Yet Another Aspiring Apparatchik Exploits Norway’s 9/11


Axel Fjeld

 

I just read a great article at PJ Media (formerly Pajamas Media) rebutting a European Leftist crying Islamophobe. Bruce Bawer speculates Axel Fjeld is trying to use his academic prowess to make his bones to get a job working in some form of lucrative European Leftist media.

 

Unfortunately for Fjeld, Bawer shows the racist-Islamophobe accusations against Counterjihad writers is based on barefaced lies.

 

JRH 7/29/18

Please Support NCCR

***********************

Yet Another Aspiring Apparatchik Exploits Norway’s 9/11

 

By BRUCE BAWER

JULY 25, 2018

PJ Media

 

The ring-shaped sculpture made of steel which carries the engraved names of the victims of the Utoya massacre on the island of Utoya, Norway, on August 5, 2015. (Sigrid Harms/picture-alliance/dpa/AP Images)

 

This year I was not going to write about 7/22, often known as Norway’s 9/11. It is the date in 2011 on which Anders Behring Breivik bombed government buildings in Oslo, killing eight people, and then gunned down sixty-nine more, mostly kids, on the nearby island of Utøya. Famously, Breivik wrote – or rather cobbled together – a massive “manifesto” consisting mainly of material from various sources that he had cut and pasted. Most of it was critical of Islam, and it was apparently meant as a justification for his actions. But none of the people whose work he borrowed had ever called for violence, let alone violence against children.

 

Nevertheless, after 7/22, the Norwegian left was quick to insist on a linkage between Breivik and serious critics of Islam, and to argue, moreover, that those critics needed to be silenced in order to avoid any more such atrocities. For a while there things got pretty dicey, with prominent academics, authors, and politicians demanding strict limits on freedom of speech and stiff prison penalties for anyone violating those limits. In one op-ed after another, I saw my name, and that of other writers, dragged through the mud. I ended up writing an e-book about it, The New Quislings.

 

Eventually it all died down. But every now and then the whole ugly business flares up again, especially when an anniversary of 7/22 rolls around. Ambitious young ideologues who are eager to kick off a career in politics, writing, media, or the public sector have discovered that a splendid way to do so is to join the pile-on. It’s easy enough to pull off: the point is not to soberly challenge the arguments made by critics of Islam, or to say any[t]hing [sic] remotely original, but to name-call – to smear them as Islamophobes, racists, and “Eurabia conspiracy theorists.” (I’ll explain that last one in a minute.)

 

Meet Axel Fjeld. On July 25, the newspaper Bergensavisen published a long essay by the thirty-year-old, who is studying for his master’s degree in philosophy. The essay was entitled “Is it possible to stop racism?” Its targets were the usual ones. For example, Hans Rustad, editor of document.no, which runs Islam-related news and commentary. Describing document.no as “Breivik’s old hunting grounds” (because he, like thousands of others, used to read it), Fjeld deplores the fact that Rustad has been invited to take part in debates in mainstream media. Similarly, he complains that Fritt Ord, a free-speech foundation, awarded a stipend to the Islam critic Peder Are Nøstvold Jensen, a.k.a. Fjordman, whom Fjeld smears as a “genocide ideologist.” In the same way, recycling a years-old leftist gripe, Fjeld rebukes a certain former Aftenposten editor for having actually had a kind word to say about my 2006 book While Europe Slept.

 

Fjeld would have his readers believe that Rustad, Jensen, and I are all racists. He doesn’t make any effort to prove that we are. In fact we are not. I am not a racist, and I have never read a remotely racist word either at document.no or in Jensen’s voluminous writings. Fjeld, then, is barefaced liar. But this is how all of these people operate. We have the facts on our side. They have no good arguments for their position. So all they can do is hurl slurs. Moreover, even as they avoid representing our opinions fairly and honestly, they pretend that we have nothing reasonable to offer, and that they, in fact, are the reasonable ones. And why should reasonable people have to “debate” unreasonable people? As Fjeld puts it: “When we are tempted to debate rationally against opinions that are not based on reason, we cannot achieve anything other than to legitimize the irrational as something that is worth discussing.”

 

Fjeld pronounces it “unbelievable” that the likes of Rustad, Jensen, and me should be given air time or op-ed space in the mainstream Norwegian media. After all, those same media would never “waste time ‘debating’ people who think that the world is flat.” So why, he asks, should they welcome the voices of people who claim “that ‘Muslims are invading Europe,’ ‘it’s only Muslims who rape,’ or ‘dark-skinned people are on average less intelligent than light-skinned people’”? Frankly, I’ve never seen anybody in Norway make the ridiculous assertion that only Muslims commit rape; nor have I witnessed a Norwegian discussion of race and I.Q. (although I’m not discounting the possibility that this thoroughly legitimate question has come up at some point).

 

As for Muslims “invading Europe” – well, for heaven’s sake, Muslims are pouring into the continent, and the consequences are grim. Deny the obvious reality all you want, but no-go zones, forced marriages, honor killings, female genital mutilation, and “grooming gangs” exist. Muslim gangs commit rapes and burn cars. Muslim women experience the same oppression in Europe that they did in the Old Country. Muslim immigrants are bankrupting welfare states, resulting in severe cuts to education, elder services, and health care. Islamic terrorism is not a fantasy. European presidents and prime ministers may continue to mouth trite nonsense about the joys of diversity, but their intelligence services are busy monitoring countless terrorist cells and working overtime to keep down the number of jihadist atrocities. Try as hard as you want to connect Breivik to Islam critics, but the fact remains that none of those critics have ever endorsed violence, while Islamic terrorists are doing exactly what the Koran tells them to.

 

For the likes of Fjeld, to discuss any of this honestly is to be a racist, and should be against the law. He explicitly rejects the notion of “the liberal marketplace of ideas” – the belief that it’s healthy to allow the expression of all views, because in the end the strongest argument will win. His own position is that exposing people to what he labels “hate” will only make them less resistant to it. Translation: to allow cogent dissent from the dominant red-green orthodoxy is to risk toppling that orthodoxy. It’s Soviet thinking, pure and simple.

 

Oh, about that “Eurabia conspiracy theorist” business. I don’t know how many people have written books criticizing the rise of Islam in the West, but there are quite a few of us from a range of backgrounds. I assume that most, like me, started writing about the topic because they were observing changes that they found unsettling. If so many writers with such diverse histories are disturbed by the same phenomena, surely that must mean that there is, indeed, something going on out there that merits concern? Years ago, Norwegian leftists came up with a handy way to dodge this question, maintaining that we Islam critics, far from being individuals articulating our own ideas, are, instead, lockstep adherents of a conspiracy theory cooked up by Bat Ye’or, author of the 2005 book Eurabia. Never mind that many of us (myself included) started writing about Islam before we’d even heard of Bat Ye’or; if you read about us in the Norwegian papers – and this includes Fjeld’s article – you will see us identified as “Eurabia writers,” lockstep adherents of the “Eurabia conspiracy theory,” the essence of which is that there is, indeed, such a thing as jihad.

 

Fjeld’s article, in short, is a load of bunk – and an unoriginal load of bunk, at that. In The New Quislings I examined a series of articles by different writers all of whom seemed to be working from exactly the same list of talking points. That doesn’t mean that Fjeld has wasted his time. On the contrary, he’s put his name on the map. He’s made it clear to the powers that be that he’s a good soldier. He’s got the party line down cold, and is willing to spit it out, every bit of it, shamelessly dishonest though it is. As long as he keeps this up, Fjeld, with a little bit of luck, will go straight from grad school into a nice, cushy job at NRK (the state-run TV network), or as a columnist for one of the taxpayer-subsidized mainstream newspapers, or as a writer-researcher at some government ministry, or as an administrator at some tony cultural institution. That’s how the careers of his equally cynical predecessors have gone, anyway, once they’ve taken the obligatory high-profile swipe at critics of Islam: they all end up being well-paid apparatchiks. It will be interesting to see exactly which path Fjeld takes.

__________________

Copyright © 2005-2018 PJ Media All Rights Reserved.

 

About PJ Media

 

For media inquiries, please contact communications@pjmedia.com

 

Since its inception in 2005, PJ Media has been focused on the news that matters — from the insightful commentary provided by our all-star lineup of columnists to our writers’ quick takes on breaking news and trending stories. The media company’s founders — Academy Award Nominee Roger L. Simon, Charles Johnson (Little Green Footballs) and Glenn Reynolds (Instapundit) — brought together a tightly knit band of bloggers into an integrated website that has evolved into a reliable source for original, unique, and cutting-edge political news and analysis.

 

We’ve been there through primaries and general elections; the U.S. border crisis; doctored climate change data; the gunrunners’ scandal; Department of Justice voter fraud and the Ground Zero mosque — stories that others in the media initially passed by.

 

As a company, we’ve always felt a special connection to the values which make America special, as well as a dedication to keeping America great for our children and our children’s children. That’s why our main focus is on the three main areas that will have the most impact on the future of America: politics, parenting and lifestyle.

 

PJMedia.com, the cornerstone of PJ Media, LLC, provides useful and helpful content for everyday Americans — especially parents who are trying to raise their kids in a very confusing and uncertain world. The website offers READ THE REST

 

John Bolton’s Appointment Rattles The Muslim Brotherhood Echo Chamber


Act for America emailed an excerpt of an article from The Federalist with the email subject line “The Muslim Brotherhood is Rattled”. The Federalist article by Ben Weingarten highlights that John Bolton’s appointment as National Security Advisor has rattled the transnational Islamic terrorist organization the Muslim Brotherhood (aka Ikhwan to many Arab speaking people) because Bolton has had the correct assessment that the terrorist network indeed should be on the State Department’s designated a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO).

 

Here is the Act for America email intro:

 

The left has made it their mission to smear anyone who opposes violent jihad, and cast them as “Islamophobic.” Recently, former ambassador John Bolton has been the target of such attacks because of his appointment as National Security Advisor (NSA) to the President. This is not only an attempt to discredit John Bolton, it is an attempt to protect the Muslim Brotherhood from finally being designated a terrorist organization.

 

As patriotic American’s we must stand up and not only support the appointment of Ambassador John Bolton, but also tell Congress it is time, once and for all, to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization. Click here to tell your local Members of Congress enough is enough.

 

JRH 4/6/18

Please Support NCCR

***************************

John Bolton

 

John Bolton’s Appointment Rattles The Muslim Brotherhood Echo Chamber

The Trump administration ought not to concede one inch to those who wish to sideline the personnel and stifle the policies that would make its counterjihadist agenda a reality.

 

By Ben Weingarten

APRIL 5, 2018

The Federalist

 

The attacks on former ambassador John Bolton following his appointment as National Security Advisor (NSA) have inadvertently served as some of his strongest endorsements.

 

First there were the hysterical cries of “neocon warmonger!” This would come as news to the NSA-designate, who was never a “liberal mugged by reality” but a self-identified “Goldwater conservative” from the start; explicitly rejects the belief in democracy-building as imperative to achieving America’s national interest under democratic peace theory; and suggests, exaggerating for effect, that following the removal of Saddam Hussein, as soon as practicable he would have told the Iraqis, “You’re on your own. Here’s a copy of the Federalist papers. Good luck.”

 

Although the “neocon warmonger” moniker is inapt, to say the least, maybe it is not such a bad thing if our enemies buy this line. In fact, this may be part of President Trump’s strategic rationale as a dealmaker for elevating a “peace-through-strength” realist portrayed as a cantankerous cowboy to the top of the National Security Council.

 

Then followed another narrative: Bolton is not only a real-life Dr. Strangelove, but worse. He is actually an adroit bureaucrat—“crazy and dangerous.” Then-senator Joe Biden, a man prone to malapropism, actually put it best when, in Bolton’s retelling, Biden said of him in 2005: “My problem with you, over the years, has been, you’re too competent. I mean, I would rather you be stupid and not very effective.”

 

But the truly revelatory attacks concern Bolton’s positions on Islamic supremacism, which reflect an understanding that jihadists pose a mortal threat that must be countered using every element of national power. You know these attacks are meaningful partly because they have been made under cover of a smear campaign.

 

Opposing Jihadis Isn’t the Same as Opposing Islam

 

Bolton has been cast as an “Islamophobe” for the thought crime of being a counterjihadist who supports other counterjihadists. The charge of “Islamophobe” is a baseless, intellectually dishonest, and lazy slur. Although it does not deserve to be dignified with a response, it goes without saying that there is nothing to indicate Bolton harbors an irrational fear of Islam, and everything to indicate he holds the very rational belief that we must defeat Islamic supremacists who wish to subject us to their tyrannical rule or destroy us.

 

“Islamophobe” is being lobbed at Bolton to try and discredit him and ultimately scuttle policies he supports intended to strike at the heart of Islamic supremacism. The “tell” is that the articles raising such accusations frequently cast counterjihadist policy positions themselves as de facto evidence of Islamophobic bigotry.

