to Dr. Welner’s interview with Bill Bennett, click here

Dr. Welner’s two interviews with Fox & Friends on San Bernardino, click here and here

Map Of Radical Mosques in the U.S.

There are more than 80 radical mosques are in the U.S., according to the Clarion Project, a non-profit group that describes itself as “dedicated to exposing the dangers of Islamist extremism.”

Using Clarion’s definitions, The Daily Caller News Foundation has mapped these radical mosques in an effort to aid readers seeking to understand the extent of radical Islamic voices in this country.

These mosques or their leading clerics have radicalized attendees to become terrorists, supported terrorist organizations, made radical Islamist remarks or hosted others that have, or are financially backed by radical individuals or organizations.

“Islamist extremists have developed a sophisticated network of interconnected organizations across American,” according to Clarion. “The common thread among these organizations is their ideology of political Islam, which aspires to implement sharia governance and to establish a global Islamic caliphate.”

The FBI declined to tell TheDCNF if the nation’s top law enforcement agency has a similar list.

The map includes 83 – or nearly 4 percent – of the 2,106 mosques in the United States as of 2010.

Mosques from Clarion Project’s list were excluded if TheDCNF could not verify their addresses. These include Islamist communes like Islamberg in New York.

Several mosques on the Clarion Project’s list stand out.

  • Dar al-Hijrah, located just outside Washington in Falls Chruch, Virginia, for example, was the place of worship for two of the 9/11 hijakers. This mosque’s present Imam, Shaker Elsayed, described Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna’s teachings as “the closest reflection of how Islam should be in this life.” The Brotherhood “seeks to implement Sharia-based governance globally,” according to the Clarion Project.

Source

RELATED ARTICLES:

Muslim Migrants Are Killing Christian Migrants

Barack Obama Blocked 75% of Strikes on the Islamic State

Radical Muslim Organization attacks Trump and Carson as ‘Islamophobes’

WASHINGTON, D.C. /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the nation’s largest Muslim advocacy organization and an unindicted supporter of terrorism today condemned both leading Republican presidential candidates for “Islamophobic and unconstitutional” comments targeting American Muslims and Syrian refugees.

According to Discover the Networks:

CAIR was co-founded in 1994 by Nihad Awad, Omar Ahmad, and Rafeeq Jaber, all of whom had close ties to the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP), which was established by senior Hamas operative Mousa Abu Marzook and functioned as Hamas’ public relations and recruitment arm in the United States. Awad and Ahmad previously had served, respectively, as IAP’s Public Relations Director and President. Thus it can be said that CAIR was an outgrowth of IAP.

CAIR opened its first office in Washington, DC, with the help of a $5,000 donation from the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), a self-described charity founded by Mousa Abu Marzook. In May 1996, CAIR coordinated a press conference to protest the decision of the U.S. government to extradite Marzook for his connection to terrorist acts performed by Hamas. CAIR characterized the extradition as “anti-Islamic” and “anti-American.” When President Bush closed HLF in December 2001 for collecting money “to support the Hamas terror organization,” CAIR decried his action as “unjust” and “disturbing.”

Notable facts about CAIR’s pas de deux with Islamic extremism and terrorism include the following:

