Muslim MMA Fighter Khabib Nurmagomedov Warns Rival Conor McGregor He Isn’t “Safe” After Insulting Islam

Khabib Nurmagomedov’s not-so-veiled threat would not be tolerated from anyone but a Muslim.

When a Muslim says such things, however, the establishment media turns a blind eye and resumes hunting for incidents of “Islamophobia.”

“Khabib warns McGregor he isn’t ‘safe’ after insulting Islam, Conor says he wants to move forward with fans of ‘all faiths,’” by Milan Ordoñez, Bloody Elbow, April 4, 2019 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

A little over a week ago, Conor McGregor was announcing his retirement from “the sport formally known as Mixed Martial Art.” Theories were formulated as to why “The Notorious” came up with the decision, but many of his fellow fighters refuse to take him seriously.

McGregor has been active on Twitter as of late, hurling insults at rival Khabib Nurmagomedov. The trade of tirades had gone severe, that even UFC president Dana White commented on how the rift between the two had already escalated to a level that is unacceptable.

Khabib went on social media to warn McGregor about his statements towards Islam.

On Wednesday night, the Irish fighter once again posted an attention-grabbing tweet, this time seemingly backtracking on previous insults on religion…

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

Pope: God Wants Catholic/Muslim Fraternity

ANSA reported Wednesday that “Pope Francis said God wants inter-faith solidarity as he spoke about his trip to Morocco last weekend during his weekly general audience on Wednesday.” The Pope said: “With Muslims, we are descendants of the same Father, Abraham: why does God permit there to be so many religions?…But what God wants is fraternity between us and in a special way – here is the reason for this trip – with our brothers, sons of Abraham like us, the Muslims. We must not be afraid of difference: God allowed this. We must be afraid if we do not work in fraternity, to walk together in life.”

Yeah, sounds like a great idea.

God doubtless wants all of us to live in peace, but what exactly is preventing that? What kind of “fraternity” can Christians enjoy with Muslims in light of these teachings:

Muslims must fight against and subjugate Christians: “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden what has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” — Qur’an 9:29

Those who believe in the divinity of Christ are unbelievers: “They have certainly disbelieved who say that Allah is Christ, the son of Mary.” — Qur’an 5:17 (cf. 5:72)

Jesus is not the Son of God and belief in the Trinity is “excess”: “O People of the Book! Do not exaggerate in your religion nor utter anything concerning Allah save the truth. The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only a messenger of Allah, and his word which he conveyed to Mary, and a spirit from him. So believe in Allah and His messengers, and do not say ‘Three.’ Cease! It is better for you! Allah is only One Allah. It is far removed from his transcendent majesty that he should have a son. His is all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And Allah is sufficient as Defender.” — Qur’an 4:171

And: “It is not befitting to Allah that he should beget a son. Glory be to him! When He determines a matter, he only says to it, ‘Be,’ and it is.” — Qur’an 19:35

Jesus was not crucified: “And because of their saying: We killed the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah’s messenger – they did not kill him or crucify him, but it appeared so to them; and those who disagree concerning it are in doubt about it; they have no knowledge of it except pursuit of a conjecture; they did not kill him for certain.” — Qur’an 4:157

Christians have forgotten part of the divine revelations they received: “From those, too, who call themselves Christians, We did take a covenant, but they forgot a good part of the message that was sent them: so we estranged them, with enmity and hatred between the one and the other, to the day of judgment. And soon will Allah show them what it is they have done.” — Qur’an 5:14

Those who believe that Jesus is God’s Son are accursed: “The Jews call Ezra a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah’s curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth! ” — Qur’an 9:30

Christians who do not accept Muhammad and the Qur’an are the most vile of created beings: “Nor did those who were given the Scripture become divided until after there had come to them clear evidence. And they were not commanded except to worship Allah, sincere to Him in religion, inclining to truth, and to establish prayer and to give zakah. And that is the correct religion. Indeed, they who disbelieved among the People of the Book and the polytheists will be in the fire of Hell, abiding eternally therein. Those are the most vile of created beings.” — Qur’an 98:6

Also, a hadith has Muhammad predicting that Jesus will return at the end of the world and break the cross, as it is an insult to Allah’s power to say that he would have allowed one of his prophets to be crucified:

Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah’s Apostle said, “By Him in Whose Hands my soul is, son of Mary [Jesus] will shortly descend amongst you people [Muslims] as a just ruler and will break the Cross and kill the pig and abolish the Jizya [a tax taken from the non-Muslims, who are in the protection, of the Muslim government]. Then, there will be abundance of money and nobody will accept charitable gifts. (Bukhari 3.34.425)

Muslims have sometimes taken this to mean not just that crosses will be destroyed in the end times, but that they should be now. In Spain in 2015, Muslims broke into a church, spray-painted “Allah” on a wall, and destroyed the crucifix. In Pakistan in 2014, Muslims destroyed a church that was under construction, and desecrated the cross. When the Islamic State occupied Mosul, it made the destruction of all crosses in the city a top priority.

Here, in conclusion, is my favorite New Testament verse, this time referring to Pope Francis: “Leave them; they are blind guides. And if a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit.” (Matthew 15:14)

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

France Won’t Take Back Islamic State Jihadis & Their Families After Furious Public Outcry

“He denied Liberation’s claim that France’s policy with regards to fighters in Syria was being dictated by public opinion.”

Better public opinion than the suicidal dictates of the globalist elites.

“France will not take back ISIS jihadis and their families following furious backlash at reports 250 of them would be allowed to return,” by Ross Ibbetson, Mailonline, April 7, 2019 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

France has ruled out repatriating jihadists and their families from Syria following furious backlash at reports 250 of them would be allowed to return.

Interior Minister Christophe Castaner told a press conference in Paris on Friday: ‘No communal repatriation was under consideration to be carried out.’

It had been reported that in early March the government was prepared to bring home around 250 men, women and children from the former ‘caliphate,’ which brought widespread public backlash.

France and other European nations are considering how to deal with the thousands of foreigners, many of whom are being held by the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces which led the final push against IS.

The issue is extremely sensitive in France, where a deadly 2015 attack on the capital claimed by IS killed 130 people and set off a wave of other deadly assaults since then.

Castaner said: ‘It’s logical that our services considered all hypotheses. This was one of the hypothesis they prepared.’

However, he reiterated that France would nonetheless study bringing back children of jihadist fighters on a ‘case-by-case basis’.

He denied Liberation’s claim that France’s policy with regards to fighters in Syria was being dictated by public opinion….

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

CNN Covers Up National Security Analyst’s Ties To Hamas-Funding Qatar Regime

It has been clear for quite some time that the establishment media is not providing news. It is a propaganda organ for the hard-Left and its jihadist allies. And now that is being definitively confirmed. CNN’s quiet deletion of Kayyem’s ties to jihad-funding Qatar demonstrates that it is aware that featuring such people undercuts its claim to be a news source.

No American (or anyone else) should trust CNN as a source of news.

It is a key part of the entire corrupt cabal that has worked hard to discredit and destroy opposition to jihad terror by mainstreaming and normalizing Islamic antisemitism, the spurious concept of “Islamophobia,” and the idea that it is “bigoted” and “hateful” to oppose jihad mass murder and Sharia oppression of women, homosexuals, and others.

“CNN Plays Cover-Up On Analyst’s Ties To Qatar Regime,” by Amber Athey, Daily Caller, April 3, 2019:

CNN quietly edited a national security analyst’s biography Wednesday after a report revealed she was a board member of a Qatari-funded organization.

The Conservative Review’s Jordan Schachtel reported Tuesday that several CNN contributors and guests have undisclosed ties to the Qatari government, which could influence their on-air coverage of Middle Eastern affairs. Juliette Kayemm [sic], a national security analyst who is on contract with CNN, was listed by the network as of Wednesday as a board member of the International Centre for Sport Security (ICSS).

ICSS president Mohammed Hanzab said in 2016 that the group is “70% funded by the Qatar government,” a regime that is accused of funding terror and violating basic human rights.

Despite the fact that CNN’s biography for Kayyem on its website called her a “board member of … the International Centre for Sport Security,” a CNN source reached out to The Daily Caller to dispute that characterization.

“She WAS on the board of International Center for Sports Security, an organization promoting best practices for the safety of sporting events, which included senior leaders from the U.S., Europe, and elsewhere. That contract ENDED several years ago,” the source claimed.

The Caller pointed out that Kayyem’s bio on the CNN website said she was a board member of the ICSS. Shortly thereafter, the source indicated that her bio had been updated.

However, rather than changing Kayyem’s affiliation with the group to past tense, CNN scrubbed any references to it entirely….

Kayyem’s affiliation with the group was also changed on her faculty page at Harvard University, where she serves as a lecturer in International Security….

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

US Muslim Soldier Suing Army – Claims She Was Forced To Remove Hijab In Front Of Others

“Though her MEO complaint was reportedly found to be ‘unsubstantiated,’ Valdovinos told the publication she now intends to take legal action against the U.S. Army for infringing upon her First Amendment rights by violating her freedom of religion. However, according to a statement from Valdovinos’s brigade officer that was obtained by Yahoo!, a commander’s inquiry into her allegations was found to have ‘concluded that the senior non-commissioned officer acted appropriately by enforcing the proper wear of the hijab, in compliance with Army Regulations.’”

So, an inquiry determined that her claims were unfounded, and she is suing anyway.

Armies have uniforms to avoid this sort of thing.

The idea of a uniform is to signify that various individuals are submitting — voluntarily, it’s a volunteer army — to a common purpose, and putting aside their differences in the service of a greater unity.

Is Cesilia Valdovinos doing that?

It’s noteworthy that we have seen Muslims claiming victim status many times before, and making false claims about being mistreated or brutalized: victimhood is a big business these days, and brings the victim many perks.

Is that what we are seeing here?

“Muslim soldier says she will sue Army for allegedly forcing her to remove hijab,” by Aris Folley, The Hill, April 3, 2019:

A Muslim soldier said she is preparing to sue the U.S. Army after her command sergeant major allegedly forced her to remove her hijab in front of others.

Sgt. Cesilia Valdovinos, a member the 704th Brigade Support Battalion who converted to Islam in 2016, told Yahoo! in a recent interview that her brigade commander, Col. David Zinn, granted her permission in June to wear a hijab while in uniform.

But Valdovinos told the publication that from that time forward, she experienced “extremely hateful” behavior because of her religion.

“I got called a ‘terrorist.’ I got called ‘ISIS.’ I hear comments that I’m the reason why 9/11 happened,” Valdovinos told Yahoo!. “There’s a lot of anger and animosity.”

Valdovinos said she filed a complaint with the military’s Equal Opportunity Office last month, however, after her command sergeant major allegedly pulled her out of rank and ordered her to remove her head covering in front of her colleagues.

“I felt embarrassed and religiously raped in a sense,” Valdovinos said in an email to the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF), a nonprofit advocacy organization that is currently representing her, according to Yahoo!.

“My religious preference is only to unveil in front of my husband in the comfort of my own home,” she continued.

With the help of MRFF, Valdovinos reportedly filed an official complaint with the Military Equal Opportunity Office (MEO) over the incident shortly thereafter.

In the complaint, Valdovinos reportedly alleges she was removed from her post as a “culinary arts specialist” because of her “religious preference to not handle pork” and claims she was referred to as “the girl with the hood” by her sergeant, among a number of other incidents, according to Yahoo.

Though her MEO complaint was reportedly found to be “unsubstantiated,” Valdovinos told the publication she now intends to take legal action against the U.S. Army for infringing upon her First Amendment rights by violating her freedom of religion.

However, according to a statement from Valdovinos’s brigade officer that was obtained by Yahoo!, a commander’s inquiry into her allegations was found to have “concluded that the senior non-commissioned officer acted appropriately by enforcing the proper wear of the hijab, in compliance with Army Regulations.”…

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

New Zealand Deputy PM Under Fire For Claiming Muslim Communities In New Zealand Have “Militant Underbelly”

The Christchurch mosque massacres are being used to shut down any negative word related to Islam, including opposition to jihad mass murder and Sharia oppression. There could be jihad activity in New Zealand; what would be preventing it?

Jihad against unbelievers is taught in the Qur’ans they read in New Zealand as much as it is in the Qur’ans they read everywhere else.

So what did Winston Peters say — 14 years ago — that was false?

The very fact that he is being made to answer for these statements now is a manifestation of the witch-hunt, Cultural Revolution collective hysteria that is currently gripping the public square.

“Winston Peters won’t apologise for Muslim comments,” RNZ, April 1, 2019:

Winston Peters isn’t backing down over comments he made about Muslims during a 2005 speech titled The End of Tolerance.

In that speech, he said New Zealand has always been a nation of immigrants, but not of Islamic immigrants.

“In New Zealand the Muslim community have been quick to show us their more moderate face, but as some media reports have shown, there is a militant underbelly here as well,” he said.

“These two groups, the moderate and militant, fit hand and glove everywhere they exist.

“Underneath it all the agenda is to promote fundamentalist Islam.

“Indeed these groups are like the mythical Hydra – a serpent underbelly with multiple heads capable of striking at any time and in any direction.”

In that speech, he also suggested asylum seeker Ahmed Zaoui must “chuckle at the naiveté and innocence of his supporters who clearly have no understanding of radical Islam.”

Mr Peters told Morning Report the comments were made in the context of recent terror attacks in London and that Imams around the world were saying the same thing.

“I was talking about extremism and I don’t resile from that.”…

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

Ilhan Omar: “To Me, The Hijab Means Power, Liberation, Beauty, & Resistance”

Vogue Arabia on Thursday published a glowing puff piece fawning over Muslim Rep. Ilhan Omar, who has, said Vogue, “made history in her adopted country,” apparently while hating every minute of it. Life in Trump’s America, she said, is “an everyday assault”; she did not, however, say anything about moving back to that paradise of multiculturalism, her native Somalia. Instead, she is bringing it here, at least in one aspect of Sharia observance: “To me,” she said, “the hijab means power, liberation, beauty, and resistance.”

What would the innumerable victims of the hijab say to that?

Omar said nothing about them. Instead, she painted the hijab as if it were entirely a matter of each woman’s free choice: “For me, that is how I raise my kids. I work to remove obstacles so they can live at their best and happiest selves. If that translates to adapting the hijab, that’s fine. If they don’t, that’s also fine. They have freedom of choice. Society tends to place lots of limitations, depending on what gender you are. I want my kids to be free. Walk in your own path. We are as much worthy of joy, power, and pleasure as the next human. We are deserving and we don’t need permission or an invitation to exist and to step into our power.”