 

As the representative par excellence of the position that America should exit the Iran deal, it should come as no surprise that the Iran deal echo chamber in exile has sprung into action in savaging the ambassador with the most outlandish of insinuations. For the Islamophobia campaign, the lesser-recognized and perhaps more insidious Muslim Brotherhood echo chamber has been activated. Bolton is on record as supporting its designation as a terrorist organization, and Brotherhood apologists and true believers cannot abide this.

 

Either We Work With Terrorists or We Don’t

 

Recall that the national security and foreign policy establishment has long held that as a “political Islamist” group, the Muslim Brotherhood ought to be treated as a legitimate diplomatic partner. The theory is that we have to choose between violent and seemingly peaceful Islamic supremacists, ignoring the fact that their differences are tactical and strategic, not ideological. They are all still Islamic supremacists.

 

Most infamously, the Obama administration supported the ascension of Mohamed Morsi, leader of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, to president during the Arab spring, with predictably horrific consequences in particular for the nation’s Christians that persist even in the era of the much-maligned counterjihadist Gen. Abdel Fattah al-Sisi.

 

Such disastrously naïve policy pushes ignore that the Muslim Brotherhood is the tip of the Sunni jihadist spear. It’s the ideological fountainhead from which violent jihadist groups from Hamas to al-Qaeda and ISIS spring. The “political” element of the Muslim Brotherhood is, if anything, more pernicious precisely because its adherents do not goose-step, guns in hand, in the public square.

 

No, the political arm engages in political and ideological warfare, tactfully seeking to impose its will through policy and subterfuge. “Social welfare” activities provide a convenient cover for the group’s ultimate aims. As the Brotherhood put it in its 1991 Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America:

 

The Ikhwan [Muslim Brothers] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.

 

On account of the Brotherhood’s nature and activities, it has been designated as a terrorist organization from Egypt to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. A bill first introduced by Sen. Ted Cruz in 2015, calling for the U.S. secretary of state to submit a report to Congress on designating the Brotherhood as a foreign terrorist organization in America, lays out several other reasons the group merits this, including:

 

The [group’s] explicit calls for violent jihad, with the end goal of imposing Islamic law over all the world of the group’s founder and spiritual leader Hassan al-Banna, and the consistently violent Islamic supremacist content of the Brotherhood’s core membership texts

 

The terrorist efforts of numerous jihadist groups explicitly tied to the Muslim Brotherhood, and the efforts of individual Muslim Brotherhood members designated as terrorists by the U.S. government themselves

 

The litany of terrorist financing cases involving the Muslim Brotherhood, including the…Holy Land Foundation case [the largest terror financing case in U.S. history] …

 

Do What We Like or Get Smeared as a Bigot

 

On the campaign trail and in its early days the Trump administration indicated an interest in designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization. But within months it shelved these plans. What happened? The Muslim Brotherhood echo chamber deployed.

 

The Brotherhood undertook an extensive lobbying and information operation designed to dissuade the administration’s plans, reportedly backed by millions of dollars. The U.S. foreign policy establishment quickly proliferated articles and comments in prominent mainstream publications defending the Muslim Brotherhood against charges of being a jihadist group, adding that designated it as such would be impractical and impracticable. Notably, The New York Times went so far as to print an op-ed in the Brotherhood’s defense written by Clinton Foundation-linked Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood spokesman Gehad el-Haddad.

 

In the midst of this flurry of articles, it leaked to the media that the CIA and State Department both produced memos against Muslim Brotherhood terrorist designation.

 

Concurrently, counterjihadists throughout the Trump administration were subjected to a barrage of attacks. Many would ultimately be sidelined, though some like Secretary of State-designate Mike Pompeo survived. He, like Bolton, is being attacked as an Islamophobic bigot as well.

 

Bolton recognized at the time that these events were not random. During a July 2017 interview he noted:

 

There’s been an amazing campaign. It’s always amazing to me how these stories and op-eds and lines of chatter appear simultaneously, all very well-coordinated…The argument being the Muslim Brotherhood is a complicated organization, not every part of it is devoted to the support of terrorism. Some of them do humanitarian work and so on; a declaration that the entire Brotherhood is a foreign terrorist organization would actually buttress the cause of the jihadis; so, therefore, don’t do anything.

 

Bolton’s riposte?

 

Let’s take the notion inherent in that argument as having some validity, that there are pieces of the Muslim Brotherhood that don’t qualify under the statutory definition we have of a foreign terrorist organization…My response to that is, ‘Okay, we need some careful drafting based on the evidence we have now that excludes some affiliates, some components of the Muslim Brotherhood from the designation.’ I’m prepared to live with that, of course, until we get more complete information.

 

This position is what really draws the ire of the Brotherhood echo chamber. CAIR, the unindicted co-conspirator in the previously mentioned largest terror financing case in U.S. history, published a press release condemning the appointment of “Islamophobe John Bolton” as NSA, citing corroborating articles from such non-biased sources as Think Progress, The Nation, Islamophobia.com, Vox, and Huffington Post.

 

As I have written previously, CAIR’s Muslim Brotherhood and jihadi ties are numerous and longstanding, involving not only its founders and present leaders to Hamas, but its harboring of apologists for Islamic terrorism, and alleged impeding of counterterrorism efforts.

 

Bolton’s endorsement of designating the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization illustrates a keen understanding of the size, scope, and nature of the Islamic supremacist threat that the national security and foreign policy establishment lacks. It is a proxy for a worldview that if followed to its logical conclusion would turn our largely futile efforts to beat back jihadists over the last 17 years on their head. This view takes Islamic supremacists at their word in their desire to impose upon us the Sharia-based, totalitarian theopolitical ideology to which they adhere. Hence the pushback.

 

Applying this worldview would lead to decisions antithetical to the progressive Wilsonian internationalists and political Islamists on myriad issues in the Middle East, including:

 

  • Treatment of Israel versus the Arabs

 

  • The Iran deal

 

  • Iran policy more broadly, including appropriate measures against its proxies in Syria and Lebanon

 

  • Qatar’s bellicosity

 

  • Turkey’s behavior under Islamic supremacist Erdogan

 

The Trump administration ought not to concede one inch to those who self-evidently wish to sideline the personnel and stifle the policies that would make its counterjihadist agenda a reality. This specious and slanderous smear campaign reflects all the better on the appointment of Bolton as NSA.

 

Photo Gage Skidmore / Flickr

________________________

Ben Weingarten is a senior contributor at The Federalist and senior fellow at the London Center for Policy Research. He is the founder and CEO of ChangeUp Media, a media consulting and production company dedicated to advancing conservative principles. You can find his work at benweingarten.com, and follow him on Twitter @bhweingarten.

 

Copyright © 2018 The Federalist, a wholly independent division of FDRLST Media, All Rights Reserved.

 

HUGE Free Speech Victory for SIOA


You do realize Left Wing Multiculturalist thinking has hampered Counterjihad writers and/or organizations to utilize proper legal protections for their brand, right? Well, that might actually be ending soon.

Simon Shiao Tam won his appellate case that will force the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to register trademarks for organizations that may have a name that a race or group of people may find offensive. In Mr. Tam’s case it was to register the trademark “Slant” as representative of his Asian-American dance rock band. A whole slew of Conservative civil rights organizations joined Mr. Tam’s suit because the outcome affected many others denied a trademark by the USPTO under a Federal Law prohibiting trademarked names to include disparaging words as defined by the government.

One of those beneficiaries of the suit won by Tam was Pamela Geller who was a bit miffed when the USPTO rejected the SIOA and AFDI registered trademark names fighting the civil rights abuses that Islam’s Sharia Law does to Western Rights and the American Constitution in particular. Below is Geller’s victory dance post celebrating the Tam decision in a Federal Circuit Court.

JRH 12/24/15 (Hat Tip: Marlene of Out Spoken Patriots Google + Group)

Please Support NCCR

**************************

HUGE Free Speech Victory for SIOA: Federal Circuit Court Reverses 70-Year “Unconstitutional”

By Pamela Geller

December 22, 2015

PamelaGeller.comAtlas Shrugs

Longtime Atlas readers are quite familiar with our First Amendment trademark case. We have been fighting to trademark SIOA (Stop Islamization of America) but were repeatedly refused because it considered “disparaging” to Muslims. It was, in effect, an application of sharia law (‘do not criticize Islam.’)

Today we had a big victory against this fascist-style ban. The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals just reversed 70 years of holdings that said there is no First Amendment protection in trademark cases. In reversing, it held as unconstitutional the “disparaging” prohibition, citing SIOA first and frequently.

What a wonderful Christmas miracle 🙂

The government cannot refuse to register disparaging marks because it disapproves of the expressive messages conveyed by the marks. It cannot refuse to register marks because it concludes that such marks will be disparaging to others. The government regulation at issue amounts to viewpoint discrimination, and under the strict scrutiny review appropriate for government regulation of message or viewpoint, we conclude that the disparagement pro- scription of § 2(a) is unconstitutional.

The USPTO had rejected AFDI’s trademark application [bad link] based on the following analysis:

“Islamisation” means converting to Islam or “to make Islamic;” and (2), “Stop” would be understood to mean that “action must be taken to cease, or put an end to, converting or making people in America conform to Islam.” Thus, the trademark, according to the “Office Action” ruling, disparaged Muslims and linked them to terrorism. (AFLC)

The court concludes that “Stop the Islamization of America” mark, as used by its promoters, is likely to be understood as “disparaging to a substantial composite” of Muslims, whether “Islamization” refers to conversion to Islam or to “a political movement to replace man-made laws with the religious laws of Islam.”

Now that Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has held as “unconstitutional” the disparaging prohibition we are going to move forward with getting our trademark.

government enacted this law—and defends it today— because it disapproves of the messages conveyed by disparaging marks. It is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment that the government may not penalize private speech merely because it disapproves of the message it conveys. That principle governs even when the government’s message-discriminatory penalty is less than a prohibition.

Courts have been slow to appreciate the expressive power of trademarks. Words—even a single word—can be powerful. Mr. Simon Shiao Tam named his band THE SLANTS to make a statement about racial and cultural issues in this country. With his band name, Mr. Tam conveys more about our society than many volumes of undisputedly protected speech. Another rejected mark, STOP THE ISLAMISATION OF AMERICA, proclaims that Islamisation is undesirable and should be stopped. Many of the marks rejected as disparaging convey hurtful speech that harms members of oft-stigmatized communi- ties. But the First Amendment protects even hurtful speech.

The government cannot refuse to register disparaging marks because it disapproves of the expressive messages conveyed by the marks. It cannot refuse to register marks because it concludes that such marks will be disparaging to others. The government regulation at issue amounts to viewpoint discrimination, and under the strict scrutiny review appropriate for government regulation of message or viewpoint, we conclude that the disparagement pro- scription of § 2(a) is unconstitutional. Because the gov- ernment has offered no legitimate interests justifying § 2(a), we conclude that it would also be unconstitutional under the intermediate scrutiny traditionally applied to regulation of the commercial aspects of speech.

This is a big case – and it won’t only affect us but the Washington Redskins, the rock band

Here are some of the salient pssages in the finding:

Importantly, every time the PTO refuses to register a mark under § 2(a), it does so because it believes the mark conveys an expressive message—a message that is dis- paraging to certain groups. STOP THE ISLAMISATION OF AMERICA is expressive. In refusing to register the mark, the Board explained that the “mark’s admonition to ‘STOP’ Islamisation in America ‘sets a negative tone and signals that Islamization is undesirable and is something that must be brought to an end in America.’” Geller, 751 F.3d at 1361.

We limit our holding in this case to the constitu- tionality of the § 2(a) disparagement provision. Recogniz- ing, however, that other portions of § 2 may likewise constitute government regulation of expression based on message, such as the exclusions of immoral or scandalous marks, we leave to future panels the consideration of the § 2 provisions other than the disparagement provision at issue here. To be clear, we overrule In re McGinley, 660 F.2d 481 (C.C.P.A. 1981), and other precedent insofar as they could be argued to prevent a future panel from considering the constitutionality of other portions of § 2 in light of the present decision.

A disparaging mark is a mark which “dishonors by comparison with what is inferior, slights, deprecates, degrades, or affects or injures by unjust comparison.” Geller, 751 F.3d at 1358 (alterations omitted). To deter- mine if a mark is disparaging under § 2(a), a trademark examiner of the PTO considers:

Trademark Manual of Exam. Proc. (“TMEP”) § 1203.03(b)(i) (Jan. 2015 ed.) (citing Geller, 751 F.3d at 1358). If the examiner “make[s] a prima facie showing that a substantial composite, although not necessarily a majority, of the referenced group would find the proposed mark, as used on or in connection with the relevant goods or services, to be disparaging in the context of contempo- rary attitudes,” the burden shifts to the applicant for rebuttal. Id. If the applicant fails to rebut the prima facie case of disparagement, the examiner refuses to register the mark. The Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure does not require an examiner who finds a mark disparaging to consult her supervisor or take any further steps to ensure the provision is applied fairly and consist- ently across the agency. Compare TMEP § 1203.03 (no discussion of action to take if examiner finds mark dis- paraging), with TMEP § 1203.01 (requiring examiner who finds a mark scandalous or immoral to consult his super- visor). A single examiner, with no input from her super- visor, can reject a mark as disparaging by determining that it would be disparaging to a substantial composite of the referenced group.