  • Co-founder Nihad Awad asserted at a 1994 meeting at Barry University, “I am a supporter of the Hamas movement.” Awad wrote in the Muslim World Monitor that the 1994 trial which had resulted in the conviction of four Islamic fundamentalist terrorists who had perpetrated the previous year’s World Trade Center bombing was “a travesty of justice.”
  • On February 2, 1995, U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White named CAIR Advisory Board member and New York imam Siraj Wahhaj as one of the “unindicted persons who may be alleged as co-conspirators” in Islamic Group leader Omar Abdel Rahman‘s foiled plot to blow up numerous New York City monuments.
  • On June 6, 2006, CAIR’s Ohio affiliate held a large fundraiser in honor of Siraj Wahhaj. Following the event, CAIR-Ohio issued a press release heralding the more than $100,000 that Wahhaj had helped raise that evening for the organization’s “civil liberties work.”
  • In October 1998, CAIR demanded the removal of a Los Angeles billboard describing Osama bin Laden as “the sworn enemy.” According to CAIR, this depiction was “offensive to Muslims.”
  • In 1998, CAIR denied bin Laden’s responsibility for the two al Qaeda bombings of American embassies in Africa. According to Ibrahim Hooper, the bombings resulted from “misunderstandings of both sides.”
  • In September 2003, CAIR’s former Community Affairs Director, Bassem Khafagi, pled guilty to three federal counts of bank and visa fraud and agreed to be deported to Egypt. Federal investigators said that a group Khafagi founded, the Islamic Assembly of North America, had funneled money to activities supporting terrorism and had published material advocating suicide attacks against the United States. Khafagi’s illegal activities took place while he was employed by CAIR.
  • In July 2004, Ghassan Elashi, a founding Board member of CAIR’s Texas chapter, was convicted along with his four brothers of having illegally shipped computers from their Dallas-area business, InfoCom Corporation, to Libya and Syria, two designated state sponsors of terrorism. That same month, Elashi was charged with having provided more than $12.4 million to Hamas while he was running HLF. In April 2005, Elashi and two of his brothers were also convicted of knowingly doing business with Hamas operative Mousa Abu Marzook, who was Elashi’s brother-in-law. Elashi’s illegal activities took place while he was employed by CAIR, whose Dallas-Fort Worth chapter depicted the Elashis’ indictment as “a war on Islam and Muslims.”
  • On September 6, 2001, the day that federal agents first raided Infocom’s headquarters, CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad denounced the U.S. government for “tak[ing] us back to the McCarthy era.”
  • FBI wiretap evidence which was introduced during the 2007 trial of the Holy Land Foundation (a trial that explored HLF’s financial ties to Hamas), proved that Nihad Awad had attended a 1993 Philadelphia meeting of Hamas leaders and operatives who collaborated on a plan to disguise funding for Hamas as charitable donations.
  • CAIR co-founder and Chairman Emeritus Omar Ahmad was named, in the same 2007 Holy Land Foundation trial, as an unindicted co-conspirator with HLF. During the trial, evidence was supplied proving that Ahmad had attended, along with Nihad Awad, the aforementioned 1993 Philadelphia meeting of Hamas leaders and operatives. Moreover, prosecutors described Ahmad as a member of theMuslim Brotherhood‘s “Palestine Committee” in America.
  • The home of Muthanna al-Hanooti, one of CAIR’s directors, was raided in 2006 by FBI agents in connection with an active terrorism investigation. FBI agents also searched the offices of Focus on Advocacy and Advancement of International Relations, al-Hanooti’s Michigan- and Washington DC-based consulting firm that investigators suspect to be a front supporting the Sunni-led insurgency in Iraq.

CAIR condemned Donald Trump for refusing to rule out special IDs and a surveillance database for American Muslims and the civil rights group similarly condemned Ben Carson for comparing Syrian refugees to “rabid dogs.”

Yahoo News asked Trump whether increased surveillance of American Muslims could include warrantless searches. “We’re going to have to do things that we never did before. And some people are going to be upset about it, but I think that now everybody is feeling that security is going to rule,” Trump said. “And certain things will be done that we never thought would happen in this country in terms of information and learning about the enemy. And so we’re going to have to do certain things that were frankly unthinkable a year ago.”

When asked whether tracking American Muslims might require registering them in a database or giving them a form of “special identification that noted their religion,” he refused to rule it out.

“We’re going to have to — we’re going to have to look at a lot of things very closely,” said Trump. “We’re going to have to look at the mosques. We’re going to have to look very, very carefully.”

SEE: Donald Trump Has Big Plans for ‘Radical Islamic’ Terrorists, 2016 and ‘That Communist’ Bernie Sanders
http://tinyurl.com/nm525n9

While talking about Syrian refugees Thursday in Alabama, Ben Carson compared them to “rabid dogs.”

Carson said: “If there is a rabid dog running around your neighborhood, you’re probably not going to assume something good about that dog. And you’re probably going to put your children out of the way.”

SEE: Ben Carson Compares Syrian Refugees to Rabid, ‘Mad’ Dogs
http://tinyurl.com/pesawxc

“By mainstreaming Islamophobic and unconstitutional policies, Donald Trump and Ben Carson are contributing to an already toxic environment that may be difficult to correct once their political ambitions have been satisfied,” said CAIR Government Affairs Manager Robert McCaw. “Such extremist rhetoric is unbecoming of anyone who seeks our nation’s highest office and must be strongly repudiated by leaders from across the political spectrum.”

In October, CAIR condemned similar remarks Trump made about his apparent willingness to close down American mosques.

SEE: CAIR Condemns Donald Trump’s Statement on Closing U.S. Mosques
http://tinyurl.com/okz43so

In September, CAIR called on Trump to also clarify what he meant when stating that he was “going to be looking at that” to a question about the Muslim “problem in this country” and “When can we get rid of them?”

SEE: CAIR Calls on Donald Trump to Clarify ‘Looking At’ Getting Rid of Muslims
http://tinyurl.com/o67lzm7

Also in September, CAIR announced the renewal of its “Share the Quran” campaign in response to Ben Carson’s false claim that Islam is “inconsistent” with the Constitution and his bigoted belief that a Muslim should not be elected president.

SEE: CAIR Announces Quran Giveaway in Response to Ben Carson’s Anti-Muslim Remarks
http://tinyurl.com/okvrcgn

CAIR is America’s largest Muslim civil liberties and advocacy organization. Its mission is to enhance the understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Radisson hotel in Mali attacked; 170 hostages taken; men shout ‘Allahu Akbar’

Islamic State Tactics Shift, Borrowing From al Qaeda

U.S. Pilots Confirm: Obama Admin Blocks 75 Percent of Islamic State Strikes