Maybe she doesn’t.

But what does Ilhan Omar think about Aqsa Parvez, whose Muslim father choked her to death with her hijab after she refused to wear it?

Or Amina Muse Ali, a Christian woman in Somalia whom Muslims murdered because she wasn’t wearing a hijab?

Has she shown any concern for the 40 women who were murdered in Iraq in 2007 for not wearing the hijab; or for Alya Al-Safar, whose Muslim cousin threatened to kill her and harm her family because she stopped wearing the hijab in Britain; or for Amira Osman Hamid, who faced whipping in Sudan for refusing to wear the hijab; or for the Egyptian girl, also named Amira, who committed suicide after being brutalized by her family for refusing to wear the hijab; or for the Muslim and non-Muslim teachers at the Islamic College of South Australia who were told they had to wear the hijab or be fired; or for the women in Chechnya whom police shot with paintballs because they weren’t wearing hijab; or for the other women in Chechnya who were threatened by men with automatic rifles for not wearing hijab; or for the elementary school teachers in Tunisia who were threatened with death for not wearing hijab; or for the Syrian schoolgirls who were forbidden to go to school unless they wore hijab; or for the women in Gaza whom Hamas has forced to wear hijab; or for the women in Iran who protested against the regime, even before the recent uprising, by daring to take off their hijabs; or for the women in London whom Muslim thugs threatened to murder if they didn’t wear hijab; or for the anonymous young Muslim woman who doffed her hijab outside her home and started living a double life in fear of her parents; or for the fifteen girls in Saudi Arabia who were killed when the religious police wouldn’t let them leave their burning school building because they had taken off their hijabs in their all-female environment; or for the girl in Italy whose mother shaved her head for not wearing hijab; or for all the other women and girls who have been killed or threatened, or who live in fear for daring not to wear the hijab?

Courageous women in the Islamic Republic of Iran are taking off their hijabs as a sign of resistance to the oppressive Sharia regime under which they live, and at least 29 women have been arrested for doing so.

For far too many women around the world, the hijab is not a symbol of power, liberation, beauty, and resistance, but of their own powerlessness, oppression, dehumanization and subjugation.

Who is standing in solidarity with them?

Not Ilhan Omar.

Or Vogue.

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

New York Times Admits That “Withdrawing From Iran Nuclear Deal Has Paid Dividends”

When even the New York Times and its house Never-Trumper Bret Stephens are applauding Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal, you know that the results have been decisively in Trump’s favor.

I detail just how bad the Iran nuclear deal really was in The Complete Infidel’s Guide to Iran.

That many, if not all, the Democrat presidential candidates want to reenter it should be regarded as suicidal and treasonous if we had a sane public discourse today, which, of course, we do not.

“The Foreign Policy Fiasco That Wasn’t: Withdrawing from the Iran nuclear deal has paid dividends,” by Bret Stephens, New York Times, March 29, 2019:

It’s been nearly a year since Donald Trump made the decision to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal, to loud cries that it would bring nothing but woe to the United States and our interests in the Middle East.

So far, the result has been closer to the opposite.

That much was further made clear thanks to excellent reporting this week by The Times’s Ben Hubbard. “Iran’s financial crisis, exacerbated by American sanctions,” he writes from Lebanon, “appears to be undermining its support for militant groups and political allies who bolster Iranian influence in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and elsewhere.”

Well, heavens to Betsy. When the Obama administration negotiated the nuclear deal, the president acknowledged that sanctions relief for Tehran would inevitably mean more money for groups like Hezbollah. But he also insisted it wouldn’t make much of a difference in terms of Iran’s capacity to make mischief in the Middle East.

Hubbard’s reporting suggests otherwise. Iran can no longer finance civilian projects or credit lines in Syria. Hezbollah fighters and Palestinian militants aren’t being paid, and their families are losing subsidized housing. Even Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah has complained publicly about the effects of U.S. sanctions.

Nor are those the only benefits of withdrawal. The U.S. is no longer looking the other way at Hezbollah’s criminal enterprises, including drug smuggling and money laundering, the way it did during the Obama administration in order to engage Iran diplomatically. Iran’s protest movement, quashed in 2009, has shown signs of renewed life, not least because of public fury that the regime spends money on foreign adventures while economic conditions worsen at home.

Most importantly, Iran has not used the U.S. withdrawal from the deal to restart its nuclear programs, despite its threats to do so. Part of this has to do with Tehran’s belief that it can wait Trump out, especially since Democrats like Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris have promised to re-enter the deal if elected….

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

Democrat Senator Tim Kaine Introduces Bill To Combat “Undeniable Threat” Of White Supremacy, Ignores Jihad

Another Democrat trying to diminish the glaring Islamic anti-semitism in his own party and also detract from the seriousness and dangers of the highly threatening and vast global jihad.

Tim Kaine asserts that “the rise of white supremacy is an undeniable threat to the safety of our communities,” and “as the threat of violent white supremacy continues to mount, we must do more to ensure law enforcement has the training and resources they need to detect, deter, and investigate these acts of terrorism.”

Kaine is advocating for taxpayer money to go toward a hunt for “white supremacists,” and he uses one incident from 2017 to back up his claims.

Meanwhile, Kaine ignores news such as the story of the five New Mexico Muslims who were recently indicted on terrorism-related offences for allegedly training children “to carry out school massacres.”

The children were living under abusive conditions; the leader of the group is Siraj Ibn Wahhaj, the son of imam Siraj Wahhaj, a former board member of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).

Siraj Wahhaj once urged the overthrow of the “filthy” U.S. government.

This same man gave an opening prayer at an event at the Democratic National Convention in 2012.

Britain’s Security Service (MI5) has already debunked the “white supremacist” or “far right” threat: it declared that “the number of far-right terror cases the authorities are faced with is ‘absolutely dwarfed’ by the number of cases related to radical Islam.”

That no doubt holds true in the U.S. as well.

“Kaine introduces domestic terrorism bill,” by Nick Shepherd, Bristol Herald Courier, March 28, 2019:

WASHINGTON D.C. — U.S. Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., has introduced a bill that would combat the threat of domestic terrorism.

Kaine and U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Illinois, introduced the legislation on Wednesday. It specifically addresses the growing threat of white supremacists and other violent right-win extremists, according to a news release. The bill is called the Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act.

“The rise of white supremacy is an undeniable threat to the safety of our communities,” Kaine said. “In 2017, violent white supremacists brought their hate to Virginia when they marched through the streets of Charlottesville. As the threat of violent white supremacy continues to mount, we must do more to ensure law enforcement has the training and resources they need to detect, deter, and investigate these acts of terrorism.”

The bill would require the Justice Department, Department of Homeland Security and the FBI to regularly assess the threat posed by domestic terrorism and provide training and resources to assist state, local and tribal law enforcement to address it…..

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

Pennsylvania’s Islamic Totalitarianism: State Dems Call Christian Prayer “Bigoted” – Applaud Qur’an Reading At State House Session

“State Rep. Jason Dawkins, another Muslim lawmaker, opened the session Tuesday by reading from the Quran, prompting applause in the chamber.”

The favored religion on the Left is one that has moved some of its adherents to wage war against the West for 1,400 years, as The History of Jihad illustrates in detail. Is it just coincidence that the Left seems to oppose every counterterror and national security measure, and always to denigrate Judeo-Christian tradition while exalting Islam?

An update on this story. “Pennsylvania state Dems slam Republican’s prayer as ‘offensive,’ bigoted,” by Lukas Mikelionis, Fox News, March 27, 2019:

Pennsylvania state Democrats branded as “offensive” a Republican’s decision Monday to open a voting session with a prayer and a thank-you to President Trump for supporting Israel, with some Dems claiming to be “horrified” by the remarks and accusing the female lawmaker of Islamophobia.

State Rep. Stephanie Borowicz, a Republican and associate pastor’s wife who was elected to the state House in November, was accused of bigotry after she invoked the name of Jesus at least 13 times just before the Legislature swore in its first Muslim woman at the Statehouse in Harrisburg.

“God forgive us — Jesus — we’ve lost sight of you, we’ve forgotten you, God, in our country, and we’re asking you to forgive us,” Borowicz said added. She then praised President Trump for his support of Israel.

“I claim all these things in the powerful, mighty name of Jesus, the one who, at the name of Jesus, every knee will bow, and every tongue will confess, Jesus, that you are Lord, in Jesus’ name,” Borowicz said.

Democrats slammed her for the prayer. Rep. Movita Johnson-Harrell, the Muslim lawmaker who was sworn in at the Statehouse, accused Borowicz of using her religion against her….

State Rep. Jason Dawkins, another Muslim lawmaker, opened the session Tuesday by reading from the Quran, prompting applause in the chamber.

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

Jordan Peterson Dropped From Cambridge University After Posing In Photo With Man In “Proud Islamophobe” T-Shirt

The shirt specifies that the wearer is against “pedophilia, rape, wife-beating, slavery, homophobia, misogyny, violence against women and children,” and more.

Is Cambridge University for those things? Or does Stephen Toope (I do hope his email address starts with “stoope”) believe that none of those things have anything to do with Islam? Unfortunately, all too many Muslim spokesmen will point to the texts and teachings of Islam to justify just those things, as we have illustrated here many times.

So what did Jordan Peterson do wrong? And also, if I pose for a photo with a man wearing a Boston Red Sox hat, does that mean that I am suddenly a Red Sox fan?

And Cambridge is a prestigious university.

“Jordan Peterson: anti-PC scholar dropped by Cambridge over Islamophobia shirt,” by Rosemary Bennett, The Times, March 26 2019:

Cambridge University withdrew a visiting fellowship from the controversial psychology professor Jordan Peterson because he was pictured with a man in an anti-Islam T-shirt.

Stephen Toope, the vice-chancellor of Cambridge, said yesterday that the “casual endorsement by association” of the message was “antithetical” to the work of the Faculty of Divinity, which had made and then rescinded the offer of a two-month fellowship.

Professor Peterson posed with his arm round the man wearing an “I’m a proud Islamophobe” T-shirt last month. The faculty became aware of the photograph early last week, Professor Toope said. It coincided with Professor Peterson going public with the news of the fellowship, which he said on his YouTube channel he would be taking up in the autumn….

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

Pennsylvania Muslim Lawmaker: Prayer In Name Of Jesus Is “Islamophobic”

Ibrahim Hooper, call your office: there was an outbreak of “Islamophobia” Monday at the Pennsylvania State Assembly. Luckily, Muslim state Rep. Movita Johnson-Harrell was there to blow the whistle on this bigotry and hatred.

The “Islamophobia,” according to journalist Todd Starnes, was committed by another state Representative, Stephanie Borowicz, who prayed this to open a legislative session: “Jesus, you are our only hope. At the name of Jesus, every knee will bow and every tongue will confess Jesus, that you are Lord.”

Johnson-Harrell was livid. The prayer, she declared was “highly offensive to me, my guests, and other members of the House.” In a statement, she added that the prayer “blatantly represented the Islamophobia that exists among some leaders — leaders that are supposed to represent the people. I came to the Capitol to help build bipartisanship and collaborations regardless of race or religion to enhance the quality of life for everyone in the Commonwealth.”

There may be a real point in there. Rep. Borowicz’s prayer may have been inappropriate in a setting in which not everyone present was Christian. We have, however, seen many imams say prayers at various legislative bodies that are not non-sectarian, but manifestly Islamic and even condemning of Jews and Christians, while the non-Muslim lawmakers stand with oblivious heads bowed.

But “Islamophobic”? This illustrates how absurd charges of “Islamophobia” are, and how any manifestation of faith other than Islam is sometimes seen as offensive to Muslims. We have seen this before. Buried in the concluding paragraphs of a Christmas Eve 2018 Washington Times report about Muslims in Uganda forcing Christians to convert to Islam was the extraordinary revelation that in that country, Muslims now consider any public statement of the Christian Faith to be a calculated insult to Muslims, for which they can justifiably exact revenge.

“In June,” the Times reported, “a group of Muslims attacked Christian preachers in eastern Uganda during a ‘crusade,’ where Christians publicly profess their faith and invite others to join. Muslims in the town accused the Christians of mocking Islam by publicly saying Jesus was the Son of God.”

In response, said Christian pastor Moses Saku, the Muslims became violent: “They became very angry and began throwing rocks at Christians, chanting ‘Allah akbar.’ Many Christians were injured during the incident.”

The Christians appealed to the Muslims to have respect for those of other faith; the Muslims responded with contempt. One Muslim, Abubakar Yusuf, declared: “We have now declared a jihad against them. We are not going to allow anybody to despise Islamic teachings at their church or crusade. We will seek revenge.”

How did the Christians “despise Islamic teachings”? By preaching aspects of Christianity, such as the divinity of Christ, that Islam denies. The Christians, knowing how delicate their situation was, would never have dreamed of actually saying something critical about Islam itself; but to the Muslims who heard them, just enunciating the tenets of their Christian faith was criticism enough. And they refused to stand for it.

That incident, and now Johnson-Harrell’s “Islamophobia” charge, are, or should be, sobering news for the comfortable Christians of the West who have made an idol out of “interfaith dialogue” and fastidiously avoid saying anything remotely critical about Islam, even as the Muslim persecution of Christians continues worldwide.

A few years ago, when jihadis attacked AFDI’s Muhammad Art Exhibit and Cartoon Contest in Garland, Texas, some Christians castigated me for co-sponsoring and speaking at the event. They said that we were being needlessly provocative, poking Muslims in the eye, goading them, etc.

These charitable and enlightened Christians said that Christians should instead be deferential to others’ religious sensibilities. At the time, I responded to these people by explaining that giving in to violent intimidation (our event was a response to the jihad murder of the Charlie Hebdo Muhammad cartoonists in Paris) would only encourage more violent intimidation, and that given the fact that Muslims frequently found even basic expressions of Christian faith to be “provocative,” they were effectively cutting the ground out from under themselves and their children, making it impossible for them to practice Christianity in the future.

Movita Johnson-Harrell has now provided more proof that this was correct. By calling Borowicz’s prayer “Islamophobic,” she is in effect saying that the public expression of the Christian Faith mocks Islam and despises Islamic teachings.