Second, the disparagement provision at issue is view- point discriminatory on its face. The PTO rejects marks under § 2(a) when it finds the marks refer to a group in a negative way, but it permits the registration of marks that refer to a group in a positive, non-disparaging man- ner. In this case the PTO refused to register Mr. Tam’s mark because it found the mark “disparaging” and “objec- tionable” to people of Asian descent. Tam, 2013 WL 5498164, at *6. But the PTO has registered marks that refer positively to people of Asian descent. See, e.g., CELEBRASIANS, ASIAN EFFICIENCY. Similarly, the PTO has prohibited the registration of marks that it found disparaged other groups. See, e.g., Pro-Football, 2015 WL 4096277 (affirming cancellation of REDSKINS); Geller, 751 F.3d 1355 (affirming rejection of STOP THE ISLAMISATION OF AMERICA); Lebanese Arak Corp., 94 U.S.P.Q.2d 1215 (refusing to register KHORAN for wine); Heeb Media, 89 U.S.P.Q.2d 1071 (refusing to register HEEB); Squaw Valley Dev. Co., 80 U.S.P.Q.2d 1264 (refusing to register SQUAW VALLEY for one class of goods, but registering it for another). Yet the government registers marks that refer to particular ethnic groups or religions in positive or neutral ways—for example,

NAACP, THINK ISLAM, NEW MUSLIM COOL, MORMON SAVINGS, JEWISHSTAR, and PROUD 2 B CATHOLIC.

Federal Circuit Court of Appeals on First Amendment Protection on Trademarks by Pamela Geller

[Blog Editor: The above link is to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals decision entitled, “Federal Circuit en banc opinion In re Simon Shao Tam rejecting 2(a) trademark disparagement”. Below is the embed from Scribd of that decision.]

 

In re Tam Fed Circuit en Banc Opinion by Jennifer Elgin

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/293858228/content?start_page=1&view_mode=scroll&access_key=key-O7jMDbriKAQhSbs24JVn&show_recommendations=true

UPDATE: Here’s our law firm’s take:

Federal Circuit Court of Appeals Finds First Amendment Applies to Trademarks and Rules that “Disparaging” Cannot Be Used to Deny Expressive Trademarks Like “Stop Islamisation of America”

As a kind of Christmas present to liberty and the U.S. Constitution, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, sitting en banc (the entire court), today reversed more than 30-years of jurisprudence by holding that trademark registration under the Lanham Act deserves First Amendment protection. The import of this holding is that trademarks may no longer be rejected by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) just because the USPTO believes the mark to be disparaging.

In the case In re Tam, the federal court, which specializes in patent and trademark cases, found that the USPTO’s rejection of the musical group name “The Slants” because it disparaged Asians was unconstitutional because there was no “compelling state interest” to censure the viewpoint of the trademark owner. As a result, Simon Tam will now be able to register his band name as a federal trademark, thus allowing him to protect the name and products and services sold using that name against encroachers and counterfeiters.

What made this decision possible was the recent litigation waged by the American Freedom Law Center (“AFLC”) on behalf of Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer to register their trademark, “Stop the Islamisation of America” (“SIOA”). Like the Slants trademark, the USPTO rejected the SIOA trademark on the ground that it disparaged Muslims and even Islamists by suggesting they should be “stopped.” AFLC argued the case before a three-judge panel of the Federal Circuit Court, which upheld the USPTO ruling of disparagement.

However, on the heels of the SIOA decision, by the time the Slants case found its way to the important Federal Circuit Court, the appellate judges were apparently ready to reverse their prior rulings which rejected any First Amendment arguments. Indeed, the court’s opinion starts off referencing the USPTO’s rejection of the SIOA trademark as a rejection aimed improperly at censuring important expressive speech. The court went on to reference SIOA, and the underlying case of In re Geller, no less than seven times.

 

David Yerushalmi, AFLC co-founder and Senior Counsel, noted:

 

“This demonstrates an important adage about good lawfare and good lawyering.  Even when you lose initially you may still ultimately prevail because good, hard-fought lawfare has a way of exposing bad law and bad judgments.  This is one of those rare instances where a federal court has emphatically and quite properly reversed itself.  You can be certain that our clients will now proudly seek federal trademark registration.”

 

Robert Muise, AFLC co-founder and Senior Counsel, added:

 

“At the end of the day, this was a complete victory for the First Amendment and an absolute defeat for political correctness.  Our SIOA trademark case paved the way for this important decision, reaffirming that hard work, determination, and some good lawyering can create a favorable sea change in the law.”

 

___________________________

Pamela Geller Biography

 

Pamela Geller is the founder, editor and publisher of Atlas Shrugs.com and President of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI) and Stop Islamization of America (SIOA). She is the author of The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America, with Robert Spencer (foreword by Ambassador John Bolton) (Simon & Schuster) and Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance (WND Books). She is also a regular columnist for World Net Dailythe American ThinkerBreitbart.com and other publications.

 

Geller’s activism on behalf of human rights has won international notice. She is a foremost defender of the freedom of speech against attempts to force the West to accept Sharia blasphemy laws, and against Sharia self-censorship by Western media outlets. Her First Amendment lawsuits filed nationwide have rolled back attempts to limit Americans’ free speech rights and limit speech to only one political perspective, and exposed attempts to make an end-run around the First Amendment by illegitimately restricting access to public fora. Her free speech event in Garland, Texas led to the capture or killing of several murderous jihadists, smoking out terror cells, leading to an increase in the threat level to BRAVO and to the consequent arrests of jihadists in several states.

 

Geller has also led awareness campaigns in READ THE REST

 

Contribute to the fight!

Exposing Islam Not Appreciated by MSM


Islam in action toon

John R. Houk
© April 11, 2015
A Houston TX area High School teacher compiled an eight page handout for class entitled: “Economics/Government: Islam/Radical Islam (Did You Know)” Evidently the Foster High School teacher teaches in a School District in which a number of Multiculturalist Liberals and Muslims reside. Local news stations in the area ran pieces on the handout and the news was quite vindictive that a teacher would dare to go off the School District curriculum to teach the truth about the dark side of Islam. The Foster High School Principal even is quoted by the local news stations that the proper disciplinarian punishment will be executed against this rebel teacher.
One thing that is glaringly noticeable is the School District does not release the school teacher’s name. The news programs that caught this story also did not release the teacher’s name. BUT after much Google searching I discovered the area newspaper, the Houston Chronicle, has released the teacher’s name (One has to be a subscriber to read article now but here’s the cache version).
This is not surprising. Even the School District did not release the name, all that any local news reporter had to do was interview the students or parents at Foster High School to discover this tidbit of information.
In my book this teacher is a hero for telling the truth. There are good reasons to bury the teacher’s name which has more to do than just privacy concerns. The proliferation of Islamic purity among Muslims have led to the persecution of truth-tellers about the dark side of Islam in Western nations:
Undoubtedly Incomplete List
TheWire.com List Compiled 3/1/13
Geert Wilders: Founder of the Dutch “Party for Freedom”; has been quoted as saying “I don’t hate Muslims, I hate Islam.”
Ayaan Hirsi Ali: Somali-born Dutch activist and politician; has written that “We are at war with Islam,” not just “radical Islam” and it must be defeated; married to British historian Niall Ferguson (though that’s probably not related)
Morris Sadek: Egyptian-American Coptic Christian; he spread the anti-Islam video “Innocence of Muslims” that sparked violent protests in several Muslim countries.
Carsten Juste & Flemming Rose: Editor-in-chief and cultural editors at Jyllands-Posten when the paper chose to publish cartoons mocking Mohammed.
Kurt Westergaard: Cartoonist who contributed to the Jyllands-Posten controversy; his turban-as-bomb drawing became the most famous of the cartoons.
Lars Vilks: Dutch cartoonist who published his own Mohammed drawings more than a year after the Jyllands-Posten incident.
Molly Norris: American cartoonist who proposed “Everybody Draw Mohammed Day” as a protest against both censorship and the idea that images of Mohtammed (sic) should be forbidden
.
Stephane Charbonnier: Editor of Charlie Hedbo (sic), a French satirical magazine that has published several mocking images of Mohammed on its cover (and got its office firebombed as a result.)
Terry Jones: Florida preacher who has burned Korans in protest of Islam.
Salman Rushdie: The Satanic Verses, etc.
Editor’s Compiled List
Theo Van Gogh: 11/2/04 Theo van Gogh -1957 to 2004. … Dutch filmmaker and journalist Theo van Gogh was slashed in the neck and shot to death in a terrorist attack by a militant Islamist in Amsterdam this morning. … Van Gogh had received death threats after making a film about spousal abuse in Islam and was supposed to be under police protection. … Theo Van Gogh also wrote a book on Islam called “Allah Weet Het Beter”,”Allah Knows Best,” detailing the Islamisation of Europe. The book is being translated into english. Van Gogh’s articles on militant Islam and Muslims warned of the mortal danger of tolerating Islamo facism (sic) in the West under a misguided policy of political correctness. (MilitantIslamMonitor.org)
Wafa Sultan: Shockingly, on U.S. soil, a citizen of this country has had to go into hiding due to threats from an organized group – radical Islamists:
Dr. Wafa Sultan has been forced to go into hiding with her family following a fatwa (religious edict) from an Islamic scholar, according to Omedia. Sultan faces the fatwa following a recent debate on Al-Jazeera in which she challenged Egyptian Islamist Talat Rheim over Dutch cartoons of Mohammed, who Muslims revere as a prophet. Sultan argued that Denmark had the right to print the cartoons. (BigPicWeblog.com – 2008)
Nonie Darwish: For thirty years, I grew up hearing similar threats from Islamic sheikhs across the Middle East. They told us, “You insult the prophet Mohammed, you die” — as the Islamic law of Sharia requires. There are still Sharia books bought and sold in America; they clearly say: “The penalty for insulting the prophet is death, even if one repents.” … (Gatestone Institute – 2012) …
The breaking news this week is that apostate author and speaker Nonie Darwish was scheduled to speak at Princeton and Columbia Universities this week (on the threat of radical Islam).

Apparently, due to pressure from Muslim groups, the Princeton group, Tigers for Israel, withdrew their invitation at the last minute claiming that they were not aware of Darwish’s views on Islam.

 

As for Columbia, keep in mind, this is the same university that hosted Mahmoud Ahmadinejad not so long ago. I don’t get it. Ahmadinejad can speak at Columbia, but not Darwish, a woman who lives under death threats? (FouseSquak – 2009)
Robert Spencer: Islam expert Robert Spencer gets a death threat; and another death threat; and another death threat; and yet anoth…well, you get the idea. (MikeDyess.info – 2012)
Walid Shoebat: … Walid, like so many others, joined the PLO and became indoctrinated with their goal of murdering Jews and destroying Israel.  He spent time in a Jerusalem jail.
Walid gave his heart to Christ, and renounced Allah, and Islam. This facilitated death threats against him and his family. In spite of personal risk, he placed himself in the hands of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and embraced his new faith and wanted to share the truth God had shown him with others. (Christians For Israel)
Pamela Geller: Atlas readers are well aware of the steady stream of threats, hate mail, and death fatwas I receive. It comes with the job; it’s an occupatonal (sic) hazard. Truthtellers, beware. Of course the muslim groups and their jackbooted tools in the media ignore the calls for my demise, and when forced to address them, it’s always the same thing: the extremists can’t help themselves, hell, I am asking it for by exposing Islamic jihad. (PamelaGeller.com [cache link because site hacked or blocked by my Internet Provider, neither would surprise me] – 2011)
Brigitte Gabriel: Brigitte Gabriel has fearlessly faced down critics, death threats, and political correctness, and is one of the most sought-after terrorism experts in the world. They Must Be Stopped is her clarion call to action. Gabriel thoroughly addresses the historical and religious basis of terrorism, its (sic) frightening encroachment into societies around the world, and its abuses of democracy in the name of religion. (ACT! for America)
Published by Brigitte Gabriel
Published on Sep 29, 2014
Fjordman: Fjordman has paid the price for having the courage to stand up for what is right and true. It is incredible, that in today’s Europe, one can hardly dare to stand up ones culture and country without undergoing intense scrutiny, harassment, and sometimes even persecution from the authorities. Not to mention risking death at the hands of the Muslims hordes who those same authorities have allowed to over run (sic) the borders and flood the continent in their millions. (Dc Gazette – 2/1/15)
… Fjordman has been a pseudonym that was exposed to the public because of Breivik’s massacre. Why was a pseudonym necessary?
 The government is the one hand. The other hand is that Islamic hatred causes the constant threat of violence and death threats by Muslims living in Europe as immigrants or as 2nd or 3rd generation Muslims adopting a European nation BUT demanding to live the culture of intolerant Islam.
This means even under a pseudonym Fjordman had to have bodyguards to protect his life from Muslim death threats. (NCCR – 6/14/12)
Raise Hands Death Threats- Left to right, Robert Muise, Pamela Geller, Nonie Darwish, Robert Spencer, James Lafferty, Simon Deng, Darwin Jiles - sm
There are more but moving on.
This long yet incomplete list of people threatened with death brings me back to the disciplined Foster High School teacher from the Houston area.
It is not surprising the eight page handout story was broke to the public by a Muslim High School student who whined to their parents about the mean things reported exposing the Islam found in the Quran, Hadith and Sira. The parents duly complained to the local chapter of Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in Houston:
It [i.e. CAIR-Houston] is a sub-chapter of CAIR-Texas, which was founded by Ghassan Elashi. He was later convicted for illegal transactions to Syria and Libya. He and two bothers (sic) were also convicted of financing Hamas.
Elashi’s company, InfoCom Corp, gave about $270,000 to senior Hamas official Mousa Abu Marzouk through his wife up until 2001 when the Holy Land Foundation was shut down. Marzouk’s wife also made a $250,000 investment in Elashi’s company.
The president of CAIR-Houston is Tarek Hussein.[4] In 2013, the Egyptian Al-Watan newspaper named him as a member of the Muslim Brotherhood lobby in the U.S.[5] (CAIR – Houston; By RYAN MAURO; Clarion Project; 2/20/14)
In case you’ve had your head in the sand since September 11, 2001; CAIR is a Radical Muslim offshoot of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood (More MB Info). The MB is quite transnational and has quite stealthily and nefariously sponsored numerous Muslim-American organizations (See Also HERE) that quite deceptively tell the public they represent a moderate version of Islam that represents an Islam is Peace mentality (And See HERE).
ALL of the Mainstream Media (MSM) reporting on the eight page handout entitled “Economics/Government: Islam/Radical Islam (Did You Know)” made Muslims a victim rather than hailing the teacher as a hero willing to go out on a limb to expose Islam. They made a point to report that the handout was not sourced BUT that he evidently got his info from the Internet from “anti-Islam websites”. So if you expose Islam’s dark side you are an anti-Islam Muslim hating racist Islamophobe. I consider myself a person who exposes Islam and yet I hold ZERO animus toward Muslims that are seriously self-deluded that Islamic holy writings (e.g. Quran, Hadith and Sira) assert any kind of peaceful nature for Islam.
My guess is Herby Woolverton might be added to any list of people threatened with death from Muslims for telling the truth but in the Muslim mind – insulted Islam, Allah and Mo.
Here are the attitude of news reporting by some television sources:
Published by CAIRtv
Published on Apr 8, 2015
Published by USA TODAY
Published on Apr 8, 2015
This video was found on mrctv.org entitled “Houston Teacher Under Fire for Student Handout on Radical Islam”.
Published by Tammy Lerner
Published on Apr 8, 2015
A teacher at Foster High School in Richmond, Texas, is accused of handing out an unapproved, eight-page handout on “radical Islam” to students. The decision has resulted in backlash from the Council on American-Islamic Relations, parents and the school district. The handout, titled, ”Islam/Radical Islam (Did You Know),” claims that “38 percent of Muslims believe people that leave the faith should be executed” and states that Islam doesn’t “tolerate” homosexuality, divorce and other behavior.

Terms like “Sharia law” and “Jihad” are defined in the handout, which claims there are “an estimated 190-300 million ‘radical Islam’ followers.” The teacher reportedly did not provide sourcing.

 

The eight-page handout also includes a section on “what to do” if taken hostage by radical Islamist.

 

One of the students in the class was reportedly Muslim and told her parents, who then contacted CAIR. The group then complained directly to officials at Foster High School.

 

In a statement to KHOU-TV, a spokesman for the Lamar Consolidated Independent School District said the district is “disappointed to learn one teacher made independent changes to a lesson plan, resulting in information being given that didn’t follow subject matter, or state and local curriculum plans.”

 

“Arbitrary curriculum decisions, which are clearly outside of the guidelines, won’t be tolerated,” the spokesman added.

 

The teacher will face “appropriate disciplinary measures,” but it wasn’t clear what that would be.

 

JRH 4/11/15

Please Support NCCR

***************************
Blog Editor: Below is the Eight Page Handout entitled “Economics/Government: Islam/Radical Islam (Did You Know)”. Here the eight pages are posted jpg photos as found on Shoebat.com April 8, 2015.

Economics-Govt.- Islam-Radical (Did You Know) pg 1

(Did You Know) pg 2
(Did You Know) pg 3
(Did You Know) pg 4 - Goal Radical Islam

(Did You Know) pg 5 Terror-Extremism

(Did You Know) pg 6

(Did You Know) pg 7 Sharia Law
(Did You Know) pg 8 Examples of Sharia Law

Expose Islam and Racists by Shining Bright Sunlight


Mo's Mouth 2 your ears

Dajjal made a passionate comment to the post “Europe: Nordic Supremacism vs. Counterjihadism”. Dajjal comments most frequently on my NCCR blog. The spam protection on NCCR is oft times hyper-sensitive which is something I do appreciate. Unfortunately the WordPress spam software for NCCR marks some of Dajjal’s comments with an approval stamp. It doesn’t do that to all of Dajjal’s comments. Well, Dajjal’s comment to “Europe: Nordic Supremacism vs. Counterjihadism” was one of those comments so marked.

 

If I had to guess the reason I suspect it is because Dajjal will back his thoughts with authoritative links. When those links are numerous evidently the software raises a red flag. Also I suspect the software raises a red flag in the face of profanity. When Dajjal becomes impassioned on a point he does have a tendency toward profanity.

 

Dajjal made his comment on March 2, 2015. I discovered it needed approval on March 9. Sorry about that Dajjal.

 

Now my post on Nordic Supremacism vs. Counterjihadism was in regard to an open letter by the Nordic Supremacist Norwegian butcher Anders Breivik that murdered 76 people mostly at a Norwegian political party youth camp located on Utoya Island about 25 miles from Oslo. Breivik’s demented thinking was to kill white Norwegians and blame Muslims with the hope of causing like-minded racists to rise up to topple European governments and replace them with a Nordic Supremacist government that deports Muslims back to Muslim dominated lands.

 

My first paragraph after offering a quote from Breivik sums up the post “Europe: Nordic Supremacism vs. Counterjihadism”:

 

The above translated to English quote defines the real difference between Europe’s Neo-Nazi/Fascist movements and the nationalistic Right Wing Counterjihadist movements. The first is nationalistic racism politically and the second is nationalistic cultural preservation that is anti-Islamic (but not maliciously violent racist) and not antisemitic.

 

To get a more concrete idea what set off Dajjal perhaps read the entire post, but in lieu of that I think the summation paragraph could be enough. I am going edit Dajjal’s more colorful language with asterisks. Clearly Dajjal aligns himself with the Counterjihadists.

 

JRH 3/9/15

Please Support NCCR

***************************

Expose Islam and Racists by Shining Bright Sunlight

[Title by Editor]

 

Dajjal

Original date: March 2, 2015 at 5:04 PM

 

There is one proper way to deal with s**t: expose it to the bright sunlight, let the birds pick out the worms and till it under so that it will nourish crops without being seen or smelled again.

 

I view supremacism as s**t. Nordic, N*gg*r, Arab, Asian; any and every kind & combination. Flush it or plow it under, don’t eat it.

 

I view authoritarian government: top down, might makes right fascism as another form of solid excrement. I object equally to national & international Socialism, Communism, cronyism and corruption whether imposed by individuals, cliques, minorities or majorities.

 

I take a firm stand on the solid foundation of the Declaration of Independence & Constitution. That government is best which governs least.

 

I do not give a damn about skin pigment, hair or facial features. It’s what’s on the inside that counts.

 

It’s the belief that they [Muslims] have a divine mission to conquer me ‘cuz I do not kiss their idol’s ass that I strenuously object to. That includes imperialism, conquest, occupation, exploitation, enslavement, murder, rape, plunder & extortion.

 

The proponents of that evil philosophy are called Muslims. Their ideology is called Islam. Their actions are atrocious and entirely unacceptable. Their goals, objectives and aspirations are intolerable regardless of the means used to realize them.

 

Supremacism & imperialism cannot be accepted; neither from Breivik nor Qaradawi. I do not accept it from the Democrat Party, Republican Establishment, SPLC, United Nations, Ecclesiastic authorities, academics or editors. They can all go to Hell.

 

My stand is on the rights of free men and their violation by authoritarian regimes including Islam. At present, Islam is the worst of them, and I concentrate on exposing it, turning the clods and separating the turds so that they can be clearly seen, smelled and identified.

 

Whomever labels me ‘racist’, ‘extremist’, ‘fascist’ or ‘Nazi’ thereby exposes himself as a slanderous liar, unable to contest verifiable facts and logical opinions clearly stated.

 

Let those in need of facts choose one of three books to read, checking their Qur’an & hadith citations with these search engines:

 

http://www.quranbrowser.com/

 

http://www.sunnah.com/

 

http://www.bharatvani.org/books/jihad/

 

http://wolfpangloss.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/malik-quranic-concept-of-war.pdf

 

http://api.ning.com/files/qnlif5STwXWJllDpiD8eR4ZJaME0iAeChqROisCh9REBFkr*W8yLdvIgQU-DjaJtNHTh1BG5Tmz20bVZDZmrci6TNPb5lEYS/MashariAlAshwaqilaMasarialUshaaqRevisedEdition.pdf

 

_____________________________

Edited by John R. Houk

Any text enclosed by brackets are by the Editor

 

© Dajjal

Europe: Nordic Supremacism vs. Counterjihadism


Making Eurabia

John R. Houk

© March 2, 2015

 

The reason I chose another <<sales narrative>> in the compendium was among other things to prevent them from immediately ending the ideological discussion with their <<6-million-omg-nazi-enough-said>>- bashing stick. I know a lot of people will be disappointed when reading this, but my love for Israel is limited to its future function as a deportation-port for disloyal jews. I am aware of the sad fact that all available statistics confirm that only aprox. Three percent of eurojews oppose multiculti (but from an anti-islamist perspective), and that only approx. 0.2 percent support nordic indigenous rights. I wish it wasn’t so. The reason why so called <<counterjihadists>>, at least the great majority, seemingly <<praise>> Israel, is to avoid the above described suppression-tactic. However, there is in fact a strong anti-nordicist/ethnocentrist wing within the counter-jihad movement, represented by Fjordman and his Jewish network, the EDL-leader, the SIOE-leaders, Wilders, Farage etc., but their organisations are so heavily infiltrated by nordicists and ethnocentrists that it’s hard to say which wing are actually controlling them. (Anders Breivik – Norwegian-to-English translation)

 

The above translated to English quote defines the real difference between Europe’s Neo-Nazi/Fascist movements and the nationalistic Right Wing Counterjihadist movements. The first is nationalistic racism politically and the second is nationalistic cultural preservation that is anti-Islamic (but not maliciously violent racist) and not antisemitic.

 

The Neo-Nazis, which in 21st century, are more likely to describe themselves as advocates of a pure Nordic Supremacist race rather than German Aryan Supremacists of Hitler’s Nazis.

 

European Counterjihadists wish to prevent the immigration of counter-culture Muslims, demand assimilation acceptance standards of resident immigrants, naturalized immigrants and natural born Muslims; or the deportation of Muslims who refuse to respect Western (not necessarily Christian) laws and cultural mores.

 

The European Multiculturalist Left (and their North American Leftist cousins) group Nordic Supremacists and Counterjihadists and call them extremist Right Wing nut jobs. Counterjihadists deplore being grouped with Nordic Supremacists. AND Nordic Supremacist purists deplore Counterjihadists and the Nordicists that swing toward tolerance of Counterjihadists.

 

I sense it is a good guess that Nordic Supremacists contribute to the rising antisemitism in Europe by grouping Left Wing Jews as traitorous Eurojews. I suspect there is no love for Observant Jews either, but I could not tell from the Nordicist Norwegian essayist explaining his belief system. Rather than follow the Hitler Final Solution of annihilation he supports deporting Left Wing Jews to Israel.

 

Contrary to the Nordic Supremacists, the Counterjihadists are quite favorable toward European Jews because Leftist Jews have very much so assimilated to Western Culture and Observant Jews have zero intention of affecting Western Culture or the Rule of Law in any way negatively on the Western nation they have are citizens (probably dwelling therein for many centuries for that matter).

 

Ergo Nordic Supremacists are racists and Counterjihadists are not racists but are promoters of their nationality’s indigenous culture and Rule of Law.

 

I am cross posting the Google English translation of Bjorn Brataas’ essay to get a good snapshot of the differences between Nordic Supremacists and Counterjihadists. I just want to be clear I am in no way supportive of Nordic Supremacism. As far as I am concerned Nordicists are as counter-culture as Islamic Supremacists. BUT it is my belief Americans need to understand what is currently convulsing Europe. Islamic radicalism is bringing more and more voting citizens in Europe toward an affinity of Nordic Supremacism and Counterjihadism. The problem is the standard cross-European voter does not really distinguish between the two movements but are just darn weary of the violent turmoil erupting in their neighborhoods from violent Muslims.