The lesson is clear. If the advice of the cosseted, suburban Western Christians who were excoriating me for the Garland event is to be heeded, Christians should make no public expression of their faith at all, and convert to Islam, so as to avoid mocking, provoking, and offending Muslims, and poking them in the eye.

And when it comes to it, that is most likely the exact thing that those Christians will do. It’s already beginning: Pennsylvania House Minority Whip Jordan Harris, a Democrat (of course), stated: “Let me be clear. I am a Christian. I spend my Sunday mornings in church worshiping and being thankful for all that I have. But in no way does that mean I would flaunt my religion at those who worship differently than I do. There is no room in our Capitol building for actions such as this, and it’s incredibly disappointing that today’s opening prayer was so divisive.”

So Harris says that Christians must not flaunt their religion. Not coincidentally, that is exactly what Islamic law says about Christians: that they should carry on their worship quietly, behind closed doors, and never make public display of it. Oh, and by the way, speaking of flaunting one’s religion, Movita Johnson-Harrell wears a hijab. Harris is not on record objecting to that kind of flaunting one’s religion.

The Christian Harris who deplores Rep. Borowicz’s prayer should calm Movita Johnson-Harrell’s rage by converting to Islam and thus removing the source of her feelings of offense. Watch for it.

Article posted with permission from Daniel Greenfield

California: Hundreds Of Protestors Rally Against Rep. Ilhan Omar At Hamas-Linked CAIR Fundraiser

Rejecting Islamic anti-Semitism and its normalization. This is good to see. Omar ought to be under fire for appearing for Hamas-linked CAIR.

CAIR is an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terror funding case — so named by the Justice Department.

CAIR officials have repeatedly refused to denounce Hamas and Hizballah as terrorist groups.

Several former CAIR officials have been convicted of various crimes related to jihad terror.

CAIR’s co-founder and longtime Board chairman (Omar Ahmad), as well as its chief spokesman (Ibrahim Hooper), have made Islamic supremacist statements about how Islamic law should be imposed in the U.S. (Ahmad denies this, but the original reporter stands by her story.)

CAIR chapters frequently distribute pamphlets telling Muslims not to cooperate with law enforcement.

CAIR has opposed virtually every anti-terror measure that has been proposed or implemented and has been declared a terror organization by the United Arab Emirates.

CAIR’s Hussam Ayloush in 2017 called for the overthrow of the U.S. government.

CAIR’s national outreach manager is an open supporter of Hamas.

But the Democrats wouldn’t dream of challenging her over this.

“Protesters in Woodland Hills Rally Outside Event Featuring Rep. Ilhan Omar,” Associated Press, March 23, 2019:

Hundreds of protesters rallied outside an event where a congresswoman spoke to a Muslim-American civil rights group.

The demonstrators were protesting the presence Saturday of U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota at the fundraising event for the Council of American-Islamic Relations of Greater Los Angeles….

The Los Angeles Daily News reports that the protesters lined a sidewalk area outside the Hilton hotel in Woodland Hills, waving Israeli flags. A smaller group of counter-protesters held up signs in support of Omar.

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

Freedom of Speech Dead in UK: London’s Muslim Mayor Defends Arrest of Christian Preacher

How much has Britain deteriorated as a free society? This much: a Christian preacher from Nigeria, Oluwole Ilesanmi, recently discovered that preaching Christianity in public is illegal in London, because it offends Muslims. And London’s Muslim mayor has defended the arrest of Ilesanmi, saying that “there are limitations” on the freedom of speech.

Ilesanmi was arrested on February 23 while he was preaching, after a Muslim complained to police. A London activist, Ambrosine Shitrit, filmed the arrest. She explained what happened in an interview with CBN News: “A man with a hoodie was trying to humiliate, to be aggressive towards this Christian street preacher. I could see that he was a Muslim man because he was talking about, ‘No. Allah is the right way.’”

The Muslim who was harassing Ilesanmi was not arrested. Ilesanmi was. A police officer asked him, “What are you doing here?”

“I am preaching,” Ilesanmi answered.

The police officer responded: “You’re preaching. I am going to require you to go away.”

To that, Ilesanmi said: “You can never.”

“Okay,” said the police officer, “then I will arrest you for breach of peace.” What Ilesanmi asked him how he was breaching the peace, the officer replied: “What you’re doing. You’re causing problems, you’re disturbing people’s day and you’re breaching their peace.”

Ambrosine Shitrit explains: “Nobody was offended by the preaching, nobody. Nobody was offended and nobody came to see what was happening.”

Andrea Williams of the Christian Legal Centre, which is working with Ilesanmi on his case, explained: “This was completely an overreach of their authority. There was no basis upon which to arrest the pastor although they did know clearly because it’s caught on the camera. There was no proper investigation. They arrested him for Islamophobia which isn’t an offense and certainly there was no evidence of the fact that he was Islamophobic or racist.”

London’s Muslim mayor, Sadiq Khan, thought this arrest was just fine. According to Christian Today, Khan was asked about the arrest of Ilesanmi during Mayor’s Question Time at the London Assembly on March 21. Instead of saying that he thought the arrest was appalling and gratuitous, and defending the freedom of speech in general and Ilesanmi’s right to preach Christianity in particular, Khan said with studied blandness: “I expect the police to take this matter seriously.”

He added: “It’s always been clear that freedom of speech is critical and must be protected but also the police must be able to investigate when allegations are made of a criminal offence.”

The possible “criminal offense” in Ilesanmi’s case is “Islamophobia” or offending a Muslim, which are criminal offenses according to Sharia, but not illegal in Britain – at least not officially.

This is in a London that has become so unsafe that Somali Muslim migrants are actually sending their children back to war-torn Mogadishu in order to keep them out of harm’s way. Crime rates are skyrocketing in Khan’s London, and Khan’s police are devoting time and attention not to stopping knife crime and making the city safe again, but making sure that Muslims don’t have to suffer hearing the sound of Christian preaching.

And when Khan was asked whether Christians could preach in London without risking arrest, he answered: “There’s not an unlimited right to freedom of expression or free speech. There are limitations and there’s a balance that needs to be done. But I’m quite clear in my own views – we should go as far as we can to uphold that really important principle [of free speech] and that includes discourse about religion.”

If there are any limits to the freedom of speech other than prohibitions on open calls for violence and criminal activity, then there is no freedom of speech at all. And if there is no freedom of speech, there is no longer a free society. Muslims complained about Oluwole Ilesanmi’s preaching, and now it is official: Muslims in Britain are a protected class whose wishes must be catered to in all circumstances.

As long as that principle goes unchallenged, Britain will continue to race toward its own ruin.

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

Ilhan Omar Holding Secret Fundraisers With Hamas-Linked CAIR & Terror-Linked Muslim Charity

The Democrats won’t say a word about this. They have already learned that nothing negative whatsoever can be said about Omar, on pain of charges of “Islamophobia.” And support for Hamas-linked CAIR is mainstream among the Democrats.

They routinely appear at CAIR events and have no apparent interest in what the group is all about.

CAIR is an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terror funding case — so named by the Justice Department.

CAIR officials have repeatedly refused to denounce Hamas and Hizballah as terrorist groups.

Several former CAIR officials have been convicted of various crimes related to jihad terror.

CAIR’s cofounder and longtime Board chairman (Omar Ahmad), as well as its chief spokesman (Ibrahim Hooper), have made Islamic supremacist statements about how Islamic law should be imposed in the U.S. (Ahmad denies this, but the original reporter stands by her story.)

CAIR chapters frequently distribute pamphlets telling Muslims not to cooperate with law enforcement.

CAIR has opposed virtually every anti-terror measure that has been proposed or implemented and has been declared a terror organization by the United Arab Emirates.

CAIR’s Hussam Ayloush in 2017 called for the overthrow of the U.S. government.

CAIR’s national outreach manager is an open supporter of Hamas.

“Omar Holding Secret Fundraisers With Islamic Groups Tied to Terror,” by Adam Kredo, Washington Free Beacon, March 22, 2019:

Democratic freshman Rep. Ilhan Omar (D., Minn.) has been holding a series of secret fundraisers with groups that have been tied to the support of terrorism, appearances that have been closed to the press and hidden from public view.

The content of these speeches, given to predominately Muslim audiences, remains unknown, prompting some of Omar’s critics to express concern about the type of rhetoric she is using before these paying audiences, particularly in light of the lawmaker’s repeated use of anti-Semitic tropes in public.

Omar recently spoke in Florida at a private event hosted by Islamic Relief, a charity organization long said to have deep ties to groups that advocate terrorism against Israel. Over the weekend, she will appear at another private event in California that is hosted by CAIR-CA PAC, a political action committee affiliated with the Council on American Islamic Relations, or CAIR a group that was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in a massive terror-funding incident.

Omar’s appearance at these closed-door forums is raising eyebrows in the pro-Israel world due to her repeated and unapologetic public use of anti-Semitic stereotypes accusing Jewish people of controlling foreign policy and politics. With Omar’s popularity skyrocketing on the anti-Israel left, it appears her rhetoric is translating into fundraising prowess.

It remains unclear what Omar has told these audiences in her private talks. Washington Free Beacon attempts to obtain video of past events were unsuccessful, and multiple local news and television outlets in the Tampa, Fla., area, where Omar spoke to Islamic Relief last month, confirmed they were unable to gain access to the closed door event.

Islamic Relief has come under congressional investigation for what lawmakers have described as its efforts to provide assistance to terrorist group such as Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood. The charity has been banned by some countries as a result of these ties.

In 2017, Congress sought to ban taxpayer funds from reaching the charity due to these terror links.

A representative from Islamic Relief declined to provide the Free Beacon with any material related to Omar’s appearance.

“The event was closed to the media. No materials are available,” the official said.

On Sunday, Omar will hold another meet and greet in Irvine, Calif., for CAIR-CA PAC. Those wishing to hear Omar speak are being asked to donate anywhere from $50 to $250 dollars, according to a flyer for the event.

The CAIR event also appears closed to the press. Free Beacon attempts to contact the organizer and obtain access were unsuccessful. Requests for comment on the nature of the speeches sent to Omar’s congressional office also were not returned.

CAIR, a Muslim advocacy group known for its anti-Israel positions, was named by the U.S. government as part of a large network of groups known to be supporting Hamas….

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

Jihad Will Continue Despite ISIS’ Caliphate Dream Being Over

The Syrian town of Baghouz, the last redoubt of the Islamic State (ISIS), was reportedly liberated on Thursday, and that means that the Islamic State’s caliphate is now definitively a thing of the past.

On June 29, 2014, the group that had up to that point called itself the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, or Shams in Arabic (hence the synonymous acronyms ISIL and ISIS) announced that it was forming a new caliphate – the single unified government of all the Muslims and the only government to which Muslims rightly owe allegiance, according to Sunni Muslim thought — and would henceforth drop the second half of its name and call itself simply the Islamic State.

This claim to constitute a new caliphate became the basis of its appeal to Muslims worldwide, who traveled in unprecedented numbers to Iraq, Syria and Libya to join it: it attracted 30,000 Muslims from 100 different countries.

The reason for this was the appeal of the idea of the caliphate. The caliph is the successor of Muhammad as the military, political, and spiritual leader of the Muslims. From the time of the origins of Islam until 1924, there was always a caliphate somewhere in the world. The Umayyad, Abbasid, and Ottoman caliphates were, at their peaks, massive empires. The caliph is the only person authorized, according to Sunni theology, to wage offensive jihad, and most did.

ISIS, along with al-Qaeda and other jihad groups, considered the abolition of the Ottoman Caliphate by Kemal Ataturk in 1924 to be the beginning of the troubles for the Islamic world: disunity, dominance by Western powers, inability to expand the domains of Islam in any concerted manner. All of them shared, and share, the goal of restoring the caliphate. Only the Islamic State ever managed to do so, albeit only for 57 months.

Once it declared itself the new caliphate, the Islamic State swiftly began to consolidate its control over the large expanses of Iraq and Syria that it controlled – an area larger than the United Kingdom with a population of eight million people. Blithely disregarding the world’s universal condemnation of its pretensions, it moved to assemble the accouterments of a state: currency, passports and the like. Its control of oil wells in Iraq quickly gave it a steady and sizeable source of wealth.

And contrary to the confident claims of Barack Obama and a host of non-Muslim leaders worldwide, it imposed Sharia in its domains, and strictly enforced it. It collected the jizya, the Qur’an-mandated tax on the “People of the Book,” from Christians. It severely punished women for not adhering to the Sharia dress code. Its scrupulous care to implement Sharia was part of its international appeal for Muslims, along with its pretensions to the caliphate.

That fact is also why we will see another caliphate, and it will be just as brutal and bloody as the Islamic State, because that brutality and bloodlust against non-Muslims were not eccentricities of a rogue non-Islamic group twisting and hijacking Islam’s peaceful teachings, as John Kerry and so many others insisted. In reality, the cruelty of the Islamic State – stonings, amputations, oppression of women and non-Muslims – is, as I have demonstrated many times from the Islamic texts, mandated in the Qur’an and the teachings of Muhammad.

Of course, the Western intelligentsia knows that to say that Islamic violence and oppression is based on Qur’anic teaching is simply a manifestation of “Islamophobia,” and that the Qur’an is full of wisdom and peace. That’s why, when some group of Muslims founds another caliphate somewhere, and it looks very much like ISIS (and Iran and Saudi Arabia and other Sharia states, for that matter), they will be utterly bewildered. Why is this misunderstanding of Islam so widespread and persistent?

Anyway, the collapse of ISIS is due to President Trump. When Obama left office, it looked as if ISIS was here to stay, and was on the path to legitimization, a la the Palestine Liberation Organization. It was finding buyers for its low-priced oil. It had, it has just been revealed, an ambassador to Turkey. If Hillary Clinton had won the Presidency, there is no doubt that it would still be a significant force in Iraq and Syria.

The caliphate is over, but ISIS isn’t. Its dispersed jihadis are focusing on attacking civilians in the West. Unfortunately, few, if any, Islamic State jihadis will take the collapse of the caliphate as a sign that their premises were wrong; they will just go wage jihad somewhere else, which is why Western countries are suicidal to take back the ISIS jihadis who are their citizens.

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

Muslim Rep. Rashida Tlaib: Democrats Were Upset With Omar’s Anti-Semitism Because Of “Islamophobia”

When Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), one of the Democratic Party’s three new stars, was asked in an interview on Showtime’s aptly named “Circus” about why some Democrats were unhappy with the anti-Semitic remarks of her fellow rising star Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), she gave the answer that we will hear again and again as long as she and Omar are in Congress: the problem is “Islamophobia.”

“Circus” host Alex Wagner asked Tlaib: “Rep. Omar…Why do you think people in your own party reacted so strongly to what she said?”

Tlaib responded: “You know, I’m trying to figure it out. This past week I feel, and I know this would be somewhat shocking for some, but I think Islamophobia is very much among the Democratic Party as well as the Republican Party. And I know that’s hard for people to hear, but there’s only been four members of Congress that are of Muslim faith. Three of them currently serve in this institution. More of us need to get elected but more of us need to understand as we come into this institution that I have a lot of work to do with my colleagues. ”

Wagner was sympathetic (of course): “So, you think Democrats have some Islamophobia, and that’s at the root of some of this consternation?”

Tlaib was certain: “I think our country’s struggling with it.”

This was a revealing exchange. The idea that anyone might be troubled by allegations that supporters of Israel have a higher loyalty to another country besides the U.S., and are being bribed by moneyed Jewish organizations, is absurd to Rashida Tlaib — after all, she likely believes both of those things. So to her, the uproar over Ilhan Omar’s anti-Semitic remarks, even though the Democrats capitulated so spectacularly to Omar, is all because of “Islamophobia.” And she says she has a lot of work to do — i.e., work to make sure that no one dares oppose anything a Muslim says or does, for fear of being tarred with this smear term.

The message is clear: from now on Democrats (and everyone else) must accept Ilhan Omar’s anti-Semitic remarks (and make no mistake, more are sure to come), and anything else that she and Tlaib say or do, because otherwise they will be tarred as “Islamophobes” and accused of bigotry against Muslims.

Well, the Democrats have been making this bed for a long time, and so it is fitting that they now have to lie in it. For years they have foreclosed upon any and all honest discussion of the motivating ideology behind jihad terrorism, dismissing it all as “Islamophobia” and, even more irrationally, as “racism,” and eagerly signing on to and validating forces such as the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in their efforts to stigmatize and silence opposition to jihad terror and Sharia oppression of women, gays, and others as “hatred.”

Through their pet media outlets, they placed the idea that it was “bigoted” to speak about Islam as having anything to do with violence and terror, despite 34,000 jihad terror attacks worldwide carried out in the name of Islam and in accord with its teachings since 9/11, into the American mainstream. Their propaganda portrayed honest counter-terror analysts as a sinister cabal of “Islamophobes” bent on slandering Muslims to make money.

They never proved those “Islamophobes” false. They never showed flaws in their analyses. They just smeared them relentlessly and made their names poisonous, without ever showing the slightest concern about the evil they were enabling by stigmatizing all opposition to it. The mechanisms by which they did this are still in place, well-heeled, and still energetically operating.

But now the same thing is being done against them, if they dare suggest that the monster they themselves created is going too far. And so those who for years have demonized and vilified their political foes instead of engaging them civilly and rationally are confronted with a force that is even more radical than they are, that has learned their methods well and doesn’t hesitate to use them against their teachers and instructors.

Pelosi and her cohorts have been given notice: toe the line or you will be destroyed. They will get in line.

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

Netherlands: Friend Claims Utrecht Jihadi “Very Religious” – 3 Other Muslims Arrested In Connection to Massacre

This article says that two others have been arrested, and a third person has been arrested as well. So this does seem to be a coordinated jihad plot.

In a note, Tanis said he was doing it in the name of Allah.

Will the Islamophobia never end?

“Brazen Shooting Traumatizes Dutch City, Three Days After Christchurch Killings,” by Milan Schreuer and Richard Pérez-Peña, New York Times, March 18, 2019 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

UTRECHT, Netherlands — Gunshots shattered the tram ride in a heavily Muslim neighborhood of this old Dutch city. The prime minister called it possible terrorism. SWAT teams rushed in, residents were ordered indoors, and all mosques closed as the police sought a killer in a country that had been spared large-scale terrorist attacks….

The suspect was later identified by the police as Gokmen Tanis, 37, an immigrant from the central Turkish town of Yozgat. Mr. Tanis had been arrested before and is facing a rape charge, according to the Dutch national broadcaster and people who know him….

“He’s very religious,” but also “a real guy of the streets, aggressive as well,” Alptekin Akdogan, who said he knew Mr. Tanis, told The New York Times. He said he and Mr. Tanis had grown up in the Kanaleneiland neighborhood.

Zabit Elmaci, 39, said he used to work with Mr. Tanis, washing dishes in a restaurant called Abrikoos. He described Mr. Tanis as “always in trouble.”

“I don’t remember him as a religious person, but about two years ago he started acting weird, so I gradually stopped seeing him,” Mr. Elmaci said….

Whether others were involved in the shooting remained unclear, although the police said they had made two additional arrests by Monday evening. Some witnesses said they had seen more than one assailant on the tram….

The authorities ordered the evacuation of all mosques in Utrecht, and security was increased at mosques elsewhere in the Netherlands….

Utrecht, about 25 miles from Amsterdam, has been a center of Dutch culture and commerce for a millennium….More than 30 percent of the city’s population is foreign-born, according to the Dutch census.

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

Islamic Jihadis See New Zealand Massacre As Best Chance To Shut Down Their Opposition

My friends, it could be time for me to be saying goodbye. Leftist and Islamic groups have been trying for years to silence all criticism of jihad terror and Sharia oppression of women and others, and in the New Zealand massacre they see the best chance in a long time to move in for the kill. I (along with other foes of jihad terror) could be banned from everything and rendered a non-person, a la Alex Jones, any day now.

This is no exaggeration. Meeting in Istanbul, the International Union for Muslim Scholars (IUMS) has called on non-Muslim countries to ban “Islamophobia,” which means criticism of Islam, including analysis of the motivating ideology fueling jihad terror. IUMS President Ahmed al-Raisouni said Friday: “IUMS calls on non-Muslim countries to ban the spread of hatred against Islam and Muslims.”

Since analysis of the motivating ideology behind jihad terror is routinely smeared as “hatred of Islam and Muslims,” this will likely outlaw all such analysis and make opposition to jihad terror effectively impossible.

And these bans are very likely coming. In America, they won’t take the form of actual laws forbidding criticism of Islam (although remember that Tom Perez, the current head of the Democratic National Committee, refused to rule out the implementation of such laws a few years ago, when he was Assistant Attorney General in the Obama administration). They’re more likely to take the form of a complete deplatforming. We will be able to speak, but no one will be able to hear us, as we won’t be allowed on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and the rest.

IUMS was not alone. Saudi King Salman tweeted: “The heinous massacre that targeted worshippers in the mosque in New Zealand is a terrorist act, and it reaffirms the responsibility of the international community in combating hate speech and terrorism that is not condoned by religions or the values of tolerance.” Apparently, terrorism that is condoned by religions is fine with him, as in “strike terror in the enemies of Allah” (Qur’an 8:60). But by “hate speech” he almost certainly means honest discussion of how Islamic jihadis use the texts and teachings of Islam to justify violence.

Domestically, the call for censorship came from the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), which has for years been trying to shut down all opposition to jihad violence and Sharia oppression of women, gays, and others. They have succeeded in fooling many people into thinking that it is “bigotry” and “racism” to oppose jihad terror, and have made those who discuss the motivating ideology behind jihad terror toxic in the public square. Now Hamas-linked CAIR is attempting to use the New Zealand massacre to achieve total victory: the complete closure of all media platforms to foes of jihad terror and Sharia oppression.

In its press conference on the New Zealand mosque shootings, CAIR top dog Nihad Awad (pictured above) named Donald Trump as responsible for the massacre, despite the fact that in the murderer’s insane “manifesto,” he asks himself: “Were/are you a supporter of Donald Trump?,” and answers: “As a symbol of renewed white identity and common purpose? Sure. As a policymaker and leader? Dear god no.” The “symbol of renewed white identity” part is all that the media is quoting. He never says he was incited to violence by Trump, or says anything about Trump and Muslims at all.

Awad also named Pamela Geller and me: “Years ago when another terrorist attacked in Norway he quoted islamophobes like Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller.” Yes, he also quoted Barack Obama and John F. Kennedy and Charles Darwin and a host of others. He said he was inspired to violent actions by al-Qaeda. Awad does not, of course, say anything about that.

Anyway, CAIR’s press conference was a full-court press for censorship, and it painted, yet again, a large target on our backs for increasingly unhinged and violent Leftists, as well as jihadis. CAIR calls for a total silencing on all platforms of so-called “hate groups,” i.e., those who dare to note that jihad terrorists are inspired by Islamic texts and teachings. It is likely that the social media giants will comply; it will not be at all surprising if they succeed in getting us completely silenced.

Not surprisingly, it was in Britain that police moved most swiftly on this. The BBC reported Saturday that “a 24-year old from Oldham” was arrested for a social media post “making reference and support for the terrible events” in New Zealand. Approving of a massacre is disgusting, and if he was calling for or approving of violence then there is no justification for that. At the same time, the BBC report says: “Social media firms and some news outlets have been criticised for sharing livestream footage of the attack and failing to address far-right extremism on their platforms.”

Calling for or justifying a massacre of innocent people is one thing. But that “failing to address far-right extremism on their platforms” is quite another. For years now, Leftists and Islamic supremacists have insisted that opposing jihad mass murder and Sharia oppression of women and others constitutes “far-right extremism.” So it is likely that those who will be shut down will not be limited solely to people such as this “24-year-old from Oldham” who was “making reference and support for the terrible events.” It will include foes of jihad terror.

If and when we are all silenced, however, the jihad will not stop. The multicultural paradise will not dawn on the planet; in fact, there will be more jihad violence and strife than ever. There just won’t be anyone around who dares to oppose it.

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

NYU: Muslim Students Claim Chelsea Clinton Responsible For New Zealand Massacre Because She Criticized Ilhan Omar

Call out Islamic antisemitism, and you’ll be responsible if some madman massacres Muslims halfway around the world. The endgame here, as always, is to stigmatize and demonize even the slightest, mildest critical word about Islam or about any Muslim individual or group. The result will be to make it absolutely impossible to call out Islamic antisemitism or to enunciate any opposition to jihad terror or Sharia oppression.

These people are not intellectually consistent. They assume here that any criticism is tantamount to incitement to violence. Will they, therefore, stop calling me and other foes of jihad terror and Sharia oppression “bigots” and “Islamophobes,” so as to avoid inciting the increasingly unhinged Left and jihadis to violence? Not on your life.

“Bizarre moment Chelsea Clinton is berated by Muslim NYU students who blame HER for New Zealand mosques attack because she ‘incited an Islamophobic mob’ against Rep Ilhan Omar,” by Keith Griffith, Dailymail.com, March 16, 2019:

Muslim students have berated Chelsea Clinton at a vigil for the victims of the New Zealand mosques massacre, saying she is to blame for the attack.

Clinton, who is pregnant with her third child, was attending the vigil at New York University on Friday when senior Leen Dweik began castigating her in an astonishing moment caught on video.

‘This right here is the result of a massacre stoked by people like you and the words that you put out into the world,’ says Dweik, gesturing to the vigil for the 49 who were killed in Christchurch when a white nationalist shooter stormed two mosques.

‘And I want you to know that and I want you to feel that deeply – 49 people died because of the rhetoric you put out there,’ Dweik continues, jabbing her index finger toward Clinton as other students snap their fingers in apparent approval of her words.

Clinton was attending the vigil at New York University on Friday when a female student began laying into her in an astonishing moment caught on video

‘And I want you to know that and I want you to feel that deeply – 49 people died because of the rhetoric you put out there,’ Dweik continued, jabbing her index finger toward Clinton.

‘I’m so sorry you feel that way,’ Clinton responds, only to provoke more ire from the crowd.

‘What does “I’m sorry you feel that way” mean? What does that mean?’ an unseen male is heard shouting from the crowd.

According to NYU student Rose Asaf, who posted the video on Twitter, students at the vigil were angry about Clinton’s accusation last month that Rep Ilhan Omar, a Minnesota Democrat, used ‘anti-Semitic language and tropes’ while criticizing Israel.

Omar came under heavy criticism within her own party for her remarks, in which she suggested that money plays a role in U.S. foreign policy toward Israel.

Clinton was one of many who condemned Omar’s remarks, writing in a tweet: ‘We should expect all elected officials, regardless of party, and all public figures to not traffic in anti-Semitism.’

Asaf blasted Clinton for her criticism of Omar, saying that the former first daughter had incited a ‘mob’ against the Muslim congresswoman.

‘People haven’t forgotten the Islamophobic mob she incited against @IlhanMN. There is no sense of responsibility,’ wrote Asaf, who identified herself as a ‘Jewish leftist’ in her Twitter profile.

Asaf has served in the NYU student senate as Senator at-Large for Marginalized Jewish Students, Student Activists, and Students With Mental Health Struggles, according to published reports.

Asaf wrote in a tweet that Dweik is a ‘bold a** palestinian muslim woman’ who ‘doesn’t have anything to apologize for.’

Her Twitter account has since been set to private….

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

Netherlands: Ex-Muslims Get Threatened “Every Single Day”

Three converts from Islam to Christianity who live in the Netherlands recently spoke about their experiences, and it’s clear that they’re not exactly finding diversity, in the form of mass Muslim migration into Europe, to be their strength.

An ex-Muslim from Kurdistan named Faraidoun Fouad recounted: “I converted in 1999. In 2002, God called me to reach out to my own people. Directly after my conversion to Christianity, I received the first threats. People who I thought were my friends, became my enemies.”

Nor were his former friends all jihadis: “Even Muslims who are not very conservative told my wife that they would kill me.”

Fouad converted twenty years ago, but his Muslim ex-friends have never gotten used to the fact: “I receive threats every day. When I post something on Facebook, I often receive hateful reactions.”

Fouad’s experience was similar to that of another convert, a woman named Esther Mulder who fled Somalia in 1992. Though they had left the homeland, they brought its mores to the Netherlands; when Esther was 14, they told her she was about to be married off. What she wanted had nothing to do with it, so she ran away from home and lived in shelters. Finally, she married a Dutchman and converted to Christianity.

The first time she entered a church, she was frightened: “I constantly looked around thinking: ‘What if one of my family members comes in or someone from Somalia?’”