 

European Leftists really control the dispensing of the Rule of Law in Europe primarily through the auspices of the European Union (EU). And as such, Leftists are grouping both movements as Right Wing extremists to keep the voters voting for them. It is my suspicion that Muslim violence will increase in such a way that European voters will eventually vote more and more for the most eloquent nationalist that wishes to prevent Muslim violence. Let the world pray that eloquent anti-Muslim violence representative is a Counterjihadist rather than a Neo-Nazi Nordicist. Counterjihadists will be a positive for the preservation of the heritage of Greco-Roman-Judeo-Christian cultural influences. Nordicists will be as culturally disruptive as Islamic Supremacists.

 

JRH 3/2/15

Please Support NCCR

*******************************

Fjordman and his Jewish network …” Lest this letter from Breivik?

Anders Breivik Jewed the Jews

 

By Bjorn Brataas

February 22, 2015 6:27 pm

VITNET

[English by Google Translate]

[Also read Gates of Vienna version from Breivik and commentary which is excellent]

 

This letter, i.e. the availability of it – and in English – is now a year and a half old. I did not know about it until I came across it by chance.

 

It is not entirely uninteresting reading. The quote I pasted in the headline is a gold grain itself, though not exactly representative of the rest of the content of the letter.

 

I present text here when one of Witness main functions is to disseminate information that is not readily available – while we trust that the reader has their own judgment and it is up to him whether he “likes” or “dislikes,” or agrees or disagree substance posted. It is this media is all about.

 

[Bjorn Brataas]

—————

Anders Breivik - screen capture from Anders Breivik to Gates of Vienna & International Press

 

Anders Behring Breivik letter 13-09-29 to International Press

 

Explanations, clarifications and the peace proposal – NRK, TV2, Aftenposten, VG and Dagbladet (<<the big five>>), are refusing to consider.

 

The ideology known as <<Nordicism [Metapedia and Wikipedia]>> has two wings; Nordic superiority (NS) and Nordic survival (indigenous rights activism). Being a nordicist of the latter category; my primary purpose is to contribute to secure the survival and prosperity of the Nordic ethnic family (the Nordic, race). National socialists and hitlerists refer to the west-nordic people as the <<Aryan race>>. There are three European races; Nordic (physical characteristics: blonde/blue eyed/longer forehead/etc.), alpine (half nordic/half Mediterranean – f. example the French) and Mediterranean – f. example most people in Portugal, Spain, Italy, Greece etc.). <<Meds>> are approx. 20 percent Nordic and 80 percent Asiatic. The essence of nordicism isn’t to exclude or discriminate but to strive for the pure Nordic ideal. Wiki Madison Grant [White Supremacist praise of Madison] for more info. Whenever a northern-European nationalist is talking about the genocide, deconstruction or ethnic cleansing of his people, he is talking about the following (illustration box):

 

Overview: The estimated time until extinction for the Nordic ethnic family if our survival is not secured: ethnic composition-13 Nordic countries in percent. Nordic vs. non-nordic. Overview of the 13 largest Nordic countries where Nordics have status as an indigenous people and until recently made out the majority: Germany, England, the Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark, Austria, Norway, Scotland, Ireland, Wales, Finland, Iceland and Luxembourg.

 

 

Year

 

Nordic (1)

 

Nordic (2)

 

Tot. North.

 

Tot. Non-North.

1900

 

71

 

19

 

90

 

10

1939

 

69

 

16

 

85

 

15

1960

 

62

 

13

 

75

 

25

1990

 

47

 

8

 

55

 

45

2013

 

35

 

5

 

40

 

60

2050

 

14

 

1

 

15

 

85

2100

 

2,9

 

>0.1

 

3

 

97

Nordic (1) = purity: 60-95%
Nordic (2) = purity: <95%+

 

The estimated time until extinction for the Nordic race occurs sometime between 2050 [Blog Editor: Hence the title of Breivic’s PDF document “2083 – A European Declaration of Independence”] and 2100. Presupposes today’s non-nordic immigration of 1% per year, today’s fertility rate, and that Nordics are not granted autonomous indigenous states. The biggest threat is neither African nor Asian immigration, but in fact inter-EEC immigration from members from the Mediterranean ethnic family and from the alpine.

 

When dealing with media-psychopaths

 

And this is where it gets problematic. The <<big five>> and liberal media in general have over the last 68 years developed multiple suppression-tactics for <<handling>> nordicists and other nationalists. Propaganda, or the use of false or exaggerated information for the support of a view or case, has been used for thousands of years to suppress political opposition, and unfortunately it’s quite effective.

 

All research, illustrated by a report published in <<Scientific American Mind>>, Jan/Feb. 2013, shows that the professions; “Media (TV/Radio)” and “Journalists” top the list over the most psychopathic professions, as they are among the most notorious manipulators, liars and deceivers. When a journalist in addition is a leftist, who is tasked with making an <<objective>> characteristic of a <<right wing extremist>>, you know that the result will be everything but credible.

 

The editors of Norway’s <<big five>> are even more leftist than their colleagues in other countries, with exceptions being Sweden and Germany. Most, if not all, of the influential editors are disciples of the 68-revolutions ideals. For example the chief editor in Aftenposten; Haugsgjerd, is a former member of AKP (Workers Communist Party), which used to make <<kill-lists>> of right wing politicians, and several of Dagbladet’s editors are self-proclaimed communists. Unfortunately, Norwegian and northern-European editors are such people. The most influential editors in Norway, for example Stanghelle, Giever, Strand, several in NRK etc., are so influential that they, a small group of no more than 20 editors, literally define reality, in Norway. The editors in NRK, Aftenposten and VG are referred to as <<the Oslo mafia>> by smaller media companies, and are known for their consensus-decisions and left wing orientation. The northern-European media’s zero-tolerance stance towards nationalists the last 68 years has been our greatest problem.

 

Although the British cultural elite admitted in 2008/09 that Nordic brats are in fact indigenous to the UK, their Norwegian colleagues are still refusing to acknowledge the fact that nordic-Norwegians are indigenous to Norway. These 20 editors are simply refusing to discuss the issue, and if you try to stress the issue you will be labeled as a Nazi and held accountable for the Jewish holocaust etc., an effective suppression-tactic.

 

22/7 was an attempt to force these 20 editors, and their colleagues in the other 12 Nordic countries into dialogue with their country’s nordicist-movements (you call them Nazi-movements). The compendium was an experimental approach. I wanted to try a different approach by making it impossible for the MSM in all 13 Nordic countries to end the discussion, using the Nazi-tactic. I was obviously naive enough to think that this approach would lead to a scenario where there could be a serious discussion about the MSMs 68-year witch-hunt and about securing Nordic survival.

 

If I could say anything to the editors in NRK, TV2, Aftenposten, VG, Dagbladet, and their northern-European colleagues, it would be; can we please just skip all the false propaganda and B.S. and focus on solving these issues through dialogue. You can start by announcing a formal apology and declare that the Nordics are indeed indigenous to all 13 Nordic countries. Afterwards, you can accept the invitation to dialogue with the nordicist-movements. Let’s start discussing <<Project Yggdrasil>>. My book; <<The Nordic Federation>> describes this peace-plan through 400 pages, but, it has been blocked by Norwegian prison authorities since 11.07.13. It’s also important to note that <<Project Yggdrasil [Blog Editor: This is the name of a blog devoted to Breivik thoughts. It has been taken down by Blogger probably due to the info found in this pro-Breivik Blog]>> [Blog Editor: What’s the reference to “Yggdrasil”?  Yggdrasil is the Norse mythological Tree of Life] was developed after 22/7 [Blog Editor: 22/7 refers to the date July 7, 2011 in which Breivik is responsible for the slaughter of 77 people – mostly youthful teens] and has nothing to do with the compendium [i.e. his 1500 page manuscript linked above]. Securing the survival of our Nordic race is an issue of utmost urgency. Consider this a formal invitation to reconciliation-talks, talks which should have taken place in 1945. I would have been able to contact the nordicist-leaders in all 13 countries, if it weren’t for the letter ban. Whatever you choose, know that you, the editors, have the influence to decide whether this conflict will end. Be smart, choose dialogue instead of persecution, for the first time in 68 years.

 

The reason I chose another <<sales narrative>> in the compendium was among other things to prevent them from immediately ending the ideological discussion with their <<6-million-omg-nazi-enough-said>>- bashing stick. I know a lot of people will be disappointed when reading this, but my love for Israel is limited to its future function as a deportation-port for disloyal Jews. I am aware of the sad fact that all available statistics confirm that only approx. three percent of eurojews oppose multiculti (but from an anti-Islamist perspective), and that only approx. 0.2 percent support nordic indigenous rights. I wish it wasn’t so. The reason why so called <<counterjihadists>>, at least the great majority, seemingly <<praise>> Israel, is to avoid the above described suppression-tactic. However, there is in fact a strong anti-nordicist/ethnocentrist wing within the counter-jihad movement, represented by Fjordman and his Jewish network, the EDL-leader, the SIOE-leaders, Wilders, Farage etc., but their organisations are so heavily infiltrated by nordicists and ethnocentrists that it’s hard to say which wing are actually controlling them.

 

When dealing with media psychopaths, a good way to counter their tactics is to use double-psychology, or at least so I thought. The compendium was, among other things, of a calculated and quite cynical <<gateway-design>> (the 2+?+?=6 -approach), created to strengthen the ethnocentrist wing in the contra-jihad movement, by pinning the whole thing on the anti-ethnocentrist wing (many of the leaders are pro-multiculti social democrats or liberalists), while at the same time protecting and strengthening the ethnocentrist-factions. The idea was to manipulate the MSM and others so that they would launch a witch-hunt and send their <<media-rape-squads>> against our opponents. It worked quite well.

 

I was never kicked out of Stormfront [Blog Editor: A racist White Supremacist website founded by Don Black – SPLC profile (I usually critical of SPLC because they lump legitimate Conservatives with actual White Supremacist) and ADL profile]. Instead, I attacked them in the compendium in order to protect them, as I knew the authorities would use the fact that I frequented the site, against them, and that an army of leftist journalists otherwise would strike hard. I tried to hint about this double-psychology, by quoting <<war is deceit>> x number of times, but I couldn’t make it more obvious, as it had to be credible to the aggressive army of 2000 media psychopaths (the MSM-rape-squad). The <<hug-your-opponents, kick-the-ones-you-love>>-tactic is one of the oldest in the book. The infiltration of the Freemasons, followed by the publication of the Freemason-pic, was in fact a deliberate and calculated attack against them.

 

Obviously, none of the above would have worked if it wasn’t credible. When I tried to publish three essays describing all of this, on 20.08.12, I was notified about the <<gag-directive>> which came into effect 08.08.12. Apparently, many people didn’t comprehend my deliberate usage of double-psychology, and this is my own fault. In any case, the Fjordman-network figured it out quite early, which explain why they have attacked me so viciously. It wasn’t my intention to cause the outing of Fjordman, with subsequently him being brutally media-raped by 200 MSM-psychopaths. But on the other hand, ethnocentrism gained momentum at the same time as I managed to prevent a significant crackdown against the European and US nordicist movement.

 

There has been an active power-struggle between the two factions within the contra-jihadist movement for years, and the reason why it’s so critically important to dominate and influence this movement is because it acts as a <<supplier of terms>> to moderate European nationalist parties with a base consisting of tens of millions of Europeans. The battle within the <<counter-jihad>>-movement is in many ways a battle for the future content of northern-European nationalism. This makes it even more ironic that many nordicists and ethnocentric nationalists, Stormfront included, still don’t know that I systematically used double-psychology in order to protect them, and in an attempt to prevent the multiculti MSM from using their <<I-win-button>>.

 

Did I serve the nordicist cause more effectively by using this tactic, rather than using rhetoric which would immediately allow them to label me as a Nazi? I believe so, but other than me should be the final judge of that.

 

When dealing with an angry mob of influential journalists and editors representing the worlds most advanced propaganda machinery, you’re fundamentally screwed no matter how you choose to maneuver. Propagandists will not waste a single second on people they do not view as threats. I could have easily avoided excessive pathologisation by keeping the message short and by clinging to the already established ideological cliff of national socialism (it’s important to remember that this was at a time when all right wing radicals were labeled as Nazis), but if they had been allowed to label me as a Nazi, the ideological considerations and discussions would be over, and my court-speeches and propaganda performance would never be broadcasted worldwide, during the trial. Furthermore, people would not be forced to seek answers in the compendium along the way. Regardless of their efforts, I felt I managed to make the best out of an almost impossible situation, despite of the fact that I made a few mistakes during the process.

 

As for my efforts to try to force the editors and ruling politicians in each of the 13 Nordic countries into dialogue with the nordicist-movements, I failed miserably, not surprisingly. It is after all a theoretical impossibility that a single soldier could manage to succeed where potent movements have failed for 68 years. But everyone should know that 22/7 happened in order to try to force a dialogue between the chief editors in the <<big five>> in all 13 Nordic countries, and the so called <<fascist movements>> in the corresponding countries.