After she converted, matters got even worse: “After my conversion, the threats started. Especially on Facebook. Most of the time they’re coming from other Somalis. They write to me in Somali, so no one else is able to understand what they’re saying. We once posted a picture of a Somali conference where everyone was standing in front of a cross. People didn’t like it and we received several threats. I was really sorry about that.”

She reestablished contact with her family, but the tension level is high: “When I’m there, my father leaves the house. The last thing he ever said to me, is that I’m no longer his daughter.”

Another convert refused to give the interviewer his name, explaining: “My family lives in Morocco and could get in trouble over this.” He recounted: “My mother taught me to respect everyone and to be kind. That was in stark contrast to what Islam was teaching me. I had to hate and curse Jews and Christians. Muhammed was my big role model, but his life was bad. He killed Jews and married a girl of six. How could he be my role model?”

After he converted, the threats started coming in so quickly that he printed out eight pages full of them and went to the police. The police counseled cowardice: “The police advised me to delete my picture from my website. I prayed about it and the Lord told me to keep the picture, ‘for you belong to me.’ It’s strange isn’t it: I’m not doing anything wrong, why would I need to hide? I live in a free country.”

Why would he need to hide? Because the new, multicultural Netherlands is not quite as free a country as it once was. The threats this man has received are a direct result of mass Muslim migration into Europe. Nor will these converts be able to rest easy anytime soon. The death penalty for apostasy is part of Islamic law. It’s based on the Qur’an: “They wish you would disbelieve as they disbelieved so you would be alike. So do not take from among them allies until they emigrate for the cause of Allah. But if they turn away, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them and take not from among them any ally or helper.” (Qur’an 4:89)

A hadith depicts Muhammad saying: “Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him” (Bukhari 9.84.57). The death penalty for apostasy is part of Islamic law according to all the schools of Islamic jurisprudence.

This is still the position of all the schools of Islamic jurisprudence, both Sunni and Shi’ite. Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the most renowned and prominent Muslim cleric in the world, has stated: “The Muslim jurists are unanimous that apostates must be punished, yet they differ as to determining the kind of punishment to be inflicted upon them. The majority of them, including the four main schools of jurisprudence (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i, and Hanbali) as well as the other four schools of jurisprudence (the four Shiite schools of Az-Zaidiyyah, Al-Ithna-‘ashriyyah, Al-Ja’fariyyah, and Az-Zaheriyyah) agree that apostates must be executed.”

Qaradawi also once famously said: “If they had gotten rid of the apostasy punishment, Islam wouldn’t exist today.”

But it does, and it is growing fast in the Netherlands, and so ex-Muslims must always tread carefully. What else did Europe’s multicultural masters expect?

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

Islamic State Spokesman: “What’s Our Crime? We Just Wanted To Apply Sharia”

In a new video, an Islamic State (ISIS) spokesman named Abu Abd al-Azeem, “whose speech,” noted Reuters, “is peppered with Koranic recitations,” complained about the bad rap his cuddly group has gotten. “Why are we bombed by planes,” he asked plaintively, “why do all the nations of the unbelieving world come together to fight us?…What is our guilt? What is our crime? We (just) wanted to apply the sharia of Allah.”

Indeed. And now, in light of that statement, here are some questions that mainstream counterterror analysts should ponder deeply: did the Islamic State actually apply Sharia? ISIS is routinely dismissed as un-Islamic, but what exactly did they do that cannot be backed up by specific citations from the Qur’an and Hadith? And if the Islamic State just wanted to apply Sharia, and Sharia is entirely benign and compatible with Western values, as Western analysts also regularly insist, then why did the whole world regard the Islamic State as a criminal entity that must be destroyed? Why was it not welcomed into the family of nations, alongside other Sharia regimes including Saudi Arabia and Iran?

The cognitive dissonance arises, of course, from the assurances we received from the likes of Barack Obama, Joe Biden, John Kerry, David Cameron, and virtually every other authority in the Western world that the Islamic State was not Islamic, and indeed, had nothing whatsoever to do with Islam.

This reached absurd levels during the Obama administration. “ISIL does not operate in the name of any religion,” said Obama’s Deputy State Department spokesperson Marie Harf in August 2014. “The president has been very clear about that, and the more we can underscore that, the better.” Yet Abu Abd al-Azeem’s words above make it abundantly clear, as does every other statement ever issued by ISIS, that the group believes itself to be operating in the name of Islam, and indeed, to embody the fullness of Islamic teaching.  In June 2014, a video circulated of a masked Islamic State commander telling a cheering crowd: “By Allah, we embarked on our Jihad only to support the religion of Allah….Allah willing, we will establish a state ruled by the Quran and the Sunna….All of you honorable Muslims are the soldiers of the Muslim State.” He promised that the Islamic State would establish “the Sharia of Allah, the Quran, and the Sunna” as the crowed repeatedly responded with screams of “Allahu akbar.”

Everything ISIS did in its heyday was clearly Islamic. The celebrated beheadings were implementation of a Qur’anic command. The Qur’an says straightforwardly, “When you meet the unbelievers, strike the necks” (47:4).

But surely the Islamic State’s practice of kidnapping Yazidi and Christian women and pressing them into sex slavery was un-Islamic, no? No. The Qur’an says that in addition to wives (“two or three or four”), Muslim men may enjoy the “captives of the right hand” (4:3, 4:24). These are specified as being women who have been seized as the spoils of war” (33:50) and are to be used specifically for sexual purposes, as men are to “guard their private parts except from their wives or those their right hands possess” (23:5-6).

If these women are already married, no problem. Islamic law directs that “when a child or a woman is taken captive, they become slaves by the fact of capture, and the woman’s previous marriage is immediately annulled.” (Reliance of the Traveller, 09.13)

ISIS knew this. In the October 2014 issue of its Dabiq magazine, it stated: “Enslaving the families of the kuffar [non-believers] and taking their women as concubines is a firmly established aspect of the Sharia.” In a November 2014 video of gleeful Islamic State jihadis laughing and bantering at a sex slave auction, one of the fighters declares: “Today is the slave market day. Today is the day where this verse applies, ‘Except with their wives and the (captives) whom their right hands possess, for (then) they are not to be blamed.” That is Qur’an 23:5-6, which tells Muslim men to “guard your private parts except with your wives and the captives of your right hand.”

On December 15, 2014, the Islamic State released a document entitled “Clarification [regarding] the Hudud” – that is, punishments Allah specifies in the Qur’an. This was essentially the Islamic State’s penal code, and every aspect of it was drawn from Islamic teaching.

It mandated death for blasphemy against Allah or Muhammad. The document specified that murder and stealing would be punished by death and crucifixion – that is, crucifixion of the dead body. Murder alone would be punishable by death. Stealing as part of banditry would be rewarded with the amputation of the right hand and the left leg, and terrorizing people would result in exile.

All this was derived from this Qur’anic verse: “Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment, except for those who return before you apprehend them. And know that Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.” (5:33-34)

Blasphemy against Islam was likewise punishable by death, also as per the Qur’an:

“If they violate their oaths after pledging to keep their covenants, and attack your religion, you may fight the leaders of paganism – you are no longer bound by your covenant with them – that they may refrain” (Qur’an 9:12)

Adulterers were to be stoned to death; fornicators would be given 100 lashes and exile. Stoning was in the hadith – a hadith in which the caliph Umar said it had once been in the Qur’an:

‘Umar said, “I am afraid that after a long time has passed, people may say, “We do not find the Verses of the Rajam (stoning to death) in the Holy Book,” and consequently they may go astray by leaving an obligation that Allah has revealed. Lo! I confirm that the penalty of Rajam be inflicted on him who commits illegal sexual intercourse, if he is already married and the crime is proved by witnesses or pregnancy or confession.” Sufyan added, “I have memorized this narration in this way.” ‘Umar added, “Surely Allah’s Apostle carried out the penalty of Rajam, and so did we after him.” (Bukhari 8.86.6829)

Sodomy (homosexuality) was also to be punished by death, as per Muhammad’s reported words: “If you find anyone doing as Lot’s people did, kill the one who does it, and the one to whom it is done.” (Sunan Abu Dawood 38:4447)

The hand of the thief would be amputated: “The thief, the male and the female, amputate their hands in recompense for what they committed as a deterrent from Allah. And Allah is Exalted in Might and Wise.” (Qur’an 5:38)

Those who drank alcohol would be lashed 80 times, also as per a hadith:

“Abu Huraira said, ‘A man who drank wine was brought to the Prophet. The Prophet said, “Beat him!” Abu Huraira added, “So some of us beat him with our hands, and some with their shoes, and some with their garments (by twisting it) like a lash, and then when we finished, someone said to him, ‘May Allah disgrace you!’ On that the Prophet said, ‘Do not say so, for you are helping Satan to overpower him.’” (Bukhari 8.86.6777)

Slanderers would likewise get eighty lashes:

“And those who accuse chaste women and then do not produce four witnesses – lash them with eighty lashes and do not accept from them testimony ever after. And those are the defiantly disobedient.” (Qur’an 24:4)

Those caught spying for the unbelievers would be put to death:

“Let not believers take disbelievers as allies rather than believers. And whoever does that has nothing with Allah, except when taking precaution against them in prudence. And Allah warns you of Himself, and to Allah is the destination.” (Qur’an 3:28)

Apostates would also be put to death:

“They wish you would disbelieve as they disbelieved so you would be alike. So do not take from among them allies until they emigrate for the cause of Allah. But if they turn away, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them and take not from among them any ally or helper.” (Qur’an 4:89)

So did the Islamic State just try to implement the Sharia? Yes. Western analysts and policymakers should ponder the implications of that fact. But they won’t.

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

Yet Another Muslim Rape Gang Is Charged

The BBC reported Monday that “eleven men have been charged with child sex offences in Sheffield.” The names of those charged make it clear that this was yet another Muslim rape gang – one of a seemingly endless stream. No one in Britain will dare to acknowledge it as such, but this dispiritingly recurring featuring of modern life in the United Kingdom is yet another product of the cultural hegemony of the Left.

Of course, the immediate culprit is Islamic teaching. One survivor of a Muslim rape gang in the UK said that her rapists would quote Quran to her, and believed their actions justified by Islam. The Qur’an teaches that Infidel women can be lawfully taken for sexual use (cf. its allowance for a man to take “captives of the right hand,” 4:3, 4:24, 23:1-6, 33:50, 70:30). The Qur’an says: “O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.” (33:59) The implication there is that if women do not cover themselves adequately with their outer garments, they may be abused, and that such abuse would be justified.

But there is another reason why it keeps happening as well. 1,400 British non-Muslim children were gang-raped and brutalized by Muslims in one city alone, and “several staff described their nervousness about identifying the ethnic origins of perpetrators for fear of being thought as racist; others remembered clear direction from their managers not to do so.”

Why did they fear being thought of as racist? The Muslim rape gangs went unreported, unprosecuted, and in general unstopped because of far-Left organizations including Hope Not Hate, Faith Matters, and Tell Mama, which waged relentless war against anyone and everyone who spoke out about the issue. These are the British equivalents of the Southern Poverty Law Center. They demonized as “Islamophobic,” “hateful” and “bigoted” anyone who said that there were Muslim rape gangs at all, and that they had to be stopped. They led the campaign to ban Pamela Geller and me from entering the country, when one of the events we had discussed going to was a rally against the Muslim rape gangs.

Hope Not Hate has scrubbed the evidence, but it used to be possible to search for “grooming” (as these gangs are usually called “grooming gangs” in the British media) at Hope Not Hate’s site. You would have seen that the vast majority of the articles mentioning this practice were attacking those who were calling attention to it and protesting against it.

Who is responsible for the mass gang-rape of British girls by Muslims? The British Left — in particular, the fascist “anti-hate” crusaders Nick Lowles and Matthew Collins of Hope Not Hate, Fiyaz Mughal of Faith Matters and Tell Mama, and their friends, supporters, and allies.

The lives of at least 1,400 girls are ruined today because of Lowles, Collins, Mughal, and their cohorts. If Britain were even close to being a sane society today, these people would be being subjected to scorching criticism, and there would be a thorough public reevaluation of how much the Left’s alliance with Islamic supremacism and smear campaign against foes of jihad terror has harmed the nation and its people.

But Britain is not a sane society today, and these sinister, cynical, authoritarian Leftists — Lowles, Mughal, and the rest of them — continue to wield their considerable power and influence in British society, working assiduously to crush all dissent. If Britain is ever to recover itself and stave off chaos, civil war and Sharia, Lowles, Collins, Mughal and others like them must be decisively repudiated and removed from all positions of influence, and their organizations exposed for what they are.

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

Fox Condemns Pirro For Asking If Omar Is Pro-Sharia

Breitbart reported Monday that the Fox News Channel “condemned host Jeanine Pirro’s remarks on Rep. IlhanOmar’s (D-MN) use of a hijab and said the issue has been dealt with directly.” Sounds serious. But what Pirro actually said was something Fox should have been applauding, if it hadn’t already become just another establishment network.

Pirro said: “Think about this: She’s not getting this anti-Israel sentiment doctrine from the Democrat Party. So if it’s not rooted in the party, where is she getting it from? Think about it. Omar wears a hijab, which according to the Quran 33:59, tells women to cover so they won’t get molested. Is her adherence to this Islamic doctrine indicative of her adherence to Sharia law, which in itself is antithetical to the United States Constitution?”

Predictably, the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) called on Fox to fire Pirro. Like a shark, CAIR can smell blood in the water: instead of defending Pirro for asking a perfectly legitimate question, Fox immediately reacted as if Pirro had stolen Barack Obama’s parking space, denouncing Pirro’s words with stern self-righteousness: “We strongly condemn Jeanine Pirro’s comments about Rep. Ilhan Omar. They do not reflect those of the network and we have addressed the matter with her directly.”

Pirro, issued a clarification, to little effect: “I’ve seen a lot of comments about my opening statement from Saturday night’s show and I did not call Rep. Omar un-American. My intention was to ask a question and start a debate, but of course because one is Muslim does not mean you don’t support the Constitution. I invite Rep. Omar to come on my show any time to discuss all of the important issues facing America today.”

Fox is increasingly slipping into the Leftist echo chamber. It is terrified of discussing these issues. A few years ago, Jeanine Pirro contacted me and was going to have me as a featured guest on a special show about Sharia. She was very excited about it, and all the arrangements were made to fly me in and get me set up in the studio. Then at the last minute, everything was canceled — it was clear that Fox executives had told her she was venturing into forbidden territory. They willingly kowtow to the Southern Poverty Law Center’s defamation campaign targeting foes of jihad terror and Sharia oppression of women and others. But last night, Pirro ventured off the reservation again, daring to suggest that Ilhan Omar’s hijab showed her to be Sharia-compliant.