 

I remember there was at least one journalist during the trial touching the core of this issue, as he stated; <<The only thing that could prevent the extinction of Nordics are racial hygiene-programmes on a full scale, something which is impossible in today’s multiethnic and multicultural societies. Therefore, it is pointless to enter into dialogue with “these people”. We simply can’t co-exist with them>>. First of all, we are of course fully aware of the fact that you feel you have no other choice than to suppress us, due to this reason. And you have been brutal the past 68 years. This harsh suppression and persecution has driven thousands of nationalists in northern-Europe to suicide, something which explains why these editors don’t like to admit to being responsible for these acts. However, if only more than one out of 5000 Nordic journalists could be this honest, 22/7 and approx. 500 annual nationalist and <<racist>> attacks could be avoided in the future.

 

Of course we understand that full scale racial hygiene-programmes are difficult in today’s societies. But if they had just stopped their bigotry for one second and listened to what we have to say, they would have learned that we can coexist. First of all, one of the reasons the first- and second-generation nordicist leaders have failed with entering into dialogue, is because of their <<all-or-nothing>>-strategy. From a “third-generation” point of view, considering that we lost the European civil war (WW2), the <<all-or-nothing>>-approach has been a complete failure, and continuing this path is counter-productive, irresponsible and may lead to extinction of the nordic race. Changing this to an <<all-or-something>>-approach is the only way to go. One bird in the hand is better than ten on the roof. <<Project Yggdrasil>> is a very good solution and a realistic compromise.

 

I believe I will be able to sell in PY to the vast majority of nordicist-leaders in all 13 Nordic countries, as soon as you lift the letter ban. The message I would send to the chief editors in NRK, TV2, Aftenposten, VG and Dagbladet, is; I ask that you support <<Project Yggdrasil>> in Norway, contributing to a situation where we are allowed to secure nordic-Norwegian survival in <<Norway-Yggdrasil>>, a Norwegian-nordic indigenous state located in Østfold, consisting of two percent of the Norwegian territory. It’s also a very small price to pay in order to end a 68 year old conflict. If an agreement is reached you will be free to transform 98 percent of Norway into your multiethnic and multicultural utopia, without the risk of facing the alternative. This model would succeed in northern-Europe, just as it would succeed on a purely political level – securing peace between <<islamofascists>> on one side, and liberalists/social democrats on the other, in countries such as Egypt and Pakistan.

 

I’m quite sure that project Yggdrasil in Norway, and in the other 12 Nordic countries, would solve a conflict which has been unsolved during the last 68 years. I ask that I’m allowed to present this peace plan to the leading nordicist voices in Norway; Tore Tvedt, Varg Vikernes, Erik Blucher, Nicolay Kvisler and others (no need to target them, as they are all non-militant political activists). Securing Nordic survival is the most important cause for all of us, and I believe they will be willing to abandon their <<all-or-nothing>>-approach, for the sake of a small but sovereign indigenous state.

 

If my assumption is correct, then a peace agreement can be reached within a year, if the chief editors in NRK, TV2, Aftenposten, VG and Dagbladet decide to support the plan, and the same could be a reality for the rest of northern-Europe within two years, if movements in these countries follow.

 

The forming of a parliamentary basis for the founding of this autonomous Norwegian-nordic indigenous state in south-west Østfold will only be possible with the backing of the editors in these five companies, as they define the political agenda in Norway. Not a single parliament member in Norway will ever dare to back project Yggdrasil without the blessing from the editors in these companies.

 

If these editors continue to refuse to have anything to do with me, the above mentioned individuals are all capable. They are the unofficial leaders of the Norwegian nordicist movement, through example, personal sacrifice and continued effort, whether they like it or not. When the Norwegian MSM announced that Fjordman was my role model and idol, they couldn’t be more wrong. These four individuals, on the other hand, are all worthy of trust, respect and praise, due to their past and continued efforts. Their advice and recommendations should be listened to by all Norwegian nationalists. Furthermore, the candidates they support can be trusted. I hope they soon will contribute to take responsibility by uniting the Norwegian nationalist movement by forming an equivalent entity to that of the Swedes Party. The reason I’m saying all of this is because it’s likely I’ll soon be <<out of the game>>, as I won’t be able to survive the SHS-programme for much longer.

 

Unfortunately but not surprisingly, the response from editors to the mentioned information will either be total silence or even more ridicule and pathologisation. After this letter I’ll probably have +2 conditions and +3 personality disorders, or perhaps the imaginary <<bad childhood>> will end up being worse. But before these editors reject <<Project Yggdrasil>>, and of course they will; they should ask them-selves; are you 100 percent sure that dialogue and reconciliation-attempts isn’t the way forward?

 

In any case, their limitless bigotry and denial, until now, has at least been quite amusing.

 

[These were the first 5 pages, the remaining pages haven’t been published in full yet.]

 

[The following quotes were taken from document.no]

 

I have guaranteed and will continue to guarantee that I will no longer propagate violence as a political tool, or for any other reason, as my only plan has been to attempt to become a fascistic “Mandela”, or to contribute to work for Nordics rights in other ways. (Page 10)

 

The reason why I’m so intensely hated by the left, and many others, has little to do with my acts, but everything to do with the “negative” media campaigns which have been, and continue to be carried out. The word “mass murderer” or “mass killer” is used consistently by journalists.

 

These 100 individuals were sons, daughters, fathers and mothers, and their families experienced an equal tragedy to that of the 22/7-families. Both myself and Sønsteby were radical nationalists fighting against foreign enemies and against Norwegians who facilitated a foreign invasion. The only difference was that Sønsteby, uninformed regarding the Labour Party’s future plans concerning forced ethnic and cultural deconstruction (muliticulti), fought to bring the social democrats to power, while I fought against Labour. (s. 16)

 

… a conflict that will continue for decades to come. Why can’t we all get along, and stop acting like angry 12-year olds? We have wanted dialogue with you for 68 years, and you refuse to even acknowledge the existence of the Norwegian fascist movement and instead try to label us as nuts and victims of child abuse. You should be ashamed of yourselves.

 

… tormented until I am pushed to take my own life.

 

Ila is refusing me to move on with my life, despite of exemplary behavior for 27 months, without exception.

 

The 22/7-attacks are today celebrated by the far right in all European countries, either you like it or not, and I have been celebrated as a hero, martyr, role-model and as a source of inspiration by tens of thousands. One of the reasons why more people began to support the reasons for the acts, is because I carried out the trial with dignity, in many people’s eyes, and that I at the same time continuously have demanded that Europe’s political elites, including European mainstream media, must immediately stop treating Norwegian, Nordic and European nationalists and fascists like animals, and instead go into dialogue with us, in order that we are granted a minimum of self-determination.

 

I have the last 27 months proved that the only thing I desire is to be a good role model to others.

 

The large majority of my supporters are, perhaps surprisingly to most, non-militant and non-violent “right-wing radicals”. It would also have ruined every chance to become what I feel obligated to try to be; a non-violent ideologue and a more active politician.

 

Violence is not, and has never been, a part of my ideology. The action was among other things a mean to bring attention to an important cause, and therefore to get a chance to bypass the wall of censorship to propagate important information, but it was not a part of my ideology.

 

It’s correct that the manifesto was a terror manual, like any other ideology’s terror-manuals. But a so called terror-manual is simply propagating means, and is never part of an ideology.

 

In other words I’m not longer a right wing extremist.… (willing to use violence), but a so called right wing radical.

 

The main reason for the fall of Labour, however, was the easily anticipated effect of double-psychology concerning the initial sympathy-phase. It was easy to see that Labour was going to make the critical mistake of misusing this opportunity, which caused significant over-exposure and subsequent antipathy. As a student of history, it was very easy to anticipate these events.

 

Even the Nazis treated Russian prisoners of war and the Jews more humanely, both in Auschwitz – Block 11, and later in Auschwitz-Birkenau. It may be true that the prisoners were forced to work until they couldn’t take it anymore, for economic gain, but they were executed in the most humane manner by zyklon-B-gas. The work able men who behaved exemplary during the stay were rarely subjected to either high- or low-intensive torture. They were all spared the suffering of long-term isolation, and were given the opportunity to be part of a community together with their own. Most of them were later, through humane executions, granted an honorable martyr’s death.

 

And if any of them wanted to end the forced labour, they could at any given time request a painless and honorable martyr’s death, by letting a guard know.

 

Apparently, all the Auschwitz-Jews got off easily, as they were evidently shown a much greater degree of humanism than I have been shown by the Norwegian Ministry of Justice and the prison authorities.

 

I showed a greater degree of humanism on 22/7, than what I have been shown after. I did in fact everything in my power to ensure that the 50 AUF-leaders and the 15 regular AUF-members were granted a quick and painless death. I granted them all an honorable martyr’s death, and due to their political sacrifice they were all, and are still, celebrated as champions of the internationalist socialist movement …

 

I would never, even if I was given the opportunity to do so, torture another human being, not even my worst enemy.

 

So if you are not willing to contribute to stop the torture, then you should at least show me the level of humanity that I and the Nazis showed.

 

I cannot kill myself, because my religion does not permit me. Suicide is a cowardly and unforgivable act that must never be considered by anyone. On the other hand, that’s easy for Jesus to say. He only had to hang on the cross for three days, and not 27 months.

 

Islamofascists in the Arab world, such as the Muslim Brotherhood, are treated just as badly as the nationalists in Europe.

 

But I have never hated them, not even now.

 

You have treated me much worse that an animal for 27 months! This is a fate much worse than death, and I would have preferred, if it was possible, to be granted at least the same degree of humanity that the Auschwitz-Jews were shown by the SS, instead of being subjected to abuse and treated worse than an animal for six more months.

_________________________________

Europe: Nordic Supremacism vs. Counterjihadism

John R. Houk

© March 2, 2015

______________________________

Fjordman and his Jewish network …” Lest this letter from Breivik?

 

© 2015 witness. Editor for Vitnet.no is bear Brataas.

 

Blog Editor: Google English translation edited by John R. Houk and spellcheck. Words that I was unsure were left alone as well as the British spelling of English words. I allowed spellcheck to capitalize many words that in my estimation should have been so; however it is possible that Anders intentionally did not capitalize some words. Keep in mind this is an English translation from Norwegian text so I am going to assume Google needed an alternative spelling. Explanatory embedded links are by the Editor.

Free Speech and Muslim Rage


We-People Defend Constitution

 

It’s time for the U.S. to stand up and protect the rights enshrined in the Constitution. If the U.S. government doesn’t understand that Islam is at war with the West and America, We the American citizens must start exercising our 1st and 2nd Amendment rights. Speak, Write, Draw, OPENLY Protest and even protect ourselves in those rights with our right to bear arms.

 

OR France’s Charlie Hebdo will become a common occurrence in the United States of America.

 

JRH 1/18/15

Please Support NCCR

*************************

Free Speech and Muslim Rage

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent: 1/16/2015 6:44 PM

 

In the wake of the deadly terrorist attacks on Charlie Hebdo, the satirical Paris newspaper, and the kosher grocery in Porte de Vincennes (France) between January 7th and January 9th, in which seventeen innocent Parisians were murdered, approximately three million French people, four by some counts, and forty world leaders, without U.S. President Obama anywhere in sight, marched through the streets of Paris to show unity against Islamic terrorism and their support for freedom of expression. For this one day, they did not allow their liberty to be constrained, but the messages emanating from this “Cry for freedom” unity rally are mixed at best.

 

Shortly after the first attack, an estimated 35,000 people appeared in east Paris at Place de La Republique. Some chanted “Charlie, Charlie” or held signs reading “I am Charlie” – the message posted on the newspaper’s website.

 

On Friday, January 9th, the iconic Arc de Triomphe on Champs-Elysees lighted with a banner reading “Paris is Charlie” in reference to Charlie Hebdo.

 

When Charlie Hebdo first published as L’Hebdo Hari Kari, its only mission was to be as “dumb and nasty” as possible (their words). And they succeeded, as millions from all faiths and all walks of life, including myself, found them to be beyond offensive.

 

Most notably, Charlie’s reprint of Jyllands-Posten’s (Dutch newspaper) cartoon that depicted the Prophet Mohammed negatively saw them prosecuted in 2005, for violating France’s “hate-speech” laws, representing a terrible assault on free speech. Ultimately they were acquitted through France’s freedom of expression laws. Even so, they never should have been charged, and their crime of “blasphemy” certainly did not warrant their death sentences.

 

Muslims, on a large scale, have raged against the U.S. and the West in their demands for justice. In their minds, justice entails the destruction of Israel and a blanket prohibition of any criticism of Islam (e.g. the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights and UN Resolution 16/18); and, despite Mahmoud Abbas’ recent statements that “human life is sacred” and the Grand Mosque of Paris’ condemnation of the Islamic terrorist attack on Charlie Hebdo, they reserve the right in their Sharia law to mock other religions, to repress and murder non-Muslims and to destroy objects of other faiths.