There is so much confusion on this issue, even among people who should know better. Media critic John Nolte tweeted: “Does a Jewish man who covers his head put the Torah above the Constitution? Does a Catholic woman who covers head put the Pope above the Constitution? What a stupid thing to say.”

No in both cases, because in both cases the headwear in question is not part of a larger system that is incompatible with Constitutional rule. However, the hijab is part of such a system, and that’s all Pirro was saying. Fox should not have rebuked her, but this is the age of pandemic cowardice, so it was likely unrealistic to expect anything else.

Ilhan Omar herself, not surprisingly, was happier with Fox News than she has probably ever been, and tweeted: “Thank you, @FoxNews. No one’s commitment to our constitution should be questioned because of their faith or country of birth.”

But that wasn’t really what Pirro did. Pirro suggested that Omar’s anti-Semitism came from Sharia. And indeed, Sharia is indeed inveterately anti-Semitic: the Qur’an demonizes the Jews in numerous ways. It depicts the Jews as inveterately evil and bent on destroying the well-being of the Muslims. They are the strongest of all people in enmity toward the Muslims (5:82); they fabricate things and falsely ascribe them to Allah (2:79; 3:75, 3:181); they claim that Allah’s power is limited (5:64); they love to listen to lies (5:41); they disobey Allah and never observe his commands (5:13). They are disputing and quarreling (2:247); hiding the truth and misleading people (3:78); staging rebellion against the prophets and rejecting their guidance (2:55); being hypocritical (2:14, 2:44); giving preference to their own interests over the teachings of Muhammad (2:87); wishing evil for people and trying to mislead them (2:109); feeling pain when others are happy or fortunate (3:120); being arrogant about their being Allah’s beloved people (5:18); devouring people’s wealth by subterfuge (4:161); slandering the true religion and being cursed by Allah (4:46); killing the prophets (2:61); being merciless and heartless (2:74); never keeping their promises or fulfilling their words (2:100); being unrestrained in committing sins (5:79); being cowardly (59:13-14); being miserly (4:53); being transformed into apes and pigs for breaking the Sabbath (2:63-65; 5:59-60; 7:166); and more. They are under Allah’s curse (9:30), and Muslims should wage war against them and subjugate them under Islamic hegemony (9:29).

Sharia also mandates that women cover their heads:

“And tell the believing women to reduce their vision and guard their private parts and not expose their adornment except that which appears thereof and to wrap their headcovers over their chests and not expose their adornment except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands’ fathers, their sons, their husbands’ sons, their brothers, their brothers’ sons, their sisters’ sons, their women, that which their right hands possess, or those male attendants having no physical desire, or children who are not yet aware of the private aspects of women. And let them not stamp their feet to make known what they conceal of their adornment. And turn to Allah in repentance, all of you, O believers, that you might succeed.” (Qur’an 24:31)

“O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.” (Qur’an 33:59)

“Narrated `Aisha (the wife of the Prophet): `Umar bin Al-Khattab used to say to Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) “Let your wives be veiled” But he did not do so. The wives of the Prophet (ﷺ) used to go out to answer the call of nature at night only at Al-Manasi.’ Once Sauda, the daughter of Zam`a went out and she was a tall woman. `Umar bin Al-Khattab saw her while he was in a gathering, and said, ‘I have recognized you, O Sauda!’ He (`Umar) said so as he was anxious for some Divine orders regarding the veil (the veiling of women.) So Allah revealed the Verse of veiling. (Al-Hijab; a complete body cover excluding the eyes).” (Bukhari 79.14.6420)

Wearing hijab is a sign that one accepts these imperatives. That is not necessarily true, as lots of women of all perspectives wear headscarves, but when a Muslim woman wears hijab, it’s reasonable to surmise that she accepts the Qur’an and Sunnah, the sources of Sharia. Sharia denies the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience, the equality of rights of women, and the equality of rights of non-Muslims. Wearing hijab is a sign of adherence to Sharia.

So what did Judge Jeanine Pirro say that was wrong about Ilhan Omar? She asked questions that need to be asked. Fox should be apologizing to Pirro, not Omar.

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

The Caliphate Is Over, But ISIS Isn’t

AFP reported Friday that the jihadists straggling out of the last stronghold of the Islamic State (ISIS) in Syria remain defiant, still vowing to murder Americans. In fact, this has been their longstanding plan, as revealed in a guide to destroying the United States that the jihad group published in its heyday, back in 2015.

The AFP report quoted one woman leaving the tiny remaining ISIS domain declaring, “The caliphate will not end, because it has been ingrained in the hearts and brains of the newborns and the little ones.” Another exclaimed: “We have left, but there will be new conquests in the future….We will seek vengeance, there will be blood up to your knees.”

The Islamic State has aspired to that for a long time. In 2015, it published How to Survive in the West, a detailed manual for subterfuge and subversion, and ultimately, for jihad bloodshed, in the United States and Europe. The ominous epigraph:

Indeed, Allah has purchased from the believers their lives and their properties [in exchange] for that they will have Paradise. They fight in the cause of Allah (God), so they kill and are killed. [It is] a true promise [binding] upon Him in the Torah and the Gospel and the Qur’an. And who is truer to his covenant than Allah ?

So rejoice in your transaction which you have contracted. And it is that which is the great success.

(Quran 9: 111)

How to Survive in the West began with a fanciful note of self-pity, claiming that Muslims were being unfairly targeted in the West:

A real war is heating up in the heart of Europe. Many Muslims are putting alot of effort into showing the world that we are peaceful citizens, we’re spending thousands of Euros to do Da’wah (invitation to Islam) campaigns to show how good we are in society, but we’re miserably failing. The leaders of disbelief repeatedly lie in the media and say that we Muslims are all terrorists, while we denied it and wanted to be peaceful citizens. But they have cornered us and forced us into becoming radicalised, and that will be the cause of their defeat and be the cause for the conquest of Rome.

Islam and Muhammad were being insulted, and it was time for Muslims to fight back:

As Muslims, we need to be prepared for what is coming our way. Media propaganda is the first step to justify what will happen later. So if Muslims are portrayed as evil terrorists, then the mass killing which happens to us afterwards will not be a big deal, infact [sic] it will be a sigh of relief for the fooled masses of people.

So what are Muslims supposed to do? Are we supposed to petition to a deaf ‘free press’ because our Prophet is being insulted day and night? Are we supposed to sit back until the police raids our homes for having the Quran and surah al-Tawbah [chapter nine of the Qur’an, which enjoins jihad warfare against Jews and Christians] on our shelves?

We as free Muslims cannot sit back and get locked up for something which is not a crime in the sight of Allah. In the Ummah (Nation) of Prophet Muhammad (saws), we have been taught to physically fight to defend ourselves and our religion, no matter where we are in the world.

How to Survive in the West then teaches Muslims “how to live a double-life, how to keep your Secret life private, how to survive in a threatening land, how you can Arm and strengthen the Muslims when the time for Jihad comes to your country, and neighborhood.”

A great deal of subterfuge would be needed:  “If you are a convert to Islam, you should try to hide your Islam as much as possible.…If you are a born Muslim: then don’t make it too obvious you have become a practicing Muslim….if you are a practising Muslim, and you have a beard already, then don’t remove it if it will bring unwanted attention to yourself. I.e. your family, friends and colleagues will get more suspicious why you removed it, forcing them to spy on you more.”

This was all part of an effort at “making yourself look more friendly and open minded to the Western public. For example: Muslims who call themselves by a Western nickname gain more acceptances by their non Muslim colleagues. This can be an advantage because it reduces their suspicion of you as they consider you more open minded and less ‘extreme’ (religious.)”

To get money, the jihadi-in-waiting should steal from non-Muslims: “Do not feel guilty if you take back a small amount of what they have stolen from us. Easy money Ideas: If you are an expert in credit card fraud, paypal/ebay scams, Phishing, hacking, or you know the secrets of a big company, then take advantage of your skills. If you can claim extra benefits from a government, then do so. If you can avoid paying taxes, then do so.”

How to Survive in the West details how jihadis should carefully use the Internet, how they should communicate with each other, how they should keep in shape, and even how they should undertake weapons training using “Toy guns (Nerf guns), or Pellet guns or Paintball guns for target practice.” It also includes bomb-making instructions and tips on how to make sure one is not under surveillance. It goes into the Charlie Hebdo jihad massacre again, explaining how its perpetrators got their weapons and carried out their attack – making it clear that the author of How to Survive in the West, and the Islamic State in general, intends to train new cadres of jihadis to carry out an increasing number of jihad massacres in the United States and Europe.

Could any ISIS adherents be following this plan in the United States today? To think that would be “Islamophobic,” right?

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

How Long Before “Islamophobia” Becomes A Criminal Offense Requiring Imprisonment?

You may think that’s a ridiculous question. The United States would never imprison people for criticizing Islam, would it? After all, we have the First Amendment!

Sure. But consider this. The whole world, East, West, North South, agrees that insulting Christianity and Judaism is a courageous act, and often even an artistic one, to be awarded by applause from the intelligentsia, and often with awards, honors, and cash grants. The whole world also agrees that insulting Islam, even including correct analysis of how jihadis use the texts and teachings of Islam to justify violence and supremacism, is a heinous crime that must be punished. In the West, it is punished by means of deplatforming, denial of service by social media giants and credit card corporations, and vilification in the most lurid of terms in the mainstream press.

In Malaysia, the punishment is simpler and not as draconian: you just get prison time. CNN reported Saturday that “a Malaysian man was sentenced to 10 years in prison for insulting Islam and the Prophet Mohammed on his Facebook page, police said. The 22-year-old Facebook user, identified as ‘Ayea Yea,’ pleaded guilty to 10 charges in a Kuala Lumpur court.” Nor was this a singular case: “The Royal Malaysia Police filed charges against three other social media account owners for insulting Islam and the Prophet Mohammed.” What’s more, Mohamad Fuzi of the Royal Malaysia Police noted: “The police had received 929 reports across the country on these cases and opened 16 investigation papers on cases connected to insulting Islam.”

This is a glimpse into the future of the U.S. and Europe. Remember back in 2009, when Barack Obama declared in Cairo: “I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.” Obama is no longer President, but the idea that the U.S. government should be solicitous of Islam in a way that it is not of Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, or any other religion is still very much with us.

Remember also when Hillary Clinton, then Secretary of State, spoke at an Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) conference in Istanbul on July 15, 2011. Clinton said that she wanted to “applaud the Organization of Islamic Conference and the European Union for helping pass Resolution 16/18 at the Human Rights Council.”

Resolution 16/18 called for the nations of the world to ban “defamation of religion,” a euphemism for criticism of Islam, since no one anywhere minded when other religions were criticized. Clinton explained in order to circumvent the First Amendment and render criticism of Islam unacceptable in the American public square, “we are focused on promoting interfaith education and collaboration, enforcing antidiscrimination laws, protecting the rights of all people to worship as they choose, and to use some old-fashioned techniques of peer pressure and shaming, so that people don’t feel that they have the support to do what we abhor.”

Clinton was declaring her intention, and presumably the policy of the Obama administration, to stigmatize speech, to the extent that people would be afraid to cross what former OIC Secretary General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu had called “red lines that should not be crossed.”

Even before Clinton spoke these fateful words, these techniques she recommended had been used by media and academic elites, whose agenda was difficult to distinguish from that of the Obama administration. In the eight years since she spoke them, these techniques have been perfected: honest analysis of the motivating ideology behind jihad terror is universally stigmatized as “Islamophobia,” and those who have dared to engage in such analysis are defamed as “hate group leaders” by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), in reports that are repeated in the establishment media as if they were neutral and objective. The “peer pressure” and “shaming” of those who speak honestly about the jihad threat is now reflexive, automatic, and even internalized by many not only on the Left, but also among conservatives: the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) has not allowed an open discussion of this issue for years, and establishment Republicans for the most part eagerly toe the “Islamophobia” line and happily make common cause with deceptive and cynical “moderate Muslims” of questionable intentions.

So what will all this look like in ten years? Probably a lot like Malaysia looks today. But those who are calling attention to this possibility are just “Islamophobes,” so who cares?

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

Minnesota: Ex-Muslim Arrested After Speaking With Muslims – “This Should Not Be Happening In This Country”

“They asked me where I’m from. I told them and the conversation led to whether I was Muslim or not. I replied, ‘I used to be but I’m a Christian now.’…Another woman who was not part of the conversation went and complained to the security.”

“I’ve been through this before in other countries. The only thing that made me sad is that it happened in America, a nation I love with all my heart. This should not be happening in this country.”

Indeed. It’s an imposition of Sharia mores. Sharia forbids Christians to proselytize. Minnesota authorities should drop this case immediately, but they probably won’t: they have too many Muslim constituents who would be outraged if the case didn’t go forward.

Speaking at the Capitol in St. Paul Minnesota

Posted by Ramin Parsa on Wednesday, March 6, 2019

“Ex-Muslim Turned Christian Pastor Speaks at Minnesota Capitol Ahead of Court Hearing,” by Anthony Gockowski, Minnesota Sun, March 7, 2019:

A group of Minnesotans gathered at the State Capitol Wednesday night to host a prayer rally for Pastor Ramin Parsa, who was arrested at the Mall of America in August on charges of misdemeanor trespassing.

As The Minnesota Sun reported in November, Parsa visited Minnesota in August and was invited by one of his hosts to see “the biggest mall in North America.” While there, Parsa said he “randomly ran into some Somalis, we had a random conversation.”

“They asked me where I’m from. I told them and the conversation led to whether I was Muslim or not. I replied, ‘I used to be but I’m a Christian now,’” he said. Parsa claims that “another woman who was not part of the conversation went and complained to the security,” and he was ultimately charged with trespassing.

Parsa, who runs Redemptive Love Ministries in Los Angeles, returned to Minnesota Wednesday evening ahead of his Thursday morning hearing. His supporters organized a prayer rally Wednesday night at the State Capitol where Parsa spoke about the religious persecution he’s experienced in other countries.

“I’ve been through this before in other countries,” he said during the rally. “The only thing that made me sad is that it happened in America, a nation I love with all my heart. This should not be happening in this country.”…

Parsa told The Minnesota Sun that he plans to plead “not guilty” Thursday morning “on the charges a Muslim in Minnesota brought against me for sharing the Gospel in a private conversation.”…

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

Hamas and al-Qaeda-Funding Qatar Has Begun A Massive Military Aircraft Project In South Carolina

The politicians in South Carolina are lining their pockets, but are we enabling those who will one day be fighting against us?

“South Carolina is becoming home to a quiet Qatari military aircraft project,” by Jordan Schachtel, Conservative Review, March 5, 2019:

The nation of Qatar, a tiny Gulf state known for its vast energy riches, tiny indigenous population, slave labor economy, and, of course, its troublesome connections to international terrorist organizations, has commenced a massive but under-the-radar spending spree in South Carolina. Through Barzan Aeronautical, a subsidiary of the Qatar defense ministry-controlled Barzan Holdings, Doha has targeted South Carolina as the location for a major military aircraft initiative. The state is home to several Qatar-friendly politicians and defense industry heavyweights.

Senator Lindsey Graham has held several face-to-face meetings with high-ranking delegations from the $320 billion Qatar Investment Authority (QIA), which has pledged to invest billions into the state. Over the past couple of years, Graham has emerged as one of the major pro-Qatar voices in the Senate. He routinely takes to television and other media platforms to repudiate Qatar’s regional adversaries, while bolstering its allies.

The top donor to South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster’s recent successful gubernatorial campaign is a major Qatari lobbyist. Between 2017 and 2018, Imaad Zuberi, a lobbyist who represents the ultra-wealthy QIA, shelled out over $50,000 for McMaster’s campaign, according to campaign finance reports. Zuberi told associates that his donations to Republicans were a way to pay for further access to politicians, according to The New York Times.

On the local level, the mayor of Charleston, which is home to a major Boeing plant, is also a friend to the Gulf state. He has “signed a declaration of understanding to encourage economic development, cultural and environmental cooperation between Charleston and Doha, Qatar’s capital city,” after meeting with Qatari investment officials, The Post and Courier reported.

Charleston is home to Boeing’s 787 Dreamliner assembly plant. Qatar recently spent over $11 billion to order 30 787s and 10 777s from Boeing. Moreover, the Qatari air force has a $6.2 billion contract with Boeing….

In interviews, Qatari officials have stressed that the one-year-old Barzan Holdings project is a top-priority project for advancing Qatar’s defense goals. In November, the ruler of Qatar himself paid a visit to the Barzan research and development center….

Using its huge energy resources turned to wealth to promise statewide development, Qatar has racked up tremendous diplomatic and financial capital with the influential politicians and defense companies of South Carolina, enough that the al Qaeda and Hamas-funding state is apparently set to build military surveillance aircraft inside the continental United States.

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

New Graphic Novel Depicts Jesus Beheading His Foes With A Whirling Sword

Joe Casey and Benjamin Marra no doubt think of themselves as cool, edgy, and courageous, unafraid to incur charges of blasphemy from furious Christians. In fact, they’re banking on those charges: “Reports say the publisher is banking on blasphemy protests to propel sales.”

This is part of the West’s cultural suicide. It’s cool, edgy and courageous to hate one’s own culture, history, and civilization, and to mock and defame its central figures. But Casey and Marra are unlikely to be as courageous when it comes to a religious figure who actually did behead his enemies. Muhammad, according to his first biographer Ibn Ishaq, beheaded between 600 and 900 men of the Jewish Qurayzah tribe after the Battle of the Trench. Will Casey and Marra publish a graphic novel about Muhammad? Not on your life. Not only would that not be courageous in the eyes of their peers, but it would also be “hateful” and “Islamophobic,” even if it contained accurate material drawn from Islamic sources.

“Jesus is stone-cold killer in new graphic novel,” WND, March 3, 2019:

What’s the last taboo?

Maybe it’s the new graphic novel from Image Comics, publisher of “The Walking Dead” series and other hits – “Jesusfreak,” in which Jesus of Nazareth is portrayed as a stone-cold killer.

Oh, and by the way, it comes out just in time for Lent.

The previews show the Messiah beheading foes with a whirling sword.

Promotional material explains: “The year is 26 C.E. A young Nazarean carpenter is having some trouble adjusting to the violent world around him – and finding his place within it. He knows he’s different, but he doesn’t know why. Not yet, anyway. A bloody, two-fisted tale of historical heroic fiction …”

Reports say the publisher is banking on blasphemy protests to propel sales.

“‘Jesusfreak’ is less inspired by any strict religious traditions and is instead more concerned with exploring the unique tension that exists between depicting a mythical figure and a historical figure – a tension that is compounded when, for many, they’re considered the same person,” said Joe Casey, the writer, when the project was first announced.

“It’s also a chance for [co-writer Benjamin] Marra and I to indulge in a specific style of hard-pulp storytelling that we think perfectly fits this material.”…

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

Professor Claims Chrislam “May Hold A Key Or Two For A More Peaceful World”

John Nassivera is a former professor who retains affiliation with Columbia University’s Society of Fellows in the Humanities.” Here he argues that a blend of Christianity and Islam could be the key to world peace, and apparently for Nassivera this blend requires Christians to give up the idea of the divinity of Christ, which he claims in the section of his article not reproduced below that many early Christians didn’t believe, and that many Christians don’t believe today. That may be true in Nassivera’s circle of acquaintances but he would likely be surprised were he to float this claim in Greece, or Nigeria, or Italy.

Anyway, notice that Nassivera’s Chrislam requires concessions only of the Christians, not of the Muslims, as is always the case in these attempts at “outreach” and “dialogue.” The cooperation is all one-way. Also, in traditional Christianity, Orthodox, Catholic, and Protestant, the divinity of Christ isn’t the minor matter Nassivera makes it out to be. It is at the core of the idea of Jesus as the savior, which Islam also rejects. For Nassivera’s Chrislam to be viable, Christians would have to accept the following Qur’an verses and other Islamic teachings:

Jesus is not the Son of God and belief in the Trinity is “excess”: “O People of the Book! Do not exaggerate in your religion nor utter anything concerning Allah save the truth. The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only a messenger of Allah, and his word which he conveyed to Mary, and a spirit from him. So believe in Allah and His messengers, and do not say ‘Three.’ Cease! It is better for you! Allah is only One Allah. It is far removed from his transcendent majesty that he should have a son. His is all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And Allah is sufficient as Defender.” — Qur’an 4:171

And: “It is not befitting to Allah that he should beget a son. Glory be to him! When He determines a matter, he only says to it, ‘Be,’ and it is.” — Qur’an 19:35

Jesus was not crucified: “And because of their saying: We killed the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah’s messenger – they did not kill him or crucify him, but it appeared so to them; and those who disagree concerning it are in doubt about it; they have no knowledge of it except pursuit of a conjecture; they did not kill him for certain.” — Qur’an 4:157

Those who believe in the divinity of Christ are unbelievers: “They have certainly disbelieved who say that Allah is Christ, the son of Mary.” — Qur’an 5:17 (cf. 5:72)

Christians have forgotten part of the divine revelations they received: “From those, too, who call themselves Christians, We did take a covenant, but they forgot a good part of the message that was sent them: so we estranged them, with enmity and hatred between the one and the other, to the day of judgment. And soon will Allah show them what it is they have done.” — Qur’an 5:14

Those who believe that Jesus is God’s Son are accursed: “The Jews call Ezra a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah’s curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth! ” — Qur’an 9:30

Christians who do not accepted Muhammad and the Qur’an are the most vile of created beings: “Nor did those who were given the Scripture become divided until after there had come to them clear evidence. And they were not commanded except to worship Allah, sincere to Him in religion, inclining to truth, and to establish prayer and to give zakah. And that is the correct religion. Indeed, they who disbelieved among the People of the Book and the polytheists will be in the fire of Hell, abiding eternally therein. Those are the most vile of created beings.” — Qur’an 98:6

Muslims must fight against and subjugate Christians: “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden what has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” — Qur’an 9:29

Also, a hadith has Muhammad predicting that Jesus will return at the end of the world and break the cross, as it is an insult to Allah’s power to say that he would have allowed one of his prophets to be crucified:

Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah’s Apostle said, “By Him in Whose Hands my soul is, son of Mary [Jesus] will shortly descend amongst you people [Muslims] as a just ruler and will break the Cross and kill the pig and abolish the Jizya [a tax taken from the non-Muslims, who are in the protection, of the Muslim government]. Then there will be abundance of money and nobody will accept charitable gifts. (Bukhari 3.34.425)

Muslims have sometimes taken this to mean not just that crosses will be destroyed in the end times, but that they should be now. In Spain in 2015, Muslims broke into a church, spray-painted “Allah” on wall, and destroyed the crucifix. In Pakistan in 2014, Muslims destroyed a church that was under construction, and desecrated the cross. When the Islamic State occupied Mosul, it made destruction of all crosses in the city a top priority.

Here, in conclusion, is my favorite New Testament verse, this time referring to Professor John Nassivera: “Leave them; they are blind guides. And if a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit.” (Matthew 15:14)

“On Faith: Chrislam, past, present and future,” by John Nassivera, Rutland Herald, March 1, 2019:

…Today, there is a new form of Islam and Christianity beginning to take shape — or perhaps, it is a recurrence to an original form of Islam. In Nigeria, a country with a large presence of both Christians and Muslims, there are those who practice a form of religion that has come to be called “Chrislam,” which is a fascinating form of monotheism — and it is spreading into the United States, as well. Those who practice Chrislam follow both Christian and Muslim traditions and theologies. They don’t think of Christianity and Islam as incompatible religions, but rather see each as being an augmentation of the other. (See “A New Religion Flourishes in Nigeria & USA,” at the website malawimuslims.com.)

Needless to say, Chrislam may hold a key or two for a more peaceful world.

Most Westerners, whether Christian or not, have no idea that both Jesus (Isa in Arabic) and his mother, Mary (Maryam in Arabic), are prominent figures in Islam’s holy book, the Quran. Muslims, in accordance with various explicit passages in the Quran, hold that Jesus was born via a virgin birth and that his mother was Mary. Islam holds that Jesus was a great prophet and teacher of major importance and in the Quran, Jesus is called “the Messiah,” “the Word of God” and “the Spirit of God” — but Islam does not go the further step, the step holding that Jesus is the Son of God and of one substance with God the Father. Muhammad, in Islam, is also a great prophet/teacher, but he is not called the Son of God, not of the same substance as God, nor is Muhammad in the Quran called the Messiah, the Word of God or the Spirit of God. In Islam, Jesus occupies the highest place among the prophets in terms of his proximity and similarity to God, but Jesus is not the “final prophet;” the final prophet is Muhammad — yet Muhammad is human and not in any sense divine. (See the recent book “The Islamic Jesus” by Mustafa Akyol, 2017.)…

The good news is that as the world becomes smaller and smaller and more and more interconnected, Christians and Muslims are going to become better and better informed about each others’ religion. Especially in Europe and Africa, Christians and Muslims are now living cheek by jowl and even inter-marrying. Truth will come out, and the truth is that Islam and Christianity have a great deal in common — especially 21st century liberal and progressive Christianity, which is a well-established movement….

As the Quran says in Surah 29: 45-49: “Dispute not with the People of the Book (Jews and Christians) … but say, We believe in the Revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; our God and your God is one; and it is to Him we all bow.”

May God, Allah and Chrislam be with you.

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

Catholic Theological Union Offers Course on “Islamophobia”

Good news! If you’re thinking about taking a summer course at the Catholic Theological Union in Chicago, now you can dive into one about how, despite over 34,000 jihad attacks worldwide since 9/11 committed in the name of Islam and in accord with its teachings, Muslims are actually victims of “Islamophobia” manufactured by a sinister “Islamophobia industry,” which prevents people nationwide from thinking that Islam is just great.

Here’s the course description:

Islam, Muslims & Islamophobia: A Catholic Response
Scott Alexander

This course will cover the epidemic of Islamophobia in contemporary U.S. American society. Its aim is: to assess the extent of the problem, including statistics regarding anti-Muslim hate crimes and an analysis of the so-called “Islamophobia industry”; to explore and deconstruct negative and harmful anti-Muslim stereotypes, particularly as key elements of dominant mainstream media, “alt-right” media, and social media narratives; and to articulate a ‘Catholic response’ based on Catholic social teaching, theology of interreligious dialogue, and the longstanding praxis of Catholic-Muslim dialogue in the U.S. in which Catholic Theological Union has played a significant role.

Scott Alexander is certainly qualified to teach a course of this kind. According to the CTU website, “Scott has been studying, teaching, and writing about Islam and Muslim-Christian relations for over 35 years. The focus of his life’s ministry is building bridges of reconciliation, mutual understanding, and solidarity for justice between Muslims and Christians in the U.S. and abroad.  As a self-described ‘scholar-activist,’ Scott devotes considerable energy to challenging structures of Islamophobia and other forms of systemic bigotry and marginalization. His most recent scholarly research focuses on the role of triumphalism in Christian-Muslim relations and deals with the inherent contradiction between religious claims to universal truth and the religiously motivated desire to impose this truth on others as a means of political and cultural domination.”

It is no surprise that with all his talk about triumphalism, systematic bigotry, marginalization, and political and cultural domination, Professor Alexander demonstrates no awareness of the fact that devout Muslims screaming “Allahu akbar” have committed numerous acts of violence against non-Muslims in Europe and North America over the last few years. Nor does he seem to be aware that the Islamic State, an international jihad terror group, has called for such attacks in Europe and North America as part of a large attempt to weaken existing governmental systems and hasten their collapse, so that Sharia entities can be established in their place. That’s a kind of systematic bigotry and marginalization, in service of political and cultural domination, that doesn’t seem to register on his radar screen.

Will this course discuss how the term “Islamophobia” was chosen by Muslim Brotherhood organizations as a weapon to intimidate people into thinking it wrong to oppose jihad terror and Sharia oppression of women and others? Will it explore the 1,400-year history of jihad warfare against Christians, and investigate the role of Islamic texts and teachings in inciting that warfare? Will it discuss the status of the subjugated dhimmis under Islamic law? Will it explore the industry of faked anti-Muslim hate crimes? Will it show how those who are accused of being part of the fictional “Islamophobia industry” are vilified with ad hominem attacks, but never actually shown to be making false statements?

The answer is obvious, of course. No to all questions.