 

Historically, totalitarian movements, such as the Islamic ideology, have advanced by restricting free speech, and unbelievably, most of the European Union now enforce laws in line with UN Resolution 16/18, which criminalizes any criticism of Islam. The Obama administration has advocated its adoption in the U.S. since 2009.

 

In April 2013, Paul Weston, the leader of the LibertyGB party was wrongfully arrested under Britain’s “hate-speech” law, Section 4 of the Public Order Act. His “crime” was that he read a forthright description of the true nature of Islam, from ‘The River War’ (1899) by Winston Churchill, as he stood on the steps of the Winchester Guildhall.

 

Similarly, one of fifty-four people arrested for “condoning terrorism”, the comedian Dieudonne, an “anti-Zionist”, was arrested 48 hours after the Paris rally for free expression on the weight of one sentence: “Tonight, as far as I’m concerned, I feel like Charlie Coulibaly”, a play of words on Charlie Hebdo and the terrorist Amedy Coulibaly.

 

Amedy Coulibaly, loyal to the Islamic State, was the terrorist who murdered four French Jews at the grocery in Portes de Vincennes, just hours before the Jewish Sabbath began. He died in the ensuing gun-battle with French security forces.

 

Dieudonne’s expression was certainly reprehensible and disgusting, but if anything, it should have simply targeted him for further scrutiny and investigation by the authorities. This same statement would not have warranted an arrest in the U.S., because it did not represent a “clear and present danger” to the public (Schenck v. U.S – 1919), above making people feel afraid.

 

U.S. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. suggested that the basis of our First Amendment is not “free thought for those who agree with us but freedom for the thought we hate.”

 

However, this does not mean that a Muslim living in the U.S. can say anything without consequences, or that we must continue down this one-way road of tolerance. The U.S. must prosecute and deport anyone supporting Islamic terrorism and the implementation of Sharia law in the U.S., since advocating sedition and the destruction of our Constitutional Republic is an anathema to free speech.

 

Fear was precisely the entity these Muslims hoped to instill in people worldwide, by murdering Charlie Hebdo editor-in-chief Stephane Charbonnier, Jean Cabut (Cabu), cartoonist Bernard Verlhac (known as Tignous), Georges Wolinski and thirteen more unfortunate souls. These Islamic terrorists, Said Kouachi and Cherif Kouachi, who were born in France, wanted everyone to understand that criticizing Islam could result in a critic’s murder.

 

Fears of more attacks remain. Early Sunday, January 11th, Hamburger Morgenpost, a German newspaper that reprinted Charlie Hebdo cartoons ridiculing the Prophet Mohammed, was a victim of arson, without any injuries. The Brussels offices of the Belgian newspaper Le Spir were also evacuated after receiving a threat. And at this writing, anti-terrorism raids are occurring all across Europe.

 

Cowering in fear behind their political correctness and multiculturalist nonsense, the New York Times was the only major newspaper that did not run the Charlie Hebdo images, which are central to the story. By refusing to publish them, they admitted their fear and allowed freedom of the press to be held hostage by murderers, an unequivocal win for the Islamic terrorists.

 

Acting in the manner of responsible news outlets and in defense of freedom of the press, the remaining top U.S. newspaper editors published images from Charlie Hebdo on their covers, soon after the Paris attacks. The Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, L.A. Times, the New York Post and the New York Daily News published them, taking a stand for liberty everywhere.

 

Liberty and our sacrosanct rights to freedom of speech and the press – all we hold dear – are under assault by Islamic terrorists, proponents for Sharia law, and this is a dangerous juncture for all free societies, in a real cultural battle between the Western civilization and Islam, with all its inherent evil. Americans must demand respect for our basic values and the right to criticize and even mock others, with or without Europe, and we must continue to speak the truth about the dark world of Islam, with its hate, intolerance, human rights violations and indiscriminate murder. And however we must defend it, through speech or force of arms, America must not allow Liberty to be held hostage by Islamic terrorists.

I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.” __ Thomas Jefferson

 

By Justin O. Smith

___________________________

Edited by john R. Houk

 

© Justin O. Smith

Counterjihadists and Senator Feinstein


Islamorealism NOT Islamophobia

John R. Houk

© January 18, 2014

 

Senator Diane Feinstein is the consummate Left Wing Democrat in the transforming America utopian pipedream that closet Marxists and Socialists dream is on high speed to fruition. To supporters of the U.S. Constitution Feinstein fired-up 2nd Amendment proponents by suggesting legal rules that would make the 2nd Amendment irrelevant without a Constitutional Amendment to make any such change.

 

That being said, if you don’t know by now, I am among other Conservative projects a Counterjihad Blogger. Essentially that means I believe Islam, Quran, Hadith, Sira or whatever; are designed to transform humanity into the Muslim view of deity, theology and way of living. That Muslim agenda must be accomplished by any means necessary. Muslims try peace first, subjugation, oppressive submission and if all else fails – a brutal form of Capital Punishment undoubtedly to set an example to those who would dare oppose Mohammed’s deity they call Allah.

 

Muslim Apologists and Leftist Multiculturalist literally hate people like me. AND so those two groups usually embark a path in the West where Free Speech still exists (but more and more diluted) to discredit Counterjihadists with outright lies about a peaceful Islam according to their Quran followed closely by the venomous accusation of being a racist and bigot.

 

I have no doubts that if a Muslim dedicated to what the Quran, Hadith, Sira or whatever says would kill me for their perception of insulting Islam. Currently I am way-way down the old totem pole of anyone a Muslim would like to silence; ergo no seeks to end my life like more notable Counterjihadists. Here are some names you may or may not recognize AND YET are probably well known among Muslim Apologists (in no particular of relevance but just from the top of my – no pun to give a Muslim any ideas intended):

 

o   Robert Spencer

 

o   Andrew Bostom

 

o   Pamela Geller

 

o   Brigitte Gabriel (Yes I am aware it is a pseudonym) – See Also ACT for America

 

o   Bat Ye’or (Another Pseudonym)

 

o   Geert Wilders

 

o   Bill Warner

 

o   Wafa Sultan

 

o   Ayaan Hirsi Ali

 

o   Ali Sina See Also HERE

 

o   Fjordman (Another pseudonym): Among critics of the Counterjihad Movement – especially in Europe – often heads the list of the false accusation of being a Right Wing, Hate Mongering, Anti-Islam racist and bigot. If you Google his name you will find volumes of vilifying critics. This is especially the case do to a mass murderer Anders Behring Breivik who massacred mostly a bunch of youth in a Norwegian youth camp under the delusion it would inspire Europeans to bring about a New World Order by deporting Muslims. Breivik quoted Fjordman extensively in a delusional Manifesto delineating a movement in his mind to purify Europe and restructure a European government. Left Wing Europeans have used Breivik’s love of Fjordman’s writing to excoriate Counterjihadists as violent Right Wing Extremists.

 

o   Walid Shoebat

 

o   Ibn Warraq

 

o   Nonie Darwish: Youtube Video: ‘Why I Left Islam’: Part ONE & Part TWO

 

I am certain I left someone out. These people are labelled extremists implying the advocacy of racist hatred or violence. The irony is that none of this applies to Counterjihad writers. The sole purpose of Counterjihadists is to shed light on what the Quran really says and exposing the deception involved with Islamic theology to convince non-Muslims to be accepting of Islam.

 

SO ANYWAY I began these thoughts talking about decidedly Left Wing Senator Diane Feinstein. Here is the thing that is remarkably shocking to a Counterjihad writer. The Democrat Leftist from California understands that Fundamentalist Muslims are a threat to the National Security of the United States. Not only has Feinstein identified Radical Islam as the enemy BUT as Chairman Senate Intelligence Committee has released a report that exposes the Obama Administration as negligent on protecting Ambassador Chris Stevens during the Benghazi attack by Islamic Terrorists.

 

I am no admirer of Senator Diane Feinstein but in this case she is awesome.

 

A Brigitte Gabriel email sent via ACT for America sent an email that reminded of this information. Below is that email.

 

 

JRH 1/18/14

Please Support NCCR

*************************************

A Tale of Three Senators

 

By Brigitte Gabriel

Sent: 1/17/2014 11:08 AM

ACT for America

 

In a time where courage is a precious commodity on Capital Hill, a Democratic U.S. Senator has set an admirable example of statesmanship in stark contrast to two of her former colleagues.

Senator Diane Feinstein of California, the Chair of Senate Intelligence Committee has sounded the alarm over the escalating threat from Jihadist terrorism and released a report in the pursuit of the truth about the terrorist attack on U.S. diplomatic facilities in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11th, 2012.

Senator Feinstein’s words and deeds stand in stark contrast to those of former Senators Hillary Clinton and John Kerry, the former and current Obama administration Secretaries of State.

Senator Feinstein recently correctly defined our enemies as a “very fundamentalist jihadist Islamic community” – in a warning that terrorism is on the rise. During a December 1st interview on CNN’s State of the Union with Candy Crowley, Senator Feinstein noted,

 

I think there is a real displaced aggression in this very fundamentalist jihadist Islamic community. And that is, that the West is responsible for everything that goes wrong and that the only thing that’s going to solve this, is Islamic sharia law and the concept of the caliphate. And I see more groups, more fundamentalists, more jihadists, more determined to kill to get where they want to get. So, it’s not an isolated phenomenon. You see these groups spread a web of connections. And this includes North Africa, it includes the Middle East, it includes other areas as well.

 

It took great courage for Senator Feinstein to publicly identify the enemy and describe the basics of the doctrine that underpins their actions. She knew full well that her democratic base will be very uncomfortable with her bold truth about a problem that is devastating our country yet no one wants to identify including the president. Her words were like a breath of fresh air. Few Republicans, much less Democrats, on Capitol Hill have done as good a job of articulating the threat we face from Jihad.

Unfortunately, Feinstein’s former colleague, Secretary of State John Kerry, is not nearly as well informed as she is. He has uttered nothing to indicate that he has any grasp of the enemy threat doctrine and what makes our enemies “tick.”

In fact, just this week, Kerry parroted the long-discredited theory that terrorism is caused by poverty. In remarks delivered during a visit to the Vatican, Kerry proclaimed poverty to be the “root cause” of terrorism.

This isn’t the first time Kerry has regurgitated such nonsense. Speaking at the Global Counterterrorism Forum in the wake of the Jihadist terrorist attack on a shopping mall in Nairobi, Kenya, Kerry called for “providing more economic opportunities” for youth to prevent them from being recruited to terrorism.

Perhaps Kerry has forgotten that Osama Bin Laden was a multimillionaire who left a life of luxury in Saudi Arabia to wage global jihad? Or maybe he forgets that the current leader of Al Qaeda, Ayman al-Zawahiri, was no pauper either. He was a professor of surgery and practicing physician at one time in his native Egypt before he turned to jihad. Then there is current captive Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who was well off enough to come to the United States to earn a degree in engineering from North Carolina A&T.

There is no actual evidence that poverty causes terrorism. Jihadist terrorism has its roots in the doctrine known as sharia. Jihadists have come to commit acts of terror from a variety of lifestyles, nationalities and socioeconomic backgrounds. There is no evidence to indicate that poverty is a prerequisite for Jihadist terrorism, despite what Kerry says.

In fact, Kerry’s statement shows a profound confusion and naïveté when it comes to the war with which we are faced. Fortunately, Senator Feinstein doesn’t have the same problem that Secretary Kerry has.

In fact, as Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Senator Feinstein has just released a new, bipartisan report on the Jihadist terror attack on US diplomatic facilities in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11th, 2012, that goes a long way toward dispelling some of the myths surrounding that attack and assigning accountability for what went wrong.

Among the report’s findings:

• The attack was NOT a spontaneous act of violence touched off by a protest in reaction to a video about the prophet Mohammed.

• The U.S. government did not do enough to prevent the attack or protect the diplomatic facilities.

• The Obama State Department had ample warning of a dangerous security situation in Benghazi but failed to take proper action to secure lives and property.

• The Obama intelligence community issued statements after the attack that turned out to be wrong and then was slow in correcting those incorrect statements.

Feinstein’s committee’s candid, accurate report is quite different from the testimony before the Senate delivered by Senator Feinstein’s former colleague, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, on January 23rd, 2013. Who can forget the shameful prevarications and doublespeak from Hillary Clinton that day?

But worst of all was this cynical and infamous passage:

 

With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest? Or was it because of guys out for a walk one night and decided they would go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make?

 

Congratulations to Senator Feinstein for identifying the mistakes for which Hillary Clinton was ultimately responsible and laying out the facts for the American people that Benghazi was PREVENTABLE, because to us, it DOES make a difference!

______________________________

Counterjihadists and Senator Feinstein

John R. Houk

© January 18, 2014

______________________________

A Tale of Three Senators

 

ACT for America is an issues advocacy organization dedicated to effectively organizing and mobilizing the most powerful grassroots citizen action network in America, a grassroots network committed to informed and coordinated civic action that will lead to public policies that promote America’s national security and the defense of American democratic values against the assault of radical Islam. We are only as strong as our supporters, and your volunteer and financial support is essential to our success. Thank you for helping us make America safer and more secure.