Will there be a course at any Islamic theological school, teaching about Muslim hatred of Christians, “the most vile of created beings” according to Qur’an 98:6?

No again.

Scott Alexander will likely never tell you this, but I will: the real originators of “Islamophobia” in the U.S. are not the supposed exponents of the “Islamophobia industry,” but Nidal Malik Hasan, Mohamed Atta, Osama bin Laden, Anwar al-Awlaki, Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, Mohammed Abdulazeez, Syed Rizwan Farook, Tashfeen Malik, Omar Mateen, and all the other Muslims who have plotted and/or carried out jihad massacres on American soil. In fact, the whole “Islamophobia” hysteria is a cynical and disingenuous attempt to divert attention away from the reality of jihad terror.

“Leave them; they are blind guides. And if a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit.” (Matthew 15:14)

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

Illinois Muslim Cleric: “We All Have A Higher Goal & That Is The Establishment Of The Caliphate”

The caliphate is, in Sunni Islamic theology, the sole legitimate government to which Muslims owe loyalty. It is ruled by a caliph, the military, political, and spiritual successor of Muhammad, and implements Islamic law, which is considered the non-negotiable law of Allah.

How loyal do you think Sheikh Omar Baloch is to the American system of non-establishment of a religion and a republican governmental system?

That’s right, not loyal at all.

But to question him about this would be “Islamophobic.”

“Illinois-Based Sheikh Omar Baloch: Islamic Relief Organizations Should Promote the Caliphate as the Long-Term Solution to Humanitarian Problems,” MEMRI, January 29, 2019
Clip No. 7053

On January 29, 2019, Illinois-based Sheikh Omar Baloch uploaded a video titled “Constructive Criticism of Islamic Relief Organizations” to his YouTube channel. In the video, Baloch said that Islamic relief organizations do not place enough emphasis on the establishment of an Islamic caliphate as the long-term solution to humanitarian problems. He said that the problem is that many Islamic organizations are scared to lose funding if they are too vocal about the establishment of a caliphate, and he criticized them because they “wear the garb of [piety]” by providing aid, but they do not call out the “forces of injustice,” for which they are serving as a “bandage.” He said that such organizations should use their platform to convey a message about the common dream, legacy, and hope of Muslims, and he elaborated: “We all have a higher goal… that is bigger than us, and that is the establishment of the caliphate.” According to the Facebook page of the Furqaan Institute of Quranic Education (FIQE), Sheikh Omar Baloch was born in Chicago and is the scholar in residence at the Al-Furqaan Foundation, of which FIQE is a division. The Facebook page also says that Baloch studied at Georgetown University, at Al-Azhar University in Egypt, at Jamia Thul Ahlul Hadith in Pakistan.

Following are excerpts:

Sheikh Omar Baloch: Today I want to talk about Islamic relief organizations.

[…]

There is not enough emphasis when it comes to Islamic relief organizations into… Number one, what is the long-term solution to all these problems?

[…]

There is only one real, real long-term solution, which a lot of people don’t like to hear, but it’s the caliphate.

[…]

We ask for funds because we talk about how bad the situation is, but it is as important to be able to raise awareness of, number one, the solution for all the Muslims, and number two, to call out the injustices that exist in any given society. It is very important to call out the injustices. A lot of Muslim relief organizations feel they’ll lose their funding if they become too vocal, but this is exactly the problem.

[…]

You are wearing the garb of being pious and doing something impious in the process if you’re helping the needy but not calling out the one who is creating the problem, because you’re just a bandage for them.

[…]

If you’re not calling out the forces of injustice and you’re not telling Muslims the long-term solution, the common dream of the Muslims, the common legacy of the Muslims, of uniting the Muslims, in using the relief organization fund platforms to do that… It’s very, very important that that message comes across, even to the people that you’re bringing the funds to, the medical supplies to, the blankets to… Even they need to hear a message of hope, that we’re all in a common boat with a common destiny, and we all as Muslims have a common destiny.

[…]

We all have a higher goal, and number two, a goal that is bigger than all of us, and that is the establishment of the caliphate, the coming back of the Muslim caliphate.

[…]

The relief organizations have a very good platform to also explain the need for a caliphate – why we need to unite the Muslims. I really wish that my brothers and sisters that work in relief organizations would take this task seriously.

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

UPS Suspends Deliveries In Heavily Muslim “No-Go Zone – Cites Attacks On Drivers

This is happening in heavily Muslim Malmö. But of course, only racist, bigoted “Islamophobes” believe that “no-go zones” exist.

Right?

Right?

“Risk of crime stops package delivery,” translated from “Risk för brott stoppar paketleverans,” Aftonbladet, February 28, 2019 (thanks to the Geller Report):

The transport company UPS no longer runs packages in Rosengård in Malmö, for security reasons. Postnord does not deliver packages to another area in Malmö, Seved.

– We must think of our staff in the first place, says Mathias Krümmel at Postnord.

A person in Malmö who ordered the delivery home to the door received notice from the distribution company UPS that the company no longer delivers to private addresses in the district of Rosengård because of the risk of being exposed to robbery or other crimes, reports Sydsvenskan.

An employee at the company’s customer service tells the newspaper that the home run in Rosengård was stopped two months ago, when drivers were attacked. Even in some areas in Stockholm, UPS has stopped the delivery of parcels.

“The stop will not be forever, but we wait until it feels safe for our drivers,” the employee told the newspaper….

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

PayPal Top Dog Admits Partnership With Hard-Left Smear Machine SPLC To Blacklist Dissidents From Leftist Agenda

The SPLC’s vicious use of its “hate group” list to demonize and destroy legitimate groups that dissent from the Leftist agenda has gotten so bad that even the Washington Post took notice.

Nonetheless, the Left’s authoritarian agenda is galloping forward, with steady bannings of dissidents from social media platforms.

Soon, only the Leftist point of view will be heard, and then an era of peace will dawn all over the West.

Won’t it?

“PayPal CEO Admits Partnership with Far-Left SPLC to Blacklist Conservatives,” by Charlie Nash, Breitbart, February 25, 2019:

PayPal CEO Dan Schulman admitted during an interview with the Wall Street Journalthat PayPal works with the far-left Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) when it considers blacklisting conservatives.

After being asked by the Wall Street Journal what “values” PayPal identifies with,” Schulman replied, “Probably the most important value to us is diversity and inclusion.”

“I think North Carolina was probably the moment that was the most visible, where we basically said this violates our core value and we need to make a very public stand on it,” claimed Schulman, referencing the time when PayPal pulled out of an investment in North Carolina because the state passed a bill making it mandatory for people to use the bathroom of their biological sex.

“Businesses need to be a force for good in those values and issues that they believe in. It shouldn’t come from backlash or people taking heat on it, because then it’s in response, as opposed to the definition of who you are and then how you react to the context that you find yourself in,” the PayPal CEO expressed, adding that the Charlottesville rally in 2017 was a “defining moment” for PayPal to start blacklisting conservatives.

Schulman claimed it “was a defining moment for us as a company,” that was “difficult,” because, “the line between free speech and hate, nobody teaches it to you in college. Nobody’s defined it in the law.”

During the interview, Schulman also admitted that the far-left SPLC helps to inform “PayPal’s decisions.”

“There are those both on the right and left that help us. Southern Poverty Law Center has brought things. We don’t always agree. We have our debates with them. We are very respectful with everyone coming in. We will do the examination carefully,” Schulman explained. “We’ll talk when we don’t agree with a finding: We understand why you think that way, but it still goes into the realm of free speech for us.”

The SPLC, which also reportedly works with Amazon, Google, Facebook, and Twitter, was forced to pay a $3.3 million settlements to anti-extremist activist Maajid Nawaz last year, after the organization included him on a list of “anti-Muslim extremists,” despite Nawaz being Muslim himself.

The lawsuit victory prompted at least 60 other organizations to also consider lawsuits against the SPLC, and in June, a Washington Post columnist declared the SPLC “has lost all credibility.”

PayPal has blacklisted WikiLeaksInfowars, conservative commentator and Vice co-founder Gavin McInnes, political activist Tommy Robinson, investigative journalist Laura Loomer, blogger Roosh V, free speech social network Gab, YouTube alternative BitChute, and a black metal music label.

Robert Spencer’s Jihad Watch, and Pamela Geller’s American Freedom Defense Initiative were also temporarily blacklisted by PayPal, before being reinstated….

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

UK’s Muslim “Advisor On Countering Extremism”: ISIS Bride Must Be Let Back In Or More Muslims Will Turn to Jihad

Sara Khan’s premise is that Muslims only turn to jihad because Infidels are unkind to them. If we turn in kindness to Muslims, all will be well. So, if this unrepentant jihadi bride is let back into Britain, and raises more jihadis, all will be well, but if she is barred from the country, more Muslims in Britain will turn to jihad.

Ultimately, resistance to jihad angers Muslims and thus creates more jihadis, so what Sara Khan is really counseling here is that Britain should simply surrender and adopt Sharia, and then all will be well.

“Stripping jihadi bride Shamima Begum of her British citizenship could spark extremist backlash against UK, warns Home Office advisor,” by Martin Robinson, Mailonline,
February 22, 2019:

Radical Islamists could exploit the decision to strip Shamima Begum of her British citizenship, the Government’s chief adviser on countering extremism has warned.

Home Secretary Sajid Javid made the move after the teenager, who fled London aged 15 to join the so-called Islamic State caliphate in Syria, said she wanted to return to the UK with her newborn son.

Independent adviser Sara Khan has cautioned that the Government must acknowledge the anxiety caused by the decision, with extremists being eager to ‘exploit alienation and grievance’.

‘While it is for courts to test the legality of decisions such as deprivation of citizenship, we have to also ask how measures such as this impact wider work on countering extremism,’ she said.

‘The Government has to recognise the unease felt by a wide range of people about decisions of this kind, not least those from minority communities with dual nationality.

‘It has to build trust in its approach, because Islamist extremists will exploit alienation and grievance to turn people against their country.’

The family of jihadi bride Shamima Begum have written to the Home Secretary challenging his decision to revoke her British citizenship.

Sajid Javid blocked the 19-year-old’s return earlier this week, saying she poses a risk to the country’s security.

But in a letter to Mr Javid, her family have said they ‘cannot simply abandon her’ and that her status is ‘a matter for our British courts’….

Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer

Claire Goforth of the “Daily Dot” Tries to Shut Down Opposition to Jihad Terror

Fascist “journalist” Claire Goforth gave her Daily Dot story an ominous title: “The Hatebook: Inside Facebook’s thriving subculture of racism.” What racism did she mean? The usual assortment of white supremacist losers, plus opponents of jihad mass murder and Sharia oppression of women, gays, and others.

Goforth relied heavily on the Leftist smear machine the Southern Poverty Law Center for her spurious analysis, although she did make a grudging admission: “The SPLC does have critics, among them many individuals affiliated with hate groups on this list, who question its methodology, politics, and motives. Proud Boys founder Gavin McInnes has filed a defamation suit against the SPLC for labeling his pro-Trump club for ‘Western chauvinists’ a hate group. Nevertheless, generally speaking, the nearly 50-year-old nonprofit is considered among the foremost authorities on hate in America.”

Yeah, sure it is. And, Goforth claims, it’s even worse:

But it’s not just that these hate groups have an oversized presence. It’s how few clicks away truly horrendous beliefs are….

Hate groups have long been using the internet to find like-minded individuals and coerce others into adopting their views. Social media sites put them all in the same place, making it far easier to find and indoctrinate a person like Fields Jr., who murdered a woman at the Unite the Right rally and posted approvingly of Nazism on his Facebook page; or Dylann Roof, who spent countless hours on a racist website before murdering Black churchgoers in South Carolina; or Anders Breivik, the Norwegian mass murderer who cited Robert Spencer dozens of times in his manifesto.

Spencer, who was banned from the United Kingdom in 2013 for extremism, is the founder of the SPLC designated hate group Jihad Watch; its Facebook page has 84,000 Likes.

A testimony to the power of shadowbanning.

Visitors to the Jihad Watch blog are asked to “help spread the truth about jihad” by “exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts.” Stories on the prolific site are largely about Muslims committing crimes, recruiting for terrorist groups, people becoming criminal and violent after converting to Islam, and the like.

recent story claims, “Yet another convert to Islam gets the idea that his new religion commands him to commit treason and mass murder.”…

Goforth goes forth at length about how white supremacists and other baddies proliferate on Facebook, and must be silenced at all costs. She stuck Jihad Watch right in the middle of her lineup of evildoers, despite not being able to produce a single “white supremacist” or “racist” or “bigoted” or “hateful” quote from me or any other Jihad Watch writer. She brings up madman Anders Breivik in a particular defamatory fashion, calling him “the Norwegian mass murderer who cited Robert Spencer dozens of times in his manifesto,” thereby giving the impression that I was calling for mass murder or approved of Breivik. She doesn’t bother, of course, to point out that Breivik criticized me in his “manifesto” for not calling for violence, and that if violence is committed ostensibly because of some idea, it doesn’t discredit the idea itself, or else the socialism she likely endorses would be amply discredited on that basis alone.

Other than that, this is just more SPLC, with only cursory and incomplete notice of the fact that the SPLC has been thoroughly unmasked and discredited as a far-Left hate group bent on destroying all dissidents. Even the Washington Post has noticed. Goforth also employs a common tactic among Leftist “journalists”: present something that is perfectly true and innocuous as if it were egregious and hateful on its face, without explaining why. The convert story she cites from Jihad Watch is particularly grisly, with the convert explaining how he wants to kill and behead people, but Goforth apparently thinks its worse that I noticed, or that I know that the convert’s new holy book tells him: “When you meet the unbelievers, strike the necks” (Qur’an 47:4).

There has been a two-decade effort on the Left to fool Americans and Europeans into thinking it “hateful” and “bigoted” to oppose jihad mass murder and Sharia oppression of women, gays, and others. Goforth is yet another Left-fascist bent on emulating the Nazi Brownshirts by defaming and crushing all those who dissent from the Leftist agenda. And she may well succeed in getting me banned from Facebook, which has made its Sharia-compliance abundantly clear. Facebook’s Vice President Joel Kaplan traveled to Pakistan in July 2017 to assure the Pakistani government that it would remove “anti-Islam” material, and they’ve been following through. But Goforth may one day regret her role in all this, when she discovers that her new friends she has enabled and aided so assiduously don’t respect and revere her as much as she does them.

Article posted with permission from Pamela Geller