Intro – Top Norwegian Prof: Critics of Mass Immigration Mentally Ill


Per Fugelli 2

Per Fugelli

 

John R. Houk

© May 24, 2013

 

Fjordman writes an essay entitled “Top Norwegian Prof: Critics of Mass Immigration Mentally Ill”. If you are an American I urge you to read this essay! The essay is about Free Speech in Norway and how the Left utilizes Hate-Speech laws to shut up Conservatives and those against the mass immigration of culturally different people to Norway. The culturally different people are not non-Nordic people of Europe or of the Oriental Asian persuasion. The immigration of people with a totally divergent culture to Norway is Sharia-Minded Muslims that are literally taking over broad swaths of Norwegian communities. This is significant because of the rise of crime perpetrated by Muslims against the Norwegians. Blond Norwegian gals are so concerned of the rape epidemic perpetrated by Muslims against non-Muslims that they are dying their hair to a dark brunette.

 

Why should Americans be concerned of how Islam affects Norwegian culture or how Norway’s Left propagandizes multiculturalism so much that they try to throw anti-multiculturalists and Counterjihadists in jail to repress threats to reversing the acceptance of multiculturalism?

 

The reason is Norway’s limitation on Liberty and Free Speech is a snapshot of America’s potential future. With Obama now being exposed as running a politically corrupt Administration that actually uses government agencies (Like the IRS, Justice Dept.  or Agenda 21) to repress American Conservatives it is quite apparent the Norwegian snapshot looms near if we do not undo Obama’s “Change”.

 

JRH 5/24/13 (Hat Tip: Gates of Vienna)

Please Support NCCR

Thoughts on Darwish Chain Email – ‘Joys of Muslim Women’


Nonie Darwish - I will not submit

John R. Houk

© May 6, 2013

 

I received a chain email from a respected friend. The chain email has been around for awhile and its most common title is “Joys of Muslim Women.” The words of the chain email are attributed to Nonie Darwish. Darwish has become an esteemed Counterjihad writer and speaker. The term Counterjihad means Darwish is scores big on the Muslim and Leftist hate-meter which in turn means Muslim Apologists and Leftist Multiculturalists spew hate towards her by ironically accusing her of Hate Speech.

 

Briefly Nonie Darwish was born a Muslim in Egypt that also resided in Gaza. Gaza can be nicknamed Hamastan due to the Muslim Brotherhood affiliated Islamic terrorist group Hamas ruling Gaza.

 

Unfortunately the chain email attribution to Nonie Darwish is a falsehood. However, Darwish agrees that much of the information in the chain email is accurate. Here are some quotes from some fact check websites (that I might illuminate are leaning toward the Left and are quick to display the Islamic Apologist view that utilizes Taqiyya [deception] to contradict Counterjihadists with abrogated verses from the Quran).

 

Watch Nonie Darwish in a passionate indictment against Islam’s Shariah Law in this video:

 

Nonie Darwish and “Islamic Apartheid” at Temple University

 

 

Fact Checkers on Chain Email:

 

About.com Urban Legends

 

Analysis: Despite the attribution at the top (“Joys of Muslim Women by Nonie Darwish”), this text was not written by Muslim-turned-Christian human rights activist Nonie Darwish; indeed, the bottom two-thirds of it repeatedly refer to her in the third person. Darwish confirmed via email that she did not write the article, though it is, in her words, “to a large extent accurate.” She further stated that her 2009 book, Cruel and Usual Punishment, better represents her views.

 

It should be noted that while the email is at least partially based on Darwish’s personal experiences growing up in a Muslim country and reading the Qur’an, her claim that it’s to a large extent accurate also means that, even in her opinion, it’s not entirely accurate. To say the least, the text is hyperbolic, awash in generalizations, and makes extreme claims about Islam and Islamic practices that do not pertain to all Muslims.

 

For more on Nonie Darwish’s views in her own words, see Cruel and Usual Punishment (Interview) – FamilySecurityMatters.org, 8 January 2009.

 

For a differing view on the Islamic faith, see Myths About Islam by Christine Huda Dodge – About.com.

 

Snopes.com

 

 

clip_image002

 

 

Fact Check: Nonie Darwish and Enough Muslims to Elect a President in 20 years – Irregular Times

 

Posted by Jim Cook

January 23rd, 2011

 

In this morning’s e-mail, Irregular Times received the following message:

 

Joys of Muslim Women by Nonie Darwish…

 

In twenty years there will be enough Muslim voters in the U.S. and Canada to elect the President or Prime Minister by themselves! Rest assured they will do so… You can look at how they have taken over several towns in the USA and Canada, Dearborn Mich. is one, Brampton, Ontario is another and there are others…

 

I think everyone in the U.S. and Canada should be required to read this, but with the ACLU, there is no way this will be widely publicized, unless each of us sends it on!

 

Claim: Nonie Darwish wrote this article, “The Joys of Muslim Women,” or any other piece of writing so titled.

Fact: Nonie Darwish has specifically denied this. The association of Nonie Darwish with this text is a hoax.

 

Claim: The ACLU is preventing the wide dissemination of the assertion I received by e-mail.

Fact: There is not any record of the ACLU agitating to restrict the dissemination of this text. It would not make sense for the ACLU to agitate to restrict dissemination of this text, since the ACLU is a major proponent of free speech, including freedom of speech for unpopular ideas across the political spectrum. As an empirical matter, a google search for the text “In twenty years there will be enough Muslim voters in the U.S. to elect the President by themselves” turns up 17,900 results, indicating a rather wide dissemination. It is nearly impossible to prove that a conspiracy does not exist, so I leave it to you to decide between the two possibilities: Either the ACLU is carrying on a stealthy, invisible and utterly ineffectual campaign to quash the story we received by e-mail this morning, or the ACLU is not trying to quash it at all.

 

Claim: “In twenty years there will be enough Muslim voters in the U.S. and Canada to elect the President or Prime Minister by themselves!”

Fact: This is a claim we looked at last September after someone used it as a justification of bans on mosque building:

 

As a mother and a grandmother, I worry. I learned that in 20 years with the rate of the birth population, we will be overtaken by Islam, and their goal is to get people in Congress and the Supreme Court to see that Shariah is implemented. My children and grandchildren will have to live under that.

 

The truth is that, according to the two most recent studies of religious populations in America, (the American Religious Identification Survey and the U.S. Religious Landscape Survey), Muslims make up only 0.6% of the adult population of the United States. That’s approximately 1.8 million out of about 300 million Americans.

 

Here’s a graph showing what we can expect the Muslim population of the United States to look like over the next twenty years if the American Muslim population follows the U.S. birth rate, the World birth rate, or the Saudi birth rate (three reasonable expectations):

 

clip_image003

 

The total U.S. population during the period will be somewhere in the range of 300-350 million. Clearly, unless a comet blasts into North America and Muslims put up their secret comet-debris-shields, there is no reasonable scenario under which the American Muslim population will come anywhere close to making up a majority in the next twenty years.

 

Conclusion: This article is once, twice, three times disconnected from reality.

 

If you want to read the chain email then you need to stick with me. I am posting it as I received it from my friend. Nonetheless, there are some allegations within the email that are simply meant to stir up an anti-Muslim sentiment among readers. The thing is exaggerated and false statistical stands do not need to be made. A careful examination of the Quran with an understanding of Islam’s dualistic theology; that the newest commands from Mohammed (or Allah depending on your perception) outweigh previous commands – the principle is Abrogation; know that although the Quran (See also Chronological Order) is considered the uncreated word of Allah by Muslims BUT the Hadith and Sira weigh in heavily in interpreting the Quran and realize that some Hadith are considered more accurate than others then become cognizant which of those Hadith are the most accepted. Muslim Apologists either knowingly lies by telling an abrogated verse (or surah) is the foundation of Islam. A Muslim theologian can lie with a straight face because Islam’s dualistic principles actually can make two opposites true if it serves the purpose of the moment. In Western thought theology is more singular in that the theological thought is either right or wrong and NOT both right dependent on circumstances.

 

As a reminder Nonie Darwish has said the chain email “Joys of Muslim Women” was not written by her but that the essence of its message is true. Now some of the claims in it are ridiculous yet the anti-woman aspect of the email is valid.

 

So without further adieu here is the text of that chain email sent to me by a friend.

 

JRH 5/6/13

Please Support NCCR

*********************************

20 years from now? Frightening!!!!

Sent to me: 5/5/2013 6:41 PM

 

I am guilty of thinking that each religion had one main prophet and a “golden rule”.  I am wrong.  The Muslim religion is spreading like the plague and it carries the same gruesome results if we do not stop it now.

 

20 years from now, I will be in Heaven – bye!!!

 

This was written by a woman born in Egypt as a Muslim. Make sure you read the paragraph (in red) towards the end.

 

Joys of Muslim Women
By Nonie Darwish

 

In the Muslim faith a Muslim man can marry a child as young as 1 year old and have sexual intimacy with this child. And then consummate the marriage by 9.

The dowry is given to the family in exchange for the woman (who becomes his slave) and for the purchase of the private parts of the woman, to use her as a toy.


Even though a woman is abused she cannot obtain a divorce.

To prove rape, the woman must have (4) male witnesses.

Often after a woman has been raped, she is returned to her family and the family must return the dowry. The family has the right to execute her (an honor killing) to restore the honor of the family. Husbands can beat their wives ‘at will’ and he does not have to say why he has beaten her.


The husband is permitted to have (4 wives) and a temporary wife for an hour (prostitute) at his discretion.


The Shariah Muslim law controls the private as well as the public life of the woman.

 

In the West World (America and Britain) Muslim men are starting to demand Shariah Law so the wife cannot obtain a divorce and he can have full and complete control of her. It is amazing and alarming how many of our sisters and daughters attending American Universities and British Universities are now marrying Muslim men and submitting themselves and their children unsuspectingly to the Shariah law.


By passing this on, enlightened American and British women may avoid becoming a slave under Shariah Law.

Ripping the West in Two.

Author and lecturer Nonie Darwish says the goal of radical Islamists is to impose Shariah law on the world, ripping Western law and liberty in two.


She recently authored the book, Cruel and Usual Punishment: The Terrifying Global Implications of Islamic Law. Darwish was born in Cairo and spent her childhood in Egypt and Gaza before immigrating to America in 1978, when she was eight years old. Her father died while leading covert attacks on Israel. He was a high-ranking Egyptian military officer stationed with his family in Gaza…


When he died, he was considered a “shahid,” a martyr for jihad. His posthumous status earned Nonie and her family an elevated position in Muslim society.


But Darwish developed a skeptical eye at an early age. She questioned her own Muslim culture and upbringing… She converted to Christianity after hearing a Christian preacher on television.


In her latest book, Darwish warns about creeping shariah law – what it is, what it means, and how it is manifested in Islamic countries.


For the West, she says radical Islamists are working to impose sharia on the world. If that happens, Western civilization will be destroyed. Westerners generally assume all religions encourage a respect for the dignity of each individual. Islamic law (Sharia) teaches that non-Muslims should be subjugated or killed in this world.


Peace and prosperity for one’s children is not as important as assuring that Islamic law rules everywhere in the Middle East and eventually in the world.


While Westerners tend to think that all religions encourage some form of the golden rule, Shariah teaches two systems of ethics – one for Muslims and another for non-Muslims. Building on tribal practices of the seventh century, Shariah encourages the side of humanity that wants to take from and subjugate others.


While Westerners tend to think in terms of religious people developing a personal understanding of and relationship with God, Shariah advocates executing people who ask difficult questions that could be interpreted as criticism.


It’s hard to imagine, that in this day and age, Islamic scholars agree that those who criticize Islam or choose to stop being Muslim should be executed. Sadly, while talk of an Islamic reformation is common and even assumed by many in the West, such murmurings in the Middle East that is silenced through intimidation.


While Westerners are accustomed to an increase in religious tolerance over time, Darwish explains how petro dollars are being used to grow an extremely intolerant form of political Islam in her native Egypt and elsewhere.


(In twenty years there will be enough Muslim voters in the U.S. and Britain to elect the President and Prime Minister by themselves! Rest assured they will do so… You can look at how they have taken over several towns in the US… Dearborn Mich. is one…and there are others… Britain has several cities now totally controlled by Muslims.)


I think everyone in the U.S. And Great Britain should be required to read this, but with the ACLU, there is no way this will be widely publicized, unless each of us sends it on!


It is too bad that so many are disillusioned with life and Christianity to accept Muslims as peaceful. Some may be but they have an army that is willing to shed blood in the name of Islam. The peaceful support the warriors with their finances and own kind of patriotism to their religion. While America and Britain are getting rid of Christianity from all public sites and erasing God from the lives of children, the Muslims are planning a great jihad on America and Britain.


This is your chance to make a difference! Pass it on to your email list or at least those you think will listen.


Some of those I’m sending it to WILL NOT! Put your head back under the covers so you can’t see the boogie man!

______________________

Chain email edited by John R. Houk